Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 391, Issue 4, pp 1397–1408 | Cite as

Results of a European inter-laboratory comparison study on the determination of EU priority polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in edible vegetable oils

  • Rupert Simon
  • José Angel Gomez Ruiz
  • Christoph von Holst
  • Thomas Wenzl
  • Elke Anklam
Original Paper

Abstract

A collaborative study on the analysis for 15 + 1 EU priority PAHs in edible oils was organised to investigate the state-of-the-art of respective analytical methods. Three spiked vegetable oils, one contaminated native sunflower oil, and one standard solution were investigated in this study. The results of 52 laboratories using either high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection or gas chromatography with mass-selective detectors were evaluated by application of robust statistics. About 95% of the laboratories were able to quantify benzo[a]pyrene together with five other PAHs included in the commonly known list of 16 US-EPA PAHs. About 80% of the participants also quantified seven additional PAHs in most samples, two of which were benzo[b]fluoranthene and benzo[k]fluoranthene, which were also known from the EPA list. Only about 50% of the participants quantified cyclopenta[cd]pyrene, benzo[j]fluoranthene, and benzo[c]fluorene. The robust relative standard deviations of the submitted results without discrimination between the methods applied ranged between 100% for 5-methylchrysene in spiked olive oil and 11% for the same analyte in spiked sunflower oil. The results clearly showed that for these analytes the methods of analysis are not yet well established in European laboratories, and more collaborative trials are needed to promote further development and to improve the performances of the respective methods.

Keywords

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) European priority PAHs Edible vegetable oils Inter-laboratory comparison study 

Supplementary material

216_2007_1771_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.4 mb)
ESM(PDF 1.44 MB)

References

  1. 1.
    Zedeck MS (1980) J Environ Pathol Toxicol 3:537–567Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Simko P (2002) J Chromatogr B 770:3–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    European Commission Scientific Committee on Food (2002) Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Food on the risks to human health of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in food. http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scf/out153_en.pdf. Accessed 3 December 2007
  4. 4.
    Straif K, Baan R, Grosse Y, Secretan B, El Ghissassi F, Cogliano V (2005) Lancet Oncol 6(12):931–932. http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    European Commission (2005) Commission Recommendation 2005/108/EC. Off J Eur Union L34:43–45. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:034:0043:0045:EN:PDF
  6. 6.
    Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) (2006) WHO technical report series 930. WHO, Geneva. http://www.who.int/ipcs/food/jecfa/summaries/summary_report_64_final.pdf
  7. 7.
    European Commission (2005) Commission Regulation (EC) No 208/2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 466/2001. Off J Eur Union L34:3–5. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:034:0003: 0005:EN:PDF
  8. 8.
    European Commission (2006) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1881/2006. Off J Eur Union L364:5–24 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:364:0005:0024:EN:PDF
  9. 9.
    Wenzl T, Simon R, Kleiner J, Anklam E (2006) Trend Anal Chem 25(7):716–725Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    International Standardisation Organisation (ISO) (2007) Homepage. http://www.iso.org. Accessed 3 December 2007
  11. 11.
    van Stijn F, Kerkhoff MAT, Vandeginste BGM (1996) J Chromatogr A 750:263–273Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Simon R, Palme S, Anklam E (2006) J AOAC Int 89(3):772–781Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    FAPAS (2004–2005) Reports 2004-0618, 2005-0621, 2005-0622. FAPAS, York, UK. http://www.fapas.com. Accessed 3 December 2007
  14. 14.
    Thompson M, Wood R (1993) J AOAC Int 76(4):926–940Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lowthian PJ, Thompson M (2002) Analyst 127:1359–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    AMC (1989) Analyst 114:1693–1697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    European Commission (2005) Commission Directive 2005/10/EC. Off J Eur Union L34:15–20 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:034:0015:0020:EN:PDF
  18. 18.
    Simon R, Palme S, Anklam E (2006) J Chromatogr A 1103:307–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Palme S, Simon R, Anklam E (2005) Validation of two methods for the quantification of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in primary smoke condensates: report on the collaborative trial (EUR 21679 EN). EC, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thompson M (2000) Analyst 125:385–386Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rupert Simon
    • 1
  • José Angel Gomez Ruiz
    • 1
  • Christoph von Holst
    • 1
  • Thomas Wenzl
    • 1
  • Elke Anklam
    • 2
  1. 1.European Commission, Directorate General Joint Research CentreInstitute for Reference Materials and MeasurementsGeelBelgium
  2. 2.European Commission, Directorate General Joint Research CentreInstitute for Health and Consumer ProtectionIspraItaly

Personalised recommendations