4.5 Article

Investigation of ractopamine-imprinted polymer for dispersive solid-phase extraction of trace β-agonists in pig tissues

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 33, 期 13, 页码 2017-2025

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201000063

关键词

beta-Agonist; Dispersive solid-phase extraction; Molecularly imprinted polymer; Pig tissue; Ractopamine

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20705042, 20775095, 90817012]
  2. Guangdong Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China [9251027501000004]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ractopamine, as an alternative beta-agonist to clenbuterol, is more and more used as leanness-enhancing agent in the swine industry. This work presents a new molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) using ractopamine as template for dispersive solid-phase extraction of trace ractopamine and the structural related beta-agonists in animal tissues. The binding properties and selectivity of MIP were investigated. High selectivity in polar environment was found, since the extraction capacity of ractopamine with the MIP was 4.5-fold as much as that with the non-imprinted polymer in acetonitrile. Cross-selectivity investigation indicates that the MIP preferentially binds the template and then the structural analogues according to their molecular similarity. Thermodynamic and kinetic investigation was performed to interpret the specific adsorption and molecular recognition of the MIP for ractopamine. Standard free energy, standard enthalpy, and standard entropy were determined. Related information suggested that adsorption of ractopamine onto MIP was an exothermic, spontaneous process. The MIP can be applied as dispersive solid-phase extraction material for enrichment of ractopamine, isoxsuprine, fenoterol and clenbuterol in complex samples before HPLC analysis. The method revealed detection limits of 0.20-0.90 mu g/L, recoveries of 83.8-115.2 and 85.2-110.2% for the spiked pig muscle and pig liver, respectively, with the RSD from 2.5 to 8.8%.

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

4.5
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