Comparison among soil series and extraction methods for the analysis of trifluralin

Accurate analytical procedures are needed to improve understanding of the fate and transport, of trifluralin, a chemical widely used as a herbicide. Analytical determination of trifluralin is challenging due to its hydrophobic, yet volatile, character and its tendency to degrade into numerous metabolites. In this research, efficient analytical methods for fortified and field-incurred soils were developed for simultaneous quantitation of trifluralin, I [2,6-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)- benzenamine, CAS Registry No. 1582-09-8; CAS Registry No. have been provided by the author], a trifluralin metabolite, II [2,6-dinitro-N-propyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine, CAS Registry No. 2077-99-8], and a related trifluoromethyldinitroaniline isomer of trifluralin, III [2,4-dinitro-N,N-dipropyl-6-(trifluoromethyl)benzenamine, CAS Registry No. 23106-20-9]. Extractions of trifluralin (0.5 and 2.5 mug/g) from silt loam, sandy loam, and silty clay soils were compared. A method was developed for the supercritical fluid extraction of trifluralin from soil using modified supercritical carbon dioxide, and the effects of cosolvent, pressure, and flow rate on recovery were evaluated. Supercritical fluid extraction was compared to liquid vortex extraction and automated Soxhlet (soxtec) extraction. Solid-phase extraction was examined for purifying soil extracts. Protocols were developed for analysis of extracts by gas and/or liquid chromatography. Immunoassay was investigated but proven to be impractical for this analysis. Soil properties and extraction methods were observed to affect the level of coextracted background interferences. Trifluralin exhibited concentration-dependent recovery regardless of soil series or extraction method.