Abstract
Analytical method for the determination of four flame retardants (FRs) from two groups was proposed. These groups included the brominated flame retardants (BFRs) 3,3′,5,5′-tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and 1,2,5,6,9,10-hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD); triester organophosphate flame retardants (OPFRs), ethylhexyl diphenyl phosphate (EHDP) and triphenyl phosphate (TPhP). Reversed-phase Ultra HPLC with a UV detector, Hypersil GOLD chromatographic column and two-eluent gradient elution programme was used to obtain the best separations within the shortest possible time. UAE extraction with acetone, ethyl acetate and acetone/ethyl acetate (1:1, v/v) solvents was proposed. For the removal of fats, addition of sulphuric acid (VI) was conducted as well as solid-phase extraction (SPE) for the final clean-up of the extracts was used. The best recoveries were achieved with acetone/ethyl acetate (1:1, v/v) mixture of solvents and Bond Elut ENV column for SPE step gave the highest overall recoveries. Method detection limits (MDL) ranged from 0.05 to 0.39 μg g−1 and method quantification limits (MQL) ranged from 0.15 to 1.16 μg g−1 for all compounds.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Flame retardants (FRs) are group of chemicals, which can be added to plastics, wood and other materials in order to reduce their ignition properties. These materials are a part of building components, electronic equipment, aircraft, automobiles and many others. FRs can be differently classified; however, the most common classification is due to the active ingredient. In this classification, the largest group comprises those containing bromine, chlorine, phosphorus, nitrogen and magnesium (Beard 2013). FRs are lipophilic, and their persistence, bioaccumulation and biomagnification can cause harmful effects on humans, animals and plants. The main source of flame retardants in humans is air (inhalation), dust, water, food, and for some person’s exposure to the chemicals. More dangerous is exposure to FRs by young children who are less able to detoxification and elimination of environmental pollution from their organisms, which can lead to diseases in adulthood (Kim et al. 2014).
Many of the animals have been subjected to research on the impact of FRs on health. As a result of their exposure to a particular group of compounds many negative effects were observed such as thyroid dysfunction, changes in homeostasis, neurotoxicity, neurobehavioral and reproduction changes (including delayed puberty, reduced pregnancy, changes in menstruation), cancer (including breast cancer) and many others (Kim et al. 2014).
Retardants penetrate to the environment as a result of the release of materials during their use (by thermal desorption, leaching and other), as well as the burning, which causes their release into the air, soil, sewage, sludge, water, and eventually to living organisms such as fish.
As literature survey reveals, in order to analyse fish samples to find FRs, there are few analytical steps that need to be conducted. First of all, fish samples must be collected, then fish tissues are manually extracted and lyophilised and eventually dried with anhydrous sodium sulphate (VI) (Covaci et al. 2009, Ueno et al. 2006, Xia et al. 2011, Xian et al. 2008, Nyholm et al. 2008). After the preliminary preparation, fish tissues were subjected to different extraction procedures. Scientists often used Soxhlet extraction (SE) with different (Covaci et al. 2009, Johnson-Restrepo et al. 2008, Ueno et al. 2006, Xian et al. 2008, Su et al. 2014, Hu et al. 2011, Lankova et al. 2013, He et al. 2013, Zhang et al. 2013, Jeong et al. 2014, Roosens et al. 2008, Roosens et al. 2010, Losada et al. 2009, McHugh et al. 2010). The advantage for this extraction was high recovery values but extraction time was quite long and ranged from 4 to 48 h. Some of the researchers also used classic solvent extraction; nevertheless, recovery values were not always high enough and the consumption of solvents was high (Nyholm et al. 2008, Asante et al. 2013, Kim et al. 2011). Very popular in those kind of matrices was accelerated solvent extraction (ASE, PLE), which can lead to very high recovery values in a short time (Xia et al. 2011, Haukas et al. 2009, Feng et al. 2010, Ilyas et al. 2013, ten Dam et al. 2012, Gao et al. 2014, Sundkvist et al. 2010). Less popular, however, not worse extraction techniques were ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) (Remberger et al. 2004), microwave assisted extraction (MAE) (Ma et al. 2013) and matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) (Campone et al. 2010). The research mentioned after the extraction step used mostly gel permeation chromatography (GPC) for the clean-up of the extracts before chromatographic analysis. Some of the scientists used solid-phase extraction (SPE) or saponification in exchange of GPC. For the final analysis, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) or gas chromatography (GC) mostly with mass spectrometry (MS) detection were used.
The aim of this study was the development of an analytical procedure for the extraction and determination of selected FRs. A new and efficient approach regarding sample clean-up was proposed using the UAE extraction with addition of sulphuric acid (VI) and SPE clean-up. For the determination the UHPLC-UV method was proposed. In this paper, we focused on two brominated flame retardants (BFRs) that are widely used and produced in high amounts—(TBBPA) and (HBCD) and two organophosphate flame retardants (OPFRs)—EHDP and TPhP. The selection of OPFRs for this study was justified by the fact that these are quite new compounds that have been of researchers’ interest in biological samples (Chen et al. 2012, Kim et al. 2011, Greaves et al. 2016).
Materials and Methods
Chemical and Reagents
Selected flame retardants were bought from Sigma-Aldrich (Poznan, Poland), HPLC grade water and acetonitrile were purchased from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany) and analytical grade acetone, hexane, acetonitrile (ACN), ethyl acetate (EtAc), dichloromethane (DCM) and sulphuric acid (VI) (98%) were acquired from Chempur (Piekary Śląskie, Poland).
Stock solutions (1 mg mL−1) of HBCD, TBBPA and TPhP were prepared by dissolving 10 mg of the appropriate standard in 10 mL of acetonitrile (HPLC grade). The stock solution (1 mg mL−1) of EHDP was prepared by dilution of the appropriate volume of standard (10 mg mL−1) in acetonitrile (HPLC grade) to the final concentration. Stock solutions of all FRs were stable for over 3 months at 4 °C. Working solutions were prepared daily by mixing the appropriate volume of each stock solution with acetonitrile (HPLC grade).
Instrumentation
The Ultra HPLC system included two L-2160U pumps (LaChrom Elite, Merck Hitachi), a L-2350 column oven, a L-2200U autosampler and a L-2400U UV detector (LaChrom Ultra, Merck Hitachi). The data was collected with EZChrom Elite software. An analytical, reversed-phase column Hypersil GOLD™ (50 mm × 2.1 mm, 1.9 μm) from Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc. was used. The UAE extraction was conducted by ultrasound bath from Polsonic (Poznań, Poland) and the frequency of ultrasound was 40 kHz. The SPE was performed using J.T. Baker spe-12G (Deventer, Netherlands).
Chromatographic Separations
The determination of selected flame retardants was performed at temperature of 25 °C using Ultra HPLC equipment and the UV detector. A gradient comprised of two solvents was used, where solvent A was acetonitrile and B was water, both HPLC grade. The solvent gradient was slightly changed from the previous work (Kowalski and Mazur 2014). The column eluent was detected and quantitated at the characteristic detection wavelength for each flame retardant using the UV detector.
UAE Extraction and Clean-Up
For the purpose of this study lyophilised muscle tissues from Herring (Clupea harengus, North Sea) were received from Gdansk University of Technology. One gram of those samples was spiked with 1 mL of appropriate concentration of standards (2 μg mL−1) and left to dry. In the next step, samples were extracted with different solvents and their mixtures (10 mL): acetone, hexane, EtAc, DCM, acetone:hexane (1:1, v/v), DCM:hexane (15:85, v/v), DCM:hexane (85:15, v/v), EtAc:DCM (1:1, v/v), acetone:EtAc (1:1, v/v), acetone:EtAc (20:80, v/v) at the ambient temperature (ca 22 °C). The UAE extraction was conducted in two steps, each of them lasted 15 min, after that extracts were filtrated. The extracts achieved were then evaporated to dryness under the nitrogen stream at ambient temperature (ca 22 °C), and reconstituted to 1 mL with DCM. Subsequently, 0.5 mL of concentrated sulphuric acid (VI) was added to the samples to remove fats from extracts. The organic layer were then transferred to another bottle, evaporated to dryness under the nitrogen stream, reconstituted in 1 mL of ACN and next 15 mL H2O was added to each sample before the SPE clean-up step. The extraction procedure was repeated three times for each sample (n = 3).
The SPE procedure was carried out using Bond Elut ENV (6 mL, 500 mg) columns, which were conditioned with 6 mL of EtAc, 6 mL of ACN and 6 mL of H2O. Afterwards, the sample was passed through the column (1 mL min−1). In the next step, column was dried for 5 min and analytes were extracted with 8 mL of EtAc. The extracts achieved were evaporated to dryness under the nitrogen stream and dissolved in 1 mL of ACN prior to the chromatographic determination.
Results and Discussion
A two-solvent gradient elution programme was used to obtain satisfactory separations for selected flame retardants. The lowest analysis time was achieved using Hypersil GOLD™ (50 mm × 2.1 mm, 1.9 μm) as an analytical column and water and acetonitrile as eluents. The gradient elution programme for the determination of flame retardants is presented in Table 1. The separations of all compounds were satisfactory and the gradient elution programme allows use of a short analysis time (less than 3.0 min) (Fig. 1). For proposed chromatographic system, chromatographic parameters including retention factor (k), resolution (R s ) and selectivity factor (α) were determined—TPhP (k = 1.06), TBBPA (k = 1.25, Rs = 0.71, α = 1.19), EHDP (k = 2.52, R s = 5.14, α = 2.01) and HBCD (k = 2.91, R s = 1.42, α = 1.15).
For the UAE extraction, different solvents were tested to obtain the best recoveries for spiked fish samples. Moreover, classic solvent extraction was also tested, however was rejected from further analysis, due to longer time, higher usage of solvents and lower recovery values achieved for each solvent’s mixture (TPhP—23–51%, TBBPA—5–60%, EHDP—21–27%, HBCD—58–107%). Within solvents tested for UAE extraction were: acetone, hexane, EtAc, DCM, acetone:hexane (1:1, v/v), DCM:hexane (15:85, v/v), DCM:hexane (85:15, v/v), EtAc:DCM (1:1, v/v), acetone:EtAc (1:1, v/v), acetone:EtAc (20:80, v/v). Different time and volume of solvents were tested in the first attempts. After several adjustments, the best results were obtained when the UAE extraction lasted 2 × 15 min and for each sample 2 × 10 mL of appropriate solvent mixture was used. Obtained extracts could not be further processed (even SPE clean-up or UHPLC analysis) without the removal of fats that were in high content in obtained extracts. Several methods were tested and only one gave satisfactory results. Literature survey reveals that most often used technique was saponification. However, with non-polar FRs, this method did not give satisfactory results, since together with fats some of the FRs were also removed from the samples and recovery values achieved were under 20% for all FRs. Another method for removal of lipids that only few references described was the use of concentrated sulphuric acid (VI). Therefore, the second attempt was to use this acid to remove fats from prepared samples. The addition of 0.5 mL of sulphuric acid (VI) to 1 mL of the extract followed by shaking for a few minutes removed fats from organic layer without removing analysed FRs. Therefore, organic layer was taken to the next step of sample preparation. However, the SPE clean-up is not totally necessary, but without this step some matrix effects occur on chromatograms. In order to achieve high recovery values, the organic layer from the extracts was dried under the nitrogen stream and then reconstituted in 1 mL of ACN. Then, 15 mL of distilled water was added in order to conduct the proper SPE clean-up. Two SPE columns were tested: Bond Elut ENV (6 mL, 500 mg) and Oasis HLB (6 mL, 500 mg). Conditioning and elution process were described in material and methods. Higher recovery values were achieved using Bond Elut ENV columns. Recovery values achieved including all analytical steps and different UAE solvents are presented in Fig. 2.
The satisfactory results were achieved for three solvents: acetone, EtAc and acetone:EtAc (1:1, v/v) using Bond Elut ENV columns (Table 2). However, the highest recoveries were achieved for the mixture of acetone/EtAc (1:1, v/v) from those tested in this research.
The chromatogram of final extract using whole analytical procedure for the UAE extraction and clean-up is presented in Fig. 3.
Standard curves were determined using linear regression: y = axe + b, where: y: peak area, a: slope, x: respective concentration and b: intercept. The parameters of calibration curves obtained were calculated and presented in Table 3. The method detection limit (MDL) and method quantification limit (MQL) values were determined using the parameters of the obtained standard curves for each analyte. The MDL was calculated as MDL = 3.3 s/a, where s is the standard deviation of the blank samples and a is the slope. The MQL value was determined as MQL = 3 MDL. The MDL and MQL values obtained by this method were recalculated including the appropriate recovery level of analyte from fish samples. Therefore, calculated values included all steps introduced to the analytical procedure.
Conclusions
A new, very fast and sensitive method has been developed for the determination of four flame retardants in fish samples using Ultra HPLC equipment and UV detection. All FRs can be determined with good separation and within 3 min using this chromatographic system.
The combination of a fast UHPLC-UV system together with an optimised UAE extraction technique with SPE clean-up procedure was verified as selective, efficient, and precise. All compounds studied can be extracted from lyophilised fish samples with different content of fat that can be removed using sulphuric acid (VI). The extraction method proposed can obtain high recovery values with different combinations of solvents acetone, EtAc and acetone:EtAc (1:1, v/v); however, the best recoveries were achieved using mixture of acetone/EtAc (1:1, v/v). For the SPE extraction, Bond Elut ENV columns have been proposed as they achieved the highest recovery values. Low values of MDL and MQL, as well as wide linear range of the developed method are satisfactory for the determination of FRs. Therefore, this method with optimised extraction procedure can be used for the analysis of different fish samples.
To conclude, the optimised UAE extraction with SPE clean-up procedure and the Ultra HPLC method for determination of the selected FRs have been successfully applied to the analysis of fish samples.
References
Asante KA, Takahashi S, Itai T, Isobe T, Devanathan G, Muto M, Agyakwah SK, Adu-Kumi S, Subramanian A, Tanabe S (2013) Occurrence of halogenated contaminants in inland and coastal fish from Ghana: levels, dietary exposure assessment and human health implications. Ecotox Environ Safe 94:123–130
Beard A (2013) European initiatives for selecting sustainable flame retardants. In: Hester RE, Harrison RM (eds) Chemical alternatives assessments. The Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, pp 44–66
Campone L, Piccinelli AL, Ostman C, Rastrelli L (2010) Determination of organophosphorous flame retardants in fish tissues by matrix solid-phase dispersion and gas chromatography. Anal Bioanal Chem 397:799–806
Covaci A, Voorspoels S, Abdallah MAE, Geens T, Harrad S, Law RJ (2009) Analytical and environmental aspects of the flame retardant tetrabromobisphenol-A and its derivatives. J Chromatogr A 1216:346–363
Feng J, Wang Y, Ruan T, Qu G, Jiang G (2010) Simultaneous determination of hexabromocyclododecanes and tris(2,3-dibromopropyl) isocyanurate using LC–APCI-MS/MS. Talanta 82:1929–1934
Gao Z, Deng Y, Yuan W, He H, Yang S, Sun C (2014) Determination of organophosphorus flame retardants in fish bypressurized liquid extraction using aqueous solutions and solid-phasemicroextraction coupled with gas chromatography-flamephotometric detector. J Chromatogr A 1366:31–37
Greaves AK, Letcher RJ, Chen D, McGoldrick DJ, Gauthier LT, Cackus SM (2016) Retrospective analysis of organophosphate flame retardants in hering gull eggs and relation to the aquatic food web in the Laurentian Great Lakes of North America. Environ Res 150:255–263
Haukas M, Mariussen E, Ruus A, Tollefsen KE (2009) Accumulation and disposition of hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) in juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchusmykiss). Aquat Toxicol 95:144–151
He MJ, Luo XJ, Yu LH, Wu JP, Chen SJ, Mai BX (2013) Diasteroisomer and enantiomer-specific profiles of hexabromocyclododecane and tetrabromobisphenol A in an aquatic environment in a highly industrialized area, South China: vertical profile, phase partition, and bioaccumulation. Environ Pollut 179:105–110
Hu X, Hu D, Song Q, Li J, Wang P (2011) Determinations of hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) isomers in channel catfish, crayfish, hen eggs and fish feeds from China by isotopic dilution LC–MS/MS. Chemosphere 82:698–707
Ilyas M, Sudaryanto A, Setiawan IE, Rivadi AS, Isobe T, Tanabe S (2013) Characterization of polychlorinated biphenyls and brominated flame retardants in sludge, sediment and fish from municipal dumpsite at Surabaya, Indonesia. Chemosphere 93:1500–1510
Jeong GH, Hwang NR, Hwang EH, Lee BC, Yoon J (2014) Hexabromocyclododecanes in crucian carp and sediment from the major rivers in Korea. Sci Total Environ 470-471:1471–1478
Johnson-Restrepo B, Adams DH, Kannan K (2008) Tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA) and hexabromocyclododecanes (HBCDs) in tissues of humans, dolphins, and sharks from the United States. Chemosphere 70:1935–1944
Kim JW, Ramaswamy BR, Chang KH, Isobe T, Tanabe S (2011) Multiresidue analytical method for the determination of antimicrobials, preservatives, benzotriazole UV stabilizers, flame retardants and plasticizers in fish using ultra high performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 1218:3511–3520
Kim YR, Harden FA, Toms LML, Norman RE (2014) Health consequences of exposure to brominated flame retardants: a systematic review. Chemosphere 106:1–19
Kowalski B, Mazur M (2014) The simultaneous determination of six flame retardants in water samples using SPE pre-concentration and UHPLC-UV method. Water Air Soil Poll 225:1866–1875
Lankova D, Kockovska M, Lacina O, Kalachova K, Pulkrabova J, Hajslova J (2013) Rapid and simple method for determination of hexabromocyclododecanes and other LC–MS–MS-amenable brominated flame retardants in fish. Anal Bioanal Chem 405:7829–7839
Losada S, Roach A, Roosens L, Santos FJ, Galceran MT, Vetter W, Neels H, Covaci A (2009) Biomagnification of anthropogenic and naturally-produced organobrominated compounds in a marine food web from Sydney Harbour, Australia. Environ Int 35:1142–1149
Ma Y, Cui K, Zeng F, Wen J, Liu H, Zhu F, Ouyang G, Luan T, Zeng Z (2013) Microwave-assisted extraction combined with gel permeation chromatography and silica gel cleanup followed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for the determination of organophosphorus flame retardants and plasticizers in biological samples. Anal Chim Acta 786:47–53
McHugh B, Poole R, Corcoran J, Anninou P, Boyle B, Joyce E, Barry Foley M, McGovern E (2010) The occurrence of persistent chlorinated and brominated organic contaminants in the European eel (Anguilla anguilla) in Irish waters. Chemosphere 79:305–313
Nyholm JR, Norman A, Norrgren L, Haglund P, Andersson PL (2008) Maternal transfer of brominated flame retardants in zebrafish (Danio rerio). Chemosphere 73:203–208
Remberger M, Sternbeck J, Palm A, Kaj L, Stromberg K, Brorstrom-Lunden E (2004) The environmental occurrence of hexabromocyclododecane in Sweden. Chemosphere 54:9–21
Roosens L, Dirtu AC, Goemans G, Belpaire C, Gheorghe A, Neels H, Blust R, Covaci A (2008) Brominated flame retardants and polychlorinated biphenyls in fish from the river Scheldt, Belgium. Environ Int 34:976–983
Roosens L, Geeraerts C, Belpaire C, Van Pelt I, Neels H, Covaci A (2010) Spatialvariations in the levels and isomeric patterns of PBDEs and HBCDs in the European eel in Flanders. Environ Int 36:415–423
Su G, Saunders D, Yu Y, Yu H, Zhang X, Liu H, Giesy JP (2014) Occurrence of additive brominated flame retardants in aquatic organisms from Tai Lake and Yangtze River in Eastern China, 2009–2012. Chemosphere 114:340–346
Sundkvist AM, Olofsson U, Haglund P (2010) Organophosphorus flame retardants and plasticizers in marine and fresh water biota and in human milk. J Environ Monitor 12:943–951
ten Dam G, Prado O, Traag W, van der Lee M, Peters R (2012) Simultaneous extraction and determination of HBCD isomers and TBBPA by ASE and LC–MSMS in fish. J Chromatogr B 898:101–110
Ueno D, Alaee M, Marvin C, Muir DCG, Macinnis G et al (2006) Distribution and transportability of hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) in the Asia-Pacific region using skipjack tuna as a bioindicator. Environ Pollut 144:238–247
Xia C, Lam JC, Sun L, Xie Z, Lam PK (2011) Hexabromocyclododecanes (HBCDs) in marine fishes along the Chinese coastline. Chemosphere 82:1662–1668
Xian Q, Ramu K, Isobe T, Sudaryanto A, Liu X, Gao Z, Takahashi S, Yu H, Tanabe S (2008) Levels and body distribution of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and hexabromocyclododecanes (HBCDs) in freshwater fishes from the Yangtze River, China. Chemosphere 71:268–276
Zhang Y, Sun H, Liu F, Dai Y, Qin X, Zhao L, Gan Z (2013) Hexabromocyclododecanes in limnic and marine organisms and terrestrial plants from Tianjin, China: diastereomer and enantiomer-specific profiles, biomagnification, and human exposure. Chemosphere 93:1561–1568
Acknowledgements
This project is financed in the framework of grant entitled: “Production and attestation of new types of reference materials crucial for achieving European accreditation for Polish industrial laboratories” attributed by the National Center for Research and Development.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of Interest
Bartosz Kowalski declares that he has no conflict of interest. Magdalena Płaszczyk declares that she has no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed.
Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human subjects.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Kowalski, B., Płaszczyk, M. UAE-SPE-UHPLC-UV Method for the Determination of Flame Retardants in Fish Tissues. Food Anal. Methods 10, 2902–2907 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-017-0833-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-017-0833-2