4.6 Article

High-performance thin-layer chromatography screening of multi class antibiotics in animal food by bioluminescent bioautography and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1356, 期 -, 页码 249-257

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2014.06.043

关键词

Multi-antibiotics screening; Aliivibrio fischeri; TLC-bioluminescent bioautography; TLC-mass spectrometry

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council
  2. Jiangnan University [2012BAD37B06, 2012BAD37B07, JUDCF10049]
  3. Jiangnan University, Wuxi, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The world-wide usage and partly abuse of veterinary antibiotics resulted in a pressing need to control residues in animal-derived foods. Large-scale screening for residues of antibiotics is typically performed by microbial agar diffusion tests. This work employing high-performance thin-layer chromatography (HPTLC) combined with bioautography and electrospray ionization mass spectrometry introduces a rapid and efficient method for a multi-class screening of antibiotic residues. The viability of the bioluminescent bacterium Aliivibrio fischeri to the studied antibiotics (16 species of 5 groups) was optimized on amino plates, enabling detection sensitivity down to the strictest maximum residue limits. The HPTLC method was developed not to separate the individual antibiotics, but for cleanup of sample extracts. The studied antibiotics either remained at the start zones (tetracyclines, aminoglycosides, fluoroquinolones, and macrolides) or migrated into the front (amphenicols), while interfering co-extracted matrix compounds were dispersed at hR(f) 20-80. Only after a few hours, the multi-sample plate image clearly revealed the presence or absence of antibiotic residues. Moreover, molecular information as to the suspected findings was rapidly achieved by HPTLC-mass spectrometry. Showing remarkable sensitivity and matrix-tolerance, the established method was successfully applied to milk and kidney samples. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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