| Literature DB >> 33367145 |
Barbara Woźniak1, Piotr Cybulski2, Artur Jabłoński3, Sebastian Witek1, Iwona Matraszek-Żuchowska1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: An effective way of preventing undesirable boar taint in pork meat caused by the presence of androstenone, skatole and indole is surgical castration of piglets. This, however, arouses growing social opposition. An alternative method of inhibiting the development of unpleasant odour is immune castration. The aim of the study was to compare the effectiveness of both methods of castration for the elimination of the compounds responsible and to assess the suitability of oral fluid for pre-slaughter predictive testing for boar taint.Entities:
Keywords: boar taint; boars; fat; liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry; oral fluid
Year: 2020 PMID: 33367145 PMCID: PMC7734676 DOI: 10.2478/jvetres-2020-0080
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Vet Res ISSN: 2450-7393 Impact factor: 1.744
LC-MS/MS parameters (MRM) used for identification of indole, skatole and androstenone
| Analyte | Structure | MRM (mass-to-charge (m/z)) | Collision energy (eV) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Indole (2,3-benzopyrrole) | 118.0 > 91.1 | 23 | |
| 118.0 > 65.0 | 33 | ||
| 118.0 > 39.1 | 47 | ||
| Skatole (3-methylindole) | 132.5 > 117.1 | 22 | |
| 132.5 > 89.0 | 41 | ||
| 132.5 > 90.2 | 33 | ||
| 2-methylindole (IS) | 132.5 > 117.2 | 23 | |
| 132.5 > 89.1 | 41 | ||
| 132.5 > 90.0 | 34 | ||
| Androstenone | 273.5 > 255.3 | 13 | |
| 273.5 > 93.2 | 26 | ||
| 273.5 > 77.2 | 25 | ||
| Testosterone-d2 (IS) | 291.2 > 111.1 | 26 | |
| 291.2 > 99.2 | 24 | ||
| IS – internal standard | |||
HPLC gradient
| Time (min) | Flow (mL min−1) | Eluent A (%) | Eluent B (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.01 | 0.35 | 40 | 60 |
| 2.00 | 0.35 | 60 | 40 |
| 3.00 | 0.35 | 90 | 10 |
| 3.99 | 0.35 | 90 | 10 |
| 4.00 | 0.45 | 90 | 10 |
| 6.00 | 0.45 | 100 | 0 |
| 7.00 | 0.45 | 100 | 0 |
| 7.01 | 0.35 | 100 | 0 |
| 7.10 | 0.35 | 40 | 60 |
| 10.00 | 0.35 | 40 | 60 |
Fig. 1Chromatographic separation of tested compounds on a column: a) ZORBAX SB-C18 (50 mm × 2.1 mm, 1.8 μm) and b) Poroshell 120-EC C18 (150 × 2.1 mm, 2.7 μm)
LC-MS/MS method validation parameters for indole, skatole and androstenone in swine oral fluid and fat
| Parameter | Indole | Skatole | Androstenone | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oral fluid | ||||
| Calibration curves | correlation coefficient | 0.9990 | 0.9988 | 0.9967 |
| Matrix calibration curves | correlation coefficient | 0.9980 | 0.9964 | 0.9859 |
| Limit of quantification | LOQ (μg L−1) | 5 | 50 | 50 |
| Repeatability | C.V. (%) | 28.20 | 30.0 | 24.4 |
| Recovery | (%) | 75.4 | 70.0 | 95.3 |
| Matrix effect | % | 10 | 11 | 30 |
| Fat | ||||
| Calibration curves | correlation coefficient | 0.9988 | 0.9989 | 0.9953 |
| Matrix calibration curves | correlation coefficient | 0.9968 | 0.9875 | 0.9840 |
| Limit of quantification | LOQ (μg L−1) | 5 | 50 | 100 |
| Repeatability | C.V. (%) | 5.0 | 32.9 | 26.3 |
| Recovery | (%) | 121.0 | 70.0 | 102.8 |
| Matrix effect | % | 75.6 | 82 | 27 |
Results of tests of pooled oral fluid samples taken from animals from four experimental groups each consisting of 14 animals
| Sampling time | Skatole | Indole | Androstenone |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gilts (control groups for IMC boars) | (μg L−1) | (μg L−1) | (μg L−1) |
| Before giving Improvac to the boars | - | - | - |
| Two weeks after the first boar immunisation with Improvac (pen 1) | - | - | - |
| Two weeks after the first boar immunisation with Improvac (pen 2) | - | - | - |
| Two weeks after the second immunisation with Improvac before slaughter | |||
| Pen 1 | 309.4 | - | - |
| Pen 2 | - | - | - |
| Pen 3 | 106.3 | - | - |
| Pen 4 | 136.4 | 38.6 | - |
| Immunologically castrated boars (IMC) | |||
| Before giving Improvac | 82.5 | - | - |
| Two weeks after the first immunisation with Improvac (pen 1) | - | - | - |
| Two weeks after the first immunisation with Improvac (pen 2) | - | - | - |
| Two weeks after the second immunisation with Improvac, before slaughter | - | - | |
| Surgically castrated boars (SC) – samples taken before slaughter | |||
| Pen 1 | - | 23.8 | - |
| Pen 2 | 69.7 | 12.2 | - |
| Pen 3 | - | - | - |
| Pen 4 | - | 86.1 | - |
| Gilts and boars (SC), 50/50 – samples taken before slaughter | |||
| Pen 1 | 153.1 | 48.9 | - |
| Pen 2 | - | - | - |
| Pen 3 | - | 125.4 | - |
| Pen 4 | - | - | - |
Fig. 2LC-MS/MS chromatograms of oral fluid samples in which were detected: a) skatole at a concentration of 136 μg L−1 (gilts); b) indole with a concentration of 86.1 μg L−1 (SC boars)
Results of studies on compounds responsible for boar taint in fat samples taken from gilts, surgically and immunologically castrated boars
| Gilts | Skatole | Indole | Androstenone |
|---|---|---|---|
| Number of samples tested (n) | 15 | 15 | 15 |
| Number of analyte-containing samples | 7 | 11 | 0 |
| C average (μg L−1) | 65.2 | 25.3 | |
| SD (μg L−1) | 8.0 | 40.9 | |
| C min-max (μg L−1) | 57.7–78.3 | 5.4–146.5 | |
| IMC boars | |||
| Number of samples tested (n) | 15 | 15 | 15 |
| Number of analyte-containing samples | 10 | 11 | 0 |
| C average (μg L−1) | 60.3 | 15.6 | |
| SD (μg L−1) | 5.8 | 8.8 | |
| C min-max (μg L−1) | 51.3–69.2 | 5.5–30.0 | |
| SC boars | |||
| Number of samples tested (n) | 15 | 15 | 15 |
| Number of analyte-containing samples | 7 | 9 | 0 |
| C average (μg L−1) | 60.3 | 18.4 | |
| SD (μg L−1) | 5.1 | 9.0 | |
| C min-max (μg L−1) | 54.0–67.5 | 5.2–35.2 | |
Fig. 3LC-MS/MS chromatogram of a fat sample taken from an immunologically castrated boar in which an indole concentration of 21 μg L−1 was determined