Electroanalytical chemistryPossibilities for the automated determination of trace concentrations of uranium in water samples by adsorptive stripping voltammetry
References (2)
- et al.
Anal. Chim. Acta
(1995) - et al.
Fresenius' J. Anal. Chem.
(1994)
Cited by (32)
Sensors for determination of uranium: A review
2019, TrAC - Trends in Analytical ChemistryCitation Excerpt :From Table 9, it could find that most of sensors by ASV method have a good sensitivity (the order of magnitude of 10−9–10−10) and those of C58 and C62 even reach the order of 10−11, which is due to the function of pre-adsorption. Moreover, most of the ligands usually detect uranyl ions under neutral condition, but some ligands can detect under strong acidic (C55 [189] and C62 [196–198]) or strong alkaline (C51 [183,184]). However, some of sensors are still interfered by Cu(II), Fe(III), Cd(II) or Pb(II) (Table 9).
Carbon nanotube-based nanocomposite sensor tuned with a catechol as novel electrochemical recognition platform of uranyl ion in aqueous samples
2018, Sensors and Actuators, B: ChemicalCitation Excerpt :These techniques usually require some pre-concentration and extraction procedures, hindering their integration for in-field analysis. Some electrochemical platforms based on using conventional pure metal transducers have been investigated for uranyl ion determination [10–15]. However, such electrodes yielded detection limits higher than the promulgated by EPA [16].
A selective electromembrane extraction of uranium (VI) prior to its fluorometric determination in water
2013, Analytica Chimica ActaCitation Excerpt :Generally, it seems that ICP-MS methods provide lowest LODs for determination of uranium [41–43]. However the EME-fluorometry procedure is a very simple and inexpensive in comparison with ICP/MS. Additionally, the optimized procedure in this study had a wide linear range that it was comparable with reported cloud point extraction-ICP/MS procedure while limited linear range was reported for other procedures for quantification of uranium [34,37–39]. It shows that the proposed method is very suitable for rapid determination of uranium, considering sensitivity, selectivity and cost effectiveness.
Optimization and validation of an automated voltammetric stripping technique for ultratrace metal analysis
2007, Analytica Chimica ActaNovel voltammetric methods for vanadium determination by exploitation of catalytic adsorptive vanadium-chloranilic acid-bromate system
2005, Analytica Chimica ActaCitation Excerpt :Because of its properties, it has been applied to direct and indirect determination of some cations, such as Ca(II), Sr(II), Ba(II), Zn(II), Pb(II), Hg(II), Cd(II), La(III), Zr(IV), Th(IV) and Mo(VI), and anions, such as F−, SO42−, PO43− and BO2−, by means of absorption spectrophotometry [1,2], polarography [3] and potentiometry [4]. Since the early 1990s, the CAA has been used in the determination of traces of such ions as U(VI) [5–8], Sb(III), Sb(V) [9,10], Mo(VI) [11–13], Sn(IV) [14], simultaneous determination of Mo(VI), U(VI), Sb(III) [15] and V(V) [16,17] by means of adsorptive stripping voltammetry (AdSV). The application of CAA in AdSV was reviewed by Sander and Henze [18].
Adsorptive stripping voltammetric measurements of trace uranium at the bismuth film electrode
2005, Analytica Chimica ActaCitation Excerpt :In particular, adsorptive-cathodic stripping voltmmetry (AdCSV), involving the interfacial accumulation of surface-active complexes of uranium onto a hanging mercury drop electrode, has been shown useful for monitoring sub-nanomolar levels of trace uranium in different natural water systems [12–15]. Uranium complexes with oxine [12], catechol [13], chloranilic acid [14], or cupferron [15] have been particularly useful for this task. A limitation of these AdCSV procedures, particularly for field screening applications, is their reliance on a mercury drop detector.