↓ Skip to main content

Molecularly imprinted vs. reversed-phase extraction for the determination of zearalenone: a method development and critical comparison of sample clean-up efficiency achieved in an on-line coupled SPE…

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
39 Mendeley
Title
Molecularly imprinted vs. reversed-phase extraction for the determination of zearalenone: a method development and critical comparison of sample clean-up efficiency achieved in an on-line coupled SPE chromatography system
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00216-018-0920-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ivona Lhotská, Barbora Gajdošová, Petr Solich, Dalibor Šatínský

Abstract

Sample preparation prior to chromatographic separation plays an important role in the analytical process. To avoid time-consuming and manual handling sample-prep, automated on-line techniques such as on-line SPE-HPLC are therefore preferred. In this study, two different on-line extraction approaches for mycotoxin/endocrine disruptor zearalenone (ZEA) determination using either molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) with selective cavities and binding sites for extraction or a reversed-phase sorbent C18 providing non-selective interactions have been developed, validated, and compared. The validation characteristics were compared and the two methods were evaluated as being almost equal in terms of linearity, repeatability, precision, and recovery. Recoveries were in the range of 99.0-100.1% and limits of detection were found the same for both methods (1.5 μg L-1). Method precision calculated for spiked beer samples was better for C18 sorbent (2.5 vs. 5.4% RSD). No significant differences in the selectivity of either extraction method were observed. The possible reasons and further details associated with this finding are discussed. Finally, both validated methods were applied for the determination of ZEA contamination in beer samples. Due to ZEA's native fluorescence, chromatographic separation with fluorimetric detection (λex = 270 nm and λem, = 458 nm) was selected. Graphical abstract Determination of zearalenone in beer using an on-line extraction chromatography system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 39 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 15%
Student > Master 4 10%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 3 8%
Researcher 3 8%
Other 8 21%
Unknown 12 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 12 31%
Unspecified 3 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 17 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 May 2018.
All research outputs
#22,767,715
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#7,543
of 9,619 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#304,461
of 344,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#138
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,619 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,026 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.