2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2018.07.057
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determination of Ochratoxin A traces in foodstuffs: Comparison of an automated on-line two-dimensional high-performance liquid chromatography and off-line immunoaffinity-high-performance liquid chromatography system

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
12
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 42 publications
(13 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
12
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The recovery of both ochratoxins is improved in comparison with previous on-line SPE methods for the determination of OTA in wine, 92% in our method vs. 82% reported by Campone et al [32] and 76% documented by Bacaloni et al [30]. Although Armutcu et al [31] showed a good recovery of 105%, their method lacked our sensitivity, with a LOQ 0.5 µg L −1 . None of the method challenged the determination of the more polar ochratoxin, OTB, that is difficult to separate from the wine matrix.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 53%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The recovery of both ochratoxins is improved in comparison with previous on-line SPE methods for the determination of OTA in wine, 92% in our method vs. 82% reported by Campone et al [32] and 76% documented by Bacaloni et al [30]. Although Armutcu et al [31] showed a good recovery of 105%, their method lacked our sensitivity, with a LOQ 0.5 µg L −1 . None of the method challenged the determination of the more polar ochratoxin, OTB, that is difficult to separate from the wine matrix.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 53%
“…None of the method challenged the determination of the more polar ochratoxin, OTB, that is difficult to separate from the wine matrix. Moreover, our novel method is notably faster, with only 6 min including the on-line SPE step, which distinguishes it from the 22-35 min methods using online extractions in wine [30][31][32].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the 25 ml analytical solvent, the hyperoside standard of 2.5 mg, or the quercitrin standard of 5.0 mg, or the quercetin standard of 2.0 mg, or the pseudohypericin standard of 1.0 mg, or the hypericin standard of 1.0 mg are dissolved to prepared stock solution, respectively. According to the guide of International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (Singh, 2015; Armutcu et al, 2018; Hsi et al, 2019), the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) of 3 and 10 were defined as the detection limit (LOD), and the quantitative limit (LOQ), respectively. In order to detect the S/N, the stock solution of hyperoside, quercitrin, quercetin, pseudohypericin, and hypericin were diluted to different concentrations, respectively.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Early and accurate detection of food safety is therefore very important for preventing, controlling, and mitigating the impact of potential outbreaks. Many analytic methods, including chromatography methods such as gas chromatography (GC) [2], high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) [3], gas chromatography-mass spectrometer (GC-MS) [4], and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometer (LC-MS) [5], and immunological detection, such as enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) [6] and lateral flow immunoassay [7], have been employed for food safety detection. Although those traditional methods are relatively sensitive and specific, they are expensive, laborious, and time-consuming and require well-trained personnel [8,9], which make them incompatible for developing countries and areas are lacking equipped facilities and specialists.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%