两种用于通过原子吸收光谱法测定土壤中痕量金属的萃取方法的比较。
Comparison of two extraction procedures for determination of trace metals in soil by atomic absorption spectrometry.
作者信息
Kucak A, Blanusa M
机构信息
Mining and Chemistry School, Varazdin, Croatia.
出版信息
Arh Hig Rada Toksikol. 1998 Dec;49(4):327-34.
The study compares nitric acid and ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA) extraction of forest soils for the analysis of trace metals Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Pb, and Cd. Fifty forest soil samples from ten different locations were extracted using both methods. The two extraction procedures were compared through regression analysis for each element. All elements were analysed by flame atomic absorption spectrometry method (AAS). The results show that both extracting procedures are only partially effective for most of the measured trace elements in soil. The extraction with diluted HNO3 was incomplete, as large amounts of siliceous material remained undigested. Recoveries obtained by this method for Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Pb, and Cd on certified reference material (San Joaquin Soil) were 34, 79, 47, 56, 71, and 102%, respectively. EDTA extraction was even less effective and is considered to reflect the quantity of bioavailable metals. The respective recoveries were 2, 45, 7, 20, 38 and 74%. The regression analyses performed for EDTA-extractable vs. HNO3-extractable metals of forest soils showed high and significant correlation for all examined metals, except Fe.
该研究比较了用硝酸和乙二胺四乙酸（EDTA）提取森林土壤以分析痕量金属铁、锰、锌、铜、铅和镉的效果。使用这两种方法对来自十个不同地点的五十个森林土壤样本进行了提取。通过对每种元素的回归分析比较了这两种提取程序。所有元素均采用火焰原子吸收光谱法（AAS）进行分析。结果表明，对于土壤中大多数被测痕量元素而言，两种提取程序都只是部分有效。用稀释的硝酸进行提取并不完全，因为大量硅质材料仍未被消化。该方法对铁、锰、锌、铜、铅和镉在标准参考物质（圣华金土壤）上的回收率分别为34%、79%、47%、56%、71%和102%。EDTA提取效果更差，被认为反映了生物可利用金属的量。各自的回收率分别为2%、45%、7%、20%、38%和74%。对森林土壤中EDTA可提取金属与硝酸可提取金属进行的回归分析表明，除铁之外，所有被测金属之间均存在高度显著的相关性。
Zotero 插件