4.4 Article

Variability and profiles of lipophilic marine toxins in shellfish from southeastern China in 2017-2020

期刊

TOXICON
卷 201, 期 -, 页码 37-45

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.toxicon.2021.08.009

关键词

Lipophilic toxins; Diarrhetic Shellfish Poisoning (DSP); Shellfish; LC-MS; MS; Monitoring; China

资金

  1. Construction of Fujian Provincial Scientific and Technological Innovation Platform [2019Y2001]
  2. Fujian Provincial Health Technology Project [2019-ZQN-29]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study analyzed a total of 1338 samples of bivalve mollusks collected from the southeast coast of China from 2017 to 2020, using UPLC-MS/MS to study the toxin profiles. The most abundant toxins found were HomoYTX, YTX, and PTX2, with varying levels of OA, DTX-1, and DTX-2. Different shellfish species showed varying levels of toxin accumulation, with peaks of different toxins observed in different months.
A total of 1338 samples were analyzed by ultrahigh performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) to study the toxin profiles of lipophilic marine toxins in bivalve mollusks collected from the southeast coast of China from 2017 to 2020. The most abundant toxin was HomoYTX, followed progressively by YTX and PTX2. Low proportions of OA, DTX-1, and DTX-2 were found. No AZA1, AZA2, and AZA3 were quantified above limit of quantitation (LOQ). The highest concentrations of HomoYTX, YTX, PTX2, OA, DTX-1, and DTX-2 were 429, 98.0, 40.3, 33.0, 22.6, and 26.5 mu g/kg, respectively. Mussels (Mytilus galloprovincialis, Perna viridis), scallop (Chlamys farreri) and clam (Atrina pectinate) accumulated higher toxin levels than clams (Sinonovaculla Constricta, Ruditapes philippinarum), oyster (Crassostrea gigas) and scallop (Arca granosa). Homo YTX and PTX2 levels reached the maximum in July and June, respectively, and the OA-group peaked in August. The results provide a reliable basis for monitoring marine toxins and protecting the health of aquatic consumers.

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

4.4
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