| Literature DB >> 31817455 |
Xing Shen1, Jiahong Chen1, Shuwei Lv1, Xiulan Sun2, Boris B Dzantiev3, Sergei A Eremin3,4, Anatoly V Zherdev3, Jianfa Xu1, Yuanming Sun1, Hongtao Lei1.
Abstract
Enrofloxacin (ENR) is a widely used fluoroquinolone (FQ) antibiotic for antibacterial treatment of edible animal. In this study, a rapid and highly specific fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) was developed for monitoring ENR residues in animal foods. First, ENR was covalently coupled to bovine serum albumin (BSA) to produce specific polyclonal antibodies (pAbs). Three fluorescein-labeled ENR tracers (A, B, and C) with different spacers were synthesized and compared to obtain higher sensitivity. Tracer C with the longest arm showed the best sensitivity among the three tracers. The developed FPIA method showed an IC50 (50% inhibitory concentration) of 21.49 ng·mL-1 with a dynamic working range (IC20-IC80) of 4.30-107.46 ng·mL-1 and a limit of detection (LOD, IC10) of 1.68 ng·mL-1. The cross-reactivity (CR) of several structurally related compounds was less than 2%. The recoveries of spiked pork liver and chicken samples varied from 91.3% to 112.9%, and the average coefficients of variation were less than 3.83% and 5.13%, respectively. The immunoassay took only 8 min excluding sample pretreatment. This indicated that the established method had high sensitivity, specificity, and the advantages of simplicity. Therefore, the proposed FPIA provided a useful screening method for the rapid detection of ENR residues in pork liver and chicken.Entities:
Keywords: antibody; chicken; enrofloxacin; fluorescence polarization immunoassay; pork liver
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31817455 PMCID: PMC6943624 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24244462
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Spectra of enrofloxacin, bovine serum albumin (BSA), and enrofloxacin-BSA.
Figure 2Antibody dilution curve against three fluorescent tracers.
Analytical characteristics of fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) with various tracers (at the optimal concentration of 0.5 nmol·L−1).
| Tracer | Titer | δmP | IC50 | LOD | Dynamic Working Range | δmP/IC50 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tracer A | 1/600 | 89 | 49.93 | 2.01 | 6.59–378.48 | 1.74 |
| Tracer B | 1/300 | 39 | 9.34 | 0.75 | 1.80–48.60 | 4.18 |
| Tracer C | 1/300 | 124 | 21.82 | 3.85 | 5.04–108.33 | 5.68 |
Figure 3Competitive kinetic curves of tracer C and antibody.
Figure 4FPIA calibration curve for enrofloxacin with tracer C. Each point represents mean ± standard deviation of three replicates.
Comparison among different detection methods of enrofloxacin.
| Method | LOD | LOQ | IC50 | Linear Range | Testing Samples | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HPLC | 7.99 | 26.6 | - | - | Milk | Huang, 2018 [ |
| SPR | 0.3 | - | 3.21 | - | Milk | Fernández, 2010 [ |
| icELISA | 0.2 | 0.6 | 9.4 | 0.6–148.0 | Beef, pork | Zhang, 2011 [ |
| CLEIA | 0.03 | 0.35 | - | 0.35–1.0 | Milk, eggs, honey | Yu, 2014 [ |
| cFLISA | 2.5 | - | 8.3 | 1–100 | Chicken | Chen, 2009 [ |
| FN-ICA | 0.02 | - | 0.22 | 0.025–3.5 | Chicken | Huang, 2013 [ |
Cross-reactivity of polyclonal antibody (pAb)-enrofloxacin to related compounds based on tracer C.
| No. | Compound | Structure | IC50(nmol·mL−1) | CR (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moiety | Substituent Group | ||||
|
| Enrofloxacin |
| ethyl | 0.027 | 100.0 |
|
| Ofloxacin |
| methyl | 1.50 | 1.8 |
|
| Levofloxacin |
| methyl | 1.62 | 1.6 |
|
| Ciprofloxacin |
| H | 2.21 | 1.2 |
|
| Gatifloxacin |
| H | 4.65 | 0.6 |
|
| Flumequine |
| H | ND a | ≤0.01 |
a ND (not determined), presented infinite IC50 values and could not be fitted with the four-parameter logistic equation.
Figure 5Effect of pH, ionic salt, and organic solvent on FPIA. Each point represents mean ± standard deviation of three replicates. (A1,A2) Effect of pH from 6.6 to 9.0 on FPIA. (B1,B2) Effect of ionic salt (NaCl) from 0 to 20% (v/v) on FPIA. (C1,C2) Effect of organic solvent (methanol) from 0 to 50% (v/v) on FPIA.
Recovery of enrofloxacin from spiked pork liver and chicken samples (n = 3).
| Sample | Spiked Level | Observed Value | Recovery (%, | Mean Recovery (%) | CV (%) | Mean CV (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pork liver | 5 | 5.64 ± 0.46 | 112.9 ± 9.1 | 105.7 | 8.07 | 3.83 |
| 10 | 10.46 ± 0.33 | 104.6 ± 3.3 | 3.13 | |||
| 50 | 49.79 ± 0.15 | 99.6 ± 0.3 | 0.30 | |||
| Chicken | 5 | 4.56 ± 0.31 | 91.3 ± 6.2 | 95.6 | 6.76 | 5.13 |
| 10 | 10.36 ± 0.26 | 103.6 ± 2.6 | 2.47 | |||
| 50 | 45.99 ± 2.84 | 92.0 ± 5.7 | 6.17 |
Figure 6Synthesis of the fluorescein-labeled tracer and immunogen. (a) Tracer A; (b) tracer B; (c) tracer C; (d) immunogen.