Chinese Journal of Chromatography ›› 2020, Vol. 38 ›› Issue (7): 775-781.DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1123.2020.02017
Previous Articles Next Articles
TIAN Hongjing1,2, LIU Tong2, YOU Song1,*(), ZHANG Feng2,*()
Received:
2020-02-19
Online:
2020-07-08
Published:
2020-12-10
Contact:
YOU Song,ZHANG Feng
Supported by:
TIAN Hongjing, LIU Tong, YOU Song, ZHANG Feng. Rapid determination of trace ciprofloxacin residue in milk samples using molecularly imprinted membrane extraction-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry[J]. Chinese Journal of Chromatography, 2020, 38(7): 775-781.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chrom-china.com/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1123.2020.02017
Compound | Precursor ion(Q1)(m/z) | Product ion(Q3)(m/z) | CE/V | DP/V |
* Quantitative ion. CE: collision energy; DP: declustering potential. | ||||
CIP | 332.1 | 288.1* | 23.78 | 104 |
245.2 | 31.26 | 104 | ||
ENR | 360.2 | 245.1 | 35.88 | 100 |
316.3* | 25.51 | 100 |
Table 1 MRM parameters for CIP and ENR
Compound | Precursor ion(Q1)(m/z) | Product ion(Q3)(m/z) | CE/V | DP/V |
* Quantitative ion. CE: collision energy; DP: declustering potential. | ||||
CIP | 332.1 | 288.1* | 23.78 | 104 |
245.2 | 31.26 | 104 | ||
ENR | 360.2 | 245.1 | 35.88 | 100 |
316.3* | 25.51 | 100 |
Fig. 2 FT-IR images of (a) blank polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) membrane, (b) molecularly imprinted membrane (MIM) and (c) non-molecularly imprinted membrane (NIM)
Analyte | Qe/(ng/cm2) | Kd/(mL/cm2) | k | k′ | |||||
MIM | NIM | MIM | NIM | MIM | NIM | ||||
*Qe=(C0-Ce)×V/A; Kd=(C0-Ce)×V/(Ce×A)=Qe/Ce; k=Kd(CIP)/Kd(others); k′=kMIM/kNIM. Qe: equilibrium adsorption capacity; C0: initial concentration; Ce: equilibrium concentration; V: volume of the initial solution; A: area of MIM & NIM. | |||||||||
CIP | 264.92±13.22 | 164.96±9.38 | 5.42±0.25 | 1.77±0.06 | 3.06±0.03 | ||||
OFL | 165.08±13.11 | 154.11±8.93 | 2.49±0.25 | 2.16±0.11 | 2.19±0.11 | 0.82±0.01 | 1.15±0.03 | ||
CFR | 99.27±0.21 | 95.88±1.13 | 2.79±0.05 | 2.48±0.10 | 1.94±0.05 | 0.68±0.00 | 1.08±0.02 | ||
SDZ | 21.95±0.86 | 22.03±0.71 | 0.27±0.02 | 0.28±0.02 | 19.84±0.43 | 6.45±0.00 | 1.00±0.07 | ||
AZI | 25.03±1.82 | 24.46±1.81 | 0.18±0.01 | 0.18±0.01 | 30.03±0.72 | 10.06±0.29 | 1.02±0.00 |
Table 2 Competitive adsorption test results for MIM and NIM on different antibiotics (n=3)
Analyte | Qe/(ng/cm2) | Kd/(mL/cm2) | k | k′ | |||||
MIM | NIM | MIM | NIM | MIM | NIM | ||||
*Qe=(C0-Ce)×V/A; Kd=(C0-Ce)×V/(Ce×A)=Qe/Ce; k=Kd(CIP)/Kd(others); k′=kMIM/kNIM. Qe: equilibrium adsorption capacity; C0: initial concentration; Ce: equilibrium concentration; V: volume of the initial solution; A: area of MIM & NIM. | |||||||||
CIP | 264.92±13.22 | 164.96±9.38 | 5.42±0.25 | 1.77±0.06 | 3.06±0.03 | ||||
OFL | 165.08±13.11 | 154.11±8.93 | 2.49±0.25 | 2.16±0.11 | 2.19±0.11 | 0.82±0.01 | 1.15±0.03 | ||
CFR | 99.27±0.21 | 95.88±1.13 | 2.79±0.05 | 2.48±0.10 | 1.94±0.05 | 0.68±0.00 | 1.08±0.02 | ||
SDZ | 21.95±0.86 | 22.03±0.71 | 0.27±0.02 | 0.28±0.02 | 19.84±0.43 | 6.45±0.00 | 1.00±0.07 | ||
AZI | 25.03±1.82 | 24.46±1.81 | 0.18±0.01 | 0.18±0.01 | 30.03±0.72 | 10.06±0.29 | 1.02±0.00 |
Fig. 4 Effect of different extraction conditions of on elution recovery of ciprofloxacin (n=3) a. loading volume; b. washing agents; c. eluent; d. eluent dosage.
Content/(ng/g) | Recovery/% (n=3) | RSDs/% | |
Intra-day (n=5) | Inter-day (n=3) | ||
10 | 119.1 | 7.9 | 7.7 |
50 | 92.6 | 7.1 | 3.3 |
100 | 95.4 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
Table 3 Recovery and RSDs of CIP spiked in milk sample at three spiked levels
Content/(ng/g) | Recovery/% (n=3) | RSDs/% | |
Intra-day (n=5) | Inter-day (n=3) | ||
10 | 119.1 | 7.9 | 7.7 |
50 | 92.6 | 7.1 | 3.3 |
100 | 95.4 | 4.8 | 4.6 |
|
Viewed | ||||||
Full text |
|
|||||
Abstract |
|
|||||