Detection of chemical residues in tangerine juices by a duplex immunoassay

Navarro, Patricia; Pérez, Antonio J.; Gabaldón, José Antonio; Núñez‐Delicado, Estrella; Puchades, Rosa; Maquieira, Ángel; Morais, Sergi

doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2013.04.062

Cited by 27 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There are five types of labeled immunoassays: radioimmunoassay (RIA), fluorescence immunoassay (FIA), chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA), enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA), and bio-barcode immunoassay, and they are employed as biosensing analytical tools [194,195]. Among them, the enzyme-based [197] Chlorpyrifos and fenthion Tangerine juices 0.20 ± 0.04 and 0.50 ± 0.06 μg/L, respectively [189] Clindamycin and lincomycin Animal tissues 1.8 and 6.8 μg/kg, respectively [198] Penicillin G, amoxicillin, ampicillin, penicillin V, cloxacillin, oxacillin, cloxacillin, carbenicillin, dicloxacillin, and methicillin, nafcillin Milk 0.7−9.3 μg/kg [199] Permethrin, aroclor1248, and aroclor1254 Soil/sediment and house dust 1.5−14.3 μg/kg [200] Sulfonamides (sulfamonomethoxine, sulfamethoxazole, sulfaquinoxaline, sulfadimethoxine, and sulfamethazine) Milk 1.00−6.10 μg/L [201] chloramphenicol, avermectin, tetracycline, and streptomycin Food 0.106−0.134 ng/mL [202] Ethylene thiourea Soil, tomato, and potato 0.201 ng/mL [203] Trimethoprim, diaveridine, brodimoprim, and ormetoprim, baquiloprim…”

Section: Immunoassays For Detecting Pesticides and Veterinary Drugsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Onsite/on‐field analysis of pesticide and veterinary drug residues by a state‐of‐art technology: A review

Rahman

Lee

et al. 2021

J of Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pesticides and veterinary drugs are generally employed to control pests and insects in crop and livestock farming. However, remaining residues are considered potentially hazardous to human health and the environment. Therefore, regular monitoring is required for assessing and legislation of pesticides and veterinary drugs. Various approaches to determining residues in various agricultural and animal food products have been reported. Most analytical methods involve sample extraction, purification (cleanup), and detection. Traditional sample preparation is time‐consuming labor‐intensive, expensive, and requires a large amount of toxic organic solvent, along with high probability for the decomposition of a compound before the analysis. Thus, modern sample preparation techniques, such as the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe method, have been widely accepted in the scientific community for its versatile application; however, it still requires a laboratory setup for the extraction and purification processes, which also involves the utilization of a toxic solvent. Therefore, it is crucial to elucidate recent technologies that are simple, portable, green, quick, and cost‐effective for onsite and infield residue detections. Several technologies, such as surface‐enhanced Raman spectroscopy, quantum dots, biosensing, and miniaturized gas chromatography, are now available. Further, several onsite techniques, such as ion mobility–mass spectrometry, are now being upgraded; some of them, although unable to analyze field sample directly, can analyze a large number of compounds within very short time (such as time‐of‐flight and Orbitrap mass spectrometry). Thus, to stay updated with scientific advances and analyze organic contaminants effectively and safely, it is necessary to study all of the state‐of‐art technology.

show abstract

Section: Immunoassays For Detecting Pesticides and Veterinary Drugsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Onsite/on‐field analysis of pesticide and veterinary drug residues by a state‐of‐art technology: A review

Rahman

Lee

et al. 2021

J of Separation Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These researches showed that the combination of chromatography and mass spectrometry detection can effectively and accurately identify different types of pesticides. In addition, some other methods for pesticide identification have been proposed, such as capillary electrophoresis (CE) (Daniel, Dos Santos, Vidal, & Do Lago, 2015; Li, Lu, Qiao, & Xu, 2017) and enzyme‐linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Navarro et al, 2013; Qian et al, 2009; Yang et al, 2008). However, above methods generally need complex testing equipment, tedious sample preparation steps, trained technicians and long testing cycles, which cannot meet the requirements testing scenarios outside the laboratory such as rapid on‐site testing and low cost.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pesticide residues identification by impedance time‐sequence spectrum of enzyme inhibition on multilayer paper‐based microfluidic chip

Yang

et al. 2020

J Food Process Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) normally vary in the level of toxicity to human health, but common electrochemical identification methods usually require complex electrode fabrication processes and high detection cost. To overcome these problems, a pesticide residues identification method based on multilayer paper-based microfluidic chip was proposed. The microfluidic chip integrates the enzyme inhibition and a label-free screen-printed carbon electrode (SPCE). Three different pesticides were selected as study objects, respectively, avermectin, phoxim, dimethoate. This chip realizes on-chip identification via analyzing impedance time-sequence spectrum data aroused by the enzyme inhibition during the 15 min period. A classification model based on principal component analysis (PCA) and support vector machines (SVMs) was established to evaluate these data. Furthermore, the real-world sample (lettuce) was tested to verify the feasibility of the proposed detection method. The results showed that the classification accuracy was achieved around 93% in multiple experiments. Therefore, the method has good stability and specificity in rapid identification of different pesticides. Practical Applications Identification of pesticide types is essential to human health, for this, impedance time-sequence spectrum data aroused by the enzyme inhibition during the 15 min period was used to establish a classification model to identity different types of pesticides. In this article, multilayer paper-based microfluidic chip and a label-free screenprinted carbon electrode (SPCE) was proposed without complicated operation steps and expensive cost, which provide a basis for establishment of the rapid pesticide discriminator.

show abstract

“…There are also many immunoassays that have been established for the detection of IMI, such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Watanabe et al, 2004;Brian et al, 2009;Navarro et al, 2013), and immunochromatographic assay (ICA) (Xu and Xu, 2012;Fang et al, 2015;Yang et al, 2018). However, ELISAs require long incubation time and multi-step operation, and ICAs generally provide qualitative or semi-quantitative results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of Fluorescence Polarization Immunoassay for Imidacloprid in Environmental and Agricultural Samples

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) for the determination of imidacloprid (IMI) was developed with advantages of simple operation and short assay time. The haptens of IMI, acetamiprid (ACE), and thiamethoxam (THI) were conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate ethylenediamine (EDF) and 4′-Aminomethyl fluorescein (AMF), respectively, to prepare six fluorescence tracers. The conjugation of IMI hapten and EDF (IMI-EDF) was selected to develop the FPIA due to the largest fluorescent polarization value increase in the presence of anti-IMI monoclonal antibody. Under the optimum condition, the limit of detection, 50% inhibition concentration and detection range of the FPIA were 1.7, 4.8, and 1.7–16.3 μg/L, respectively. The cross-reactivities (CRs) with the analogs of IMI were negligible except for imidaclothiz with CR of 79.13%. The average recovery of spiked paddy water, corn and cucumber samples were 82.4–118.5% with the RSDs of 7.0–15.9%, which indicated the FPIA had good accuracy. Thus, the developed FPIA was a potential tool for the rapid and accurate determination of IMI in agricultural and environmental samples.

show abstract

Detection of chemical residues in tangerine juices by a duplex immunoassay

Cited by 27 publications

References 31 publications

Onsite/on‐field analysis of pesticide and veterinary drug residues by a state‐of‐art technology: A review

Onsite/on‐field analysis of pesticide and veterinary drug residues by a state‐of‐art technology: A review

Pesticide residues identification by impedance time‐sequence spectrum of enzyme inhibition on multilayer paper‐based microfluidic chip

Development of Fluorescence Polarization Immunoassay for Imidacloprid in Environmental and Agricultural Samples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About