4.7 Article

Critical evaluation of sample preparation for SP-ICP-MS determination of selenium nanoparticles in microorganisms - focus on yeast

期刊

JOURNAL OF ANALYTICAL ATOMIC SPECTROMETRY
卷 38, 期 11, 页码 2448-2457

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d3ja00181d

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article discusses reliable quantification methods and sample preparation protocols for biogenic selenium nanoparticles. Ten different extraction approaches were compared and their efficiency was evaluated using single particle - ICP-MS. The results showed that enzymatic digestion resulted in the highest recoveries but also the broadest size distribution.
The interest in biogenic SeNPs, produced accidentally or intentionally by a variety of procedures involving microorganisms or plants and their extracts, creates a need for methods for their reliable quantification in complex biological matrices. Particular interest is focused on sample preparation with its potential risks of non-quantitative recoveries as well as possible dissolution or formation of SeNPs during the analytical protocol. This relatively new topic is attracting a lot of attention from academia as well as the food and feed industry, considering aspects of industrial processing and profitability, medical use, and potential toxicity of SeNPs. Ten approaches, including enzymatic, mechanical and chemical extractions, aiming at the extraction of SeNPs from selenized yeast S. cerevisiae were compared. The efficiency of the extraction procedures was evaluated by single particle (SP) - ICP-MS using a collision/reaction cell. An enzymatic digestion resulted in the highest recoveries of SeNPs but, at the same time, the broadest size distribution. Chemical extractions, although leading to recoveries higher than those by mechanical procedures, were not considered as efficient, as they caused partial dissolution of NPs. Different sample preparation protocols for the characterization of biogenic SeNPs in yeast by SP-ICP-MS have been critically evaluated.

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