Comparative study of extraction methods for the determination of PAHs from contaminated soils and sediments.
The following four methods were compared on the extraction efficiency of 16 EPA (US Environmental Protection Agency) polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs): German method of the Verband Deutscher Landwirtschaftlicher Untersuchungs und Forschungsanstalten (VDLUFA), two methods of the International Organization for Standardization using shaking (ISO A) and Soxhlet extraction (ISO B) and an ultrasonic method. Recovery rates of 16 PAHs were determined in two soils. Extraction efficiency was evaluated in five soils and three sediments. Effect of drying soils and sediments on extraction efficiency was tested using the VDLUFA and the ultrasonic methods. Our study shows that the number of aromatic rings, rather than extraction procedures, significantly influenced recovery rates of individual PAHs. No significant differences in extraction efficiency of the four methods were observed for less polluted samples. For highly polluted soils, extraction efficiency decreased in the following order: VDLUFA method > ISO A > ultrasonic method > ISO B. Influence of soil moisture on extraction efficiency depended to some extent on both solvent used and content of PAHs in samples. A mixture of dichloromethane/acetone (5:1) is recommended for PAH extraction from moist samples when the ultrasonic method is used.
Song
Y F
YF
Laboratory of Ecological Process of Trace Substances, Terrestrial Eco-System, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shenyang, People's Republic of China.
Jing
X
X
Fleischmann
S
S
Wilke
B M
BM
D002623:Chemistry Techniques, Analytical; D004784:Environmental Monitoring / Q000379:methods*; D019015:Geologic Sediments / Q000737:chemistry*; D011084:Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons / Q000032:analysis*; D012987:Soil; D012989:Soil Pollutants / Q000032:analysis*; D012997:Solvents; D014867:Water
D011084:Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons; D012987:Soil; D012989:Soil Pollutants; D012997:Solvents; D014867:Water