4.7 Article

Non-targeted screening and analysis of volatile organic compounds in drinking water by DLLME with GC-MS

Journal

SCIENCE OF THE TOTAL ENVIRONMENT
Volume 694, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.07.300

Keywords

Non-targeted analysis; Dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction; In silico toxicity prediction; Drinking water; Volatile organic compound

Funding

  1. Chinese Academy of Sciences [21677062]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21677062]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Environmental Chemistry and Ecotoxicology, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences [KF2015-12]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in drinking water may potentially be hazardous. We developed a novel non-targeted analysis method of VOCs in drinking water that uses dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction coupled with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Analysis parameters were selected from range-finding tests on the peak number and average area of the extracted compounds. The optimized method was applied to analyze VOCs in tap water samples collected from Wuhan City, China. Twenty-seven compounds with high match degrees and a high prevalence were selected for quantification and evaluation. We used structure-activity relationships to predict the carcinogenicity of these compounds. Although most of the compounds were non-toxic, compounds such as dibutyl phthalate and diacetone alcohol should be investigated further. Untargeted analysis of the tap water samples identified 75-200 VOCs, including 67 highly prevalent compounds. Industrial and pharmaceutical chemicals accounted for approximately 70% of the VOCs in the samples. This method of non-targeted analysis and in silico toxicity prediction is simple and economic, and could be used in screening VOCs in drinking water. (C) 2019 Published by Elsevier B.V.

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