Traceability of sulfonamide antibiotic treatment by immunochemical analysis of farm animal hair samples
- 129 Downloads
The use of hair to trace use of unauthorized substances, therapeutic agents, or their misuse is becoming very attractive since residues can be detected for a long time after treatment. For this purpose, an indirect enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) has been evaluated for its capability to trace sulfonamide antibiotic treatment by analyzing cattle and pig hair samples. Pigmented and nonpigmented hair samples from control and sulfamethazine (SMZ)-treated pigs and calves were collected, extracted under different alkaline conditions, and analyzed by ELISA after just diluting the extracts with the assay buffer. Data analysis following the European recommendations for screening methods demonstrates that the ELISA can detect SMZ in hair samples with a limit of detection (90% of the zero dose (IC90)) between 30 and 75 ng g−1. The same samples have been analyzed by HPLC after a dual solid-phase extraction. The ELISA results matched very well those obtained by the chromatographic method, demonstrating that the immunochemical method can be used as a screening tool to trace animal treatments. Between the benefits of this method are the possibility to directly analyze hair extracts with sufficient detectability and its high-throughput capability. Preliminary validation data are reported using an experimental approach inspired on the Commission Decision 2002/657/EC criteria for screening methods.
KeywordsSulfonamide antibiotics Sulfamethazine Hair analysis ELISA Immunoassay HPLC-DAD Treatment traceability
This work has been supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology (Contract numbers AGL2008-05578-C05-01/03 and NAN2004-09195-C04-04) and by the European Community (KBBE2007- 211326). The AMR group is a Grup de Recerca de la Generalitat de Catalunya and has support from the Departament d’Universitats, Recerca i Societat de la Informació la Generalitat de Catalunya (expedient 2005SGR 00207).
- 11.Cooper G (2005) Clin Chim Acta 355:S424–S424Google Scholar
- 12.Cooper G, Wilson L, Reid C, Baldwin D, Hand C, Spiehler V (2003) J Anal Toxicol 27:581–586Google Scholar
- 13.Cooper G, Wilson L, Reid C, Baldwin D, Hand C, Spiehler V (2005) J Anal Toxicol 29:678–681Google Scholar
- 14.Han EY, Miller E, Lee J, Park Y, Lim M, Chung HS, Wylie FM, Oliver JS (2006) J Anal Toxicol 30:380–385Google Scholar
- 16.Miller EI, Wylie FM, Oliver JS (2006) J Anal Toxicol 30:441–448Google Scholar
- 17.Moore C, Deitermann D, Lewis D, Feeley B, Niedbala RS (1999) J Forensic Sci 44:609–612Google Scholar
- 20.European Commission (200) Commission Decision 2002/657/EC of 12 August 2002 implementing Council Directive 96/23/EC concerning the performance of analytical methods and the interpretation of results Official Journal of the European Union, L221, 8–36 (17 August 2002)Google Scholar