คำศัพท์เฉพาะทางเคมี2.5.3. Calibrati

คำศัพท์เฉพาะทางเคมี2.5.3. Calibration and sensitivity

Calibration and standard addition graphs were obtained for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb. However, due to unavailability of certified reference material, the standard addition technique was used throughout the development of Plackett–Burman and central composite designs.

The linear range of the calibration curve reached from the detection limit up to 200, 10, 100 and 100 μg L−1, for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, respectively. The regression equations (n = 5) for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb determination were, Y = (5.0 × 10−2) (Al) + (1.7 × 10−3), Y = (7.6 × 10−3) (Cd) + (3.0 × 10−3), Y = (1.1 × 10−3) (Ni) + (4.0 × 10−4) and Y = (9.0 × 10−4) (Pb) + (7.0 × 10−3), respectively. The data revealed excellent coefficient of correlation (R2) ranged as 0.995–0.999.

The limits of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) for TMs were calculated as under, View the MathML source, respectively, where ‘s’ is the standard deviation of 10 measurements of the blank and ‘m’ is the slope of the calibration graph obtained for each case. The LOD of 10, 0.05, 0.15 and 0.5 μg L−1 and LOQ 33.3, 0.17, 45 and 1.6 μg L−1 were calculated for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, respectively.

In order to confirm the applicability and accuracy of the MAE, the six replicates subsamples of a milk sample, spiked with certified standard solutions of Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, prior to the MAE and conventional wet acid digestions. Due to high concentration of Al and Ni, the subsamples of milk were diluted up to 100 and 10 times, respectively before standard addition method. Such spiking was performed at three concentration levels 2, 4 and 8 μg L−1 of Cd, while 5, 10 and 20 μg L−1 for Al, Ni and Pb. Average recovery of each, Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, before and after standard addition method are shown in Table 6. The paired t-test was also applied to compare the results obtained from both methods. A tExperimental values was calculated at degrees of freedom (n − 1) 5, the experimental values were lower than the tCritical (2.23) at a confidence interval of 95% (P > 0.05), indicates a nonsignificant differences ( Table 6). The precision of the methods, expressed as the relative standard deviation (RSD) for a series of nine independent analyses of the same sample, provided values ranging from 4.05% to 7.53% as a function of the toxic metal considered and its concentration level.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 1:

2.5.3. chemical terminology and sensitivity CalibrationCalibration and standard addition graphs were obtained for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb. However, due to unavailability of certified reference material, the standard addition technique was used throughout the development of Plackett–Burman and central composite designs.The linear range of the calibration curve reached from the detection limit up to 200, 10, 100 and 100 μg L−1, for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, respectively. The regression equations (n = 5) for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb determination were, Y = (5.0 × 10−2) (Al) + (1.7 × 10−3), Y = (7.6 × 10−3) (Cd) + (3.0 × 10−3), Y = (1.1 × 10−3) (Ni) + (4.0 × 10−4) and Y = (9.0 × 10−4) (Pb) + (7.0 × 10−3), respectively. The data revealed excellent coefficient of correlation (R2) ranged as 0.995–0.999.The limits of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) for TMs were calculated as under, View the MathML source, respectively, where 's' is the standard deviation of 10 measurements of the blank and 'm' is the slope of the calibration graph obtained for each case. The LOD of 10, 0.05, 0.15 and 0.5 μg L−1 and LOQ 33.3, 0.17, 45 and 1.6 μg L−1 were calculated for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, respectively.In order to confirm the applicability and accuracy of the MAE, the six replicates subsamples of a milk sample, spiked with certified standard solutions of Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, prior to the MAE and conventional wet acid digestions. Due to high concentration of Al and Ni, the subsamples of milk were diluted up to 100 and 10 times, respectively before standard addition method. Such spiking was performed at three concentration levels 2, 4 and 8 μg L−1 of Cd, while 5, 10 and 20 μg L−1 for Al, Ni and Pb. Average recovery of each, Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, before and after standard addition method are shown in Table 6. The paired t-test was also applied to compare the results obtained from both methods. A tExperimental values was calculated at degrees of freedom (n − 1) 5, the experimental values were lower than the tCritical (2.23) at a confidence interval of 95% (P > 0.05), indicates a nonsignificant differences ( Table 6). The precision of the methods, expressed as the relative standard deviation (RSD) for a series of nine independent analyses of the same sample, provided values ranging from 4.05% to 7.53% as a function of the toxic metal considered and its concentration level.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 2:

Chemical terminology 2.5.3. Calibration and sensitivity Calibration and standard addition graphs were obtained for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb. However, Due to unavailability of Certified reference Material, the standard addition Technique was used throughout the Development of Plackett-Burman and Central composite Designs. The linear Range. of the calibration curve reached from the detection limit up to 200, 10, 100 and 100 μg L-1, for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, respectively. The regression equations (n = 5) for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb. determination were, Y = (5.0 × 10-2) (Al) + (1.7 × 10-3), Y = (7.6 × 10-3) (Cd) + (3.0 × 10-3), Y = (1.1 ×. 10-3) (Ni) + (4.0 × 10-4) and Y = (9.0 × 10-4) (Pb) + (7.0 × 10-3), respectively. The data revealed excellent coefficient of correlation (R2) ranged. as from 0.995 to 0.999. The Limits of detection (LOD) and Limit of quantification (LOQ) for TMs were calculated as under, View the MathML Source, respectively, where 's' is the standard deviation of 10 measurements of the blank and' M. 'is the slope of the calibration graph obtained for each case. The LOD of 10, 0.05, 0.15 and 0.5 μg L-1 and LOQ 33.3, 0.17, 45 and 1.6 μg L-1 were calculated for Al, Cd, Ni and Pb. , respectively. In Order to Confirm the applicability and accuracy of the MAE, the Six replicates subsamples of a Milk sample, spiked with Certified standard Solutions of Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, prior to the MAE and conventional Wet acid Digestions. Due to. high concentration of Al and Ni, the subsamples of milk were diluted up to 100 and 10 times, respectively before standard addition method. Such spiking was performed at three concentration levels 2, 4 and 8 μg L-1 of Cd, while 5, 10. and 20 μg L-1 for Al, Ni and Pb. Average recovery of each, Al, Cd, Ni and Pb, before and after standard addition method are shown in Table 6. The paired t-test was also applied to compare the results. obtained from both methods. A tExperimental values ​​was calculated at degrees of freedom (n - 1) 5, the experimental values ​​were lower than the tCritical (2.23) at a confidence interval of 95% (P> 0.05), indicates a nonsignificant differences (. Table 6). The precision of the methods, expressed as the relative standard deviation (RSD) for a series of nine independent analyses of the same sample, provided values ​​ranging from 4.05% to 7.53% as a function of the toxic metal considered and its. concentration level.

ผลลัพธ์ (อังกฤษ) 3:

Chemical terminology 2.5.3. Calibration and sensitivity

Calibration and standard addition graphs were obtained for Al Cd,,, Ni and Pb. However due to, unavailability of certified reference material the standard, addition technique was used throughout. The development of Plackett - Burman and central composite designs.

.The linear range of the calibration curve reached from the detection limit up, to 200 10 100 and, 100 thermal g L − 1 for Al Cd,,,, Ni, and Pb respectively. The regression equations (n = 5), for Al Cd Ni and, Pb, determination were Y = (5.0 × 10 − 2) (Al). (1.7 × 10 − 3), Y = (7.6 × 10 − 3) (Cd) (3.0 × 10 − 3), Y = (1.1 × 10 − 3) (Ni) (4.0 × 10 − 4) and Y = (9.0 × 10 − 4) (Pb) (7.0. * 10 − 3),Respectively. The data revealed excellent coefficient of correlation (R2) ranged as 0.995 - 0.999.

The limits of detection. (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) for TMs were calculated, as under View the MathML source respectively where,, 's.' Is the standard deviation of 10 measurements of the blank and 'm' is the slope of the calibration graph obtained for each. Case. The LOD of 10 0.05,,0.15 and 0.5 thermal g L − 1 and, LOQ 33.3 0.17 45 and, 1.6 thermal g L − 1 were calculated for Al Cd Ni and,,, Pb respectively.

In order. To confirm the applicability and accuracy of the MAE the six, replicates subsamples of a milk sample spiked with, certified. Standard solutions of Al Cd Ni and Pb,,, to prior the MAE and conventional wet acid digestions. Due to high concentration. Of Al, and NiThe subsamples of milk were diluted up to 100 and, 10 times respectively before standard addition method. Such spiking. Was performed at three concentration levels 2 4 and, 8 thermal g L − 1 of Cd while, and, 5 10 20 thermal g L − 1, for Al Ni and Pb. Average. Recovery of each Al Cd,,,, Ni and Pb before and after standard addition method are shown in Table 6.The paired t-test was also applied to compare the results obtained from both methods. A tExperimental values was calculated. At degrees of freedom (n − 1), 5 the experimental values were lower than the tCritical (2.23) at a confidence interval of 95% (P. > 0.05), indicates a nonsignificant differences (Table 6). The precision of, the methodsExpressed as the relative standard deviation (RSD) for a series of nine independent analyses of the, same sample provided. Values ranging from 4.05% to 7.53% as a function of the toxic metal considered and its concentration level.