4.4 Article

Optimisation and validation of a quantitative and confirmatory LC-MS method for multi-residue analyses of beta-lactam and tetracycline antibiotics in bovine muscle

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/19440049.2011.627883

Keywords

animal products - meat; veterinary drug residues - antibiotics; chromatography - LC/MS

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A multi-residue method for the determination of the beta-lactam antibiotics ampicillin, cefazolin, cloxacillin, dicloxacillin, nafcillin, oxacillin, penicillin G, penicillin V and the tetracyclines chlotetracycline, tetracycline and oxytetracycline was optimised and validated in bovine muscle. The method is based on the extraction of the residues from muscle using water/acetonitrile (2/8, v/v) with subsequent use of dispersive solid-phase C18 and hexane for purification. Extracts were analysed using ultra-performance liquid chromatography (UPLC-MS/MS) coupled with the mass spectrometer in positive electrospray ionisation mode (ESI+) for all analytes. The method was validated according to the requirements of European Commission Decision 2002/657/EC. The validation results were obtained within the MRL range of 0-1.5 of the MRL, with recoveries varying from 90% to 110% and CV < 20% (n = 54), except for cloxacillin, dicloxacillin and nafcillin. However, matrix interference was observed. The decision limit (CC alpha) ranged from 10% to 15% of the MRL. The uncertainty measurement was estimated based on both bottom-up and top-down strategies and the uncertainty values were found to be lower than 20% of the MRL. The method has a simple extraction procedure whereby analytes are separated with reasonable resolutions in a single 11-min chromatographic run. According to the validation results, this method is suitable for monitoring beta-lactams and tetracyclines according to National Program for Residue and Contaminant Control - Brazil (NPRC-Brazil) in bovine muscle.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available