4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Comparison of different sample treatments for the analysis of ochratoxin A in must, wine and beer by liquid chromatography

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1029, Issue 1-2, Pages 125-133

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2003.12.021

Keywords

extraction methods; wine; beer; must; food analysis; ochratoxin A; mycotoxins

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ochratoxin A (OTA) is a mycotoxin produced by some species of Aspergillus and Penicillium verrucosum. It has been found in foods and feed all over the world. There is a great concern about OTA because it is nephrotoxic and probably, carcinogenic to humans. Most of analytical methods developed for OTA in wine, beer and other products are based on LC with fluorescence detection (LC-FLD). In the present work, various procedures for extraction and/or clean-up for determination of OTA in musts, wine and beer by LC-FLD were compared: (1) dilution with polyethylen glycol 8000 and NaHCO3 solution and clean-up an on immunoaffinity column (IAC); (2) extraction with chloroform and IAC clean-up; solid-phase extraction (SPE) on (3) reversed-phase (RP) C-18; (4) RP phenylsilane and (5) Oasis HLB cartridges. SPE on phenylsilane and Oasis HLB have not been reported for OTA analysis in beverages. The same LC-FLD conditions and concentration ratio were used. The former procedure was simple, rapid and provided flat baselines, free from most impurity peaks, high OTA recoveries and quite repeatable results. RP C-18 using methanol-acetic acid (99.5:0.5) as elution solvent provided good recoveries and precision, thus becoming a cheaper but interesting alternative at 0.1-1 ng/ml spiking levels. Oasis HLB cartridges were usually better than phenylsilane. Possible binding of OTA to proteins or other components was tested by acid treatment before extraction but no significant differences with controls appeared. (C) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available