Air-assisted liquid-liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating deep eutectic solvent for the analysis of ultraviolet filters in water samples by high performance liquid chromatography with the aid of response surface methodology

Abstract

For this work, a novel air-assisted liquid-liquid microextraction based on solidification of floating deep eutectic solvent (AA-LLME-SFDES), coupled with a high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was developed for the detection of benzophenone and salicylate ultraviolet filters in water samples. Three types of fatty acid-based hydrophobic deep eutectic solvents (DESs) with low viscosity, low-density, and melting point close to room temperature were prepared and employed as extraction solvents. This air-assisted liquid-liquid microextraction was carried out in a glass centrifuge tube. Subsequently, the glass tube was introduced into ice-water bath and held for 3 min, during which the upper DES phase was solidified. The water phase was easily extracted using a syringe equipped with a long needle, and later, the glass tube was removed from ice-water bath. The solidified DES phase was immediately melted at room temperature and used for HPLC analysis. The response surface methodology was employed to optimize some influencing parameters such as the volume of the extraction solvent, the pH value of sample solution, the number of extraction cycles, and the addition of salt. A quadratic model, namely a central composite design, was used to replace the conventional single factor analysis. It was found that under optimal conditions, the limits of determination and quantification were 0.045–0.54 µg L−1 and 0.15–2.0 µg L−1, respectively. The relative standard deviations for inter-day (n = 5) and intra-day (n = 5) precision were ≤ 4.2%, whereas the enrichment factors for the ultraviolet filters were obtained from 41 to 50. Furthermore, this novel method was successfully employed for the detection of benzophenone and salicylate ultraviolet filters from real water samples. The recoveries ranged from 87.5% to 105.8%, whereas the RSDs were lower than 3.6%.