Search

In this work, a new mega-method of sample preparation called "QuEChERSER" (more than QuEChERS) is being presented for the first time. Fast, efficient, and cost-effective analysis of chemical contaminants in meat is useful for international trade, domestic monitoring, risk assessment, and other purposes. The goal of this study was to develop and validate a simple high-throughput mega-method for residual analysis of 161 pesticides, 63 veterinary drugs, 24 metabolites, and 14 legacy environmental contaminants (polychlorinated biphenyls) in bovine muscle for implementation in routine laboratory analyses. Sample preparation of 2 g test portions entailed QuEChERS-based extraction with 10 mL of 4:1 (v/v) acetonitrile/water, and then 204 μL was taken, diluted, and ultracentrifuged prior to analysis of veterinary drugs and pesticides by ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. The remaining extract was salted out with 4:1 (w/w) anhydrous MgSO 4 /NaCl, and 1 mL was transferred to an autosampler vial for automated mini-cartridge solid-phase extraction (Instrument Top Sample Preparation) cleanup with immediate injection using fast low-pressure gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry analysis. The automated cleanup and both instruments were all operated in parallel in 13-15 min cycle times per sample. Method validation according to United States Department of Agriculture requirements demonstrated that 221 (85%) of the 259 analytes gave average recovery between 70 and 120% and interday relative standard deviation of ≤25%. Analysis of a certified reference material for veterinary drugs in freeze-dried bovine muscle was also very accurate, further demonstrating that the QuEChERSER mega-method can be implemented to save time, labor, and resources compared to current practices to use multiple methods to cover the same analytical scope.

In this study, analytical results were compared when using different approaches to bulk food sample comminution, consisting of a vertical chopper (Blixer) at room temperature and dry ice cryogenic conditions, followed by further subsample processing (20 g) using liquid nitrogen cryogenic conditions (cryomill). Analysis of the 43 targeted spiked and incurred contaminants in a food mixture consisting of equal parts orange, apple, kale, salmon, and croaker involved quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe (QuEChERS) with automated mini-column solid-phase extraction (known as ITSP) cleanup, followed by low-pressure gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LPGC-MS/MS). Different ambient Blixer test portion sizes of 20, 10, 5, 2, and 1 g were assessed, and for cryogenic Blixer conditions, a 0.5 g test portion was also tested. In the case of the cryomill, test portions were 2, 1, and 0.5 g and all subsamples in all cases entailed five replicates. Determined concentrations and precisions (CV) of the analytes were compared to assess possible differences in systematic and random forms of error. A quality control spike was made before each step in the procedures to isolate that individual step in the uncertainty measurements using the error propagation sum of squares approach. Results indicated that the uncertainty of the sample preparation and LPGC-MS/MS analysis steps were 2-7 and 11% CV, respectively, while uncertainties of sample processing ranged from 6% CV for the cryomill to 12% CV for the ambient Blixer conditions. The common use of internal standards reduced overall method uncertainty from 12-15 to 7-10% CV. For the analytes, matrix, conditions, and tools used in this study, the minimal test sample weight that gave satisfactory recoveries and precision was found to be 1 g in all cases.

Quantitative method validation is a well-established process to demonstrate trueness and precision of the results with a given method. However, an assessment of qualitative results is also an important need to estimate selectivity and devise criteria for chemical identification when using the method, particularly for mass spectrometric analysis. For multianalyte analysis, automatic instrument software is commonly used to make initial qualitative identifications of the target analytes by comparison of their mass spectra against a database library. Especially at low residue levels in complex matrices, manual checking of results is typically needed to correct the peak assignments and integration errors, which is very time-consuming. Low-pressure gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (LP-GC-MS) has been demonstrated to increase the speed of analysis for GC-amenable residues in various foods and provide more advantages over the traditional GC-MS approach. LP-GC-MS on a time-of-flight (ToF) instrument was used, which provided high sample throughput with <10 min analysis time. The method had already been validated to be acceptable quantitatively for nearly 150 pesticides, and in this study of qualitative performance, 90 samples in total of strawberry, tomato, potato, orange, and lettuce extracts from the QuEChERS sample preparation approach were analyzed. The extracts were randomly spiked with different pesticides at different levels, both unknown to the analyst, in the different matrices. Automated software evaluation was compared with human assessments in terms of false-positive and -negative results. Among the 13590 possible permutations with 696 blind additions made, the automated software approach yielded 1.2% false presumptive positives with 23% false negatives, whereas the analyst achieved 0.8% false presumptive positives and 17% false negatives for the same analytical data files. False negatives frequently occurred due to challenges at the lowest concentrations, but 70% of them involved certain pesticides that degraded (e.g., captafol, folpet) or otherwise could not be detected. The false-negative rate was reduced to 5-10% if the problematic analytes were excluded. Despite its somewhat better performance in this study, the analyst approach was extremely time-consuming and would not be practical in high sample throughput applications for so many analytes in complicated matrices.

A fast and easy sample preparation procedure for analysis of acrylamide in various food matrices was developed and optimized. In its first step, deuterated acrylamide internal standard is added to 1 g of homogenized sample together with 5 mL of hexane, 10 mL of water, 10 mL of acetonitrile, 4 g of MgSO4, and 0.5 g of NaCl. Water facilitates the extraction of acrylamide; hexane serves for sample defatting; and the salt combination induces separation of water and acetonitrile layers and forces the majority of acrylamide into the acetonitrile layer. After vigorous shaking of the extraction mixture for 1 min and centrifugation, the upper hexane layer is discarded and a 1 mL aliquot of the acetonitrile extract is cleaned up by dispersive solid-phase extraction using 50 mg of primary secondary amine sorbent and 150 mg of anhydrous MgSO4. The final extract is analyzed either by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry or by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (in positive chemical ionization mode) using the direct sample introduction technique for rugged large-volume injection.