| Literature DB >> 34056180 |
Zhihui Lin1, Yingnan Lin2, Jianqi Lin1, Yizhi Zhang2, Song Fang2.
Abstract
A modified QuEChERS method in combination with high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) was first developed for the determination of fenbutatin oxide in six types of samples (soil, tobacco, rice, milk, pork liver, and pork). Fenbutatin oxide was extracted with acetonitrile containing 1% formic acid (v/v) and purified by dispersive solid-phase extraction using primary secondary amine (PSA) and quantitatively analyzed by HPLC-MS/MS. In the range of 0.005-1 mg/kg, a good linear relationship exists between the concentration of fenbutatin oxide and the peak area, giving a coefficient of determination (R 2) of >0.99. The recoveries of fenbutatin oxide at three spiked levels were 79.04-97.12% with the relative standard deviations (RSDs) of 3.30-10.96%, and the limit of quantification (LOQ) was 0.007 mg/kg. In addition, the developed method is consistent with the reference method (R 2 = 0.9896, n = 40). The method is demonstrated to be convenient and reliable for the routine monitoring of fenbutatin oxide in soil and plant- and animal-derived foods.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34056180 PMCID: PMC8153780 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.1c00593
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Figure 1Experimental optimization of the extraction agent (A), water absorbent (B), and purification agent (C, D).
Figure 2Representative chromatograms of fenbutatin oxide in six samples.
Overview of the Standard Curve, Sensitivity, and Matrix Effect of Fenbutatin Oxide in Different Samples
| samples | range (mg/L) | regression equation | LOD (mg/kg) | LOQ (mg/kg) | matrix effect | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| soil | 0.005–1 | 0.9994 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 0.93 | |
| tobacco | 0.9953 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 1.06 | ||
| rice | 0.9980 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 1.01 | ||
| milk | 0.9987 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 1.27 | ||
| pork liver | 0.9941 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 1.29 | ||
| pork | 0.9981 | 0.002 | 0.007 | 1.01 |
Recovery Rates of Fenbutatin Oxide in Different Samples
| sample | concentration (mg/kg) | recovery range (%) | average recovery (%) | RSD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| soil | 0.02 | 85.80–96.10 | 92.20 | 4.40 |
| 0.10 | 91.60–101.90 | 97.12 | 4.42 | |
| 0.50 | 83.60–105.10 | 91.70 | 9.10 | |
| tobacco | 0.02 | 80.10–95.12 | 87.74 | 7.24 |
| 0.10 | 75.60–88.50 | 82.84 | 6.72 | |
| 0.50 | 74.00–82.11 | 79.04 | 4.37 | |
| rice | 0.02 | 81.10–96.30 | 88.42 | 6.83 |
| 0.10 | 79.40–94.50 | 84.82 | 7.44 | |
| 0.50 | 82.10–95.60 | 90.34 | 5.78 | |
| milk | 0.02 | 81.80–96.10 | 88.20 | 6.51 |
| 0.10 | 88.90–104.60 | 95.12 | 7.40 | |
| 0.50 | 80.30–105.10 | 89.70 | 10.96 | |
| pork liver | 0.02 | 70.60–82.70 | 79.64 | 6.48 |
| 0.10 | 81.40–91.40 | 87.44 | 4.60 | |
| 0.50 | 72.00–84.00 | 78.82 | 5.74 | |
| pork | 0.02 | 74.70–87.60 | 80.82 | 6.68 |
| 0.10 | 77.40–94.50 | 86.42 | 8.14 | |
| 0.50 | 83.80–90.90 | 87.78 | 3.30 |
Figure 3Correlation between the established method in this work and the reference method (SN/T 4558-2016) in terms of detecting fenbutatin oxide in real samples (n = 40).