Skip to main content
Log in

A Comparison of Three Methods of Extraction for the Determination of Polyphenols and Organic Acids in Tobacco by UPLC–MS–MS

  • Limited Short Communication
  • Published:
Chromatographia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Matrix solid phase dispersion (MSPD), ultrasonic extraction followed by a solid phase extraction (USE–SPE) and reflux extraction (REFLUX) were studied for the analysis of polyphenols and organic acids in tobacco. The analysis was by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC–MS–MS). The multi-mode support sorbent Zirconia/AA12S50 in MSPD is more suitable for the extraction of tobacco polyphenols than conventional silica or C18 silica. Although the matrix effect of USE–SPE is slightly stronger than MSPD and REFLUX for most target compounds, it gave higher extraction capacity, recoveries and sensitivity.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Leffingwell LC (1999) Leaf Chemistry-8A, Basic chemical formic constituents of tobacco leaf and differences among tobacco acetic types. In: Davis DL, Nielsen MT (Eds) Tobacco propyroglutamic duction, chemistry and technology. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp 265

  2. Torikaiu K, Uwano Y, Nakamori T, Tarora W, Takahashi H (2005) Food Chem Toxicol 43:559–568. doi:10.1016/j.fct.2004.12.011

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Qiu JS, Jin XH (2002) J Chromatogr A 950:81–88. doi:10.1016/S0021-9673(02)00034-1

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Qiu J (1999) J Chromatogr A 859:153–158. doi:10.1016/S0021-9673(99)00886-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. de Rijke E, Out P, Niessen WMA, Ariese F, Gooijer C, Brinkman UTA (2006) J Chromatogr A 1112:31–63. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2006.01.019

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kristenson EM, Brinkman UTA, Ramos L (2006) Trends analyt Chem 25:96–111. doi:10.1016/j.trac.2005.05.011

    Google Scholar 

  7. Ziaková A, Brandsteterová E, Blahová E (2003) J Chromatogr A 983:271–275. doi:10.1016/S0021-9673(02)01712-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Xiao HB, Krucker M, Albert K, Liang XM (2004) J Chromatogr 1032:117–124. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2003.09.032

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dopico-García MS, Valentão P, Jagodziñska A, Klepczyñska J, Guerra L, Andrade PB, Seabra RM (2007) Talanta 74:20–31. doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2007.05.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Minuti L, Pellegrino R (2008) J Chromatogr A 1185:23–30. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2008.01.039

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Chu XG, Hu XZ, Yao HY (2005) J Chromatogr A 1063:201–210. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2004.12.003

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Totti S, Fernández M, Ghini S, Picó Y, Fini F, Mañes J, Girotti S (2006) Talanta 69:724–729. doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2005.11.012

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Yao LH, Datta N, Tomás-Barberán FA, Ferreres F, Martos I (2003) Food Chem 81:159–168. doi:10.1016/S0308-8146(02)00388-6

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Weston RJ, Brocklebank LK, Lu YR (2000) Food Chem 70:427–435. doi:10.1016/S0308-8146(00)00127-8

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. McNeff C, Carr PW (1995) Anal Chem 67:2350–2353. doi:10.1021/ac00110a005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sun L, McCormick AV, Carr PW (1994) J Chromatogr 658:465–473. doi:10.1016/0021-9673(94)80037-5

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Zhou T, Lucy CA (2008) J Chromatogr A 1213:8–13. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2008.09.097

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Blackwell JA, Carr PW (1992) Anal Chem 64:863–873. doi:10.1021/ac00032a008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Hu Y, Yang X, Carr PW (2002) J Chromatogr A 968:17–29. doi:10.1016/S0021-9673(02)00754-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Matuszewski BK, Constanzer ML, Chavez-Eng CM (2003) Anal Chem 75:3019–3030. doi:10.1021/ac020361s

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Matuszewski BK (2006) J Chromatogr B 830:293–300. doi:10.1016/j.jchromb.2005.11.009

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Benijts T, Dams R, Lambert W, Leenheer DA (2004) J Chromatogr A 1029:153–159. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2003.12.022

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Abhilash PC, Jamil S, Singh N (2007) J Chromatogr A 1176:43–47. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2007.11.005

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kruve A, Künnapas A, Herodes K, Leito I (2008) J Chromatogr A 1187:58–66. doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2008.01.077

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Liu Yang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Xiang, G., Yang, L., Zhang, X. et al. A Comparison of Three Methods of Extraction for the Determination of Polyphenols and Organic Acids in Tobacco by UPLC–MS–MS. Chroma 70, 1007–1010 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-009-1253-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-009-1253-2

Keywords

Navigation