Cargando…

How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins

Microfiltration is a common step in liquid chromatography – tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS), a method of choice in determining several mycotoxins in a solution at once. However, microfiltration may entail filter-analyte interactions that can affect the accuracy of the procedure, and underestimate e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tomas, Marija Kovač, Mijatović, Anto, Nevistić, Mateja Bulaić, Šarkanj, Bojan, Babić, Jurislav, Kovač, Tihomir
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Sciendo 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10231880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37014685
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/aiht-2023-74-3693
_version_ 1785051834216349696
author Tomas, Marija Kovač
Mijatović, Anto
Nevistić, Mateja Bulaić
Šarkanj, Bojan
Babić, Jurislav
Kovač, Tihomir
author_facet Tomas, Marija Kovač
Mijatović, Anto
Nevistić, Mateja Bulaić
Šarkanj, Bojan
Babić, Jurislav
Kovač, Tihomir
author_sort Tomas, Marija Kovač
collection PubMed
description Microfiltration is a common step in liquid chromatography – tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS), a method of choice in determining several mycotoxins in a solution at once. However, microfiltration may entail filter-analyte interactions that can affect the accuracy of the procedure, and underestimate exposure. The aim of our study was to assess how five different membrane materials for syringe filters (nylon, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyethersulphone, mixed cellulose ester, and cellulose acetate) affect microfiltration and recovery of EU-regulated mycotoxins, including aflatoxins B1, B2, G1, and G2, deoxynivalenol, fumonisins B1 and B2, zearalenone, T-2 and HT-2 toxins, and ochratoxin A. Polytetrafluoroethylene filters turned out to least affect microfiltration through mycotoxin loss, followed by more commonly used nylon filters, whereas the remaining three filter membrane materials had such a negative effect on recoveries that we found them incompatible with the procedure. Our findings clearly suggest that it is important to select a proper filter type that suits analyte properties and solution composition and to discard the first few filtrate drops to ensure the accuracy of the analytical procedure.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10231880
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Sciendo
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102318802023-06-01 How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins Tomas, Marija Kovač Mijatović, Anto Nevistić, Mateja Bulaić Šarkanj, Bojan Babić, Jurislav Kovač, Tihomir Arh Hig Rada Toksikol Original Article Microfiltration is a common step in liquid chromatography – tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS), a method of choice in determining several mycotoxins in a solution at once. However, microfiltration may entail filter-analyte interactions that can affect the accuracy of the procedure, and underestimate exposure. The aim of our study was to assess how five different membrane materials for syringe filters (nylon, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyethersulphone, mixed cellulose ester, and cellulose acetate) affect microfiltration and recovery of EU-regulated mycotoxins, including aflatoxins B1, B2, G1, and G2, deoxynivalenol, fumonisins B1 and B2, zearalenone, T-2 and HT-2 toxins, and ochratoxin A. Polytetrafluoroethylene filters turned out to least affect microfiltration through mycotoxin loss, followed by more commonly used nylon filters, whereas the remaining three filter membrane materials had such a negative effect on recoveries that we found them incompatible with the procedure. Our findings clearly suggest that it is important to select a proper filter type that suits analyte properties and solution composition and to discard the first few filtrate drops to ensure the accuracy of the analytical procedure. Sciendo 2023-04-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10231880/ /pubmed/37014685 http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/aiht-2023-74-3693 Text en © 2023 Marija Kovač Tomas et al., published by Sciendo https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
spellingShingle Original Article
Tomas, Marija Kovač
Mijatović, Anto
Nevistić, Mateja Bulaić
Šarkanj, Bojan
Babić, Jurislav
Kovač, Tihomir
How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins
title How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins
title_full How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins
title_fullStr How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins
title_full_unstemmed How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins
title_short How different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven EU-regulated mycotoxins
title_sort how different microfilters affect the recovery of eleven eu-regulated mycotoxins
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10231880/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37014685
http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/aiht-2023-74-3693
work_keys_str_mv AT tomasmarijakovac howdifferentmicrofiltersaffecttherecoveryofeleveneuregulatedmycotoxins
AT mijatovicanto howdifferentmicrofiltersaffecttherecoveryofeleveneuregulatedmycotoxins
AT nevisticmatejabulaic howdifferentmicrofiltersaffecttherecoveryofeleveneuregulatedmycotoxins
AT sarkanjbojan howdifferentmicrofiltersaffecttherecoveryofeleveneuregulatedmycotoxins
AT babicjurislav howdifferentmicrofiltersaffecttherecoveryofeleveneuregulatedmycotoxins
AT kovactihomir howdifferentmicrofiltersaffecttherecoveryofeleveneuregulatedmycotoxins