4.7 Article

An electrochemical immunosensor for ochratoxin A determination in wines based on a monoclonal antibody and paramagnetic microbeads

Journal

ANALYTICAL AND BIOANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 403, Issue 6, Pages 1585-1593

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00216-012-5951-5

Keywords

Ochratoxin A; Electrochemical immunosensor; Wine samples; Magnetic beads

Funding

  1. Science and Innovation Ministry [INC10-0178, PTQ-10-03580, AP2010-4609]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We report a direct competitive immunosensor for the rapid determination of ochratoxin A (OTA) in wine samples. Magnetic beads (1 +/- 0.5 mu m diameter) covered with streptavidin were functionalized with a monoclonal antibody against OTA, and then left to incubate in a solution of tracer (ochratoxin conjugated to the enzyme peroxidase) and a range of OTA concentrations (10(-4) to 1,000 ng mL(-1)). After washing and separation steps helped with a magnetic field, a volume of the dispersion was put on screen-printed electrodes under a magnet, and after adding the substrate the -benzoquinone generated enzymatically was detected by differential-pulse voltammetry. Wine samples (2 mL) were easily prepared simply by adjusting to pH = 7.5 with diluted NaOH and by adding polyvinylpyrrolidone for complexing polyphenols, without any other clean-up or preconcentration steps. The limit of detection for detecting OTA in wines was of 0.11 +/- 0.01 ng L-1, well below the permitted content of the mycotoxin by the European Union (< 2 ng mL(-1)). Spiked wines were subjected to immunosensor calibrations to study the matrix effects. OTA concentrations measured with the immunosensor were compared with those obtained by high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to fluorescence detection (AOAC official method 2001.01). The OTA levels from two red wines of Campo de Borja, Spain, ranged from about 0.027 to 0.033 ng mL(-1) of OTA.

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