Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
DOI 10.1007/s10661-014-4051-8
The simultaneous stripping of arsenic and selenium
from wastewaters using hollow-fibre supported liquid
membranes
Lihle D. Mafu & Titus A. M. Msagati &
Bhekie B. Mamba
Received: 30 May 2013 / Accepted: 11 September 2014 / Published online: 25 September 2014
# Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014
Abstract The extraction of total arsenic and selenium
using hollow-fibre supported liquid membranes
(HFSLMs), with specific interest in the optimal condi-
tions for the extraction in wastewater, is reported. The
extraction time, type of liquid membrane, sample and
donor pH and stirring rate were optimised, and thereaf-
ter, the developed method was tested in real wastewater
samples. The optimal HFSLMs adopted, after optimisa-
tion tests, comprised of Aliquat 336, 0.8 M NaOH,
200 rpm and 80 min as the extractant, stripping phase,
stirring rate and reaction time, respectively. The devel-
oped method had reasonable-to-high extraction efficien-
cies in real wastewater samples with the final effluent
recording as high as 73 and 78 % removal efficiencies
for Se and As, respectively. Considering the initial con-
centrations found in the samples, use of this developed
method could bring down the concentrations to levels
admissible by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency (US-EPA) and World Health
Organisation (WHO).
Keywords Aliquat 336 . Arsenic . Selenium .
Hollow-fibre supported liquid membranes . Wastewater
L. D. Mafu : T. A. M. Msagati (*) : B. B. Mamba
College of Science, Engineering and Technology,
Nanotechnology for Water Sustainability Research Unit,
University of South Africa (Florida),
UNISA Science Campus, Corner of Christiaan de Wet Road
& Pioneer Avenue, Florida, 1709 Johannesburg, South Africa
e-mail: msagatam@unisa.ac.za
Introduction
Arsenic and selenium are amongst metallic pollutants
found in many aquatic environments, and they both
exist in two dominant oxidation states, namely, As(III)
and As(V), and Se(IV) and Se(VI), respectively (Jain
and Ali 2000; Kumar and Riyazuddin 2011; Sharif et al.
2005). Arsenic and selenium compounds and/or com-
plexes have been used for over a decade in pesticides,
wood preservatives and electronic industries, but their
main sources in the environment are fossil fuel and
biomass combustion, natural disasters such as volcanic
eruptions, as well as in food additives and cosmetics
(Kobya et al. 2011; Miekeley et al. 2005; Najafi et al.
2010; Salleh et al. 2000). Both these metalloids and their
complexes have been reported to have carcinogenic
effects which may lead to the disruption of ATP produc-
tion, lung cancer, cancer of the kidneys, etc. (Dogan
et al. 2010). It is thus very important to remove these
pollutants, existing in any form, because they tend to
undergo redox reactions which may lead to the forma-
tion of one or more of the toxic speciation forms. For
example, As(V) can easily be reduced to As(III) in
acidic conditions just like Se(VI) can easily be reduced
to Se(IV) in acidic conditions.
Sample preparation and remediation methods that
have previously been used for the removal of heavy
metals such as As and Se include solvent extraction,
co-precipitation, solid-phase extraction, coagulation,
flocculation, ion exchange and ultrafiltration (Najafi
et al. 2010; Miekeley et al. 2005; Kobya et al. 2011;
8866
Manajlovic et al. 2009). Not only were these methods
used for the remediation of As and Se, other metals as
well have been pre-concentrated and extracted. All these
methods have been applied with various degrees of
success, but shortcomings such as the usage of large
volumes of organic solvents, complex operations, diffi-
culties in automation, longer extraction times and also
high capital and maintenance costs overshadowed their
successes (Vassileva et al. 2001; Zeng et al. 2010).
The use of hollow-fibre supported liquid membranes
(HFSLMs) is not new but has been used to remove other
pollutants (both organic and inorganic) mostly individ-
ually. Reports on simultaneous extraction of pollutants
using HFSLMs are not too common (Liu et al. 2007;
Poliwoda et al. 2010; Zhang et al. 2010). It has many
advantages which far outweigh its disadvantages, and
among the striking features of the HFSLM technique is
their high removal efficiencies, less usage of organic
solvents and ease in automation (Zeng et al. 2010).
Figure 1 shows a drawing of a polypropylene hollow
fibre. It is a porous tube with a hollow lumen which
holds the stripping phase, pores which are immobilised
with a few microlitres of organic solvent which facili-
tates the stripping/extraction.
The outside of the hollow fibre generally contains the
unwanted pollutants where the extraction mechanism is
highly dependent on the ability of the organic phase to
extract analytes and also the stripping solution’s affinity
to the analytes. Another instrumental factor in the strip-
ping is the difference in pH values between the sample
and the stripping phase because it facilitates the move-
ment of ions between the two phases and hence the
movement of the cationic species as well (Chimuka
et al. 2010; Lozano et al. 2011).
Fig. 1 Hollow-fibre supported
liquid membrane
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
Organic solvents have been reported in the literature
for the enrichment of metals and include octanol
(Es’haghi and Azmoodeh 2010), n-dodecane (Liu and
Shi 2009) undecane, CYANEX® 301 (Pancharoen et al.
2009) and AliquatTM 336 (Fontàs et al. 2000). These
solvents have been used very effectively to extract
metals such as copper (Es’haghi and Azmoodeh 2010;
Yang and Kocherginsky 2006), lead (Zeng et al. 2010),
cadmium (Peng et al. 2007) and mercury (Pancharoen
et al. 2009). Aliquat 336 is a basic extractant; it is highly
recommended for utilisation in HFSLM procedures for
separation of metals due to its ease of forming temporal
complexes with most metals, hence facilitating the
movement of pollutants from the sample phase to the
donor phase. It is also categorised as one of the green
solvents (Guell et al. 2008). The structure of Aliquat 336
consists of long hydrocarbon chains attached to a central
and positive nitrogen atom which makes it a more
suitable extractant for a wide range of anionic metal
compounds. It can form salts with anions over a wide
pH range; hence, it finds most applications in acidic
media to slightly alkaline pH levels (Fontàs et al.
2000). It has also been used to remove heavy metals
from wastewater in the textile industries (Asai et al.
2006), as an anti-static agent, in the cosmetic industry,
and as a colorant or a de-colorant (Guell et al. 2008;
Nayl 2010).
Considering that Aliquat 336 is generally used in
metal extraction and has the ability to strip most toxic
metals, the need to carry out a study on more than one
metal extraction is significant. To the best of our knowl-
edge, the simultaneous stripping of these two metals
using Aliquat 336 has not been performed successfully
to date, and no findings have yet been reported in
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874 8867

literature. This work reports on the development of a Table 1 Parameters and their values measured in situ
method using a hollow-fibre supported liquid mem- Sampling stage pH Temperature Conductivity
brane for the effective pre-concentration of arsenic and (°C) (18.4 MΩ)
selenium from wastewater for detection and analysis by
various analytical techniques. Anaerobic 1.9 20.1 3,999
Anoxic 2.1 19.8 3,999
Aeration 3.0 20.0 3,999
Materials and methods Final effluent 6 21.7 2,137

Chemicals and reagents

Undecane, octanol, Aliquat 336, acetone, nitric acid,
hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide (AR grade),
supplied by Merck (Darmstadt, Germany), were all of
analytical grade and were used without any further
purification. Deionised water (18.4-MΩ conductivity)
was obtained from an in-house reverse osmosis system
and was used for most dilutions and the preparation of
standards. Q3/2 Accurel polypropylene hollow-fibre
membrane (200-μm wall thickness, 600-μm inner di-
ameter and 0.2-μm pore size) was obtained from
Membrana GmbH (Wuppertal, Germany).
Instrumentation
For the analysis and quantification of the stripped and
pre-concentrated arsenic and selenium, inductively
coupled plasma-optical emission spectroscopy (ICP-
OES) was used (Wirsam Scientific, GBC Quantima
Series ICP connected to a GBC SDS 720 auto sampler).
Sampling
The treatment plan of interest is categorised into differ-
ent stages from which each plays a different role in the
treatment process. The chosen stages are anaerobic,
anoxic, aeration and the final effluent. On sampling,
samples were kept in sampling bottles that had been
rinsed with 10 % HNO3 and these samples were kept
below 5 °C until use. Sample pH, temperature and
conductivity were recorded in situ and are presented in
Table 1.
bulk stock standard solutions. Subsequent dilution stan-
dards were prepared from the stock standard solutions
by dilutions using deionised water.
HFSLM procedure
A polypropylene hollow fibre was cut into equal
lengths, 6 cm each, and cleaned with acetone, and one
end of the polypropylene hollow fibre was sealed. The
pores of the hollow fibre were then immobilised with the
organic solvent (Aliquat 336, Aliquat 336+octanol and
Aliquat 336+undecane) of choice, thus allowing the
solution to fill the pores. The hollow fibre was then
rinsed lightly, and an aqueous solution acting as the
acceptor phase was introduced into the lumen of the
hollow fibre by syringe. The other end was also sealed
and then the polypropylene hollow fibre was immersed
in a sample solution while stirring for an optimal period
of time. In order to ensure optimal extraction perfor-
mance, selectivity and reproducibility of the method,
different conditions such as the temperature, pH of both
the sample (donor) and organic phases, and the extrac-
tion time were optimised in a sequence where one
parameter is varied while keeping the other variables
constant. The enrichment factor, per cent extraction and
the amount extracted were then calculated using
Eqs. (1), (2) and (3), respectively:
C fst
EF ¼ ð1Þ
C is
C i −C f
%E ¼  100 ð2Þ
Ci

Preparation of standards E ¼ C i −C f ð3Þ

Arsenic and selenium metals were dissolved in a small where

amount of 15 M aqua regia and 0.5 M HNO3, respec-
tively, and then diluted to the mark with deionised water EF is the enrichment factor
(in a 1,000-ml volumetric flask), and this formed the Cfst is the initial concentration in the stripping phase
8868
Cis is the initial analyte concentration in the sample
phase
%E is the percentage removal of analytes from the
sample
Ci is the initial concentration in the sample before
extraction
Cf is the final concentration in the sample after
extraction
E is the extracted amount
Results and discussions
Optimisation of various parameters
Organic phase and pH
The organic phase or extractant is a fundamental tool in
the operations of a hollow-fibre supported liquid mem-
brane as metal ions are transferred into the stripping
solution while the extractant recedes and diffuses to
the opposite side of the liquid membrane by the concen-
tration gradient to react again with metal ions in the feed
solution(Chimuka et al. 2010). Different organic sol-
vents extract different pollutants differently, but the
amount of stripped pollutant is almost the same for
inorganic species with similar properties (Jönsson and
Mathiasson 2000). In this study, undiluted Aliquat 336,
Aliquat/octan-1-ol (1:1) and Aliquat/undecane (1:1)
were tested to evaluate their performance in the removal
of both arsenic and selenium in synthetic samples con-
taining 500 μg l−1 of each metal element. The influence
of pH and temperature on the performance of the differ-
ent extractant proportions/mixtures was investigated.
Table 2 shows the parameters investigated in the three
organic phases.
The primary optimisation model incorporates codes
which represent specific groups, e.g. 132 means that the
Table 2 Optimisation setup
Stripping solutions Organic phase Samples
Aqua regia 0.1 M Aliquat only Aqua regia only
Aqua regia ≥0.1 M Aliquat+octanol (1:1) 100 μg l−1 in 0.1
M aqua regia
NaOH (0.2 M) Aliquat+undecane (1:1) 100 μg l−1 in 0.2
M aqua regia
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
stripping phase is aqua regia 0.1 M, Aliquat+undecane
(1:1) as the organic phase and 100 μg l−1 in 0.1 M aqua
regia. The results for experiments carried out for arsenic
are presented in Fig. 2.
From Fig. 2, it is evident that all the organic solvents
tested were able to remove more than 20 % of the total
As in all the solutions. Also to be noted is that the
alteration of each parameter affected the percentage
removal either positively or negatively. As outlined in
many other studies (Chimuka et al. 2010; Pancharoen
et al. 2009; Peng et al. 2007), the performance of the
HFSLM technique is governed by parameters such as
pH, temperature and extraction duration; therefore, it is
essential to optimise these factors in order to develop an
effective technique operating optimally to remove pol-
lutants in samples, be it organic or inorganic.
From the first optimisation step, it was evident that
sodium hydroxide was the best stripping reagent in
terms of efficiency in the stripping phase (area marked
3 in Fig. 2). By using sodium hydroxide, it was possible
to achieve recoveries of more than 69 % independent of
the acidity of the sample or the organic phase used. This
implies that sodium hydroxide was a better stripping
phase reagent compared to the acidic aqua regia. Also,
in Fig. 2, it can be observed that the samples with a
higher acidity seem to enhance the stripping of arsenic
as evidenced from the rise of the slope in the graph
(removal percentage) in the sample compartments (i.e.
3.3.3>3.3.2, 3.2.3>3.2.2 and 3.1.3>3.1.2).
The circled areas marked (i), (ii) and (iii) in Fig. 2
represent the highest points of extraction in each stage.
Another observation from Fig. 2 is that Aliquat 336 was
found to be the best extractant in all stages as it was able
to strip more than 50 % of the target metallic species.
The observation can be summarised in that phase sys-
tems 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 were the most efficient in terms of
the amount of total arsenic removed even though phase
systems 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.3.2 and 3.3.3 also achieved more
than 70 % of arsenic removals. Therefore, phase system
3.1.3 was used for all subsequent stripping experiments.
Figure 3 shows the trend in the optimisation of phase
systems in the stripping of selenium.
One significant observation from Fig. 3 is that all the
HFSLM phase combinations and the net extraction per-
centages of selenium were found to be lower than those
of arsenic although high enough (~77 %) to conclude
that there was substantial stripping. It is thus worth
noting that the removal trends shown in Figs. 2 and 3
are similar, in that the highest stripping for both metals
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
Fig. 2 Primary optimisation
results for arsenic (NB: phase
combinations as in Table 3)
was obtained when phase systems 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 were
employed. These phase systems are combinations of
NaOH (stripping phase), Aliquat 336 (extractant), ana-
lyte in 0.1 M aqua regia and NaOH (stripping phase),
and Aliquat 336 (extractant) for analytes present in
2.0 M aqua regia.
For the subsequent series of optimisation steps, un-
diluted Aliquat 336 was used as the extractant of choice
and NaOH as the stripping reagent for acidified samples.
Stripping time dependence
Stripping of analytes from environmental matrices using
liquid membranes is time dependent (Jönsson and
Fig. 3 Optimisation of phase
system in the stripping
experiments for selenium
(NB: phase combinations
as in Table 3)
8869
Mathiasson 2000). Appropriate optimisation of the ex-
traction time in order to enhance the enrichment of the
analyte is required. On the other hand, it is essential that
the sample have sufficient contact time with the
HFSLMs for the effective mass transfer to occur. The
time optimisation experiments for stripping time rang-
ing from 10 to 110 min using 0.5 M NaOH as the
stripping solution, Aliquat 336 as the extractant and
100 μg l−1 As and Se dissolved in 0.1 M aqua regia
were carried out separately for the two different toxi-
cants (arsenic and selenium), and the results are present-
ed in Fig. 4.
From Fig. 4, it can be seen that the amount of both
arsenic and selenium extracted increased with
8870
Fig. 4 The amount of inorganics
removed as a function of time
increasing extraction time up until 70 min after which a
decrease was observed. A significant decline started
after 80 min of extraction time for both arsenic and
selenium. This can be attributed to the possible back-
diffusion of the inorganic species (arsenic and selenium)
into the sample phase that may be caused by the changes
in the pH of the receiving phase and also the new
concentration gradient established after extraction
(Lozano et al. 2011).
Another factor that may be playing an important role
in the effective stripping of the two metalloids is the size
of the two species because the bigger the size of the
metalloid, the lower the efficiency in the extraction
(Lozano et al. 2011). The two metalloids differ in terms
of their molecular sizes and thus their stripping trends
differ, such that for arsenic, the highest amount was
Fig. 5 Effect of stirring rate on
extraction
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
extracted after 70 min, whilst extraction of selenium
was highest at a time of 90 min. Taking this factor into
consideration, the optimal extraction time for the simul-
taneous stripping of arsenic and selenium was set at
80 min.
Effect of stirring rate
According to Guell et al. (2008), stirring enhances mass
transfer during the enrichment processes; it promotes
the equilibrium of solutes in the stirred sample and
improves the continued active interaction between the
sample and the extraction material. The effect of stirring
rate was therefore investigated by varying the stirring
rate from 20 up to 1,000 r min−1, while monitoring the
stripping capacity, as shown in Fig. 5.
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874 8871

Fig. 6 Effect of the concentration

variation of NaOH in mol/L

Figure 5 shows that there was a slight increase in the The results given in Fig. 6 show that the concentra-
percentage removal as the stirring rate was increased tion of NaOH in the stripping phase does affect the
from 20 to 300 r min−1 with a maximum and a signifi- stripping of the two target pollutants, because the per-
cant decline with a further increase in the stirring rate centage stripped increased with increasing concentra-
(Fig. 5). This may be attributed to the fact that at high tion of NaOH almost throughout the concentration
stirring rate, there is minimal contact between the sam- range studied. The optimum concentration for subse-
ple molecule and the liquid membrane, thus slowing quent experiments was then fixed at 0.8 M. This implies
down the diffusion of analyte molecules across the that the stripping of these elements depends solely on
hydrophobic liquid membrane supported in the pores the amount of ions freely moving in the stripping solu-
of the hollow fibre. tion. Since the pollutants are also ions in solution, their
removal is therefore improved as the amounts of ions
Effect of the reagent concentration in the stripping freely roaming in the stripping solution are increased.
phase
Method validation and the simultaneous removal of As
Since the stripping phase plays an essential role in the and Se
membrane extraction processes (Chimuka et al. 2010), it
is essential to find the ideal reagent concentration suit- After having optimised the various operational parame-
able for optimal removal of analytes. The effect of the ters, the technique was then tested on the simultaneous
concentration of the NaOH as the stripping phase re- stripping or removal of both target pollutants in samples
agent for the two metals was investigated by varying the from a wastewater treatment plant. The conditions under
concentration from 0.1 up to 1.0 M while monitoring the which this test was performed are listed in Table 3.
percentage stripped (Fig. 6).
Table 4 Selectivity of HFSLM for the stripping of arsenic and
selenium
Table 3 Optimal parameters for developed HFSLM
Element Removal (%) Enrichment factors
Parameter Optimal response
As 78 99
Stripping reagent 0.8 M NaOH Se 74 93
Extractant Aliquat 336 (undiluted) Pb 39 20
Extraction time 80 min Cd 48 29
Stirring rate 200 r min−1 Hg 41 34
8872
Table 5 Performance of the HFSLM on samples from wastewater
treatment plants
Sampling stage Removal (%) (As) Removal (%) (Se)
Anaerobic 65 60
Anoxic 64 60
Aeration 73 69
Final effluent 78 73
For validation of the developed method, the metal
recovery experiments were performed using a simulated
solution containing metal concentrations of 0.1 mg l−1,
and the extraction using HFSLMs was carried out using
optimal conditions as given in Table 3. It was found that
the method could successfully remove 81 and 76 % of
arsenic and selenium, respectively, with pre-
concentration factors of 101 and 93, respectively.
Selectivity studies for the developed method
In as much as the two toxicants were removed from the
wastewater matrix, it was essential to carry out selectiv-
ity studies to determine the specificity of the developed
method for the targeted analytes. To accomplish this
task, a synthetic solution was prepared and spiked with
arsenic, selenium and also lead, mercury, and cadmium,
and the HFSLM extraction was performed under the
optimal conditions as identified (Table 3). The results
are depicted in Table 4 and clearly show a fairly good
Fig. 7 Proposed extraction mechanism for the simultaneous extraction of both arsenic and selenium
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
selectivity of HFSLMs for the target species arsenic and
selenium during simultaneous extraction and stripping
in one single stage in the presence of lead, mercury and
cadmium.
Analysis of wastewater treatment plant samples
After the optimisation procedure, this method was then
implemented in environmental wastewater effluent sam-
ples to pre-concentrate As and Se. Wastewater treatment
plant samples (samples collected as described in the
“Sampling” section) were filtered through a Whatman
filter paper without any adjustment to the sample pH.
All the treatment stages of the wastewater treatment
plant, i.e. pre-anoxic, anaerobic, anoxic, aeration, elutri-
ation and final effluent stages, were sampled and
analysed. The results obtained are given in Table 5.
The results show that the developed method is capable
of removing arsenic and selenium from wastewater
sources. Further observations suggest that most of the
toxicants are removed in the final effluent stage (78 and
73 % of arsenic and selenium, respectively) even though
during the aeration stage the removals were also high
(73 and 69 % of arsenic and selenium, respectively).
The proposed possible mechanism for the simulta-
neous stripping of arsenic and selenium whereby all the
forms of arsenic and selenium present in the solution
interact with the Aliquat 336 to form arsenic and sele-
nium complexes in the hydrophobic membrane phase is
shown in Fig. 7. The anionic part of the complex formed
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
in the membrane phase is then extracted by the NaOH
during the stripping phase forming a sodium-arsenic/
selenium complex, hence removing the arsenic/
selenium from the sample in the sample phase. The
mechanism may be represented by the following general
Eqs. (4) and (5) Zhang et al. 2010:
A þ N R4 Cl→N R4 A þ Cl −
N R4 A þ NaOH→N R4 OH þ NaA
Equations (4) and (5) show the interactions that take
place at the sample phase-membrane interface and at the
stripping phase-membrane interface, respectively,
whereby A represents each of the two As and Se
oxyanions. It can be noted from Fig. 7 that as the
extraction progresses, OH− takes the place of Cl−.
Statistical evaluation of As and Se removal
The simultaneous removal efficiency of the developed
method is satisfactory and it opens up new possibilities
in remediation science. However, the quantities of the
removals of As against Se seem to be in the same region.
As such, the test statistic t was analysed for pooled data
to establish if there is any statistical difference in the
removal efficiencies of the developed method towards
As and Se. Because the averages (μ), as shown in
Table 5, are different, the t test equation will be
μ1 −μ2
t¼ rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
N 1 −N 2
spooled
N 1N 2
where
t is the Student’s t test
spooled is the pooled standard deviation
Ni is the replicate analysis of the ith data
μi is the mean average of the ith data
and spooled is given by
vffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
u XN 1 XN 2 
u 2
t 1 ðxi −μ1 Þ þ
spooled ¼ 1
N 1 þ N 2 −2
for the ith data being As data and jth data being Se
data.
The calculated t value gave 0.84065 whilst at 6
degrees of freedom and at 95 % confidence level, t
statistic is 2.45, and since 0.84065<2.45, we reject the
null hypothesis at 95 % confidence level for 8−2=6
8873
degrees of freedom and conclude that there is no differ-
ence in the removal efficiencies of As and Se simulta-
neously using the developed method.
Conclusions
ð4Þ
A hollow-fibre supported liquid membrane method was
ð5Þ successfully developed by optimising experimental pa-
rameters such as sample pH, acceptor phase pH, type
and concentration of acceptor phase solution, stirring
rate and extraction time. The summary of the optimised
results is presented in Table 3. On application in actual
wastewater samples, the developed method was able to
pre-concentrate and remove 78 and 73 % of arsenic and
selenium, respectively, from the final effluent stage
sample. This developed method also showed a selectiv-
ity coefficient of >1 towards both target analytes. From
analysis of the method performance on real water sam-
ples, it was concluded that the removal of As and Se is
the same which may also imply that the remediation of
these analytes in water happens via the same
mechanism.
References
Asai, S., Watanabe, K., Saito, K., & Sugo, T. (2006). Preparation
of Aliquat 336-impregnated porous membrane. Journal of
Membrane Science, 281, 195–202.
Chimuka, L., Msagati, T. A. M., Cukrowska, E., & Tutu, H.
(2010). Critical parameters in a supported liquid membrane
extraction technique for ionizable organic compounds with a
stagnant acceptor phase. Journal of Chromatography. A,
1217(16), 2318–2325.
Dogan, O., Tuzen, M., Mendil, D., & Soylak, M. (2010).
Determination of As (III) and As (V) species in some
natural water and food samples by solid-phase extrac-
tion on Streptococcus pyogenes immobilized on
Sepabeads SP 70 and hydride generation atomic absorp-
tion spectrometry. Food and Chemical Toxicology,
48(5), 1393–1398.
2 Es’haghi, Z., & Azmoodeh, R. (2010). Hollow fiber supported
x j −μ2 liquid membrane microextraction of Cu 2+followed by
flame atomic absorption spectroscopy determination.
Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 3(1), 21–26.
Fontàs, C., Palet, C., Salvadó, V., & Hidalgo, M. (2000). A hollow
fiber supported liquid membrane based on Aliquat 336 as a
carrier for rhodium ( III ) transport and preconcentration.
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 178, 131–139.
Guell, R., Antico, E., Salvadó, V., & Fontas, C. (2008). Efficient
hollow fiber supported liquid membrane system for the re-
moval and preconcentration of Cr ( VI ) at trace levels.
Separation and Purification Technology, 62, 389–393.
8874
Jain, C. K., & Ali, I. (2000). Arsenic: occurrence, toxicity and
speciation techniques. Water Research, 34(17), 4304–4312.
Jönsson, J.A., & Mathiasson, L. (2000). Membrane-based tech-
niques for sample enrichment, 902, 205–225.
Kobya, M., Gebologlu, U., Ulu, F., Oncel, S., & Demirbas, E.
(2011). Removal of arsenic from drinking water by the
electrocoagulation using Fe and Al electrodes.
Electrochimica Acta, 56(14), 5060–5070.
Kumar, A. R., & Riyazuddin, P. (2011). Speciation of selenium in
groundwater: seasonal variations and redox transformations.
Journal of Hazardous Materials, 192(1), 263–269.
Liu, Y., & Shi, B. (2009). Hollow fiber supported liquid membrane
for extraction of ethylbenzene and nitrobenzene from aque-
ous solution: a Hansen solubility parameter approach.
Separation and Purification Technology, 65, 233–242.
Liu, J., Tor, L., Mayer, P., & Ake, J. (2007). Passive extraction and
clean-up of phenoxy acid herbicides in samples from a
groundwater plume using hollow fiber supported liquid
membranes. Journal of Analytical and Applied Pyrolysis,
1160, 56–63.
Lozano, L. J., Godínez, C., Ríos, A. P. D. L., & Hernández-
fernández, F. J. (2011). Recent advances in supported ionic
liquid membrane technology. Journal of Membrane Science,
376(1–2), 1–14.
Manajlovic, D., Popara, A., Dojcinovic, B. P., Nikolic, A.,
Kuraica, M. M., Obradovic, B. M., & Puric, J. (2009).
Comparison of two methods of removal of arsenic from
portable water. Vacuum, 83, 142–145.
Miekeley, N., Pereira, C., Casartelli, E. A., Almeida, A. C., &
Carvalho, M. D. F. B. (2005). Inorganic speciation analysis of
selenium by ion chromatography-inductively coupled plasma-
mass spectrometry and its application to effluents from a petro-
leum refinery B. Spectrochimica Acta, Part B, 60, 633–641.
Najafi, M. N., Seidi, S., Alizadeh, R., & Tavakoli, H. (2010).
Spectrochimica Acta Part B Inorganic selenium speciation
in environmental samples using selective electrodeposition
coupled with electrothermal atomic absorption spectrometry.
Spectrochimica Acta, Part B, 65, 334–339.
Nayl, A.A. (2010). Extraction and separation of Co (II) and Ni (II)
from acidic sulfate solutions using Aliquat 336. 173, 223–230.
Environ Monit Assess (2014) 186:8865–8874
Pancharoen, U., Poonkum, W., & Waritswat, A. (2009). Treatment
of arsenic ions from produced water through hollow fiber
supported liquid membrane. Journal of Alloys and
Compounds, 482, 328–334.
Peng, J., Liu, R., Liu, J., He, B., Hu, X., & Jiang, G. (2007).
Ultrasensitive determination of cadmium in seawater by hol-
low fiber supported liquid membrane extraction coupled with
graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry.
Spectrochimica Acta, Part B, 62, 499–503.
Poliwoda, A., Krzy, M., & Wieczorek, P. P. (2010). Supported
liquid membrane extraction with single hollow fiber for
the analysis of fluoroquinolones from environmental sur-
face water samples. Journal of Chromatography. A, 1217,
3590–3597.
Salleh, S. H., Saito, Y., & Jinno, K. (2000). An approach to
solventless sample preparation procedure for pesticides anal-
ysis using solid phase microextraction/supercritical fluid ex-
traction technique. Analytica Chimica Acta, 418, 69–77.
Sharif, A.K.M., Krishnamoorti, K.R., Alamgir, M., & A., B.S.
(2005). Determination of arsenic, chromium, selenium and
zinc in some tropical fish by neutron activation. Journal of
National Oceanographic, Atmospheric and Maritime
Institute, 22(2), 1–8.
Vassileva, E., Becker, A., & Broekaert, J.A.C. (2001).
Determination of arsenic and selenium species in groundwa-
ter and soil extracts by ion chromatography coupled to in-
ductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, 441, 135–146.
Yang, Q., & Kocherginsky, N. M. (2006). Copper recovery and
spent ammoniacal etchant regeneration based on hollow
fiber supported liquid membrane technology: from bench-
scale to pilot-scale tests. Journal of Membrane Science, 286,
301–309.
Zeng, C., Wen, X., Tan, Z., Cai, P., & Hou, X. (2010). Hollow fi
ber supported liquid membrane extraction for ultrasensitive
determination of trace lead by portable tungsten coil electro-
thermal atomic absorption spectrometry. Microchemical
Journal, 96(2), 238–242.
Zhang, W., Cui, C., & Hao, Z. (2010). Transport study of Cu(II)
through hollow fiber supported liquid. Chinese Journal of
Chemical Engineering, 18(1), 48–54.