4.7 Article

Determination of phthalic acid esters in different baby food samples by gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry

Journal

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 410, Issue 22, Pages 5617-5628

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-018-0977-y

Keywords

Phthalic acid esters; Baby foods; QuEChERS; Gas chromatography; Tandem mass spectrometry

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness [CTQ2014-57195-P]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this work, a new method has been developed for the determination of 14 phthalic acid esters (i.e., benzylbutyl phthalate (BBP), bis-2-n-butoxyethyl phthalate (DBEP), dibutyl phthalate (DBP), dicyclohexyl phthalate (DCHP), bis-2-ethoxyethyl phthalate (DEEP), diethyl phthalate (DEP), diisodecyl phthalate (DIDP), diisononyl phthalate (DINP), bis-isopentyl phthalate (DIPP), bis (2-methoxyethyl) phthalate (DMEP), dimethyl phthalate (DMP), di-n-octyl phthalate (DNOP), bis-n-pentyl phthalate (DNPP), dipropyl phthalate (DPP)) and one adipate (bis (2-ethylhexyl) adipate (DEHA)) in different baby foods. Separation was carried out by gas chromatography triple quadrupole tandem mass spectrometry while the previous extraction of the samples was carried out using the QuEChERS method. The methodology was validated for four baby food samples (two fruit compotes of different compositions and two meat and fish purees with vegetables) using dibutyl phthalate-3,4,5,6-d(4) (DBP-d(4)) as internal standard. Determination coefficients (R (2)) of matrix-matched calibration curves were above 0.9922 in all cases while relative recovery values ranged between 70 and 120%, with relative standard deviation values below 19%. The limits of quantification of the method ranged between 0.03 and 1.11 mu g/kg. Finally, the analysis of commercially available samples was carried out finding the presence of BBP, DEHA, DEP, DIDP, and DPP in some of the studied samples.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available