投稿中心

审稿中心

编辑中心

期刊出版

网站地图

友情链接

引用本文:林罗敏,唐鹊辉,彭亮,韦桂峰,林叔忠,李湘姣,杨浩文.浮游植物叶绿素a的微波法研究及其与反复冻融法的比较.湖泊科学,2016,28(5):1148-1152. DOI:10.18307/2016.0526
LIN Luomin,TANG Quehui,PENG Liang,WEI Guifeng,LIN Shuzhong,LI Xiangjiao,YANG Haowen.Microwave-assisted method for extracting chlorophyll-a in phytoplankton and its comparison with freezing-thawing extraction method. J. Lake Sci.2016,28(5):1148-1152. DOI:10.18307/2016.0526
【打印本页】   【HTML】   【下载PDF全文】   查看/发表评论  【EndNote】   【RefMan】   【BibTex】
←前一篇|后一篇→ 过刊浏览    高级检索
本文已被:浏览 2563次   下载 1740 本文二维码信息
码上扫一扫!
分享到: 微信 更多
浮游植物叶绿素a的微波法研究及其与反复冻融法的比较
林罗敏1, 唐鹊辉1, 彭亮1, 韦桂峰1, 林叔忠2, 李湘姣2, 杨浩文2
1.暨南大学生态学系, 热带亚热带水生态工程教育部工程研究中心, 广州 510632;2.广东省水文局, 广州 510150
摘要:
为缩短样品处理时间和提高测定准确度,本文设计和优化了微波处理辅助提取浮游植物叶绿素a的方法,并比较了反复冻融法和微波法对浮游植物叶绿素a的提取效率.结果表明:(1)微波法提取叶绿素a的最优处理条件为:高火(额定输出功率800 W)处理60 s左右.过滤水量为:贫营养型水体为1000 ml以上,中、富营养水体为100~500 ml.(2)反复冻融法在测定贫营养型水体时更稳定,而微波法对中、富营养水样提取率显著高于冻融法,可提高7%~12%,对具胶被及硅质外壳的藻类提取效率极显著高于冻融法,测定结果的相对偏差更小,且提取时间较冻融法缩短一半以上,适用于富营养化水体的应急监测.
关键词:  微波法  反复冻融法  提取  浮游植物  叶绿素a
DOI:10.18307/2016.0526
分类号:
基金项目:广东省水利科技创新项目“广东省河流水生态健康评价指标体系及评价方法研究”(2014-01)资助.
Microwave-assisted method for extracting chlorophyll-a in phytoplankton and its comparison with freezing-thawing extraction method
LIN Luomin1, TANG Quehui1, PENG Liang1, WEI Guifeng1, LIN Shuzhong2, LI Xiangjiao2, YANG Haowen2
1.Engineering Research Center of Tropical and Subtropical Aquatic Ecological Engineering Ministry of Education, Department of Ecology, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632, P. R. China;2.Hydrological Bureau of Guangdong Province, Guangzhou 510150, P. R. China
Abstract:
In order to save time of sample processing and to improve the determining accuracy, a microwave-assisted extraction method was designed and optimized to extract chlorophyll-a in phytoplankton, and was compared to the freezing-thawing method for extraction efficiency of chlorophyll-a. The results showed that microwave-assisted extraction method was optimal in 60 s treatment with output power of 800 W, and the appropriate water volume for filtration was about 100-500 ml for samples collected in meso-eutrophic waterbodies and 1000 ml for those from oligotrophic waterbodies. The chlorophyll extraction rate of microwave-assisted extraction method was significantly higher than that of freezing-thawing method in meso-eutrophic waterbodies, which can increased by 7%-12%, while freezing-thawing method was more stable in measuring chlorophyll-a of oligotrophic waterbodies. For those algae with a glue shell or siliceous shell, microwave-assisted extraction method had a higher efficiency for chlorophyll-a extraction and a lower relative standard deviation than the freeze-thaw method. The microwave-assisted extraction method needs only one half operation time of the freezing-thawing extraction method, so that it is more suitable for emergency monitoring of eutrophic waterbodies, while the freezing-thawing extraction method is more suitable for monitoring oligotrophic waterbodies.
Key words:  Microwave-assisted extraction method  freezing-thawing method  extraction  phytoplankton  chlorophyll-a
分享按钮