Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 444

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Optimization and validation of a quantitative liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometric method covering 295 bacterial and fungal metabolites including all regulated mycotoxins in four model food matrices

Open access
Malachová, Alexandra, Sulyok, Michael, Beltrán, Eduardo, Berthiller, Franz, Krska, Rudolf·2014·Journal of Chromatography A

Abstract

An LC-MS/MS "dilute and shoot" method for the determination of 295 fungal and bacterial metabolites was optimized and validated according to the guidelines established in the Directorate General for Health and Consumer Affairs of the European Commission (SANCO) document No. 12495/2011. Four different types of food matrices were chosen for validation: apple puree for infants (high water content), hazelnuts (high fat content), maize (high starch and low fat content) and green pepper (difficult or unique matrix). Method accuracy and precision was evaluated using spiked samples in five replicates at two concentration levels. Method trueness was demonstrated through participation in various proficiency tests. Although the method covers a total number of 331 analytes, validation data were acquired only for 295 analytes, either due to the non-availability of analytical standards or due other reasons described in this paper. Concerning the apparent recovery, the percentage of 295 analytes matching the acceptable recovery range of 70-120% lied down by SANCO varied from 21% in green pepper to 74% in apple puree at the highest spiking level. At the levels close to limit of quantification only 20-58% of the analytes fulfilled this criterion. The extent of matrix effects was strongly dependent on the analyte/matrix combination. In general, the lowest matrix effects were observed in apple puree (59% of analytes were not influenced by enhancement/suppression at all at the highest validation level). The highest matrix effects were observed in green pepper, where only 10% of analytes did not suffer from signal suppression/enhancement. The repeatability of the method was acceptable (RSD≤20) for 97% of all analytes in apple puree and hazelnuts, for 95% in maize and for 89% in green pepper. Concerning the trueness of the method, Z-scores were generally between -2 and 2, despite a broad variety of different matrices. Based on these results it can be concluded that quantitative determination of mycotoxins by LC-MS/MS based on a "dilute and shoot" approach is also feasible in case of complex matrices.

Overview

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 · 10.1016/j.chroma.2014.08.037

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 18 references

Cited by

See all 444

Metadata

Authors
Malachová, A., Sulyok, M., Beltrán, E., Berthiller, F., & Krska, R.
Venue
Journal of Chromatography A
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-10
Volume
1362
Pages
145-156
ISSN
0021-9673 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2009639464
Cited by
444
References
18
FWCI
43.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Optimization and validation of a quantitative liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometric method covering 295 bacterial and fungal metabolites including all regulated mycotoxins in four model food matrices. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.chroma.2014.08.037
The paper
Malachová, A., Sulyok, M., Beltrán, E., Berthiller, F., & Krska, R. (2014). Optimization and validation of a quantitative liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometric method covering 295 bacterial and fungal metabolites including all regulated mycotoxins in four model food matrices. Journal of Chromatography A. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2014.08.037

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.