National University of Science and Technology "MISIS", 4 Leninsky Ave, Moscow, Russia, 119991.
Université de Pau et des Pays de l'Adour (UPPA), Institut des Sciences Analytiques et de Physico-Chimie pour l'Environnement et les matériaux (IPREM), UMR 5254 UPPA/CNRS, 64053, Pau Cedex 9, France.
Anal Bioanal Chem. 2019 Dec;411(30):8011-8021. doi: 10.1007/s00216-019-02147-9. Epub 2019 Nov 28.
Nanoparticles (NPs) in the environment have a potential risk for human health and the ecosystem due to their ubiquity, specific characteristics, and properties (extreme mobility in the environment, abilities to accumulate of toxic elements and penetrate into living organisms). There is still a gap in studies on the chemical composition of natural NPs. The main reason is the difficulty to recover NPs, which may represent only one-thousandth or less of the bulk environmental sample, for further dimensional and quantitative characterization. In the present study, a methodology for the recovery of the nanoparticle fraction from polydisperse environmental samples was developed taking as example volcanic ashes from different regions of the world. For the first time, three separation methods, namely, filtration through a 0.45-μm membrane, sedimentation, and coiled tube field-flow fractionation (CTFFF), were comparatively studied. The separated fractions were characterized by laser diffraction and scanning electron microscopy and then analyzed by inductively coupled plasma atomic emission and mass spectrometry. It has been shown that all three methods provide the separation of NPs less than 400 nm from the bulk material. However, the fraction separated by sedimentation also contained a population (5% in mass) of submicron particles (~ 400-900 nm). The filtration resulted in low recovery of NPs. The determination of most trace elements was then impossible; the concentration of elements was under the limit of detection of the analytical instrument. The sedimentation and CTFFF made it possible to determine quantifiable concentrations for both major and trace elements in separated fractions. However, the sedimentation took 48 h while CTFFF enabled the fractionation time to be decreased down to 2 h. Hence, CTFFF looked to be the most promising method for the separation of NPs followed by their quantitative elemental analysis.
环境中的纳米颗粒(NPs)由于其普遍性、特定特征和性质(在环境中极端的迁移能力、积累有毒元素和穿透生物体的能力),对人类健康和生态系统具有潜在风险。目前,关于天然 NPs 化学组成的研究还存在空白。主要原因是难以回收 NPs,因为它们可能只代表环境样品总量的千分之一或更少,以便进一步进行尺寸和定量表征。在本研究中,以来自世界不同地区的火山灰为例,开发了一种从多分散环境样品中回收纳米颗粒部分的方法。首次比较研究了三种分离方法,即 0.45-μm 膜过滤、沉降和盘管场流分离(CTFFF)。分离得到的部分用激光衍射和扫描电子显微镜进行了表征,然后用电感耦合等离子体质谱和原子发射光谱进行了分析。结果表明,所有三种方法都能将粒径小于 400nm 的 NPs 从大块材料中分离出来。然而,沉降分离出的部分还含有亚微米颗粒(~400-900nm)的颗粒群(占质量的 5%)。过滤导致 NPs 回收率低。大多数痕量元素的浓度无法确定;元素浓度低于分析仪器的检测限。沉降和 CTFFF 使得可以确定分离部分中主要和痕量元素的可量化浓度。然而,沉降需要 48 小时,而 CTFFF 使分离时间可以减少到 2 小时。因此,CTFFF 似乎是分离 NPs 及其定量元素分析最有前途的方法。