Cited by 13Forensic Toxicology and Drug AnalysisPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental ImpactsAnalytical chemistry methods development

Comprehensive method to detect nitazene analogues and xylazine in wastewater

Open access
Keller, Emma L., Peake, Brock, Simpson, Bradley S., White, Jason M., Gerber, Cobus·2025·Environmental Science and Pollution Research

Abstract

A class of novel synthetic opioids, nitazenes, have infiltrated the illicit drug market worldwide. Their high potency leading to overdose and fatality is a public health concern. Xylazine is a non-opiate sedative typically used for veterinary applications. The drug has recently appeared as an adulterant in the informal drug market, particularly within opioid drugs such as fentanyl and heroin. Determining the extent of use of these drugs is challenging due to low levels consumed. Wastewater analysis has been applied to monitor novel psychoactive substance use at a population level. This study presents the validation of a sensitive analytical method for the detection and quantification of trace levels of nitazenes and xylazine in wastewater. A solid phase extraction method was employed, yielding a concentration factor of 1000-fold. The method was applied to wastewater samples collected in Australia. Five different nitazenes were found near the limit of detection and quantitation levels, with detection frequencies ranging from 3 to 6% of all samples analysed. Xylazine was detected at a higher detection frequency (26% of all samples analysed). The method presented in this study could be used as an early warning system to track the use of xylazine and nitazenes internationally.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11356-025-36425-0

Cites

20 of 20 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Older gas chromatography-mass spectrometry methods frequently lack the necessary sensitivity for nitazenes, often missing them in casework.

    “Furthermore, older gas chromatography–mass spectrometry methods also frequently lack the necessary sensitivity for nitazenes, often missing them in casework [50,51,52].”

    From Nitazenes: The Emergence of a Potent Synthetic Opioid Threat (2025) · cites this paper as [50]

    The Results and discussion section says gas chromatography may lack the sensitivity or selectivity needed to detect nitazenes in wastewater. It does not describe older GC–MS methods, establish that this happens frequently, or report nitazenes being missed in forensic casework. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Forensic laboratories are adapting to analyse nitazenes in alternative matrices such as hair for retrospective exposure assessment, dried blood spots for micro-sampling in clinical settings, and wastewater for early warning and epidemiological monitoring.

    “Forensic laboratories are also adapting to analyse nitazenes in alternative matrices such as hair [62] for retrospective exposure assessment, dried blood spots [54,63] for micro-sampling in clinical settings, and wastewater for early warning and epidemiological monitoring [50,64].”

    From Nitazenes: The Emergence of a Potent Synthetic Opioid Threat (2025) · cites this paper as [50]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keller, E. L., Peake, B., Simpson, B. S., White, J. M., & Gerber, C.
Affiliations
University of South Australia (AU)
Corresponding author
Gerber, Cobus
Venue
Environmental Science and Pollution Research
Published
2025-04-22
Volume
32
Issue
57
Pages
30863-30870
ISSN
  • 0944-1344 (ISSN-L)
  • 1614-7499
OpenAlex
W4409635835
Cited by
13
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6
FWCI
6.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Science and Pollution Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission
  • SA Health
  • University of South Australia
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Toxicology › Forensic Toxicology and Drug Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Pharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Analytical chemistry methods development
Keywords
nitazenes, xylazine, synthetic opioids, wastewater-based epidemiology, new psychoactive substances, drug adulteration, solid-phase extraction, trace detection, early warning systems
MeSH terms
Environmental Monitoring, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Xylazine, Solid Phase Extraction, Wastewater

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review