Focused microwave, supercritical fluid and subcritical solvent extraction methods were compared with the classical Soxhlet and sonication procedures for routine determination of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in contaminated soil. In each case the extraction efficiency was examined for 5 series (n = 5) of 15 PAHs. Quantitative and pragmatic arguments were considered toward the selection of an appropriated method for routine analysis. The new extraction techniques yielded interesting alternatives to conventional ones, not least since their quantitative results proved more easily reproducible than those afforded either by Soxhlet and sonication. Besides, the automation of extraction systems is a crucial criterion for routine analysis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dupeyron et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: