Advertisement

Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 405, Issue 12, pp 4253–4267 | Cite as

Preparation of guanidinium terminus-molecularly imprinted polymers for selective recognition and solid-phase extraction (SPE) of [arginine]-microcystins

  • Elbert A. Mbukwa
  • Titus A. M. MsagatiEmail author
  • Bhekie B. Mamba
Original Paper

Abstract

About 70 % of microcystin (MC) congeners reported in literature consist of l-arginine amino acid (R) with its guanidinium terminal extending out of the cyclic moiety of these MCs. Molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) bearing guanidinium terminus cavities was successfully synthesised using l-arginine as a template. Non-imprinted polymer (NIP; without template) was also synthesised for control purposes. The surface area, total pore volume and average pore diameter of MIP and NIP were 267.13 m2/g, 0.63 cm3/g and 88.39 Å; 249.39 m2/g; 0.54 cm3/g and 87.14 Å, respectively. The polymers were investigated for selective recognition and extraction of [arginine]-MCs in water using solid-phase extraction/liquid chromatography-electrospray ionisation–mass spectrometry (SPE/LC-ESI-MS) method. Representative model standard solutions (0.5–10.0 μg/L) of MC-LR and MC-LY were spiked in distilled water, recovered by SPE and quantified by LC-ESI-MS. In this study, Oasis Waters™ HLB cartridges served as positive control SPE sorbents. The MIP recognised MC-LR with high recoveries (70.8–91.4 %; r 2  = 0.9962) comparable to HLB cartridges (71.0–91.85 %; r 2  = 0.9993), whereas the NIP did not recognise or retain MC-LR. Also, neither MIP nor NIP recognised or retained MC-LY. Extracts of environmental toxic Microcystis aeruginosa were subjected to SPE procedure employing MIP, NIP and HLB cartridges. Microcystin-LR, -YR, -RR, -WR, -(H4)YR and (D-Asp3, Dha7)MC-RR were extracted by MIP and HLB cartridges only as confirmed by LC-ESI-MS. This study demonstrated that the prepared MIP have potential applications for the removal in water and LC-ESI-MS identifications of MCs consisting the guanidinium moiety, i.e.[arginine]-MCs, and in particular targeting commonly encountered toxic congeners, MC-LR, -YR and -RR.

Online Abstract Figure 1

Synthesis of guanidinium-terminus-based molecularly imprinted polymers and their applications for selective recognition, binding and solid-phase extraction of MC-LR from aqueous media

Open image in new window

Keywords

Guanidinium terminus MIP SPE Selective recognition [arginine]-Microcystins 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We acknowledge the World Bank-Science and Technology Higher Education Project (WB-STHE Project, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania) and the Centre for Nano-materials, Department of Applied Chemistry, University of Johannesburg (Republic of South Africa) for financial support.

Supplementary material

216_2013_6791_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (77 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 77.4 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    WHO (1999) In: Chorus I, Bartam J, Chorus I, Bartam J (eds) Toxic cyanobacteria in water: a guide to their public health consequences, monitoring and managements. E&FN Spon, LondonGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vasconcelos V (2006) Eutrophication, toxic cyanobacteria and cyanotoxins: when ecosystems cry for help. Limnetica 25(1–2):425–432Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Richardson SD, Ternes TA (2011) Water analysis: emerging contaminants and current issues. Anal Chem 83:461–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jochimsen EM, Carmichael WW, An JS, Cardo DM, Cookson ST, Holmes CE, Antunes MB, de Melo Filho DA, Lyra TM, Barreto VS, Azevedo SM, Jarvis WR (1998) Liver failure and death after exposure to microcystins at a haemodialysis centre in Brazil. N Engl J Med 338:873–878CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Carmichael WW (1992) Cyanobacteria secondary metabolites—the cyanotoxins. J Appl Bacteriol 72:445–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zurawell R (2010) Alberta environment cyanotoxin program status report. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. pp. 1–72Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Falconer IR, Humpage AR (2005) Health risk assessment of cyanobacterial (blue-green algal) toxins in drinking water. Int J Environ Res Publ Health 2:43–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krska R, Becalski A, Braekevelt E, Koerner T, Cao X-L, Dabeka R, Godefroy S, Ben Lau B, Moisey J, Rawn DFK, Scott PM, Wang Z, Forsyth D (2012) Challenges and trends in the determination of selected chemical contaminants and allergens in food. Anal Bioanal Chem 402:139–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Trojanowicz M (2010) Chromatographic and capillary electrophoretic determination of microcystins. J Sep Sci 33:359–371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Msagati TAM, Siame BA, Shushu DD (2006) Evaluation of methods for the isolation, detection and quantification of cyanobacterial hepatotoxins. Aquat Toxicol 78:382–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zeck A, Eikenberg A, Weller MG, Niessner R (2001) Highly sensitive immunoassay based on a monoclonal antibody specific for [4-arginine]-microcystins. Anal Chim Acta 441:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sivonen K, Jones G (1999) Cyanobacterial toxins. In: Chorus I, Bartram J (eds) Toxic cyanobacteria in water: a guide to their public health consequences; monitoring and management. E & FN Spon, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lawton LA, Edwards C, Codd GA (1994) Extraction and high-performance liquid chromatography method for the determination of microcystins in raw and treated waters. Analyst 119:1525–1530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Żwir-Ferenc A, Biziuk M (2006) Review- solid phase extraction technique—trends, opportunities and applications. Pol J Environ Stud 15(5):677–690Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xie L, Park H-D (2007) Determination of microcystins in fish tissues using HPLC with a rapid and efficient solid phase extraction. Aquacult 271:530–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Aranda-Rodriguez R, Kubwabo C, Benoit FM (2003) Extraction of 15 microcystins and nodularin using immunoaffinity columns. Toxicon 42:587–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    He C, Long Y, Pan J, Li K, Liu F (2007) Application of molecularly imprinted polymers to solid-phase extraction of analytes from real samples. J Biochem Biophys Methods 70:133–150, ReviewCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chetan R, Pravin S, Dinesh M, Nikhil P (2008) Synthesis and characterization of MIPs—a viable commercial venture. http://www.pharmainfo.net/reviews/synthesis-and-characterization-mips-viable-commercial-venture. Accessed 27 Apr 2011
  19. 19.
    Wang X, Chen L, Xu X, Li Y (2011) Synthesis of molecularly imprinted polymers via ring-opening metathesis polymerization for solid-phase extraction of bisphenol A. Anal Bioanal Chem 401:1423–1432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mayes AG, Whitcombe MJ (2005) Synthetic strategies for the generation of molecularly imprinted organic polymers. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 57:1742–1778CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alexander C, Andersson HS, Andersson LI, Ansell RJ, Kirsch N, Nicholls IA, O’Mahony J, Whitcombe MJ (2006) Molecular imprinting science and technology: a survey of the literature for the years up to and including 2003. J Mol Recognit 19:106–180, ReviewCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pichon V (2007) Selective sample treatment using molecularly imprinted polymers. J Chromatogr A 1152:41–53, ReviewCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chianella I, Lotierzo M, Piletsky SA, Tothill IE, Chen BN, Karim K, Turner APF (2002) Rational design of a polymer specific for microcystin-LR using a computational approach. Anal Chem 74:1288–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chianella I, Piletsky SA, Tothill IE, Chen B, Turner APF (2003) MIP-based solid phase extraction cartridges combined with MIP-based sensors for the detection of microcystin-LR. Biosens Bioelectron 18:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kubo T, Hosoya K, Watabe Y, Tanaka N, Sano T, Kaya K (2004) Recognition of hepatotoxic homologues of microcystin using a combination of selective adsorption media. J Sep Sci 27:316–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Metcalf JS, Meriluoto JAO, Codd GA (2006) Mini review Legal and security requirements for the air transportation of cyanotoxins and toxigenic cyanobacterial cells for legitimate research and analytical purposes. Toxicol Lett 163:85–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wu L, Gao Y, Wang J (2007) Biosensors—synthesis, application and molecular recognition mechanism study of phenylalanine molecularly imprinted polymer. Anal Lett 40:3129–3147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tao J, Frankel AD (1992) Specific binding of arginine to TAR RNA. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA/Biochem 89:2723–2726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Betts MJ, Russell RB (2003) Amino acid properties and consequences of substitutions. In: Barnes MR, Gray IC (eds) Bioinformatics for genetics. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vasantha K, Dhanuskodi S (2004) Single crystal growth and characterization of phase-matchable l-arginine maleate: a potential nonlinear optical material. J Cryst Growth 269:333–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Schug KA, Lindner W (2005) Non-covalent binding between guanidinium and anionic groups: focus on biological- and synthetic-based arginine/guanidinium interactions with phosph[on]ate and sulf[on]ate residues. Chem Rev 105:67–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Shreder K, Liu Y, Nomanhboy T, Fuller SR, Wong MS, Gai WZ, Wu J, Leventhal PS, Lill JR, Corral S (2004) Design and synthesis of AX7574: a microcystin-derived, fluorescent probe for serine/threonine phosphatases. Bioconjug Chem 15:790–798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chen H, Gu L, Yin Y, Koh K, Lee J (2011) Molecular recognition of arginine by supramolecular complexation with calixarene crown ether based on surface plasmon resonance. Int J Mol Sci 12:2315–2324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Julian RR, Beauchamp JL (2001) Site specific sequestering and stabilization of charge in peptides by supramolecular adduct formation with 18-crown-6 ether by way of electrospray ionization. Int J Mass Spectrom 210:613–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Julian RR, Akin M, May JA, Stoltz BM, Beauchamp JL (2002) Molecular recognition of arginine in small peptides by supramolecular complexation with dibenzo-30-crown-10 ether. Int J Mass Spectrom 220:87–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shimoni L, Glusker JP (1995) Hydrogen bonding motifs of protein side chains: descriptions of binding of arginine and amide groups. Protein Sci 4:65–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Mbukwa EA, Msagati TAM, Mamba BB (2012) Quantitative variations of intracellular microcystin-LR, -RR and -YR in samples collected from four locations in Hartbeespoort Dam in North-West Province (South Africa) during the 2010/2011 summer season. Int J Environ Res Public Health 9:3484–3505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Mbukwa EA, Msagati TAM, Mamba BB (2012) Supported liquid membrane-liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis of cyanobacterial toxins in fresh water systems. J Phys Chem Earth 50–52:84–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Harding WR, Paxton BR (2001) Cyanobacteria in South Africa. A Review. WRC Report No. TT 153/01. Water Research Commission, PretoriaGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Xie S, Svec F, Fréchet JMJ (1998) Porous polymer monoliths: preparation of sorbent materials with high-surface areas and controlled surface chemistry for high-throughput, online, solid-phase extraction of polar organic compounds. Chem Mater 10:4072–4078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Batra D, Shea KJ (2003) Combinatorial methods in molecular imprinting. Curr Opin Chem Biol 7:434–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ye L, Haupt K (2004) Molecularly imprinted polymers as antibody and receptor mimics for assays, sensors and drug discovery. Anal Bioanal Chem 378:1887–1897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Cameán A, Moreno IM, Ruiz MJ, Pico Y (2004) Determination of microcystins in natural blooms and cyanobacterial strain cultures by matrix solid-phase dispersion and liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem 380:537–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Diehnelt CW, Peterman SM, Budde WL (2005) Liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry and accurate m/z measurements of cyclic peptide. Trends Anal Chem 24(7):622–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Yuan M, Namikoshi M, Otsuki A, Watanabe MF, Rinehart KL (1999) Electrospray ionization mass spectrometric analysis of microcystins, cyclic heptapeptide hepatotoxins: modulation of charge states and [M + H]+ to [M + Na]+ ratio. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom 10:1138–1151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Department of Water Affairs (DWA), RSA (2012) Hartbeespoort Dam Remediation Program–Clear Water State & Algae Concentration. Department of Water Affairs: Pretoria, South Africa. 196.3.165.92/hartiesdev/algaesitrep.aspx. Accessed 11 Jun 2012
  47. 47.
    Kumar S, Rai SB (2010) Spectroscopic studies of l-arginine molecule. Indian J Pure Appl Phys 48:251–255Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elbert A. Mbukwa
    • 1
  • Titus A. M. Msagati
    • 1
    Email author
  • Bhekie B. Mamba
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Applied Chemistry, Faculty of ScienceUniversity of JohannesburgJohannesburgSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations