4.7 Article

Multi-residue method for the determination of antibiotics and some of their metabolites in seafood

期刊

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
卷 104, 期 -, 页码 3-13

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2016.11.031

关键词

Antibiotics; Multi-residue; Seafood; UHPLC-MS/MS; Microbial growth inhibition test

资金

  1. European Union [311820, 614168]
  2. European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
  3. Catalan Government [2014-SGR-291, 2014-SGR-418, 2016FI_B00601]
  4. Ramon y Cajal program [RYC- 2014-16707]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The presence of antibiotics in seafood for human consumption may pose a risk for consumers. A methodology for the analysis of antibiotics in seafood based on QuEChERS (quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe) extraction, followed by detection and quantification using liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry was developed. The analytical method was evaluated for the determination of 23 antibiotics (including parent compounds and some metabolites) in fish, mussels and clams. Recoveries ranged between 30% and 70% for most of the compounds and method detection and quantification limits (MDLs and MQLs) were between 0.01 and 031 ng/g thy weigh (dw) and 0.02-1.03 ng/g (dw) respectively. Real seafood samples were analysed using this method. Nine antibiotics were found at levels above MDLs; however none of them exceed the maximum residue limits (MRL) established by the authorities. Tetracycline was the most ubiquitous compound, presenting also the highest concentration: 5.63 ng/g (dw) in fish from Netherlands. In addition, an alternative technique based on microbial growth inhibition was explored as semiquantitative detection method of antibiotics in seafood. This methodology could be applied as a fast screening technique for the detection of macrolides and beta-lactams in seafood but further research is needed for other antibiotics families. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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