4.6 Article

Simultaneous Analysis of 20 Mycotoxins in Grapes and Wines from Hexi Corridor Region (China): Based on a QuEChERS-UHPLC-MS/MS Method

期刊

MOLECULES
卷 23, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules23081926

关键词

QuEChERS; UHPLC-MS/MS; mycotoxins; grapes and wines; hexi corridor region

资金

  1. Gansu Development and Reform Commission Program [GSSKS-2015-153-3]
  2. Fu Xi Talents Program [Gaufx-02Y06]
  3. College Research Plan of Gansu Agricultural University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of this study is to develop and validate an improved analytical method for the simultaneous quantification of 20 types of mycotoxins in grapes and wines. In this research, the optimization of tandem mass spectrometer (MS/MS) parameter, ultra-high pressure liquid chromatography (UHPLC) separation, and QuEChERS procedure, which includes wine/water ratio, the amount and type of salt, clean-up sorbent, were performed, and the whole separation of mycotoxins was accomplished within 7 min analyzing time. Under optimum conditions, recoveries ranged from 85.6% to 117.8%, while relative standard deviation (RSD) remained between 6.0% and 17.5%. The limit of detection (LOD, 0.06-10 mu g/L) and the limit of quantification (LOQ, 0.18-30 mu g/L) were lower than those permitted by legislation in food matrices, which demonstrated the high sensitivity and applicability of this efficient method. Finally, 36 grapes and 42 wine samples from the Hexi Corridor region were analyzed. Penicillic acid (PCA), mycophenolic acid (MPA), cyclopiazonic acid (CPA), fumonisin B1 (FB1) and zearalenone (ZEN) were detected in a small number of grape samples with lower concentrations between 0.10 mu g/L and 81.26 mu g/L. Meanwhile, ochratoxin A (OTA), aflatoxin B2 (AFB2), MPA, CPA, and ZEN were detected in some wine counterparts with concentrations ranged from 0.10 mu g/L to 4.62 mu g/L. However, the concentrations of the detected mycotoxins were much lower than the maximum legal limits set of other products.

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