Interference Effects of Coexisting Ions on the Determination of Uranium in Aqueous Solutions Using Laser-Induced Fluorescence

Accurate determination of trace uranium in aqueous systems is essential for reliable spectroscopic analysis, yet laser-induced fluorescence (LIF) measurements of uranyl ions are often affected by matrix interference. In this study, the effects of common coexisting ions (Fe³⁺, Al³⁺, Mg²⁺, SO₄²⁻, and NO³⁻) on uranyl fluorescence signals were systematically investigated. Using a controlled variable approach, mixed solutions that contained fixed uranium concentrations (1 and 20 ng/mL) and varying concentrations of interfering ions  (1–100 μg/mL) were analyzed with a WGJ-III microuranium analyzer. The results demonstrate that different ions exhibit distinct interference behaviors that lead to fluorescence quenching or signal modulation depending on the ion type and concentration. The observed effects are discussed in terms of possible spectroscopic and chemical interaction mechanisms that influence uranyl fluorescence. This work provides a quantitative assessment of matrix interference in LIF-based uranium determination and offers useful insights for improving analytical accuracy in spectroscopic uranium analysis.

1. D. N. Deepika, M. R. Ambika, K. Naregundi, S. Kumara, K. N. V. Kumar, N. Nagaiah, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 200, No. 11-12, 1084–1089 (2024).

2. A. Timofeev, A. A. Migdisov, A. E. Williams-Jones, R. Roback, A. T. Nelson, H. Xu, Nat. Commun., 9, 1469 (2018).

3. W. Gu, Z. Hou, W. Song, J. Ji, X. Yu, J. Liu, Y. Song, Z. Li, Z. Wang, Anal. Chim. Acta, 1288, 342167 (2024).

4. Y. Faqir, Z. Li, T. Gul, Zahoor, Z. Jiang, L. Yu, et al., Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf., 293, 118043 (2025).

5. G. M. Qi, S. Q. Tong, X. C. Lin, Spectroscopy and Spectral Analysis, 43, No. 12, 3813–3819 (2023).

6. G. Bjørklund, Y. Semenova, L. Pivina, M. Dadar, M. M. Rahman, J. Aaseth, Arch. Toxicol., 94, No. 5, 1551–1560 (2020). 721-9729

7. R. Li, H. Fan, Y. Chen, J. Huang, G. L. Liu, L. Huang, Opt. Express, 31, No. 13, 21586–21613 (2023).

8. S. H. Frisbie, E. J. Mitchell, B. Sarkar, Environ. Sci.: Processes Impacts, 15, No. 10, 1817–1823 (2013).

9. S. Zhang, Y. Bai, X. Wen, A. Z. Ding, J. H. Zhi, Environ. Sci. Poll. Res., 25, No. 18, 17967–17979 (2018).

10. T. Trojek, D. Trojkova, P. Mikysek, Radiat. Prot. Dosim., 198, No. 9–11, 654–660 (2022).

11. J. Hu, J. B. Griffith, M. S. Elioff, J. Photochem. Photobiol., A, 443, Suppl. C, 114848 (2023).

12. V. Krivan, Spectrochim. Acta, Part B, 52, 2061–2076 (1997).

13. Z. Zhou, Y. Zhou, X. Liang, F. Xie, S. Liu, J. Ma, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 322, No. 3, 2049–2056 (2019).

14. X. Wang, M. Li, F. Wu, G. Li, S. He, X. Wang, Ind. Water Treat., 41, No. 5, 1–6 (2021).

15. E. R. Hinton, L. E. White, Anal. Lett., 14, No. 12, 947–958 (2006).

16. T. Su, L. Li, S. P. Tan, J. Z. Wu, J. Nucl. Radiochem., 37, No. 1, 1–6 (2015).

17. X. Zhao, S. Sun, M. Li, J. Zhang, K. Li, L. Pang, Y. Shi, Y. Chen, J. Chemom., 35, No. 12, 1–13 (2021).

18. R. Roinson, A. Karamanoukian, J.-P. Boucher, N. Vignais, IEEE Sensors J., 25, No. 10, 16720–16725 (2025).

19. Y. Zhang, S. Huang, B. Mei, L. Jia, J. Liao, W. Zhu, Sci. Total Environ., 881, Suppl. C, 163525 (2023)

20. O. Lahav, M. Telzhensky, A. Zewuhn, Y. Gendel, J. Gerth, W. Calmano, L. Birnhack, Sep. Purif. Technol., 108, 103–110 (2013).

21. L. Xu, X. Song, Z. Wang, X. Liu, W. Zhang, S. Tao, Chem. Eng. J., 522, 167262 (2025).

22. H. Zeng, S. Basak, K. U. Ulrich, M. Sahu, P. Biswas, J. G. Catalano, D. E. Giammar, Environ. Sci. Technol., 43, No. 5, 1373–1378 (2009).

23. Y. Wang, W. Zhang, J. Chen, Y. Guo, J. Radioanal. Nucl. Chem., 328, No. 3, 1019–1032 (2021).

24. M. Gu, J. Li, A. Zhou, Res. Explor. Lab., 41, No. 11, 1–6 (2022).

25. J. Li, D. He, X. Sun, D. Xu, Xinjiang Environ. Prot., 47, No. 1, 45–50 (2025).

26. N. Kumar, M. J. Servis, A. E. Clark, Solvent Extr. Ion Exch., 40, No. 1–2, 165–187 (2021).