| Literature DB >> 35541852 |
Nadeem Muhammad1,2, Fenglian Wang2, Qamar Subhani2,3, Qiming Zhao2,4, Muhammad Abdul Qadir5, Hairong Cui1, Yan Zhu2.
Abstract
There are increasing concerns about the dietary risks of neonicotinoids (NNIs); therefore their sensitive and accurate determination in dietary products is indispensable. However, the complex composition of agricultural food matrixes makes their extraction and quantitative determination a challenging task. Realizing this need, we herein report a simple, cost-effective, selective and sensitive fluorescence analytical workflow for analyses of two non-fluorescent neonicotinoids imidacloprid (IMI) and clothianidin (CLT) in six complex food samples (honey, ginger, durian, apple, tomato, cucumber) by online clean-up of sample extracts using two-dimensional ion chromatography (2D-IC) and a subsequent online post column UV induced fluorescence detection system. This online clean-up setup has proven advantageous to improve the limit of detection, potentially diminish matrix effects, and reduce analysis time and labor. The developed method showed excellent analytical figures of merit including linearity, selectivity, repeatability, recovery, and resolution for analysis of IMI and CLT in food samples. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 35541852 PMCID: PMC9078649 DOI: 10.1039/c7ra12555k
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Chemical structures of imidacloprid and clothianidin.
Fig. 2Systematic flow scheme of 2D-IC system: (A) sample loading; (B) matrix interferences removal; (C) analytes transfer in second dimension and (D) regeneration, re-equilibrium of pre-treatment column and isocratic separation and post column PIF detection in second dimension.
Automatic system operation procedureb
| Position | Programming | Time (min) | Mobile phase of pre-treatment column | Mobile phase of analytical column | Valve 1 (V-1) | Valve 2 (V-2) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Sampling | 0.0 | 55 mM NaOH + 20% ACN | 1.5 mM Na2CO3 +15 mM NaOH + 18% ACN | Load | Inject |
| 2 | Sample extract pre-treatment | 0–4.50 | — | — | Inject | Inject |
| 3 | Analytes collection | 4.50–5.50 | — | — | Load | Load |
| 4 | Analyses, regeneration, and re-equilibrium | 5.50–15.50 | — | — | Load | Inject |
Manual 25 μL sample injection.
Inject for 60 s.
Fig. 3Isocratic separation of two NNIs and PIF detection at λex/λem = 332/368 nm for IMI and λex/λem = 353/408 nm for CLT, respectively.
Fig. 4Sample chromatograms: analyses of blank samples extract without 2D-IC treatment (black lines); analyses of fortified sample extract at (10× LOQ) fortification level without 2D-IC treatment (blue lines); analyses of blank sample extract via 2D-IC treatment (red lines) and analyses of fortified sample extracts via 2D-IC treatment (green lines). Mobile phase: 1.5 mM Na2CO3 + 15 mM NaOH +18% ACN; columns: IonPac® AS12A column (250 mm × 4 mm i.d; 13 mm particle size) preceded by an IonPac® AG12A guard column (50 mm × 4 mm i.d; 13 mm particle size); injection volume: 25 μL; temperature: ambient; flow rate: 1.0 mL min−1; FLD detector wavelengths: λex/λem = 332/368 nm for 0–6.50 min and 353/408 nm for 6.5–10 min; peaks: (1) IMI = imidacloprid and CLT = clothianidin.
Calibration and peak parameters for nicotinoids in a solvent
| Analyte | Retention time (min) | Peak asymmetry | Peak resolution | Linear range (μg kg−1) | Correlation ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IMI | 4.90 | 1.32 | 4.29 | 0.12–1250 | 0.9999 |
| CLT | 8.90 | 1.31 | — | 0.51–5000 | 0.9991 |
LODs and LOQs for two NNIs in three matrices
| Analyte | Honey (μg kg−1) | Ginger (μg kg−1) | Durian (μg kg−1) | Apple (μg kg−1) | Tomato (μg kg−1) | Cucumber (μg kg−1) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LOD | LOQ | LOD | LOQ | LOD | LOQ | LOD | LOQ | LOD | LOQ | LOD | LOQ | |
| IMI | 0.036 | 0.119 | 0.035 | 0.119 | 0.037 | 0.123 | 0.034 | 0.113 | 0.35 | 0.116 | 0.037 | 0.123 |
| CLT | 0.153 | 0.510 | 0.151 | 0.502 | 0.154 | 0.512 | 0.142 | 0.472 | 0.143 | 0.476 | 0.144 | 0.479 |
Intra- and inter-day precision at three concentration levels LOQ, 2 × LOQ, 10 × LOQ for IMI and CLT in honey, ginger, durian, apple, tomato and cucumber samples. (n = 5)
| Analyte | Conc. level (μg kg−1) | Honey (% RSDs) | Ginger (% RSDs) | Durian (% RSDs) | Apple (% RSDs) | Tomato (% RSDs) | Cucumber (% RSDs) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intra | Inter | Intra | inter | Intra | Inter | Intra | Inter | Intra | Inter | Intra | Inter | ||
| IMI | LOQ (0.12) | 0.12 | 2.60 | 5.18 | 8.96 | 1.16 | 8.68 | 1.25 | 3.68 | 5.6 | 7.52 | 0.78 | 3.07 |
| 2× LOQ (0.24) | 10.31 | 3.69 | 2.16 | 4.70 | 12.69 | 9.73 | 5.81 | 8.54 | 8.89 | 7.23 | 0.21 | 5.39 | |
| 10× LOQ (1.2) | 6.14 | 5.98 | 7.96 | 5.23 | 8.98 | 8.90 | 3.69 | 9.27 | 0.86 | 2.37 | 5.86 | 2.17 | |
| CLT | LOQ (0.51) | 7.96 | 10.23 | 10.44 | 12.36 | 0.12 | 5.67 | 6.18 | 3.84 | 1.24 | 4.21 | 3.57 | 8.42 |
| 2× LOQ (1.02) | 9.38 | 11.40 | 4.16 | 7.23 | 3.19 | 7.65 | 7.23 | 4.87 | 5.98 | 8.71 | 2.79 | 8.12 | |
| 10× LOQ (5.1) | 0.68 | 9.51 | 3.24 | 5.16 | 5.26 | 11.89 | 8.95 | 4.20 | 0.95 | 3.58 | 0.91 | 4.81 | |
Recovery (%RE) and repeatability (%RSD) at three concentration LOQ, 2× LOQ, 10× LOQ for IMI and CLT in honey, ginger, durian, apple, tomato and cucumber samples (na = 5)
| Analytes | Con. (μg kg−1) | Honey | Ginger | Durian | Apple | Tomato | Cucumber |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IMI | LOQ (0.12) | 77.41 ± 0.12 | 97.22 ± 5.18 | 93.23 ± 1.16 | 84.14 ± 7.13 | 101.24 ± 8.74 | 99.73 ± 3.16 |
| 2× LOQ (0.24) | 79.80 ± 10.31 | 100.46 ± 2.16 | 105.6 ± 12.69 | 86.10 ± 9.53 | 100.13 ± 7.12 | 101.2 ± 10.79 | |
| 10× LOQ (1.2) | 89.36 ± 6.14 | 84.50 ± 7.96 | 83.18 ± 8.98 | 82.43 ± 5.24 | 94.50 ± 7.06 | 93.12 ± 7.38 | |
| CLT | LOQ (0.51) | 81.10 ± 7.96 | 83.18 ± 10.44 | 90.06 ± 0.12 | 81.80 ± 5.06 | 93.12 ± 11.04 | 98.03 ± 0.18 |
| 2× LOQ (1.02) | 95.23 ± 9.38 | 88.32 ± 4.16 | 106.8 ± 3.19 | 89.28 ± 10.18 | 88.72 ± 7.16 | 102.8 ± 8.13 | |
| 10× LOQ (5.1) | 90.75 ± 0.68 | 74.60 ± 3.24 | 73.71 ± 5.26 | 90.05 ± 1.73 | 84.80 ± 4.94 | 83.21 ± 3.29 |
Replicate of five readings.
Matrix effects (ME) and determination coefficients (r2) for NNIs in six matricesa
| Analyte | Honey | Ginger | Durian | Apple | Tomato | Cucumber | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ME |
| ME |
| ME |
| ME |
| ME |
| ME |
| |
| IMI | −0.22 | 0.9993 | 10.02 | 1 | −14.21 | 0.9999 | 3.52 | 0.9980 | 5.78 | 0.9934 | −0.30 | 1 |
| CLT | +11.90 | 0.9963 | +5.30 | 0.9990 | +11.06 | 1 | 1.23 | 0.9974 | 2.98 | 0.9945 | 0.40 | 0.9999 |
IMI: imidacloprid and CLT: clothadine.
Comparison of sample preparation and detection methods for the determination of imidacloprid and clothianidin in food samplesa
| Sample | Sample preparation method | No. of analytes | Solvent uses (mL) | Analysis time (min) | Detection | LOD | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Honey | DLLME and QuEChERS | 7 | >2.5, >10 | 66 | HPLC-UV | 1.5–2.5 μg kg−1 |
|
| Cucumber | QuEChERS method | 4 | >10 | 20 | HPLC-DAD | 0.04 mg kg−1 |
|
| Eggplant, cucumber | Ionic liquid extraction | 7 | >33 | 30 | HPLC-DAD | 0.002–0.003 mg kg−1 |
|
| Honey | Ionic liquid extraction | 4 | >50 μL | 14 | HPLC-DAD | 50 μg kg−1 |
|
| Honey | SPE | 7 | >19 | No separation | LC/LC-MS | 0.03 μg kg−1 |
|
| Potato | SPE | 4 | >80 | 9.10 | LC-DAD | 3.2–15 μg L−1 |
|
| Cucumber soil | QuEChERS method | 3 | >10 | 14 | LC-DAD | 0.01–0.08 mg kg−1 |
|
| Commercial formulation | Direct | 2 | N.A | N.A | Spectrophotometric | 0.17–0.32 mg L−1 |
|
| Honey bee | SPE | 2 | >85 mL | 7 | HPLC-FLD | 0.09–1.5 μg kg−1 |
|
| Honey bee, maize leave | Sample clean-up | 2 | >50–150 mL | 25 | LC-hν-ED | 2.4 mg L−1 |
|
| SPE | 2 | 100 mL | 7 | MEKC-UV | 0.71–1.18 mg L−1 |
| |
| Honey, ginger, durian | Online-sample clean-up | 2 | 900 μL | 9.5 | IC-hv | 0.036–0.15 μg kg−1 | This work |
DLLME: dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction; MEKC: micellar electrokinetic capillary chromatography.