Table 2.

Comparison of figure of merits with previously reported GO based column SPE method.

Sorbents	Analytes	SCa (mg g−1)	LODb (µg L−1)	Eluents	PFc	Techniques	Applications	Reference
GOXPA	Pb, Cu	51.8,17.4	1.43, 0.048	5 mL (2M HCl)	150	ICP-OES	Battery effluent, Fish samples	This work
Dithizone immobilized silica gel	Cu	0.76	0.2	10% HNO3	43	FAAS	Water samples	42
Sulfur nanopartice	Cu, Pb	3.55, 4.69	0.24, 0.63	3 mL(3.0M HNO3) in methanol	158.0, 175.0	FAAS	Marine samples	43
GO-TBCPA	Cu	6.0	0.63	3M HNO3	250	FAAS	Water, blood, tomato, spinach and soil samples	44
GO@SiO2	Pb, Cu	13.6,6.0	0.27,0.084	2 mL (2M HNO3)	200, 250	FAAS	water sample	22
Graphene with dithizone	Pb	16.6	0.61	2 mL (2M HNO3)	125	FAAS	water and vegetable samples	45
GO-TiO2	Cu, Pb,	0.8, 13.5,	0.48, 2.64	1.5 mL (0.5M HNO3)	10	ICP-OES	Environmental sample	46
GO-MCNTs-DETA	Pb	6.6	0.24	2 mL (2M HCl)	75	ICP-OES	Wastewater samples	38
Polycarboxylic microsphere polymer gel	Cu, Pb	—	0.01,0.02	2M HNO3	50–150	FAAS, ETAAS	Sea water, Mineral water	47
Nanometer-sized ZrO2	Cu	1.3	0.058	3M HCl	25	ICP-OES	Dried fish and water	12
Dithizone modified TiO2 nanoparticle	Pb	22.5	1.72	1.5 mL (0.25M HCl)	—	ICP-AES	Food stuff & Plant sample	48
Acrylic acid grafted polytetrafluorethane fibers	Pb	213	0.26	1.0M HNO3	49	FAAS	environmental and biological samples	49
Cu(II)-imprinted styrene–divinylbenzene	Cu	9.55	1.03	0.5% HNO3	12	FAAS	Water sample	50
Silica gel	Pb	27.1	0.60	20.0 mL of 0.10 mol/L HNO3	—	FAAS	Water sample	51
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes	Pb	—	0.0028	0.3M HNO3	26	HG-AFS	water sample	52
GO–silica	Cu, Pb	—	0.023, 0.028	0.1M (0.5 M HNO3)	120	ICP-MS	Environmental water sample	53
PS GO	Pb	227.92	2.3	5 mL (2M HCl)	400	FAAS	Water and food	23

^asorption capacity, ^blimit detection, ^cpreconcentration factor.