4.7 Article

Doping-control analysis of 14 diuretics in animal-derived foods using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

期刊

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 174, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2021.106948

关键词

Diuretics; Foodborne doping; Animal-derived foods; Ultra-high-performance liquid; chromatography; Mass spectrometry

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81872628]
  2. Hebei province science and technology plan project [21475501D]
  3. Project of Chinese General Administration of Customs [2019HK112]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A rapid, sensitive, and confirmatory method was developed for the determination of 14 diuretics in multiple animal-derived foods using UHPLC-MS/MS. The method showed satisfactory recoveries and quantitation limits for surveillance monitoring of foodborne doping.
A rapid, sensitive, and confirmatory method was developed and validated for the determination of 14 diuretics in multiple animal-derived foods using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). Analytes were extracted from samples using acetonitrile containing 0.1% formic acid (FA) and then purified and concentrated using an Oasis PRIME HLB cartridge. The extraction and purification as well as the chromatographic and MS conditions were investigated to increase sample throughput and sensitivity. Quantification was performed using MS/MS with an electrospray ionization source in the positive multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode. The overall recoveries ranged from 60.8 to 116.4% with intra-day and inter-day relative standard deviation lower than 11.8% and 12.2%, respectively. The limits of quantitation for different matrices (pork, beef, lamb, milk, and eggs) were between 0.53 and 2.43 mu g/kg, which were satisfactory for surveillance monitoring. The proposed method can be used to provide additional information for the reliable risk assessment of foodborne doping.

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

4.7
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