4.7 Article

Universal screening of 200 mycotoxins and their variations in stored cereals in Shanghai, China by UHPLC-Q-TOF MS

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 387, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.132869

关键词

Mycotoxins; Universal screening; Stored cereals; Ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole-time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-Q-TOF MS)

资金

  1. Shanghai Agriculture Applied Technology Development Program, China [2019-02-08-00-12-F01148]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A rapid and reliable UHPLC-Q-TOF MS technique was developed for universal screening of 200 mycotoxins in cereals. The method can identify tentative untargeted mycotoxins with a large range of polarity without reference materials. The study found that some mycotoxins, previously unreported in cereals, pose emerging potential health risks to humans and animals.
Due to the challenge of hundreds of potential mycotoxins that may be present in cereals, a rapid and reliable ultra-high performance liquid chromatography coupled with quadrupole-time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-Q-TOF MS) technique was developed for universal screening of 200 mycotoxins (prototype, emerging and related derivatives) in cereals. With satisfactory sensitivity of accurate mass full-spectrum acquisition, it is feasible to preliminarily identify tentative untargeted mycotoxins with a large range of polarity without reference materials. The current screening method was also validated by the determination of 33 typical mycotoxins, and the screening detection limits in the range of 0.5-100 mu g kg(-1) were established in cereals. In total, 138 stored samples were contaminated by 46 mycotoxins and their metabolites, some of which were firstly reported in cereals, posing emerging potential health risks to humans and animals. Furthermore, the accumulation, transformation and degradation mechanisms of typical mycotoxins in cereals were investigated under real storage conditions.

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