Skip to main content
Log in

Simultaneous determination of six major ergot alkaloids and their epimers in cereals and foodstuffs by LC–MS–MS

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper describes a new and rapid method for accurate quantification of the six ergot alkaloids, ergometrine, ergotamine, ergosine, ergocristine, ergocryptine, and ergocornine, by liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry (LC–MS–MS). The six ergot alkaloids studied have been defined by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) as among the most common and physiologically active ones. In addition, the method enables the quantification of the corresponding six epimers (ergo-inines) of these ergot alkaloids. This is of considerable importance in terms of the differences in toxicity of the isomeric forms. The method involves extraction under alkaline conditions using a mixture of acetonitrile and ammonium carbonate buffer followed by a rapid clean-up using dispersive solid-phase extraction with PSA (primary secondary amine) and a short chromatographic LC-run (21 min) with subsequent MS–MS detection. The method was developed and validated using ten different cereal and food samples. The major strength of the new method compared with previously published techniques is the simplicity of the clean-up procedure and the short analysis time. The limits of quantification were 0.17 to 2.78 μg kg−1 depending on the analyte and matrix. Recovery values for the 12 ergot alkaloids spiked into ten different matrices at levels of 5, 50, and 100 μg kg−1 were between 69 and 105% for 85 of 90 recovery measurements made over six days. Measurement uncertainty values were highly satisfactory. At a concentration level of 5 μg kg−1 the expanded measurement uncertainty ranged from ±0.56 to ±1.49 μg kg−1, at a concentration level of 100 μg kg−1 the expanded measurement uncertainty ranged from ±8.9 to ±20 μg kg−1. Both LOQs and measurement uncertainties were dependent on the analyte but almost independent of the matrix. The method performance was satisfactory when tested in a mini-intercomparison study between three laboratories from three different countries.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lorenz K (1979) CRC Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 11:311–354

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Řeháček Z, Sajdl P (1990) Ergot alkaloids—chemistry, biological effects, biotechnology. Elsevier, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  3. Schoch U, Schlatter C (1985) Mitt Gebiete Lebensm Hyg 76:631–644

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wolff J (1989) Getreide Mehl Brot 43:103–108

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Amelung D (1999) Getreide Magazin 5:138–145

    Google Scholar 

  6. Engelke T (2002) Dissertation, Universität Göttingen

  7. Krska R, Crews C (2007) Food Addit Contam (in press)

  8. Bennet JW, Klich M (2003) Clin Microbiol Rev 16:497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. EFSA (2005) EFSA J 225:1–27

    Google Scholar 

  10. Komarova EL, Tolkachev ON (2001) Pharm Chem J 35:504–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bürk G, Höbel W, Richt A (2006) Mol Nutr Food Res 50:437–442

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lampen A, Klaffke H (2006) J Verbraucherschutz Lebensmittelsicherheit 1:148–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Scott PM, Lombaert GA, Pellaers P, Bacler S, Lappi J (1992) J AOAC Int 75:773–779

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Müller C, Klaffke HS, Krauthause W, Wittkowski R (2006) Mycotoxin Res 22:197–200

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ware GM, Price G, Carter L Jr, Eitenmiller RR (2000) JAOAC Int 83:1395–1399

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Scott PM (1995) Food Addit Contam 12:395–403

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Scott P (2007) Mycotoxin Res 23:113–121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Komarova EL, Tolkachev ON (2001) Pharm Chem J 35:542–549

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Mohamed R, Gremaud E, Richoz-Payot J, Tabet JC, Guy PA (2006) J Chromatogr A 1114:62–72

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Lehner AF, Craig M, Fannin N, Bush L, Tobin T (2005) J Mass Spectrom 40:1484–1502

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lehner AF, Craig M, Fannin N, Bush L, Tobin T (2005) J Mass Spectrom 39:1275–1286

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Baumann U, Hunziker HR, Zimmerli B (1985) Mitt Gebiete Lebensm Hyg 76:609–630

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Scott PM, Lawrence GA (1980) J Agric Food Chem 28:1258–1261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Peng L, Rustamov I, Loo L, Farkas T (2007) Phenomenex Application Note TN-1031 (www.Phenomenex.com/TechnNotes/1031)

  25. Lauber U, Schaufer R, Gredziak M, Kiesswetter Y (2005) Mycotoxin Res 21:258–262

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Mohamed R, Gremaud E, Richoz-Payot J, Tabet JC, Guy PA (2006) Mass Spectrom 20:2787–2799

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Krska R, Welzig E, Berthiller F, Molinelli A, Mizaikoff B (2005) Food Addit Contam 22:345–353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hafner M, Sulyok M, Schuhmacher R, Crews C, Krska R (2007) World Mycotoxin J (in press)

  29. Krska R (1998) J Chromatogr A 815:49–57

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Anastassiades M, Lehotay SJ, Stajnbaher D, Schenck FJ (2003) J AOAC INT 86:412–431

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Eurachem (2000) Quantifying uncertainty in analytical measurement. CITAC Guide number 4. http://www.measurementuncertainty.org/mu/QUAM2000–1.pdf

  32. Scott PM, Lombaert GA, Pellaers P, Bacler S, Lappi J (1992) J AOAC Int 75:773–779

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would especially like to thank the UK Food Standards Agency for financial support of the project. Dr Uwe Lauber from the Chemisches und Veterinäruntersuchungsamt Stuttgart in Germany is acknowledged for his willingness to participate in the mini-intercomparison study. Rudolf Krska wants to thank Martin Hafner, Michael Sulyok, Rainer Schuhmacher (all BOKU/IFA-Tulln), Patrick Hough, and, especially, Simon Hird (both CSL) for advice and tuition in LC–MS–MS. This article was written during a secondment year of the first author at the Central Science Laboratory in Sand Hutton, York, which would not have been possible without the great support of Professor John Gilbert, Dr Laurence Castle (both CSL), Dr Rainer Schuhmacher, Professor Mathias Müller (IFA-Tulln), the Christian Doppler Research Association, and the University of Natural Resources and Applied Life Sciences, Vienna.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Rudolf Krska or Colin Crews.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

(PDF 22.3 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Krska, R., Stubbings, G., Macarthur, R. et al. Simultaneous determination of six major ergot alkaloids and their epimers in cereals and foodstuffs by LC–MS–MS. Anal Bioanal Chem 391, 563–576 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-008-2036-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-008-2036-6

Keywords

Navigation