| Literature DB >> 31452126 |
Martyna Pajewska-Szmyt1,2, Elena Sinkiewicz-Darol3,4, Urszula Bernatowicz-Łojko3,4, Tomasz Kowalkowski1,2, Renata Gadzała-Kopciuch5,6, Bogusław Buszewski1,2.
Abstract
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in breast milk has been determined. Therefore, it was necessary to develop and adapt an analytical method to analyze PCB compounds. The whole procedure was applied to 31 breast milk samples, which were collected from Polish mothers. The QuEChERS method was optimized as a fast and cheap sample preparation method. The procedure allowed us to obtain recovery values between 96.46% and 119.98% with acceptable relative standard deviations (3.36-12.71%). Gas chromatography with mass spectrometry (GC-MS) was used for final determination. The method was validated using parameters such as linearity, limit of detection and quantification, intra-day precision, and reproducibility. The mean concentration of ∑iPCBs in this study was 30.94 ng/g of lipid. Assigned daily intake of PCBs was lower than the tolerable daily intake, which shows that the analyzed milk is safe to the infants. However, the monitoring of PCBs in milk is still important, and the QuEChERS method with GC-MS can be an effective tool for tracking organic impurities in breast milk.Entities:
Keywords: Breast milk; Gas chromatography; Mass spectrometry; Polychlorinated biphenyls; QuEChERS method
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31452126 PMCID: PMC6828831 DOI: 10.1007/s11356-019-06201-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Environ Sci Pollut Res Int ISSN: 0944-1344 Impact factor: 4.223
Retention time, SIM mode, and recovery calculated for three concentration levels and matrix effect for selected PCBs
| PCB congener | IUPAC name | Retention time (min) | SIM ions | Recovery (%) (RSD) | Matrix effect (%) (RSD) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10 (ng/mL) | 5 (ng/mL) | 2 (ng/mL) | |||||
| 28 | 2,4,4′- Trichlorobiphenyl | 12.118 | 150.05/186.00/255.90/257.90 | 96.46 (8.33) | 110.61 (9.54) | 110.73 (10.36) | 3.50 (1.40) |
| 52 | 2,2′,5,5′-Tetrachlorobiphenyl | 12.728 | 150.05/220.00/254.85/291.90 | 102.51 (4.86) | 116.09 (7.18) | 104.44 (8.82) | 7.53 (1.14) |
| 101 | 2,2′,4,5,5′-Pentachlorobiphenyl | 14.331 | 184.00/253.90/325.80 | 114.04 (8.66) | 105.79 (12.71) | 117.76 (3.69) | 9.68 (0.73) |
| 118 | 2,3′,4,4′,5′-Pentachlorobiphenyl | 15.488 | 183.90/253.90/255.90/325.80 | 107.12 (8.76) | 111.82 (8.96) | 115.03 (8.11) | 11.30 (0.31) |
| 153 | 2,2′,3,4,4′,5′-Hexachlorobiphenyl | 16.387 | 217.90/289.90/359.80 | 103.61 (7.19) | 105.76 (8.70) | 119.98 (3.45) | 8.34 (1.24) |
| 138 | 2,2′,4,4′,5,5′-Hexachlorobiphenyl | 15.877 | 217.95/289.90/359.80 | 103.98 (7.13) | 107.86 (8.62) | 103.10 (8.45) | 6.77 (0.45) |
| 180 | 2,2′,3,4,4′,5,5′-Heptachlorobiphenyl | 17.580 | 251.95/323.80/393.75 | 101.53 (4.46) | 102.64 (6.11) | 102.78 (7.91) | 1.53 (2.45) |
Examples of investigation studies on PCB in breast milk from different countries
| Country | Sampling year | Number of samples | Reference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Poland (Toruń, Kujawsko-Pomorskie) | 2017 | 30 | 30.94 | <LOQ-119.87 | This study |
| Poland (Poznań, Wielkopolskie) | 2000–2001 | 27 | 114.8 | 29.9–485.9 | Szyrwińska and Lulek ( |
| *Poland (Łódź/Łask, Łódzkie) | 2008–2010 | 40 | – | dl-PCBs 0.0015–0.019 | Kamińska et al. ( |
| Wielkopolska | 2004 | 22 | 63–413 | Jaraczewska et al. ( | |
| Wielkopolska | 2000–2001 | 12 | 77.6 | – | Lulek et al. ( |
| Warszawa | 2002–2005 | 28 | – | Hernik et al. ( | |
| Slovakia | 2010–2012 | 37 | 165.57 | – | Čechová et al. ( |
| The Netherlands | 2011–2014 | 120 | 42.68 | – | |
| Norway | 2001–2006 | 388 | 74.00 | – | |
| Denmark | 2011–2014 | 438 | – | 57.81–967.48 | Antignac et al. ( |
| Finland | 22 | – | 44.42–190.7 | ||
| France | 96 | – | 14.26–397.27 | ||
| Russia | 1997–2009 | 155 | – | 19–655 | Mamontova et al. ( |
| Ghana | 2014–2016 | 128 | 3.64 | <LOQ-29.20 | Asamoah et al. ( |
| China | 2011 | 1760 | 6.6 | 2.3–19.0 | Deng et al. ( |
| Northern Tanzania | 2012 | 95 | – | <LOQ-157.0 | Müller et al. ( |
–No data
Fig. 1Mean concentrations of PCBs detected in milk samples, divided according to the week of lactation
Correlations between PCBs and other measured variables
| Correlation matrix | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marked correlations are significant at | ||||||
| PCB 52 | PCB101 | PCB153 | PCB138 | PCB180 | Sum of PCB | |
| Lipids (g/100 mL) | − 0.124 | 0.132 | − 0.560 | − 0.201 | − 0.353 | − 0.351 |
| Lactation period | 0.317 | 0.182 | 0.633 | 0.525 | 0.796 | 0.662 |
| Total protein (g/100 mL) | − 0.215 | − 0.049 | − 0.310 | − 0.073 | − 0.415 | − 0.303 |
| Nutritional value (g/100 mL) | − 0.182 | − 0.059 | − 0.294 | − 0.053 | − 0.409 | − 0.282 |
| Carbohydrates (g/100 mL) | 0.014 | 0.017 | 0.070 | 0.097 | 0.341 | 0.154 |
| Dry weight (g/100 mL) | − 0.166 | 0.087 | − 0.512 | − 0.133 | − 0.287 | − 0.315 |
| Energy value (kcal/100 mL) | − 0.169 | 0.089 | − 0.554 | − 0.166 | − 0.332 | − 0.350 |
Fig. 2Cluster analysis heat map of investigated samples
Fig. 3Classification of samples in the space of three latent factors: the first two factors (a) and third factor (b)
Mean and range of estimated daily intake of PCBs for the analyzed milk (μg/kg body weight/day)
| PCBs | Mean | Median | Minimum | Maximum | Referencea |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 52 | 0.05 | 0.06 | 0.02 | 0.09 | 1.00 |
| 101 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.04 | |
| 153 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.15 | |
| 138 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.10 | |
| 180 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.02 | 0.13 | |
| 0.14 | 0.12 | 0.04 | 0.47 |
aVan Oostdam et al. (1999)