机构地区:[1]中国科学院地球环境研究所黄土与第四纪地质国家重点实验室,西安710061 [2]西安交通大学人居环境与建筑工程学院,西安710049 [3]同济大学海洋地质国家重点实验室,上海200092
出 处:《地球环境学报》2017年第2期176-184,共9页Journal of Earth Environment
基 金:中国科学院"西部之光"人才培养引进计划(XAB2015B01)~~
摘 要:由古菌和细菌产生的甘油二烷基甘油四醚类化合物(GDGTs)是微生物学和古环境研究中的一类重要的生物标志化合物。有机溶剂萃取法和改进的Bligh-Dyer法(简称BD法)是两种常用的提取环境样品中GDGTs的方法,然而目前对这两种方法提取效果的对比研究还比较少。本研究分别采用超声波有机溶剂萃取法和BD法对两个土壤样品和两个湖泊沉积物样品的GDGTs进行了提取。对比分析表明,超声波有机溶剂萃取法提取出的核心脂形式的GDGTs(C-GDGTs)含量较高而BD法通常能提取出更多的完整极性膜脂形式的GDGTs(IP-GDGTs)。另外,两种方法得到的C-GDGTs中TEX_(86)、MBT和CBT指标基本相同,但BD法提取的C-GDGTs的BIT值稍微偏高。这些结果将为土壤和湖泊沉积物样品GDGTs提取方法的选择以及不同研究间各指标的对比提供一定的依据。Background, aim, and scope The microbial glycerol dialkyl glycerol tetraethers (GDGTs) are increasingly popular in the field of organic geochemistry. These high-molecular-weight compounds produced by archaea and bacteria are sensitive to environmental variables, and therefore they contain important information on environmental parameters in paleoclimatic studies. Two extraction method, the ultrasonic-assisted organic solvent extraction and the modified Bligh-Dyer extraction (the BD extraction), are commonly applied for extracting GDGTs from environment samples. To date, however, only a few studies have compared the effect of the two extraction methods on the yield and distribution of GDGTs. In this study, we aimed to systematically compare the effect of the ultrasonic-assisted organic solvent extraction and the BD extraction on GDGTs extracted from sediment and soil samples, and to further provide some basis for the choice of extraction methods for GDGTs in soils and lake sediments, as well as for the comparison of GDGT distributions between different studies. Materials and methods We extracted GDGTs by the ultrasonic-assisted organic solvent extraction and the BD extraction from two soil samples and two lake sediment samples collected from the Qinghai province, China. GDGTs present as both core lipids (C-GDGTs) and intact polar lipids (IP-GDGTs) were analyzed as follows: each GDGT sample was separated into two halves, with one half subjecting to hydrolysis (the hydrolyzed fraction) and the other not (the non-hydrolyzed fraction); GDGTs of each fraction was directly measured on the high performance liquid chromatography-atmospheric pressure chemical ionization-mass spectrometry. Quantification was performed by way of peak area integration of [M+H]+ ions in the extracted ion chromatogram, and comparison with the internal standard. Ionization efficiency for each GDGT was assumed identical. GDGTs in the non-hydrolyzed fraction were C-GDGTs, while the difference in yield of GDGTs between
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...