4.1 Article

Highly selective enrichment of aflatoxin B1 from edible oil using polydopamine-modified magnetic nanomaterials

期刊

FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
卷 41, 期 2, 页码 321-327

出版社

SOC BRASILEIRA CIENCIA TECNOLOGIA ALIMENTOS
DOI: 10.1590/fst.34619

关键词

polydopamine; magnetic nanoparticles; selective enrichment; Aflatoxin B-1

资金

  1. Zhenjiang Scientific and Technological Foundation for Social Development [SH2017053]
  2. Jiangsu Provincial University students creation [201810289100H]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province, China [BK20180979]
  4. Natural Science Research of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions of China [18KJB550003]
  5. Doctoral Research startup Funds of Jiangsu university of science and technology [1182931801]
  6. Emerging science and technology innovation team funding of JUST [1182921902]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a method for enriching AFB(1) using Fe3O4@PDA MNPs combined with fluorescence rapid detection was developed, showing good experimental conditions and precision.
Aflatoxin B-1 (AFB(1)) is a highly toxic mycotoxin that enters the human body through the food chain and poses a serious threat to human health. In this paper, polydopamine (PDA)-coated Fe3O4 magnetic nanoparticles (Fe3O4@PDA MNPs) were prepared by the co-precipitation method to enrich aflatoxin from edible oil. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, and vibrating sample magnetometer were used to characterize the Fe3O4@PDA MNPs. Using the obtained Fe3O4@PDA MNPs as an adsorbent, a simple method for enriching AFB(1) from samples by magnetic solid phase extraction (MSPE) combined with fluorescence rapid detection was developed. The effects of the ratio of Fe3O4 MNPs to PDA, adsorption dosage, sample volume, adsorption time, and elution time on enrichment of AFB(1) were investigated to determine the optimal experimental conditions. This method has good intraday and daytime precision.

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

4.1
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