4.7 Article

Multi-mycotoxin stable isotope dilution LC-MS/MS method for Fusarium toxins in cereals

期刊

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 408, 期 1, 页码 307-317

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-015-9110-7

关键词

Trichothecenes; Enniatins; Stable isotope dilution assay; LC-MS/MS; Solid-phase extraction; Barley

资金

  1. Forschungskreis der Ernahrungsindustrie e.V. (FEI, Bonn)
  2. AiF
  3. German Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs and Energy (AiF) [17221 N]
  4. Wissenschaftsforderung der Deutschen Brauwirtschaft e.V.
  5. Faculty Graduate Center Weihenstephan of TUM Graduate School at Technische Universitat Munchen, Germany

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A multi-mycotoxin stable isotope dilution LC-MS/MS method was developed for 14 Fusarium toxins including modified mycotoxins in cereals (deoxynivalenol, 3-acetyldeoxynivalenol, 15-acetyldeoxynivalenol, HT2-toxin, T2-toxin, enniatin B, enniatin B1, enniatin A1, enniatin A, beauvericin, fusarenone X, nivalenol, deoxynivalenol-3-glucoside, and zearalenone). The chromatographic separation of the toxins with particular focus on deoxynivalenol and deoxynivalenol-3-glucoside was achieved using a C-18-hydrosphere column. An expedient sample preparation method was developed that uses solid-phase extraction for the purification of trichothecenes combined with zearalenone, enniatins, and beauvericin and provides excellent validation data. Linearity, intra-day precision, inter-day precision, and recoveries were >= 0.9982, 1-6 %, 5-12 %, and 79-117 %, respectively. Method accuracy was verified by analyzing certified reference materials for deoxynivalenol, HT2-toxin, and T2-toxin with deviations below 7 %. The results of this method found barley malt samples from 2012, 2013, and 2014 frequently contaminated with high concentrations of enniatin B, deoxynivalenol, and its modified mycotoxin deoxynivalenol-3-glucoside. Samples from 2012 were especially contaminated. Fusarenone X was not detected in any of the analyzed samples.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据