4.7 Article

Comparison of matrix-solid phase dispersion and liquid-solid extraction connected with solid-phase extraction in the quantification of selected furanocoumarins from fruits of Heracleum leskowii by high performance liquid chromatography

Journal

INDUSTRIAL CROPS AND PRODUCTS
Volume 50, Issue -, Pages 131-136

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2013.07.015

Keywords

Matrix solid-phase dispersion; Liquid-solid extraction; Solid-phase extraction; Heracleum leskowii; Furanocoumarins; High performance liquid chromatography

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, we compared a novel application of matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) methodology and classical liquid-solid extraction (LSE) connected with solid-phase extraction (SPE) for the determination of furanocoumarins from Heracleum leskowii fruits. Fruits of H. leskowii contain the following furanocoumarins: umbelliferon, xanthotoxin, angelicin, isopimpinellin, bergapten, imperatorin, isoimperatorin. Several dispersants, eluents and sample to sorbent mass ratio were examined during the optimization of the process in order to obtain the best selectivity and yield. Quantitative analysis was carried out by high performance liquid chromatography with diode array detector (HPLC-DAD). The method was validated. The calibration curves for all standards were linear over the concentration range 10-100 mu g/mL. The correlation coefficients of all calibration curves were R-2 > 0.9990. LOD and LOQ values ranged from 2.97 mu g/mL to 10.82 mu g/mL, and from 9.03 mu g/mL to 38.32 mu g/mL respectively. The recoveries of the LSE-SPE and MSPD method were in the range of 94.04-102.31% and 92.43-96.27%, respectively. The relative standard deviation (RSD%), as a measure of repeatability, was lower than 5.88% for MSPD and 5.09% for LSE-SPE. MSPD extraction method was compared to the classic analytical method combining liquid-solid extraction with solid-phase extraction. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available