Ionic liquids versus ionic liquid-based surfactants in dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction for determining copper in water by flame atomic absorption spectrometry

This work compares the performance of dispersive liquid–liquid method (DLLME) as a prior step for determining copper by flame atomic absorption spectrometry (FAAS), when using the ionic liquid (IL) 1-butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate (C₄MIm-PF₆) or the IL-based surfactant 1-hexadecyl-3-butylimidazolium bromide (C₁₆C₄Im-Br) as extractant solvents. For the water-insoluble C₄MIm-PF₆, the most conventional DLLME mode using acetonitrile as dispersive solvent was employed. For the water-soluble C₁₆C₄Im-Br, the in situ DLLME mode with lithium bis[(trifluoromethane)sulfonyl]imide (Li-NTf₂) as metathesis reagent was employed. In both approaches, some effective parameters such as volumes of extractant and dispersive solvents, concentration of complexing agent, pH of sample solution, salting-out effect and final diluting solvent to ensure compatibility with FAAS, were properly optimised. The optimum conditions for the IL-DLLME method using C₄MIm-PF₆ were: 100 μL of neat C₄MIm-PF₆, 1 mL of acetonitrile, 10 mL of water, no control of pH for environmental waters, NaCl content of 23 g L⁻¹, diethyl dithiocarbamate (DDTC) as complexing agent at 10 mg L⁻¹ and final dilution of the micro-droplet with acetonitrile up to 70 µL. The optimum conditions for the in situ IL-DLLME method using C₁₆C₄Im-Br were: 0.8 mL of acetonitrile, 10 mL of water containing C₁₆C₄Im-Br at 25.2 mmol L⁻¹, final dilution step of the micro-droplet with 200 µL of acetonitrile and remaining conditions as those of C₄MIm-PF₆. The analytical performance of both methods was similar, being slightly better for the IL-DLLME method using C₄MIm-PF₆, with limits of detection (LOD) of 3.3 µg L⁻¹ (versus 5.1 µg L⁻¹ when using C₁₆C₄Im-Br), precision values as intraday relative standard deviation (RSD in %) lower than 8.8% (being of 10% for the C₁₆C₄Im-Br method) and an enrichment factor of 54 (being 27 when using C₁₆C₄Im-Br). The DLLME-FAAS method with C₄MIm-PF₆ was used in the analysis of environmental waters with successful performance, with relative recoveries of 110% and 105%, and interday precision with RSD values of 21% and 7.4% for spiked levels of 60 and 160 µg L⁻¹, respectively. The results obtained when analysing an urban wastewater sample coming from an inter-laboratory exercise was comparable to those obtained for other 93 laboratories. The method was also valid for the determination of Cu²⁺ in presence of foreign ions commonly found in natural waters.