Skip to main content
Log in

A comparative review on methods of detection and quantification of mycotoxins in solid food and feed: a focus on cereals and nuts

  • Review
  • Published:
Mycotoxin Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many emerging factors and circumstances urge the need to develop and optimize the detection and quantification techniques of mycotoxins in solid food and feed. The diversity of mycotoxins, which have different properties and affinities, makes the standardization of the analytical procedures and the adoption of a single protocol that covers the attributes of all mycotoxins a tedious or even an impossible mission. Several modifications and improvements have been undergone in order to optimize the performance of these methods including the extraction solvents, the extraction methods, the clean-up procedures, and the analytical techniques. The techniques range from the rapid screening methods, which lack sensitivity and specificity such as TLC, to a spectrum of more advanced protocols, namely, ELISA, HPLC, and GC–MS and LC–MS/MS. This review aims at assessing the current studies related to these analytical techniques of mycotoxins in solid food and feed. It discusses and evaluates, through a critical approach, various sample treatment techniques, and provides an in-depth examination of different mycotoxin detection methods. Furthermore, it includes a comparison of their actual accuracy and a thorough analysis of the observed benefits and drawbacks.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data is contained within the article.

Abbreviations

15-AcDON:

15-Acetyl-deoxynivalenol

3-AcDON:

3-Acetyl-deoxynivalenol

AA:

Acetic acid

ACN:

Acetonitrile

AFB1:

Aflatoxin B1

AFB2:

Aflatoxin B2

AFG1:

Aflatoxin G1

AFG2:

Aflatoxin G2

AFs:

Aflatoxins

ATX:

Altertoxin

BEA:

Beauvercin

BSA:

N,O-bis(trimethylsilyl) acetamide

DAS:

Diacetoxyscirpenol

DON:

Deoxynivalenol

dSPE:

Dispersive solid phase extraction

ELISA:

Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

ESI:

Electrospray ionization

ESI − :

Negative electrospray ionization

ESI + :

Positive electrospray ionization

FA:

Formic acid

FBs:

Fumonisins

FUS:

Fusaproliferin

GC:

Gas chromatography

GC-MS:

Gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry

GC–MS/MS:

Gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

HPLC:

High-performance liquid chromatography

HPLC-ELSD:

High-performance liquid chromatography-evaporative light scattering detector

HPLC-FLD:

High-performance liquid chromatography–fluorimetric detector

HPLC-UV:

High-performance liquid chromatography–ultraviolet detector

HT-2:

HT-2 toxin

IAC:

Immuno-affinity columns

LC–MS/MS:

Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

LOD:

Limit of detection

LOQ:

Limit of quantification

MeOH:

Methanol

MPL:

Maximum permissible limits

MRM:

Multiple reaction monitoring

MTX:

Mycotoxin

NA:

Not available

NIV:

Nivalenol

OTA:

Ochratoxin A

OTB:

Ochratoxin B

OTC:

Ochratoxin C

PBS:

Phosphate-buffered saline

PCD:

Post-column derivatization

PDA:

Photodiode array detector

QqQ:

Triple quadrupole system

QuEChERS:

Quick, easy, cheap, efficient, rugged, and safe method

RSDr:

Relative standard deviation for repeatability

RT:

Room temperature

SIDA:

Stable isotope dilution analysis

SLE:

Supported liquid extraction

sMRM:

Scheduled multiple reaction monitoring

SPE:

Solid phase extraction

SRM:

Single reaction monitoring

T-2:

T-2 toxin

TLC:

Thin layer chromatography

TMCS:

Trimethylchlorosilane

TMSI:

N-trimethylsilylimidazole

UPLC-FLD:

Ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography linked with fluorescence detection

UV:

Ultraviolet

WAHSPE:

Water acetonitrile heptane solid phase extraction

ZEN:

Zearalenone

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Idea of the article: André El Khoury and Jean Claude Assaf. Literature search, data analysis, and writing: Alaa Abou Dib Drafting and critical revision: Jean Claude Assaf, Espérance Debs, Sami El Khatib, Nicolas Louka, and André El Khoury.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to André El Khoury.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dib, A.A., Assaf, J.C., Debs, E. et al. A comparative review on methods of detection and quantification of mycotoxins in solid food and feed: a focus on cereals and nuts. Mycotoxin Res 39, 319–345 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12550-023-00501-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12550-023-00501-6

Keywords

Navigation