28.02.2013 Views

PDF (Full Text) - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Institutional Repository

PDF (Full Text) - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Institutional Repository

PDF (Full Text) - Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Institutional Repository

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC METHODS FOR<br />

THE DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI BIN YAACOB<br />

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA


BAHAGIAN A – Pengesahan Kerjasama *<br />

Adalah disahkan bahawa projek penyelidikan tesis ini telah dilaksanakan melalui<br />

kerjasama antara _____________________ dengan _________________________<br />

Disahkan oleh:<br />

Tandatangan : .......................................................... Tarikh : ..........................<br />

Nama : ..........................................................<br />

Jawatan :...........................................................<br />

(Cop rasmi)<br />

* Jika penyediaan tesis/projek melibatkan kerjasama.<br />

BAHAGIAN B – Untuk Kegunaan Pejabat Sekolah Pengajian Siswazah<br />

Tesis ini telah diperiksa dan diakui oleh:<br />

Nama dan Alamat<br />

Pemeriksa Luar : Prof. Dr. Noor Azhar Bin Mohd Shazili<br />

Pengarah<br />

Institut Oseanografi,<br />

Kolej <strong>Universiti</strong> Sains dan <strong>Teknologi</strong> <strong>Malaysia</strong>,<br />

Mengabang Telipot<br />

21030 Kuala Terengganu<br />

Nama dan Alamat<br />

Pemeriksa Dalam I : Prof. Madya Dr. Razali Bin Ismail<br />

Fakulti Sains,<br />

UTM, Skudai<br />

Pemeriksa Dalam II :<br />

Nama Penyelia Lain<br />

(jika ada) :<br />

Disahkan oleh Penolong Pendaftar di Sekolah Pengajian Siswazah:<br />

Tandatangan : .......................................................... Tarikh : ..........................<br />

Nama : .GANESAN A/L ANDIMUTHU


STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC METHODS FOR<br />

THE DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI BIN YAACOB<br />

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the<br />

requirements for the award of the degree of<br />

Doctor of Philosophy<br />

Faculty of Science<br />

<strong>Universiti</strong> <strong>Teknologi</strong> <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

APRIL 2006


Specially dedicated to:<br />

My mother, wife, sons, daughters and all families for<br />

all the love, support and continuous prayer<br />

for my success in completing this work.<br />

iii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

All praise be to ALLAH SWT and blessing be upon His Prophet SAW whose<br />

ultimate guidance creates a more meaningful purpose to this work.<br />

I wish to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the people who have both<br />

directly and indirectly contributed to this thesis. The following are those to whom I<br />

am particularly indebted:<br />

My supervisors A.P. Dr. Abdull Rahim bin Hj. Mohd. Yusoff and Prof. Dr.<br />

Rahmalan Ahamad for their invaluable guidance, freedom of work and<br />

constant encouragement throughout the course of this work.<br />

School Of Health Sciences, USM, Health Campus, Kubang Krian Kelantan<br />

for awarding study leave together with scholarship in completing the work.<br />

Prof Baharuddin Saad from USM Penang, AP Dr. Razali Ismail from<br />

Chemistry Department, Faculty of Science, UTM and Prof Barek from<br />

Charles University, Prague, Czeck Republic for their useful discussion and<br />

suggestion. Also to Mr Radwan Ismail from Department of Chemistry,<br />

Penang Branch, Mrs Marpongahtun Misni and Mr Wan Kamaruzaman Wan<br />

Ahmad for their friendship, ideas and continuous support in carrying out this<br />

work. Also to Mr Mat Yasin bin Sirin, Mrs Ramlah binti Husin and Mr Azmi<br />

Mahmud for their assistance throughout the work.<br />

UTM for awarding Short Term Grant No: 75152 / 2004<br />

My mother, wife and all families for their encouragements, supports, patience,<br />

tolerance and understanding.<br />

iv


ABSTRACT<br />

Aflatoxin, which is produced by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

fungi is one of the compounds in the mycotoxin group. The main types of aflatoxins<br />

are AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 which have carcinogenic properties and are<br />

dangerous to human health. Various techniques have been used for their measurements<br />

such as the high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), enzyme linked<br />

immunosorbant assay (ELISA) and radioimmunoassay (RIA) but all these methods<br />

have disadvantages such as long analysis time, consume a lot of reagents and<br />

expensive. To overcome these problems, the voltammetric technique was proposed in<br />

this study using controlled growth mercury drop (CGME) as the working electrode and<br />

Britton Robinson buffer (BRB) as the supporting electrolyte. The voltammetric<br />

methods were used for investigating the electrochemical properties and the quantitative<br />

analysis of aflatoxins at the mercury electrode. The experimental conditions were<br />

optimised to obtain the best characterised peak in terms of peak height with analytical<br />

validation of the methods for each aflatoxin. The proposed methods were applied for<br />

the analysis of aflatoxins in groundnut samples and the results were compared with<br />

those obtained by the HPLC technique. All aflatoxins were found to adsorb and<br />

undergo irreversible reduction reaction at the working mercury electrode. The<br />

optimum experimental parameters for the differential pulse cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetry (DPCSV) method were the BRB at pH 9.0 as the supporting electrolyte,<br />

initial potential (Ei): -0.1 V, final potential (Ef): -1.4 V, accumulation potential (Eacc): -<br />

0.6 V, accumulation time (tacc): 80 s, scan rate: 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude: 80 mV.<br />

The optimum parameters for the square wave stripping voltammetry (SWSV) method<br />

were Ei = -0.1 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc: -0.8 V, tacc: 100 s, scan rate: 3750 mV/s, frequency:<br />

125 Hz and voltage step: 30 V. At the concentration of 0.10 µM, using DPCSV<br />

method with the optimum parameters, AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 produced a<br />

single peak at -1.21 V, -1.23 V, -1.17 V and -1.15 V (versus Ag/AgCl) respectively.<br />

Using the SWSV method, a single peak appeared at -1.30 V for AFB1 and AFB2 while<br />

-1.22 V for AFG1 and AFG2. The calibration curves for all aflatoxins were linear with<br />

the limit of detection (LOD) of approximately 2.0 ppb and 0.50 ppb obtained by the<br />

DPCSV and SWSV methods respectively. The results of aflatoxins content in<br />

individual groundnut samples do not vary significantly when compared with those<br />

obtained by the HPLC technique. Finally, it can be concluded that both proposed<br />

methods which are accurate, precise, robust, rugged, fast and low cost were<br />

successfully developed and are potential alternative methods for routine analysis of<br />

aflatoxins in groundnut samples.<br />

v


ABSTRAK<br />

Aflatoksin adalah sejenis sebatian yang dihasilkan oleh kulat Aspergillus flavus<br />

dan Aspergillus parasiticus yang digolongkan di dalam kumpulan mikotoksin. Jenis<br />

utama aflatoksin adalah AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 dan AFG2 yang bersifat karsinogen serta<br />

merbahaya kepada kesihatan manusia. Pelbagai teknik telah digunakan untuk<br />

menentukan aflatoksin seperti kromatografi cecair prestasi tinggi (HPLC), asai serapan<br />

imuno berikatan enzim (ELISA) dan radioamunoasai (RIA) tetapi teknik-teknik ini<br />

mempunyai kelemahan seperti masa analisis yang panjang, melibatkan reagen yang<br />

banyak dan kos yang mahal. Untuk mengatasi masalah ini, teknik voltammetri telah<br />

dicadangkan untuk kajian aflatoksin menggunakan titisan raksa pembesaran terkawal<br />

(CGME) sebagai elektrod bekerja dan larutan penimbal Britton-Robinson (BRB)<br />

sebagai elektrolit penyokong. Pelbagai kaedah voltammetri telah digunakan untuk<br />

mengkaji sifat elektrokimia aflatoksin pada elektrod raksa dan analisis kuantitatifnya.<br />

Parameter kajian telah dioptimumkan untuk memperolehi puncak yang elok<br />

berdasarkan ketinggian puncak serta pengesahan analisis untuk kaedah yang<br />

dibangunkan bagi setiap aflatoksin. Kaedah ini telah digunakan untuk menentukan<br />

kandungan aflatoksin di dalam sampel kacang tanah di mana keputusan yang diperolehi<br />

telah dibandingkan dengan keputusan HPLC. Semua aflatoksin yang dikaji didapati<br />

terjerap dan menjalani proses tindakbalas penurunan tidak berbalik pada elektrod raksa.<br />

Parameter optimum untuk kaedah voltammetri perlucutan kathodik denyut pembeza<br />

(DPCSV) adalah larutan BRB pada pH 9.0 sebagai larutan elektrolit, keupayaan awal<br />

(Ei): -1.0 V, keupayaan akhir (Ef): -1.4 V, keupayaan pengumpulan (Eacc): -0.6 V, masa<br />

pengumpulan (tacc): 80 s, kadar imbasan: 50 mV/s dan amplitud denyut: 80 mV. Untuk<br />

kaedah voltammetri perlucutan gelombang bersegi (SWSV), parameter optimum adalah<br />

Ei : -1.0 V, Ef : -1.4 V, Eacc: -0.8 V, tacc: 100 s, kadar imbasan: 3750 mV/s, frekuensi:<br />

125 Hz dan beza keupayaan: 30 mV. Menggunakan parameter optimum untuk DPCSV,<br />

0.10 µM AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 dan AFG2 menghasilkan puncak tunggal pada<br />

keupayaan -1.21 V, -1.23 V, -1.17 V dan -1.15 V (melawan Ag/AgCl) masingmasingnya.<br />

Menggunakan kaedah SWSV, puncak terhasil pada -1.30 V untuk AFB1<br />

dan AFB2, -1.22 V untuk AFG1 dan AFG2. Keluk kalibrasi adalah linear untuk semua<br />

aflatoksin dengan had pengesanan (LOD) pada 2.0 dan 0.5 ppb diperolehi dari kaedah<br />

DPCSV dan SWSV masing-masingnya. Keputusan analisis kandungan aflatoksin di<br />

dalam sampel kacang tanah tidak memberi perbezaan ketara berbanding dengan yang<br />

diperolehi menggunakan teknik HPLC. Kesimpulannya, kedua-dua kaedah yang dikaji<br />

yang merupakan kaedah yang tepat, jitu, cepat, sesuai digunakan dengan pelbagai<br />

model voltammetri dan kos yang murah telah berjaya dibangunkan dan berpotensi besar<br />

menjadi kaedah alternatif untuk analisis kandungan aflatoksin di dalam kacang tanah<br />

secara berkala.<br />

vi


TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE<br />

TITLE i<br />

DECLARATION ii<br />

DEDICATION iii<br />

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv<br />

ABSTRACT v<br />

ABSTRAK vi<br />

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii<br />

LIST OF TABLES xiii<br />

LIST OF FIGURES xvi<br />

ABBREVATIONS xxix<br />

LIST OF APPENDICES xxxiii<br />

1 LITERATURE REVIEW 1<br />

1.1 Overview 1<br />

1.2 Aflatoxins 3<br />

1.2.1 Aflatoxins in general 3<br />

1.2.2 Chemistry of aflatoxins 5<br />

1.2.3 Health aspects of aflatoxins 12<br />

1.2.4 Analytical methods for the determination of<br />

aflatoxins<br />

16<br />

1.2.5 Electrochemical properties of aflatoxins 28<br />

1.3. Voltammetric technique 30<br />

1.3.1 Voltammetric techniques in general 30<br />

vii


1.3.2 Voltammetric measurement 31<br />

1.3.2.1 Instrumentation 31<br />

1.3.2.2 Solvent and supporting electrolyte 44<br />

1.3.2.3 Current in voltammetry 46<br />

1.3.2.4 Quantitative and quantitative aspects of<br />

voltammetry<br />

48<br />

1.3.3 Type of voltammetric techniques 49<br />

1.3.3.1 Polarography 49<br />

1.3.3.2 Cyclic voltammetry 51<br />

1.3.3.3 Stripping voltammetry 54<br />

1.3.3.3a Anodic stripping voltammetry 56<br />

1.3.3.3b Cathodic stripping voltammetry 57<br />

1.3.3.3c Adsorptive stripping voltammetry 58<br />

1.3.3.4 Pulse voltammetry 59<br />

1.3.3.4a Differential pulse voltammetry 60<br />

1.3.3.4b Square wave voltammetry 61<br />

1.4 Objective and scope of study 64<br />

1.4.1 Objective of study 64<br />

1.4.2 Scope of study 67<br />

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 70<br />

2.1 Apparatus, material and reagents 70<br />

2.1.1 Apparatus 70<br />

2.1.2 Materials 72<br />

2.1.2.1 Aflatoxin stock and standard solutions 72<br />

2.1.2.2 Real samples 73<br />

2.1.3 Reagents 73<br />

2.1.3.1 Britton Robinson buffer, 0.04 M 73<br />

2.1.3.2 Carbonate buffer, 0.04 M 74<br />

2.1.3.3 Phosphate buffer, 0.04 M 74<br />

viii


2.1.3.4 Ascorbic acid 74<br />

2.1.3.5 β-cyclodextrin solution, 1.0 mM 75<br />

2.1.3.6 L-Cysteine, 1.0 x 10 -5 M 75<br />

2.1.3.7 2,4-dihydrofuran, 0.15 M 75<br />

2.1.3.8 Coumarin, 3.0 x 10 -2 M 75<br />

2.1.3.9 Poly-L-lysine, 10 ppm 75<br />

2.1.3.10 Standard aluminium (II) solution, 1.0 mM 75<br />

2.1.3.11 Standard plumbum(II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.12 Standard zinc (II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.13 Standard copper (II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.14 Standard nickel (II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.15 Methanol: 0.1 N HCl solution, 95% 76<br />

2.1.3.16 Zinc sulphate solution, 15% 76<br />

2.2 Analytical Technique 77<br />

2.2.1 General procedure for voltammetric analysis 77<br />

2.2.2 Cyclic voltammetry (Anodic and cathodic<br />

directions)<br />

77<br />

2.2.2.1 Standard addition of sample 77<br />

2.2.2.2 Repetitive cyclic voltammetry 78<br />

2.2.2.3 Effect of scan rate 78<br />

2.2.3 Differential pulse cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetric determination of AFB2<br />

78<br />

2.2.3.1 Effect of pH 79<br />

2.2.3.2 Method optimisation for the determination 79<br />

of AFB2<br />

2.2.3.2a Effect of scan rate 79<br />

2.2.3.2b Effect of accumulation potential 80<br />

2.2.3.2c Effect of accumulation time 80<br />

2.2.3.2d Effect of initial potential 80<br />

2.2.3.2e Effect of pulse amplitude 80<br />

ix


2.2.3.3 Method validation 80<br />

2.2.3.4 Interference studies 81<br />

2.2.3.4a Effect of Cu(II), Ni (II), Al(III), 81<br />

Pb(II) and Zn(II)<br />

2.2.3.4b Effect of ascorbic acid, 82<br />

β-cyclodextrin and L-cysteine<br />

2.2.3.5 Modified mercury electrode with PLL 82<br />

2.2.4 Square wave cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

(SWSV)<br />

82<br />

2.2.4.1 SWSV parameters optimisation 82<br />

2.2.4.2 SWSV determination of all aflatoxins 82<br />

2.2.5 Stability studies of aflatoxins 83<br />

2.2.5.1 Stability of 10 ppm aflatoxins 83<br />

2.2.5.2 Stability of 1 ppm aflatoxins 83<br />

2.2.5.3 Stability of 0.1 µM aflatoxins exposed<br />

to ambient temperature<br />

83<br />

2.2.5.4 Stability of 0.1 µM aflatoxins in different<br />

pH of BRB<br />

84<br />

2.2.6 Application to food samples 84<br />

2.2.6.1 Technique 1 84<br />

2.2.6.2 Technique 2 84<br />

2.2.6.3 Technique 3 85<br />

2.2.6.4 Blank measurement 85<br />

2.2.6.5 Recovery studies 85<br />

2.2.6.6 Voltammetric analysis 86<br />

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 88<br />

3.1 Cyclic voltammetric studies of aflatoxins 88<br />

3.1.1 Cathodic and anodic cyclic voltammetric<br />

of aflatoxins<br />

89<br />

x


3.2 Differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

of AFB2<br />

102<br />

3.2.1 Optimisation of conditions for the stripping 104<br />

analysis<br />

3.2.1.1 Effect of pH and type of supporting 104<br />

electrolyte<br />

3.2.1.2 Optmisation of instrumental conditions 117<br />

3.2.1.2a Effect of scan rate 118<br />

3.2.1.2b Effect of accumulation time 119<br />

3.2.1.2c Effect of accumulation<br />

potential<br />

120<br />

3.2.1.2d Effect of initial potential 121<br />

3.2.1.2e Effect of pulse amplitude 122<br />

3.2.2 Analysis of aflatoxins 127<br />

3.2.2.1 Calibration curves of aflatoxins and<br />

validation of the proposed method<br />

129<br />

3.2.2.1a Calibration curve of AFB2 129<br />

3.2.2.1b Calibration curve of AFB1 134<br />

3.2.2.1c Calibration curve of AFG1 137<br />

3.2.2.1d Calibration curve of AFG2 140<br />

3.2.2.2 Determination of limit of detection 143<br />

3.2.2.3 Determination of limit of quantification 147<br />

3.2.2.4 Inteference studies 150<br />

3.3 Square-wave stripping voltammetry (SWSV) of<br />

aflatoxins<br />

157<br />

3.3.1 SWSV determination of AFB2 158<br />

3.3.1.1 Optimisation of experimental and 159<br />

instrumental SWSV parameters<br />

3.3.3.1a Influence of pH of BRB 159<br />

3.3.3.1b Effect of instrumental<br />

variables<br />

160<br />

xi


3.3.2 SWSV determination of other aflatoxins 166<br />

3.3.3 Calibration curves and method validation 168<br />

3.4 Stability studies of aflatoxins 175<br />

3.4.1 10 ppm aflatoxin stock solutions 175<br />

3.4.2 1 ppm aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 179<br />

3.4.2.1 Month to month stability studies 179<br />

3.4.2.2 Hour to hour stability studies 181<br />

3.4.2.3 Stability studies in different pH<br />

of BRB<br />

186<br />

3.4.2.4 Stability studies in 1.0 M HCl and<br />

1.0 M NaOH<br />

191<br />

3.5 Voltammetric analysis of aflatoxins in real samples 192<br />

3.5.1 Study on the extraction techniques 193<br />

3.5.2 Analysis of blank 194<br />

3.5.3 Recovery studies of aflatoxins in real samples 196<br />

3.5.4 Analysis of aflatoxins in real samples 199<br />

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 204<br />

4.1 Conclusions 204<br />

4.2 Recommendations 206<br />

REFERENCES 208<br />

Appendices A – AM 255 - 317<br />

xii


LIST OF TABLES<br />

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE<br />

1.0 Scientific name for aflatoxin compounds 7<br />

1.1 Chemical and physical properties of aflatoxin 10<br />

compounds<br />

1.2 Summary of analysis methods used for 19<br />

determination of aflatoxins in various samples<br />

1.3 Working electrode and limit of detection for 32<br />

modern polarographic and voltammetric<br />

techniques.<br />

1.4 The application range of various analytical 33<br />

techniques and their concentration limits when<br />

compared with the requirements in different<br />

fields of chemical analysis<br />

1.5 List of different type of working electrodes and 36<br />

its potential windows<br />

1.6 Electroreducible and electrooxidisable organic 50<br />

functional groups<br />

1.7 The characteristics of different type of 53<br />

electrochemical reaction.<br />

1.8 Application of Square Wave Voltammetry 62<br />

technique<br />

2.0 List of aflatoxins and their batch numbers 72<br />

used in this experiment<br />

2.1 Injected volume of aflatoxins into eluate of 86<br />

groundnut and the final concentrations obtained<br />

in voltammetric cell<br />

3.0 The dependence of current peaks of aflatoxins to 97<br />

their concentrations obtained by cathodic cyclic<br />

measurements in BRB at 9.0.<br />

xiii


3.1 Effect of buffer constituents on the peak height 109<br />

of 2.0 µM AFB2 at pH 9.0. Experimental<br />

conditions are the same as Figure 3.21<br />

3.2 Compounds reduced at the mercury electrode 116<br />

3.3 Optimum parameters for 0.06 µM and 2.0 µM 126<br />

AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.4 The peak height and peak potential of aflatoxins 127<br />

obtained by optimised parameters in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0 using DPCSV technique.<br />

3.5 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 131<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM by the proposed voltammetric procedure (n=8).<br />

3.6 Mean values for recovery of AFB2 standard 132<br />

solution (n=3).<br />

3.7 Influence of small variation in some of the 133<br />

assay condition of the proposed procedure on its<br />

suitability and sensitivity using 0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

3.8 Results of ruggedness test for proposed method 134<br />

using 0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

3.9 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 136<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM AFB1 by proposed voltammetric procedure<br />

(n=5).<br />

3.10 Mean values for recovery of AFB1 standard 137<br />

solution (n=3).<br />

3.11 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 139<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM AFG1 by proposed voltammetric procedure<br />

(n=5).<br />

3.12 Mean values for recovery of AFG1 standard 139<br />

solution (n=3).<br />

3.13 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 141<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM AFG2 by proposed voltammetric procedure.<br />

xiv


3.14 Mean values for recovery of AFG2 standard 142<br />

solution (n=5).<br />

3.15 Peak height and peak potential of 0.10 µM 143<br />

aflatoxins obtained by BAS and Metrohm<br />

voltammetry analysers under optimised<br />

operational parameters for DPCSV method.<br />

3.16 Analytical parameters for calibration curves 145<br />

for AFB1,AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 obtained by<br />

DPCSV technique using BRB at pH 9.0 as the<br />

supporting electrolyte.<br />

3.17 LOD values for determination of aflatoxins 148<br />

obtained by various methods.<br />

3.18 LOQ values for determination of aflatoxins 149<br />

obtained by various methods.<br />

3.19 Peak current and peak potential for all aflatoxins 167<br />

obtained by SWSV in BRB at pH 9.0 (n=5).<br />

3.20 Analytical parameters for calibration curves for 172<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 obtained by<br />

SWSV technique in BRB pH 9.0 as the<br />

supporting electrolyte.<br />

3.21 Result of reproducibility study (intra-day and inter- 173<br />

day measurements) for 0.1 µM aflatoxins in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 obtained by SWSV method.<br />

3.22 Application of the proposed method in evaluation 174<br />

of the SWSV method by spiking the aflatoxin<br />

standard solutions.<br />

3.23 Average concentration of all aflatoxins within a 175<br />

year stability studies.<br />

3.24 The peak current and peak potential of 10 ppb 196<br />

AFB2 in presence and absence of a blank sample.<br />

3.25 Total aflatoxin contents in real samples which 203<br />

were obtained by DPCSV and HPLC<br />

techniques (average of duplicate analysis)<br />

xv


LIST OF FIGURES<br />

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE<br />

1.0 Aspergillus flavus seen under an electron 4<br />

microscope.<br />

1.1 Chemical structure of coumarin 6<br />

1.2 Chemical structures of (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, 8<br />

(c) AFG1, (d) AFG2, (e) AFM1 and (f) AFM2<br />

1.3 Hydration of (a) AFB1 and (b) AFG1 by TFA 9<br />

produces (c) AFB2a and (d) AFG2a<br />

1.4 Transformation of toxic (a) AFB1 to non-toxic 11<br />

(b) aflatoxicol A.<br />

1.5 Major DNA adducts of AFB1; (a) 8,9-Dihydro-8- 13<br />

(N 7 -guanyl)-9-hydroxy-aflatoxin B1 (AFB1-Gua)<br />

and (b) 8,9-Dihydro-8-(N 5 -Formyl-2 ’ .5 ’ .6 ’ -<br />

triamino-4 ’ -oxo-N 5 -pyrimidyl)-9-hydroxy-Aflatoxin<br />

B1 (AFB1-triamino-Py)<br />

1.6 Metabolic pathways of AFB1 by cytochrom P-450 14<br />

enzymes; B1-epoxide = AFB1 epoxide, M1=<br />

aflatoxin M1, P1= aflatoxin P1 and Q1 = aflatoxin<br />

Q1.<br />

1.7 A typical arrangement for a voltammetric 34<br />

electrochemical cell (RE: reference electrode,<br />

WE: working electrode. AE: auxiliary electrode)<br />

1.8 A diagram of the Hanging Mercury Drop Electrode 37<br />

(HMDE)<br />

1.9 A diagram of the Controlled Growth Mercury 38<br />

Electrode (CGME)<br />

1.10 Cyclic voltammograms of (a) reversible, 52<br />

(b) irriversible and (c) quasireversible reaction at<br />

mercury electrode (O = oxidised form and R = reduced<br />

form)<br />

xvi


1.11 The potential-time sequence in stripping analysis 55<br />

1.12 Schematic drawing showing the Faradaic current 59<br />

and charging current versus pulse time course<br />

1.13 Schematic drawing of steps in DPV by 60<br />

superimposing a periodic pulse on a linear scan<br />

1.14 Waveform for square-wave voltammetry 61<br />

2.0 BAS CGME stand (a) which is connected to 71<br />

CV-50W voltammetric analyser and interface<br />

with computer (b) for data processing<br />

2.1 VA757 Computrace Metrohm voltammetric 71<br />

analyser with 663 VA stand (consists of Multi<br />

Mode (MME))<br />

3.0 Cathodic peak current of 0.6 µM AFB1 in various 89<br />

pH of BRB obtained in cathodic cyclic voltammetry.<br />

Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0 and scan rate = 200<br />

mV/s)<br />

3.1 Shifting of peak potential of AFB1 with increasing 90<br />

pH of BRB. Parameter conditions are the same<br />

as in Figure 3.0.<br />

3.2 Mechanism of reduction of AFB1 in BRB at pH 6.0 90<br />

to 8.0.<br />

3.3 Mechanism of reduction of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 91<br />

to 11.0.<br />

3.4 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFB1 92<br />

obtained at scan rate of 200 mV/s, Ei = 0, Elow =<br />

-1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB solution at pH 9.0.<br />

3.5 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFB2 92<br />

in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.6 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFG1 93<br />

in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

xvii


3.7 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFG2 93<br />

in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.8 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.6 µM AFB1 in BRB at pH 94<br />

9.0 obtained by cathodic cyclic voltammetry. All<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.9 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.1 µM Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 94<br />

9.0 obtained by cathodic cyclic voltammetry. All<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.10 Anodic cyclic voltammogram of 1.3 µM AFB2 95<br />

obtained at scan rate of 200 mV/s, Ei = -1.5 V,<br />

Elow = -1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.11 Effect of increasing AFB2 concentration on the 96<br />

peak height of cathodic cyclic voltammetrc curve<br />

in BRB at pH = 9.0. (1.30 µM, 2.0 µM, 2.70 µM<br />

and 3.40 µM). All parameter conditions are the<br />

same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.12 Peak height of reduction peak of AFB2 with 96<br />

increasing concentration of AFB2. All parameter<br />

conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.13 Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 98<br />

µM AFB2 in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.14 Increasing Ip of 1.3 µM AFB2 cathodic peak 98<br />

obtained from repetitive cyclic voltammetry. All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.15 Peak potential of 1.3 µM AFB2 with increasing 99<br />

number of cycle obtained by repetitive cyclic<br />

voltammetry.<br />

xviii


3.16 Plot of log Ip versus log υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in 100<br />

BRB solution at pH 9.0. All experimental conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.17 Plot of Ep versus log υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB 101<br />

solution at pH 9.0.<br />

3.18 Plot of Ip versus υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB 102<br />

solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.19 DPCS voltammograms of 1.0 µM AFB2 (Peak I) 103<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) at tacc = 0 and 30 s. Other<br />

parameter conditions; Ei = 0, Ef = -1.50 V,<br />

Eacc = 0, υ =50 mV/s and pulse amplitude =<br />

100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

3.20 DPCS voltammograms of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB 104<br />

in BRB (Peak I) at different pH values; 6.0, 7.0,<br />

8.0, 9.0, 11.0and 13.0. Other parameter conditions;<br />

Ei = 0, Ef =-1.50 V, Eacc = 0, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude =100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

3.21 Dependence of the Ip for AFB2 on the pH of 105<br />

0.04 M BRB solution. AFB2 concentration:<br />

2.0 µM, Ei =0, Ef = -1.5 V, Eacc = 0, tacc = 30 sec,<br />

υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.22 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 obtained in BRB (a) at pH 106<br />

from 9.0 decreases to 4.0 and re-increase to 9.0 and<br />

(b) at pH from 9.0 increase to 13.0 and re-decrease<br />

to 9.0.<br />

3.23 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB2 in BRB at 107<br />

pH (a) 6.0, (b) 9.0 and (c) 13.0.<br />

3.24 Opening of lactone ring by strong alkali caused no 108<br />

peak to be observed for AFB2 in BRB at pH 13.0.<br />

3.25 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 in different concentration of 109<br />

BRB at pH 9.0. Experimental conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.20.<br />

3.26 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 in different pH and concentrations 110<br />

of BRB.<br />

xix


3.27 DPCS voltammograms of 2.0 AFB2 (Peak I) 110<br />

in (a) 0.04 M, (b) 0.08 M and (c) 0.08 M BRB<br />

at pH 9.0 as the blank. Ei = 0 V, Ef = -1.5 V,<br />

Eacc = 0 V, tacc = 30 sec, υ = 50mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

3.28 Chemical structures of (a) 2,3-dihydrofuran, 111<br />

(b) tetrahydrofuran and (c) coumarin.<br />

3.29 Voltammograms of 2,3-dihydrifuran (peak I) for 112<br />

concentrations from (b) 0.02 to 0.2 µM in (a)<br />

BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.30 Dependence of Ip of coumarin to its concentrations 112<br />

3.31 Voltammograms of coumarin at concentration of 113<br />

(b) 34 µM, (c) 68 µM, (d) 102 µM, (e) 136 µM<br />

and (f) 170 µM in (a) BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.32 Chemical structures of (a) cortisone and (b) 114<br />

testosterone.<br />

3.33 Chemical structures of (a) digoxin and (b) digitoxin 115<br />

3.34 Effect of pH of BRB solution on the Ep for AFB2. 117<br />

AFB2 concentration: 2.0 µM. Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5 V,<br />

Eacc = 0, tacc = 30 s and υ = 50 mV/s.<br />

3.35 Effect of various υ to the (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM 118<br />

AFB2 peak in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 0, Ef = 1.50 V,<br />

Eacc = 0, tacc = 15 s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.36 Effect of tacc on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 119<br />

peak in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 0, Ef = 1.50 V, Eacc = 0,<br />

υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.37 The relationship between (a) Ip and (b) Ep with 120<br />

Eacc for 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5 V, tacc = 15 s, υ = 40 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.38 Effect of Ei on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 121<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. Ef = 1.50 V, Eacc = -0.80 V,<br />

tacc = 40 s,υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude =<br />

100 mV.<br />

xx


3.39 Effect of pulse amplitude on (a) Ip and (b) Ep 122<br />

of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V,<br />

Ef = 1.50 V, Eacc = -0.80 V, tacc = 40 s and υ =<br />

40 mV/s.<br />

3.40 Effect of Eacc on Ip of 0.06 µM AFB2. Ei = -1.0 V, 123<br />

Ef = -1.50 V, tacc = 40 s, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.41 Effect of tacc on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 0.06 µM AFB2 124<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.42 The effect υ on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 0.06 µM AFB2 125<br />

In BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.43 Voltammograms of 0.06 µM AFB2 obtained under 126<br />

(a) optimised and (b) unoptimised parameters in BRB<br />

at pH 9.0.<br />

3.44 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM (a) AFB1, (b) AFG1, 128<br />

(c) AFB2 and (d) AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 1.0<br />

(except for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.45 Voltammograms of (b) mixed aflatoxins in (a) BRB at 129<br />

pH 9.0 as the blank. Parameters condition: Ei = -0.95 V,<br />

Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

Pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.46 Increasing concentration of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. 130<br />

The parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc =-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.47 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB2 130<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.46.<br />

3.48 Standard addition of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0. 135<br />

The parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc =-0.8 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxi


3.49 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB1 135<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.48.<br />

3.50 Effect of concentration to Ip of AFG1 in BRB at 138<br />

pH 9.0. Ei = -0.95 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc =-0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.51 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFG1 138<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.50.<br />

3.52 Effect of concentration to Ip of AFG2 in BRB at 140<br />

pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc =-0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.53 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFG2 141<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.52.<br />

3.54 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, 144<br />

(c) AFG1 and (d) AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

(d) obtained by 747 VA Metrohm. Ei = -1.0 V (except<br />

for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.55 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of 150<br />

Zn 2+ up to 1.0 µM.<br />

3.56 Voltammograms of (i) 0.1µM AFB2 and (ii) AFB2-Zn 151<br />

complex with increasing concentration of Zn 2+ (a = 0,<br />

b = 0.75 µM, c = 1.50 µM, d = 2.25 µM and e = 3.0 µM).<br />

Blank = BRB at pH 9.0. Experimental conditions;<br />

Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s,<br />

υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.57 Ip of all aflatoxins after reacting with increasing 151<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 3.0.<br />

Measurements were made in BRB at pH 9.0 within<br />

15 minutes of reaction time. Ei = -1.0 V (except<br />

for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxii


3.58 Absorbance of all aflatoxins with increasing 152<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 3.0 within 15<br />

minutes of reaction time<br />

3.59 Voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2 with increasing 153<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ (from 0.10 to 0.50 µM) in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -0.25 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplirude =<br />

80 mV. .<br />

3.60 Chemical structure of ascorbic acid. 153<br />

3.61 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration 154<br />

of ascorbic acid up to 1.0 µM. Concentrations of<br />

all aflatoxins are 0.1µM.<br />

3.62 Voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2 with increasing 154<br />

concentration of ascorbic acid.<br />

3.63 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration 155<br />

of β-cyclodextrin up to 1.0 µM.<br />

3.64 Voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2 with increasing 156<br />

concentration of β-cyclodextrin.<br />

3.65 Chemical structure of L-cysteine. 156<br />

3.66 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration 157<br />

of cysteine up to 1.0 µM.<br />

3.67 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 obtained by 158<br />

(a) DPCSV and (b) SWSV techniques in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0. Parameters for DPCSV: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef =<br />

-1.40V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV and for SWSV: Ei = -1.0 V,<br />

Ef = -1.40V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, frequency =<br />

50 Hz, voltage step = 0.02 V, amplitude = 80 mV<br />

and υ = 1000 mV/s.<br />

3.68 Influence of pH of BRB on the Ip of 0.10 µM 159<br />

AFB2 using SWSV technique. The instrumental<br />

Parameters are the same as in Figure 3.67.<br />

3.69 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 in different pH 160<br />

of BRB. Parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef =<br />

-1.40 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, voltage step =<br />

xxiii


0.02 V, amplitude = 50 mV, frequency = 50 Hz<br />

and υ = 1000 mV/s.<br />

3.70 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at 160<br />

pH 9.0.<br />

3.71 Effect of Eaccto the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at 161<br />

pH 9.0.<br />

3.72 Relationship between Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 while 162<br />

increasing tacc.<br />

3.73 Effect of frequency to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in 162<br />

BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.74 Linear relatioship between Ip of AFB2 and square 163<br />

root of frequency.<br />

3.75 Influence of square-wave voltage step to Ip of 163<br />

0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

3.76 Influence of square-wave amplitude to Ip of 0.10 µM 164<br />

AFB2.<br />

3.77 Relationship of SWSV Ep of AFB2 with increasing 164<br />

amplitude.<br />

3.78 Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained under (a) non-optimised 165<br />

and (b) optimised SWSV parameters compared with<br />

that obtained under (c) optimised DPCSV parameters.<br />

3.79 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained under 166<br />

(a) non-optimised and (b) optimised SWSV<br />

parameters compared with that obtained under (c)<br />

optimised DPCSV parameters.<br />

3.80 Ip of 0.10 µM aflatoxins obtained using two 167<br />

different stripping voltammetric techniques under<br />

their optimum paramter conditions in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.81 Voltammograms of (i) AFB1, (ii) AFB2, (iii) AFG1 168<br />

and (iV) AFG2 obtained by (b) DPCSV compared<br />

with that obtained by (c) SWSV in (a) BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.82 SWSV voltammograms for different concentrations 169<br />

of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0. The broken line<br />

xxiv


epresents the blank: (a) 0.01 µM, (b) 0.025 µM,<br />

(c) 0.05 µM, (d) 0.075 µM, (e) 0.10 µM, (f) 0.125<br />

µM and (g) 0.150 µM. Parameter conditions:<br />

Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 100 s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V, pulse<br />

amplitude = 75 mV and scan rate = 3750 mV/s.<br />

3.83 Calibration curve for AFB1 obtained by SWSV 170<br />

method.<br />

3.84 Calibration curve for AFB2 obtained by SWSV 170<br />

method.<br />

3.85 Calibration curve for AFG1 obtained by SWSV 170<br />

method.<br />

3.86 Calibration curve for AFG2 obtained by SWSV 171<br />

method.<br />

3.87 LOD for determination of aflatoxins obtained by 171<br />

two different stripping methods.<br />

3.88 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in 176<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%) at preparation date.<br />

3.89 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in 176<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%) after 6 months of<br />

storage time.<br />

3.90 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in 177<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%) after 12 months of<br />

storage time.<br />

3.91 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm AFB1 (a) kept in 178<br />

the cool and dark conditions and (b) exposed to<br />

ambient conditions for 3 days.<br />

3.92 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB1 in BRB 178<br />

solution prepared from (a) good and (b) damaged<br />

10 ppm AFB1 stock solution.<br />

3.93 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB1 in BRB 179<br />

solution prepared from (a) good and (b) damaged<br />

10 ppm AFB1 stock solution after 2 week stored in<br />

the cool and dark conditions.<br />

xxv


3.94 Percentage of Ip of 0.10 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH 180<br />

9.0 at different storage time in the cool and dark<br />

conditions.<br />

3.95 Percentage of Ip of all aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 181<br />

exposed to ambient conditions up to 8 hours of<br />

exposure time.<br />

3.96 Reaction of 8,9 double bond furan rings in AFB1 182<br />

with TFA, iodine and bromine under special<br />

conditions (Kok, et al., 1986).<br />

3.97 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB1 obtained in (a) 183<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 which were prepared from (b)<br />

damaged and (c) fresh stock solutions.<br />

3.98 Ip of 0.10 µM AFB1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 184<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.99 Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 184<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.100 Ip of 0.10 µM AFG1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 185<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.101 Ip of 0.10 µM AFG2 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 185<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.102 Peak heights of 0.10 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH 187<br />

(a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c) 9.0 and (d) 11.0 exposed to<br />

ambient conditions up to 3 hours of exposure time.<br />

3.103 Resonance forms of the phenolate ion 187<br />

(Heathcote, 1984).<br />

3.104 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 188<br />

6.0 from 0 to 3 hrs exposure time.<br />

3.105 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 188<br />

11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

xxvi


3.106 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 189<br />

6.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

3.107 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 189<br />

11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

3.108 Absorbance of 1.0 ppm aflatoxins in BRB at pH 190<br />

(a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c) 9.0 and (d) 11.0 from 0 to 3<br />

hours of exposure time.<br />

3.109 The peak heights of aflatoxins in 1.0 M HCl from 191<br />

0 to 6 hours of reaction time.<br />

3.110 The peak heights of aflatoxins in 1.0 M NaOH from 192<br />

0 to 6 hours of reaction time.<br />

3.111 Voltammograms of real samples after extraction by 193<br />

Technique (a) 1, (b) 2 and (c) 3 with addition of<br />

AFB1 standard solution in BRB at pH 9.0 as a<br />

blank.<br />

3.112 Voltammograms of blank in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained 194<br />

by (a) DPCSV and (b) SWSV methods.<br />

3.113 DPCSV (a) and SWSV (b) voltammograms of 10 195<br />

ppb AFB2 (i) in present of blank sample (ii) obtained<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0 (iii) as the supporting electrolyte.<br />

3.114 DPCSV voltammograms of real samples (b) added 197<br />

with 3 ppb (i), 9 ppb (ii) and 15 ppb (iii) AFB1<br />

obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank on the<br />

first day measurement.<br />

3.115 Percentage of recoveries of (a) 3 ppb, (b) 9 ppb, 198<br />

(c) 15 ppb of all aflatoxins in real samples<br />

obtained by DPCSV methods for one to three<br />

days of measurements.<br />

3.116 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S11 (b) 199<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxvii


3.117 SWSV voltammograms of real sample, S11 (b) 200<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

3.118 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S07 (b) 200<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.119 SWSV voltammograms of real sample, S07 (b) 201<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

3.120 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S10 (b) 201<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.121 SWSV voltammograms of real sample, S10 (b) 202<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxviii


ABBREVIATIONS<br />

AAS Atomic absorption spectrometry<br />

Abs Absorbance<br />

ACP Alternate current polarography<br />

ACV Alternate current voltammetry<br />

AD Amperometric detector<br />

AdCSV Adsorptive cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

AE Auxiliary electrode<br />

AFB1 Aflatoxin B1<br />

AFB2 Aflatoxin B2<br />

AFG1 Aflatoxin G1<br />

AFG2 Aflatoxin G2<br />

AFM1 Aflatoxin M1<br />

AFM2 Aflatoxin M2<br />

AFP1 Aflatoxin P1<br />

AFQ1 Aflatoxin Q1<br />

Ag/AgCl Silver/silver chloride<br />

ASV Anodic stripping voltammetry<br />

β-CD β-cyclodextrin<br />

BFE Bismuth film electrode<br />

BLMs Bilayer lipid membranes<br />

BRB Britton Robinson Buffer<br />

CA Concentration of analyte<br />

CE Capillary electrophoresis<br />

CGME Controlled growth mercury electrode<br />

CME Chemically modified electrode<br />

CPE Carbon paste electrode<br />

CSV Cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

CV Cyclic voltammetry<br />

xxix


DC Direct current<br />

DCP Direct current polarography<br />

DME Dropping mercury electrode<br />

DMSO Dimethyl sulphonic acid<br />

DNA Deoxyribonucliec acid<br />

DPCSV Differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

DPP Differential pulse polarography<br />

DPV Differential pulse voltammetry<br />

Eacc Accumulation potential<br />

Ei Initial potential<br />

Ef Final potential<br />

Ehigh High potential<br />

Elow Low potential<br />

Ep Peak potential<br />

ECS Electrochemical sensing<br />

Et4NH4 OH Tetraethyl ammonium hydroxide<br />

ELISA Enzyme linked immunosorbant assay<br />

FD Fluorescence detector<br />

FDA Food and Drug Administration<br />

GCE Glassy carbon electrode<br />

GC-FID Gas chromatography with flame ionisation detector<br />

HMDE Hanging mercury drop electrode<br />

HPLC High performance liquid chromatography<br />

HPTLC High pressure thin liquid chromatography<br />

IAC Immunoaffinity chromatography<br />

IACLC Immunoaffinity column liquid chromatography<br />

IAFB Immunoaffinity fluorometer biosensor<br />

IARC International Agency for Research Cancer<br />

Ic Charging current<br />

Id Diffusion current<br />

If Faradaic current<br />

xxx


Ip Peak height<br />

ICP-MS Induced coupled plasma-mass spectrometer<br />

IR Infra red<br />

IUPAC International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry<br />

KGy Kilogray<br />

LD50 Lethal dose 50<br />

LOD Limit of detection<br />

LOQ Limit of quantification<br />

LSV Linear sweep voltammetry<br />

MFE Mercury film electrode<br />

MS Mass spectrometer<br />

MECC Micellar electrokinetic capillary chromatography<br />

MOPS 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulphonic<br />

MOSTI Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation<br />

NP Normal polarography<br />

NPP Normal pulse polarography<br />

NPV Normal pulse voltammetry<br />

OPLC Over pressured liquid chromatography<br />

PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon<br />

PLL Poly-L-lysine<br />

ppb part per billion<br />

ppm part per million<br />

PSA Potentiometric stripping analysis<br />

RDX Hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-1,3,5-triazine<br />

RE Reference electrode<br />

RIA Radioimmunoassay<br />

RNA Ribonucleic acid<br />

RSD Relative standard deviation<br />

S/N Signal to noise ratio<br />

SCE Standard calomel electrode<br />

SCV Stair case voltammetry<br />

xxxi


SDS Sodium dodecyl sulphate<br />

SHE Standard hydrogen electrode<br />

SIIA Sequential injection immunoassay<br />

SMDE Static mercury drop electrode<br />

SPE Solid phase extraction<br />

SPCE Screen printed carbon electrode<br />

SWP Square-wave polarography<br />

SWV Square-wave voltammetry<br />

SWSV Square-wave stripping voltammetry<br />

SV Stripping voltammetry<br />

tacc Accumulation time<br />

TBS Tris buffered saline<br />

TEA Triethylammonium<br />

TLC Thin layer chromatography<br />

TFA Trifluoroacetic acid<br />

UME Ultra microelectrode<br />

ν Scan rate<br />

v/v Volume per volume<br />

UVD Ultraviolet-Visible detector<br />

UV-VIS Ultraviolet-Visible<br />

WE Working electrode<br />

WHO World Health Organisation<br />

λmax Maximum wavelenght<br />

εmax Maximum molar absorptivity<br />

xxxii


LIST OF APPENDICES<br />

xxxiii<br />

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE<br />

A Relative fluorescence of aflatoxins in different 255<br />

solvent s<br />

B UV spectra of the principal aflatoxins (in methanol) 256<br />

C Relative intensities of principal bands in the IR 257<br />

spectra of the aflatoxins<br />

D Calculation of concentration of aflatoxin stock 258<br />

solution<br />

E Extraction procedure for aflatoxins in real samples 259<br />

F Calculation of individual aflatoxin in groundnut 260<br />

samples.<br />

G Cyclic voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2 and AFG2 262<br />

with increasing of their concentrations.<br />

H Dependence if the peak heights of AFB1, AFG1 264<br />

and AFG2 on their concentrations.<br />

I Repetitive cyclic voltammograms and their peak 266<br />

heights of AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

J Plot Ep – log scan rate for the reduction of AFB1, 270<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

K Plot of peak height versus scan rate for 1.3 µM of 272<br />

AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

L Voltammograms of AFB2 with increasing 274<br />

concentration.<br />

M Voltammograms of 0.1 µM and 0.2 µM AFB2 275<br />

obtained on the same day measurements<br />

N Voltammograms of AFB2 at inter-day 276<br />

measurements


O F test for robustness and ruggedness tests 278<br />

P Voltammograms of AFB1 with increasing 280<br />

concentration<br />

Q Voltammograms of AFG1 with increasing 281<br />

concentration<br />

R Voltammograms of AFG2 with increasing 282<br />

concentration<br />

S LOD determination according to Barek et al. (2001a) 283<br />

T LOD determination according to Barek et al. (1999) 286<br />

U LOD determination according to Zhang et al. (1996) 287<br />

V LOD determination according to Miller and 288<br />

Miller (1993)<br />

W ANOVA test 290<br />

X Peak height of aflatoxins in presence and absence of PLL 292<br />

Y SWSV voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 293<br />

and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Z SWSV voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB1, AFB2, 295<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

AA UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 297<br />

and AFG2 stock solutions<br />

AB Voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 299<br />

obtained from 0 to 6 months of storage time in the<br />

cool and dark conditions.<br />

AC Voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and 302<br />

AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0 from 0 to 8 hours of<br />

exposure time.<br />

AD UV-VIS spectrums of AFB2 in BRB at pH 6.0 305<br />

and 11.0.<br />

xxxiv


AE Voltammograms of AFB1 and AFG1 in 1.0 M HCl 307<br />

and 1.0 M NaOH<br />

AF DPCSV voltammograms of real samples added with 309<br />

various concentrations of AFG1<br />

AG SWSV voltammograms of real samples added with 310<br />

various concentrations of AFB1.<br />

AH Percentage of recoveries of various concentrations 311<br />

of all aflatoxins (3.0 and 9.0 ppb) in real samples<br />

obtained by SWSV method.<br />

AI Calculation of percentage of recovery for 3.0 ppb 312<br />

AFG1 added into real samples.<br />

AJ HPLC chromatograms of real samples: S10 and S07 313<br />

AK Calculation of aflatoxin in real sample, S13 314<br />

AL List of papers presented or published to date 315<br />

resulting from this study.<br />

AM ICP-MS results for analysis of BRB at pH 9.0 317<br />

xxxv


1.1 Overview<br />

CHAPTER I<br />

LITERATURE REVIEW<br />

Humans are continuously exposed to varying amounts of chemicals that have<br />

been shown to have carcinogenic or mutagenic properties in environmental systems.<br />

Exposure can occur exogenously when these agents are present in food, air or water, and<br />

also endogenously when they are products of metabolism or pathophysiologic states such<br />

as inflammation. Great attention is focused on environmental health in the past two<br />

decades as a consequence of the increasing awareness over the quality of life due to<br />

major environment pollutants that affect it. Studies have shown that exposure to<br />

environmental chemical carcinogens have contributed significantly to cause human<br />

cancers, when exposures are related to life style factors such as diet (Wogan et al., 2004).<br />

The contamination of food is part of the global problem of environmental<br />

pollution. Foodstuffs have been found contaminated with substances having<br />

carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic and allergenic properties. As these substances can<br />

be supplied with food throughout the entire life-time of a person, it is necessary to deal<br />

with the chronic action of trace amounts of such substances. Hence the systematic<br />

determination of the foreign substances in nutritional products and feedstock plays an<br />

important role. The determination of trace impurities presents considerable difficulties<br />

owing to the fact that food is a complex system containing thousands of major and minor<br />

compounds (Nilufer and Boyacio, 2002). Increasing environment pollution by toxic<br />

substances such as toxic metals, organometallic and organic pollutants in air,


water, soil and food, calls for reliable analytical procedures for their control in<br />

environmental samples which needs reliable and sensitive methods (Fifield and Haines,<br />

2000). The choice of the method of analysis depends on the sample, the analyte to be<br />

assayed, accuracy, limit of detection, cost and time to complete the analysis (Aboul-<br />

Eneim et a., 2000). For development of this method, emphasis should be on<br />

development of simplified, cost-effective and efficient method that complies with the<br />

legislative requirements (Stroka and Anklam, 2002; Enker, 2003).<br />

The widespread occurrence of aflatoxins producing fungi in our environment and<br />

the reported naturally occurring of toxin in a number of agricultural commodities has led<br />

the investigator to develop a new method for aflatoxin analysis (Creepy, 2002). An<br />

accurate and sensitive method of analysis is therefore required for the determination of<br />

these compounds in foodstuffs that have sustained mould growth.<br />

Numerous articles concerning methods for determination of aflatoxins have been<br />

published. However, with regard to electroanalytical technique, only one method of<br />

determination was reported using the differential pulse pulse polarographic (DPP)<br />

technique which was developed by Smyth et al. (1979). In this experiment, the obtained<br />

limit of detection of aflatoxin B1 was 25 ppb which was higher as compared to the<br />

common amount of aflatoxin in contaminated food samples which is 10 ppb as reported<br />

by Pare (1997) or even less. In <strong>Malaysia</strong>, the regulatory limit for total aflatoxins in<br />

groundnut is 15 ppb. The regulatory for other foods and milk is 10 ppb and 0.05 ppb<br />

respectively (<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act, 1983).<br />

1.2 AFLATOXINS<br />

1.2.1 Aflatoxins in General<br />

Aflatoxins are a group of heterocyclic, oxygen-containing mycotoxins that<br />

possess the bisdifuran ring system. It was discovered some 43 years ago in England<br />

2


following a poisoning outbreak causing 100,000 turkeys death (Miller, 1987 and<br />

Cespedez and Diaz, 1997). The aflatoxins are the most widely distributed fungal toxins<br />

in food. The occurrence of the aflatoxins in food products demonstrated that the high<br />

levels of aflatoxins are significant concern both for food traders and food consumers<br />

(Tozzi et al. 2003; Herrman, 2004; Haberneh, 2004). Aflatoxin is a by-product of mold<br />

growth in a wide range of agriculture commodities such as peanuts (Urano et al., 1993),<br />

maize and maize based food (Papp et al., 2002; Mendez-Albores et al., 2004),<br />

cottonseeds (Pons and Franz, 1977), cocoa (Jefferey et al., 1982), coffee beans (Batista et<br />

al., 2003), medical herbs ( Reif and Metzger, 1998; Rizzo et al., 2004), spices<br />

(Erdogen, 2004; Garner et al., 1993; Akiyama et al., 2001; Aziz et al., 1998), melon<br />

seeds (Bankole et al., 2004) and also in human food such as rice (Shotwell et al., 1966;<br />

Begum and Samajpati, 2000), groundnut (Bankole et al., 2005), peanut products ( Patey<br />

et al., 1990), corn ( Shotwell and Goulden, 1977; Urano et al., 1993 ), vegetable oil<br />

(Miller et al., 1985), beer (Scott and Lawrence, 1997), dried fruits ( Abdul Kadar et al.,<br />

2004, Arrus et al. (2004), milk and dairy products (Kamkar, 2004; Aycicek et al. 2005;<br />

Sarimehmetoglu et al., 2004; Martin and Martin, 2004 ). Meat and meat products are<br />

also contaminated with alfatoxins when farm animals are fed with aflatoxin contaminated<br />

feed (Miller, 1987 and Chiavaro et al., 2001).<br />

The molds that are major producers of aflatoxin are Aspergillus flavus<br />

(Bankole et al. 2004) and Aspergillus parasiticus (Begum and Samajpati, 2000;<br />

Setamou et al., 1997; Erdogen, 2004; Gourama and Bullerman, 1995). Aspergillus<br />

flavus, which is ubiquitous, produces B aflatoxins (Samajphati, 1979) while Aspergillus<br />

parasiticus, which produces both B and G aflatoxins, has more limited distribution<br />

(Garcia-Villanova et al., 2004). A picture of Aspergillus flavus seen under an electron<br />

microscope is shown in Figure 1.0.<br />

Black olive is one of the substrate for Aspergillus parasiticus growth and<br />

aflatoxin B1 production as reported by Leontopoulos et al., (2003). Biosynthesis of<br />

aflatoxins by this fungi depends on the environmental condition such as temperature and<br />

humidity during crop growth and storage (Leszczynska et al., 2000; Tarin et al., 2004<br />

3


and Pildain et al., 2004). The optimum temperatures for aflatoxins growth are 27.84 0 C<br />

and 27.30 0 C at pH=5.9 and 5.5 respectively.<br />

Figure 1.0: Aspergillus flavus seen under an electron microscope<br />

Before harvest, the risk for the development of aflatoxins is greatest during major<br />

drought (Turner et al., 2005). When soil moisture is below normal and temperature is<br />

high, the number of Aspergillus spores in the air increases. These spores infect crops<br />

through areas of damage caused by insects and inclement weather. Once infected, plant<br />

stress occurs, which favor the production of aflatoxins. Fungal growth and aflatoxins<br />

contamination are the sequence of interactions among the fungus, the host and the<br />

environment. The appropriate combination of water stress, high temperature stress and<br />

insect damage of the host plant are major determining factors in mold infestation and<br />

toxin production (Faraj et al., 1991; Koehler, 1985; Park and Bullerman, 1983).<br />

Additional factors such as heat treatment, modified-atmosphere packaging or the<br />

presence of preservative, also contribute in increasing growth rate of the aflatoxins.<br />

Farmers have minimal control over some of these environmental factors.<br />

However appropriate pre-harvest and post-harvest management and good agricultural<br />

practice, including crop rotation, irrigation, timed planting and harvesting and the use of<br />

pesticides are the best methods for preventing or controlling aflatoxins contamination<br />

4


(Turner et al., 2005). Timely harvesting could reduce crop moisture to a point where the<br />

formation of the mould would not occur. For example harvesting corn early when<br />

moisture is above 20 percent and then quickly drying it to a moisture level of at least 15<br />

percent will keep the Aspergillus flavus from completing its life cycle, resulting in lower<br />

aflatoxin concentration. Aflatoxins are to be found in agricultural products as a<br />

consequence of unprosperous storage conditions where humidity of 70 -90 % and a<br />

minimum temperature of about 10° C. Commodities that have been dried to about 12 to<br />

0.5 % moisture are generally considered stable, and immune to any risk of additional<br />

aflatoxins development. Moreover, the minimum damage of shells during mechanized<br />

harvesting of crop reduces significantly the mould contamination. Biocontrol of<br />

aflatoxin contamination is another way to reduce this contamination. The natural ability<br />

of many microorganisms including bacteria, actinomycetes, yeasts, moulds and algae has<br />

been a source for bacteriological breakdown of mycotoxins. The most active organism<br />

such as Flavobacterium aurantiacum which in aqueous solution can take up and<br />

metabolise aflatoxins B1, G1 and M1 (Smith and Moss, 1985).<br />

Production of aflatoxins is greatly inhibited by propionic acid as revealed by<br />

Molina and Gianuzzi (2002) when they studied the production of aflatoxins in solid<br />

medium at different temperature, pH and concentration of propionic acid. It also can be<br />

inhibited by essential oil extracted from thyme as found by Rasooli and Abnayeh (2004).<br />

Other chemicals that can inhibit the growth of this fungus are ammonia, copper sulphate<br />

and acid benzoic (Gowda et al., 2004).<br />

1.2.2 Chemistry of Aflatoxins<br />

Aflatoxins can be classified into two broad groups according to chemical<br />

structure which are difurocoumarocyclopentenone series and ifurocoumarolactone<br />

(Heathcote, 1984). They are highly substituted coumarin derivatives that contain a fused<br />

dihydrofuran moiety. The chemical structure of coumarin is shown in Figure 1.1.<br />

5


Figure 1.1 Chemical structure of coumarin<br />

O<br />

There are six major compounds of aflatoxin such as aflatoxin B1 (AFB1),<br />

aflatoxin B2 (AFB2), aflatoxin G1 (AFG2), aflatoxin G2 (AFG2), aflatoxin M1 (AFM1)<br />

and aflatoxin M2 (AFM2) (Goldblatt, 1969). The former four are naturally found<br />

aflatoxins and the AFM1 and AFM2 are produced by biological metabolism of AFB1<br />

and AFB2 from contaminated feed used by animals. They are odorless, tasteless and<br />

colorless. The scientific name for these aflatoxin compounds are listed in Table 1.0.<br />

Aflatoxins have closely similar structures and form a unique group of highly oxygenated,<br />

naturally occurring heterocyclic compounds. The chemical structures of these aflatoxins<br />

are shown in Figure 1.2. The G series of aflatoxin differs chemically from B series by<br />

the presence of a β-lactone ring, instead of a cyclopentanone ring. Also a double bond<br />

that may undergo reduction reaction is found in the form of vinyl ether at the terminal<br />

furan ring in AFB1 and AFG1 but not in AFB2 and AFG2. However this small<br />

difference in structure at the C-2 and C-3 double bond is associated with a very<br />

significant change in activity, whereby AFB1 and AFG1 are carcinogenic and<br />

considerably more toxic than AFB2 and AFG2. The dihydrofuran moiety in the structure<br />

is said to be of primary importance in producing biological effects. Hydroxylation of the<br />

bridge carbon of the furan rings for AFM1 does not significantly alter the effects of the<br />

compounds. The absolute configuration of AFB2 and AFG2 follows from the fact that it<br />

is derived from the reduction of AFB1 and AFG1 respectively.<br />

AFB is the aflatoxin which produces a blue color under ultraviolet while AFG<br />

produces the green color. AFM produces a blue-violet fluorescence while AFM2<br />

produces a violet fluorescence (Goldblatt, 1969). Relative fluorescence of aflatoxins in<br />

several organic solvents are shown in Appendix A (White and Afgauer, 1970). The<br />

O<br />

6


Table 1.0 Scientific name for aflatoxin compounds<br />

Aflatoxin B1<br />

(AFB1)<br />

Aflatoxin B2<br />

(AFB2)<br />

Aflatoxin G1<br />

(AFG1)<br />

Aflatoxin G2<br />

(AFG2)<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

M1<br />

(AFM1)<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

M2<br />

2,3,6a,9a-tetrahydro-4-methoxycyclopenta[c]<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione<br />

2,3,6a,8,9,9a-Hexahydro-4-methoxycyclopenta[c]<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione<br />

3,4, 7a,10a-tetrahydro-5-methoxy-1H, 12H<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h]pyrano[3,4-c]l]- benzopyran-<br />

1,12-dione<br />

3,4,7a,8,9,10, 10a-Hexahydro-5-methoxy-1H,12H-<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h]pyrano[3,4-c][l]- benzopyran-<br />

1,12-dione<br />

4-Hydroxy AFB1<br />

4-Hydroxy AFB2<br />

natural fluorescence of aflatoxins arises from their oxygenated pentaheterocyclic<br />

structure. The fluorescence capacity of AFB2 and AFG2 is ten times larger than that of<br />

AFB1 and AFG1, probably owing to the structural difference, namely double bond on the<br />

furanic ring. Such a double bond seems to be very important for the photophysical<br />

7


O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

(a) (b)<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

(c) (d)<br />

(e) (f)<br />

Figure 1.2 Chemical structures of (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, (c) AFG1, (d) AFG2,<br />

(e) AFM1 and (f) AFM2.<br />

properties of these derivatives measured just after spectroscopic studies (Cepeda et al.,<br />

1996). The excitation of the natural fluorescence of AFB1 and AFG1 can be promoted<br />

O<br />

8


in many different ways such as post-column iodination (Tuinstra and Haasnoot, 1983;<br />

Davis and Diener, 1980), post-column bromination (Kok et al.,1986; Kok, 1994 ;<br />

Versantroort et al., 2005 ), use of cyclodextrin compound (Cepeda et al., 1996; Chiavaro<br />

et al., 2001; Franco et al., 1998) and trifluoroacetic acid, TFA (Stack and Pohland,<br />

1975; Takahashi, 1977a; Haghighi et al., 1981; Nieduetzki et al., 1994 ).<br />

AFB1 and AFG1 form hemiacetals, AFB2a and AFG2a when reacted with acidic<br />

solution such as triflouroacetic acid (TFA) as represented in Figure 1.3 (Joshua, 1993).<br />

The hydroxyaflatoxins are unstable and tend to decompose to yellow products in the<br />

presence of air, light and alkali. Their UV and visible spectra are similar to those of the<br />

major aflatoxins.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

TFA<br />

TFA<br />

HO<br />

(a) (c)<br />

HO<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

(b) (d)<br />

Figure 1.3 Hydration of AFB1 (a) and AFG1 (b) by TFA produces AFB2a (c) and<br />

AFG2a (d) (Joshua, 1993).<br />

The close relationship between AFB1, AFG1, AFB2a and AFG2a was shown by the<br />

similarities in their IR and UV spectra. The main difference between AFB2a and AFG2a<br />

with AFB1 and AFG1 are found in the IR spectra, where an additional band at 3620 cm -1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

9


indicates the presence of a hydroxyl group in AFB2a and AFG2a. The absence of bands<br />

at 3100, 1067 and 722 cm -1 (which arise in AFB1 and AFG1 from the vinyl ether group)<br />

indicates that the compounds are hydroxyl derivatives of AFB2 and AFG2. Some<br />

chemical and physical properties of aflatoxin compounds are listed in Table 1.1<br />

(Heathcote and Hibbert, 1978; Weast and Astle, 1987). The close relationship between<br />

these aflatoxins was shown by the similarities in their UV and IR spectra as shown in<br />

Appendix B and C respectively.<br />

Table 1.1 Chemical and physical properties of aflatoxin compounds<br />

Molecular<br />

formula<br />

Molecular weight<br />

Crystals<br />

Melting point<br />

( ° C )<br />

Fluorescence<br />

under UV light<br />

Solubility<br />

Other properties<br />

AFB1<br />

C17H12O6<br />

312<br />

Pale yellow<br />

268.9<br />

Blue<br />

AFB2<br />

C17H14O6<br />

314<br />

Pale yellow<br />

286.9<br />

Blue<br />

AFG1<br />

C17H12O7<br />

328<br />

Colorless<br />

244.6<br />

Green<br />

AFG2<br />

C17H14O7<br />

330<br />

Colorless<br />

237.40<br />

Green<br />

Soluble in water and polar organic solvent. Normal solvents<br />

are: methanol, water: acetonitrile (9:1), trifluoroacetic acid,<br />

methanol: 0.1N HCl (4:1), DMSO and acetone<br />

Odorless, colorless and tasteless in solution form.<br />

Incompatible with strong acids, strong oxidising agents and<br />

strong bases. Soluble in water, DMSO, 95% acetone or<br />

ethanol for 24 hours under ambient temperature<br />

10


STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC METHODS FOR<br />

THE DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI BIN YAACOB<br />

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA


BAHAGIAN A – Pengesahan Kerjasama *<br />

Adalah disahkan bahawa projek penyelidikan tesis ini telah dilaksanakan melalui<br />

kerjasama antara _____________________ dengan _________________________<br />

Disahkan oleh:<br />

Tandatangan : .......................................................... Tarikh : ..........................<br />

Nama : ..........................................................<br />

Jawatan :...........................................................<br />

(Cop rasmi)<br />

* Jika penyediaan tesis/projek melibatkan kerjasama.<br />

BAHAGIAN B – Untuk Kegunaan Pejabat Sekolah Pengajian Siswazah<br />

Tesis ini telah diperiksa dan diakui oleh:<br />

Nama dan Alamat<br />

Pemeriksa Luar : Prof. Dr. Noor Azhar Bin Mohd Shazili<br />

Pengarah<br />

Institut Oseanografi,<br />

Kolej <strong>Universiti</strong> Sains dan <strong>Teknologi</strong> <strong>Malaysia</strong>,<br />

Mengabang Telipot<br />

21030 Kuala Terengganu<br />

Nama dan Alamat<br />

Pemeriksa Dalam I : Prof. Madya Dr. Razali Bin Ismail<br />

Fakulti Sains,<br />

UTM, Skudai<br />

Pemeriksa Dalam II :<br />

Nama Penyelia Lain<br />

(jika ada) :<br />

Disahkan oleh Penolong Pendaftar di Sekolah Pengajian Siswazah:<br />

Tandatangan : .......................................................... Tarikh : ..........................<br />

Nama : .GANESAN A/L ANDIMUTHU


STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC METHODS FOR<br />

THE DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI BIN YAACOB<br />

A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the<br />

requirements for the award of the degree of<br />

Doctor of Philosophy<br />

Faculty of Science<br />

<strong>Universiti</strong> <strong>Teknologi</strong> <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

APRIL 2006


Specially dedicated to:<br />

My mother, wife, sons, daughters and all families for<br />

all the love, support and continuous prayer<br />

for my success in completing this work.<br />

iii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

All praise be to ALLAH SWT and blessing be upon His Prophet SAW whose<br />

ultimate guidance creates a more meaningful purpose to this work.<br />

I wish to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to the people who have both<br />

directly and indirectly contributed to this thesis. The following are those to whom I<br />

am particularly indebted:<br />

My supervisors A.P. Dr. Abdull Rahim bin Hj. Mohd. Yusoff and Prof. Dr.<br />

Rahmalan Ahamad for their invaluable guidance, freedom of work and<br />

constant encouragement throughout the course of this work.<br />

School Of Health Sciences, USM, Health Campus, Kubang Krian Kelantan<br />

for awarding study leave together with scholarship in completing the work.<br />

Prof Baharuddin Saad from USM Penang, AP Dr. Razali Ismail from<br />

Chemistry Department, Faculty of Science, UTM and Prof Barek from<br />

Charles University, Prague, Czeck Republic for their useful discussion and<br />

suggestion. Also to Mr Radwan Ismail from Department of Chemistry,<br />

Penang Branch, Mrs Marpongahtun Misni and Mr Wan Kamaruzaman Wan<br />

Ahmad for their friendship, ideas and continuous support in carrying out this<br />

work. Also to Mr Mat Yasin bin Sirin, Mrs Ramlah binti Husin and Mr Azmi<br />

Mahmud for their assistance throughout the work.<br />

UTM for awarding Short Term Grant No: 75152 / 2004<br />

My mother, wife and all families for their encouragements, supports, patience,<br />

tolerance and understanding.<br />

iv


ABSTRACT<br />

Aflatoxin, which is produced by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

fungi is one of the compounds in the mycotoxin group. The main types of aflatoxins<br />

are AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 which have carcinogenic properties and are<br />

dangerous to human health. Various techniques have been used for their measurements<br />

such as the high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC), enzyme linked<br />

immunosorbant assay (ELISA) and radioimmunoassay (RIA) but all these methods<br />

have disadvantages such as long analysis time, consume a lot of reagents and<br />

expensive. To overcome these problems, the voltammetric technique was proposed in<br />

this study using controlled growth mercury drop (CGME) as the working electrode and<br />

Britton Robinson buffer (BRB) as the supporting electrolyte. The voltammetric<br />

methods were used for investigating the electrochemical properties and the quantitative<br />

analysis of aflatoxins at the mercury electrode. The experimental conditions were<br />

optimised to obtain the best characterised peak in terms of peak height with analytical<br />

validation of the methods for each aflatoxin. The proposed methods were applied for<br />

the analysis of aflatoxins in groundnut samples and the results were compared with<br />

those obtained by the HPLC technique. All aflatoxins were found to adsorb and<br />

undergo irreversible reduction reaction at the working mercury electrode. The<br />

optimum experimental parameters for the differential pulse cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetry (DPCSV) method were the BRB at pH 9.0 as the supporting electrolyte,<br />

initial potential (Ei): -0.1 V, final potential (Ef): -1.4 V, accumulation potential (Eacc): -<br />

0.6 V, accumulation time (tacc): 80 s, scan rate: 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude: 80 mV.<br />

The optimum parameters for the square wave stripping voltammetry (SWSV) method<br />

were Ei = -0.1 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc: -0.8 V, tacc: 100 s, scan rate: 3750 mV/s, frequency:<br />

125 Hz and voltage step: 30 V. At the concentration of 0.10 µM, using DPCSV<br />

method with the optimum parameters, AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 produced a<br />

single peak at -1.21 V, -1.23 V, -1.17 V and -1.15 V (versus Ag/AgCl) respectively.<br />

Using the SWSV method, a single peak appeared at -1.30 V for AFB1 and AFB2 while<br />

-1.22 V for AFG1 and AFG2. The calibration curves for all aflatoxins were linear with<br />

the limit of detection (LOD) of approximately 2.0 ppb and 0.50 ppb obtained by the<br />

DPCSV and SWSV methods respectively. The results of aflatoxins content in<br />

individual groundnut samples do not vary significantly when compared with those<br />

obtained by the HPLC technique. Finally, it can be concluded that both proposed<br />

methods which are accurate, precise, robust, rugged, fast and low cost were<br />

successfully developed and are potential alternative methods for routine analysis of<br />

aflatoxins in groundnut samples.<br />

v


ABSTRAK<br />

Aflatoksin adalah sejenis sebatian yang dihasilkan oleh kulat Aspergillus flavus<br />

dan Aspergillus parasiticus yang digolongkan di dalam kumpulan mikotoksin. Jenis<br />

utama aflatoksin adalah AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 dan AFG2 yang bersifat karsinogen serta<br />

merbahaya kepada kesihatan manusia. Pelbagai teknik telah digunakan untuk<br />

menentukan aflatoksin seperti kromatografi cecair prestasi tinggi (HPLC), asai serapan<br />

imuno berikatan enzim (ELISA) dan radioamunoasai (RIA) tetapi teknik-teknik ini<br />

mempunyai kelemahan seperti masa analisis yang panjang, melibatkan reagen yang<br />

banyak dan kos yang mahal. Untuk mengatasi masalah ini, teknik voltammetri telah<br />

dicadangkan untuk kajian aflatoksin menggunakan titisan raksa pembesaran terkawal<br />

(CGME) sebagai elektrod bekerja dan larutan penimbal Britton-Robinson (BRB)<br />

sebagai elektrolit penyokong. Pelbagai kaedah voltammetri telah digunakan untuk<br />

mengkaji sifat elektrokimia aflatoksin pada elektrod raksa dan analisis kuantitatifnya.<br />

Parameter kajian telah dioptimumkan untuk memperolehi puncak yang elok<br />

berdasarkan ketinggian puncak serta pengesahan analisis untuk kaedah yang<br />

dibangunkan bagi setiap aflatoksin. Kaedah ini telah digunakan untuk menentukan<br />

kandungan aflatoksin di dalam sampel kacang tanah di mana keputusan yang diperolehi<br />

telah dibandingkan dengan keputusan HPLC. Semua aflatoksin yang dikaji didapati<br />

terjerap dan menjalani proses tindakbalas penurunan tidak berbalik pada elektrod raksa.<br />

Parameter optimum untuk kaedah voltammetri perlucutan kathodik denyut pembeza<br />

(DPCSV) adalah larutan BRB pada pH 9.0 sebagai larutan elektrolit, keupayaan awal<br />

(Ei): -1.0 V, keupayaan akhir (Ef): -1.4 V, keupayaan pengumpulan (Eacc): -0.6 V, masa<br />

pengumpulan (tacc): 80 s, kadar imbasan: 50 mV/s dan amplitud denyut: 80 mV. Untuk<br />

kaedah voltammetri perlucutan gelombang bersegi (SWSV), parameter optimum adalah<br />

Ei : -1.0 V, Ef : -1.4 V, Eacc: -0.8 V, tacc: 100 s, kadar imbasan: 3750 mV/s, frekuensi:<br />

125 Hz dan beza keupayaan: 30 mV. Menggunakan parameter optimum untuk DPCSV,<br />

0.10 µM AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 dan AFG2 menghasilkan puncak tunggal pada<br />

keupayaan -1.21 V, -1.23 V, -1.17 V dan -1.15 V (melawan Ag/AgCl) masingmasingnya.<br />

Menggunakan kaedah SWSV, puncak terhasil pada -1.30 V untuk AFB1<br />

dan AFB2, -1.22 V untuk AFG1 dan AFG2. Keluk kalibrasi adalah linear untuk semua<br />

aflatoksin dengan had pengesanan (LOD) pada 2.0 dan 0.5 ppb diperolehi dari kaedah<br />

DPCSV dan SWSV masing-masingnya. Keputusan analisis kandungan aflatoksin di<br />

dalam sampel kacang tanah tidak memberi perbezaan ketara berbanding dengan yang<br />

diperolehi menggunakan teknik HPLC. Kesimpulannya, kedua-dua kaedah yang dikaji<br />

yang merupakan kaedah yang tepat, jitu, cepat, sesuai digunakan dengan pelbagai<br />

model voltammetri dan kos yang murah telah berjaya dibangunkan dan berpotensi besar<br />

menjadi kaedah alternatif untuk analisis kandungan aflatoksin di dalam kacang tanah<br />

secara berkala.<br />

vi


TABLE OF CONTENTS<br />

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE<br />

TITLE i<br />

DECLARATION ii<br />

DEDICATION iii<br />

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iv<br />

ABSTRACT v<br />

ABSTRAK vi<br />

TABLE OF CONTENTS vii<br />

LIST OF TABLES xiii<br />

LIST OF FIGURES xvi<br />

ABBREVATIONS xxix<br />

LIST OF APPENDICES xxxiii<br />

1 LITERATURE REVIEW 1<br />

1.1 Overview 1<br />

1.2 Aflatoxins 3<br />

1.2.1 Aflatoxins in general 3<br />

1.2.2 Chemistry of aflatoxins 5<br />

1.2.3 Health aspects of aflatoxins 12<br />

1.2.4 Analytical methods for the determination of<br />

aflatoxins<br />

16<br />

1.2.5 Electrochemical properties of aflatoxins 28<br />

1.3. Voltammetric technique 30<br />

1.3.1 Voltammetric techniques in general 30<br />

vii


1.3.2 Voltammetric measurement 31<br />

1.3.2.1 Instrumentation 31<br />

1.3.2.2 Solvent and supporting electrolyte 44<br />

1.3.2.3 Current in voltammetry 46<br />

1.3.2.4 Quantitative and quantitative aspects of<br />

voltammetry<br />

48<br />

1.3.3 Type of voltammetric techniques 49<br />

1.3.3.1 Polarography 49<br />

1.3.3.2 Cyclic voltammetry 51<br />

1.3.3.3 Stripping voltammetry 54<br />

1.3.3.3a Anodic stripping voltammetry 56<br />

1.3.3.3b Cathodic stripping voltammetry 57<br />

1.3.3.3c Adsorptive stripping voltammetry 58<br />

1.3.3.4 Pulse voltammetry 59<br />

1.3.3.4a Differential pulse voltammetry 60<br />

1.3.3.4b Square wave voltammetry 61<br />

1.4 Objective and scope of study 64<br />

1.4.1 Objective of study 64<br />

1.4.2 Scope of study 67<br />

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 70<br />

2.1 Apparatus, material and reagents 70<br />

2.1.1 Apparatus 70<br />

2.1.2 Materials 72<br />

2.1.2.1 Aflatoxin stock and standard solutions 72<br />

2.1.2.2 Real samples 73<br />

2.1.3 Reagents 73<br />

2.1.3.1 Britton Robinson buffer, 0.04 M 73<br />

2.1.3.2 Carbonate buffer, 0.04 M 74<br />

2.1.3.3 Phosphate buffer, 0.04 M 74<br />

viii


2.1.3.4 Ascorbic acid 74<br />

2.1.3.5 β-cyclodextrin solution, 1.0 mM 75<br />

2.1.3.6 L-Cysteine, 1.0 x 10 -5 M 75<br />

2.1.3.7 2,4-dihydrofuran, 0.15 M 75<br />

2.1.3.8 Coumarin, 3.0 x 10 -2 M 75<br />

2.1.3.9 Poly-L-lysine, 10 ppm 75<br />

2.1.3.10 Standard aluminium (II) solution, 1.0 mM 75<br />

2.1.3.11 Standard plumbum(II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.12 Standard zinc (II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.13 Standard copper (II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.14 Standard nickel (II) solution, 1.0 mM 76<br />

2.1.3.15 Methanol: 0.1 N HCl solution, 95% 76<br />

2.1.3.16 Zinc sulphate solution, 15% 76<br />

2.2 Analytical Technique 77<br />

2.2.1 General procedure for voltammetric analysis 77<br />

2.2.2 Cyclic voltammetry (Anodic and cathodic<br />

directions)<br />

77<br />

2.2.2.1 Standard addition of sample 77<br />

2.2.2.2 Repetitive cyclic voltammetry 78<br />

2.2.2.3 Effect of scan rate 78<br />

2.2.3 Differential pulse cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetric determination of AFB2<br />

78<br />

2.2.3.1 Effect of pH 79<br />

2.2.3.2 Method optimisation for the determination 79<br />

of AFB2<br />

2.2.3.2a Effect of scan rate 79<br />

2.2.3.2b Effect of accumulation potential 80<br />

2.2.3.2c Effect of accumulation time 80<br />

2.2.3.2d Effect of initial potential 80<br />

2.2.3.2e Effect of pulse amplitude 80<br />

ix


2.2.3.3 Method validation 80<br />

2.2.3.4 Interference studies 81<br />

2.2.3.4a Effect of Cu(II), Ni (II), Al(III), 81<br />

Pb(II) and Zn(II)<br />

2.2.3.4b Effect of ascorbic acid, 82<br />

β-cyclodextrin and L-cysteine<br />

2.2.3.5 Modified mercury electrode with PLL 82<br />

2.2.4 Square wave cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

(SWSV)<br />

82<br />

2.2.4.1 SWSV parameters optimisation 82<br />

2.2.4.2 SWSV determination of all aflatoxins 82<br />

2.2.5 Stability studies of aflatoxins 83<br />

2.2.5.1 Stability of 10 ppm aflatoxins 83<br />

2.2.5.2 Stability of 1 ppm aflatoxins 83<br />

2.2.5.3 Stability of 0.1 µM aflatoxins exposed<br />

to ambient temperature<br />

83<br />

2.2.5.4 Stability of 0.1 µM aflatoxins in different<br />

pH of BRB<br />

84<br />

2.2.6 Application to food samples 84<br />

2.2.6.1 Technique 1 84<br />

2.2.6.2 Technique 2 84<br />

2.2.6.3 Technique 3 85<br />

2.2.6.4 Blank measurement 85<br />

2.2.6.5 Recovery studies 85<br />

2.2.6.6 Voltammetric analysis 86<br />

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 88<br />

3.1 Cyclic voltammetric studies of aflatoxins 88<br />

3.1.1 Cathodic and anodic cyclic voltammetric<br />

of aflatoxins<br />

89<br />

x


3.2 Differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

of AFB2<br />

102<br />

3.2.1 Optimisation of conditions for the stripping 104<br />

analysis<br />

3.2.1.1 Effect of pH and type of supporting 104<br />

electrolyte<br />

3.2.1.2 Optmisation of instrumental conditions 117<br />

3.2.1.2a Effect of scan rate 118<br />

3.2.1.2b Effect of accumulation time 119<br />

3.2.1.2c Effect of accumulation<br />

potential<br />

120<br />

3.2.1.2d Effect of initial potential 121<br />

3.2.1.2e Effect of pulse amplitude 122<br />

3.2.2 Analysis of aflatoxins 127<br />

3.2.2.1 Calibration curves of aflatoxins and<br />

validation of the proposed method<br />

129<br />

3.2.2.1a Calibration curve of AFB2 129<br />

3.2.2.1b Calibration curve of AFB1 134<br />

3.2.2.1c Calibration curve of AFG1 137<br />

3.2.2.1d Calibration curve of AFG2 140<br />

3.2.2.2 Determination of limit of detection 143<br />

3.2.2.3 Determination of limit of quantification 147<br />

3.2.2.4 Inteference studies 150<br />

3.3 Square-wave stripping voltammetry (SWSV) of<br />

aflatoxins<br />

157<br />

3.3.1 SWSV determination of AFB2 158<br />

3.3.1.1 Optimisation of experimental and 159<br />

instrumental SWSV parameters<br />

3.3.3.1a Influence of pH of BRB 159<br />

3.3.3.1b Effect of instrumental<br />

variables<br />

160<br />

xi


3.3.2 SWSV determination of other aflatoxins 166<br />

3.3.3 Calibration curves and method validation 168<br />

3.4 Stability studies of aflatoxins 175<br />

3.4.1 10 ppm aflatoxin stock solutions 175<br />

3.4.2 1 ppm aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 179<br />

3.4.2.1 Month to month stability studies 179<br />

3.4.2.2 Hour to hour stability studies 181<br />

3.4.2.3 Stability studies in different pH<br />

of BRB<br />

186<br />

3.4.2.4 Stability studies in 1.0 M HCl and<br />

1.0 M NaOH<br />

191<br />

3.5 Voltammetric analysis of aflatoxins in real samples 192<br />

3.5.1 Study on the extraction techniques 193<br />

3.5.2 Analysis of blank 194<br />

3.5.3 Recovery studies of aflatoxins in real samples 196<br />

3.5.4 Analysis of aflatoxins in real samples 199<br />

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 204<br />

4.1 Conclusions 204<br />

4.2 Recommendations 206<br />

REFERENCES 208<br />

Appendices A – AM 255 - 317<br />

xii


LIST OF TABLES<br />

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE<br />

1.0 Scientific name for aflatoxin compounds 7<br />

1.1 Chemical and physical properties of aflatoxin 10<br />

compounds<br />

1.2 Summary of analysis methods used for 19<br />

determination of aflatoxins in various samples<br />

1.3 Working electrode and limit of detection for 32<br />

modern polarographic and voltammetric<br />

techniques.<br />

1.4 The application range of various analytical 33<br />

techniques and their concentration limits when<br />

compared with the requirements in different<br />

fields of chemical analysis<br />

1.5 List of different type of working electrodes and 36<br />

its potential windows<br />

1.6 Electroreducible and electrooxidisable organic 50<br />

functional groups<br />

1.7 The characteristics of different type of 53<br />

electrochemical reaction.<br />

1.8 Application of Square Wave Voltammetry 62<br />

technique<br />

2.0 List of aflatoxins and their batch numbers 72<br />

used in this experiment<br />

2.1 Injected volume of aflatoxins into eluate of 86<br />

groundnut and the final concentrations obtained<br />

in voltammetric cell<br />

3.0 The dependence of current peaks of aflatoxins to 97<br />

their concentrations obtained by cathodic cyclic<br />

measurements in BRB at 9.0.<br />

xiii


3.1 Effect of buffer constituents on the peak height 109<br />

of 2.0 µM AFB2 at pH 9.0. Experimental<br />

conditions are the same as Figure 3.21<br />

3.2 Compounds reduced at the mercury electrode 116<br />

3.3 Optimum parameters for 0.06 µM and 2.0 µM 126<br />

AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.4 The peak height and peak potential of aflatoxins 127<br />

obtained by optimised parameters in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0 using DPCSV technique.<br />

3.5 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 131<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM by the proposed voltammetric procedure (n=8).<br />

3.6 Mean values for recovery of AFB2 standard 132<br />

solution (n=3).<br />

3.7 Influence of small variation in some of the 133<br />

assay condition of the proposed procedure on its<br />

suitability and sensitivity using 0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

3.8 Results of ruggedness test for proposed method 134<br />

using 0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

3.9 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 136<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM AFB1 by proposed voltammetric procedure<br />

(n=5).<br />

3.10 Mean values for recovery of AFB1 standard 137<br />

solution (n=3).<br />

3.11 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 139<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM AFG1 by proposed voltammetric procedure<br />

(n=5).<br />

3.12 Mean values for recovery of AFG1 standard 139<br />

solution (n=3).<br />

3.13 Peak height (in nA) obtained for intra-day and 141<br />

inter-day precision studies of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM AFG2 by proposed voltammetric procedure.<br />

xiv


3.14 Mean values for recovery of AFG2 standard 142<br />

solution (n=5).<br />

3.15 Peak height and peak potential of 0.10 µM 143<br />

aflatoxins obtained by BAS and Metrohm<br />

voltammetry analysers under optimised<br />

operational parameters for DPCSV method.<br />

3.16 Analytical parameters for calibration curves 145<br />

for AFB1,AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 obtained by<br />

DPCSV technique using BRB at pH 9.0 as the<br />

supporting electrolyte.<br />

3.17 LOD values for determination of aflatoxins 148<br />

obtained by various methods.<br />

3.18 LOQ values for determination of aflatoxins 149<br />

obtained by various methods.<br />

3.19 Peak current and peak potential for all aflatoxins 167<br />

obtained by SWSV in BRB at pH 9.0 (n=5).<br />

3.20 Analytical parameters for calibration curves for 172<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 obtained by<br />

SWSV technique in BRB pH 9.0 as the<br />

supporting electrolyte.<br />

3.21 Result of reproducibility study (intra-day and inter- 173<br />

day measurements) for 0.1 µM aflatoxins in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 obtained by SWSV method.<br />

3.22 Application of the proposed method in evaluation 174<br />

of the SWSV method by spiking the aflatoxin<br />

standard solutions.<br />

3.23 Average concentration of all aflatoxins within a 175<br />

year stability studies.<br />

3.24 The peak current and peak potential of 10 ppb 196<br />

AFB2 in presence and absence of a blank sample.<br />

3.25 Total aflatoxin contents in real samples which 203<br />

were obtained by DPCSV and HPLC<br />

techniques (average of duplicate analysis)<br />

xv


LIST OF FIGURES<br />

FIGURE NO. TITLE PAGE<br />

1.0 Aspergillus flavus seen under an electron 4<br />

microscope.<br />

1.1 Chemical structure of coumarin 6<br />

1.2 Chemical structures of (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, 8<br />

(c) AFG1, (d) AFG2, (e) AFM1 and (f) AFM2<br />

1.3 Hydration of (a) AFB1 and (b) AFG1 by TFA 9<br />

produces (c) AFB2a and (d) AFG2a<br />

1.4 Transformation of toxic (a) AFB1 to non-toxic 11<br />

(b) aflatoxicol A.<br />

1.5 Major DNA adducts of AFB1; (a) 8,9-Dihydro-8- 13<br />

(N 7 -guanyl)-9-hydroxy-aflatoxin B1 (AFB1-Gua)<br />

and (b) 8,9-Dihydro-8-(N 5 -Formyl-2 ’ .5 ’ .6 ’ -<br />

triamino-4 ’ -oxo-N 5 -pyrimidyl)-9-hydroxy-Aflatoxin<br />

B1 (AFB1-triamino-Py)<br />

1.6 Metabolic pathways of AFB1 by cytochrom P-450 14<br />

enzymes; B1-epoxide = AFB1 epoxide, M1=<br />

aflatoxin M1, P1= aflatoxin P1 and Q1 = aflatoxin<br />

Q1.<br />

1.7 A typical arrangement for a voltammetric 34<br />

electrochemical cell (RE: reference electrode,<br />

WE: working electrode. AE: auxiliary electrode)<br />

1.8 A diagram of the Hanging Mercury Drop Electrode 37<br />

(HMDE)<br />

1.9 A diagram of the Controlled Growth Mercury 38<br />

Electrode (CGME)<br />

1.10 Cyclic voltammograms of (a) reversible, 52<br />

(b) irriversible and (c) quasireversible reaction at<br />

mercury electrode (O = oxidised form and R = reduced<br />

form)<br />

xvi


1.11 The potential-time sequence in stripping analysis 55<br />

1.12 Schematic drawing showing the Faradaic current 59<br />

and charging current versus pulse time course<br />

1.13 Schematic drawing of steps in DPV by 60<br />

superimposing a periodic pulse on a linear scan<br />

1.14 Waveform for square-wave voltammetry 61<br />

2.0 BAS CGME stand (a) which is connected to 71<br />

CV-50W voltammetric analyser and interface<br />

with computer (b) for data processing<br />

2.1 VA757 Computrace Metrohm voltammetric 71<br />

analyser with 663 VA stand (consists of Multi<br />

Mode (MME))<br />

3.0 Cathodic peak current of 0.6 µM AFB1 in various 89<br />

pH of BRB obtained in cathodic cyclic voltammetry.<br />

Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0 and scan rate = 200<br />

mV/s)<br />

3.1 Shifting of peak potential of AFB1 with increasing 90<br />

pH of BRB. Parameter conditions are the same<br />

as in Figure 3.0.<br />

3.2 Mechanism of reduction of AFB1 in BRB at pH 6.0 90<br />

to 8.0.<br />

3.3 Mechanism of reduction of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 91<br />

to 11.0.<br />

3.4 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFB1 92<br />

obtained at scan rate of 200 mV/s, Ei = 0, Elow =<br />

-1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB solution at pH 9.0.<br />

3.5 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFB2 92<br />

in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.6 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFG1 93<br />

in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

xvii


3.7 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFG2 93<br />

in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.8 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.6 µM AFB1 in BRB at pH 94<br />

9.0 obtained by cathodic cyclic voltammetry. All<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.9 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.1 µM Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 94<br />

9.0 obtained by cathodic cyclic voltammetry. All<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.10 Anodic cyclic voltammogram of 1.3 µM AFB2 95<br />

obtained at scan rate of 200 mV/s, Ei = -1.5 V,<br />

Elow = -1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.11 Effect of increasing AFB2 concentration on the 96<br />

peak height of cathodic cyclic voltammetrc curve<br />

in BRB at pH = 9.0. (1.30 µM, 2.0 µM, 2.70 µM<br />

and 3.40 µM). All parameter conditions are the<br />

same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.12 Peak height of reduction peak of AFB2 with 96<br />

increasing concentration of AFB2. All parameter<br />

conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.13 Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 98<br />

µM AFB2 in BRB solution at pH 9.0. All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.14 Increasing Ip of 1.3 µM AFB2 cathodic peak 98<br />

obtained from repetitive cyclic voltammetry. All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.15 Peak potential of 1.3 µM AFB2 with increasing 99<br />

number of cycle obtained by repetitive cyclic<br />

voltammetry.<br />

xviii


3.16 Plot of log Ip versus log υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in 100<br />

BRB solution at pH 9.0. All experimental conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.17 Plot of Ep versus log υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB 101<br />

solution at pH 9.0.<br />

3.18 Plot of Ip versus υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB 102<br />

solution at pH 9.0. All parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

3.19 DPCS voltammograms of 1.0 µM AFB2 (Peak I) 103<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) at tacc = 0 and 30 s. Other<br />

parameter conditions; Ei = 0, Ef = -1.50 V,<br />

Eacc = 0, υ =50 mV/s and pulse amplitude =<br />

100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

3.20 DPCS voltammograms of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB 104<br />

in BRB (Peak I) at different pH values; 6.0, 7.0,<br />

8.0, 9.0, 11.0and 13.0. Other parameter conditions;<br />

Ei = 0, Ef =-1.50 V, Eacc = 0, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude =100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

3.21 Dependence of the Ip for AFB2 on the pH of 105<br />

0.04 M BRB solution. AFB2 concentration:<br />

2.0 µM, Ei =0, Ef = -1.5 V, Eacc = 0, tacc = 30 sec,<br />

υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.22 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 obtained in BRB (a) at pH 106<br />

from 9.0 decreases to 4.0 and re-increase to 9.0 and<br />

(b) at pH from 9.0 increase to 13.0 and re-decrease<br />

to 9.0.<br />

3.23 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB2 in BRB at 107<br />

pH (a) 6.0, (b) 9.0 and (c) 13.0.<br />

3.24 Opening of lactone ring by strong alkali caused no 108<br />

peak to be observed for AFB2 in BRB at pH 13.0.<br />

3.25 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 in different concentration of 109<br />

BRB at pH 9.0. Experimental conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.20.<br />

3.26 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 in different pH and concentrations 110<br />

of BRB.<br />

xix


3.27 DPCS voltammograms of 2.0 AFB2 (Peak I) 110<br />

in (a) 0.04 M, (b) 0.08 M and (c) 0.08 M BRB<br />

at pH 9.0 as the blank. Ei = 0 V, Ef = -1.5 V,<br />

Eacc = 0 V, tacc = 30 sec, υ = 50mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

3.28 Chemical structures of (a) 2,3-dihydrofuran, 111<br />

(b) tetrahydrofuran and (c) coumarin.<br />

3.29 Voltammograms of 2,3-dihydrifuran (peak I) for 112<br />

concentrations from (b) 0.02 to 0.2 µM in (a)<br />

BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.30 Dependence of Ip of coumarin to its concentrations 112<br />

3.31 Voltammograms of coumarin at concentration of 113<br />

(b) 34 µM, (c) 68 µM, (d) 102 µM, (e) 136 µM<br />

and (f) 170 µM in (a) BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.32 Chemical structures of (a) cortisone and (b) 114<br />

testosterone.<br />

3.33 Chemical structures of (a) digoxin and (b) digitoxin 115<br />

3.34 Effect of pH of BRB solution on the Ep for AFB2. 117<br />

AFB2 concentration: 2.0 µM. Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5 V,<br />

Eacc = 0, tacc = 30 s and υ = 50 mV/s.<br />

3.35 Effect of various υ to the (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM 118<br />

AFB2 peak in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 0, Ef = 1.50 V,<br />

Eacc = 0, tacc = 15 s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.36 Effect of tacc on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 119<br />

peak in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 0, Ef = 1.50 V, Eacc = 0,<br />

υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.37 The relationship between (a) Ip and (b) Ep with 120<br />

Eacc for 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5 V, tacc = 15 s, υ = 40 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.38 Effect of Ei on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 121<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. Ef = 1.50 V, Eacc = -0.80 V,<br />

tacc = 40 s,υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude =<br />

100 mV.<br />

xx


3.39 Effect of pulse amplitude on (a) Ip and (b) Ep 122<br />

of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V,<br />

Ef = 1.50 V, Eacc = -0.80 V, tacc = 40 s and υ =<br />

40 mV/s.<br />

3.40 Effect of Eacc on Ip of 0.06 µM AFB2. Ei = -1.0 V, 123<br />

Ef = -1.50 V, tacc = 40 s, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.41 Effect of tacc on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 0.06 µM AFB2 124<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.42 The effect υ on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 0.06 µM AFB2 125<br />

In BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

3.43 Voltammograms of 0.06 µM AFB2 obtained under 126<br />

(a) optimised and (b) unoptimised parameters in BRB<br />

at pH 9.0.<br />

3.44 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM (a) AFB1, (b) AFG1, 128<br />

(c) AFB2 and (d) AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 1.0<br />

(except for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.45 Voltammograms of (b) mixed aflatoxins in (a) BRB at 129<br />

pH 9.0 as the blank. Parameters condition: Ei = -0.95 V,<br />

Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

Pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.46 Increasing concentration of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. 130<br />

The parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc =-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.47 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB2 130<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.46.<br />

3.48 Standard addition of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0. 135<br />

The parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc =-0.8 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxi


3.49 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB1 135<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.48.<br />

3.50 Effect of concentration to Ip of AFG1 in BRB at 138<br />

pH 9.0. Ei = -0.95 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc =-0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.51 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFG1 138<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.50.<br />

3.52 Effect of concentration to Ip of AFG2 in BRB at 140<br />

pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc =-0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.53 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFG2 141<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter conditions are<br />

the same as in Figure 3.52.<br />

3.54 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, 144<br />

(c) AFG1 and (d) AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

(d) obtained by 747 VA Metrohm. Ei = -1.0 V (except<br />

for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.55 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of 150<br />

Zn 2+ up to 1.0 µM.<br />

3.56 Voltammograms of (i) 0.1µM AFB2 and (ii) AFB2-Zn 151<br />

complex with increasing concentration of Zn 2+ (a = 0,<br />

b = 0.75 µM, c = 1.50 µM, d = 2.25 µM and e = 3.0 µM).<br />

Blank = BRB at pH 9.0. Experimental conditions;<br />

Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s,<br />

υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.57 Ip of all aflatoxins after reacting with increasing 151<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 3.0.<br />

Measurements were made in BRB at pH 9.0 within<br />

15 minutes of reaction time. Ei = -1.0 V (except<br />

for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxii


3.58 Absorbance of all aflatoxins with increasing 152<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 3.0 within 15<br />

minutes of reaction time<br />

3.59 Voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2 with increasing 153<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ (from 0.10 to 0.50 µM) in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -0.25 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplirude =<br />

80 mV. .<br />

3.60 Chemical structure of ascorbic acid. 153<br />

3.61 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration 154<br />

of ascorbic acid up to 1.0 µM. Concentrations of<br />

all aflatoxins are 0.1µM.<br />

3.62 Voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2 with increasing 154<br />

concentration of ascorbic acid.<br />

3.63 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration 155<br />

of β-cyclodextrin up to 1.0 µM.<br />

3.64 Voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2 with increasing 156<br />

concentration of β-cyclodextrin.<br />

3.65 Chemical structure of L-cysteine. 156<br />

3.66 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration 157<br />

of cysteine up to 1.0 µM.<br />

3.67 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 obtained by 158<br />

(a) DPCSV and (b) SWSV techniques in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0. Parameters for DPCSV: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef =<br />

-1.40V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV and for SWSV: Ei = -1.0 V,<br />

Ef = -1.40V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, frequency =<br />

50 Hz, voltage step = 0.02 V, amplitude = 80 mV<br />

and υ = 1000 mV/s.<br />

3.68 Influence of pH of BRB on the Ip of 0.10 µM 159<br />

AFB2 using SWSV technique. The instrumental<br />

Parameters are the same as in Figure 3.67.<br />

3.69 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 in different pH 160<br />

of BRB. Parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef =<br />

-1.40 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, voltage step =<br />

xxiii


0.02 V, amplitude = 50 mV, frequency = 50 Hz<br />

and υ = 1000 mV/s.<br />

3.70 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at 160<br />

pH 9.0.<br />

3.71 Effect of Eaccto the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at 161<br />

pH 9.0.<br />

3.72 Relationship between Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 while 162<br />

increasing tacc.<br />

3.73 Effect of frequency to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in 162<br />

BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.74 Linear relatioship between Ip of AFB2 and square 163<br />

root of frequency.<br />

3.75 Influence of square-wave voltage step to Ip of 163<br />

0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

3.76 Influence of square-wave amplitude to Ip of 0.10 µM 164<br />

AFB2.<br />

3.77 Relationship of SWSV Ep of AFB2 with increasing 164<br />

amplitude.<br />

3.78 Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained under (a) non-optimised 165<br />

and (b) optimised SWSV parameters compared with<br />

that obtained under (c) optimised DPCSV parameters.<br />

3.79 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained under 166<br />

(a) non-optimised and (b) optimised SWSV<br />

parameters compared with that obtained under (c)<br />

optimised DPCSV parameters.<br />

3.80 Ip of 0.10 µM aflatoxins obtained using two 167<br />

different stripping voltammetric techniques under<br />

their optimum paramter conditions in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.81 Voltammograms of (i) AFB1, (ii) AFB2, (iii) AFG1 168<br />

and (iV) AFG2 obtained by (b) DPCSV compared<br />

with that obtained by (c) SWSV in (a) BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

3.82 SWSV voltammograms for different concentrations 169<br />

of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0. The broken line<br />

xxiv


epresents the blank: (a) 0.01 µM, (b) 0.025 µM,<br />

(c) 0.05 µM, (d) 0.075 µM, (e) 0.10 µM, (f) 0.125<br />

µM and (g) 0.150 µM. Parameter conditions:<br />

Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 100 s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V, pulse<br />

amplitude = 75 mV and scan rate = 3750 mV/s.<br />

3.83 Calibration curve for AFB1 obtained by SWSV 170<br />

method.<br />

3.84 Calibration curve for AFB2 obtained by SWSV 170<br />

method.<br />

3.85 Calibration curve for AFG1 obtained by SWSV 170<br />

method.<br />

3.86 Calibration curve for AFG2 obtained by SWSV 171<br />

method.<br />

3.87 LOD for determination of aflatoxins obtained by 171<br />

two different stripping methods.<br />

3.88 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in 176<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%) at preparation date.<br />

3.89 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in 176<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%) after 6 months of<br />

storage time.<br />

3.90 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in 177<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%) after 12 months of<br />

storage time.<br />

3.91 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm AFB1 (a) kept in 178<br />

the cool and dark conditions and (b) exposed to<br />

ambient conditions for 3 days.<br />

3.92 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB1 in BRB 178<br />

solution prepared from (a) good and (b) damaged<br />

10 ppm AFB1 stock solution.<br />

3.93 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB1 in BRB 179<br />

solution prepared from (a) good and (b) damaged<br />

10 ppm AFB1 stock solution after 2 week stored in<br />

the cool and dark conditions.<br />

xxv


3.94 Percentage of Ip of 0.10 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH 180<br />

9.0 at different storage time in the cool and dark<br />

conditions.<br />

3.95 Percentage of Ip of all aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 181<br />

exposed to ambient conditions up to 8 hours of<br />

exposure time.<br />

3.96 Reaction of 8,9 double bond furan rings in AFB1 182<br />

with TFA, iodine and bromine under special<br />

conditions (Kok, et al., 1986).<br />

3.97 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB1 obtained in (a) 183<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 which were prepared from (b)<br />

damaged and (c) fresh stock solutions.<br />

3.98 Ip of 0.10 µM AFB1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 184<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.99 Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 184<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.100 Ip of 0.10 µM AFG1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 185<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.101 Ip of 0.10 µM AFG2 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 185<br />

from 0 to 8 hours in (a) light exposed and (b)<br />

light protected.<br />

3.102 Peak heights of 0.10 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH 187<br />

(a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c) 9.0 and (d) 11.0 exposed to<br />

ambient conditions up to 3 hours of exposure time.<br />

3.103 Resonance forms of the phenolate ion 187<br />

(Heathcote, 1984).<br />

3.104 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 188<br />

6.0 from 0 to 3 hrs exposure time.<br />

3.105 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 188<br />

11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

xxvi


3.106 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 189<br />

6.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

3.107 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 189<br />

11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

3.108 Absorbance of 1.0 ppm aflatoxins in BRB at pH 190<br />

(a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c) 9.0 and (d) 11.0 from 0 to 3<br />

hours of exposure time.<br />

3.109 The peak heights of aflatoxins in 1.0 M HCl from 191<br />

0 to 6 hours of reaction time.<br />

3.110 The peak heights of aflatoxins in 1.0 M NaOH from 192<br />

0 to 6 hours of reaction time.<br />

3.111 Voltammograms of real samples after extraction by 193<br />

Technique (a) 1, (b) 2 and (c) 3 with addition of<br />

AFB1 standard solution in BRB at pH 9.0 as a<br />

blank.<br />

3.112 Voltammograms of blank in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained 194<br />

by (a) DPCSV and (b) SWSV methods.<br />

3.113 DPCSV (a) and SWSV (b) voltammograms of 10 195<br />

ppb AFB2 (i) in present of blank sample (ii) obtained<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0 (iii) as the supporting electrolyte.<br />

3.114 DPCSV voltammograms of real samples (b) added 197<br />

with 3 ppb (i), 9 ppb (ii) and 15 ppb (iii) AFB1<br />

obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank on the<br />

first day measurement.<br />

3.115 Percentage of recoveries of (a) 3 ppb, (b) 9 ppb, 198<br />

(c) 15 ppb of all aflatoxins in real samples<br />

obtained by DPCSV methods for one to three<br />

days of measurements.<br />

3.116 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S11 (b) 199<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxvii


3.117 SWSV voltammograms of real sample, S11 (b) 200<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

3.118 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S07 (b) 200<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.119 SWSV voltammograms of real sample, S07 (b) 201<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

3.120 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S10 (b) 201<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

3.121 SWSV voltammograms of real sample, S10 (b) 202<br />

with the addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions: Eacc =<br />

-0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

xxviii


ABBREVIATIONS<br />

AAS Atomic absorption spectrometry<br />

Abs Absorbance<br />

ACP Alternate current polarography<br />

ACV Alternate current voltammetry<br />

AD Amperometric detector<br />

AdCSV Adsorptive cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

AE Auxiliary electrode<br />

AFB1 Aflatoxin B1<br />

AFB2 Aflatoxin B2<br />

AFG1 Aflatoxin G1<br />

AFG2 Aflatoxin G2<br />

AFM1 Aflatoxin M1<br />

AFM2 Aflatoxin M2<br />

AFP1 Aflatoxin P1<br />

AFQ1 Aflatoxin Q1<br />

Ag/AgCl Silver/silver chloride<br />

ASV Anodic stripping voltammetry<br />

β-CD β-cyclodextrin<br />

BFE Bismuth film electrode<br />

BLMs Bilayer lipid membranes<br />

BRB Britton Robinson Buffer<br />

CA Concentration of analyte<br />

CE Capillary electrophoresis<br />

CGME Controlled growth mercury electrode<br />

CME Chemically modified electrode<br />

CPE Carbon paste electrode<br />

CSV Cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

CV Cyclic voltammetry<br />

xxix


DC Direct current<br />

DCP Direct current polarography<br />

DME Dropping mercury electrode<br />

DMSO Dimethyl sulphonic acid<br />

DNA Deoxyribonucliec acid<br />

DPCSV Differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

DPP Differential pulse polarography<br />

DPV Differential pulse voltammetry<br />

Eacc Accumulation potential<br />

Ei Initial potential<br />

Ef Final potential<br />

Ehigh High potential<br />

Elow Low potential<br />

Ep Peak potential<br />

ECS Electrochemical sensing<br />

Et4NH4 OH Tetraethyl ammonium hydroxide<br />

ELISA Enzyme linked immunosorbant assay<br />

FD Fluorescence detector<br />

FDA Food and Drug Administration<br />

GCE Glassy carbon electrode<br />

GC-FID Gas chromatography with flame ionisation detector<br />

HMDE Hanging mercury drop electrode<br />

HPLC High performance liquid chromatography<br />

HPTLC High pressure thin liquid chromatography<br />

IAC Immunoaffinity chromatography<br />

IACLC Immunoaffinity column liquid chromatography<br />

IAFB Immunoaffinity fluorometer biosensor<br />

IARC International Agency for Research Cancer<br />

Ic Charging current<br />

Id Diffusion current<br />

If Faradaic current<br />

xxx


Ip Peak height<br />

ICP-MS Induced coupled plasma-mass spectrometer<br />

IR Infra red<br />

IUPAC International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry<br />

KGy Kilogray<br />

LD50 Lethal dose 50<br />

LOD Limit of detection<br />

LOQ Limit of quantification<br />

LSV Linear sweep voltammetry<br />

MFE Mercury film electrode<br />

MS Mass spectrometer<br />

MECC Micellar electrokinetic capillary chromatography<br />

MOPS 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulphonic<br />

MOSTI Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation<br />

NP Normal polarography<br />

NPP Normal pulse polarography<br />

NPV Normal pulse voltammetry<br />

OPLC Over pressured liquid chromatography<br />

PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon<br />

PLL Poly-L-lysine<br />

ppb part per billion<br />

ppm part per million<br />

PSA Potentiometric stripping analysis<br />

RDX Hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-1,3,5-triazine<br />

RE Reference electrode<br />

RIA Radioimmunoassay<br />

RNA Ribonucleic acid<br />

RSD Relative standard deviation<br />

S/N Signal to noise ratio<br />

SCE Standard calomel electrode<br />

SCV Stair case voltammetry<br />

xxxi


SDS Sodium dodecyl sulphate<br />

SHE Standard hydrogen electrode<br />

SIIA Sequential injection immunoassay<br />

SMDE Static mercury drop electrode<br />

SPE Solid phase extraction<br />

SPCE Screen printed carbon electrode<br />

SWP Square-wave polarography<br />

SWV Square-wave voltammetry<br />

SWSV Square-wave stripping voltammetry<br />

SV Stripping voltammetry<br />

tacc Accumulation time<br />

TBS Tris buffered saline<br />

TEA Triethylammonium<br />

TLC Thin layer chromatography<br />

TFA Trifluoroacetic acid<br />

UME Ultra microelectrode<br />

ν Scan rate<br />

v/v Volume per volume<br />

UVD Ultraviolet-Visible detector<br />

UV-VIS Ultraviolet-Visible<br />

WE Working electrode<br />

WHO World Health Organisation<br />

λmax Maximum wavelenght<br />

εmax Maximum molar absorptivity<br />

xxxii


LIST OF APPENDICES<br />

xxxiii<br />

APPENDIX TITLE PAGE<br />

A Relative fluorescence of aflatoxins in different 255<br />

solvent s<br />

B UV spectra of the principal aflatoxins (in methanol) 256<br />

C Relative intensities of principal bands in the IR 257<br />

spectra of the aflatoxins<br />

D Calculation of concentration of aflatoxin stock 258<br />

solution<br />

E Extraction procedure for aflatoxins in real samples 259<br />

F Calculation of individual aflatoxin in groundnut 260<br />

samples.<br />

G Cyclic voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2 and AFG2 262<br />

with increasing of their concentrations.<br />

H Dependence if the peak heights of AFB1, AFG1 264<br />

and AFG2 on their concentrations.<br />

I Repetitive cyclic voltammograms and their peak 266<br />

heights of AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

J Plot Ep – log scan rate for the reduction of AFB1, 270<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

K Plot of peak height versus scan rate for 1.3 µM of 272<br />

AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

L Voltammograms of AFB2 with increasing 274<br />

concentration.<br />

M Voltammograms of 0.1 µM and 0.2 µM AFB2 275<br />

obtained on the same day measurements<br />

N Voltammograms of AFB2 at inter-day 276<br />

measurements


O F test for robustness and ruggedness tests 278<br />

P Voltammograms of AFB1 with increasing 280<br />

concentration<br />

Q Voltammograms of AFG1 with increasing 281<br />

concentration<br />

R Voltammograms of AFG2 with increasing 282<br />

concentration<br />

S LOD determination according to Barek et al. (2001a) 283<br />

T LOD determination according to Barek et al. (1999) 286<br />

U LOD determination according to Zhang et al. (1996) 287<br />

V LOD determination according to Miller and 288<br />

Miller (1993)<br />

W ANOVA test 290<br />

X Peak height of aflatoxins in presence and absence of PLL 292<br />

Y SWSV voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 293<br />

and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Z SWSV voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB1, AFB2, 295<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

AA UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 297<br />

and AFG2 stock solutions<br />

AB Voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 299<br />

obtained from 0 to 6 months of storage time in the<br />

cool and dark conditions.<br />

AC Voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and 302<br />

AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0 from 0 to 8 hours of<br />

exposure time.<br />

AD UV-VIS spectrums of AFB2 in BRB at pH 6.0 305<br />

and 11.0.<br />

xxxiv


AE Voltammograms of AFB1 and AFG1 in 1.0 M HCl 307<br />

and 1.0 M NaOH<br />

AF DPCSV voltammograms of real samples added with 309<br />

various concentrations of AFG1<br />

AG SWSV voltammograms of real samples added with 310<br />

various concentrations of AFB1.<br />

AH Percentage of recoveries of various concentrations 311<br />

of all aflatoxins (3.0 and 9.0 ppb) in real samples<br />

obtained by SWSV method.<br />

AI Calculation of percentage of recovery for 3.0 ppb 312<br />

AFG1 added into real samples.<br />

AJ HPLC chromatograms of real samples: S10 and S07 313<br />

AK Calculation of aflatoxin in real sample, S13 314<br />

AL List of papers presented or published to date 315<br />

resulting from this study.<br />

AM ICP-MS results for analysis of BRB at pH 9.0 317<br />

xxxv


1.1 Overview<br />

CHAPTER I<br />

LITERATURE REVIEW<br />

Humans are continuously exposed to varying amounts of chemicals that have<br />

been shown to have carcinogenic or mutagenic properties in environmental systems.<br />

Exposure can occur exogenously when these agents are present in food, air or water,<br />

and also endogenously when they are products of metabolism or pathophysiologic<br />

states such as inflammation. Great attention is focused on environmental health in the<br />

past two decades as a consequence of the increasing awareness over the quality of life<br />

due to major environment pollutants that affect it. Studies have shown that exposure to<br />

environmental chemical carcinogens have contributed significantly to cause human<br />

cancers, when exposures are related to life style factors such as diet (Wogan et al.,<br />

2004).<br />

The contamination of food is part of the global problem of environmental<br />

pollution. Foodstuffs have been found contaminated with substances having<br />

carcinogenic, mutagenic, teratogenic and allergenic properties. As these substances can<br />

be supplied with food throughout the entire life-time of a person, it is necessary to deal<br />

with the chronic action of trace amounts of such substances. Hence the systematic<br />

determination of the foreign substances in nutritional products and feedstock plays an<br />

important role. The determination of trace impurities presents considerable difficulties<br />

owing to the fact that food is a complex system containing thousands of major and<br />

minor compounds (Nilufer and Boyacio, 2002). Increasing environment pollution by<br />

toxic substances such as toxic metals, organometallic and organic pollutants in air,


water, soil and food, calls for reliable analytical procedures for their control in<br />

environmental samples which needs reliable and sensitive methods (Fifield and Haines,<br />

2000). The choice of the method of analysis depends on the sample, the analyte to be<br />

assayed, accuracy, limit of detection, cost and time to complete the analysis (Aboul-<br />

Eneim et a., 2000). For development of this method, emphasis should be on<br />

development of simplified, cost-effective and efficient method that complies with the<br />

legislative requirements (Stroka and Anklam, 2002; Enker, 2003).<br />

The widespread occurrence of aflatoxins producing fungi in our environment<br />

and the reported naturally occurring of toxin in a number of agricultural commodities<br />

has led the investigator to develop a new method for aflatoxin analysis (Creepy, 2002).<br />

An accurate and sensitive method of analysis is therefore required for the determination<br />

of these compounds in foodstuffs that have sustained mould growth.<br />

Numerous articles concerning methods for determination of aflatoxins have<br />

been published. However, with regard to electroanalytical technique, only one method<br />

of determination was reported using the differential pulse pulse polarographic (DPP)<br />

technique which was developed by Smyth et al. (1979). In this experiment, the<br />

obtained limit of detection of aflatoxin B1 was 25 ppb which was higher as compared<br />

to the common amount of aflatoxin in contaminated food samples which is 10 ppb as<br />

reported by Pare (1997) or even less. In <strong>Malaysia</strong>, the regulatory limit for total<br />

aflatoxins in groundnut is 15 ppb. The regulatory for other foods and milk is 10 ppb<br />

and 0.05 ppb respectively (<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act, 1983).<br />

1.2 AFLATOXINS<br />

1.2.1 Aflatoxins in General<br />

Aflatoxins are a group of heterocyclic, oxygen-containing mycotoxins that<br />

possess the bisdifuran ring system. It was discovered some 43 years ago in England<br />

2


following a poisoning outbreak causing 100,000 turkeys death (Miller, 1987 and<br />

Cespedez and Diaz, 1997). The aflatoxins are the most widely distributed fungal toxins<br />

in food. The occurrence of the aflatoxins in food products demonstrated that the high<br />

levels of aflatoxins are significant concern both for food traders and food consumers<br />

(Tozzi et al. 2003; Herrman, 2004; Haberneh, 2004). Aflatoxin is a by-product of mold<br />

growth in a wide range of agriculture commodities such as peanuts (Urano et al., 1993),<br />

maize and maize based food (Papp et al., 2002; Mendez-Albores et al., 2004),<br />

cottonseeds (Pons and Franz, 1977), cocoa (Jefferey et al., 1982), coffee beans (Batista<br />

et al., 2003), medical herbs ( Reif and Metzger, 1998; Rizzo et al., 2004), spices<br />

(Erdogen, 2004; Garner et al., 1993; Akiyama et al., 2001; Aziz et al., 1998), melon<br />

seeds (Bankole et al., 2004) and also in human food such as rice (Shotwell et al., 1966;<br />

Begum and Samajpati, 2000), groundnut (Bankole et al., 2005), peanut products (<br />

Patey et al., 1990), corn ( Shotwell and Goulden, 1977; Urano et al., 1993 ), vegetable<br />

oil (Miller et al., 1985), beer (Scott and Lawrence, 1997), dried fruits ( Abdul Kadar et<br />

al., 2004, Arrus et al. (2004), milk and dairy products (Kamkar, 2004; Aycicek et al.<br />

2005; Sarimehmetoglu et al., 2004; Martin and Martin, 2004 ). Meat and meat<br />

products are also contaminated with alfatoxins when farm animals are fed with<br />

aflatoxin contaminated feed (Miller, 1987 and Chiavaro et al., 2001).<br />

The molds that are major producers of aflatoxin are Aspergillus flavus<br />

(Bankole et al. 2004) and Aspergillus parasiticus (Begum and Samajpati, 2000;<br />

Setamou et al., 1997; Erdogen, 2004; Gourama and Bullerman, 1995). Aspergillus<br />

flavus, which is ubiquitous, produces B aflatoxins (Samajphati, 1979) while Aspergillus<br />

parasiticus, which produces both B and G aflatoxins, has more limited distribution<br />

(Garcia-Villanova et al., 2004). A picture of Aspergillus flavus seen under an electron<br />

microscope is shown in Figure 1.0.<br />

Black olive is one of the substrate for Aspergillus parasiticus growth and<br />

aflatoxin B1 production as reported by Leontopoulos et al., (2003). Biosynthesis of<br />

aflatoxins by this fungi depends on the environmental condition such as temperature<br />

and humidity during crop growth and storage (Leszczynska et al., 2000; Tarin et al.,<br />

3


2004 and Pildain et al., 2004). The optimum temperatures for aflatoxins growth are<br />

27.84 0 C and 27.30 0 C at pH=5.9 and 5.5 respectively.<br />

Figure 1.0: Aspergillus flavus seen under an electron microscope<br />

Before harvest, the risk for the development of aflatoxins is greatest during<br />

major drought (Turner et al., 2005). When soil moisture is below normal and<br />

temperature is high, the number of Aspergillus spores in the air increases. These spores<br />

infect crops through areas of damage caused by insects and inclement weather. Once<br />

infected, plant stress occurs, which favor the production of aflatoxins. Fungal growth<br />

and aflatoxins contamination are the sequence of interactions among the fungus, the<br />

host and the environment. The appropriate combination of water stress, high<br />

temperature stress and insect damage of the host plant are major determining factors in<br />

mold infestation and toxin production (Faraj et al., 1991; Koehler, 1985; Park and<br />

Bullerman, 1983). Additional factors such as heat treatment, modified-atmosphere<br />

packaging or the presence of preservative, also contribute in increasing growth rate of<br />

the aflatoxins.<br />

Farmers have minimal control over some of these environmental factors.<br />

However appropriate pre-harvest and post-harvest management and good agricultural<br />

practice, including crop rotation, irrigation, timed planting and harvesting and the use<br />

4


of pesticides are the best methods for preventing or controlling aflatoxins<br />

contamination (Turner et al., 2005). Timely harvesting could reduce crop moisture to a<br />

point where the formation of the mould would not occur. For example harvesting corn<br />

early when moisture is above 20 percent and then quickly drying it to a moisture level<br />

of at least 15 percent will keep the Aspergillus flavus from completing its life cycle,<br />

resulting in lower aflatoxin concentration. Aflatoxins are to be found in agricultural<br />

products as a consequence of unprosperous storage conditions where humidity of 70 -<br />

90 % and a minimum temperature of about 10° C. Commodities that have been dried<br />

to about 12 to 0.5 % moisture are generally considered stable, and immune to any risk<br />

of additional aflatoxins development. Moreover, the minimum damage of shells during<br />

mechanized harvesting of crop reduces significantly the mould contamination.<br />

Biocontrol of aflatoxin contamination is another way to reduce this contamination. The<br />

natural ability of many microorganisms including bacteria, actinomycetes, yeasts,<br />

moulds and algae has been a source for bacteriological breakdown of mycotoxins. The<br />

most active organism such as Flavobacterium aurantiacum which in aqueous solution<br />

can take up and metabolise aflatoxins B1, G1 and M1 (Smith and Moss, 1985).<br />

Production of aflatoxins is greatly inhibited by propionic acid as revealed by<br />

Molina and Gianuzzi (2002) when they studied the production of aflatoxins in solid<br />

medium at different temperature, pH and concentration of propionic acid. It also can be<br />

inhibited by essential oil extracted from thyme as found by Rasooli and Abnayeh<br />

(2004). Other chemicals that can inhibit the growth of this fungus are ammonia, copper<br />

sulphate and acid benzoic (Gowda et al., 2004).<br />

1.2.2 Chemistry of Aflatoxins<br />

Aflatoxins can be classified into two broad groups according to chemical<br />

structure which are difurocoumarocyclopentenone series and ifurocoumarolactone<br />

(Heathcote, 1984). They are highly substituted coumarin derivatives that contain a<br />

fused dihydrofuran moiety. The chemical structure of coumarin is shown in Figure 1.1.<br />

5


Figure 1.1 Chemical structure of coumarin<br />

O<br />

There are six major compounds of aflatoxin such as aflatoxin B1 (AFB1),<br />

aflatoxin B2 (AFB2), aflatoxin G1 (AFG2), aflatoxin G2 (AFG2), aflatoxin M1<br />

(AFM1) and aflatoxin M2 (AFM2) (Goldblatt, 1969). The former four are naturally<br />

found aflatoxins and the AFM1 and AFM2 are produced by biological metabolism of<br />

AFB1 and AFB2 from contaminated feed used by animals. They are odorless, tasteless<br />

and colorless. The scientific name for these aflatoxin compounds are listed in Table 1.0.<br />

Aflatoxins have closely similar structures and form a unique group of highly<br />

oxygenated, naturally occurring heterocyclic compounds. The chemical structures of<br />

these aflatoxins are shown in Figure 1.2. The G series of aflatoxin differs chemically<br />

from B series by the presence of a β-lactone ring, instead of a cyclopentanone ring.<br />

Also a double bond that may undergo reduction reaction is found in the form of vinyl<br />

ether at the terminal furan ring in AFB1 and AFG1 but not in AFB2 and AFG2.<br />

However this small difference in structure at the C-2 and C-3 double bond is associated<br />

with a very significant change in activity, whereby AFB1 and AFG1 are carcinogenic<br />

and considerably more toxic than AFB2 and AFG2. The dihydrofuran moiety in the<br />

structure is said to be of primary importance in producing biological effects.<br />

Hydroxylation of the bridge carbon of the furan rings for AFM1 does not significantly<br />

alter the effects of the compounds. The absolute configuration of AFB2 and AFG2<br />

follows from the fact that it is derived from the reduction of AFB1 and AFG1<br />

respectively.<br />

AFB is the aflatoxin which produces a blue color under ultraviolet while AFG<br />

produces the green color. AFM produces a blue-violet fluorescence while AFM2<br />

produces a violet fluorescence (Goldblatt, 1969). Relative fluorescence of aflatoxins in<br />

several organic solvents are shown in Appendix A (White and Afgauer, 1970). The<br />

O<br />

6


Table 1.0 Scientific name for aflatoxin compounds<br />

Aflatoxin B1<br />

(AFB1)<br />

Aflatoxin B2<br />

(AFB2)<br />

Aflatoxin G1<br />

(AFG1)<br />

Aflatoxin G2<br />

(AFG2)<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

M1<br />

(AFM1)<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

M2<br />

2,3,6a,9a-tetrahydro-4-methoxycyclopenta[c]<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione<br />

2,3,6a,8,9,9a-Hexahydro-4-methoxycyclopenta[c]<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione<br />

3,4, 7a,10a-tetrahydro-5-methoxy-1H, 12H<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h]pyrano[3,4-c]l]- benzopyran-<br />

1,12-dione<br />

3,4,7a,8,9,10, 10a-Hexahydro-5-methoxy-1H,12H-<br />

furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h]pyrano[3,4-c][l]- benzopyran-<br />

1,12-dione<br />

4-Hydroxy AFB1<br />

4-Hydroxy AFB2<br />

natural fluorescence of aflatoxins arises from their oxygenated pentaheterocyclic<br />

structure. The fluorescence capacity of AFB2 and AFG2 is ten times larger than that of<br />

AFB1 and AFG1, probably owing to the structural difference, namely double bond on<br />

the furanic ring. Such a double bond seems to be very important for the photophysical<br />

7


O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

(a) (b)<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

(c) (d)<br />

(e) (f)<br />

Figure 1.2 Chemical structures of (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, (c) AFG1, (d) AFG2,<br />

(e) AFM1 and (f) AFM2.<br />

properties of these derivatives measured just after spectroscopic studies (Cepeda et al.,<br />

1996). The excitation of the natural fluorescence of AFB1 and AFG1 can be promoted<br />

O<br />

8


in many different ways such as post-column iodination (Tuinstra and Haasnoot, 1983;<br />

Davis and Diener, 1980), post-column bromination (Kok et al.,1986; Kok, 1994 ;<br />

Versantroort et al., 2005 ), use of cyclodextrin compound (Cepeda et al., 1996;<br />

Chiavaro et al., 2001; Franco et al., 1998) and trifluoroacetic acid, TFA (Stack and<br />

Pohland, 1975; Takahashi, 1977a; Haghighi et al., 1981; Nieduetzki et al., 1994 ).<br />

AFB1 and AFG1 form hemiacetals, AFB2a and AFG2a when reacted with<br />

acidic solution such as triflouroacetic acid (TFA) as represented in Figure 1.3 (Joshua,<br />

1993). The hydroxyaflatoxins are unstable and tend to decompose to yellow products<br />

in the presence of air, light and alkali. Their UV and visible spectra are similar to those<br />

of the major aflatoxins.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

TFA<br />

TFA<br />

HO<br />

(a) (c)<br />

HO<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

(b) (d)<br />

Figure 1.3 Hydration of AFB1 (a) and AFG1 (b) by TFA produces AFB2a (c) and<br />

AFG2a (d) (Joshua, 1993).<br />

The close relationship between AFB1, AFG1, AFB2a and AFG2a was shown by the<br />

similarities in their IR and UV spectra. The main difference between AFB2a and<br />

AFG2a with AFB1 and AFG1 are found in the IR spectra, where an additional band at<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

9


3620 cm -1 indicates the presence of a hydroxyl group in AFB2a and AFG2a. The<br />

absence of bands at 3100, 1067 and 722 cm -1 (which arise in AFB1 and AFG1 from the<br />

vinyl ether group) indicates that the compounds are hydroxyl derivatives of AFB2 and<br />

AFG2. Some chemical and physical properties of aflatoxin compounds are listed in<br />

Table 1.1 (Heathcote and Hibbert, 1978; Weast and Astle, 1987). The close<br />

relationship between these aflatoxins was shown by the similarities in their UV and IR<br />

spectra as shown in Appendix B and C respectively.<br />

Table 1.1 Chemical and physical properties of aflatoxin compounds<br />

Molecular<br />

formula<br />

Molecular weight<br />

Crystals<br />

Melting point<br />

( ° C )<br />

Fluorescence<br />

under UV light<br />

Solubility<br />

Other properties<br />

AFB1<br />

C17H12O6<br />

312<br />

Pale yellow<br />

268.9<br />

Blue<br />

AFB2<br />

C17H14O6<br />

314<br />

Pale yellow<br />

286.9<br />

Blue<br />

AFG1<br />

C17H12O7<br />

328<br />

Colorless<br />

244.6<br />

Green<br />

AFG2<br />

C17H14O7<br />

330<br />

Colorless<br />

237.40<br />

Green<br />

Soluble in water and polar organic solvent. Normal solvents<br />

are: methanol, water: acetonitrile (9:1), trifluoroacetic acid,<br />

methanol: 0.1N HCl (4:1), DMSO and acetone<br />

Odorless, colorless and tasteless in solution form.<br />

Incompatible with strong acids, strong oxidising agents and<br />

strong bases. Soluble in water, DMSO, 95% acetone or<br />

ethanol for 24 hours under ambient temperature<br />

10


Many researches have studied the stability of aflatoxins. For example, AFB1<br />

was not found in fruit samples after being irradiated with 5.0 Kgy or more of gammairradiation<br />

as reported by Aziz and Moussa (2002). Gonzalez et al. (1998) have studied<br />

the effect of electrolysis, ultra-violet irradiation and temperature on the decomposition<br />

of AFB1 and AFG1. UV irradiation caused an intense effect on aflatoxins where after<br />

60 min of radiation, AFG1 suffers practically with no more decomposition. However,<br />

when the aflatoxin solutions were placed in a 90° C bath for 3 min, a decrease of 20%<br />

from total amount of both AFB1 and AFG1 was obtained. A greater extent of<br />

decomposition (50%) was found for treatment at 100° C during longer time. Levi<br />

(1980) reported that experimental roasting under conditions simulating those of the<br />

typical roasting operation (20 min at 200 ± 5° C) destroyed about 80% of AFB1 added<br />

to green coffee. It was also found that AFB2 decomposed to a larger extent than AFG1<br />

indicating a lower stability against prolonged heat treatment. During food<br />

fermentation which involved other fungi such as Rhizopus oryzae and R. oligosporus,<br />

cyclopentanone moiety of AFB1 was reduced resulting in the formation of aflatoxicol<br />

A as shown in Figure 1.4 which is non-toxic compound. It retains the blue-fluorescing<br />

property of AFB1 under UV light. It has been considered to be one of the most<br />

important B1 metabolites because there is a correlation between the presence of this<br />

metabolite in animal tissues and body fluids with toxicity of AFB1 in different animals<br />

(Lau and Chu, 1983). Aflatoxin solution prepared in water, dimethyl sulphonic acid<br />

(DMSO), 95% acetone or ethanol is stable for 24 hours under ambient conditions.<br />

AFM1 is relatively stable during pesteuring, sterilisation, preparation and storage of<br />

various dairy products (Gurbay et al., 2004).<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

+ R.oryzae<br />

+ R. oligosporus<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 1.4 Transformation of toxic (a) AFB1 to non-toxic (b) aflatoxicol A<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

11<br />

OCH3


1.2.3 Health Aspect of Aflatoxins<br />

Aflatoxins have received greater attention than any other mycotoxins. There are<br />

potent toxin and were considered as human carcinogen by The International Agency for<br />

Research on Cancer (IARC) as reported in World Health Organisation (WHO)’s<br />

monograph (1987). These mycotoxins are known to cause diseases in man and animals<br />

called aflatoxicosis (Eaton and Groopman, 1994). Human exposure to aflatoxins is<br />

principally through ingestion of contaminated foods (Versantroort et al., 2005).<br />

Inhalation of the toxins may also occur occasionally due to the occupational exposure.<br />

After intake of contaminated feedstuffs aflatoxins cause some undesirable effect in<br />

animals, which can range from vomiting, weight loss and acute necrosis to various<br />

types of carcinoma, leading in many cases to death (Pestka and Bondy, 1990 and<br />

Bingham et al., 2004). Even at low concentration, aflatoxins diminish the immune<br />

function of animals against infection. Epidemiological studies have shown a<br />

correlation between liver cancer and the prevalence of aflatoxins in the food supply.<br />

In views of occurrence and toxicity, AFB1 is extremely carcinogenic while<br />

others are considered as highly carcinogenic as reported by Carlson (2000). It is<br />

immunosuppressive and a potent liver toxin; less than 20 µg of this compound is lethal<br />

to duckling (Hussein and Brasel, 2001). AFB1 is biochemically binding to DNA,<br />

inhibit DNA, RNA, and protein syntheses, and effects DNA polymerase activity as<br />

reported by Egner et al. (2003). Previous research results have demonstrated the<br />

covalent binding of highly reactive metabolite of AFB1 to the N-7 atom of guanine<br />

residues, resulting in major DNA adducts (Moule, 1984; Johnson et al., 1997; Egner et<br />

al., 2003). Major DNA adducts of AFB1 are shown in Figure 1.5.<br />

The four main aflatoxins display decreasing potency in the order AFB1 > AFG1<br />

> AFB2 > AFG2 as reported by Betina (1984). This order of toxicity indicates that the<br />

double bond in terminal furan of AFB1 structure is a critical point for determining the<br />

degree of biological activity of this group of mycotoxins (Hall and Wild, 1994). It<br />

appears that the aflatoxins themselves are not carcinogenic but rather some of their<br />

12


NH 2<br />

NH<br />

O<br />

N<br />

OH<br />

N<br />

N<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

OCH 3<br />

NH 2<br />

NH<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

N<br />

N NH 2<br />

CHO<br />

(a) (b)<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

Figure 1.5 Major DNA adducts of AFB1; (a) 8,9- Dihydro-8-(N 7 -guanyl)-<br />

9-hydroxy-aflatoxin B1 (AFB1-Gua) and (b) 8,9-Dihydro-8-(N 5 - Formyl-2 ’ .5 ’ .6 ’ -<br />

triamino-4 ’ -oxo-N 5 -pyrimidyl)-9-hydroxy- Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1-triamino-Py)<br />

metabolites (de Vries, 1996). For example, metabolite transformation of AFB1 by<br />

cytochrome P-450 enzyme produces aflatoxin Q1 (AFQ1), AFM1, AFB1-epoxide and<br />

aflatoxin P1 (AFP1) as shown in Figure 1.6. For hamiacetals, AFB2a and AFG2a,<br />

however, are relatively non-toxic despite the close similarity of their structure to those<br />

of AFB1 and AFG1 even at the highest dosages (1200 µg for AFB2a and 1600 µg for<br />

AFG2a).<br />

AFM1 is the main metabolic derivatives of aflatoxins in several animal species<br />

It is found in the cow milk due which had consumed feed which contaminated with<br />

AFB1 as reported by Chang et al. (1983), Yousef and Marth (1985), Van Egmond<br />

(1989), Tuinstra (1990) and Lopez et al. (2002). The relative amount of AFM1<br />

excreted is related to the amount of AFB1 in the feed, and about 0.1% of AFB1<br />

ingested is excreted into milk as AFM1 (Miller, 1987). There was a linear relationship<br />

between the amount of AFM1 in milk and AFB1 in feeds consumed by animals as<br />

reported by Dragacci (1995). AFM1 is produced by hydroxylation of AFB1 in the liver<br />

OCH 3<br />

13


O<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

B 1-epoxide<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Aflatoxin B 1<br />

M 1 P 1<br />

O<br />

Figure 1.6 Metabolic pathways of AFB1 by cytochrom P-450 enzymes; B1-<br />

epoxide = AFB1 epoxide, M1 = aflatoxin M1, P1 = aflatoxin P1 and Q1 = aflatoxin<br />

Q1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Q I<br />

O<br />

14<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

OH


of lactating animals, including humans. It is also known as milk toxin which is much<br />

less carcinogenic and mutagenic than AFB1. It has been classified by the International<br />

Agency For Research Cancer (IARC) as a Group 2 carcinogen (IARC, 1993). It can<br />

generally be found in milk and milk products such as dry milk, whey, butter, cheese,<br />

yogurt and ice cream. AFM2 is the analogous metabolic derivatives of AFB2.<br />

Aflatoxins have been considered as one of the most dangerous contaminant in<br />

food and feed. The contaminated food will pose a potential health risk to human such as<br />

aflatoxicosis and cancer (Jeffrey and Williams, 2005). Aflatoxins consumption by<br />

livestock and poultry results in a disease called aflatoxicosis which clinical sign for<br />

animals include gastro intestinal dysfunction, reduced reproductivity, reduced feed<br />

utilisation, anemia and jaundice. Humans are exposed to aflatoxins by ingestion,<br />

inhalation and dermal exposure as reported by Etzel (2002). LD50 which is the amount<br />

of a materials, given all at once, causes the death of 50% (one half) of a group of test<br />

animal (www.aacohs.ca/oshanswers) for most animal and human for AFB1 is between<br />

0.5 to 10.0 mg kg -1 body weight (Smith and Moss, 1985; Salleh, 1998). Clinical<br />

features were characterised by jaundice, vomiting, and anorexia and followed by<br />

ascites, which appeared rapidly within a period of 2-3 weeks.<br />

Besides causing health problems to humans, aflatoxin also can cause adverse<br />

economic effect in which it lowers yield of food production and fiber crops and<br />

becoming a major constraint of profitability for food crop producer countries, an<br />

example of which is given in Rachaputi et al. (2001). It has been estimated that<br />

mycotoxin contamination may affect as much as 25% of the world’s food crop each<br />

year (Lopez, 1999) resulting in significant economic loss for these countries.<br />

Aflatoxins also inflict losses to livestock and poultry producers from aflatoxincontaminated<br />

feeds including death and the more subtle effects of immune system<br />

suppression, reduced growth rates, and losses in feed efficiency.<br />

Due to the above reason, aflatoxin levels in animal feed and various human food<br />

products is now monitored and tightly regulated by the most countries. In <strong>Malaysia</strong>,<br />

15


the action level for total aflatoxins is 15ppb (<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act, 1983). The<br />

European Commission has set limits for the maximum levels of total aflatoxins and<br />

AFB1 allowed in groundnuts, nuts, dried fruit and their products. For foods ready for<br />

retail sale, these limits are 4 ppb for total aflatoxins and 2 ppb for AFB1, and for foods<br />

that are to be processed further the limits stand at 15 ppb for total aflatoxins and 8 ppb<br />

of AFB1 (European Commission Regulation, 2001). The Food and Drug<br />

Administration (FDA) in USA has established an action level of 0.5 ppb of mycotoxin,<br />

AFM1 in milk for humans and 20 ppb for other aflatoxins in food other than milk<br />

(www.ansci.cornel.edu/toxiagents).<br />

In Brazil, the limits allowed for food destined for human consumption are 20<br />

µg/kg of total aflatoxin for corn in grain, flours, peanut and by-products, and 0.5 µg/l of<br />

AFM1 in fluid milk (Sassahara et al., 2005). Australia has established a minimum level<br />

of 15 ppb for aflatoxin in raw peanut and peanut product (Mackson et al., 1999). In<br />

Germany, regulatory levels of total aflatoxins are 4 ppb and 2 ppb for AFB1. For<br />

human dietary products, such as infant nutriment, there are stronger legal limits, 0.05<br />

ppb for AFB1 and the total aflatoxins (Reif and Metzger, 1995). The Dutch Food Act<br />

regulates that food and beverages may contain no more than 5 µg of AFB1 per kg<br />

(Scholten and Spanjer, 1996).<br />

Regulatory level set by Hong Kong government is 20 ppb for peanuts and<br />

peanut products and 15 ppb for all other foods (Risk Assessment Studies report, 2001).<br />

Because of all these reasons, systematic approaches to sampling, sample preparation<br />

and selecting appropriate and accurate method of analysis of aflatoxin are absolutely<br />

necessary to determine aflatoxins at the part-of-billion (ppb) level as reported by Park<br />

and Rua (1991).<br />

1.2.4 Analytical Methods for the Determination of Aflatoxins<br />

Monitoring the presence of aflatoxin in various samples especially in food is<br />

not only important for consumer protection, but also for producers of raw products<br />

16


prior to cost intensive processing or transport. Several methods for aflatoxins<br />

determination in various samples have been developed and reported in the literature.<br />

Method based on thin-layer chromatography (TLC) (Lafont and Siriwardana, 1981;<br />

AOAC, 1984) and high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with ultraviolet<br />

absorption, fluorescence, mass spectrometry or amperometry detection, have been<br />

reported (Kok et al., 1986; Taguchi et al., 1995; Ali et al., 2005; Manetta et al.,<br />

2005).<br />

TLC and HPLC techniques are well proven and widely accepted; however,<br />

both techniques have their own disadvantages. These methods require well equipped<br />

laboratories, trained personnel, harmful solvents and time consuming. Moreover,<br />

instrumentations used are expensive (Badea et al., 2004). The main disadvantage<br />

associated with TLC is the lack of precision where a possible measurement error of ±<br />

30 – 50 % is indicated when standard and unknown aflatoxins spot are matched, and<br />

± 15 -25 % when the unknown is interpolated between two standards (Takahashi,<br />

1977b). In this technique, the greater effect was caused by sample matrix which is<br />

usually very complicated (Lin et al., 1998). Poor repeatability is associated with the<br />

sample application, development and plate interpretation steps. HPLC technique is<br />

often viewed as laborious and time intensive, needs complex gradient mobile phase,<br />

large quantity of organic solvent, requiring a significant investment in equipments,<br />

materials and maintenance (Pena et al., 2002).<br />

Pre-column derivatisation technique could improve the sensitivity of the<br />

measurement however, it requires chemical manipulations which are time consuming,<br />

involves aggressive reagents such as bromine, TFA and iodine and also it is difficult<br />

to automate. Other disadvantages of this procedure include the requirement to<br />

prepare iodine solution daily, the necessity for two pumps, dilution of the eluent<br />

stream, the need to thermostat the reactor coil and insufficient day-to-day<br />

reproducibility (Kok et al., 1986). The method using TFA as derivatising agent has<br />

poor reproducibility and is difficult to automate (Reif and Metzger, 1995).<br />

17


Other methods such as enzyme linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) (Chu et<br />

al., 1987; Lee et al., 1990; Pesavento et al., 1997 and Aycicek et al., 2005),<br />

radioimmunoassay (RIA) (Stroka et al., 2000) and immunoaffinity clean up (Garner,<br />

1993 and Niedwetzki et al., 1994) have also been developed for the detection of these<br />

compounds. The simplicity, sensitivity and rapid detection of aflatoxin by ELISA<br />

has made it possible to monitor several samples simultaneously but ELISA and other<br />

immunochemical methods require highly specific polyclonal or monoclonal sera for<br />

specific and sensitive detection of antigen. The production of specific antibodies for<br />

aflatoxins has allowed the development of this technique based on direct or indirect<br />

competition. This method, however, presents some drawbacks such as long<br />

incubation time, washing and mixing steps (Badea et al., 2004) and is labor intensive<br />

(Carlson et al., 2000). It also requires highly specific polyclonal or monoclonal sera<br />

which is expensive (Rastogi et al., 2001). Blesa et al. (2003) reported that the ELISA<br />

method is a good screening method for investigation of aflatoxins. RIA is very<br />

sensitive but has several disadvantages. The radioisotopes are health hazards,<br />

disposable difficulties and may have short half life (Trucksess et al., 1991).<br />

Cole et al., (1992) have used micellar electrokinetic capillary chromatography<br />

(MECC) technique for rapid separation of aflatoxins. Pena et al., (2002) proposed<br />

capillary electrophoresis (CE) for determination of aflatoxins. They found that the<br />

limit of detection (LOD) of this technique was 0.02 to 0.06 ppb with analysis time of<br />

50 minutes. Due to long duration time and involving use of many reagents such as<br />

benzene and acetonitrile for preparation of aflatoxin stock solution and sodium<br />

dodecyl sulphate (SDS), sodium dihydrogenphosphate, sodium borate and γcyclodextrin<br />

for preparing the buffer solution in performing the analysis, this<br />

technique may not be suitable for routine analysis of aflatoxins. A summary of<br />

techniques used for the determination of aflatoxins compounds in various samples<br />

together with its detection limit is shown in Table 1.2.<br />

18


Table 1.2 Summary of analysis methods used for the determination of aflatoxins in<br />

various samples<br />

No<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

9<br />

Method<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in spices<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in spices<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in peanut<br />

butter<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in peanut<br />

butter<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in peanut<br />

butter<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

airborne dust<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in corn,<br />

peanuts and peanut butter<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

medicinal herbs and plant<br />

extract<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

airborne dust and human sera<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

0.06<br />

0.5<br />

5.0<br />

0.5<br />

Not stated<br />

B1, G1, G2<br />

= 3.1<br />

B2 = 1.8<br />

Not stated<br />

0.05<br />

0.08<br />

Reference<br />

Garner et al.<br />

1993)<br />

Akiyama et al.<br />

(2001)<br />

Beebe (1978)<br />

Duhart et al.<br />

(1988)<br />

Patey et al.<br />

(1991)<br />

Kussak et al.<br />

(1995a)<br />

Trucksess et al.<br />

(1991)<br />

Reif and<br />

Metzger (1995)<br />

Brera et al.<br />

(2002)<br />

19


No<br />

10<br />

11<br />

12<br />

13<br />

14<br />

15<br />

16<br />

17<br />

18<br />

Method<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

groundnut, peanut and peanut<br />

butter<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

standard samples<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in wine<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in corn,<br />

almonds, peanuts, milo,rice,<br />

pistachio, walnuts, corn and<br />

cottonseed<br />

M1 in milk and non fat dry<br />

milk<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in beer<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in poultry<br />

and pig feeds and feedstuffs<br />

M1 in milk<br />

M1 in whole milk<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

2.0<br />

Not stated<br />

0.02<br />

Not stated<br />

0.014<br />

B1, G1=<br />

0.019,<br />

B2, G2 =<br />

0.015<br />

1.0<br />

0.05<br />

0.014<br />

Reference<br />

Chemistry<br />

Department,<br />

MOSTI (1993)<br />

Holcomb et al.<br />

(2001)<br />

Takahashi<br />

(1977a)<br />

Wilson and<br />

Romer (1991)<br />

Chang and<br />

Lawrence<br />

(1997)<br />

Scot and<br />

Lawrence<br />

(1997)<br />

Cespedes and<br />

Diaz (1997)<br />

Yousef and<br />

Marth (1985)<br />

Fremy and<br />

Chang (2002)<br />

20


No<br />

19<br />

20<br />

21<br />

22<br />

23<br />

24<br />

25<br />

26<br />

27<br />

Method<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

and UVD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

and UVD<br />

HPLC-<br />

UVD<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in pistachio<br />

kernels and shells<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in urine<br />

M1 in milk<br />

M1 in urine and milk<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in sesame<br />

butter and tahini<br />

B1 and ochratoxin A in bee<br />

pollen<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

contaminated cocoa beans<br />

B1 and B2 in wine and fruit<br />

juices<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in corn<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

B1 = 0.8,<br />

B2 = 0.29<br />

G1 = 0.9<br />

G2 = 1.1<br />

0.0068<br />

10<br />

0.0025<br />

Not stated<br />

B1= 0.2<br />

1.0<br />

0.02<br />

B1, G1 =<br />

1.0,<br />

B2, G2 =<br />

0.25<br />

Reference<br />

Chemistry<br />

Department,<br />

MOSTI (1993)<br />

Kussak et al.<br />

(1995b)<br />

Gurbey et al.<br />

(2004)<br />

Simon et al.<br />

(1998)<br />

Nilufer and<br />

Boyacio (2002)<br />

Garcia-<br />

Villanove et al.<br />

(2004)<br />

Jefferey et al.<br />

(1982)<br />

Takahashi<br />

(1997b)<br />

Fremy and<br />

Chang (2002)<br />

21


No<br />

28<br />

29<br />

30<br />

31<br />

32<br />

33<br />

34<br />

35<br />

36<br />

Method<br />

HPLC-<br />

UVD<br />

HPLC-<br />

UVD<br />

HPLC-<br />

UVD<br />

HPLC-<br />

UVD<br />

HPLC-<br />

UVD<br />

HPLC-AD<br />

HPTLC<br />

HPTLC-<br />

SPE<br />

TLC<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1in standard sample<br />

B1and B2 in cottonseed<br />

B1 in egg<br />

B1 and M1 in corn<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in soy<br />

sauces and soybean paste<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

standard sample<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in corn,<br />

buckwheat, peanuts and<br />

cheese<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

palm kernel<br />

B1and M1in artificial<br />

contaminated beef livers<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

Not stated<br />

5.0<br />

1.0<br />

B1 = 3.0 -5.0<br />

M1 = not<br />

stated<br />

1.0<br />

7.0<br />

B1 = 0.2<br />

B2, G1, G2 =<br />

0.1<br />

B1 = 3.7, B2<br />

= 2.5, G1 =<br />

3.0, G2 = 1.3<br />

B1= 0.03,<br />

M1 = 0.1<br />

Reference<br />

Rastogi et al.<br />

(2001)<br />

Pons and Franz<br />

(1977)<br />

Trucksess et al.<br />

(1977)<br />

Stubblefield and<br />

Shotwell (1977)<br />

Wet et al.<br />

(1980)<br />

Gonzalez et al.<br />

(1998)<br />

Kamimura et al.<br />

(1985)<br />

Nawaz et al.<br />

(1992)<br />

Stabblefield et<br />

al. (1982)<br />

22


No<br />

37<br />

38<br />

39<br />

40<br />

41<br />

42<br />

43<br />

44<br />

45<br />

Method<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC<br />

TLC-FDs<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1in milk and milk powder<br />

Total aflatoxin in wheat<br />

and soybean<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

apples, pears, apple juice<br />

and pear jams<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in corn<br />

and peanut meal<br />

M1 in milk and condensed,<br />

evaporated and non-fat<br />

powdered milk<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

ginger root and oleoresin<br />

B1in black olives<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

cereal and nuts<br />

M1in milk<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

0.05<br />

Not stated<br />

B1, G1 = 2.0-<br />

2.8,<br />

B2, G2 = 2.0<br />

Corn = 2.0<br />

Peanut meal =<br />

3.0<br />

Milk = 0.1<br />

Others = 0.2<br />

Not stated<br />

3000-7000<br />

Not stated<br />

0.005<br />

Reference<br />

23<br />

Bijl and<br />

Peteghem (1985)<br />

Shotwell et al.<br />

(1977b)<br />

Gimeno and<br />

Martins (1983)<br />

Bicking et al.<br />

(1983)<br />

Fukayama et al.<br />

(1980)<br />

Trucksess and<br />

Stoloff (1980)<br />

Tutour et al.<br />

(1984)<br />

Saleemullah et<br />

al. (1980)<br />

Gauch et al.<br />

(1982)


No<br />

46<br />

47<br />

48<br />

49<br />

50<br />

51<br />

52<br />

53<br />

54<br />

Method<br />

OPLC-FD<br />

LC-MS<br />

ELISA<br />

ELISA<br />

ELISA<br />

ELISA<br />

ELISA<br />

ELISA ST<br />

MECC<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

maize, fish, wheat, peanuts,<br />

rice and sunflower seeds<br />

B1, B2, G1 anf G2 in figs<br />

and peanuts<br />

M1 in milk, yogurt,<br />

cheddar and Brie<br />

M1 in infant milk products<br />

and liquid milk<br />

M1in curd and cheese<br />

M1 in cheese<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

sesame butter and tahini<br />

B1in corn<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

standard samples<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

Not stated<br />

1.0<br />

0.01 – 0.05<br />

Not stated<br />

Not stated<br />

Not stated<br />

Not stated<br />

5.0<br />

0.05 – 0.09<br />

Reference<br />

Papp et al.<br />

(2002)<br />

Vahl and<br />

Jargensen<br />

(1998)<br />

Fremy and Chu.<br />

(1984)<br />

Rastogi et al.<br />

(1977)<br />

Grigoriadou et<br />

al. (2005)<br />

Sarimehtoglu et<br />

al. (1980)<br />

Nilufar and<br />

Boyacio (2000)<br />

Beaver et al.<br />

(1991)<br />

Cole et al.<br />

(1992)<br />

24


No<br />

55<br />

56<br />

57<br />

58<br />

59<br />

60<br />

61<br />

62<br />

63<br />

Method<br />

MECC FS<br />

IAC<br />

IAC<br />

FI-IA-AD<br />

GC-FID<br />

ECS with<br />

BLMs<br />

DPP<br />

SIIA<br />

MS<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in feed<br />

samples<br />

Total aflatoxins and B1 in<br />

nuts<br />

B1 in mixed feeds<br />

M1 in raw milk<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

culture medium<br />

M1 in skimmed milk<br />

B1 in rice, milk, corn and<br />

peeletised rabbit feed<br />

M1in an artificial<br />

contaminated food<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

contaminated corns<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

0.02 – 0.06<br />

Total = 1.0<br />

B1 = 0.2<br />

2.0<br />

0.011<br />

Not stated<br />

761<br />

25<br />

0.2<br />

10<br />

Reference<br />

Pena et al.<br />

(2002)<br />

Leszezynska et<br />

al. (1998)<br />

Shannon et al.<br />

(1984)<br />

Badea et al.<br />

(1977)<br />

Goto et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Androu et al.<br />

(1997)<br />

Smyth et al.<br />

(1979)<br />

Garden and<br />

Strachen (2001)<br />

Plattner et al.<br />

(1984)<br />

25


No<br />

64<br />

65<br />

66<br />

67<br />

68<br />

69<br />

70<br />

71<br />

72<br />

Method<br />

IAFB<br />

IACLC<br />

IACLC<br />

ICA<br />

TLC<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

LC-MS<br />

LC-MS<br />

TLC<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1in standard sample<br />

B1 and total aflatoxin in<br />

peanut butter, pistachio<br />

paste, fig paste and paprika<br />

powder<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

maize and peanut butter<br />

B1 in rice, corn and wheat<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

peppers<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

traditional herbal<br />

medicines<br />

M1 in bovine milk<br />

M1in sidestream cigarette<br />

smoke<br />

M1in milk and milk<br />

products<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

0.1<br />

Not stated<br />

B1, B2, G1,<br />

G2 = 2.0<br />

2.5<br />

Not stated<br />

Not stated<br />

0.02 – 0.15<br />

3.75<br />

0.0125<br />

Reference<br />

Carlson et al.<br />

(2002)<br />

Stroka et al.<br />

(2000)<br />

Chan et al.<br />

(1984)<br />

Xiulan et al.<br />

(2006)<br />

Erdogan (2004)<br />

Ali et al. (2005)<br />

Sorensen and<br />

Elbaek (2005)<br />

Edinboro and<br />

Karnes (2005)<br />

Bakirci (2001)<br />

26


No<br />

73<br />

74<br />

75<br />

76<br />

77<br />

78<br />

79<br />

80<br />

81<br />

82<br />

Method<br />

ELISA<br />

TLC<br />

Ridascreen<br />

Test<br />

Ridascreen<br />

Test<br />

TLC<br />

ECS-ELISA<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

HPLC-FD<br />

LC-MS<br />

ELISA-SPE<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

Aflatoxin / samples<br />

B1and M1 in food and dairy<br />

products<br />

M1 in Iranian feta cheese<br />

M1 in pasteurised milk<br />

M1 in raw milk<br />

B1in melon seeds<br />

B1in barley<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in bee<br />

pollen<br />

M1in milk and cheese<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in<br />

peanuts<br />

M1 in milk<br />

Detection<br />

limit (ppb)<br />

Not stated<br />

0.015<br />

Not stated<br />

0.245<br />

2.0<br />

0.02 – 0.03<br />

Not stated<br />

Milk = 0.001,<br />

Cheese =<br />

0.005<br />

B1, B2, G1,<br />

G2 = 0.125 –<br />

2.50<br />

0.025<br />

Reference<br />

Aycicek et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Kamkar et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Alborzi et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Sassahara et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Bankole et al.<br />

(2005b)<br />

Ammida et al.<br />

(2004)<br />

Gonzalez et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Manetta et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Blesa et al.<br />

(2001)<br />

Micheli et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

27


Notes:<br />

Table 1.2 Continued<br />

AD: Amperometric detector<br />

IAC: Immunoaffinity chromatography<br />

IACLC: Immunoaffinity column liquid chromatogtaphy<br />

IAFB: Immunoaffinity fluorometer biosensor<br />

BLMs: Bilayer lipid membranes<br />

DPP: Differential pulse polarography<br />

ECS: Electrochemical sensing<br />

ECS-ELISA: Electrochemical sensing based on indirect ELISA<br />

ELISA: Enzyme linked immunosorbant assay<br />

ELISA ST: Enzyme linked immunosorbant assay for screening<br />

ELISA-SPE: Enzyme linked immuno sorbant assay combined with screen<br />

printed electrode<br />

FD: Fluorescence detector<br />

FI-IA-AD: Flow-injection immunoassay with amperometric detector<br />

GC-FID: Gas chromatography with flame ionization detecter<br />

HPLC: High pressure liquid chromatography<br />

HPTLC: High pressure thin liquid chromatography<br />

HPTLC-SPE: High pressure thin liquid chromatography with solid phase<br />

extraction<br />

ICA: Immnuochromatographic assay<br />

MECC: Micellar electrokinetic’s capillary chromatography<br />

MS: Mass spectrometry<br />

OPLC: Over pressured liquid chromatography<br />

SIIA: Sequential injection immunoassay test<br />

TLC: Thin layer chromatography<br />

TLC-FDs: Thin layer chromatography with fluorescence densitometer<br />

UVD: Ultraviolet detector<br />

1.2.5 Electrochemical Properties of Aflatoxins<br />

Polarographic determination of aflatoxin has been studied by Smyth et al.<br />

(1979) using DPP technique to determine AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 in food<br />

samples using Britton-Robinson buffer solution as the supporting electrolyte. They<br />

found that all aflatoxins exhibited similar polarographic behaviour over a pH range 4 –<br />

28


11. They also obtained that the best-defined waves for analytical purposes were in<br />

Britton-Robinson buffer at pH 9. Slight differences in the potential of reduction of<br />

aflatoxins have been observed owing to their slight differences in structure. They found<br />

that the half wave potentials of reduction of the various aflatoxins were AFB1 = -1.26<br />

V, AFB2 = -1.27 V, AFG1 = -1.21 V and AFG2 = -1.23 V (all versus SCE). The limit<br />

of detection for AFB1 in pure solutions was about 2 x 10 -8 M (25 ppb).<br />

Gonzalez et al. (1998) have studied the cyclic voltammetry of AFG1 in<br />

methanol: water (1:1, v/v) solution on different electrodes such as glassy carbon,<br />

platinum and gold electrodes. They found that AFG1 gave high peak current at a<br />

potential of about +1.2V using glassy carbon electrode compared to other types of<br />

working electrode. The electro activity of the studied aflatoxins increased in the order<br />

AFG2 < AFB1 < AFB2 < AFG1. This order reflects the ability of the aflatoxins<br />

molecules to undergo electrochemical oxidation on glassy carbon electrode.<br />

Duhart et al. (1988) have determined all types of aflatoxin using HPLC<br />

technique with electrochemical detection. They have used differential-pulse mode at<br />

the dropping mercury electrode (DME) with 1 s drop time for detection system, large<br />

drop size, current scale of 0.5 µA and modulation amplitude of 100 mV. They have<br />

found that using mobile phase which consisted of 62.7% BRB at pH 7, 17.9% methanol<br />

and 19.4% acetonitrile, the peak potentials for all aflatoxins were slightly different<br />

which were AFB1 = -1.37 V, AFB2 = -1.36 V, AFG1 = -1.30 V and at -1.30 V for<br />

AFG2. Due to the fairly close together of peak potentials, a potential of -1.28 V has<br />

been selected for detection purposes of these aflatoxins together with HPLC technique.<br />

They found that using this technique average percentage recoveries for peanut butter<br />

samples (n = 4) which have been spiked with a mixture of the four aflatoxins were<br />

AFB1 (76%), AFB2 (77%), AFG1 (87%) and AFG2 (81%). This results show that a<br />

major advantage of this technique was it did not require a derivatisation step as is<br />

common for fluorescent detection.<br />

29


1.3 Voltammetric Techniques<br />

1.3.1 Voltammetric Techniques in General<br />

Voltammetry is an electrochemical method in which current is measured as a<br />

function of the applied potential. It is a branch of electrochemistry in which the<br />

electrode potential, or the faradaic current or both are changed with time. Normally,<br />

there is an interrelationship between all three of these variables (Bond et al., 1989).<br />

The principle of this technique is a measurement of the diffusion controlled current<br />

flowing in an electrolysis cell in which one electrode is polarisable (Fifield and Kealey,<br />

2000). In this technique a time dependent potential is applied to an electrochemical<br />

cell, and the current flowing through the cell is measured as a function of that potential.<br />

A plot of current which is directly proportional to the concentration of an electroactive<br />

species as a function of applied potential is called a voltammogram. The<br />

voltammogram provides quantitative and qualitative information about the species<br />

involved in the oxidation or reduction reaction or both at the working electrode.<br />

Polarography is the earliest voltammetric technique which was developed by<br />

Jaroslav Heyrovsky (1890-1967) in the early 1920s, for which he was awarded the<br />

Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1959. It was the first major electro analytical technique<br />

(Barek et al., 2001a). Since then many different forms of voltammetry have been<br />

developed such as direct current polarography (DCP), normal polarography (NP),<br />

differential pulse polarography (DPP), square-wave polarography (SWP), alternate<br />

current polarography (ACP), cyclic voltammetry (CV), stripping voltammetry (SV),<br />

adsorptive stripping voltammetry (AdSV) and adsorptive catalytic stripping<br />

voltammetry (AdCSV) techniques. Working electrodes and limit of detection (LOD)<br />

for these modern voltammetric techniques are shown in Table 1.3 (Barek et al., 2001a).<br />

The advantage of this technique include high sensitivity where quantitative and<br />

qualitative determination of metals, inorganic and organic compounds at trace levels,<br />

10 -4 – 10 -8 M (Fifield and Kealey, 2000), selectivity towards electro active species<br />

30


(Barek et al., 2001b), a wide linear range, portable and low-cost instrumentation,<br />

speciation capability and a wide range of electrode that allow assays of many types of<br />

samples such as environmental samples (Zhang et al., 2002; Ghoneim et al., 2000;<br />

Buffle et al., 2005), pharmaceutical samples (Yaacob, 1993; Yardimer et al., 2001;<br />

Abdine et al., 2002; Hilali et al., 2003 and Carapuca et al., 2005 ), food samples<br />

(Ximenes et al., 2000; Volkoiv et al., 2001); Karadjova et al., 2000; Sabry and Wahbi,<br />

1999 and Sanna et al., 2000), dye samples (Mohd Yusoff et al., 1998 and Gooding et<br />

al., 1997) and forensic samples (Liu et al., 1980; Wasiak et al., 1996; Pourhaghi-Azar<br />

and Dastangoo, 2000; Woolever et al., 2001).<br />

Various advances during the past few years have pushed the detectability of<br />

voltammetric techniques from the submicromolar level for pulse voltammetric<br />

techniques to the subpicomolar level by using an adsorptive catalytic stripping<br />

voltammetry (Czae and Wang, 1999). The comparison of using polarographic and other<br />

analytical techniques in different application fields is depicted in Table 1.4 (Barek et al.,<br />

2001a).<br />

1.3.2 Voltammetric Measurement<br />

1.3.2.1 Instrumentation<br />

Voltammetry technique makes use of a three-electrode system such as working<br />

electrode (WE), reference electrode (RE) and auxiliary electrode (AE). The whole<br />

system consist of a voltammetric cell with a various volume capacity, magnetic stirrer<br />

and gas line for purging and blanketing the electrolyte solution.<br />

31


Table 1.3 Working electrodes and LOD for modern polarographic and<br />

voltametric techniques<br />

Technique<br />

TAST<br />

Normal pulse polarography (NPP)<br />

Normal pulse voltammetry (NPV)<br />

Stair case voltammetry (SCV)<br />

Differential pulse polarography (DPP)<br />

Differential pulse voltammetry (DPV)<br />

Square wave polarography (SWP)<br />

Square wave voltammetry (SWV)<br />

Alternate current polarography (ACP)<br />

Alternate current voltammetry (ACV)<br />

Anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV)<br />

Cathodic stripping voltammetry (CSV)<br />

Potentiometric stripping analysis (PSA)<br />

Working<br />

electrode<br />

DME<br />

DME<br />

HMDE<br />

HMDE<br />

DME<br />

HMDE<br />

DME<br />

HMDE<br />

DME<br />

HMDE<br />

HMDE<br />

MFE<br />

MFE<br />

LOD<br />

~ 10 -6 M<br />

~ 10 -7 M<br />

~ 10 -7 M<br />

~ 10 -7 M<br />

~ 10 -7 M<br />

~ 10 -8 M<br />

~ 10 -8 M<br />

~ 10 -8 M<br />

~ 10 -7 M<br />

~ 10 -8 M<br />

~ 10 -10 M<br />

~ 10 -9 M<br />

~ 10 -12 M<br />

32


Table 1.4 The application range of various analytical techniques and their<br />

concentration limits when compared with the requirements in different fields of<br />

chemical analysis.<br />

Field of chemical analysis<br />

Environmental monitoring<br />

Toxicology<br />

Pharmacological studies<br />

Food control<br />

Forensic<br />

Drug assay<br />

Analytical techniques<br />

Adsorptive stripping voltammetry<br />

Anodic / cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

Differential pulse voltammetry<br />

Differential pulse polarography<br />

Tast polarography<br />

d.c.polarography<br />

spectrophotometry<br />

HPLC with voltammetric detection<br />

HPLC with fluorescence detection<br />

Concentration range<br />

10 -12 M to 10 -4 M<br />

10 -11 M to 10 -2 M<br />

10 -10 M to 10 -4 M<br />

10 -8 M to 10 -4 M<br />

10 -7 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -5 M to 10 -2 M<br />

Application range<br />

10 -12 M to 10 -7 M<br />

10 -11 M to 10 -6 M<br />

10 -8 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -7 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -6 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -5 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -6 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -7 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -9 M to 10 -3 M<br />

33


Analytical techniques<br />

Spectrofluorometry<br />

Atomic absorption spectrometry<br />

Atomic fluorescence spectrometry<br />

Radioimmunoanalysis<br />

Neutron activation analysis<br />

x-ray fluorescence analysis<br />

mass spectrometry<br />

Table 1.4 Continued<br />

Application range<br />

A typical arrangement for a voltammetric electrochemical cell is shown in Figure 1.7<br />

(Fifield and Haines, 2000).<br />

N2<br />

Inlet<br />

RE WE<br />

10 -9 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -8 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -9 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -13 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -9 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -7 M to 10 -3 M<br />

10 -9 M to 10 -3 M<br />

Figure 1.7 A typical arrangement for a voltammetric electrochemical cell<br />

(RE: reference electrode, WE: working electrode, AE: auxiliary electrode)<br />

AE<br />

Cell<br />

cover<br />

Solution<br />

Level<br />

Stirrer<br />

34


The arrangement of the electrodes within the cell is important. The RE is<br />

placed close to the WE and the WE is located between the RE and the AE. Using the<br />

three-electrode-cell concept, a potentiostat monitors the voltage over the WE and AE<br />

which is automatically adjusted to give the correct applied potential. This is obtained<br />

by continuously measuring the potential between the WE and the RE, by comparing it<br />

to the set voltage and by adjusting the applied voltage accordingly if necessary. The<br />

cell material depends on application that it is usually a small glass beaker with a close<br />

fitting lid, which includes ports for electrodes and a nitrogen gas purge line for<br />

removing dissolved oxygen and an optional stir bar.<br />

The WE is the electrode where the redox reaction of electroactive species takes<br />

place and where the charge transfer occurs. It is potentiostatically controlled and can<br />

minimise errors from cell resistance. It is made of several different materials including<br />

mercury, platinum, gold, silver, carbon, chemically modified and screen printed<br />

electrode. The performance of voltammetry is strongly influenced by the WE. The<br />

ideal characteristics of this electrode are a wide potential range, low resistance,<br />

reproducible surface and be able to provide a high signal-to-noise response. The WE<br />

must be made of a material that will not react with the solvent or any component of the<br />

solution over as wide a potential range as possible. The potential window of such<br />

electrodes depends on the electrode material and the composition of the electrolyte as<br />

summarised in Table 1.5 below (Wang, 2000). Majority of electrochemical methods<br />

use HMDE and MFE (Economou and Fielden, 1995) for use in the cathodic potential<br />

area, whereas solid electrode such as gold, platinum, glassy carbon, carbon paste are<br />

used for examining anodic processes.<br />

Mercury has been used for the WE in earlier voltammetry techniques,<br />

including polarography. Since mercury is a liquid, the WE often consists of a drop<br />

suspended from the end of a capillary tube. It has several advantages including its high<br />

over potential for the reduction of hydronium ion to hydrogen gas. This allows for the<br />

application of potential as negative as -1.0 V versus SCE in acidic solution, and -2.0V<br />

versus SCE in basic solution.<br />

35


Table 1.5 List of different type of working electrodes and its potential windows.<br />

ELECTRODE<br />

Hg<br />

Pt<br />

C<br />

ELECTROLYTE<br />

1 M H2SO4<br />

1 M KCl<br />

1 M NaOH<br />

0.1 M Et4NH4 OH<br />

1 M H2SO4<br />

1 M NaOH<br />

1 M HClO4<br />

0.1M KCl<br />

POTENTIAL WINDOWS<br />

+0.3 to -0.1V<br />

0 to -1.9V<br />

-0.1 to -2.0V<br />

-0.1 to -2.3V<br />

+1.0 to -0.5V<br />

+0.5 to -1.0V<br />

+1.5 to -1.0V<br />

+1.0 to -1.3V<br />

Other advantages of using mercury as the working electrode include the ability<br />

of metals to dissolve in the mercury, resulting in the formation of an amalgam. The<br />

greatest advantages of this electrode is that new drops or new thin mercury films can be<br />

readily formed, and this cleaning process removes problems that could be caused by<br />

contamination as a result of previous analysis. In contrast, this is not the generally case<br />

for electrodes made from other materials, with the possible exception of carbon<br />

electrodes, where the electrode cleaning is made of cutting off a thin layer of the<br />

previous electrode surface. Another advantage is the possibility to achieve a state of<br />

pseudostationary for linear sweep voltammetry (LSV) using higher scan rate.<br />

Miniaturised and compressible mercury electrode offer new possibilities in<br />

voltammetry especially for determination of biologically active species and surfactant.<br />

One limitation of mercury electrode is that it is easily oxidised at + 0.3 V and cannot be<br />

used at potential more positive than + 0.4 V versus the SCE, depending on the<br />

composition of the solution (Dahmen, 1986 and Fifield and Haines, 2000). At this<br />

potential, mercury dissolves to give an anodic polarographic wave due to formation of<br />

mercury (I) (Skoog et al., 1996).<br />

36


There are three main types of mercury electrode used in voltammetry<br />

techniques including hanging mercury drop electrode (HMDE), dropping mercury<br />

drop electrode (DME) and static mercury drop electrode (SMDE). In the HMDE, a<br />

drop of the desired size is formed and hanged at the end of a narrow capillary tube. In<br />

the DME, mercury drops form at the end of the capillary tube as a result of gravity.<br />

The drop continuously grows and has a finite lifetime of several seconds. At the end<br />

of its lifetime the mercury drop is dislodged, either manually or by the gravity, and<br />

replaced by a new drop. In the SMDE, it uses a solenoid-driven plunger to control<br />

the flow of mercury. It can be used as either HMDE or DME. A single activation of<br />

solenoid momentarily lifts the plunger, allowing enough mercury to flow through the<br />

capillary to form a single drop. To obtain a dropping mercury electrode the solenoid<br />

is activated repeatedly. The diagram of HMDE is shown in Figure 1.8 (Metrohm,<br />

2005).<br />

Figure 1.8 A diagram of the HMDE<br />

37


Other type of mercury electrode is the controlled growth mercury drop<br />

electrode (CGME). In this electrode, a fast response valve controls the drop growth.<br />

The cross sectional view of the CGME is shown in Figure 1.9 (BAS, 1993).<br />

Figure 1.9 A diagram of the CGME<br />

The capillary has a stainless stell tube embedded in the top end of the<br />

capillary. Mercury flow through the capillary is controlled by a fast response valve.<br />

The valve is rubber plug at the end of a shaft which when displaced slightly up will<br />

allow mercury to flow. Since the contact between filament of mercury in the capillary<br />

and the reservoir is a stainless steel tube, the electrode has low resistance. The total<br />

resistance from the contact point to the mercury is about 7 ohm. The valve seal is<br />

controlled by the valve seal adjustment knob. The opening of this valve is controlled<br />

by a computer-generated pulse sequence, which leads to a stepped increase in the<br />

drop size. Changing the number of pulse and/or the pulse width, so a wide range of<br />

drop sizes is available can therefore vary the drop size. Varying the time between the<br />

38


pulses can control the rate of growth of the mercury drop. Therefore, a slowly<br />

growing mercury drop suitable for stripping experiments can be generated. An<br />

important advantage of the CGME compared to HMDE is no contamination of the<br />

capillary due to back diffusion (Dean, 1995).<br />

In addition to the mercury drop electrode, mercury may be deposited onto the<br />

surface of a solid electrode to produce mercury film electrode (MFE). The MFE is<br />

based on an electrochemically deposited mercury film on conventional substrate<br />

electrode such as a solid carbon, platinum, or gold electrode. The solid electrode is<br />

placed in solution of mercury ion (Hg 2+ ) and held at a potential at which the reduction<br />

of Hg 2+ to Hg is favorable, forming a thin mercury film. It displays the properties of a<br />

mercury electrode, having various electro analytical advantageous such as a high<br />

hydrogen evolution over potential and simple electrochemistry of many metals and<br />

other species of analytical interest. For example, Castro et al. (2004) have used thinfilm<br />

coated on a glassy carbon electrode (GCE) for quantitative determination of<br />

polycyclic aromatic hydrogen (PAH). In this experiment, they plated the mercury over<br />

5 min at a cell voltage of -0.9 V. Economou and Fielden (1995) have developed a<br />

square wave adsorptive stripping voltammetric technique on the MFE for study of<br />

riboflavin. In this work, riboflavin was absorbed on the MFE at a potential of 0.0 V<br />

(vs. Ag/AgCl) in pH 12.0 of electrolyte solution.<br />

However, the increased risks associated with the use, manipulation and disposal<br />

of metallic mercury or mercury salt, have led to general trend for more environmentalfriendly<br />

analytical methods such as using bismuth film electrode (BFE) instead of<br />

mercury (Kefala et al., 2003; Economou, 2005; Lin et al., 2005a and Lin et al., 2005b ).<br />

The BFE consists of a thin bismuth film deposited on a carbon paste substrate that has<br />

shown to offer comparable performance to the MFE. Morfobos et al. (2004) have<br />

studied square wave adsorptive stripping voltammetry (SWAdSV) on a rotating-disc<br />

BFE for simultaneous determination of nickel (II) and cobalt (II). Hocevar et al. (2005)<br />

have developed a novel bismuth-modified carbon paste (Bi-CPE) for a convenient and<br />

39


eliable electrochemical sensor for trace heavy metals detection in conjunction with<br />

stripping electroanalysis.<br />

In another study, using pencil-lead BFE as the working electrode, Demetriades<br />

et al. (2004) have determined trace metals by anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV).<br />

They revealed that pencil-lead BFE were successfully applied to the determination of<br />

plumbum and zinc in tap water with results in satisfactory agreement with atomic<br />

absorption spectrometry (AAS). Zahir and Abd Ghani (1997) have developed a pencil<br />

2B graphite paste electrode which was fabricated with polymerized 4-vinylpyridine for<br />

glucose monitoring.<br />

Other solid or metal electrode commonly used as WE are carbon, platinum<br />

(Salavagione et al., 2004; Santos and Machado, 2004; Aslanoglu and Ayne, 2004 ),<br />

gold (Hamilton and Ellis,1980; Parham and Zargar, 2001; Parlim and Zarger, 2003;<br />

Moressi et al., 2004; Munoz et al., 2005;), graphite (Orinakova et al., 2004; Pezzatini et<br />

al., 2004; Jin and Lin, 2005), diamond (Sonthalia et al., 2004) and silver (Iwamoto et<br />

al., 1984). Solid electrodes based on carbon are currently in widespread use in<br />

voltammetric technique, primarily because of their broad potential window, low<br />

background current, rich surface chemistry, low cost, chemical inertness, and suitability<br />

for various sensing and detection application (Wang, 2000). It includes glassy carbon<br />

electrode (GCE), carbon paste electrode (CPE), chemically modified electrode (CME)<br />

and screen-printed electrode (SPE).<br />

For the GCE, the usual electrode construction is a rod of glassy carbon, sealed<br />

into an inert electrode body, a disc of electrode material is exposed to the solution. It is<br />

the most commonly used carbon electrode in electro analytical application (Ozkan and<br />

Uslu, 2002; Ibrahim et al., 2003; Erk, 2004). The cleaning of this electrode is<br />

important, to maintain a reactive and reproducible surface. Pre-treated<br />

electrochemically GCE have increased oxygen functionalities that contribute to more<br />

rapid electron transfer. Wang et al. (1997) have used in adsorptive potentiometric<br />

stripping analysis of tamoxifen, a nonsteriodal anti-estrogen used widely for the<br />

40


treatment of hormone-dependent breast cancer. The electrode was anodised at + 1.7 V<br />

for 1 min in the electrolyte containing tomixifen. Using cyclic voltammetric technique,<br />

they found that a large definite anodic peak corresponding to the oxidation of the<br />

adsorbed drug at GCE at + 0.985 V. Other workers using GCE as the WE were Wang<br />

et al. (2004), Shi and Shiu (2004) and Ji et al. (2004).<br />

The CPE, a mixture of carbon powder and a pasting medium at certain ratio,<br />

were the result of an attempt to produce electrode similar to the dropping mercury<br />

electrode (Kizek et al., 2005). They are particularly useful for anodic studies, modified<br />

electrode and also for stripping analysis. CMEs are electrodes which have been<br />

deliberately treated with some reagents, having desirable properties, so as to take on the<br />

properties of the reagents (Arrigan, 1994; Kutner et al., 1998). A few examples of<br />

these applications were reported by Abbaspour and Moosavi, (2002), Abbas and<br />

Mostafa (2003); Ciucu et al. (2003); Ferancova et al. (2000) and Padano and Rivas<br />

(2000).<br />

SPE are increasingly being used for inexpensive, reproducible and sensitive<br />

disposable electrochemical sensors for determination of trace levels of pollutant and<br />

toxic compounds in environmental and biological fluids sample (Wring et al., 1991).<br />

A disposable sensor has several advantages, such as preventing contamination between<br />

samples, constant sensitivity and high reproducibility of different printed sensors (Kim<br />

et al., 2002). The most useful materials for printing electrochemical sensors could be<br />

carbon-based inks because they have a very low firing temperature (20-120° C) and can<br />

be printed on plastic substrate. Carbon can also be directly mixed with different<br />

compounds, such as mediator and enzymes. A few examples of the experiments which<br />

used SPE as the WE were reported by Kim et al. (2002), for detection of phenols using<br />

α-cyclodextrin modified screen printed graphite electrodes. Ohfuji et al. (2004) have<br />

constructed a glucose sensor based on a SPE and a novel mediator pyocyanin from<br />

Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Carpini et al. (2004) have studied oligonucleotide-modified<br />

screen printed gold electrodes for enzyme-amplified sensing of nucleic acid. Lupu et<br />

al. (2004) have developed SPE for the detection of marker analytes during wine<br />

41


making. In this work they have developed biosensors for malic acid and glucose with a<br />

limit of detection of 10 -5 M and 10 -6 M for malic acid and glucose respectively. The<br />

sensors were applied in the analysis of different samples of wine.<br />

Besides using macro-electrode, voltammetric technique also utilizes<br />

microelectrode (Lafleur et al. 1990) with the size of electrode radius much smaller than<br />

the diffusion-layer thickness, typically between 7 to 10 µM (Hutton et al., 2005 and<br />

Buffle and Tercier-Waeber, 2005) as the WE. It is constructed from the same materials<br />

as the macro-electrode but with a smaller diameter to enhance mass transport of analyte<br />

to the electrode surface due to smaller electrode than the diffusion layer. Hence,<br />

increasing signal-to noise ratio and measurement can be made in highly resistive media<br />

due to decrease of the ohmic drop that results when the electrode size reduced<br />

(Andrieux et al., 1990). The microelectrode with diameter as small as 2 µm, allow<br />

voltammetric measurements to be made on even smaller sample (Harvey, 2002). Aoki<br />

(1990) reported that ultra microelectrodes influence electrode kinetics more specifically<br />

than conventional electrode because of lateral diffusion promotes mass transport. Since<br />

it minimise uncompensated resistance, they are useful for determination of kinetic<br />

parameters. Almeida et al. (1998) have done voltammetric studies of the oxidation of<br />

the anti-oxidant drug dipyridamole (DIP) in acetonitrile and ethanol using ultra<br />

microelectrode (UME). In this work they studied cyclic voltammetric technique of the<br />

drug with the UME which was 12.7 µm diameters. They found that with that electrode,<br />

the diffusion current of DIP is proportional to the electrode radii for low scan rates in<br />

cyclic voltammetry.<br />

The second electrode used in the voltammetric system is auxiliary electrode<br />

(AE). The AE is made of an inert conducting material typically a platinum electrode<br />

wire (Wang, 2000). It provides a surface for a redox reaction to balance the process that<br />

occured at the surface of the WE. It does not need special care, such as polishing. In<br />

order to support the current generated at the WE, the surface area of the AE must be<br />

equal to or larger than of the WE. The function of the AE is to complete the circuit,<br />

allowing charge flow through the cell (Fifield and Haines, 2000). In an electro<br />

42


analytical experiment, there is no need to place the AE in a separate compartment since<br />

the diffusion of product that was produced by a redox reaction at the surface of the AE<br />

does not significantly interfere the redox reaction at the WE.<br />

The third electrode used in the voltammetric technique is reference electrode<br />

(RE). This RE provides a stable potential so that any change in cell potential is<br />

attributed to the working electrode. The major requirement for the RE is that the<br />

potential does not change during the recording voltammetric curve at different applied<br />

voltage (Heyrovsky and Zuman, 1968). The common RE are standard hydrogen<br />

electrode (SHE), calomel electrode (SCE) and silver/silver electrode (Ag/AgCl). The<br />

SHE is the reference electrode used to establish standard-state potential for other half<br />

reaction. It consists of a platinum electrode immersed in a solution in which the<br />

hydrogen ion activity is 1.00 and in which hydrogen gas is bubbled at a pressure of 1<br />

atm. The standard-state potential for the reaction;<br />

2H + (aq) + 2e - → H2 (g) (1.0)<br />

is 0.00 V for all temperatures. It is rarely used because it is difficult to prepare and<br />

inconvenient to use.<br />

The second reference electrode is the Standard Calomel Electrode (SCE)<br />

which is based on the redox couple between mercury chloride (Hg2Cl2) and Hg as<br />

below;<br />

Hg2Cl2(s) + 2e 2Hg(l) + 2Cl - (aq) (1.1)<br />

The potential of this electrode is determined by the concentration of chloride ion. It is<br />

constructed using an aqueous solution saturated with potassium chloride (KCl) which<br />

has a potential of + 0.2444 V at 25 0 C. It consists of an inner tube packed with a paste<br />

of Hg, Hg2Cl2 and saturated KCl. A small hole connects the two tubes, an asbestos fiber<br />

serves as a salt bridge to the solution in which the SCE is immersed.<br />

43


Other type of reference electrode is the Ag/AgCl electrode which is the most<br />

common RE since it can be used at higher temperature. This electrode is based on the<br />

redox couple between silver chloride ( AgCl ) and silver ( Ag ) as illustrated below;<br />

AgCl(s) + 2e Ag(s) + Cl - (1.2)<br />

The potential of this electrode is determined by the concentration of Cl - . For saturated<br />

KCl the potential is + 0.197 V whereas for 3.5 M KCl the potential electrode is + 0.205<br />

V at 25° C (Harvey, 2000).<br />

1.3.2.2 Solvent and Supporting Electrolyte<br />

Electrochemical measurements are commonly carried out in a medium which<br />

consists of solvent containing a supporting electrolyte. Sometimes in most cases,<br />

supporting electrolyte has to be added to the dissolved sample in an attempt to achieve<br />

the following (Heyrovsky and Zuman 1968);<br />

a) To make solution conductive<br />

b) To control the pH value so that organic substances are reduced in a<br />

given potential range and inorganic substances are not hydrolysed<br />

c) To ensure the formation of such complexes that give well<br />

developed and well separated waves<br />

d) To shift the hydrogen evaluation towards more negative potentials<br />

and to eliminate catalytic effects on hydrogen evolution<br />

e) To suppress unwanted maxima by addition of surface-active<br />

substances to the supporting electrolyte.<br />

The choice of the solvent is primarily by the solubility of the analyte, its redox<br />

activity and also by solvent properties such as electrical conductivity, electrochemical<br />

activity and chemical reactivity. The solvent should not react with the analyte and<br />

44


should not undergo electrochemical reaction over a wide potential range. In aqueous<br />

solution the cathodic potential is limited by the reduction of hydrogen ions:<br />

2 H + (aq) + 2 e - → H2 (g) (1.3)<br />

resulting hydrogen evolution current. The more acidic the solution the more positive<br />

is the potential of this current due to the reaction expressed by;<br />

E = E 0 H2/H+ - 0.059 pH (1.4)<br />

The composition of the electrolyte may affect the selectivity of voltammetric<br />

measurements. The ideal electrolyte should give well-separated and well-shaped peaks<br />

for all the analytes sought, so that they can be determined simultaneously. For example<br />

Kontoyannis et al. (1999) used tris buffered saline (TBS) at pH 7.4 as the supporting<br />

electrolyte for simultaneous determination of diazepam and liposome using DPP<br />

technique. Inam and Somer (1998) have determined selenium (Se) and lead (Pb)<br />

simultaneously in whole blood sample by the same technique using 0.1 M HCl as the<br />

supporting electrolyte. They observed that there were three peaks at -0.33 V, -0.54 V<br />

and -0.41 V which belonged to an intermetallic compound (PbSe), Se and Pb<br />

respectively. Barbiera et al. (1997) have developed anodic stripping voltammetric<br />

technique for simultaneous determination of trace amounts of zinc, lead and copper in<br />

rum without pre-treatment and in the absence of supporting electrolyte. They observed<br />

that there were three peaks at -0.92 V, -0.42 V and 0.05 V which belong to Zn, Pb and<br />

Cu respectively.<br />

Because of the sensitivity of the voltammetric method, certain impurities in<br />

supporting electrolyte can affect the accuracy of the procedures. It is thus necessary to<br />

prepare the supporting electrolyte from highly purified reagents and should not easily<br />

oxidised and reduced. To obtain acceptable ionic strength of supporting electrolyte,<br />

certain concentration should be prepared which is usually about 0.1 M. This level is a<br />

compromise between high conductivity and minimum contamination (Wang, 2000).<br />

45


The low ionic strength which is 0.01 M of supporting electrolyte (HClO4 – NaClO4)<br />

was very effective for the adsorptive accumulation of analyte on the electrode as found<br />

by Berzas et al. (2000) when they developed adsorptive stripping square wave<br />

technique for determination of sildenafil citrate (Viagra) in pharmaceutical tablet.<br />

Dissolved oxygen must be removed from supporting electrolyte first since the<br />

reduction of dissolved oxygen will cause two cathodic peaks at -0.05 V and -0.9 V<br />

(versus SCE) as reported by Fraga et al. (1998) and Reinke and Simon (2002). With<br />

increasing pH, the waves due to reduction of oxygen are shifted to more negative<br />

potential. The oxygen reduction generates a large background current, greater than that<br />

of the trace analyte, and dissolved oxygen therefore tends to interfere with<br />

voltammetric analysis (Colombo and van den Berg, 1998). The common method for the<br />

removal of dissolved oxygen is by purging with an inert gas such as nitrogen or argon<br />

where longer time may be required for large sample volume or for trace measurements.<br />

To prevent oxygen from reentering, the cell should be blanketed with the gas while the<br />

voltammogram is being recorded. However, this conventional procedure is time<br />

consuming and not suitable for flow analysis. Due to this reason, Colombo and van den<br />

Berg (1998) have introduced in-line deoxygenating for flow analysis with voltammetric<br />

detection. They have used an apparatus which is based on the permeation of oxygen<br />

through semi-permeable silicone tubing into an oxygen free chamber and enables the<br />

determination of trace metals by flow analysis with voltammetric determination.<br />

1.3.2.3 Current in Voltammetry<br />

When an analyte is oxidised at the working electrode, a current passes electrons<br />

through the external electric circuitry to the auxiliary electrode, where reduction of the<br />

solvent or other components of the solution matrix occurs. Reducing an analyte at the<br />

working electrode requires a source of electrons, generating a current that flows from<br />

the auxiliary electrode to the cathode. In either case, a current resulting from redox<br />

reaction at the working electrode and auxiliary electrode is called a faradaic current. A<br />

current due to the analyte’s reduction is called a cathodic current. Anodic currents are<br />

46


due to oxidation reaction. The magnitude of the faradaic current is determined by the<br />

rate ofthe resulting oxidation or reduction reaction at the electrode surface. Two factors<br />

contribute to the rate of the electrochemical reaction which are the rate at which the<br />

reactants and products are transported to and from the electrode, and the rate at which<br />

electron pass between the electrode and the reactants and products in solution.<br />

There are three modes of mass transport that influence the rate at which reactant<br />

and products are transported to and from the electrode surface which are diffusion,<br />

migration and convection. Difussion from a region of high concentration to region of<br />

low concentration occurs whenever the concentration of an ion or molecule at the<br />

surface of electrode is different from that in bulk solution. When the potential applied<br />

to the WE is sufficient to reduce or oxidise the analyte at the electrode surface, a<br />

concentration gradient is established. The volume of solution in which the<br />

concentration gradient exists is called the diffusion layer. Without other modes of mass<br />

transport, the width of the diffusion layer increases with time as the concentration of<br />

reactants near electrode surface decreases. The contribution of diffusion to the rate of<br />

mass transport is time-dependent.<br />

Convection occurs when a mechanical means is used to carry reactants toward<br />

the electrode and to remove products from the electrode. Ther most common means of<br />

convection is to stirr the solution using a stir bar. Other methods include rotating the<br />

electrode and incorporating the electrode into a flow cell.<br />

Migration occurs when charged particles in solution are attracted or repelled<br />

from an electrode that has a positive or negative surface charge. When the electrode is<br />

positively charged, negatively charged particles move toward the electrode, while the<br />

positive charged particles move toward the bulk solution. Unlike diffusion and<br />

convection, migration only affects the mass transport of charged particles.<br />

The rate of mass transport is one factor influencing the current in voltammetry<br />

experiment. When electron transfer kinetics are fast, the redox reaction is equilibrium,<br />

47


and the concentrations of reactants and products at the electrode are those psecified by<br />

Nersnt Equation. Such systems are considered electrochemically reversible. In other<br />

system, when electron transfer kinetics are sufficiently slow, the concentration of<br />

reactants and products at the electrode surface, and thus the current, differ from that<br />

predicted by the Nersnt euqation. In this case the system is electrochemically<br />

irreversible.<br />

Other currents that may exist in an electrochemical cell those are unrelated to<br />

any redox reaction are nonfaradaic and residual currents. The nonfaradaic current must<br />

be accounted for if the faradaic component of the measured current is to be determined.<br />

This current occurs whenever the electrode’s potential is changed. Another type of nonfaradaic<br />

current is charging current which occur in electrochemical cell due to the<br />

electrical double layer’s formation. Residual current is a small current that inevitably<br />

flows through electrochemical cell even in the absence of analyte (Harvey, 2000).<br />

1.3.2.4 Quantitative and Qualitative Aspects of Voltammetry<br />

Quantitative information is obtained by relating current to the concentration of<br />

analyte in the bulk solution and qualitative information is obtained from the<br />

voltammogram by extracting the standard-state potential for redox reaction. The<br />

concentration of the electroactive species can be quantitatively determined by the<br />

measurement of limiting current which is linear function of the concentration of electro<br />

active species in bulk solution.<br />

Half- potential serves as a characteristic of a particular species which undergoes<br />

reduction or oxidation process at the electrode surface in a given supporting electrolyte,<br />

and it is independent of the concentration of that species. Its function in the qualitative<br />

determination is the same as retention time in chromatographic technique.<br />

48


1.3.3 Type of Voltammetric Techniques<br />

1.3.3.1 Polarography<br />

Polarography is a subclass of voltammetry in which the WE is the DME. This<br />

technique has been widely used for the determination of many important reducible<br />

species since the DME has special properties particularly its renewable surface and<br />

wide cathodic potential range. In this technique, it takes place in an unstirred solution<br />

where a limiting current is diffusion limiting current (Harvey, 2000). Each new<br />

mercury drop grows in a solution whose composition is identical to that of the initial<br />

bulk solution. The relationship between the concentration of analyte, CA, and limiting<br />

current ( Id ) is given by Ilikovic equation ( Ewing, 1997; Heyrosky, 1968; Ilkovic,<br />

1934 and Dahmen,1986).<br />

I<br />

d<br />

1<br />

2<br />

2<br />

1<br />

3 6<br />

= 708nD<br />

m t C<br />

(1.5)<br />

where:<br />

n = number of electrons transferred in the redox reaction<br />

D = analyte’s diffusion coefficient ( cm 2 sec -1 )<br />

m = flow rate of mercury drop (g sec -1 )<br />

t = drop time (sec)<br />

CA = concentration of depolariser (mol l -1 )<br />

The above equation represents the current at the end of the drop life. The average<br />

current (Iave) over the drop life is obtained by integrating the current over this time<br />

period:<br />

I ave<br />

= 607nD<br />

A<br />

1<br />

2 m 3<br />

2<br />

t 6<br />

1<br />

C A (1.6)<br />

From the above equation, there is a linear relationship between diffusion current and<br />

concentration of electroactive species. It also indicates that the limiting diffusion<br />

49


current is a function of the diffusion coefficient which depends on the size and shape<br />

of the diffusion particle. As compared to another technique such as cyclic<br />

voltammetry technique, in this technique, the peak current is directly proportional to<br />

concentration and increases with the square root of the scan rate as given by the<br />

Randles-Sevcik equation (Equation 1.7) for a reversible system (Wang, 2000).<br />

Ip = (2.69 x 10 5 ) n 3/2 ACD 1/2 υ 1/2 (1.7)<br />

where;<br />

n = number of electron<br />

A = electrode area (cm 2 )<br />

C = concentration (mol cm -3 )<br />

D = diffusion coefficient (cm 2 s -1 )<br />

υ = scan rate (V s -1 )<br />

There are several types of polarographic techniques as was mentioned earlier.<br />

Polarography is used extensively in the analysis of metal ion, inorganic anions and<br />

organic compounds containing easily reducible or oxidisable functional group. A list<br />

of electroreducible and electrooxidisable organic functional groups is shown in Table<br />

1.6 (Dean, 1995).<br />

Table 1.6 Electroreducible and electrooxidisable organic functional groups<br />

Electroreducible<br />

organic functional<br />

groups<br />

Electrooxidisable<br />

organic functional<br />

groups<br />

Aromatic carboxylic acid, azomethines, azoxy compounds<br />

conjugated alkene, conjugated aromatic, conjugated carboxylic<br />

acid conjugated halide, conjugated ketone, diazo compounds,<br />

dienes, conjugated double bond, nitroso compounds,<br />

organometallics, disulfide, heterocycles, hydroquinones,<br />

acetylene, acyl sulfide aldehyde, hydroxylamines, imines,<br />

ketones, nitrates, nitriles nitro compounds, oximes, peroxides,<br />

quinones, sulfones, sulfonium salts and thiocyanates.<br />

Alcohols, aliphatic halides, amines, aromatic amines, aromatic<br />

ides, carboxylic acids, ethers, heterocyclic amines, heterocyclic<br />

aromatics, olefins, organometallic and phenols.<br />

50


1.3.3.2 Cyclic Voltammetry<br />

Cyclic voltammetry (CV) is a potential-controlled reversal electrochemical<br />

experiment. A cyclic potential sweep is imposed on an electrode and the current<br />

response is observed (Gosser, 1993). CV is an extension of linear sweep<br />

voltammetry (LSV) in that the direction of the potential scan is reversed at the end of<br />

the first scan (the first switching potential) and the potential range is scanned again in<br />

the reverse direction. The experiment can be stopped at the final potential, or the<br />

potential can be scanned past this potential to the second switching potential, where<br />

the direction of the potential scan is again reversed. The potential can be cycled<br />

between the two switching potentials for several cycles before the experiment is<br />

ended at the final potential. CV is the most widely used technique for acquiring<br />

qualitative information about electrochemical reactions.<br />

Analysis of the current response can give considerable information about the<br />

thermodynamics of redox processes, the kinetics of heterogeneous electron-transfer<br />

reaction and the coupled chemical reactions or adsorption processes. It is often the first<br />

electrochemical experiment performed in an electrochemical study especially for any<br />

new analyte since it offers a rapid location of redox potentials of the electro active<br />

species and convenient evaluation of the effect of media upon the redox process. In the<br />

CV technique, the applied potential sweep backwards and forwards between two limits,<br />

the starting potential and the switching potentials. In this technique, the potential of the<br />

WE is increased linearly in an unstirred solution. The resulting plot of current versus<br />

potential is called a cyclic voltammogram. Figure 1.10a to 1.10c show the cyclic<br />

voltammograms for reversible, irreversible and quasireversible reactions. For a typical<br />

reduction and oxidation process in reversible reaction (as in Figure 1.10a), during the<br />

forward sweep the oxidised form is reduced, while on the reverse sweep the reduced<br />

form near the electrode is reoxidised. Chemical reaction coupled to the electrode<br />

reaction can drastically affect the shape of the CV response. In the case of irreversible<br />

reaction, no reverse peak is observed (Figure 1.10b).<br />

51


(c)<br />

Figure 1.10 Cyclic voltammograms of (a) reversible, (b) irriverisble and (c)<br />

quasireversible reactions at mercury electrode (O = oxidised form and R = reduced<br />

form)<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

52


The cyclic voltammogram shows characteristics of an analyte by several<br />

important parameters such as peak currents and peak potentials that can be used in the<br />

analysis of the cyclic voltammetric response either the reaction is reversible,<br />

irreversible or quasi-reversible as listed in Table 1.7. Cyclic voltammogram will<br />

guide the analyst to decide the potential range for the oxidation or reduction of the<br />

analyte and that it can be a very useful diagnostic tool.<br />

Table 1.7 The characteristics of different type of electrochemical reaction<br />

Type of reaction<br />

Reversible<br />

Irreversible<br />

Quasi-reversible<br />

Characteristics<br />

Cathodic and anodic peak potential are separated by 59/n mV.<br />

The position of peak voltage do not alter as a function of voltage<br />

scan rate<br />

The ratio of the peak current is equal to one<br />

The peak currents are proportional to square root of the scan rate<br />

The anodic and cathodic peaks are independent of the scan rate<br />

Disappearance of a reverse peak<br />

The shift of the peak potential with scan rate ( 20 – 100 mV/s)<br />

Peak current is lower than that obtained by reversible reaction.<br />

Larger separation of cathodic and anodic peak potential<br />

(> 57/ n mV) compared to those of reversible system.<br />

53


1.3.3.3 Stripping Voltammetry<br />

Stripping technique is one of the most important and sensitive electrochemical<br />

technique for measuring trace metals and organic samples. The term stripping is<br />

applied to a group of procedures involving preconcentration of the determinant onto<br />

the working electrode, prior to its direct or indirect determination by means of a<br />

potential sweep (Wang, 1985). The preconcentration (or accumulation) step can be<br />

adsorptive, cathodic or anodic. Its remarkable sensitivity is attributed to the addition<br />

of an effective preconcentration step with advanced measurement procedures that<br />

generate an extremely favorable signal-to-noise ratio as reported by Blanc et al.<br />

(2000). Brainina et al. (2000) list advantages of this technique such as high<br />

sensitivity, low detection limit, wide spectrum of test materials and analytes, both of<br />

organic and inorganic origin, insignificant effect of matrix in certain instances,<br />

compatibility with other methods, relative simplicity and low cost of equipment and<br />

finally, it can be automatic on-line and portable options. This technique is able to<br />

measure many analytes simultaneously such as reported by Ghoneim et al. (2000).<br />

They have determined up to eleven metals in water sample simultaneously using this<br />

technique. Stripping voltammetry technique utilises a few steps as follows;<br />

a) Deposition step:<br />

In this step, analyte will be preconcentrated on the WE within a certain time<br />

while solution is stirred. The deposition potential imposed on the WE is chosen<br />

according to the species to be determined and is maintained for a deposition period<br />

depending on their concentration. The choice of deposition potential can provide some<br />

selectivity in the measurement (Sun et al., 2005). Deposition time must be controlled<br />

since the longer the deposition time, the larger the amount of analye available at the<br />

electrode during stripping. During deposition step, the solution is stirred to facilitate<br />

transportation of ions of interest to the surface of WE.<br />

54


) Rest step:<br />

In this step, it allows formation of a uniform concentration of the ions of interest<br />

on the mercury. As the forced convection is stopped at the end of the deposition period,<br />

the deposition current drops almost to zero and a uniform concentration is established<br />

very rapidly. It also insures that the subsequent stripping step is performed in a<br />

quiescent solution.<br />

c) Stripping step:<br />

This step consists of scanning the potential anodically for anodic stripping and<br />

cathodically for cathodic stripping. When the potential reaches the standard potential<br />

of a certain ion of interest–metal ion complex, the particular ion of interest is reoxidised<br />

or reduced back into solution and a current is flowing. The resultant voltammogram<br />

recorded during this step provide the analytical information of the ions of interest. The<br />

stripping step after preconcentration gives the possibility for selective determination of<br />

different substances assuming that they also have different peak potential as reported by<br />

Kubiak et al. (2001). The potential-time sequence in stripping analysis is shown in<br />

Figure 1.11 which shows all three steps that were mentioned earlier.<br />

Applied<br />

Potential<br />

Deposition<br />

Stirred<br />

Deposition potential<br />

Time<br />

Stripping<br />

Quiescent<br />

Final potential<br />

Figure 1.11 The potential-time sequence in stripping analysis<br />

55


Most stripping measurements require the addition of appropriate supporting<br />

electrolyte and removal of dissolved oxygen. The former is needed to decrease the<br />

resistance of the solution and to ensure that the metal ions of interest are transported<br />

toward the electrode by diffusion and not by electrical migration. Contamination of the<br />

sample by impurities in the reagents used for preparing the supporting electrolyte is a<br />

serious problem. Dissolved oxygen severely hampers the quantitation and must be<br />

removed.<br />

The main types of interference in stripping analysis are overlapping stripping<br />

signals, the adsorption of organic surfactants on the electrode surface, the presence of<br />

dissolved oxygen and the formation of intermetallic compounds by metals such as<br />

copper and zinc co-deposited in the mercury electrode. Overlapping signals cause<br />

problems in the simultaneous determination of analytes with similar redox potential<br />

such as lead and tin. Intermetallic-compounds formation and surfactant cause a<br />

depression of the stripping response and also shifting the signal location. Stripping<br />

voltammetry is composed of three related techniques that are anodic, cathodic and<br />

adsorptive stripping voltammetry.<br />

1.3.3.3a Anodic Stripping Voltammetry (ASV)<br />

ASV is mainly used in the determination of metal ions that can be reduced and<br />

then re-oxidised at a mercury electrode. Voltammetric measurements of numerous<br />

metal ions in various types of samples have been reported (Arancibia et al., (2004) and<br />

Shams et al., (2004)). The term ASV is applied to the technique in which metal ions<br />

are accumulated by reduction at an HMDE held at a suitable negative potential. The<br />

deposition potential is usually 0.3 to 0.5 V more negative than a standard potential for<br />

reduced metal ion to be determined. ASV consists of two steps. The first step is a<br />

controlled potential electrolysis in which the working electrode is held at a cathodic<br />

potential sufficient to deposit the metal ion (M n+ ) on the electrode to form an amalgam,<br />

M(Hg). This step is called accumulation step which is represented by an equation;<br />

56


M n+ + ne - + Hg → M(Hg) (1.8)<br />

The solution is stirred during this process to increase the rate of deposition. Near the<br />

end of the deposition time, stirring is stopped to eliminate convection as a mode of<br />

mass transport. The duration of the deposition step is selected according to the<br />

concentration level of the metals ion.<br />

In the second step, the potential is scanned anodically toward more positive<br />

potential. When the potential of the WE is sufficiently positive the analyte is stripped<br />

from the electrode, returning to solution as its oxidised form. This step is called<br />

stripping which is represented by an equation<br />

M(Hg) → M n+ + ne - (1.9)<br />

The current during the stripping step is monitored as a function of potential giving rise<br />

to a peak-shaped voltammogram. The peak current is proportional to the analyte’s<br />

concentration.<br />

1.3.3.3b Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry (CSV)<br />

CSV is used to determine a wide range of organic compounds, and also<br />

inorganic compounds that form insoluble salts with the electrode material. It has been<br />

found to be widely applicable to many problems of clinical and pharmaceutical interest<br />

(Wang, 1988). Voltammetric measurements of numerous electro active species of<br />

biological significance such as drugs (Ghoneim et al., 2003; Arranz et al., 1999;<br />

Rodriguez et al., 2004; Ghoneim and Beltagi, 2003 and Cabanillas et al., 2003 ) and<br />

toxic substances ( Hourch et al., 2003; Safavi et al., 2004 ) have been reported.<br />

The term CSV was used originally for the indirect trace determination of<br />

organic compounds as mercury salt, involving anodic oxidation of mercury and<br />

subsequently cathodic reduction of mercury. This technique is similar to the previous<br />

57


technique with two exceptions. First, the deposition step involves the oxidation of the<br />

mercury electrode from Hg to Hg 2+ , which then reacts with the analyte to form an<br />

insoluble salt at the surface of the electrode. For example, when chloride ion (Cl - ) is the<br />

analyte, the deposition step is<br />

2Hg(l) + 2Cl - (aq) → Hg2Cl2 (s) + 2e - (1.10)<br />

Secondly, stripping is accomplished by scanning cathodically toward a more negative<br />

potential, reducing Hg 2+ back to Hg and returning the analyte to the solution.<br />

Hg2Cl2(s) + 2e - → 2Hg(l) + 2Cl - (aq) (1.11)<br />

1.3.3.3c Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry (AdSV)<br />

The term AdSV seems to have been first used by Lam et al. in 1983. It is a<br />

powerful analytical technique for the determination of nmol levels of a wide range of<br />

organic compounds (Smyth and Smyth, 1978; Smyth and Vos, 1992). In technical<br />

report for International Union Of Pure And Applied Chemistry under Analytical<br />

Chemistry Division Commission On Electro analytical Chemistry (Fogg and Wang<br />

1999), suggested that AdSV technique is applied to stripping voltammetric technique in<br />

which accumulation is effected by adsorption of mainly organic determinants and that<br />

can be justified less in case of the adsorption of metal complexes in determining metal<br />

ions. The AdSV term should not be applied when there is a change of oxidation state<br />

of the metal ion during the accumulation for example in the accumulation of copper (I)<br />

complexes or salts or in other cases where an organic compounds is being accumulated,<br />

and determined indirectly, as a metal salts or complex such as mercury salts or nickel<br />

complexes.<br />

In this technique the deposition step occurs without electrolysis process.<br />

Instead, the analyte adsorbs on to the electrode’s surface. During deposition, the<br />

electrode is maintained at a potential that enhances adsorption. When deposition is<br />

58


sufficient the potential is scanned in an anodic or cathodic direction depending on<br />

whether we wish to oxidise or reduce the analyte. In recent years, AdSV which<br />

improves sensitivity and selectivity, have promoted the development of many<br />

electrochemical methods for ultra-trace measurement of a variety of organic (Ghoneim<br />

et al., 2003; Ghoniem and Taufik, 2004; Farias et al., 2003 and Hourch et al., 2003)<br />

and inorganic species (Ensafi et al., 2004; Zimmerman et al., 2001) and Jurado-<br />

Gonzalez et al. (2003). Barek et al. (2001a) reported that AdSV on HMDE is much<br />

more sensitive with a typical LOD between 10 -9 and 10 -10 M.<br />

1.3.3.4 Pulse voltammetry<br />

This technique uses pulse waveform in recording its voltammogram which<br />

offers enhanced sensitivity and resolution. The advantage of pulse techniques is that the<br />

waveform is designed so as to discriminate against non-faradic current hence, increase<br />

sensitivity. The enhanced resolution is particularly useful when several electroactive<br />

species are being analysed simultaneously (Fifield and Haines, 2000). In this<br />

technique, current sampling takes place at the end of the pulse and utilise the different<br />

time dependence of faradic (if) and charging current (ic), as shown in Figure 1.12.<br />

+<br />

Current<br />

0<br />

Faradaic<br />

Current, i f<br />

Changing<br />

Current, i c<br />

Pulse time<br />

Sampling time<br />

Time<br />

Figure 1.12 Schematic drawing showing the if and ic versus pulse time course<br />

59


This technique, is aimed at lowering the detection limits of voltammetric measurement<br />

down to 10 -8 M in its differential pulse mode. Increasing the ratio between the faradic<br />

and non-faradic current permit convenient quantitation down to the 10 -8 M<br />

concentration level (Wang, 2000). Differential pulse and square wave techniques are<br />

the most commonly used pulse technique. Differential pulse polarograms or<br />

voltammograms are peak shaped because current difference is measured. The<br />

following section gives an overview of three important waveforms in pulse technique.<br />

1.3.3.4a Differential Pulse Voltammetry (DPV)<br />

In DPV, fixed magnitude pulse (10 to 100 mV) superimposed on a linear<br />

potential ramp are applied to the working electrode at a time just before the end of the<br />

drop as shown in Figure 1.13. The current is sampled twice, just before the pulse<br />

application and again late in the pulse life normally after 40 ms, when the charging<br />

current has decayed. Subtraction of the first current sampled from the second provides<br />

a stepped peak-shape derivative voltammogram. The resulting differential pulse<br />

voltammogram consists of current peaks, the height of which is directly proportional to<br />

the concentration of corresponding analyte. The differential-pulse operation results in a<br />

very effective correction of the charging background current.<br />

E<br />

Step E<br />

Outlet<br />

Time<br />

Pulse<br />

Amplitude<br />

Pulse Width<br />

Sample Period<br />

Sample Period<br />

Pulse Period<br />

Figure 1.13 The schematic diagram of steps in DPV by superimposing a periodic<br />

pulse on a linear scan<br />

t<br />

60


1.3.3.4b Square Wave Voltammetry (SWV)<br />

SWV is a large-amplitude differential technique in which a waveform<br />

composed of a symmetrical square wave, superimposed on a base staircase potential, is<br />

applied to the working electrode. The current is sampled twice during each squarewave<br />

cycle, once at the end of forward pulse and another at the end of the reverse pulse.<br />

Since the square-wave modulation amplitude is very large, the reverse pulses cause the<br />

reverse reaction of the product of the forward pulse. The difference between the two<br />

measurements is plotted versus the base staircase potential as shown in Figure 1.14.<br />

The resulting peak current is proportional to the concentration of the analyte. Excellent<br />

sensitivity accrues from the fact that the net current is larger than either the forward or<br />

reverse components. Coupled with the effective discrimination against the charging<br />

current, very low detection limits can be attained.<br />

Applied<br />

Potential<br />

ESW<br />

1<br />

2<br />

Accumulation Time<br />

τ<br />

Time<br />

Figure 1.14 Waveform for square-wave voltammetry<br />

The advantage of SWV is that a response can be found at a high effective scan<br />

rate, thus reducing the scan time. Because of its high scan rate, it provides a great<br />

economy of time (Arranz et al., 1999 and Ghoneim and Tawfik., 2004). There are<br />

∆E<br />

61


several reports on application of the SWV technique for determination of several<br />

samples as listed in Table 1.8 which involves deoxygenation step prior analysis.<br />

However, in certain case beside it offers the additional advantage of high speed; it can<br />

increase analytical sensitivity and relative insensitivity to the presence of dissolved<br />

oxygen as reported by Economou et al. (2002).<br />

No<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

7<br />

8<br />

Table 1.8 Application of SWV technique<br />

Sample<br />

Ketorolac in human serum<br />

Imidacloprid in river water<br />

Cocaine and its metabolite<br />

Amlodipine besylate in<br />

tablets and biological fluids<br />

EDTA species in water<br />

RDX in soil<br />

Levofloxacin in human<br />

urine<br />

Sertraline in commercial<br />

products<br />

Supporting electrolyte<br />

Acetate buffer, pH 5.0<br />

BRB, pH 7.2<br />

Phosphate buffer, pH 8.5<br />

BRB, pH 11.0<br />

Diluted HCl, pH 2.8 and<br />

0.05 M NaCl<br />

0.1 M acetate buffer, pH<br />

4.5<br />

0.05 M acetate buffer, pH<br />

5.0<br />

0.1 M borate, pH 8.2<br />

Reference<br />

Radi et al. (2001)<br />

Guiberteau et al.<br />

(2001)<br />

Pavlova et al.<br />

(2004)<br />

Gazy (2004)<br />

Zhao et al. (2003)<br />

Ly et al. (2002)<br />

62<br />

Radi and El-Sherif<br />

(2002)<br />

Nouws et al.<br />

(2005a)


No<br />

9<br />

10<br />

11<br />

12<br />

13<br />

14<br />

15<br />

16<br />

17<br />

Sample<br />

Cadmium in human hair<br />

Copper, stannous,<br />

antimony, thallium, and<br />

plumbum in food and<br />

environmental matrices<br />

Imatinib (Gleevec) and its<br />

metabolite in urine<br />

Famotidine in urine<br />

Haloperidol in bulk form,<br />

pharmaceutical formulation<br />

and biological fluids<br />

Copper, cadmium and zinc<br />

complexes with<br />

cephalosporin antibiotic<br />

Triprolidine in<br />

pharmaceutical tablets<br />

Metoclopramide in tablet<br />

and urine<br />

Cefoperazone in bacterial<br />

culture, milk and urine<br />

Table 1.8 continued<br />

Supporting electrolyte<br />

0.01 M TEA, pH 11.0<br />

0.1 M dibasic ammonium<br />

citrate, pH 6.3<br />

0.012 M HClO4, pH 2.0<br />

0.02 M MOPS buffer, pH<br />

6.7<br />

BRB, pH 9.0<br />

Acetic acid, pH 7.34<br />

0.04 M BRB, pH 11.0<br />

0.4 M HCl-sodium<br />

acetate, pH 6.2 and 0.2 M<br />

KCl<br />

BRB, pH 4.4<br />

Reference<br />

Arancibia et al.<br />

(2004)<br />

Locatelli (2005)<br />

Rodriguez et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Skrzypek et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

El-Desoky et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

El-Maali et al.<br />

(2004)<br />

Zayed and Habib<br />

(2005)<br />

Farghaly et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

Billova et al.<br />

(2005)<br />

63


Notes:<br />

Table 1.8 continued<br />

BRB: Britton-Robinson buffer<br />

EDTA: Ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid<br />

HClO4: Perchloric acid<br />

MOPS: 3-(N-morpholino)propanesulphonic<br />

RDX: Hexahydro-1,3,5-trinitro-1,3,5-triazine<br />

TEA: Triethylammonium<br />

1.4 Objective and Scope of Study<br />

1.4.1 Objective of Study<br />

The development of methods for the determination of aflatoxins has been<br />

constantly in demand due to the fact that aflatoxins are a major concern as the toxic<br />

contaminants of foodstuffs and animal feed, and have been recognised as a potential<br />

threat to human health since the early 1960s resulting in frequent economic losses.<br />

The widespread occurrence of aflatoxins producing fungi in our environment and the<br />

reported natural occurrence of toxin in a number of agricultural commodities has led<br />

the investigator to develop a new method for aflatoxins analysis.<br />

In order to maintain an effective control of aflatoxins in food and foodstuffs<br />

proper analytical procedures must be applied. Different analytical methods such as<br />

thin layer, liquid chromatography or enzyme immunoassay test which were<br />

mentioned in Chapter I, have been developed for aflatoxins determination. However<br />

all these proposed techniques have their disadvantages. For HPLC technique, the<br />

method requires well equipped laboratories, trained personnel, harmful solvents as<br />

well as time consuming, and costly in buying and maintenance.<br />

64


For immunological methods such as ELISA technique, it has a few<br />

disadvantages such as long incubation time, washing and mixing steps and also labour<br />

intensive. This method requires highly specific polyclonal or monoclonal sera which<br />

is costly. For radioimmunoassay (RIA) technique, it uses radioisotope which raises<br />

concerns in radiation safety in dealing with and also in disposing radioactive waste. For<br />

micellar electrokinetic capillary chromatography (MECC) technique, it needs preparing<br />

a lot of reagents for the buffering system and takes considerable time to complete the<br />

analysis.<br />

With regards to voltammetric analysis, no stripping voltammetric study of<br />

aflatoxins is reported until now. This study has been proposed in order to develop a<br />

new alternative technique for determination of aflatoxins. This technique is the most<br />

promising method for determination of aflatoxins due to its main advantages compared<br />

to competing analytical techniques such as excellent sensitivity, reasonable speed,<br />

minimal sample pre-treatment, satisfactory selectivity, wide applicability, ability to<br />

undertake speciation analysis and low cost of instrumentation and maintenance as<br />

reported by Economou et al. (2002) and Radi (2003). Stripping analysis has been<br />

proven to be a powerful technique for the determination of both organic and inorganic<br />

electroactive species (Bond, 1980). Differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry<br />

satisfies the requirement of an efficient and senstitive technique for the determination<br />

of aflatoxin compounds because it has been shown to be a powerful technique in<br />

determination of other organic compounds in various sample origins down to ppb level<br />

as reported by Zima et al. (2001), Sun and Jiao (2002), Yardimer and Ozaltin (2004)<br />

and Nouws et al. (2005b).<br />

In this research, the voltammetric behaviour of these compounds would be<br />

studied in great detail and the stripping voltammetry especially differential pulse<br />

stripping voltammetry (DPSV) and square wave stripping voltammetry (SWSV)<br />

techniques could provide accurate and sensitive methods for aflatoxins determination<br />

especially in food sample such as groundnuts, would be investigated.<br />

65


The groundnut is selected for the sample to be analysed in this study since<br />

among foods and foodstuff, peanut and peanuts products are widely utilized as health<br />

food (www.copdockmill.co.uk/aflatoxin). It seem to be significantly contaminated with<br />

aflatoxins. It contains high content of carbohydrate which provides a substrate that is<br />

particularly suitable for toxin production (Neal, 1987). This will affect the quality and<br />

safety of humans life. Futhermore, Aspergillus moulds which produces aflatoxins grow<br />

easy on groundnut.<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 were selected as the subjects in this study due<br />

to the regulatory requirement for their determination in imported raw grounnuts as<br />

imposed by the <strong>Malaysia</strong>n government to assure that this commodity is free from any<br />

toxin contamination before being supplied for the domestic market. AFM1 and AFM2<br />

are not involved in this study since currently no such regulation imposed by the<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>n government even though a regulatory standard has already been set which is<br />

not more 0.05 ppb AFM1 and AFM2 should be present in milk and milk products. For<br />

the time being, the analysis on AFM1 and AFM2 are not being carried out in <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

The other reason, globally, AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 are more concerned with<br />

their contamination in many food samples compared to AFM1 and AFM2 which<br />

contaminate milk and milk products only.<br />

The objectives of this study are:<br />

a) To investigate the electrochemical behaviour of aflatoxins B1 (AFB1), AFB2,<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 on the mercury electrode in appropriate supporting electrolyte.<br />

b) To establish optimum conditions for the determination of those aflatoxins by<br />

the method of differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) and<br />

square wave stripping voltammetry (SWV) techniques with a HMDE as the<br />

working electrode using Britton-Robinson buffer (BRB) solution as the<br />

supporting electrolyte.<br />

66


c) To develop an accurate, sensitive, fast and simple method for the determination<br />

of all studied aflatoxins in food samples such as ground nut and comparing the<br />

results with the established method such as HPLC.<br />

1.4.2 Scope of Study<br />

The studies are as follows:<br />

a) Studies on the voltammetric behaviour of aflatoxin compounds using cyclic<br />

voltammetry (CV) technique as an introductory step. Using this technique, the<br />

effect of increasing concentration of aflatoxins, scan rate and repetitive scanning<br />

on the peak height (Ip) and peak potential (Ep) of each aflatoxin will be<br />

investigated.<br />

b) Studies on the differential pulse cathodic and anodic stripping voltammetriy<br />

(DPCSV) of all aflatoxins. Parameters optimisation include pH of supporting<br />

electrolyte, accumulation potential (Eacc), accumulation time (tacc), scan rate (υ),<br />

initial potential (Ei), final potential (Ef) and pulse amplitude.<br />

c) Using optimised analytical parameters and experimental conditions, the effect of<br />

increasing concentration of aflatoxins to the Ip of the compounds will be studied.<br />

Regression equation, R 2 value, linearity range, limit of detection (LOD), limit of<br />

quantification (LOQ), accuracy and reliability of the method will be obtained.<br />

Ruggedness and robustness tests also will be studied for the proposed technique.<br />

d) The proposed technique will be further investigated in terms of interference<br />

where each aflatoxin will be reacted with increasing amounts of metals ion such<br />

as zinc, aluminum, nickel, lead and copper, and with organic compounds such as<br />

ascorbic acid, L-cysteine and β-cyclodextrin.<br />

67


e) The optimised parameters for DPCSV technique will be applied for square wave<br />

stripping voltammetry (SWSV) including optimisation steps such as the Eacc,<br />

tacc, pulse amplitude, scan rate, voltage step and frequency. The last 3<br />

parameters are interrelated to each other in the SWSV technique.<br />

f) Both DPCSV and SWSV techniques that were successfully developed will be<br />

applied in the determination of aflatoxins content in real samples such as<br />

groundnut. The recovery studies also will be carried out for the accuracy test of<br />

the developed method. The results will be compared with that obtained by<br />

accepted technique such HPLC. For the HPLC analysis, the final solutions from<br />

the extraction and clean-up procedures of groundnut in chloroform were sent to<br />

the Chemistry Department, Penang Branch, Ministry of Science, Technology<br />

and Innovation (MOSTI).<br />

g) The stability of aflatoxins will be determined for aflatoxin stock and standard<br />

solutions according to the following procedures<br />

i) Aflatoxin stock solutions prepared in benzene: acetonitrile (98:2)<br />

will be studied using ultra-violet-visible spectrophotometer. In<br />

this analysis, each aflatoxin stock solution will be monitored<br />

every month (from 0 to 12 months) and the concentrations of<br />

aflatoxins will be calculated from the measured absorbance.<br />

ii) Aflatoxin standard solutions in BRB which was kept in the<br />

freezer at -4.0 0 C will be measured using voltammetric technique<br />

monthly up to 6 months<br />

iii) Aflatoxin standard solutions in BRB which have been added into<br />

the voltammetric cell and exposed to ambient temperature will be<br />

onitored every hour (from 0 to 8 hours) by measuring their peak<br />

height and peak potential<br />

68


iv) Aflatoxin standard solution in BRB which was added into the<br />

voltammetric cell containing BRB at different pH (6.0, 7.0, 9.0<br />

and 11.0) and exposed to ambient temperature will be monitored<br />

every hour (from 0 to 3 hours) by measuring their peak height<br />

and peak potential.<br />

69


CHAPTER II<br />

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY<br />

2.1 Apparatus, Materials and Reagents<br />

2.1.1 Apparatus<br />

A BAS CV-50W voltammetric analyser in connection with a Control Growth<br />

Mercury Electrode (CGME) stand equipped with a three-electrode system and a 20 ml<br />

capacity BAS MR-1208 cell as shown in Figure 2.0 were used for all the voltammetric<br />

determinations. The working electrode was a Hanging Mercury Drop Electrode<br />

(HMDE). As a reference and counter-electrode, a silver-silver chloride (Ag / AgCl)<br />

and a platinum wire were used, respectively. All potentials are quoted relative to this<br />

reference electrode. BAS CV-50W was connected to a computer for data processing.<br />

For robustness test which is required in validating procedure for developed technique,<br />

VA 757 Computrace Metrohm Voltammetric analyzer as shown in Figure 2.1 was used.<br />

A pH meter Cyber-scan model equipped with a glass electrode combined with an<br />

Ag/AgCl reference electrode, was employed for all pH measurements. UV-VIS<br />

spectrophotometer (UV-2501/PC Shimadzu) was used for measurement of absorbance<br />

of all 10 ppm aflatoxin stock solutions and 1 ppm aflatoxin standard in BRB solution.<br />

70


(a) (b)<br />

Figure 2.0 BAS CGME stand (a) which is connected to CV-50W voltammetric<br />

analyser and interface with computer (b) for data processing<br />

Figure 2.1 VA757 Computrace Metrohm voltammetric analyzer with 663 VA<br />

Stand (consists of Multi Mode Electrode (MME))<br />

71


2.1.2 Materials<br />

2.1.2.1 Aflatoxin Stock and Standard Solutions<br />

Aflatoxin B1 (AFB1), aflatoxin B2 (AFB2), aflatoxin G1 (AFG1) and aflatoxin<br />

G2 ( AFG2) (SIGMA) are supplied by Chemopharm with a quantity of 1 mg per bottle<br />

each. The batch numbers of these aflatoxins are listed in Table 2.0.<br />

Table 2.0 List of aflatoxins and their batch numbers used in this experiment.<br />

Aflatoxins<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Batch Number<br />

112K4049<br />

120K4014<br />

11K4003<br />

082K4091<br />

Stock solutions of these aflatoxins with concentrations of 10 ppm each were<br />

prepared by dissolving the total amount of aflatoxin with 2.0 ml acetonitrile. The<br />

solution was transfered into 100 ml volumetric flask. Benzene was added into the flask<br />

until 100 ml mark. The flasks were covered with aluminium foil and kept in<br />

refrigerator with a temperature of 16° C. The absorbances of these stock solutions were<br />

measured using ultraviolet-visible (UV) spectrometer and the concentrations of<br />

aflatoxins were calculated. This measurement of these aflatoxins stock solutions were<br />

carried out monthly per a year while kept under cool condition for stability study.<br />

72


For preparation of aflatoxins standard solution with concentration of 1 ppm, 1<br />

ml of the stock solution was pipetted and placed into an amber bottle. Nitrogen was<br />

bubbled into the solution to remove all the organic solvent until dryness followed with<br />

an addition of 10 ml BRB at pH of 9.0. The solution was well mixed and kept in<br />

freezer at temperature of -4 0 C. This standard solution was analysed by voltammetric<br />

technique very month for 6 months to observe the stability of the aflatoxins in buffered<br />

solution. To obtain the concentration of 0.1 µM of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2<br />

each in 10 ml supporting electrolyte, an amount of 312, 315, 328 and 330 µl was<br />

injected into the cell respectively.<br />

2.1.2.2 Real Samples<br />

Real samples such as groundnut were purchased from a few domestic shops<br />

which are located in Taman <strong>Universiti</strong>, Skudai, Johor. These samples were labeled as<br />

S01 to S15.<br />

2.1.3 Reagents<br />

The chemicals used were all of analytical reagent quality grade and the<br />

solutions were prepared with de-ionised water obtained from a Barnstead Ultra<br />

Nanopure water system. 1% of sodium hypochlorite was used to clean all glasswares<br />

used.<br />

2.1.3.1 Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB), 0.04 M<br />

BRB with a buffering range from 2.0 to 12 was prepared by dissolving 2.47 g of<br />

boric acid (Fluka) in a 1liter flask containing 2.3 ml of glacial acetic acid (MERCK)<br />

and 2.70 ml orthophosphoric acid (Ashland Chemical) and then further diluting to the 1<br />

liter mark with deionised water. The pH of the buffer solution was adjusted to the<br />

73


equired value by addition of 1.0 M sodium hydroxide (MERCK) or 1.0 M<br />

hydrochloric acid solutions (MERCK).<br />

2.1.3.2 Carbonate Buffer, 0.04 M<br />

Carbonate buffer with a buffering range from pH 9.0 to 12 was prepared by<br />

mixing two different solutions which were firstly prepared. The first solution, 0.04 M<br />

sodium bicarbonate was prepared by dissolving 3.36 g sodium bicarbonate (MERCK) in<br />

a 1 liter of de-ionised water. Similarly, for the second solution, 0.04 M sodium<br />

carbonate was prepared by dissolving 4.24 g sodium carbonate (MERCK) in 1 liter of<br />

deionised water. The pH of the buffer was adjusted to the required value by mixing the<br />

two solutions.<br />

2.1.3.3 Phosphate Buffer, 0.04 M<br />

Phosphate buffer was prepared by mixing two different solutions which were<br />

firstly prepared. The first solution, 0.04 M potassium hydrogen phosphate was prepared<br />

by dissolving 5.44 g potassium hydrogen phosphate (BDH) in a 1 liter of deionised<br />

water. Similarly, for the second solution, 0.04 M sodium hydrogen phosphate was<br />

prepared by dissolving 5.68 g sodium hydrogen phosphate (BDH) in 1 liter of deionised<br />

water. The pH of the buffer was adjusted to the required value by mixing the two<br />

solutions.<br />

2.1.3.4 Ascorbic Acid Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

This solution was prepared by dissolving 0.0176 g of ascorbic acid (GCE) in<br />

100 ml of de-ionised water.<br />

74


2.1.3.5 β-cyclodextrin (β-CD) Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

This solution was prepared by dissolving 0.1135 g of C42H70O35 (Fluka) in 100<br />

ml of de-ionised water.<br />

2.1.3.6 L-cysteine, 1.0 x 10 -5 M<br />

This solution was prepared by dissolving 0.012 g of cysteine (SIGMA) in 100<br />

ml of de-ionised water. 1.0 ml of this solution was diluted to 100 ml with de-ionised<br />

water.<br />

2.1.3.7 2,4-dihydrofuran, 0.15 M<br />

This solution was prepared by diluting 1.105 ml of 13.57 M of 2,4 dihydrofuran<br />

(SIGMA) into 100 ml with de-ionised water.<br />

2.1.3.8 Coumarin, 3.0 x 10 -2 M<br />

methanol.<br />

This solution was prepared by dissolving 0.21 g of coumarin (SIGMA) in 50 ml<br />

2.1.3.9 Poly-L-lysine (PLL), 10 ppm<br />

This solution was prepared by dissolving 0.001 g of poly-l-lysine (SIGMA) in<br />

100 ml de-ionised water.<br />

2.1.3.10 Standard Aluminium (III) Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

The standard aluminium (III) solution was prepared by dissolving 0.5212 g of<br />

Al(NO3)3.9H2O (MERCK) in 100 ml de-ionised water.<br />

75


2.1.3.11 Standard Plumbum (II) Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

The standard plumbum (II) solution was prepared by dissolving 0.0530 g<br />

Pb(NO3)2 (EMORY) in 100 ml deionised water.<br />

2.1.3.12 Standard Zinc (II) Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

The standard zinc (II) solution was prepared by dissolving 0.121g ZnSO4.5H2O<br />

(BDH) in 100 ml de-ionised water.<br />

2.1.3.13 Standard Copper (II) Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

The standard copper (II) solution was prepared by dissolving 0.0980 g.<br />

CuSO4.7H2O (GCE) in 100 ml de-ionised water.<br />

2.1.3.14 Standard Nickel (II) Solution, 1.0 mM<br />

The standard nickel (II) solution was prepared by dissolving 0.0963 g<br />

NiCl2.6H2O (MERCK) in 100 ml deionised water.<br />

2.1.3.15 Methanol: 0.1 N HCl Solution, 98 %<br />

This solution was prepared by mixing 98 ml of methanol and 2 ml 0.1 N HCl.<br />

2.1.3.16 Zinc Sulphate Solution, 15%<br />

This solution was prepared by dissolving 15 g of zinc sulphate (MERCK) in 100<br />

ml de-ionised water.<br />

76


2.2 Analytical Technique<br />

2.2.1 General Procedure for Voltammetry Analysis<br />

The general procedure used to obtain stripping voltammograms was according<br />

to the following procedures. A 10 ml aliquot of buffer solution was placed in a<br />

voltammographic cell and the required aflatoxin standard solution was added using a<br />

micropipette. The stirrer was switched on at 300 rpm and the solution was purged with<br />

nitrogen gas for 10 minute. After forming a new HMDE, accumulation was effected for<br />

the required time at the appropriate potential while stirring the solution. A medium<br />

mercury drop size was used. At the end of the accumulation time the stirring was<br />

switched off and after 10 s had elapsed to allow the solution to become quiescent, the<br />

negative going potential was initiated. When further volume of aflatoxin were added to<br />

the cell, the solution was redeoxygenated with nitrogen gas for another 2 minute before<br />

carrying out further voltammetric determination following the mentioned general<br />

procedures.<br />

2.2.2 Cyclic Voltammetry (Anodic and Cathodic Directions)<br />

Cyclic voltammetry of all aflatoxins were carried out by anodic and cathodic<br />

cyclic techniques. The initial parameters for cathodic cyclic voltammetry are as<br />

follows; initial potential (Ei) = 0 V, high potential, (EH) = 0 V, low potential (EL) = -<br />

1.50 V, scan rate (υ)= 200 mV/s, quiet time = 10 s and sensitivity = 1 µA/V. For anodic<br />

cyclic voltammetry, all previous parameters were maintained except for Ei = -1.50 V.<br />

The concentration of aflatoxins used for these experiments were fixed at 1.3 µM.<br />

2.2.2.1 Standard Addition of Sample<br />

5 ppm (1.59 x 10 -5 M) AFB2 standard solution was prepared by taking 5.0 ml<br />

aflatoxin stock solution, degassed until dryness and redissolved in BRB pH 9.0. For<br />

cyclic voltammetry experiment, general procedure as previouly mentioned was<br />

77


followed. A 818 µl of 1.59 x 10 -5 M AFB2 standard solution was then added into<br />

voltammetric cell containing 10 ml of supporting electrolyte which resulted in<br />

concentration of aflatoxin of 1.3 µM in the cell. The solution was purged with nitrogen<br />

for 120 s before being scanned. Further series of scans were carried out with increasing<br />

concentration of the aflatoxins from 2.0 to 3.4 µM. Subsequently a purge of 120 s was<br />

employed between the cyclic voltammetry. A graph of peak current against aflatoxin<br />

concentration was plotted and linearity of the curve was calculated. This method was<br />

repeated for other aflatoxins.<br />

2.2.2.2 Repetitive Cyclic Voltammetry<br />

Using the aflatoxins with concentration of 1.3 µM, repetitive cyclic voltammetry<br />

for anodic and cathodic direction were run using the same parameters as mentioned<br />

before with the υ of 200 mV/s and 10 cyclic number. Any change in the Ip and Ep<br />

height of all aflatoxins due to the increasing number of the cycle were observed.<br />

2.2.2.3 Effect of Scan Rate (υ)<br />

The whole procedure for cyclic voltammetry was repeated for all aflatoxins with<br />

different υ from 20 mV/s to 500 mV/s while other parameters kept constant. The<br />

applied υ were 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 200, 300, 400 and 500 mV/s. Any change in the Ip<br />

and Ep of all aflatoxins due to the changing of the υ were observed. Graphs of log Ip<br />

against log υ, Ep versus log υ and Ip versus υ were plotted.<br />

2.2.3 Differential Pulse Cathodic Stripping Voltammetric Determination of<br />

AFB2<br />

A 315 µl of 1 ppm (0.318 x 1-0 -5 M) AFB2 sample solution in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

was added by means of micropipette into the cell which contained 10 ml of the BRB<br />

with the same pH. The resulting concentration of sample in the voltammetric cell is 0.1<br />

µM (31.4 ppb). The solution was deoxygenated with nitrogen free oxygen for 120 s<br />

78


efore carrying out further voltammetry. Three further series of sample additions were<br />

employed with a purge of 120 s were performed between each cathodic stripping cycle.<br />

2.2.3.1 Effect of pH<br />

The following general procedure was carried out. A 1.26 ml of 5 ppm (1.59 x<br />

10 -5 M) AFB2 standard solution was added by means of micropipette into the cell which<br />

contained 8.74 ml of BRB at pH 9.0. The resulting concentration of sample in<br />

voltammetric cell is 2.0 µM (628 ppb). The solution was deoxygenated with nitrogen<br />

for 120 s before carrying out further voltammetry. The whole procedure was repeated<br />

for series of buffer from pH 4.0 to 13.0 and a graph of Ip vs. pH was then plotted.<br />

2.2.3.2 Method Optimisation for the Determination of AFB2<br />

The optimisation steps for determination of AFB2 were carried out using two<br />

different concentrations of AFB2 which were 2.0 uM and 0.02 µM for high and low<br />

concentrations respectively. The initial parameters used for this optimisation steps are;<br />

Ei = 0 mV, Ef = -1500 mV, Eacc = 0 mV, tacc = 0, υ = 20 mV/s, pulse implitude = 100<br />

mV and quite time = 10 s. General procedure for voltammetric analysis was employed.<br />

The Ip and Ep values were observed. The same procedure was repeated with the same<br />

parameters except for tacc was 30 s. For the optimisation steps, the influence of each<br />

parameter on the Ip and Ep of AFB2 was studied. In each experiment, one of the<br />

parameters was varied while others were kept constant.<br />

2.2.3.2a Effect of Scan Rate (υ)<br />

After the best condition of pH was chosen, the effect of υ was carried out. The υ<br />

were varied from 20 to 100 mV/s while maintaining other parameters constant.<br />

Subsequently a purge of nitrogen gas for 120 s was employed between cathodic<br />

stripping cycles. A graph of Ip against υ was then plotted and the best υ was then<br />

selected.<br />

79


2.2.3.2b Effect of Accumulation Potential (Eacc)<br />

The general procedure was followed with the best condition of pH and υ set to<br />

the required value. Effect of Eacc was carried out with other parameters kept unchanged<br />

as previously mentioned. A graph of Ip against Eacc was then plotted.<br />

2.2.3.2c Effect of Accumulation Time (tacc)<br />

Using the best condition for Eacc, tacc and pH of BRB solution, general procedure<br />

was followed where a series of scans with increasing tacc were carried out. A graph of Ip<br />

against tacc was then plotted.<br />

2.2.3.2d Effect of Initial Potential (Ei)<br />

The effect of Ei to the Ip using the chosen previous optimised parameters was<br />

carried out where a series of scans with different Ei while Ef kept constant were<br />

performed. The effect of Ei was carried out with variation of 0 V to -1.10 V and<br />

increasing towards more negative potential until it reached the required maximum Ip. A<br />

graph of Ip against Ei was then plotted.<br />

2.2.3.2e Effect of Pulse Amplitude<br />

The best conditions of other parameter were chosen and the pulse amplitude was<br />

optimised as the final step in this optimisation procedure. The effect of pulse amplitude<br />

was carried out with variation of 30 to 100 mV. A graph of Ip against pulse amplitude<br />

was then plotted.<br />

2.2.3.3 Method Validation<br />

Validation of the method was examined via evaluation of linearity, limit of<br />

detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), accuracy, repeatability, reproducibility,<br />

80


ecovery, robustness and ruggedness. Multiple scanning of blank before addition of<br />

AFB2 standard solution was performed. LOD was calculated by standard addition of<br />

low concentration of aflatoxins until a response was obtained that is significantly<br />

different from the blank sample (Barek et al., 2001a). The intra-assay and inter-assay<br />

precision for AFB2 was calculated from repeated analysis of certain concentration of<br />

AFB2 during one working day and on different days respectively. Recovery study for<br />

the accuracy of the method were performed by adding an amount of AFB2 into the<br />

eluate of real samples and after extraction and clean-up procedures before being<br />

analysed for AFB2 and percentage recovery of AFB2 was calculated. The robustness,<br />

as a measure of procedure’s capability to remain unaffected by small variations of some<br />

important procedure conditions, was examined by analysis of 0.1 µM AFB2 (31.4 ppb)<br />

under the successive variation of pH of the supporting electrolyte (pH 8.5 – 9.5), Eacc<br />

(from - 0.59 to - 0.61 V) and tacc (75 – 85 s). The ruggedness of the measurement was<br />

examined by applying the proposed procedure to assay of aflatoxin using two different<br />

models of voltammetry instruments that were BAS and Metrohm voltammetry<br />

analysers.<br />

For other aflatoxins (AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2) the same procedures were<br />

followed as mentioned for AFB2 including method validation as well. For all cases,<br />

each calibration curve was constructed and the same statistical parameters were<br />

evaluated.<br />

2.2.3.4 Interference Studies<br />

2.2.3.4a Effect of Cu (II), Ni (II), Al (III), Pb (II) and Zn (II)<br />

The effect of all the above metals on the measurement of 0.1 µM of aflatoxin in<br />

BRB pH 9 was carried out by adding a series of concentration of all metal standard<br />

solutions into the aflatoxin solution in the voltammetric cell started from 0.1 to 1.0 µM<br />

concentration. The graphs of Ip of respective aflatoxin against the concentration of all<br />

standard solutions were plotted.<br />

81


2.2.3.4b Effect of Ascorbic Acid, β-CD and L-cysteine<br />

The effect of ascorbic acid, β-CD and L-cysteine on the measurement of 0.1µM<br />

of aflatoxin in BRB pH 9 were carried by adding a series of concentration of ascorbic<br />

acid, β-CD and L-cysteine solutions into the aflatoxin solution in the voltammetric cell<br />

from 0.1 to 1.0 µM concentration of each compound. The graphs of Ip of respective<br />

aflatoxin against the concentration of added acorbic acid, β-CD and L-cysteine were<br />

plotted.<br />

2.2.3.5 Modified Mercury Electrode with Poly-L-Lysine (PLL)<br />

10 ml of BRB solution at pH 9.0 was pipetted into voltammetric cell followed<br />

with 10 µl of PLL and 0.1 µM aflatoxins. The solution was purged for 10 minutes<br />

before general procedure for voltammetric determination was applied. Ip of 0.1µM<br />

AFB2 was measured. The procedure was repeated by using different pH of BRB.<br />

2.2.4 Square Wave Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry (SWSV)<br />

All optimised parameters which were obtained using DPCSV were applied using<br />

SWSV for determination of 0.1 µM of each aflatoxin.<br />

2.2.4.1 SWSV Parameters Optimisation<br />

All SWSV parameters such as pulse amplitude, voltage step and frequency were<br />

optimised to obtain maximum Ip and defined peak for AFB2. For this optimisation<br />

procedure, 0.1 µM AFB2 was used.<br />

2.2.4.2 SWSV Determination of All Aflatoxins<br />

Other aflatoxins with concentration of 0.1 µM have been measured using SWSV<br />

technique with optimised parameters. The results of Ip and Ep of all aflatoxins were<br />

82


compared with those obtained by DPCSV technique. The effect of concentration on Ip<br />

and Ep of aflatoxins has been observed. The plot of Ip versus concentration of<br />

respective aflatoxin was constructed and all statistical parameters were evaluated.<br />

2.2.5 Stability Studies of Aflatoxins<br />

These studies were carried out by a series of experiments according to the<br />

procedures elaborated below;<br />

2.2.5.1 Stability of 10 ppm Aflatoxins<br />

Stability of 10 ppm aflatoxin stock solutions prepared in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%) was monitored using UV-VIS spectrophotometer using 98% of benzene:<br />

acetonitrile as a blank. 1 ml of sample was scanned three times starting from λ of 500<br />

nm to 280 nm. This measurement was done every month from first day of preparation<br />

for 12 months period time. The concentration of each aflatoxin were calculated using<br />

the formula as stated in Appendix D.<br />

2.2.5.2 Stability of 1 ppm Aflatoxins<br />

Stability of 1ppm aflatoxin standard solutions prepared in BRB pH 9.0 was<br />

performed using DPCSV method. In this experiment, 0.1 µM of each aflatoxin was<br />

scanned every month from first to 6 th month. The graph of Ip current against months of<br />

keeping period was plotted.<br />

2.2.5.3 Stability of 0.1 µM Aflatoxins Exposed to Ambient Temperature<br />

Stability study of 0.1 µM aflatoxins in BRB pH 9.0 which was exposed to the<br />

ambient temperature in voltammetric cell was performed using DPCSV method. In this<br />

experiment, 0.1 µM of each aflatoxin was scanned every hour from 0 to 8 th hour<br />

83


exposure time. The graph of Ip against exposure time was plotted. Nitrogen gas was<br />

purged for 10 min before performing each scan.<br />

2.2.5.4 Stability of 0.1µM Aflatoxins in Different pH of BRB<br />

Stability of 0.1µM aflatoxins in different pH of BRB (6 to 11.0) were observed.<br />

For each pH value, the Ip of aflatoxin was measured for 3 hours. The graph of Ip against<br />

exposure time for each pH of BRB was plotted.<br />

2.2.6 Application to Food Sample<br />

Fifteen batches of real samples (groundnut) were purchased and labeled with<br />

S01 to S15 were used in this study. The samples were subjected to the extraction and<br />

clean-up procedure prior voltammetric analysis using DPCSV and SWSV techniques.<br />

A few techniques which were named as Technique 1, 2 and 3 were studied for<br />

extraction and clean-up of real samples.<br />

2.2.6.1 Technique 1<br />

50 g of groundnut samples were weighed into 250 ml blender, then 100 ml of<br />

acetonitrile-water (9:1) solution were added and shaken for 1 hour. The extraction<br />

solution was filtered through a pre-pleated filter paper to remove solid material and<br />

extract was collected and kept for analysis (Pena et al., 2002).<br />

2.2.6.2 Technique 2<br />

Groundnut samples were first ground in a household blender at high speed for<br />

3 minutes. For extraction, 10 ml of methanol-water (80:20) was added to 5g of sample,<br />

followed by 5 ml hexane. The suspension was hand shaken for 3 minutes and then<br />

passed through Whatman No. 4 filter paper. The aqueous layer was diluted 1 in 10 for<br />

the assays to avoid any interference from methanol, hence the consequence aflatoxin’s<br />

84


concentration in the extracted solution was 1/20 th that in groundnut samples. The<br />

extraction took approximately 15 minutes to perform (Garden et al., 2001)<br />

2.2.6.3 Technique 3<br />

This technique is adapted by The Chemistry Department, Penang Branch,<br />

Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), Pulau Pinang (2003) as<br />

shown in Appendix E. 1.0 ml of final solution in chloroform was taken and put into an<br />

amber bottle followed with degassing and re-dissolved in 1.0 ml BRB at pH 9.0 before<br />

spiking into voltammetric cell for analysis.<br />

2.2.6.4 Blank Measurement<br />

For blank measurement, the procedure of extraction and clean-up steps were<br />

followed as previously mentioned in Appendix E without addition of real sample. The<br />

blank consisted of methanol, 0.1 N HCl, 15% ZnSO4 and chloroform. 1.0 ml of final<br />

solution was collected from extraction procedure in chloroform, degassed and redissolved<br />

in 1.0 ml of BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

2.2.6.5 Recovery Studies<br />

Recovery studies for aflatoxins in groundnut samples were performed using<br />

DPCSV and SWSV techniques. For this study, a certain volume of 1.0 ppm of<br />

aflatoxins as listed in Table 3.3 were injected into 20.0 ml of eluate from blended real<br />

sample (Ammida et al., 2004). The sample with injected aflatoxins was then mixed<br />

with 20.0 ml zinc sulphate, 15%. The total amount of added aflatoxins in the cell<br />

obtained by respective injected volume is shown in Table 2.1. The solution was well<br />

mixed for 30 s and subjected to extraction procedure as previously mentioned. Sample<br />

solution was prepared by degassed of 1 ml of chloroform until dryness followed with<br />

dissolution in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

85


Table 2.1 Injected volume of aflatoxins into eluate of groundnut and the final<br />

concentrations obtained in voltammetric cell<br />

Injected volume of 1 ppm<br />

aflatoxins (ml)<br />

1.6<br />

5.1<br />

9.3<br />

2.2.6.6 Voltammetric Analysis<br />

Final concentration in<br />

voltammetric cell (ppb)<br />

3.0<br />

9.0<br />

15.0<br />

Voltammetric analysis of blank, recovery and real samples were carried out<br />

using DPCSV and SWSV techniques. For each sample, 200 µl of the solution was<br />

spiked into 10 ml supporting electrolyte followed with general voltammetric<br />

determination procedure. Voltammograms of each samples were recorded and any peak<br />

appeared was observed. For determination of aflatoxin in real sample, standard addition<br />

method was applied by spiking 10 ppb of aflatoxin standard followed with general<br />

procedure for voltammetric analysis. The amount of aflatoxin in groundnut sample was<br />

calculated according to the formula as stated below;<br />

Aflatoxin (ppb) = P ’ / P x C x 12.5 (2.0)<br />

where;<br />

P ’<br />

= Ip of sample (nA)<br />

P = Ip of aflatoxin standard (after substract from P ’ ) (nA)<br />

C = Concentration of aflatoxin spiked in the cell (ppb)<br />

12.5 = Factor value after the sample weight, volume of chloroform used<br />

in the extraction and preparation of injection sample have been<br />

considered<br />

86


The detailed information on how this formula was formulated are shown in Appendix F<br />

The results were compared with that obtained by HPLC technique. The HPLC<br />

system used was a Waters model comprising WATERS 600 controller, WATERS 717<br />

auto sampler, WATERS temperature control module and MILLENIUM<br />

chromatography manager, equipped with a model WATERS 420-AC fluorescence<br />

detector filled with standard optical filters with 338 nm bandpass excitation filter and<br />

425 nm longpass emission filter, gain; 16 and maximum span. For chromatographic<br />

separation, a Nova-Pak C-18 steel column (150 x 3.9 mm, 4um particle size) was<br />

employed. The separation was carried out at room temperature using, as the mobile<br />

phase of 70% water, 20 % methanol and 10 % acetonitrile with a flow rate of 1.6 ml /<br />

min at column temperature of 30° C. The injection volume was 30 µl with 12 min for<br />

running time.<br />

87


CHAPTER III<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

3.1 Cyclic Voltammetric Studies of Aflatoxins<br />

Cyclic voltammetric (CV) experiment is normally carried out for the initial<br />

electroanalytical studies of any compound to obtain information on electroanalytical<br />

properties of the compounds before being investigated in depth using other<br />

electroanalytical techniques is carried out (Wang, 2000). In this work, all aflatoxins<br />

(AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2) have been initially analysed by this technique. The<br />

main objective of this experiment was to obtain the electroanalytical properties of<br />

aflatoxin at different scan rates in various pH of BRB solution. Any current peak that<br />

appeared from the voltammogram was evaluated to confirm the type of reaction of<br />

aflatoxin on the mercury electrode. The repetitive cyclic voltammetry were also<br />

performed at certain CV parameters such as scan rate of 200 mV/s in BRB solution with<br />

pH of 9.0. This experiment was carried out to observe the process of accumulation of<br />

aflatoxins on mercury electrode with longer accumulation time. Various pH medium of<br />

BRB have been used in these experiments to observe any involvement of hydronium<br />

ion in the electrode processs of aflatoxins on the mercury electrode (Kamal et al.,<br />

1996). The peak potentials of these compounds which were measured throughout this<br />

work were against an Ag/AgCl as the reference electrode.<br />

88


3.1.1 Cathodic and Anodic Cyclic Voltammetric of Aflatoxins<br />

The parameters set up for cathodic cyclic voltammetric measurement were<br />

initial potential (Ei ) = 0 mV, high potential (EH ) = 0 mV, low potential (EL) = -1500<br />

mV, scan rate (ν) = 200 mV/s and sensititvity = 1 µA/V. A BRB solution with pH 9.0<br />

was initially used as the supporting electrolyte following the previous experiment<br />

carried out by Smyth et al. (1979) using DPP technique. The result that were obtained<br />

showed that the BRB solution with pH 9.0 was the best medium for reduction of<br />

aflatoxins on the mercury electrode. CV experiments results also revealed that the BRB<br />

pH 9.0 is the optimum pH for this reduction to take place. Figure 3.0 shows the Ip of<br />

0.6 µM AFB1 obtained by cathodic cyclic voltammetry in different pH of BRB. The Ep<br />

of AFB1 was shifted to the more negative direction with increasing pH as shown in<br />

Figure 3.1 indicating that proton was involved in the reduction of AFB1 (Sun et al.,<br />

2005).<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13<br />

pH of BRB<br />

Figure 3.0 Cathodic peak current of 0.6 µM AFB1 in various pH of BRB obtained<br />

by cathodic cyclic voltammetry. Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0 and scan rate = 200<br />

mV/s.<br />

89


From the Figure 3.0, the curve rises from pH 6.0 to 9.0 then goes down from pH<br />

9.0 to 12.0. According to Smyth et al. (1979), for pH 6.0 to 8.0, the reduction peak of<br />

AFB1 was caused by the reduction of double bond in benzene ring which conjugates to<br />

the keto group and followed by the protonation of molecule that preceded the reduction<br />

until it achieved maximum reduction at pH 9.0. The possible mechanism for this<br />

reaction is shown in Figure 3.2.<br />

O<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

O<br />

1.34<br />

1.33<br />

1.32<br />

1.31<br />

1.3<br />

1.29<br />

1.28<br />

1.27<br />

OCH 3<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13<br />

pH of BRB<br />

Figure 3.1 Shifting of Ep of AFB1 with incresing pH of BRB. Parameter conditions<br />

are the same as in Figure 3.0.<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

2H +<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

H H<br />

Figure 3.2 Mechanism of reduction of AFB1 in BRB at pH 6.0 to 8.0<br />

90


2<br />

For pH 10 to 12.0, due to decreasing number of hydrogen ions in the supporting<br />

electrolyte that is involved in the reduction process, anion radical was dimerised and<br />

produced a reduction peak. Their mechanism is shown in Figure 3.3.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

2 H 2O<br />

D imer + 2 OH -<br />

Figure 3.3 Mechanism of reduction of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 to 11.0<br />

Using BRB at pH 9.0 as the optimum medium for the supporting electrolyte,<br />

cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 µM of all aflatoxins were obtained where all<br />

aflatoxins produced a sharp and well defined cathodic wave around -1.315 V for both<br />

AFB1 and AFB2, -1.245 V for AFG1 and -1.250 V for AFG2 with a peak current of 42<br />

nA, 30 nA, 47 nA and 39 nA for AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 respectively. The peak<br />

was located not far from the peak of hydrogen over potential which was at -1.450 V.<br />

For all aflatoxins, no oxidation wave appeared in the anodic branch, which indicates<br />

that the aflatoxins reductions are irreversible. Cyclic voltammograms of all aflatoxins<br />

are shown in Figures 3.4 to 3.7.<br />

The effect of initial potential (Ei)) on cathodic peak of AFB1 was investigated.<br />

Varying Ei caused no extra peak to appear for both cathodic and anodic waves which<br />

O<br />

91


show that the Ei did not produce any significant change on the cathodic peak of AFB1.<br />

The Ip were almost the same for Ei at 0 to -0.8 V which was around 22 nA.<br />

Figure 3.4 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFB1, obtained at<br />

scan rate of 200 mV/s, Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB solution at pH<br />

9.0.<br />

Figure 3.5 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB solution at pH<br />

9.0. All parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

92


Figure 3.6 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFG1 in BRB solution at pH<br />

9.0. All parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

Figure 3.7 Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 µM AFG2 in BRB solution at pH<br />

9.0. All parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

For Ei of more than -0.80 V, the Ip decreased to 17 nA as shown in Figure 3.8.<br />

This is because the presence of Zn +2 in BRB solution facilitates the migration and<br />

adsorption of aflatoxin towards the working electrode. This is proven by the study of<br />

93


Zn +2 using CV technique with various Ei and the results are shown in Figure 3.9. There<br />

is no significant change on Ep of AFB1 (-1.30 V) with changing Ei .<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

5<br />

0<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4<br />

E i (-V)<br />

Figure 3.8 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.6 µM AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained by<br />

cathodic cyclic voltammetry. Parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 4.4.<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2<br />

E i (-V)<br />

Figure 3.9 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.1 µM Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained by<br />

cathodic cyclic voltammetry. Parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

Anodic cyclic voltammetry measurement was carried out using the same<br />

parameters with the exception of Ei = -1500 mV (versus Ag/AgCl). The anodic cyclic<br />

voltammograms confirmed that the reduction reaction of all aflatoxins are irreversible<br />

94


whereby only cathodic peak appeared but with a slightly higher current of 46.76 nA at -<br />

1.318 V for AFB1, 35 nA at -1.311 V for AFB2, 52 nA at 1.243 V for AFG1 and 50 nA<br />

at -1.259 V for AFG2. This may be due to longer time of anodic scanning itself, which<br />

gave a longer time for accumulation of aflatoxins on the mercury electrode surface<br />

compared to the cathodic measurement. For example, anodic cyclic voltammogram of<br />

AFB2 is shown in Figure 3.10.<br />

Figure 3.10 Anodic cyclic voltammogram of 1.3 µM AFB2 obtained at scan rate of<br />

200 mV/s, Ei = -1.5 V, Elow = -1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB solution at pH 9.0.<br />

Standard additions of each aflatoxin shows that the peak current at their<br />

respective potential increases with increasing concentrations. The voltammograms of<br />

AFB2 (Figure 3.11) shows that the peak current at -1.315 V increases with increasing<br />

AFB2 concentration. This dependence is represented in Figure 3.12. The<br />

corresponding equation for this dependence is given below;<br />

Ip (nA) = 21.65 x (µM) + 6.605 (R 2 = 0.9857, n = 4) (3.0)<br />

No extra peak was observed with this standard addition either at the anodic<br />

direction or cathodic direction. This result reveals that the appeared peak was due to the<br />

respective aflatoxin and does not from other electroactive compounds.<br />

95


Figure 3.11 Effect of increasing AFB2 concentration on the peak height of cathodic<br />

cyclic voltammetric curve in BRB at pH 9.0; (a) 1.30 µM, (b) 2.0 µ M (c) 2.70 µM and<br />

(d) 3.40 µM. Parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

y = 21.65x + 6.605<br />

R 2 = 0.9857<br />

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4<br />

[AFB2] / uM<br />

Figure 3.12 Peak height of reduction peak of AFB2 with increasing concentration of<br />

AFB2. Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

96


For other aflatoxins, the dependence of current peak to their concentrations in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 is listed in Table 3.0. The regression equations of this relationship show<br />

that the peak heights of aflatoxins are correlate well with the concentration of<br />

aflatoxins. Cathodic cyclic voltammograms of other aflatoxins for increasing<br />

concentrations are shown in Appendix G. The plots of Ip versus concentrations for<br />

other aflatoxins are shown in Appendix H.<br />

Table 3.0 The dependence of current peaks of aflatoxins to their concentrations<br />

obtained by cathodic cyclic measurement in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Regression equation for increasing<br />

concentration from 1.30 to 3.40 µM (n=4)<br />

y = 22.451x + 10.989<br />

y = 21.650x + 6.605<br />

y = 24.756x + 13.072<br />

y = 33.55x + 1.435<br />

R 2<br />

0.9899<br />

0.9807<br />

0.9812<br />

0.9914<br />

Repetitive cathodic stripping voltammetry studies for all aflatoxins were also<br />

carried out in order to observe whether any adsorption phenomenon took place at the<br />

surface of mercury electrode as reported by Ghoneim et al. (2003a). The results show<br />

that the reduction peak of all aflatoxins increases with the number of cycles, which may<br />

be attributed to adsorption of aflatoxins at the mercury electrode surface (Farias et al.,<br />

2003). No other cathodic peak was observed for all cases which show that no other<br />

species was produced by the reduction of aflatoxins. The peak potentials of all<br />

97


aflatoxins were shifted to less negative direction with increasing number of cycles. For<br />

example, repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of AFB2 is shown in Figure 3.13.<br />

Figures 3.14 and 3.15 show the increasing of peak current of AFB2 cathodic peak and<br />

shifting of its peak potential to less negative direction with increasing number of cycle<br />

respectively. For other aflatoxins, their repetitive cyclic voltammogram are shown in<br />

Appendix I.<br />

Figure 3.13 Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0. Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1 2 3 4 5<br />

No of cycle<br />

Figure 3.14 Increasing Ip of 1.3 µM AFB2 cathodic peaks obtained from repetitive<br />

cyclic voltammetry. Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

98


E p (-mV)<br />

1316<br />

1312<br />

1308<br />

1304<br />

1300<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6<br />

No of cycle<br />

Figure 3.15 Peak potential of 1.3 µM AFB2 with increasing number of cycle<br />

obtained by repetitive cyclic voltammetry.<br />

The adsorption of aflatoxins on the electrode surface is expected to be due to the<br />

aflatoxins chemical structures that consist of many functional groups such as ketones,<br />

ester and ether. The presence of these functional groups increases the polarity and<br />

adsorption (Volke and Liska, 1994) of the compound and may be attributed to the<br />

adsorption process taking place on the electrode surface. Furthermore, due to the<br />

presence of the phenyl ring, aflatoxins have surface activity and are readily adsorbed<br />

onto mercury surface (El-Hefnawey et al., 2004). However, a further increase in the<br />

repeatitive cycle tends to slow down the increment of the Ip due to the formation of a<br />

double layer at the mercury electrode (Fifield and Kealey, 2000).<br />

The effect of increasing scan rate, υ (from 20 to 500 mV/s) to the Ep and Ip of<br />

aflatoxins cathodic peaks were observed under the same experimental conditions.<br />

Linear relationship was observed between the log Ip versus log υ for all aflatoxins with<br />

slope values of 0.5346, 0.5097, 0.5623 and 0.5439 for AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2<br />

respectively. The slope value of more than 0.5 indicates that the diffusion current<br />

99


produced by the reduction of all aflatoxins on the mercury electrode are influenced by<br />

adsorption in the electrochemical process at the electrode surface (Gosser, 1994 and<br />

Yaridimer and Ozaltin, 2001). For example, a plot of log Ip versus log υ for AFB2 is<br />

shown in Figure 3.16.<br />

Log Ip<br />

1.9<br />

1.7<br />

1.5<br />

1.3<br />

1.1<br />

0.9<br />

0.7<br />

0.5<br />

y = 0.5097x + 0.4115<br />

R 2 = 0.995<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

log scan rate<br />

Figure 3.16 Plot of log Ip versus log υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB solution at pH 9.0.<br />

Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

Plotting Ep versus log υ for scan rates in the range of 20 to 500 mV/s for all<br />

aflatoxins, linear graphs were obtained according to the equation:<br />

a) Ep (-mV) = 61.415 log υ + 1171.6 (R 2 = 0.9987, n = 9) for AFB1 (3.1)<br />

100<br />

b) Ep (-mV) = 40.065 log υ + 1223.2 (R 2 = 0.9936, n = 9) for AFB2 (3.2)<br />

c) Ep (-mV) = 48.484 log υ + 1134.8 (R 2 = 0.9978, n = 9) for AFG1 (3.3)<br />

d) Ep (-mV) = 49.297 log υ + 1146.0 (R 2 = 0.9984), n= 9) for AFG2 (3.4)<br />

The Ep linearly shifted to the more negative direction which confirms the<br />

irreversibility of the reduction processes on the mercury electrode (de Betono et al,<br />

1996 and Arranz et al. 1999). Figure 3.17 shows a plot of Ep of AFB2 versus log υ in<br />

the range of 20 to 500 mV/s. For other aflatoxins, these plots are shown in Appendix J.


Ep (-mV)<br />

1340<br />

1330<br />

1320<br />

1310<br />

1300<br />

1290<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

y = 40.065x + 1223.3<br />

R 2 = 0.9936<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

log scan rate<br />

Figure 3.17 Plot of Ep versus log scan rate for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB solution at pH<br />

9.0<br />

A linear plot was obtained for the effect of scan rate on Ip of aflatoxins with 2<br />

linear regions. Taking AFB2 for an example, in the first region which is for the faster<br />

scan rate (100 to 500 mV/s) the equation was linear according to the equation Ip =<br />

0.0759x + 24.566 (R 2 = 0.9917, n = 5) as shown in Figure 3.18. At the second region<br />

where the scan rate was slow (20 to 80 mV/s), the linear equation is Ip = 0.2639x + 6.16<br />

(R = 0.9979, n = 5) which was also linear. Due to the slope of slow scan rate region<br />

that is higher than the fast scan rate region, it can be concluded that the reduction of<br />

aflatoxins on the mercury electrode prefers a slow reaction. The plots for other<br />

aflatoxins are illustrated in Appendix K.<br />

As far as the chemical structures of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 are<br />

concerned, the main difference of AFB1 and AFG1 with AFB2 and AFG2 is the<br />

absence of double bond in the terminal furan ring of AFB2 and AFG2 compared to<br />

AFB1 and AFG1. From the result, it suggests that this double bond does not play a<br />

major role in the reduction process at the mercury electrode since all of them gave<br />

single cathodic peak at very close potentials. However, the double bond in the benzene<br />

101


ing which conjugates with the keto group has the potential to be reduced on the<br />

mercury electrode and produce cathodic peak.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550<br />

Scan rate (mv/s)<br />

Figure 3.18 Plot of Ip versus υ for 1.3 µM AFB2 in BRB solution at pH 9.0.<br />

Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.4.<br />

From overall results of CV studies, all aflatoxins reduced at mercury electrode<br />

gave a single cathodic peak with Ip at about 40 ± 5.0 nA for the concentration of 1.3 µM<br />

with Ep between -1.250 V and -1.315 V. All the aflatoxins were adsorbed onto the<br />

mercury electrode. Due to these properties, an adsorptive cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetric technique was developed to obtain more sensitive method for the<br />

determination of trace levels of aflatoxins.<br />

3.2 Differential Pulse Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry (DPCSV) of AFB2<br />

In this experiment, AFB2 was used to represent the aflatoxins since all of them<br />

have the same electrochemical behaviour as those found in previous experiments.<br />

Since the results from CV studies showed that all aflatoxins underwent reduction<br />

102


process only, AFB2 was analysed by DPCSV technique using these parameters; Ei = 0,<br />

Ef = –1.50 V, Eacc = 0 mV, no tacc at υ of 50 mV/s.<br />

103<br />

In this study, AFB2 standard solution was redissolved in BRB at pH 9.0 after the<br />

organic solvent had been completely removed to avoid any effect on the diffusion rate<br />

of electroactive species and the electrical double layer thickness which may increase the<br />

current resistance and further increase the noise level (Kotoucek et al. 1997). BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0 was used as the supporting electrolyte because from the previous<br />

experiment by CV technique, the BRB solution at pH 9.0 was the best solution for the<br />

determination of aflatoxin. The initial result in Figure 3.19 shows that a single peak<br />

with a peak height (Ip) about 5.0 nA was observed at a peak potential (Ep) of -1.256 V<br />

for 1.0 uM AFB2. The other peak which appears at Ep of -0.92 V is the Zn peak from<br />

the contamination of BRB solution. The single peak at -1.256 V was due to the AFB2<br />

reduction peak since no extra peak was observed as previously confirmed by the CV<br />

technique.<br />

Figure 3.19 DPCS voltammograms of 1.0 µM AFB2 (Peak I) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) at<br />

tacc = 0 (b) and 30 s (c). Other parameter conditions; Ei = 0, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc = 0 V, υ =<br />

50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.


The effect of tacc on the Ip of AFB2 peak was also examined. When tacc was set<br />

to 30 s, the Ip of AFB2 increased to 22 nA and at the same time, no increase for the Ip of<br />

the Zn peak (Figure 3.19). This result suggests that AFB2 has been actively adsorbed on<br />

the mercury electrode surface. This phenomenon is similar to the previous result found<br />

by the CV study.<br />

3.2.1 Optimisation of Conditions for the Stripping Analysis<br />

3.2.1.1 Effect of pH and Type of Supporting Electrolyte<br />

The adsorptive cathodic stripping voltammetric response for 2.0 µM AFB2 was<br />

examined in BRB solution over the pH range from 3.0 to 13.0 using cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetry, under the operational conditions: Ei = 0 V, Ef = -1.5 V, Eacc = 0 V, tacc =<br />

30 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV. The results are presented in Figure<br />

3.20.<br />

Figure 3.20 DPCS voltammograms for 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB (Peak I) at different<br />

pH values: (a) 6.0, (b) 7.0 (c) 8.0 (d) 9.0 (e) 11.0 and (f) 13.0. Eacc = 0 V, tacc = 30 s,<br />

υ= 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak.<br />

104


Since only a single cathodic peak for AFB2 was obtained, it can be concluded<br />

that the AFB2 molecule exhibits one reduction peak over the studied pH. It was found<br />

that for pH less than 4.0, no peak was observed. At pH 4.0 and less, the peak of AFB2<br />

was probably overlapped by hydrogen over potential which appeared at less negative<br />

potential (Abu Zuhri et al, 2000). In acidic conditions, the concentration of hydrogen<br />

ion is higher and more readily reduced at the mercury electrode producing a peak at<br />

potential value around -1.20 V.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

The single and characteristic AFB2 peak was initially observed at pH 5.0 with Ip<br />

of 11.0 nA and Ep located at -1.119 V. The increase in the pH gradually increased the Ip<br />

until it reached its maximum value at pH 9.0 (45 nA at Ep of -1.192 V). When there is<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

4 6 8 10 12<br />

pH<br />

105<br />

further increase of pH beyond pH 9.0, the Ip decreased until it disappeared at pH 13.0 as<br />

shown in Figure 3.21. This result is not contradictory with that obtained by Smyth et al.<br />

(1979) when they studied the effect of pH of BRB on the peak height of AFB1 using the<br />

differential pulse polarographic (DPP) technique. They also found that BRB at pH 9.0<br />

gave the highest Ip of AFB1.<br />

.<br />

Figure 3.21 Dependence of the Ip for AFB2 on the pH of 0.04 M BRB solution.<br />

AFB2 concentration: 2.0 µM, Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5V, Eacc = 0, tacc = 30 sec, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 100 mV.


The sharp decrease in Ip at pH 10.0 to 12.0 and no current peak obtained for pH<br />

13.0 indicates that there is deficiency in the amount of hydrogen for reduction process<br />

to take place, hence the peak height decreased. At pH 13.0 no peak was observed<br />

which indicates that at this pH, the chemical structure of AFB2 may be totally damaged<br />

or another reaction has taken place under alkaline medium. This finding was confirmed<br />

by measuring AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0 and followed with the lower pH such as 4.0 and<br />

subsequently increased to pH 9.0. The measurements were then carried out in the<br />

higher pH such as 10.0, 11.0, 12.0 and 13.0 and then back to 9.0 without changing the<br />

solution. The result of this experiment is shown in Figure 3.22.<br />

I p (n A )<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

9 6 4<br />

pH of BRB<br />

6 9<br />

I p (n A )<br />

(a) (b)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

9 10 11 12 13 12 10 9<br />

pH of BRB<br />

Figure 3.22 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 obtained in BRB (a) pH from 9.0 decreases to 4.0<br />

and reincrease to 9.0 (b) pH from 9.0 increase to 13.0 and redecrease to 9.0.<br />

Results show that at pH 4.0, no peak was observed but while the pH was<br />

increased to 6.0 and pH 9.0, the peak appeared which indicated that the structure of<br />

AFB2 was not damaged by the strong acidic condition. When pH was adjusted to pH<br />

13.0, the peak dissapeared and no peak was observed even when the pH was re-adjusted<br />

to 9.0 which showed that at pH 13.0, the structure of AFB2 was totally damaged or<br />

transformed to nonelectroactive compound in the strong basic media.<br />

106


The above finding was further confirmed by measuring the absorbance of the<br />

AFB2 using UV-VIS spectrophotometer. The results from UV-VIS technique are<br />

shown in Figures 3.23a, 3.23b and 3.23c for AFB2 in BRb pH 6.0, 9.0 and 13.0<br />

respectively. The results show that no absorbance was obtained at wavelength (λ) of<br />

365 nm for AFB2 in BRB at pH 13.0 while for AFB2 in BRB at pH 6.0 and 9.0 the<br />

absorbance were 0.104 and 0.102 respectively. This was due to the fact that in BRB pH<br />

13.0 the functional group (ketone), one of the UV chromophore which conjugates to<br />

double bond in benzene ring is damaged due to the opening of this ring by the high<br />

basic condition as reported by Janssen et al. (1997).<br />

(a) (b)<br />

(c)<br />

Figure 3.23 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB2 in BRB at pH (a) 6.0, (b) 9.0 and (c)<br />

13.0.<br />

107


Figure 3.24 shows the opening of the lactone ring when AFB2 reacts with high<br />

alkaline solution. When no keto group conjugated with the double bond, it is difficult<br />

for the carbon-carbon double bond in the benzene to be reduced (Smyth and Smyth,<br />

1978) which produce no reduction peak.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

O<br />

HO<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

Figure 3.24 Opening of lactone ring by strong alkali caused no peak to be observed<br />

for AFB2 in BRB at pH 13.0.<br />

This results shows that the reduction of AFB2 is totally dependent on the<br />

supporting electrolyte which suggests that the reduction of AFB2 involves the reaction<br />

of AFB2 with hydrogen ions originating from the supporting electrolyte (Abu Zuhri,<br />

2000, Herdenandez et al., 1977 and Rodriguez et al. 2005).<br />

The peak response was also examined in the presence of different buffers such<br />

as phosphate and acetate buffers at the pH 9.0. BRB was selected as the most suitable<br />

supporting electrolyte since it gave the highest Ip and good repeteability, as shown in<br />

Table 3.1. It was found that the presence of peak of AFB2 reduction is strongly<br />

influenced by pH and the buffer constituent.<br />

The supporting electrolyte has two roles to play. The concentration of the<br />

supporting electrolyte regulates the electrical resistance of the cell and it also controls<br />

the migration of ions between the working and secondary electrode (Riley and<br />

Tomlinson, 1987).<br />

108


Table 3.1 Effect of buffer constituents on the Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 at pH 9.0.<br />

Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.21<br />

Buffer solution<br />

Britton Robinson<br />

Carbonate<br />

Phosphate<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

50.08<br />

27.82<br />

43.74<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.192<br />

-1.130<br />

-1.140<br />

0.02 M 0.04 M<br />

[BRB]<br />

0.08 M<br />

% RSD (n =5)<br />

0.51<br />

1.19<br />

1.35<br />

The effect of different concentrations of BRB at pH 9.0 as the supporting<br />

electrolyte has been carried out and the results are shown in Figure 3.25 which shows<br />

that BRB with 0.04 M concentration gave the highest Ip of AFB2 compared with other<br />

studied concentrations. In 0.08 M, the Ip decreases due to the excess of supporting<br />

electrolyte concentration causing the ionic migration of the aflatoxin to be reduced<br />

(Riley and Tomlinson, 1987).<br />

Figure 3.25 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 in different concentration of BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

Experimental conditions are the same as in Figure 3.20.<br />

109


Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0.02 M 0.04 M<br />

[BRB]<br />

0.08 M<br />

pH = 6.0<br />

pH = 7.0<br />

pH = 9.0<br />

110<br />

The effect of different pH and concentrations of BRB has been studied and the<br />

results are shown in Figure 3.26. The figure shows that BRB with concentration of 0.04<br />

M at pH 9.0 is the most suitable solution for the voltammetric determination of AFB2.<br />

This can be explained that for 0.04 M at pH 9.0, the migration and adsorption of AFB2<br />

at the working electrode was maximum as compared to other conditions.<br />

Voltammograms of AFB2 in different concentrations of BRB at pH 9.0 are shown in<br />

Figure 3.27<br />

Figure 3.26 Ip of 2.0 µM AFB2 in different pH and concentrations of BRB<br />

Figure 3.27 DPCS voltammograms of 2.0 µM AFB2 (peak I) in (a) 0.04 M, (b) 0.08<br />

M and (c) 0.02 M BRB at pH 9.0 as the blank. Ef = -1.5 V, Eacc = 0 v, tacc = 30 s, υ = 50<br />

mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV. Peak II is the Zn peak


As determined in previous CV and DPCSV experiments, AFB2 were reduced at the<br />

mercury electrode. Based on the chemical structure of aflatoxin, there are a few sites<br />

that may undergo this process. There are double bonds in the terminal furan rings for<br />

AFB1 and AFG1 and a double bond in the benzene ring which is conjugated with the<br />

ketone group for all aflatoxins. Further investigations have been carried out to confirm<br />

which site is actually involved in this reduction reaction at the mercury electrode by<br />

voltammetric study of separate basic compounds that form aflatoxins which are 2,3<br />

dihydrofuran and coumarin.<br />

Another compound is tetrahydrofuran but it does not have any double bond in<br />

their chemical structure which may not be reducable at the electrode, hence no detailed<br />

investigation has been carried out. Their chemical structures are shown in Figures 3.28a<br />

to 3.28c. Other possibility of the chemical structure that form aflatoxin compound was<br />

not studied due to the unavailability of the compound.<br />

O O<br />

(a) (b) (c)<br />

Figure 3.28<br />

coumarin<br />

Chemical structures of (a) 2,3 dihydrofuran (b) tetrahydrofuran and (c)<br />

Voltammograms of 0.02 to 0.2 µM of 2,3 dihyrofuran in BRB pH 9.0 are shown<br />

in Figure 3.29. There is a small peak observed at -1.21 V which has not significantly<br />

increased when the concentration was increased. The result indicates that 2,3<br />

dihydrofuran is not reduced at the mercury electrode which indicates that the reduction<br />

of AFB1 and AFG1 is not due to the reduction of double bond in their terminal furan<br />

rings.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

111


Figure 3.29 Voltammograms of 2,3 dihydrofuran (peak I) for concentrations from (b)<br />

0.02 to 0.2 µM in (a) BRB at pH 9.0. Peak II; Zn peak.<br />

The second compound that may undergo reduction at the mercury electrode is<br />

coumarin (Figure 3.27c). Increasing the concentration of coumarin yields a linear<br />

relationship of Ip corresponding to an equation of y = 25.877x – 35.5 (R 2 = 0.9953).<br />

A plot of Ip versus concentration of coumarin is shown in Figure 3.30.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

500<br />

400<br />

300<br />

200<br />

100<br />

0<br />

y = 25.877x - 35.5<br />

R 2 = 0.9953<br />

0 5 10 15 20<br />

[Coumarin] x10 -5 M<br />

Figure 3.30 Dependence of Ip of coumarin to its concentrations<br />

112


The voltammograms of coumarin with increasing concentration are represented<br />

in Figure 3.31which shows that it was reduced at the mercury electrode producing sharp<br />

and characteristic peak at Ep of -1.49 V. The result of voltammetric study of coumarin<br />

shows that it is solely involved in the reduction of all studied aflatoxins.<br />

As electrochemical behaviour of the aflatoxins closely parallels that of<br />

coumarin, it is likely that the electroactivity of these compounds is associated with<br />

coumarin moiety in their molecules structure. The main difference in behaviour lies in<br />

the fact that the reduction of the aflatoxins occurs at a potential of about 300 – 400 mV<br />

more positive than that for coumarin. This can be explained by the increased<br />

conjugation caused by ketone group in the neighbouring cyclopentanone (AFB1 and<br />

AFB2) or δ-lactone (AFG1 and AFG2) rings. Based on this reason, aflatoxins are<br />

easier to reduce compared to coumarin and their Ep are located at more positive than<br />

that for coumarin.<br />

Figure 3.31 Voltammograms of coumarin at concentration of (b) 34 µM, (c) 68 µM,<br />

(d) 102 µM, (e) 136 µM and (f) 170 µM in (a) BRB at pH 9.0<br />

113


Based on all previous results, it can be concluded that a double bond in the<br />

benzene ring which conjugates with the ketone group undergoes a reduction reaction<br />

that produces a single cathodic peak for all studied aflatoxins. This finding is also in<br />

O<br />

O<br />

HO<br />

O<br />

HO<br />

O<br />

CH 3<br />

CH 3<br />

OH<br />

114<br />

agreement with a few reports that have been previously published for compounds that<br />

have a double bond in the benzene ring which has conjugated with the ketone group<br />

reduced at the mercury electrode. For example, cortisone and testosterone were reduced<br />

and peaks were obtained for the reduction of the C = C double bond at -1.77 V and -<br />

1.84 V (versus SCE) respectively in 0.1 M tri-ethyl ammonium per chlorate (TEAP)–<br />

50 % methanol as reported by Smyth and Smyth (1978). Both compounds are 3-keto<br />

steroids with un-saturation between C4 and C5 as shown in Figure 3.32a and 3.32b.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.32 Chemical structures of (a) cortisone and (b) testosterone.<br />

Smyth and Smyth (1978) also reported that cardiovascular drugs such as digoxin<br />

and digitoxin (Figure 3.33) also undergo reduction reaction which occurs at C=C bond<br />

in the five membered ring structure containing the conjugated carbonyl group. Using<br />

DPP technique, digoxin and digitoxin gave peak at -2.285 V and -2.325 V (versus SCE)<br />

respectively in propan-2-ol – 0.01 M tetrabutylammonium bromide (TBAB).


(C18H31O9)O<br />

CH 3<br />

H<br />

OH<br />

CH 3<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

O<br />

(C18H31O9)O<br />

CH 3<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.33 Chemical structures of (a) digoxin and (b) digitoxin.<br />

H<br />

CH 3<br />

OH<br />

O<br />

115<br />

Other examples for the compounds that undergo reduction reaction which occurs<br />

at C=C bond in their chemical structures are listed in Table 3.2. Other compounds that<br />

have the same chemical structure and reduced at the mercury electrode produce<br />

cathodic peak are enoxacin (Zhang et al. 1996), ofloxacin (Rizk et al. 1998) and<br />

Alizarin Red S (ARS) (Sun and Jiao, 2002). Based on the previous reports, taking into<br />

account that the molecular structure of AFB2 is similar in case where the carbonyl<br />

group conjugates to the double bond in the benzene ring, it is assumed that AFB2<br />

undergoes reduction reaction at the mercury electrode whereby C=C bond in its<br />

chemical structure is reduced at the mercury electrode.<br />

The Ep of AFB2 is also pH dependent and shifted towards a more negative<br />

direction in increasing pH of the BRB solution which indicates the involvement of<br />

protons in the AFB2 electrode reaction (Ghoneim et al., 2003a and Rodriguez et al.,<br />

2004). A plot of Ep versus pH of supporting electrolyte is illustrated in Figure 4.34.<br />

Two ranges were observed in the Ep – pH plot (Range I for pH from 5 to 8 and Range II<br />

for pH from 9 to 12 as in Figure 4.33) with an intersection point at pH 8.7 which was<br />

thought to correspond to the pKa value of the adsorbed AFB2 (Navalion et al. 2002).<br />

This result again suggests that the deprotonated form of the AFB2 is the electroactive<br />

species adsorbed in the HMDE.<br />

O


Table 3.2 Compounds reduced at the mercury electrode<br />

Compound<br />

Imidazoacridinone<br />

Warfarin<br />

Lavonogestrel<br />

Nalidixic acid<br />

O<br />

Chemical structure<br />

H3C<br />

O<br />

N<br />

NHCH2N(CH2CH3)2<br />

N<br />

O O<br />

H<br />

ONa CH2COCH3<br />

N N<br />

C2H5<br />

O<br />

HO<br />

CCH<br />

COOH<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.41<br />

-1.40<br />

-1.44<br />

-1.30<br />

Supporting<br />

electrolyte<br />

Phosphate<br />

buffer at<br />

pH 7.4<br />

BRB at<br />

pH 5.0<br />

BRB at<br />

pH 3.0<br />

BRB at<br />

pH 5.0<br />

Reference<br />

Cakala et<br />

al., (1999)<br />

116<br />

Ghoneim<br />

and Tawfik,<br />

(2004)<br />

Ghoneim et<br />

al., (2004a)<br />

Ibrahim et<br />

al., (2002)


Ep (-mV)<br />

1250<br />

1200<br />

1150<br />

1100<br />

Range I<br />

4 6 8 10 12 14<br />

pH<br />

Range II<br />

Figure 3.34 Effect of pH of BRB solution on the Ep for AFB2. AFB2 concentration:<br />

2.0 µM, Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5 V, Eacc = 0, tacc = 30s, υ = 50 mV/s.<br />

The relation between Ep and pH of the medium over the range, 5.0 to 8.0 is expressed<br />

by the following equation:<br />

Ep (-mV) = 21.4 pH + 1015.9 (R 2 = 0.9777, n = 4) (3.5)<br />

The Ep remains constant for pH 10.0 to pH 12.0 which suggests that within this range of<br />

pH, the reaction is independent of the number of protons involved in the reduction<br />

process.<br />

3.2.1.2 Optimisation of Instrumental Conditions<br />

The voltammetric determination of analyte at trace level normally involves very<br />

small current responses. For that reason it is important to optimise all the parameters<br />

which may have an influence on the measured current. From the previous experiment,<br />

BRB solution at pH 9.0 was chosen as the best supporting electrolyte, thus this solution<br />

has been used throughout this optimisation procedure using differential pulse cathodic<br />

117


stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) technique. The effect of Ei, Ef, Eacc, tacc, υ and pulse<br />

amplitude to the Ip and Ep and of AFB2 peak have been studied. This optimisation<br />

procedure used two different concentrations of AFB2 which are 2.0 µM and 0.06 µM<br />

for high and low concentrations respectively. The former has been initially used<br />

followed with the latter as the final optimisation step. The initial parameters used for<br />

this optimisation were; Ei = 0 mV, Ef = -1500 mV, Eacc= 0 mV, tacc = 15 s, υ = 20 mV/s,<br />

pulse amplitude = 100 mV and quiescent time = 10 sec. Using all the stated parameters,<br />

the Ip obtained for 2.0 µM of AFB2 was 29 nA and the Ep was -1.240 V.<br />

3.2.1.2a Effect of Scan Rate (υ)<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100 120<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1320<br />

1290<br />

1260<br />

1230<br />

0 30 60 90 120<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

118<br />

The dependence of Ip and Ep of AFB2 on υ has been studied. The υ was varied from 20<br />

to 100 mV/s while other parameters were unchanged. Figure 3.35a shows a maximun<br />

response (36 nA) obtained at scan rate of 40 mV/s.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.35 Effect of various υ to the (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 peak in<br />

BRB pH 9.0. Ei = 0, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc = 0, tacc = 15 s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

Ip decreases slowly for the increasing υ from 50 to 80 mV/s and sharply drops for 100<br />

mV/s. The increasing υ has shifted the Ep of AFB2 towards a more negative direction<br />

according to the equation;


Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

E (-mV) = 0.6x (mV/s) + 1230.4 (R 2 = 0.9896, n = 5) (3.6)<br />

as shown in Figure 3.35b. From this study, the υ of 40 mV/s was used for further<br />

optimisation step.<br />

3.2.1.2b Effect of Accumulation time (tacc)<br />

The effect of tacc to the Ip and Ep of AFB2 peak have been studied over the range<br />

of 15 to 60 s as shown in Figure 3.36. It was found that, for the first 40 s, the Ip<br />

increases with tacc. This is due to the larger amount of AFB2 which has accumulated at<br />

the electrode surface with longer tacc. Since the amount of AFB2 is proportional to the<br />

tacc, the resulting peak currents yield a straight line when plotted against the tacc within<br />

the stated accumulation range as shown in Figure 3.36a. This relationship follows the<br />

equation;<br />

Ip (nA) = 0.4895x (x 10 -6 M) + 26.132 (R 2 = 0.9727, n = 5) (3.7)<br />

0 20 40 60<br />

Accumulation time (s)<br />

E p (-m V )<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

1260<br />

1250<br />

1240<br />

1230<br />

0 20 40 60<br />

Accumulation time (s)<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.36 Effect of tacc on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei =<br />

0, Ef = - 1.50 V, Eacc = 0 mV, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mv.<br />

However, when the tacc is longer than 40s, the Ip slowly decreases which is due to the<br />

complete coverage of the electrode surface (Wang, 1985). This complete coverage<br />

119


phenomenon can be confirmed by increasing drop size of HMDE which resulting<br />

increased of the peak height.<br />

3.2.1.2c Effect of Accumulation Potential (Eacc)<br />

The influence of Eacc to the Ip and Ep of AFB2 reduction peak has been<br />

observed. An Eacc means the potential at which the AFB2 is deposited at the mercury<br />

electrode surface. The optimised Eacc refers to the potential that is the most effective for<br />

the deposition of the AFB2 at the mercury electrode surface while AFB2 solution<br />

remains unstirred which produces the largest Ip and minimum side reaction. (Wang,<br />

1985). The result shown in Figure 3.37 shows that over a range of 0 to -1200 mV, a<br />

highest Ip was found at Eacc of -800 mV which indicates that at this potential, strong<br />

adsorption of AFB2 takes place on the electrode surface. The Ip and Ep of AFB2 at this<br />

optimum Eacc are 50 nA and -1.248 V respectively.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 400 800<br />

Eacc (-mV)<br />

1200<br />

E p (-m V )<br />

1258<br />

1256<br />

1254<br />

1252<br />

1250<br />

1248<br />

1246<br />

(a) (b)<br />

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400<br />

Eacc (-mV)<br />

Figure 3.37 The relationship between (a) Ip and (b) Ep with Eacc for 2.0 µM AFB2<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = 0, Ef = -1.50 V, tacc = 15 s, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude =<br />

100 mV.<br />

A linear response was obtained for the Eacc over a range of 0 to -0.80 V ( R 2 = 0.9769, n<br />

= 5). From Figure 3.37b, for Eacc at more negative than -0.80 V with the same Ei (Ei =<br />

0), Ep of AFB2 were constant which indicates that after the maximum Eacc was achieved<br />

and the accumulation process of AFB2 at electrode surface was not effective, there are<br />

120


no more changes in Ep. At the same time, Ip decreased until it totally disappeared at Eacc<br />

of -1.5 V. The result does not contradict with the suggestion made by Harvey (2000)<br />

that the Eacc was usually several tenths of a volt (0.3 to 0.5 V) before the Ep of<br />

electroactive species being investigated. Since the highest Ip with no extra peak was<br />

obtained at an Eacc of -0.80 V, this potential was chosen as the optimum Eacc.<br />

3.2.1.2d Effect of Initial Potential (Ei)<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Further optimisation was performed by observing the effects of Ei to the Ip and<br />

0 300 600<br />

Ei (-mV)<br />

900 1200<br />

Ep (-m V)<br />

1260<br />

1256<br />

1252<br />

1248<br />

1244<br />

1240<br />

0 300 600<br />

Ei (-mV)<br />

900 1200<br />

121<br />

Ep of AFB2. The Ei used in this study were 0, 200, 400, 600, 800 and 1000 mV while Ef<br />

was kept constant at -1500 mV. The result is shown in Figure 3.38a. The result indicates<br />

that when the Ei was changed to more negative values, the Ip slowly decreased until the<br />

Ei was -800mv. However at -1000 mV the Ip sharply increased and gave a maximum<br />

response (53 nA). In other words, when the Ei was changed through this manner, the<br />

window of scanning potential was smaller and hence, the time for analysis became<br />

shorter. For Ei which was more negative than -1000 mV, the scan was not performed<br />

due to the very short range of scanning potential. Also because of the instrumental<br />

limitations, this experiment cannot be continued unless other instrumental parameters<br />

such as pulse amplitude and υ are changed.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.38 Effect of Ei on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ef = -<br />

1.50 V, Eacc = -0.80 V, tacc = 40 s, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV


Ip (nA )<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 30 60 90 120 150<br />

Pulse amplitude (mV)<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1300<br />

1260<br />

1220<br />

1180<br />

1140<br />

0 30 60 90 120<br />

Pulse amplitude (mV)<br />

122<br />

From Figure 3.38b, Ep remains constant for Ei of 0 to -400 mV. It started to shift<br />

towards a more negative direction when the Ei was -600 mV and remained constant<br />

after this value. This experiment reveals that the best potential window was from -1.0<br />

V to -1.50 V which can save the analysis time and at the same time gave maximum Ip.<br />

3.2.1.2e Effect of Pulse Amplitude<br />

The effect of the pulse amplitude on the Ip shows that the Ip increased and Ep<br />

displaced towards less negative direction when the pulse amplitude increased from the<br />

range of 30 to 100mV as shown in Figure 4.39. The result shows that a maximum value<br />

of Ip (53 nA) was obtained at pulse amplitude of 100 mV. At the higher value of pulse<br />

amplitude, the Ip is slightly increased but peak broadening was observed, so 100 mV is<br />

chosen for optimum pulse amplitude.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.39 Effect of pulse amplitude on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.50 V, Eacc = -0.80 V, t acc = 40 s and υ = 40 mV/s.<br />

From this study, the optimum conditions for electroanalytical determination of<br />

2.0 µM AFB2 by DPCSV technique were as follows; Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = - 1.5 V,<br />

Eacc = -0.80 V, tacc = 40 s, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV. Using this<br />

optimised parameters, the Ip and Ep of 2.0 uM AFB2 were found to be 53 nA and -1.208<br />

V respectively which was able to enhance the peak current to about 83% as compared to<br />

that obtained by unoptimised parameters.


ip (nA)<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

0 400 800 1200 1600<br />

Accumulation potential (-mV)<br />

123<br />

From the previous optimisation procedures, the Ip of AFB2 was enhanced by<br />

83% and an attempt was made to get higher Ip by further optimisation steps using the<br />

lower concentration of AFB2. The reason is using high concentration of AFB2 may lead<br />

to the formation of mercury electrode saturation due to the adsorption of AFB2. This<br />

optimisation was carried out using 0.06 µM AFB2 and all previous optimised<br />

parameters were applied.<br />

The optimisation steps followed the same procedure as for 2.0 µM AFB2. The Ip<br />

and Ep initially obtained for 0.06 µM AFB2 were 13.90 nA and -1.232 V respectively.<br />

The effect of Eacc on the Ip and Ep of AFB2 as shown in Figure 3.40 revealed that the Ip<br />

obtained for Eacc of -200 mV, -400 mV, -600 mV, -800 mV and -1000mV are not<br />

similar which were about 14 nA compared to 11.37 nA and 12.42 nA for 0 and -1100<br />

mV respectively. No peak was observed for Eacc more negative than -1100 mV.<br />

Figure 3.40 Effect of Eacc on Ip of 0.06 µM AFB2. Ei = - 1.0 V, Ef = -1.50 V, tacc = 40<br />

s, scan rate = 40 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

Using the potential window of Ei = -1.0 V and Ef = -1.4 V, the optimum Eacc<br />

was -0.60 V which gave the Ip of 16.84 nA compared to another potential range (Ei = -<br />

1.0 V and Ef = -1.50 V) which produced only 13.78 nA. The Ep of AFB2 remained<br />

constant for all studied Eacc. The results suggested that using lower concentration, the<br />

optimum Eacc is less negative compared to the higher concentration because for the<br />

lower concentration, the electroactive species could easily completely reduce at the<br />

mercury electrode. The Ep of AFB2 was independent of the Eacc at the low


concentrations. From this experiment, Eacc = -0.6 V, Ei = -1.0 V and Ef = -1.40 V were<br />

chosen as the optimum condition for Eacc and potential window respectively.<br />

The effect of the tacc to the Ip of AFB2 was also investigated and the result is<br />

shown in Figure 3.41a which shows that by increasing tacc, for the range of 20 to 80 s,<br />

the Ip linearly increased following the equation:<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Ip (nA) = 0.4038x (x s) - 0.2847 (R 2 = 0.999, n = 5) (3.8)<br />

The maximum Ip of 31.86 nA was obtained at an Eacc of 80 s. When AFB2 was<br />

deposited at the mercury electrode for more than 80 s, the Ip was not significantly<br />

increased (Figure 3.41a) which may be due to the saturation of the mercury electrode<br />

surface and adsorptive equilibrium was achieved (Shams et al. 2004). Due to this<br />

reason, the tacc at 80 s was chosen as the optimum tacc . The Ep of AFB2 was shifted<br />

toward less negative direction with increasing tacc as shown in Figure 3.41b.<br />

0 30 60 90 120 150<br />

Accumulation time (s)<br />

E p (-m V)<br />

1250<br />

1240<br />

1230<br />

1220<br />

1210<br />

1200<br />

0 30 60 90 120 150<br />

t acc (s)<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.41 Effect of tacc on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 0.06 µM in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = - 1.0<br />

V, Ef = -1.40 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 100 mV.<br />

124<br />

The relationship between the υ and Ip of AFB2 cathodic peak was also<br />

investigated, which revealed that when the υ is increased, the Ip also increased as shown


in Figure 3.42a. For the υ between 20 to 50 mV/s, the Ip is linearly proportional to the υ<br />

according to the following equation:<br />

I p (n A)<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Ip (nA) = 0.6481x (x mV/ s) + 5. 8407 (R 2 = 0.9999 n = 3) (3.9)<br />

The Ip was not significantly different when the υ was faster than 60 mV/s. Therefore,<br />

50 mV/s was selected as the optimum υ which gave the maximum Ip of AFB2. The Ep<br />

of AFB2 has linearly shifted towards a more negative direction for this range and a<br />

small change for the υ of 60 and 80 mV/s as shown in Figure 3.42b. Due to<br />

instrumentation limitations, for the υ of 50 mV/s, the pulse amplitude was changed to<br />

80 mV instead of 100 mV. Without that, the Ip of AFB2 could not be automatically<br />

calculated by the computer software. The maximum Ip that was obtained from this<br />

optimisation was 38.18 nA at Ep of -1.23 V which was about 200% higher than before<br />

being optimised (13.90 nA at -1.232 V). Figure 3.44 illustrates the voltammograms of<br />

0.06 uM AFB2 obtained under optimised and unoptimised conditions.<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

Ep ( -m V )<br />

1225<br />

1220<br />

1215<br />

1210<br />

1205<br />

1200<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.42 Effect of υ on (a) Ip and (b) Ep of 0.06 µM AFB2. Ei = - 1.0 V, Ef = -1.40<br />

V, Eacc = -0.60 V and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

125


Figure 3.43 Voltammogramms of 0.06 µM AFB2 obtained under (a) unoptimised and<br />

(b) optimised parameters in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

From this optimisation steps, the final optimum parameters of DPCSV for<br />

determination of 0.06 µM AFB2 compound are; Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.40 V, Eacc =<br />

-0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV. Table 3.3 represents all<br />

optimised parameters for both low and high concentrations of AFB2.<br />

Table 3.3 Optimum parameters for 0.06 µM and 2.0 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Parameters<br />

Ei (V)<br />

Ef (V)<br />

Eacc (V)<br />

tacc (s)<br />

υ (mV/s)<br />

Pulse amplitude<br />

0.06 µM AFB2<br />

-1.0<br />

-1.4<br />

-0.6<br />

80<br />

50<br />

80<br />

2.0 µM AFB2<br />

-1.0<br />

-1.5<br />

-0.8<br />

40<br />

40<br />

100<br />

126


For voltammetric study of other aflatoxin except AFG1, the optimum<br />

parameters for lower concentration of AFB2 was used throughout the experiments since<br />

it give more sensitive and shorter analysis time compared to other optimum parameters.<br />

For AFG1, only Ei was changed to -0.95 V to obtain the peak that is located at the<br />

middle of the potential range.<br />

3.2.2 Analysis of Aflatoxins<br />

The optimum parameters determined were then used for determination of 0.1<br />

µM AFB2, AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2. The values of Ip and Ep obtained from these<br />

analysis are listed in Table 3.4. The relative standard deviation (RSD) for five<br />

measurements of each aflatoxins are less than 5% which means that the precision of the<br />

method is good and the obtained analytical information has good reliability as reported<br />

by Aboul-Eneim et al. (2001). Voltammograms of each aflatoxin are shown in Figure<br />

3.44a to 3.44d. Voltammograms of four aflatoxins which were mixed together are<br />

shown in Figure 3.45 which shows that the combination of peak from AFB1 and AFB2<br />

and also from AFG1 and AFG2 produced two shoulders.<br />

Table 3.4 The Ip and Ep of aflatoxins obtained by optimised parameters in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0 using DPCSV technique<br />

Aflatoxin, 0.1 µM<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Ip (nA), (n=5)<br />

57.38 ± 0.43<br />

57.49 ± 1.02<br />

56.85 ± 1.28<br />

56.20 ± 1.16<br />

RSD (%)<br />

0.75<br />

1.77<br />

2.25<br />

2.06<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.22<br />

-1.23<br />

-1.15<br />

-1.17<br />

127


(a) (b)<br />

(c) (d)<br />

Figure 3.44 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM (a) AFB1, (b) AFG1, (c) AFB2 and (d)<br />

AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V (except for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

128


Figure 3.45 Voltammograms of (b) mixed aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 as the blank<br />

(a). Parameters condition; Ei = -0.95 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50<br />

mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

A study was carried out to observe a relationship between Ip and concentration<br />

of aflatoxins. For each aflatoxin, the calibration curve was prepared by a series of<br />

standard addition of aflatoxins. Statistical parameters such as linearity range, R 2 value,<br />

limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), accuracy and precision were<br />

evaluated. For ruggedness and robustness tests of the proposed technique, only AFB2<br />

was used.<br />

3.2.2.1 Calibration Curves of Aflatoxins and Validation of the Proposed Method<br />

3.2.2.1a Calibration curve of AFB2<br />

The calibration curve for AFB2 determination was established by applying the<br />

developed procedure. The Ip of AFB2 with increasing concentration is shown in Figure<br />

3.46 which shows that after Ip achieved its maximum value it tends to level off with<br />

further addition of AFB2 standard solution as expected for a process that was limited by<br />

adsorption of analyte. This phenomenon was similarly observed in the previous study<br />

129


carried out by the CV technique. The linear plot of Ip versus the concentration of AFB2<br />

is shown in Figure 3.47. Their voltammograms are shown in Appendix L<br />

I p (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

200<br />

160<br />

120<br />

80<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50<br />

[AFB2] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.46 Increasing concentration of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. The parameter<br />

conditions are Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

y = 5.5385x + 3.2224<br />

R 2 40<br />

0<br />

= 0.9980<br />

0 10 20<br />

[AFB2] X10<br />

30 40<br />

-8 M<br />

Figure 3.47 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0. The<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure 4.46<br />

It shows that the range of linearity was found to be from 2.0 to 32.0 x 10 -8 M<br />

(6.29 to 100.63 ppb) with a LOD of 0.796 x 10 -8 M (2.50 ppb) and LOQ was 2.65 x<br />

10 -8 M (8.33 ppb). The R 2 value was 0.9980. The LOD was determined by standard<br />

130


addition of lower concentration of analyte until a sample peak is obtained that was<br />

significantly different from the blank signal (Barek et al., 1999).<br />

For the determination of precision of the developed method, the reproducibility<br />

was calculated from 8 independent measurements of 0.10 µM and 0.20 µM of AFB2<br />

solution on the same day, obtaining relative standard deviations (RSD) of 2.83 % and<br />

0.72% respectively. The precision is good since the mean values do not exceeds 15%<br />

of the variance coefficient (CV) (Torreiro et al. 2004). Voltammograms of these<br />

measurements are shown in Appendix M. For the inter-days (within 3 days) accuracy<br />

determinations, the RSD for day 1, day 2 and day 3 obtained for measurement of 0.10<br />

µM are 2.83%, 2.39% and 1.31% respectively and for 0.20 µM were 0.72 %, 1.03 %<br />

and 0.98 %. Voltammograms of these measurements for 0.10 µM AFB2 are shown in<br />

Appendix N. The results of these precision studies for intra-day and inter-day are<br />

shown in Table 3.5.<br />

Table 3.5 Ip (in nA) obtained for intra-day and inter-day precision studies of 0.10<br />

µM and 0.20 µM by the proposed voltammetric procedure (n=8)<br />

[AFB2]<br />

0.1 µM<br />

0.2 µM<br />

Intra-day<br />

measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

57.68 ± 1.63<br />

(2.83%)<br />

114.87 ± 0.83<br />

(0.72%)<br />

Day 1<br />

57.68 ± 1.63<br />

(2.83%)<br />

114.87 ± 0.83<br />

(0.72%)<br />

Inter-day measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

Day 2<br />

56.52 ± 1.35<br />

(2.39%)<br />

113.85 ± 1.17<br />

(1.03 %)<br />

Day 3<br />

56.59 ± 0.74<br />

(1.31%)<br />

112.78 ± 1.11<br />

(0.98%)<br />

131


The accuracy of the method is defined as the closeness of agreement between<br />

the experiment result and the true value (Chan et al., 2004). It is determined by<br />

calculating the percentage of relative error between the measured mean concentrations<br />

and the added concentrations (Torriero, 2004). In order to determine the accuracy of<br />

the proposed method, a recovery study was carried out by the addition of an amount of<br />

three different concentrations of AFB2 (0.10 µM, 0.15 µM and 0.20 µM) into the<br />

voltammetric cell and measuring the peak currents of respective concentrations. The<br />

actual amount of AFB2 found in the cell were calculated using the obtained regression<br />

equation (y = 5.5385x + 3.2224). The recoveries obtained were 97.29 ± 1.29 %, 97.15 ±<br />

0.79 % and 99.39 ± 0.50 % respectively as shown in Table 3.6. The result shows that<br />

the recovery of AFB2 standard is considered good.<br />

No of<br />

experiment<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

Table 3.6 Mean values for recovery of AFB2 standard solution (n = 3)<br />

Amount<br />

added<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

10<br />

15<br />

20<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

56.32<br />

55.45<br />

58.04<br />

85.21<br />

84.78<br />

85.10<br />

113.85<br />

114.20<br />

113.75<br />

Amount<br />

found<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

9.59<br />

9.44<br />

9.88<br />

14.80<br />

14.73<br />

14.78<br />

19.97<br />

20.03<br />

19.94<br />

Recovery<br />

(%)<br />

95.90<br />

94.40<br />

98.80<br />

98.67<br />

98.25<br />

98.53<br />

99.85<br />

100.15<br />

99.70<br />

%Recovery ± SD<br />

(RSD)<br />

96.37 ± 2.24<br />

(2.39 %)<br />

98.47 ± 0.24<br />

(0.24 %)<br />

99.90 ± 0.23<br />

(0.23 %)<br />

132


The robustness of the proposed technique was evaluated by examining the<br />

influence of small variation in some of the most important procedural conditions,<br />

including pH (8.5 to 9.5), Eacc (-0.59 V and -0.61 V) and tacc (75 s and 85 s) to the Ip of<br />

AFB2 (Ghoneim et al., 2004b). The results of these studies are shown in Table 3.7.<br />

Using F test with 95 % degree of freedom, the results showed that none of these<br />

variables significantly affected the obtained Ip of AFB2. Thus, the proposed technique<br />

could be considered robust.<br />

Table 3.7 Influence of small variation in some of the assay conditions of the<br />

proposed procedure on its suitability and sensitivity using 0.10 µM AFB2<br />

Variable<br />

pH 9.0<br />

8.5<br />

9.5<br />

Eacc -0.60 V<br />

-0.59 V<br />

-0.61 V<br />

tacc 80 s<br />

75 s<br />

85 s<br />

Condition<br />

Eacc = -0.60 V<br />

tacc = 80 s<br />

pH = 9.0<br />

tacc = 80 s<br />

pH = 9.0<br />

Eacc = -0.60 V<br />

Ip of AFB2 (nA)<br />

± SD, n=5<br />

60.62 ± 0.88<br />

58.82 ± 0.79<br />

59.30 ± 0.44<br />

60.62 ± 0.88<br />

58.78 ± 1.02<br />

59.82 ± 0.91<br />

60.62 ± 0.88<br />

58.78 ± 0.48<br />

60.90 ± 0.76<br />

Recovery ±SD (%)<br />

n = 5<br />

103.01 ±1.50<br />

100.33 ± 1.35<br />

101.15 ± 0.75<br />

103.01 ± 0.48<br />

100.26 ± 1.75<br />

102.04 ± 1.56<br />

103.01 ± 0.48<br />

100.26 ± 0.82<br />

103.49 ± 1.30<br />

Moreover, the ruggedness of the proposed technique was examined by applying<br />

the procedure to the analysis of 0.1 µM AFB2 using two potentiostat models, BAS CV<br />

133


450 W and VA 757 Metrohm Analysers, under the same optimised experimental<br />

parameters. The results of these studies are listed in Table 3.8. Using the same<br />

statistical test, the results show no significant difference in the Ip of AFB2 obtained by<br />

using both analysers which indicates that the proposed procedure could be considered<br />

rugged. Detailed information on F test for robustness and ruggedness evaluations are<br />

elaborated in Appendix O.<br />

Table 3.8 Results of ruggedness test for proposed method using 0.10 µM AFB2<br />

Voltammetric analyser<br />

BAS CV50W<br />

VA 757 Metrohm<br />

3.2.2.1b Calibration Curve of AFB1<br />

Ip of AFB2 ± SD<br />

(nA) , n = 5<br />

58.08 ± 1.63<br />

57.98 ± 0.83<br />

Recovery ± SD (%)<br />

n = 5<br />

99.11 ± 2.79<br />

98.94 ± 1.42<br />

Using the same approach as carried out for AFB2, the calibration curve for<br />

AFB1 was constructed by plot of Ip of AFB1 versus their concentrations. DPCSV<br />

measurements of increasing concentrations were applied and the result is shown in<br />

Figure 3.48. Figure 3.49 shows the linear curve for AFB1 which has a linear range<br />

between 2.0 to 32.0 x 10 -8 M (6.29 to 100.63 ppb) with a R 2 value of 0.9989. LOD of<br />

the measurement of AFB1 was 0.5 x 10 -8 M (1.56 ppb). LOQ was 1.67 x 10 -8 M (5.2<br />

ppb). Voltammograms of AFB1 with successive standard addition for AFB1 are shown<br />

in Appendix P.<br />

134


Ip (nA)<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50<br />

0<br />

[AFB1] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.48 Standard addition of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

y = 5.4363x + 3.7245<br />

R 2 = 0.9989<br />

0 10 20 30 40<br />

[AFB1] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.49 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0. All<br />

parameter conditions used are the same as stated in Figure 3.48.<br />

135


Repeatability was examined by performing five replicate measurements for 0.10<br />

and 0.20 µM AFB1 both intra-day and inter-day measurements for it precision and the<br />

result is shown in Table 3.9. Relative standard deviation (RSD) of 0.10 µM and 0.20<br />

µM for intra-day measurement were 1.83% and 0.74% respectively have been achieved.<br />

For inter-day measurements, RSD of 0.10 µM of AFB1 for day 1, day 2 and day 3 were<br />

1.83%, 4.37% and 2.86% respectively and for 0.20 µM RSD of Ip were 0.74%, 1.93%<br />

and 0.56%. The results indicate the high precision of the proposed procedure.<br />

The accuracy of the proposed method was evaluated by applying the same<br />

procedure as for AFB2. The results are shown in Table 3.10 which shows that the<br />

accuracy of the proposed method is considered high.<br />

Table 3.9 Ip (in nA) obtained for intra-day and inter-day precision studies of 0.10<br />

µM and 0.20 µM AFB1 by proposed voltammetric procedure (n=5)<br />

[AFB1]<br />

0.10 µM<br />

0.20 µM<br />

Intra-day<br />

measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

58.64 ± 1.11<br />

(1.89%)<br />

112.84 ± 0.82<br />

(0.73%)<br />

Day 1<br />

58.64 ± 1.11<br />

(1.89%)<br />

112.84 ± 0.82<br />

(0.73%)<br />

Inter-day measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

Day 2<br />

58.53 ± 1.01<br />

(1.72%)<br />

112.68 ± 0.81<br />

(0.72%)<br />

Day 3<br />

57.49 ± 0.67<br />

(1.13%)<br />

113.26 ± 0.63<br />

(0.56%)<br />

136


No of<br />

experiment<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

Table 3.10 Mean values for recovery of AFB1 standard solution (n = 3)<br />

Amount<br />

added<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

10<br />

15<br />

20<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

58.49<br />

57.11<br />

57.80<br />

84.70<br />

85.24<br />

85.85<br />

112.26<br />

113.32<br />

112.58<br />

3.2.2.1c Calibration Curve of AFG1<br />

Amount<br />

found<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

10.07<br />

9.83<br />

9.95<br />

14.89<br />

14.97<br />

15.08<br />

19.99<br />

20.06<br />

19.96<br />

Recovery<br />

(%)<br />

100.70<br />

98.30<br />

99.50<br />

99.27<br />

99.80<br />

100.53<br />

99.97<br />

100.31<br />

99.80<br />

137<br />

Recovery ± SD (%)<br />

(RSD)<br />

99.50 ± 1.20<br />

(0.21 %)<br />

99.87 ± 0.63<br />

(0.63 %)<br />

100.15 ± 0.49<br />

(0.26 %)<br />

The validation of this proposed method for quantitative assay of AFG1 was<br />

examined via the evaluation of the same parameters as for AFB1. The effect of<br />

increasing concentration of AFG1 to their Ip up to 45 x 10 -8 M (147.6 ppb) is shown in<br />

Figure 3.50. The calibration curve with a linear range of 2.0 to 32.0 x 10 -8 M (6.56 to<br />

105 ppb) with a R 2 value of 0.9992 was obtained as shown in Figure 3.51. LOD value<br />

for this measurement was 1.0 x 10 -8 M (3.28 ppb) and LOQ was 3.33 x 10 -8 M (10.93<br />

ppb) Voltammograms of AFG1 with increasing concentration are shown in Appendix<br />

Q. The results for the precision and accuracy tests are listed Table 3.11 and 3.12<br />

respectively.


I p (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50<br />

[AFG1] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.50 Effect of concentration to Ip of AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -0.95 V,<br />

Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

y = 5.5899x + 3.708<br />

R 2 = 0.9992<br />

0 10 20 30 40<br />

[AFG1] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.51 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

The parameter conditions are same as in Figure 3.50.<br />

138


Table 3.11 Ip (in nA) obtained for intra-day and inter-day precision studies of 0.10<br />

µM and 0.20 µM of AFG1 by proposed voltammetric procedure (n=5)<br />

[AFG1]<br />

0.10 µM<br />

0.20 µM<br />

No of<br />

experiment<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

Intra-day<br />

measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

58.11 ± 0.93<br />

(1.60%)<br />

117.60 ± 1.24<br />

(1.05%)<br />

Day 1<br />

58.11 ± 0.93<br />

(1.60%)<br />

117.60 ± 1.24<br />

(1.05%)<br />

Inter-day measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

Day 2<br />

59.34 ± 0.81<br />

(1.37%)<br />

118.85 ± 1.12<br />

(0.94 %)<br />

Day 3<br />

57.56 ± 1.09<br />

(1.89%)<br />

117.65 ± 1.21<br />

(1.02%)<br />

Table 3.12 Mean values for recovery of AFG1 standard solution (n = 3)<br />

Amount<br />

added<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

10<br />

15<br />

20<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

58.83<br />

58.16<br />

57.16<br />

88.20<br />

89.62<br />

88.78<br />

118.16<br />

117.52<br />

118.10<br />

Amount<br />

found<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

9.97<br />

9.98<br />

9.81<br />

14.78<br />

15.02<br />

14.88<br />

19.80<br />

19.69<br />

19.79<br />

Recovery<br />

(%)<br />

99.70<br />

99.80<br />

98.10<br />

98.53<br />

100.13<br />

99.20<br />

99.00<br />

98.45<br />

98.95<br />

Recovery ± SD (%)<br />

(RSD)<br />

99.20 ± 0.95<br />

(0.95 %)<br />

99.28 ± 0.80<br />

(0.81 %)<br />

98.80 ± 0.30<br />

(0.30 %)<br />

139


3.2.2.1d Calibration Curve of AFG2<br />

The applicability of the proposed DPCSV technique as an analytical method for<br />

the last type of aflatoxin which is AFG2 was examined by measuring the peak current<br />

of AFG2 as a function of its concentration under optimised operational parameters.<br />

Figure 3.52 shows the effect of increasing concentration of AFG2 to the Ip. A<br />

calibration graph for AFG2 was constructed by standard addition method.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50<br />

[AFG2] / X10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.52 Effect of concentration of AFG2 to Ip of AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude =<br />

80 mV.<br />

The correlation between Ip and concentration of AFG2 was linear within the<br />

range 2.0 to 32.0 x 10 -8 M (6.60 to 105.61 ppb) as shown in Figure 3.53. The<br />

calibration graph was represented by the equation: ip (µA) = 5.7132x (x 10 -8 M) +<br />

1.1682; R 2 = 0.9989 and n = 10. The LOD was found to be 0.758 x 10 -8 M (2.50 ppb)<br />

and LOQ was 2.53 x 10 -8 M (8.33 ppb). The voltammograms of AFG2 with successive<br />

addition of its concentration are shown in Appendix R. The results of precision studies<br />

for 0.10 µM and 0.20 µM of AFG2 which were obtained by proposed method are<br />

represented in Table 3.13.<br />

140


Ip (nA)<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

y = 5.7132x + 1.1682<br />

R 2 = 0.9989<br />

0 10 20 30 40<br />

[AFG2] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.53 Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0. All<br />

parameters used are the same as stated in Figure 3.52.<br />

Table 3.13 Ip (in nA) obtained for intra-day and inter-day precision studies of 0.10<br />

µM and 0.20 µM of AFG2 by proposed voltammetric procedure (n=5).<br />

[AFG1]<br />

0.10 µM<br />

0.20 µM<br />

Intra-day<br />

measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

58.53 ± 1.05<br />

(1.79%)<br />

115.40 ± 1.69<br />

(1.46%)<br />

Day 1<br />

58.53 ± 1.05<br />

(1.79%)<br />

115.40 ± 1.69<br />

(1.46%)<br />

Inter-day measurement<br />

Ip ± SD (RSD)<br />

Day 2<br />

59.11 ± 1.19<br />

(2.01%)<br />

115.20 ± 1.82<br />

(1.58 %)<br />

Day 3<br />

58.72 ± 1.14<br />

(1.94%)<br />

115.40 ±1.14<br />

(0.99%)<br />

For accuracy, it was examined by performing three replicate measurements for<br />

0.1 µM, 0.15 µM and 0.2 µM AFG2 solutions under the same operational parameters.<br />

Percentage recoveries (R%) of 100.12 +/- 0.25 %, 99.66 +/- 0.90 % and 100.03 +/- 0.26<br />

141


% were achieved respectively with a mean value of % RSD of 0.47%, which indicates<br />

the high accuracy of the proposed technique. Table 3.14 shows the results of accuracy<br />

study for AFG2.<br />

No of<br />

experiment<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

Table 3.14 Mean values for recovery of AFG2 standard solution (n = 3)<br />

Amount<br />

added<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

10<br />

15<br />

20<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

58.14<br />

58.20<br />

59.10<br />

86.20<br />

87.50<br />

86.10<br />

115.40<br />

115.80<br />

115.20<br />

Amount<br />

found<br />

(x 10 -8 M)<br />

9.97<br />

9.98<br />

10.04<br />

14.88<br />

15.10<br />

14.86<br />

19.99<br />

20.06<br />

19.96<br />

Recovery<br />

(%)<br />

99.97<br />

99.80<br />

100.40<br />

99.22<br />

100.70<br />

99.06<br />

99.97<br />

100.31<br />

99.80<br />

Recovery ± SD<br />

(%)<br />

(RSD)<br />

100.12 ± 0.25<br />

(0.25 %)<br />

99.66 ± 0.90<br />

(0.90 %)<br />

100.03 ± 0.26<br />

(0.26 %)<br />

The Ip and Ep of the aflatoxins with concentration of 0.10 µM which were<br />

obtained by BAS C50W were not significantly different compared to those obtained by<br />

VA 757 Metrohm Analyser as shown in Table 3.15, indicating that the proposed<br />

technique can be applied using different types of voltammetry analysers. Figures 3.54a<br />

to 3.54d show the voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 which were<br />

obtained using Metrohm voltammetry analyser. From the validation of the proposed<br />

technique, Table 3.16 shows all statistical parameters for the aflatoxins.<br />

142


Table 3.15 Ip and Ep of 0.10 uM aflatoxins obtained by BAS and Metrohm<br />

voltammetry analysers under optimised operational parameters for DPCSV method.<br />

Aflatoxins<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

BAS CV 50W<br />

Ip (nA) ± SD<br />

(RSD)<br />

58.28 ± 2.79<br />

(4.78%)<br />

58.08 ± 1.63<br />

(2.81%)<br />

56.85 ± 1.87<br />

(3.29%)<br />

56.20 ± 1.34<br />

(2.38%)<br />

Voltammetry analysers<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.22<br />

-1.23<br />

-1.15<br />

-1.17<br />

3.2.2.2 Determination of Limit of Detection (LOD)<br />

757 VA Metrohm<br />

Ip (nA) ± SD<br />

(RSD)<br />

59.88 ± 0.94<br />

(1.57%)<br />

57.98 ± 0.83<br />

(1.43%)<br />

59.26 ± 0.84<br />

(1.42%)<br />

57.56 ± 0.63<br />

(1.10%)<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.23<br />

-1.24<br />

-1.15<br />

-1.18<br />

The limit of detection (LOD) is an important quantity in chemical analysis. The<br />

LOD is the smallest concentration or amount that can be detected with reasonable<br />

certainty for a given analytical procedure (Ahmad, 1993; Miller and Miller, 1993). It is<br />

the lowest concentrations that can be distinguished from the noise level as described by<br />

Bressole et al. (1996). Thompson (1998) reported that the detection limit caused<br />

problems for analytical chemists because they are difficult to interpret and the arbitrary<br />

dichotomising of the concentration domain provides misleading viewpoint of the<br />

behaviour of analytical systems.<br />

143


(a) (b)<br />

(c) (d)<br />

Figure 3.54 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, (c) AFG1 and (d)<br />

AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained by 757 VA Metrohm voltammetry analyser. Ei = -1.0<br />

V (except for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

In order to estimate the LOD, some alternative methods have been used to<br />

overcome the difficulties such as:<br />

144


Aflatoxin<br />

B1<br />

B2<br />

G1<br />

G2<br />

Table 3.16 Analytical parameters for calibration curves for AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and<br />

AFG2 obtained by DPCSV technique using BRB at pH 9.0 as the supporting electrolyte<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.22<br />

-1.23<br />

-1.15<br />

-1.17<br />

Notes:<br />

Regression<br />

equations<br />

y = 5.4363x + 3.7245<br />

y = 5.5385x + 3.2224<br />

y = 5.5899x + 3.7080<br />

y = 5.7132x + 1.1682<br />

Sensitivity<br />

(µA/µM)<br />

0.5436<br />

0.5539<br />

0.5900<br />

0.5713<br />

Linearity range<br />

(x 10 -8 M / ppb)<br />

2 – 32 / 6.24 – 99.84<br />

2 – 32 / 6.29 – 100.63<br />

2 – 32 / 6.56 – 104.92<br />

2 – 32 / 6.60 – 105.61<br />

Ep = Peak potential for aflatoxins at concentration of 0.1 µM<br />

y = mx + c; y = nA, x = x 10 -8 M, c = nA<br />

LOD = limit of detection<br />

145<br />

LOD<br />

(x10 -8 M / ppb)<br />

0.5 / 1.56<br />

0.796 / 2.50<br />

1.0 / 3.28<br />

0.758 / 2.50<br />

R 2<br />

0.9989<br />

0.9980<br />

0.9992<br />

0.9989


a) The concentration giving a signal three times the standard error plus the<br />

y-intercept divided by the slope of calibration curve (Miller and Miller,<br />

1993; Sturm et al., 1997; Yilmaz et al., 2001: Arranz et al., 2003;<br />

Skrzypek et al., 2005 and Nouws et al., 2005). This calculation is used<br />

by International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC)<br />

(IUPAC, 1978).<br />

b) The analyte concentration giving a signal equal to a blank signal plus<br />

two or three (Conesa et al., 1996) standard deviations of the blank.<br />

c) The concentration giving a signal equal to three times (Zhang et al.,<br />

146<br />

1996) or 3.3 times (Perez-Ruiz et al., 2004) the standard deviation of the<br />

blank signal divided by the slope from the calibration curve. The latter<br />

used 12 blank determinations to calculate standard deviation of the<br />

blank.<br />

d) The concentration giving a signal to noise ratio of 3:1 (3 S/N) (Yardimer<br />

and Ozaltin, 2001; Khodari et al., 1997; Wang et al., 1997; Liu et al.,<br />

2000; Ibrahim et al., 2002; Al-ghamdie et al., 2004 and Farghaly et al.,<br />

2005).<br />

e) The value of three fold standard deviation from seven determinations of<br />

the analyte at the concentration corresponding to the lowest point on the<br />

appropriate straight line of the calibration curve which was evaluated by<br />

R 2 value as reported by Barek et al. (1999).<br />

f) The concentration giving 3 times standard deviation of intercept of the<br />

calibration divided by a slope of the calibration curve as reported by Gao<br />

et al. (2004) and El-Desoky and Ghoneim (2005).


g) The lowest concentration of sample that give the significantly different<br />

signal from the blank after standard addition of lower concentration<br />

(Barek et al., 2001a).<br />

h) Use of the robust regression method where the detection limit is dealt as<br />

a hypothesis test in relation to the presence of analyte in an unknown<br />

sample by using the experimental information provided by the<br />

calibration set (Ortiz et al., 1993).<br />

The results of the determinations of aflatoxins using several methods according<br />

to Barek et al. (2001a), Barek et al. (1999), Zhang et al. (1996) and Miller and Miller<br />

(1993) are shown in Table 3.17. These methods were chosen due to its simplicity and<br />

are widely used by many researchers. Examples of these calculations for AFB1 are<br />

represented in Appendix S, T, U and V for each method respectively.<br />

From the results, the LOD values obtained according to Barek et al. (1999),<br />

Barek et al. (2001a) and Zhang et al. (1996) are not significantly different as was<br />

proven by ANOVA test which is reported in Appendix W (Youmen, 1973). The<br />

Method 1 (according to Barek et al., 2001a) was selected for the determination of the<br />

LOD of all aflatoxins throughout this study since it gives the lowest LOD value as<br />

compared to that obtained by other methods.<br />

3.2.2.3 Determination of Limit of Quantification (LOQ)<br />

The limit of quantification (LOQ) is the lower limit for precise quantitative<br />

measurements (Miller and Miller, 1993; Chan et al., 2004). It is determined by the<br />

formula of (LOD / 3) x 10 as reported by Ozkan et al. (2003) and Ghoneim et al.<br />

147<br />

(2004). A value of YB + 10SB has been suggested for this limit (Miller and Miller,<br />

1993; Rodriguez et al., 2005) where YB is a blank signal and SB is the standard deviation<br />

of blank. The LOQ vaules for all aflatoxins obtained by the proposed methods are listed<br />

in Table 3.18.


Aflatoxin<br />

B1<br />

B2<br />

G1<br />

G2<br />

Table 3.17 LOD values for determination of aflatoxins obtained by various methods<br />

Notes:<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

0.50<br />

0.78<br />

1.00<br />

0.76<br />

1<br />

ppb<br />

1.56<br />

2.50<br />

3.28<br />

2.50<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

0.64<br />

0.89<br />

1.06<br />

0.92<br />

Method 1: According to Barek et al. (2001a)<br />

Method 2: According to Barek et al. (1999)<br />

Method 3: According to Zhang et . (1996)<br />

Method 4: According to Miller and Miller (1993)<br />

2<br />

ppb<br />

2.00<br />

2.80<br />

3.50<br />

3.02<br />

Method<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

0.75<br />

0.91<br />

1.10<br />

0.86<br />

3<br />

ppb<br />

2.35<br />

2.86<br />

3.60<br />

2.84<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

1.14<br />

1.47<br />

2.09<br />

2.48<br />

148<br />

4<br />

ppb<br />

3.56<br />

4.62<br />

6.84<br />

8.18


Aflatoxin<br />

B1<br />

B2<br />

G1<br />

G2<br />

Table 3.18 LOQ values for determination of aflatoxins obtained by various methods<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

1.67<br />

2.60<br />

3.33<br />

2.53<br />

1<br />

Notes:<br />

ppb<br />

5.20<br />

8.33<br />

10.93<br />

8.33<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

2.13<br />

2.97<br />

3.53<br />

3.07<br />

Method<br />

Method 1: According to Barek et al. (2001a)<br />

Method 2: According to Barek et al. (1999)<br />

Method 3: According to Zhang et al. (1996)<br />

Method 4: According to Miller and Miller (1993)<br />

2<br />

ppb<br />

6.67<br />

9.33<br />

11.67<br />

10.07<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

2.50<br />

2.03<br />

3.67<br />

2.87<br />

3<br />

ppb<br />

7.83<br />

9.53<br />

7.87<br />

9.47<br />

149<br />

4<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

3.80<br />

4.90<br />

12.00<br />

8.27<br />

ppb<br />

11.87<br />

15.40<br />

22.80<br />

27.27


3.2.2.4 Interference studies<br />

Possible interference from various metal ions and organic substances were<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

[Aflatoxin] = 0.1 uM<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6<br />

[Zn(II)] / uM<br />

0.8 1 1.2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

150<br />

investigated by spiking with excess amount of these interfering substances to the BRB<br />

at pH 9.0 containing 0.10 µM of each aflatoxin under optimum experimental conditions.<br />

The experiments showed that the presence of up to 10-fold of Al 3+ , Cu 2+ , Ni 2+ , Pb 2+ ,<br />

Zn 2+ , ascorbic acid, β-cyclodextrin and cysteine did not affect much the signal measured<br />

which indicates that there was no serious interference to the voltammetric determination<br />

of all studied aflatoxins. For example, the effect of Zn ion to the Ip of all aflatoxins is<br />

shown in Figure 3.55. Voltammogram of AFB2 with addition of this ion is shown in<br />

Figure 3.56(i). The interference study by Zn 2+ was further carried out by initially<br />

reacted all aflatoxins with Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 3.0 before being added into the<br />

voltammetric cell containing BRB at pH 9.0. Voltammograms of complex AFB2-Zn<br />

with increasing concentration of Zn 2+ are shown in Figure 3.56(ii). Figure 3.57 shows<br />

the Ip of all aflatoxins which were complexed with Zn 2+ decreased drastically with the<br />

addition of 1.0 µM Zn 2+ . This effect indicates that Zn 2+ interferes with the<br />

measurement of aflatoxins in acid condition.<br />

Figure 3.55 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of Zn 2+ up to 1.0 µM


(i) (ii)<br />

Figure 3.56 Voltammograms of (i) 0.10 µM AFB2 and (ii) 0.1 µM AFB2-Zn<br />

complex with increasing concentration of Zn 2+ ( a = 0, b = 0.75 µM, c = 1.50 µM, d =<br />

2.25 µM and e = 3.0 µM). Blank = BRB at pH 9.0. Experimental conditions; Ei = -1.0<br />

V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2<br />

[Zn] / uM<br />

3 4<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.57 Ip of all aflatoxins-Zn complex after reacting with increasing<br />

concentration of Zn 2+ in BRB at pH 3.0. Measurements were made in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

within 15 minutes of reaction time. Ei = -1.0 (except AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc<br />

= -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

151


Similarly, studies carried out using UV-VIS spectrometric technique also<br />

showed that absorbance of 1.0 ppm AFB2 decreases with increasing concentration of<br />

Zn 2+ (from 0.15 to 0.60 ppm) in acidic condition as shown in Figure 3.58. The same<br />

patterns were also found for other aflatoxins. Their absorbances decreased linearly with<br />

increasing concentration of Zn 2 . From this study, it can be concluded that Zn 2+ reacted<br />

with all aflatoxins in acidic medium but does not in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

Abs<br />

0.12<br />

0.1<br />

0.08<br />

0.06<br />

0.04<br />

0.02<br />

0<br />

[aflatoxins] = 1.0 ppm<br />

0 0.15 0.3<br />

[Zn(II)] / ppm<br />

0.45 0.6<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.58 Absorbance of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of Zn 2+ in<br />

BRB at pH 3.0 within 15 minutes of reaction time.<br />

For Zn 2+ , studies using initial potential (Ei) at - 0.25 V instead -1.0 V was<br />

conducted. The aim was to investigate the response of Zn peak which appeared at -0.98<br />

V with increasing Zn 2+ concentration and the result is shown in Figure 3.59. The figure<br />

illustrates that the Zn 2+ peak increases while no significant change was observed on Ip<br />

and Ep of AFB2 which show that the peak appeared at the Ep of -0.98 was from the<br />

Zn 2+ .<br />

152


Figure 3.59 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 with increasing concentrations of<br />

Zn 2+ (from 0.10 to 0.50 µM) in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei = -0.25 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

For interference study by organic substance, ascorbic acid (Figure 3.60) was<br />

selected due to its high content in food as a natural micronutrient and plays many<br />

physiological roles as reported by Perez-Ruiz et al. (2004).<br />

HO<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

HO<br />

OH<br />

Figure 3.60 Chemical structure of ascorbic acid<br />

Ascorbic acid may interfere with the measurement of aflatoxins because of its<br />

reducing property due to the presence of the ene-1, 2- diol system (Verma et al., 1991).<br />

Its structure has a double bond which conjugates to the ketone group, similar to the<br />

153


aflatoxins chemical structures which may reduce at HMDE in BRB at pH 9.0 and<br />

interfere the measurement of aflatoxins. The result of this study is shown in Figures<br />

3.61 and 3.62 indicate that no significant change was observed by increasing the<br />

concentration of ascorbic acid up to ten-fold of the aflatoxins concentration.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2<br />

[ascorbic acid] / uM<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.61 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of ascorbic acid up to<br />

1.0 µM. Concentrations of all aflatoxins are 0.1 µM.<br />

Figure 3.62 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 with increasing concentration of<br />

ascorbic acid.<br />

154


Interference studies were also carried out with β-cyclodextrin. Cyclodextrins<br />

(CDs) are cyclic oligosaccharides with a hydrophilic outer surface and lipophilic central<br />

cavity. CDs are formed with a various numbers of glucose units such as α-, β- and γ-<br />

I p (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

[Aflatoxins] = 0.1 uM<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1<br />

[B-CD] / uM<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

155<br />

CD, formed by 6, 7 and 8 glucose units, respectively, are present in the greatest amount.<br />

The pKa values of α-, β- and γ-CD are 12.33, 12.20 and 12.08, respectively and the<br />

species are charged in strong alkaline solution (Fang et al., 1998). In aqueous solutions,<br />

CDs are able to solubilise lipophilic moiety of the compound molecule into the central<br />

cavity without any covalent bond. Such complexes are called inclusion complexes<br />

(Loftson and Brewster, 1996).<br />

Due to its inherent interesting inclusion properties which are exhibited both in<br />

solid state and in aqueous solution as reported by Fang et al. (1998) and its capability of<br />

forming complexes with aflatoxins, β-CD was selected in this study. In optimum pH of<br />

supporting electrolyte for the determination of aflatoxins (pH 9.0), the charged β-CD<br />

may react with aflatoxins. The result of this study is as in Figure 3.63 and the<br />

voltammograms of AFB2 with increasing concentration of β-CD in Figure 3.64 shows<br />

that not much interference was observed with increasing concentration of β-CD up to<br />

ten-fold of concentration of aflatoxins.<br />

Figure 3.63 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of β- cyclodextrin up to<br />

1.0 µM.


Figure 3.64 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 with increasing concentration of β-<br />

cyclodextrin.<br />

Another organic compound which was used in this interference study was Lcysteine<br />

(Figure 3.65).<br />

H 2 N<br />

O<br />

OH<br />

SH<br />

Figure 3.65 Chemical structure of L-cysteine<br />

The result of this study is given in Figure 3.66 which shows that Ip of all<br />

aflatoxins decreased slightly when cysteine was added. Cysteine is one of the organic<br />

compound that show a high activity for electrocatalytic adsorption on mercury and the<br />

most modified electrode as reported by Shahrokhian and Karimi (2004). The result<br />

obtained may be due to the accumulation of L-cysteine on the surface electrode as the<br />

concentration of cysteine was increased, which made the electrode surface saturated,<br />

hence, limiting the adsorption of aflatoxins.<br />

156


Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

[Aflatoxins] = 0.1 uM<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1<br />

[L-cysteine] / uM<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.66 Ip of all aflatoxins with increasing concentration of cysteine up to 1.0 µM<br />

157<br />

From this interference study, all studied metal ions and organic compounds<br />

neither significantly decreased nor enhanced the Ip of all aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

Attempts have been made to enhance the Ip of aflatoxins by performing mercury<br />

electrode modification using poly-L-lysine (PLL) as described by Ferreira et al. (1999).<br />

However the aflatoxin peak does not increase and this may be due to unsuitable medium<br />

for reaction between aflatoxins and PLL to take place. For example, Ip of AFB2 was<br />

enhanced about 15% in BRB at pH 5.0 however at pH 9.0 the Ip was decreased to<br />

almost 35% from its original value as shown in Appendix X.<br />

3.3 Square-Wave Stripping Voltammetry (SWSV) of Aflatoxins<br />

Since aflatoxins can be adsorbed on the mercury surface as has been proven by<br />

CV and DPCSV studies, another technique of adsorptive stripping method for<br />

quantitative measurement of aflatoxins such as SWSV was developed. By using strong<br />

adsorptive phenomenon and by accumulation of aflatoxins at a HMDE prior to SWSV<br />

measurement, higher sensitivities can be readily achieved in order to obtain a much<br />

lower level of detection for aflatoxins. Compared with other pulse techniques, SWSV is<br />

faster and the entire potential scan can be completed in approximately 2 s on a single<br />

drop of mercury electrode (Jelen et al., 1997). In this study, SWSV was used in<br />

combination with an HMDE to study the Ip of aflatoxins in various BRB pH medium<br />

using optimum parameters that have been obtained using DPCSV technique. The


influences of SWSV instrumental variables such as frequency and voltage step on the<br />

SWSV responses have been evaluated. Overall results show that, compared with<br />

DPCSV technique, SWSV produces much higher Ip for all aflatoxins at the same<br />

concentration. Finally the proposed method was applied to the determination of<br />

aflatoxin in groundnut samples.<br />

3.3.1 SWSV Determination of AFB2<br />

Previous optimised parameters that were obtained by DPCSV have been applied<br />

to the determination of 0.10 µM AFB2 using SWSV technique which produces a single<br />

and well developed peak at Ep of -1.30 V with Ip of 230 nA. The Ip was about 380 %<br />

(3.8 times) higher as compared with that obtained by DPCSV which was only 60 nA as<br />

shown in Figure 3.67.<br />

Figure 3.67 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained by (a) DPCSV and (b)<br />

SWSV techniques in BRB at pH 9.0. Parameters for DPCSV: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV and for SWSV: Ei =<br />

-1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, frequency = 50 Hz, voltage step = 0.02 V,<br />

amplitude = 50 mV and υ = 1000 mV/s.<br />

158


3.3.1.1 Optimisation of Experimental and Instrumental SWSV Parameters<br />

3.3.1.1a Influence of pH of BRB<br />

Using optimised parameters as stated in Figure 3.67 for SWSV, the pH of BRB<br />

was varied between 6.0 and 13.0. Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 showed maximum value at pH<br />

9.0 as shown in Figure 3.68. This result was the same as found using CV and DPCSV<br />

techniques where BRB at pH 9.0 is the best supporting electrolyte for the determination<br />

of aflatoxins. Voltammogram of AFB2 in differenct pH is shown in Figure 3.69.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14<br />

pH of BRB<br />

Figure 3.68 Influence of pH of BRB on the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 using SWSV<br />

technique. The instrumental parameters are the same as in Figure 3.67.<br />

159


Figure 3.69 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in different pH of BRB. Parameter<br />

conditions; Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, voltage step = 0.02 V,<br />

amplitude = 50 mV, frequency = 50 Hz and scan rate = 1000 mV/s<br />

3.3.1.1b Effect of Instrumental Variables<br />

With regard to the instrumental variables, the relationship between Ip and Ei was<br />

studied for 0.10 µM AFB2, and Ei was varied from 0 to -1.2 V. It was found that a<br />

maximum amount of 250 nA was obtained for Ei = -1.0 as shown in Figure 3.70. The Ip<br />

was slowly decreased when the value of Ei was more negative than -1.0 V.<br />

.<br />

Ip InA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4<br />

- Ei (V)<br />

Figure 3.70 Effect of Ei to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

160


The influence of Eacc to Ip of AFB2 was investigated where the Eacc was varied between<br />

0 to -1.4 V. The maximum value of Ip was obtained at -0.8 V (265 nA) as shown in<br />

Figure 3.71. This value was selected for subsequent experiments<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6<br />

- E acc (V)<br />

Figure 3.71 Effect of Eacc to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

The effect of tacc on the Ip was studied where tacc was varied from 0 to 200 s.<br />

The result is shown in Figure 3.72 which reveals that there is linearity up to 100 s<br />

according to equation; y = 3.020x + 20.143 (n=6) with R 2 = 0.9950, after which it<br />

increased slower and levelled off at about 140 s. After 160 s, Ip decreased which may be<br />

due to the desorption of the aflatoxins back to the bulk solution. Thus, the tacc of 100 s<br />

appeared to be the optimum tacc for the pre-concentration prior to stripping.<br />

A linear increase in Ip of AFB2 was observed when frequency was varied from<br />

25 to 125 Hz as shown in Figure 3.73. The frequency value of 125 Hz was adopted as<br />

the optimum value.<br />

161


I p (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

400<br />

350<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

0 40 80 120 160 200 240<br />

t acc (s)<br />

Figure 3.72 Relationship between Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 while increasing tacc<br />

0 50 100 150<br />

Frequency (Hz)<br />

Figure 3.73 Effect of frequency to the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

The Ip of AFB2 depends linearly on the square root of frequency as shown in<br />

Figure 3.74 which indicates that AFB2 adsorbed on the mercury electrode as reported<br />

by Komorsky-Lovric et al. (1992). This result is in agreement with that obtained by<br />

previous CV and DPCSV experiments.<br />

162


Ip (nA)<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

y = 107.91x - 424.7<br />

R 2 = 0.9919<br />

3 5 7 9 11<br />

(Frequency) 1/2<br />

Figure 3.74 Linear relationships between Ip of AFB2 and square root of frequency<br />

The Ip of the AFB2 increases linearly with variation voltage step from 10 mV to<br />

30 mV but after this value the Ip decreases (Figure 3.75). Hence, 30 mV was selected as<br />

the optimum voltage step for further experiments.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05<br />

Voltage step (V)<br />

Figure 3.75 Influence of square-wave voltage step to Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

163


Regarding the influence of the square wave amplitude, the maximum value for<br />

Ip was observed at 0.05 V when the amplitude increases from 0.025 to 0.10V as shown<br />

in Figure 3.76. The Ep of AFB2 was ideally linear and shifted to a more negative<br />

direction with increasing amplitude according to the equation; y = 1.2x -1.36 (n=4, R 2 =<br />

1.0) as shown in Figure 3.77. Since the square wave frequency, voltage step and scan<br />

rate are interrelated, for frequency of 125 Hz and voltage step of 0.03 V, the scan rate is<br />

3750 mV/ s.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

E p (-V)<br />

1000<br />

750<br />

500<br />

250<br />

0<br />

1.34<br />

1.32<br />

1.3<br />

1.28<br />

1.26<br />

1.24<br />

1.22<br />

0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 0.125<br />

Amplitude (V)<br />

Figure 3.76 Influence of square-wave amplitude to Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2.<br />

y = -1.2x + 1.36<br />

R2 = 1<br />

0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 0.125<br />

Amplitude (V)<br />

Figure 3.77 Relationship of SWSV Ep of AFB2 with increasing amplitude<br />

164


Accordingly, the optimum experimental and instrumental parameters of the<br />

proposed SWSV procedure for the determination of AFB2 are Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V,<br />

Eacc = -0.80 V, tacc = 100 s, frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V, amplitude = 75<br />

V, scan rate = 3750 mV/s in BRB at pH 9.0 as the supporting electrolyte. Using these<br />

parameters, the Ip for 0.10 µM AFB2 was 913 nA with Ep at -1.28 V an increase of<br />

220% before being optimised. Figure 3.78 shows the Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained<br />

under optimised and non-optimised SWSV parameters compared with that obtained<br />

under optimised DPCSV parameters.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

1050<br />

900<br />

750<br />

600<br />

450<br />

300<br />

150<br />

0<br />

a b c<br />

Figure 3.78 The Ip of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained under (a) non-optimised and (b)<br />

optimised SWSV parameters compared with that obtained under (c) optimised DPCSV<br />

parameters.<br />

The voltammograms of AFB2 are shown in Figure 3.79. As compared to the<br />

DPCSV, the Ip value for the optimised parameters for SWSV was 15 times higher. This<br />

high sensitivity is one of the SWSV characteristics that was also found by other<br />

165<br />

researchers such as reported by Radi et al. (2001), Guiberteau et al. (2001), El-Hady et<br />

al. (2004), Gazy et al. (2004), Farghaly and Ghandour (2005) and Pacheco et al. (2005).


Figure 3.79 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 obtained under (a) non-optimised<br />

and (b) optimised SWSV parameters compared with that obtained under (c) optimised<br />

DPCSV parameters.<br />

3.3.2 SWSV Determination of Other Aflatoxins<br />

Using the optimum SWSV parameters, the Ip of AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 at<br />

concentration of 0.10 µM have been measured in BRB at pH 9.0. The results are shown<br />

in Table 3.19. When compared with the Ip that were obtained by DPCSV, overall<br />

results show that it increases about 15 times for AFB1 and AFB2 while for AFG1 and<br />

AFG2 about 11 times as shown in Figure 3.80. Their voltammograms are shown in<br />

Figure 3.81 which also includes DPCSV voltammograms for comparison.<br />

166


Table 3.19 Ip and Ep for all aflatoxins obtained by SWSV in BRB at pH 9.0 (n=5)<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

Ip (nA) / (RSD)<br />

838.8 ± 5.72 (0.68%)<br />

825.4 ± 11.51 (1.39%)<br />

633.0 ± 3.16 (0.50%)<br />

674.2 ± 11.86 (1.76%)<br />

AFB1 AFB2 AFG1 AFG2<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.30<br />

-1.30<br />

-1.24<br />

-1.24<br />

DPCSV<br />

SWSV<br />

Figure 3.80 Ip of 0.10 µM aflatoxins obtained using two different stripping<br />

voltammetric techniques under their optimum parameter conditions in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

167


(i) (ii)<br />

(iii) (iv)<br />

Figure 3.81 Voltammograms of (i) AFB1, (ii) AFB2, (iii) AFG1 and (iv) AFG2<br />

obtained by (b) DPCSV compared with that obtained by (c) SWSV in (a) BRB at pH<br />

9.0.<br />

3.3.3 Calibration Curves and Method Validation<br />

After optimisation of the experimental condition, calibration curves were<br />

prepared by measuring the Ip of each aflatoxin with different concentration. For<br />

example, voltammograms of AFB1 with varying concentrations are shown in Figure<br />

3.82.<br />

168


Figure 3.82 SWSV voltammograms for different concentrations of AFB1 in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0. The broken line represents the blank; (a) 0.01 µM, (b) 0.025 µM, (c) 0.05 µM,<br />

(d) 0.075 µM, (e) 0.10 µM, (f) 0.125 µM and (g) 0.150 µM. Parameter conditions; Ei =<br />

-1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03<br />

V, pulse amplitude = 75 mV and scan rate = 3750 mV/s.<br />

The calibration curves for all aflatoxins are shown in Figures 3.83 to 3.86. The<br />

LOD were determined by standard addition of low concentration of analyte (AFB1,<br />

AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2) until a response was obtained that is significantly different<br />

from the blank sample (Barek et al., 2001a). LOQ were calculated using the formula<br />

LOD/3 x 10. Figure 3.87 shows the comparison of the LOD values obtained by SWSV<br />

compared with those obtained by DPCSV. The obtained LOD and LOQ for all<br />

aflatoxins are lower than those obtained by DPCSV technique which suggests that the<br />

SWSV is much better than DPCSV in terms of sensitivity.<br />

169


I p (nA)<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

y = 70.97x + 76.588<br />

R 2 = 0.9984<br />

0 5 10 15 20<br />

[AFB1] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.83 Calibration curve for AFB1 obtained by SWSV method.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

y = 61.97x + 243.36<br />

R 2 = 0.9938<br />

0 2.5 5 7.5 10 12.5 15<br />

[AFB2] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.84 Calibration curve for AFB2 obtained by SWSV method<br />

I p (nA)<br />

y = 51.046x + 164.79<br />

R 2 = 0.9912<br />

0 5 10 15<br />

[AFG1] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.85 Calibration curve for AFG1 obtained by SWSV method.<br />

170


I p (nA)<br />

LOD (ppb)<br />

1000<br />

3.5<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

3<br />

2.5<br />

2<br />

1.5<br />

1<br />

0.5<br />

0<br />

0<br />

y = 49.816x + 157.18<br />

R 2 = 0.9906<br />

0 5 10 15<br />

[AFG2] x 10 -8 M<br />

Figure 3.86 Calibration curve for AFG2 obtained by SWSV method.<br />

AFB1 AFB2 AFG1 AFG2<br />

DPCSV<br />

SqWSV<br />

Figure 3.87 LOD for determination of aflatoxins obtained by two different stripping<br />

methods.<br />

Furthermore, this technique provides a shorter time analysis due to the fast scan<br />

rate (3750 mV/s). Table 3.20 summarises the characteristics of the calibration plots<br />

established using optimum SWSV parameters for all aflatoxins.<br />

171


Aflatoxin<br />

B1<br />

B2<br />

G1<br />

G2<br />

Table 3.20 Analytical parameters for calibration curves for AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and<br />

AFG2 obtained by SWSV technique in BRB at pH 9.0 as the supporting electrolyte.<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.30<br />

-1.30<br />

-1.24<br />

-1.24<br />

Notes;<br />

Regression<br />

Equations<br />

y = 70.97x + 76.59<br />

y = 61.97x + 243.36<br />

y = 51.046x + 64.79<br />

y = 49.816x + 57.18<br />

Ep = Peak potential for aflatoxins at concentration of 0.1 µM<br />

y = mx + c; y = nA, x = x 10 -8 M, c = nA<br />

LOD = limit of detection<br />

LOQ = limit of quantification<br />

Sensitivity<br />

(µA/µM)<br />

7.097<br />

6.197<br />

5.105<br />

4.982<br />

Linearity range<br />

(x 10 -8 M / ppb)<br />

1 – 15 / 3.12 – 46.73<br />

1– 12.5 / 3.14 – 39.31<br />

1– 12.5 / 3.28 – 40.98<br />

1– 12.5 / 3.30 – 41.25<br />

LOD<br />

(x 10 -8 M<br />

/ ppt)<br />

0.125 /<br />

393<br />

0.15 / 468<br />

0.15 / 492<br />

0.15 / 500<br />

172<br />

LOQ<br />

(x 10 -8<br />

M/<br />

ppb)<br />

0.42 /<br />

1.31<br />

0.50 /<br />

1.56<br />

0.50 /<br />

1.64<br />

0.50 /<br />

1.67<br />

R 2<br />

0.9984<br />

0.9938<br />

0.9912<br />

0.9906


Reproducibility was evaluated by performing ten measurements of aflatoxins<br />

with concentration of 0.10 µM on the same day and within 3 days for intra and interdays<br />

measurements respectively. The results are shown in Table 3.21. For all<br />

measurements of all aflatoxins, the RSD were between 0.30% to 1.92% which indicates<br />

that the proposed method is reproducible and gives high precision. Voltammograms of<br />

0.1 µM AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 for intra-day precision (n=10) are shown in<br />

Appendix Y.<br />

Table 3.21 Result of reproducibility study for 0.1 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Aflatoxins<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Ip (nA) for intra-day<br />

( ± SD, n = 10) (RSD)<br />

833 ± 10.02<br />

(1.20%)<br />

816 ± 14.88<br />

(1.82%)<br />

630 ± 4.38<br />

(0.70%)<br />

669 ± 9.92<br />

(1.48%)<br />

173<br />

Ip (nA) for inter-day (± SD, n = 10) (RSD)<br />

Day 1<br />

832 ± 8.77<br />

(1.05%)<br />

817 ± 14.24<br />

(1.74%)<br />

634 ± 2.07<br />

(0.33%)<br />

674 ± 11.86<br />

(1.76%)<br />

Day 2<br />

833 ± 10.87<br />

(1.30)<br />

812 ± 15.62<br />

(1.92%)<br />

628 ± 2.55<br />

(0.41%)<br />

665 ± 4.83<br />

(0.73%)<br />

Day 3<br />

833 ± 9.07<br />

(1.09)<br />

816 ± 13.92<br />

(1.71%)<br />

631 ± 4.32<br />

(0.68%)<br />

674 ± 8.41<br />

(1.25)<br />

For assessing accuracy of the proposed method, an amount of 5 x 10 -8 M and 10<br />

x 10 -8 M of each aflatoxin were spiked into voltammetric cell and their respective Ip<br />

were measured. From the obtained Ip, the actual concentration found was calculated<br />

according to the respective calibration plot. The results are summarised in Table 3.22<br />

which show that the recoveries for 5 x 10 -8 M and 10 x 10 -8 M of all aflatoxins are<br />

between 93 to 106% which indicate that the proposed method is of a very high<br />

accuracy. Voltammograms of 10 x 10 -8 M of all aflatoxins (n= 3) are shown in


Appendix Z. From the method validation, the results show that the proposed SWSV<br />

method is satisfactorily precise and accurate, gives very low detection limit and<br />

provides very short time analysis. This method was applied for analysis of aflatoxin<br />

content in groundnut samples together with the DPCSV method.<br />

Table 3.22 Application of the proposed method in evaluation of accuracy of the<br />

SWSV method by spiking the aflatoxin standard solutions.<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Amount<br />

added<br />

( x 10 -8 M)<br />

5.0<br />

10.0<br />

5.0<br />

10.0<br />

5.0<br />

10.0<br />

5.0<br />

10.0<br />

Obtained Ip<br />

(nA)<br />

(± SD, n =3)<br />

442.33 ± 2.56<br />

839.00 ± 5.29<br />

566.30 ± 3.79<br />

820.67 ± 6.81<br />

424.33 ± 5.03<br />

639.07 ± 5.51<br />

417.33 ± 2.08<br />

664.00 ± 1.00<br />

Amount<br />

found<br />

( x 10 -8 M)<br />

(± SD)<br />

5.15 ± 0.03<br />

10.60 ± 0.07<br />

5.19 ± 0.03<br />

9.39 ± 0.07<br />

5.04 ± 0.06<br />

9.57 ± 0.80<br />

5.24 ± 0.03<br />

10.17 ± 0.02<br />

Recovery ±<br />

SD (%)<br />

103.00 ± 0.60<br />

106.00 ± 0.70<br />

103.64 ± 0.58<br />

93.90 ± 0.70<br />

100.87 ± 1.20<br />

95.70 ± 0.80<br />

104.80 ± 0.53<br />

101.70 ± 0.20<br />

174<br />

RSD of<br />

recovery<br />

(%)<br />

0.58<br />

0.66<br />

0.56<br />

0.75<br />

1.19<br />

0.84<br />

0.51<br />

0.20


3.4 Stability Studies of Aflatoxins<br />

3.4.1 10 ppm Aflatoxin Stock Solutions<br />

10 ppm aflatoxin stock solutions which were prepared in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98:2) and stored in the dark under refrigeration at temperature of 14 0 C were<br />

monitored for their stability by measuring the absorbance using UV-VIS<br />

175<br />

spectrophotometer every month for twelve months. This study was carried out to<br />

determine the shelf life of aflatoxins stock solution in benzene: acetonitrile kept under<br />

the dark and cool conditions. The obtained concentrations of all aflatoxins monitored<br />

for the period of twelve months at their respective wavelengths are shown in Table 3.23.<br />

UV-VIS spectrums for each freshly prepared AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 are shown<br />

in Appendix AA.<br />

Table 3.23 Average concentration of all aflatoxins within a year stability studies<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

λ range (nm)<br />

346 – 348<br />

349 – 351<br />

355 – 357<br />

355 – 357<br />

Average concentration<br />

within a year ± SD (ppm)<br />

(RSD)<br />

10.63 ± 0.32 (3.01%)<br />

10.73 ± 0.42 (3.91%)<br />

10.68 ± 0.44 (4.12%)<br />

10.58 ± 0.40 (3.78%)<br />

The results show that within a year, all aflatoxins which were stored in the cool and<br />

dark conditions are stable and their concentrations are maintained at 10 ppm with RSD<br />

of less than 5.0 %.


Figures 3.88 to 3.90 show the UV-VIS spectrums for all aflatoxins at 0, 6 and 12<br />

months storage time respectively. There are no significant changes in wavelengths for<br />

maximum absorbance of all aflatoxin within the stipulated period of time.<br />

Figure 3.88 UV-VIS spectrum of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%) at preparation date.<br />

Figure 3.89 UV-VIS spectrum of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%) after 6 months of storage time.<br />

176


Figure 3.90 UV-VIS spectrum of 10 ppm of all aflatoxins in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%) after 12 months of storage time.<br />

The maximum absorbance obtained for all aflatoxins are due to the presence of<br />

UV chromophore which is a carbonyl group (C=O) in the aflatoxin molecules. This<br />

group has a transition electronic level between non-bonding (n) and Π * antibonding<br />

which generally occurs at 250 to 300 nm. Due to the conjugation of carbonyl group<br />

with a double bond in benzene ring in the aflatoxin structure, this transition takes place<br />

at longer wavelength which is more than 300 nm as stated in Table 3.23 (Fifield and<br />

Haines, 2000). The result of this study shows that all aflatoxin stock solutions which<br />

were stored in the cool and dark conditions have a shelf life of at least one year and can<br />

be used for further voltammetric study<br />

The same aflatoxin stock solution was exposed to ambient condition, for<br />

example, AFB1, the obtained UV-VIS spectrum is different where the wavelength for<br />

the maximum absorbance was shifted from 348 nm to 335 nm as shown in Figure 3.91<br />

indicating that the chemical structure of AFB1 may be damaged and cannot be used for<br />

voltammetric study.<br />

177


Figure 3.91 UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm AFB1 (a) kept in the cool and dark<br />

conditions and (b) exposed to ambient conditions for 3 days.<br />

This can be clearly seen when a lower concentration (1 ppm) of the same<br />

solution was studied and compared with a new fresh stock solution of the same<br />

concentration (Figure 3.92). The result indicates that aflatoxin stock solutions must be<br />

protected from light and kept in cool condition for longer shelf life. The spectrum of<br />

AFB1 prepared from damaged stock solution shows extra peak at λ of 330 nm while for<br />

AFB1 which was prepared from freshly prepared stock solution has only a single peak<br />

at the same λ as obtained for the stock solution.<br />

Figure 3.92 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB1 in BRB solution prepared from (a)<br />

freshly prepared and (b) damaged 10 ppm AFB1 stock solution<br />

178


The diluted solutions were kept in the dark and cool conditions for 2 weeks and<br />

their absorbance were re-measured. The result is shown in Figure 3.93 which shows<br />

that AFB1 from damaged stock produced lower absorbance and at the same time, λ was<br />

179<br />

shifted to lower value from 335 nm to 320 nm compared to the result that was obtained<br />

at the preparation date while the AFB1 from freshly prepared stock shows no significant<br />

change in its absorbance and λ values. These results indicate that AFB1 solution in<br />

BRB prepared from damaged stock is less stable compared to that one prepared from<br />

the fresh stock solution.<br />

Figure 3.93 UV-VIS spectrums of 1 ppm AFB1 in BRB solution prepared from (a)<br />

freshly prepared and (b) damaged 10 ppm AFB1 stock solution after 2 weeks of storage<br />

in the dark and cool conditions.<br />

3.4.2 1 ppm Aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

4.4.2.1 Month to Month Stability Studies<br />

1.0 ppm aflatoxins prepared in BRB at pH 9.0 which were stored in the freezer<br />

at temperature of -4.0 0 C were monitored for their stability within 6 months from the<br />

preparation date using the DPCSV technique. The aim of this study was to determine<br />

the shelf life of 1.0 ppm aflatoxin in BRB at pH 9.0 kept under the cool and dark<br />

conditions. 0.1 µM of each aflatoxin was spiked in 10 ml BRB at pH 9.0 as the


supporting electrolyte and the Ip and Ep of respective aflatoxin were observed from 0 to<br />

6 month storage time. The result is shown in Figure 3.94. Voltammograms of all<br />

aflatoxins obtained after 0 to 6 month storage time are shown in Appendix AB. The<br />

result shows that after three months storage time, the Ip of AFG1 and AFG2 decreased<br />

to about 60 % from original Ip measured at first day of preparation while the Ip of AFB1<br />

and AFB2 still maintained about 75% of their respective Ip. Based of this result, the<br />

stability order of these aflatoxins is suggested as in the order of AFB2 > AFB1 > AFG2<br />

> AFG1. Based on their chemical structures, aflatoxin with a double bond in the<br />

terminal furan ring is less stable in BRB at pH 9.0 as compared to aflatoxin that has a<br />

single bond in their furan ring.<br />

The finding also reveals that AFG1 and AFG2 can be used up to 2 months while<br />

AFB1 and AFB2 up to 3 months. After these periods of time, the respective aflatoxin<br />

should be disposed and the new standard solution should be freshly prepared for the rest<br />

of experiment.<br />

Percentage (%)<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7<br />

Storage time in freezer (months)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.94 Percentage of Ip of 0.1 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 at different<br />

storage time in the cool and dark conditions.<br />

180


4.4.2.2 Hour to Hour Stability Studies<br />

Each aflatoxin (0.1 µM) was spiked in BRB at pH 9.0 and monitored by the<br />

DPCSV technique from 0 to 8 hours exposure to ambient conditions. The purpose of<br />

this study was to evaluate the stability of aflatoxins in BRB under ambient conditions<br />

up to 8 hours. The period of 8 hours was selected due to the normal working hours. A<br />

plot of percentage of all aflatoxins versus exposure time is illustrated in Figure 3.95.<br />

Voltammograms of all aflatoxins which were exposed from 0 to 8 hours in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 are shown in Appendix AC.<br />

Percentage (%)<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.95 Percentage of Ip of all aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 exposed to ambient<br />

condition up to 8 hours of exposure time.<br />

The result shows that AFB1 and AFB2 measured in BRB at pH 9.0 were stable<br />

within 8 hours of exposure time where the Ip for both aflatoxins were reduced only 15%<br />

from initial Ip. In contrast, AFG1 and AFG2 gave significant reduction in the Ip within<br />

181<br />

the same period of exposure time where the Ip of AFG1 and AFG2 were reduced to 38%<br />

and 48% respectively. The Ep of all aflatoxins were shifted to more negative direction<br />

with increasing exposure time as shown in Appendix AC. The experiment reveals that<br />

AFG1 and AFG1 were less stable in BRB at pH 9.0 as compared to AFB1 and AFB2.


Based on their chemical structures, the most reactive functional groups susceptible for<br />

ease of attack by chemical reagents are the two lactones rings of AFG1 and AFG2 and<br />

cyclopentanone rings of AFB1 and AFB2. AFG1 and AFG2 were less stable due to the<br />

easier opening of the lactone rings in strong alkali as compared to the cyclopentanone<br />

ring as reported by Jaimez et al. (2000). The other functional group of this aflatoxin is<br />

less readily attacked by any chemical reagents except for the double bond of terminal<br />

furan ring in AFB1 and AFG1 which are susceptible to attacks by certain reagents such<br />

as TFA (Beebe, 1978; Cespedes and Diaz, 1997; Dhavan and Choudry, 1995; Akiyama<br />

et al., 2001; Erdogan, 2004), iodine (Davis and Diener, 1980; Tuinstra and Haasnoot,<br />

1983; Beaver and Wilson, 1990) or bromine in special conditions as shown in Figure<br />

3.96 (Kok et al., 1986).<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

Br 2<br />

4 s , 20 0<br />

C<br />

TFA<br />

I 2<br />

HO<br />

30 min, 50 0<br />

C<br />

40 s, 60 0<br />

C<br />

I<br />

Br<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

I O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Br O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

OCH3<br />

Figure 3.96 Reactions of 8, 9 double bond furan rings in AFB1 with TFA, iodine<br />

and bromine under special conditions (Kok et al., 1986).<br />

182


As mentioned earlier, 1 ppm AFB1 standard solution from the “damaged” AFB1<br />

stock solution was prepared in BRB at pH 9.0. Beside UV-VIS spectrophotometric<br />

determination, it was measured by the DPCSV technique and found that the Ip was only<br />

4.0 nA as compared to the freshly prepared from fresh stock solution which gave a peak<br />

current of 60 nA as shown in Figure 3.97. The result indicates that almost all the AFB1<br />

molecules present in BRB solution were already damaged.<br />

Figure 3.97 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB1 obtained in (a) BRB at pH 9.0 which<br />

were prepared from (b) damaged and (c) fresh stock solutions.<br />

Another possible reason why aflatoxins were damaged when exposed to ambient<br />

condition is due to the fact that aflatoxins are not stable to light. Experiments were<br />

performed to verify this statement by running the same experiment as previously<br />

mentioned except by wrapping the voltammetric cell with aluminum foil. The results<br />

are shown in Figure 3.98 to 3.101 which indicate that in the absence of a lighting<br />

system, Ip decreased much faster due to unexplained reason. The result of this<br />

experiment shows that the light was not a main factor that caused instability of<br />

aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

183


Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 2 4 6 8 10<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

Figure 3.98 Ip of 0.1 µM AFB1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 from 0 to 8 hours in (a)<br />

light exposed and (b) light protected.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 2 4 6 8 10<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

Figure 3.99 Ip of 0.1 µM AFB2 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 from 0 to 8 hours in (a)<br />

light exposed and (b) light protected.<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

184


Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

0 2 4 6 8 10<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

Figure 3.100 Ip of 0.1 µM AFG1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 from 0 to 8 hours in (a)<br />

light exposed and (b) light protected.<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

0 2 4 6 8 10<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

Figure 3.101 Ip of 0.1 µM AFG2 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 from 0 to 8 hours in (a)<br />

light exposed and (b) light protected.<br />

185


3.4.2.3 Stability Studies In Different pH of BRB<br />

0.1 µM of each aflatoxin was measured in four different pH of BRB (6.0, 7.0,<br />

9.0 and 11.0) and the measurements was made in ambient conditions from 0 to 3 hours<br />

of exposure time. The purpose of this experiment was to study the stability of all<br />

aflatoxins when exposed to ambient condition in slightly acidic, neutral and basic<br />

medium in a period of three hours. The results of these studies are shown in Figures<br />

4.103. At 0 hr exposure time, the Ip of all aflatoxins in BRB at pH 6.0 (Figure 3.102a),<br />

7.0 (Figure 3.102b), and 11.0 (Figure 3.102d) were lower as compared in BRB at pH<br />

9.0 (Figure 3.102c) as these pH were not the optimum pH for the voltammetric analysis<br />

of aflatoxins. In acidic medium, all aflatoxins were stable within 3 hours exposure time<br />

which shows that no reaction has occurred between acid and aflatoxins that can damage<br />

the chemical structures of the aflatoxins. This may be due to the formation of the<br />

phenolate ions which existed in the resonance state as shown in Figure 3.103<br />

(Heathcote, 1984). However, in strong basic medium (pH 11), Ip for all aflatoxins<br />

decreased with longer exposure time and the peak current of AFG1 and AFG2 totally<br />

disappeared after 2 and 3 hours respectively. In strong basic medium, hydroxyl ion can<br />

slowly react with cyclopentanone and lactone groups of the aflatoxins. AFG1 and<br />

AFG2 show faster decreasing value in the Ip compared to AFB1 and AFB2 due to the<br />

readiness of the lactone group being attacked in strong basic condition. Figures 3.104,<br />

3.105, 3.106 and 3.107 show the voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 and AFG2 in BRB<br />

at pH 6.0 and 11.0 for 0 to 3 hours of exposure time respectively.<br />

186


Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

O<br />

O<br />

pH 6.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

pH 9.0<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

pH 7.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

(a) (b)<br />

O<br />

pH 11.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

(c) (d)<br />

Figure 3.102 Peak heights of 0.1 µM aflatoxins in BRB at pH (a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c) 9.0<br />

and (d) 11.0 exposed to ambient conditions up to three hours of exposure time.<br />

_ O<br />

O_<br />

O O<br />

OCH 3<br />

Figure 3.103 Resonance forms of the phenolate ion (Heathcote, 1984)<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

187<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2


Figure 3.104 Voltammograms of 0.1 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 6.0 from 0 to 3.0 hrs of<br />

exposure time.<br />

Figure 3.105 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 11.0 (b) from 0 to 3.0<br />

hrs exposure time.<br />

188


Figure 3.106 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 6.0 from 0 to 3.0 hrs<br />

of exposure time.<br />

Figure 3.107 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 11.0 from 0 to 3.0 hrs<br />

of exposure time.<br />

189


The same studies were carried out using UV-VIS spectrophotometer for the<br />

same period of exposure time which showed that the absorbance of all aflatoxins in<br />

BRB at pH 11.0 decreased with increasing exposure time as shown in Figure 3.108.<br />

Overall results are in agreement with that found by voltammetric techniques. UV-VIS<br />

spectrums for AFB2 and AFG2 in BRB pH at 6.0 and 11.0 are shown in Appendix AD.<br />

Abs<br />

Abs<br />

0.16<br />

0.14<br />

0.12<br />

0.1<br />

0.08<br />

0.06<br />

0.04<br />

0.02<br />

0<br />

0.14<br />

0.12<br />

0.1<br />

0.08<br />

0.06<br />

0.04<br />

0.02<br />

0<br />

pH 6.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

pH 9.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Abs<br />

Abs<br />

0.12<br />

0.1<br />

0.08<br />

0.06<br />

0.04<br />

0.02<br />

0<br />

0.07<br />

0.06<br />

0.05<br />

0.04<br />

0.03<br />

0.02<br />

0.01<br />

0<br />

pH 7.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

(a) (b)<br />

pH 11.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

(c) (d)<br />

Figure 3.108 Absorbance of 1.0 ppm aflatoxins in BRB at pH of (a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c)<br />

9.0 and (d) 11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs of exposure time.<br />

190<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2


3.4.2.4 Stability Studies in 1.0 M HCl and 1.0 M NaOH<br />

The objective of this study was to investigate the stability of all aflatoxins in<br />

acid and basic medium within certain period of time where the stability of aflatoxins in<br />

1.0 M HCl and 1.0 M NaOH respectively were carried out. In each case, 0.1 µM of<br />

aflatoxin was dissolved in 1.0 M HCl and NaOH respectively before being spiked into<br />

the voltammetric cell for voltammetric measurement. The measurement was taken<br />

every hour in a period of 6 hours as shown in Figures 3.109 and 3.110. Ip for all the<br />

aflatoxins show no significant difference when placed in 1.0 M HCl up to 6 hours as<br />

compared to that obtained with 1.0 M NaOH. For aflatoxins left in 1.0 M NaOH, the Ip<br />

of AFG1 and AFG2 were significantly reduced as compared to AFB1 and AFB2. The<br />

voltammograms of AFB1 and AFG1 in 1.0 M HCl and 1.0 M NaOH for a period of 6<br />

hrs are shown in Appendix AE. No peak was observed after 5 hours of reaction for<br />

AFG1 and AFG2. It can be concluded that up to 6 hrs of reaction time, aflatoxins are<br />

stable in 1.0 M HCl medium compared with 1.0 M NaOH. This outcome confirmed the<br />

results obtained by previous stability studies where all aflatoxins in acidic media are<br />

more stable than those in basic media.<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6<br />

Reaction time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.109 The peak heights of 0.10µM aflatoxins in 1.0 M HCl from 0 to 6 hrs of<br />

reaction time.<br />

191


Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6<br />

Reaction time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.110 The peak heights of 0.10 µM aflatoxins in 1.0 M NaOH from 0 to 6 hrs<br />

of reaction time.<br />

3.5 Voltammetric Analysis of Aflatoxins in Real Samples<br />

Both the proposed DPCSV and SWSV techniques with their optimum<br />

parameters were applied to the determination of aflatoxins in 15 groundnut real<br />

samples. The extraction and clean-up methods for aflatoxin in real samples which have<br />

been previously applied by other researchers (Garden et al., 2001; Pena et al., 2002;<br />

Chemistry Department, 2002) were tried in order to obtain the highest yield of<br />

aflatoxins with the minimum matrix effect. From this study the most reliable technique<br />

was chosen for the analysis of the real samples. In addition, a standard addition method<br />

was applied for the determination of aflatoxin content in order to overcome any matrix<br />

effect (Sanna et al., 2000; Guiberteau et al.,2001; Ghoneim et al., 2003; Rodriguez et<br />

al., 2004). This method also provides the highest precision because the uncertainties<br />

introduced by the sample injection are avoided (Chan, 2004). The results which were<br />

obtained by these proposed techniques were compared with those obtained by the<br />

HPLC which is currently an accepted technique for the routine analysis of aflatoxin<br />

compounds in <strong>Malaysia</strong> (Chemistry Dept., 2000).<br />

192


3.5.1 Study on the Extraction Techniques<br />

Three different extraction techniques, labelled as Technique 1, 2 and 3 were<br />

applied in the extraction of groundnut. The results in Figures 3.111a to 3.111c showed<br />

the Technique 3 gives a well defined peak current for the aflatoxin as compared to other<br />

techniques.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

(c)<br />

Figure 3.111 Voltammograms of real samples after extraction by Technique (a) 1, (b)<br />

2 and (c) 3 with addition of 10 ppb AFB1 standard solution in BRB at pH 9.0 as a<br />

blank.<br />

193


For Technique 3, a standard addition of 10 ppb AFB1 into the sample solution<br />

produced a higher Ip of 20.5 nA with the Ep at -1.24 V. However, for the Technique 1,<br />

Ip of 10 ppb AFB1 standard solution was only 5 nA and no peak was observed for<br />

AFB1 which was spiked in real sample solution obtained by the Technique 2 even<br />

though the concentration of standard solution was increased 5 times. This may be due<br />

to high matrix effect that eliminates the analyte response. Based on this result, the<br />

Technique 3 was selected for extraction and clean-up processes of aflatoxin from<br />

groundnut samples throughout this analysis of real samples.<br />

4.5.1 Analysis of Blank<br />

The results of these analyses are shown in Figures 3.112a and 3.112b which<br />

show no peak was observed for the blank samples which indicate that the reagents used<br />

in extraction and clean-up steps did not produce any peak within the scanned potential<br />

range.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.112 Voltammograms of blank in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained by (a) DPCSV and<br />

(b) SWSV methods.<br />

194


Baseline for the blank however, is higher as compared to the BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

This may be due to the effect of organic compounds which were used in the extraction<br />

process such as methanol and chloroform present in the blank solution which could not<br />

be removed completely during nitrogen purging. The voltammetric measurement was<br />

repeated after two weeks for the same solution and no significant changes in their<br />

voltammograms were observed.<br />

195<br />

Further investigation which involved the addition of 10 ppb AFB2 in the blank<br />

sample to observe any effect on Ip of AFB2 was carried out with the DPCSV and SWSV<br />

methods. Voltammograms of the blank sample with AFB2 are shown in Figure 3.113<br />

and Table 3.24 shows the Ip of AFB2 for both cases. Since the Ip of 10 ppb AFB2<br />

measured in the presence and absence of the blank sample is not significantly different,<br />

it may be concluded that the blank sample does not interfere with the determination of<br />

aflatoxin in the real sample.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

Figure 3.113 DPCSV (a) and SWSV (b) voltammograms of 10 ppb AFB2 (i) in<br />

presence of a blank sample (ii) obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 (iii) as the supporting<br />

electrolyte.


Table 3.24 The Ip and Ep of 10 ppb AFB2 in the presence and absence of a blank<br />

sample<br />

Sample<br />

10 ppb AFB2 in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0<br />

10 ppb AFB2 in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 +<br />

blank sample<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

21.23 ± 0.21<br />

(0.98%)<br />

20.40 ± 0.20<br />

(0.99%)<br />

DPCSV (n=3)<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.25<br />

-1.25<br />

3.5.3 Recovery Studies of Aflatoxins in Real Samples<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

454 ± 2.65<br />

(0.58%)<br />

443 ± 3.21<br />

(0.72%)<br />

SWSV (n=3)<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.34<br />

-1.34<br />

This study was carried out by spiking three different concentration levels (3 ppb,<br />

9 ppb and 15 ppb) into the eluate of ground nut sample followed by the extraction and<br />

cleaning-up processes. 15 ppb was the highest concentration used in this study since<br />

this is the highest permissible level for total aflatoxin that should be present in<br />

groundnut sample as imposed by the <strong>Malaysia</strong>n Government. The voltammetric<br />

measurements have been made continuously for three days to observe the recovery of<br />

aflatoxins in real samples which was kept in the freezer at 4° C. Figure 3.114 shows the<br />

DPCSV voltammograms of real samples added with 3 ppb, 9 ppb and 15 ppb AFB1 in<br />

BRB at pH 9.0 for day one. For other aflatoxin such as AFG1 their voltammograms are<br />

shown in Appendix AF. The same study was carried out by the SWSV method and for<br />

example, the SWSV voltammograms of AFB1 are shown in Appendix AG.<br />

196


(i) (ii)<br />

Figure 3.114 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample (b) added with 3 ppb (i), 9 ppb<br />

(ii) and 15 ppb AFB1 (iii) obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank on the first day of<br />

measurement.<br />

(iii)<br />

197


Figure 3.115 shows the percentage of recovery for all aflatoxins within 3 days<br />

obtained by the DPCSV techniques. For those obtained by the SWSV technique, their<br />

figures are shown in Appendix AH.<br />

% recovery<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3<br />

% recovery<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

% recovery<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3<br />

0<br />

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3<br />

(a) (b)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

(c)<br />

Figure 3.115 Percentage of recoveries of (a) 3 ppb, (b) 9 ppb and (c) 15 ppb of all<br />

aflatoxins in real samples obtained by the DPSV method for one to three days<br />

measurements.<br />

The results show that at first day of measurement using both techniques, the<br />

recoveries of 3 ppb, 9 ppb and 15 ppb of all aflatoxins were from 85 % to 102 % which<br />

indicate that the recovery is good. An example on how the recovery is calculated is<br />

represented in Appendix AI. The European Committee for Standardisation (CEN<br />

Report, 1999) stated that the percentage recovery for aflatoxins in real samples should<br />

198<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2


e 50 to 120%. Based on these criteria, the recoveries of total aflatoxins are acceptable<br />

using this developed method. These recovery values slightly decreased with longer<br />

keeping time which may be due to the matrix effect. Based on this finding, it is<br />

suggested that the recovery study should be performed on the same day of the sample<br />

preparation.<br />

3.5.4 Analysis of Aflatoxins in Real Samples<br />

In this study, all real samples were analysed using the developed DPCSV and<br />

SWSV methods. For all samples, only the AFB1 was found in this analysis. The<br />

DPCSV and SWSV voltammograms of the real samples and with added 10 ppb AFB1<br />

standard solution are shown in Figures 3.116 to 3.121. Examples of real samples with<br />

no aflatoxin, small and large traces of aflatoxin are shown in samples S11, S07 and S10<br />

respectively. The DPCSV voltammograms of these samples are shown in Figure 3.116,<br />

3.118 and 3.120 respectively. The sample S11 shows no traces of aflatoxin, S07<br />

contains 5.90 ppb and S10 contains 31.93 ppb aflatoxin. As comparison, the HPLC<br />

chromatograms for real samples (S07 and S10) are shown in Appendix AJ.<br />

Figure 3.116 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample, S11 (b) with the addition of 10<br />

ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions; Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

199


Figure 3.117 SWSV voltammograms of real sample S11 (b) with the addition of 10<br />

ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions; Eacc = -0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s, frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

Figure 3.118 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample S07 (b) with the addition of 10<br />

ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions; Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

200


Figure 3.119 SWSV voltammograms of real sample S07 (b) with the addition of 10<br />

ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions; Eacc = -0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s, frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

Figure 3.120 DPCSV voltammograms of real sample S10 (b) with the addition of 10<br />

ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank. Parameter conditions; Eacc = -0.6 V,<br />

tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV<br />

201


Figure 3.121 SWSV voltammograms of real sample S10 (b) with the addition of 10<br />

ppb AFB1 (c) in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank. . Parameter conditions; Eacc = -0.8 V,<br />

tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750 mV/s, frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and<br />

pulse amplitude = 75 mV.<br />

The total aflatoxin contents in all 15 samples are shown in Table 3.25. The<br />

results that were obtained by the HPLC technique are also listed which are not<br />

significantly different. In our study using the both proposed techniques, out of 15<br />

analysed samples, 2 samples (13%) were contaminated with more than 15 ppb of total<br />

aflatoxins, 8 samples (53%) were not contaminated and 34% were contaminated with<br />

less than 15 ppb of aflatoxin. Higher levels of aflatoxins were observed in groundnuts<br />

which have been kept for two weeks in the laboratory (S04 and S10) before being<br />

analysed compared to the same samples that were analysed immediately (S01 and S02).<br />

This indicates that the storage time also can affect the level of aflatoxins in groundnut<br />

samples. Due to that reason other samples were analysed immediately. Appendix AK<br />

shows an example on how the aflatoxin content in the S13 was calculated.<br />

202


Table 3.25 Total aflatoxin contents in real samples which were obtained by the<br />

DPCSV, SWSV and HPLC techniques (average of duplicate analysis)<br />

Samples<br />

S01<br />

S02<br />

S03<br />

S04<br />

S05<br />

S06<br />

S07<br />

S08<br />

S09<br />

S10<br />

S11<br />

S12<br />

S13<br />

S14<br />

S15<br />

n.d: not detected<br />

DPCSV<br />

12.73<br />

7.12<br />

n.d<br />

21.46<br />

9.90<br />

n.d<br />

5.90<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

31.93<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

10.76<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

Total aflatoxin (ppb)<br />

SWSV<br />

13.92<br />

8.36<br />

n.d<br />

29.72<br />

8.95<br />

n.d<br />

8.17<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

35.65<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

9.21<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

HPLC<br />

14.34<br />

8.83<br />

0.50<br />

19.08<br />

5.34<br />

n.d<br />

3.67<br />

n.d<br />

1.84<br />

36.00<br />

0.42<br />

1.75<br />

8.25<br />

n.d<br />

n.d<br />

203


4.1 Conclusions<br />

CHAPTER IV<br />

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS<br />

The voltammetry technique which is one of the electrochemical methods was<br />

successfully studied through various methods such as cyclic voltammetry (CV),<br />

differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) and square-wave stripping<br />

voltammetry (SWSV) for determination of aflatoxin compounds. The objectives of this<br />

research were to study the electroanalytical properties of aflatoxins and developing<br />

voltammetric methods for the determination of these compounds in food samples such<br />

as groundnuts. This study met these objectives in terms of the determination of<br />

electroanalytical properties of aflatoxins and has also proven the hypothesis regarding<br />

these properties for the studied compounds such as the compounds that are actively<br />

adsorbed on mercury electrode and undergone totally irreversible reduction reaction.<br />

This study was also successful in developing the DPCSV and SWSV methods for<br />

qualitative and quantitive determinations of aflatoxins in standard solution and real<br />

groundnut samples. The study also proved that aflatoxins which are organic compounds<br />

can be determined by voltammetric techniques with convenient quantitation down to<br />

10 -9 M (or ppt) concentration level<br />

The voltammetric studies of aflatoxins reveals that the proposed DPCSV and<br />

SWSV methods are free from inteference effect by studied metal ions and organic<br />

compounds. Both techniques are successful in the determination of aflatoxin as<br />

204


individual rather than in mixed condition. An attempt to analyse them simultaneously<br />

was not possible due to the fact that the location of the peak potentials of all aflatoxins<br />

are very close each other. Harvey (2000) suggested that to get separate peaks for mixed<br />

analytes, the difference of their respective peak potential should be more than 0.08 V.<br />

All studied aflatoxins (AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2) undergo reduction<br />

reactions at the mercury electrode with totally irreversible reaction in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

The respective DPCSV and SWSV peak currents increase linearly with increasing<br />

concentration for all aflatoxins in the range of 0.02 to 0.32 µM and from 0.01 to 0.125<br />

µM. The peak potentials for all aflatoxins in this solution are located within -1.20 V<br />

and they are shifted towards the less negative direction with increasing concentration of<br />

aflatoxins. The aflatoxins that are adsorbed on the mercury electrode produce higher<br />

peak current with longer accumulation time until a limit is reached due to the saturation<br />

of the electrode surface.<br />

The DPCSV technique that was successfully developed for the determination of<br />

aflatoxins was one which gives a detection limit of around 2.0 ppb for all aflatoxins.<br />

This is an acceptable LOD for the determination of aflatoxin in groundnut samples.<br />

The optimum parameter conditions for the DPCSV method of the aflatoxins are Ei = -<br />

1.0 V (except for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50<br />

mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV/s. A SWSV technique was also successfully<br />

developed for the analysis of aflatoxins which gives a lower LOD of around 0.5 ppb.<br />

The optimum parameter conditions for the SWSV for all aflatoxins are Ei = -1.0 V<br />

(except for AFG1 = -0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, scan rate = 3750<br />

mV/s, frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and pulse amplitude = 50 mV/s. From<br />

the statistical analysis of the both proposed techniques, the methods are considered<br />

sensitive, accurate, precise, rugged, robust and provide shorter analysis time.<br />

From the stability studies of aflatoxins, it can be concluded that aflatoxins stock<br />

solution in acetonitrile: benzene (98%) should be kept in the dark and cool conditions<br />

for longer shelf life. For aflatoxin standard solutions prepared in BRB at pH 9.0 and<br />

205


stored in the same conditions as for the stock solutions, AFG1 and AFG2 could be used<br />

up to 2 months while AFB1 and AFB2 up to 3 months. All afaltoxins are stable in 1.0<br />

M HCl within 6 hours compared to that in 1.0 M NaOH.<br />

Both proposed technique are successfully developed and applied in the<br />

determination of aflatoxins in groundnuts. The results that were obtained by both<br />

techniques are not significantly different than those obtained by the HPLC. As<br />

compared to the latter technique, the proposed techniques gave an advantage in terms of<br />

analysis time where the voltammetric analysis need less than 2 minutes or even less<br />

than 30 s for SWSV technique to complete the analysis of one sample while the HPLC<br />

takes approximate 15 min. However, the HPLC is able to separate and analyse all<br />

aflatoxins simultaneously compared to the proposed techniques.<br />

Finally, it can be concluded that the proposed DPCSV and SWSV methods<br />

which are sensitive, accurate, precise, fast, rugged, robust and low cost methods were<br />

successfully developed for the determination of aflatoxins in groundnuts samples. Both<br />

methods have a great potential as an alternative method for this application in the<br />

future.<br />

4.2 Recommendations<br />

In this study, the mercury electrode was applied throughout the experiment. Due<br />

to the oxidation of mercury taking place at the oxidation potential of more than 0 V to<br />

form mercury (I), the study of aflatoxins were restricted in the range of 0 to -1.5 V.<br />

Further study is suggested by using alternative electrodes such as carbon paste, carbon<br />

paste with chemical modified electrode, gold, platinum or glassy carbon electrode<br />

which has a larger potential window compared to the mercury electrode. Another<br />

working electrode such as bismuth film electrode (BFE) can be further investigated for<br />

this analysis due to its performance that has been proven to compare favorably to or<br />

even surpass to that of mercury electrode (Hutton et al., 2005; Economou, 2005).<br />

206


A study on reagents that can complex with aflatoxins is suggested in order to<br />

make the simultaneous determination of aflatoxins in real sample possible. The use of<br />

surface active reagents such as alginic acid, Triton X-100 or alkaline phosphatase that<br />

can be adsorbed on mercury electrode (Wang, 2000) and inhibit one of the aflatoxins<br />

can be studied so as to observe their effect on the peak current of aflatoxins either as in<br />

standard solution or simulation samples.<br />

A study of the effect of storage condition and the storing time duration of<br />

groundnut samples to the level of aflatoxins using the DPCSV and SWSV techniques is<br />

suggested. The results from this study can provide valuable information on good<br />

practice in storing groundnuts at home and for obtaining a data base regarding the<br />

storing time of groundnuts to avoid any contamination by aflatoxins. The stability of<br />

aflatoxins which are treated at various temperatures and exposure time to ultra violet<br />

(UV) light is suggested. The reason for this study is to determine the degree of<br />

temperature and exposure time to UV light that can totally diminish the aflatoxins.<br />

Finally, in this study, the DPCSV and SWSV techniques were applied in<br />

analysed of groundnut samples but for the future works, both techniques can be<br />

explored for analysis of aflatoxins in other types of samples such as rice, cooking oil,<br />

207<br />

cigarettes tobacco, local and imported meats, bread, fish and vegetables due to higher<br />

consumption by the <strong>Malaysia</strong>n population. Some reports have been published regarding<br />

these analyses (Aycicek et al., 2005; Edinboro and Karnes, 2005; Shenasi and Candlish,<br />

2002; Arrus et al., 2004; AbdulKadar et al., 2004; Erdogan, 2004; Gowda, 2004) but<br />

unfortunately none of them are related to the local environment in <strong>Malaysia</strong> except a<br />

paper by Ali et al. (2005) which focused on the analysis of aflatoxins in commercial<br />

traditional herbal medicines used in <strong>Malaysia</strong> and Indonesia.


REFERENCES<br />

Abbas, A.N. and Mostafa, G.A.E. (2003). New Triiodomercurate-Modified Carbon<br />

Paste Electrode for the Potentiometric Determination of Mercury. Anal. Chim.<br />

Acta. 478:329-335.<br />

Abbaspour, A. and Moosavi, S.M.M.(2002). Chemically Modified Carbon Paste<br />

Electrode for Determination of Copper (II) by Potentiometric Method. Talanta.<br />

52: 91-96.<br />

Abdine, H. and Belal, F. (2002). Polarographic Behaviour and Determination of<br />

Acrivastine Capsules and Human Urine. Talanta. 56: 97-104<br />

Abdulkadar, A.H.W., Abdulla, A. A. A., Afrah M. A. and Jassim, H.A. (2004).<br />

Mycotoxins in Food Products Available in Qatar. Food Control. 15: 543-548.<br />

Aboul-Eneim, H. Y., Stefan, R-I. and Baiulescu, G-E. (2000). Quality and Realibility in<br />

Analytical Chemistry. New York: CRC Press.<br />

Abu Zuhri, A. Z., Zatar, N. A., Shubeitah, R.M. and Arafat, H.H. (2000). Voltammetric<br />

and Spectrophotometric Determination of Nizatidine in Pharmaceutical<br />

Formulations. Mikrochim. Acta.134:153-160.<br />

Ahmad, M. (1993). Pengenalan Statistik Dalam Kimia Analisis. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan<br />

Bahasa Dan Pustaka.<br />

Akiyama, H., Goda, Y. Tanaka. T, and Toyoda, M. (2001). Determination of Aflatoxins<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2 in Spices Using a Multifunctional Column Clean-up, J. of<br />

Chromatography A. 932: 153-157.<br />

208


Alborzi, S., Pourabbas, B., Rashidi, M. and Astaneh, B. (2005). Aflatoxin M1<br />

Contaminated in Pasteurised Milk in Shiraz (south of Iran). Food Control. Article<br />

in press.<br />

Al-Ghamdi, A.H., Al-shadokhy, M.A. and Al-watan, A.A. (2004). Electrochemical<br />

Determination of Cephalothin Antibiotic by Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric<br />

Technique. J.Pharm. Bioanal. Anal. 35(5):1001-1009.<br />

Ali, N., Hashim, N.H., Saad, B., Safan, K., Nakajima, M. and Yoshizawa, T. (2005).<br />

Evaluation of a Method to Determine the Natural Occurence of Aflatoxins in<br />

Commercial Traditional Herbal Medicines From <strong>Malaysia</strong> and Indonesia. Food<br />

and Chemical Toxicology. 43(12): 1763-1772.<br />

Almeida, l.E., Castilho, M., Maza, L.H. and Tabak, M.(1998). Voltammetric and<br />

Spectroscopic Studies of the Oxidation of the Anti-oxidant Drug Dipyridamole in<br />

Acetonitrile and Ethanol. Anal. Chim. Acta. 375: 223-231.<br />

Ammida, N.H.S., Micheli, L. and Palleschi, G. (2004). Electrochemical Immunosensor<br />

for Determination of Aflatoxin B1 inBarley. Anal. Chim. Acta. 520: 159-164.<br />

Andrieux, C.P., Hapiot, P. and Saveant, J.M.(1990). Ultramicroelectroded for Fast<br />

Electrochemical Kinetics. Electroanalysis. 2:183-193.<br />

Androu, V.G., Nikolelis, D. and Tarus, B. (1997). Electrochemistry Investigation of<br />

Transduction of Interactions of Alfatoixin M1 With Bilayer Lipid Membranes<br />

(BLMs), Anal. Chim. Acta. 350:121-127.<br />

Aoki, K. (1990). Theory of Stationary Current Potential Curves at Interdigitated<br />

Microarray Electrodes for Quasi-reversible and Totally Irreversible Electrode<br />

Reactions. Electroanalysis. 2: 229-233.<br />

209


Arancibia, V., Alarcon, L. and Sefura, R. (2004). Supercritical Fluid Extraction of<br />

Cadmium as Cd-Oxime Complex From Human Hair; Determination of Square-<br />

Wave Anodic or Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta. 502:<br />

189-194.<br />

Arranz, A., Dolara, I., de Betono, S.F., Moreda, J. M., Cid, A. and Arranz, J.F.<br />

(1999). Electroanalytical Study and Square Wave Voltammetric Techniques for<br />

the Determination of β-blocker Timolol at the Mercury Electrode. Anal. Chim<br />

.Acta. 389: 225-232.<br />

Arranz, P., Arranz, A., Moreda, J. M., Cid, A. and Arranz, J.F. (2003). Stripping<br />

Voltammetric and Polarographic Techniques for Determination of Anti-fungal<br />

Ketoconazole on the Mercury Electrode. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 33: 589-596.<br />

Arrigan, D. W. M. (1994). Voltammetric Determination of Trace Metals and<br />

Organics After Accumulation at Modified Electrodes. Analyst. 119: 1953-1966.<br />

Arrus, K., Blank, G., Abramson, D. Clear, R. and Holley, R. A. (2004). Aflatoxins<br />

Production by Aspergillus flavous in Brazil Nuts. J of Stored Products<br />

Research. 41(5): 513-527.<br />

Aslanoglu, M. and Ayne, G. (2004). Voltammetric Studies of the Interaction of<br />

Quinacrine With DNA. Anal. Bioanal.Chem. 380: 658-663.<br />

Aycicek, H., Aksoy, A. and Saygi, S.(2005). Determination of Aflatoxin Levels in<br />

Some Dairy and Food Products Which Consumed in Ankara, Turkey. Food<br />

Control. 16: 263-266.<br />

Aziz, N.H. and Moussa, L.A., (2002). Influence of Gamma-radiation on Mycotoxin<br />

Producing Moulds and Mycotoxins in Fruits. Food Control. 13: 281-288.<br />

210


Aziz, N.H., Youssef, Y.A., El-Fouly, M.Z. and Moussa, L.A., (1998).<br />

Contamination of Some Common Medicinal plant Samples and Spices by Fungi<br />

and Their Mycotoxins. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin. 39: 279-285.<br />

Badea, M., Micheli, L., Messia, M. C., Candigliota, T., Marconi, E., Mottram, T.,<br />

Velasco-Garcia, M., Moscone, E. and Palleschi, G. (2004). Aflatoxin M1<br />

Determination in Raw Milk Using a Flow-injection Immunoassay System. Anal<br />

Chim Acta. 520: 141-148.<br />

Bakirci, I. (2001). A Study On the Occurence of Aflatoxin M1 in Milk and Milk<br />

Products Produced in Van Province of Turkey. Food Control. 12: 47-51.<br />

211<br />

Bankole, S.A., Ogunsanwo, B.M. and Eseigbe, D.A. (2005a). Aflatoxins in Nigerian<br />

Dry-roasted Groundnuts. Food Chemistry. 89: 503-506.<br />

Bankole, S.A., Ogunsanwo, B.M. and Mabekoje, O.O.(2004) Natural Occurrence of<br />

Moulds and Aflatoxin B1 in Melon Seed From Markets in Nigeria. Food and<br />

Chemical Toxicology. 42: 1309-1314.<br />

Bankole, S.A., Ogunsanwo, B.M., Osho, A. and Adewuyi, G.O. (2005b). Fungal<br />

Contamination and Aflatoxin B1 of ‘Egusi’ Melon Seeds in Nigeria. Food<br />

Control. Article in press.<br />

Barbeira, P.J.S. and Stradiotto, W.R., (1997). Simultaneous Determination of Trace<br />

Amounts of Zinc, Lead and Copper in Rum by Anodic Stripping Voltammetry.<br />

Talanta. 44: 185-188.<br />

Barker, G.C. and Jenkins, I.L. (1952). Square-wave Polarography. Analyst. 77: 685-<br />

695.


Barek, J., Fogg, A. G., Muck, A. and Zima, J. (2001a). Polarography and<br />

Voltammetry at Mercury Electrodes. Critical Reviews In Analytical Chemistry.<br />

31: 291-309.<br />

212<br />

Barek, J., Cvacka, J., Muck, A. and Quaiserova, A. (2001b). Electrochemical<br />

Methods for Monitoring of Environmental Carcinogens. Fresenius J Anal Chem.<br />

369: 556-562.<br />

Barek, J., Pumera, M., Muck. A., Kaderabkova, M. and Zima, J. (1999).<br />

Polarographic and Voltammetric Determination of Selected Nitrated Polycyclic<br />

Aromatic Hydrocarbons. Anal Chim Acta. 393: 141-146.<br />

BAS (1993) Controlled Growth Mercury Electrode Instruction Manual,<br />

Bioanalytical System, Inc. Indiana.<br />

Batista, L.B., Chalfoun, S.M., Prado, G., Schwan, R.F. and Wheals, A.E. (2003).<br />

Toxigenic Fungi Associated With Processed (green) Coffee Beans (Coffea<br />

arabica-L). Int J Of Food Microbiolog. 85: 293 – 300.<br />

Beaver, R.W. and Wilson, D.M. (1990). Comparison of Postcolumn Derivatisation-<br />

Liquid Chromatography With Thin-layer Chromatography for Determination of<br />

Aflatoxins in Naturally Contaminated Corn. J. Assoc.Off. Anal. Chem. 73(4):<br />

379 – 381.<br />

Beaver, R.W., James, M.A. and Lin, T.Y. (1991). ELISA-based Screening Test<br />

With Liquid Chromatography for the Determination of Aflatoxin in Corn. J.<br />

Assoc.Off. Anal. Chem. 74: 827 – 829.<br />

Beebe, B.M. (1978). Reverse Phase High Pressure Liquid Chromatographic<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins in Foods. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 81: 1347-<br />

1352.


Begum, F. and Samajpati, N. (2000). Mycotoxin Production on Rice, Pulses and<br />

Oilseeds. Naturwissenschaften. 87: 275-277.<br />

Berzas, J.J., Rodriguez, J., Castaneda, G. and Villasenor, M.J. (2000).<br />

Voltammetric Behavior of Sildenafil Citrate (Viagra) Using Square-wave and<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Square-wave Techniques. Determination in<br />

Pharmaceutical Products. Anal. Chim. Acta. 417: 143-148.<br />

Betina, V. (1984). Mycotoxin – Production, Isolation, Separation and Purification.<br />

Netherland: Elsevier Science.<br />

Bicking, M.K.L., Kniseley, R.N and Svec, H.J. (1983). Coupled-Column for<br />

Quantitating Low Levels of Aflatoxins. J . Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66: 905-908.<br />

Bijl, J. and Peteghen, C.V.(1985). Rapid Extraction and Sample Clean-up for the<br />

Fluorescence DensitometricDetermination of Aflatoxin M1in Milk and Milk<br />

Powder. Anal. Chim. Act. 170: 149-152.<br />

Billova, S., Kizek, R., Jelen, F. and Novotna, P. (2003). Square-wave Voltammetric<br />

Determination of Cefoperazone in a Bacterial Culture, Pharmaceutical Drug,<br />

Milk and Urine. Anal Bioanal Chem. 377: 362-369.<br />

Bingham, A.K., Huebner, H.J., Phillips, T.D. and Baver, J.E. (2004). Identification<br />

and Reduction of Urinary Aflatoxin Metabolites in Dog. Food and Chemical<br />

Toxicology. 42(11): 1851-1858.<br />

Blanc, R., Gonzalez-Casado, A., Navabu, A. and Vilchez, J.L. (2000). The Estimate<br />

of Blanks in Differential Pulse Voltammetric Technique: Application to<br />

Detection Limits Evaluation as Recommended by IUPAC. Anal. Chim. Acta.<br />

403: 117-123.<br />

213


Blesa, J., Soriano, J.M., Molto, J.C., Marin, R. and Manes, J. (2003). Determination<br />

of Aflatoxins in Peanuts by Matrix Solid-phase Dispersion and Liquid<br />

Chromatography, J of Chromatography A. 1011: 49-54.<br />

Bond, A.M., Oldham, K.B. and Zoski, C.G. (1989). Steady State Voltammetry.<br />

Anal. Chim. Acta. 216: 177-230.<br />

Brainina, Kh. (1974). Stripping Voltammetry in Chemical Analysis. New York:<br />

Wiley and Sons.<br />

Brainina, Kh., Malakhova, N.A. and Stojko, Y. (2000). Stripping Voltammetry in<br />

Environmental and Food Analysis. Fresenius J Anal Chem. 368: 307-325.<br />

214<br />

Brera, C., Caputi, R., Miraglia, M., Iavicoli, I., Salerno, A. and Carelli, G. (2002).<br />

Exposure Assessment to Mycotoxins in Workplace: Aflatoxins and Ochratoxin<br />

A Occurence in Airborne Dust and Human Sera. Microchemical J. 73(1-2): 167-<br />

173.<br />

Bressolle, F., Bromet-Petit, M. and Audron, M. (1996). Validation of Liquid<br />

Chromatography and Gas Chromatography Methods: Application to<br />

Pharmacokinetic. J. Chromatogr, B. 686: 3-10.<br />

Buffle, J. and Tercier-Waeber, M-L. (2005). Voltammetric Environmental Trace-<br />

Metal Analysis and Speciation: From Laboratory to in situ Measurements. Trend<br />

In Anal. Chem. 24(3): 172-191.<br />

Cakala, M., Mazerska, Z., Donten, M. and Stojek, Z. (1999). Electroanalytical and<br />

Acid-base Properties of Imidazoacridinanone, an Antitumor Drug (C-1311).<br />

Anal. Chim. Acta. 379: 209-215.


Canabillas, A.G., Burguillos, J.M.O., Canas, M.A.M, Caceres, M.I.R. and Lopez,<br />

F.S. (2003). Square Wave Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric Determination of<br />

Piromidic acid. Application in Urine. J Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 33: 553-562.<br />

Carapuca, H.M., Cabral, D.J. and Rocha, L.S. (2005). Adsorptive Stripping<br />

Voltammetry of Trimethoprim: Mechanistic Studies and Application to the Fast<br />

Determination in Pharmaceutical Suspensions. J Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 38: 364-<br />

369.<br />

215<br />

Carlson, M.A. , Bargeron, C.B. , Benson, R.C., Fraser, A.B., Phillips, T.E., Velky, J.<br />

T., Groopman, J.D., Strickland, P.T. and Ko, H.W. (2000). An Automated,<br />

Handheld Biosensor for Aflatoxin. Biosensors and Bioelectronic. 14: 841-848.<br />

Carpini, G., Lucavelli, F., Marrazza, G. and Mascini, M., (2004). Oligonucleotide-<br />

Modified Screen-printed Gold Electrodes for Enzyme Amplified Sensing of<br />

Nucleic Acids. Biosensors and Bioelectronic. 20: 167-175.<br />

Castro, A.A., Wagener, A.L.R., Farias, P.A.M. and Bastos, M. B. (2004).<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry of 1-hydroxypyrene at the Thin-film<br />

Mercury Electrode-basis for Quantitative Determination of PAH Metabolite in<br />

Biological Materials. Anal. Chim. Acta. 521: 201-207.<br />

CEN Report. (1999). Food analysis – Biotoxins – Criteria of Analytical Methods of<br />

Mycotoxins. European Committee for Standardisation CR 13505:99 E. 1-7.<br />

Cepeda, A., Franco, C.M., Fente, C.A., Vazquez, B.I., Rodriguez, J.L., Prognon, P.<br />

and Mahuzier, G. (1996). Post-collumn Excitation of Aflatoxins Using<br />

Cyclodextrins in Lliquid Chromatography for Food Analysis. J of Chromatogr.<br />

A. 721: 69-74.


Cespedez, A.E and Diaz, G.J. (1997). Analysis of Aflatoxins in Poultry and Pig<br />

Feeds and Feedstuffs used in Colombia. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 80: 1215-<br />

1219.<br />

Chan, C.C. (2004). Potency method validation. In: Chan, C.C., Lam, H., Lee, Y.C.<br />

and Zhang, X-M. Analytical Method Validation and Instrument Performance<br />

Verification. USA: John Wiley and Sons.<br />

216<br />

Chan, D., MacDonald, S.J., Boughtflower, V. and Brereton, P. (2004). Simultaneous<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins and Ochratoxin A in Food Using a <strong>Full</strong>y<br />

Automated Immunoaffinity Column Clean-up and Liquid Chromatography-<br />

Fluorescence Detection. J of Chromatoraphy A. 1059: 13-16.<br />

Chang, H.L. and De Vries, J.W. (1983). Rapid High Performance Liquid<br />

Chromatography Determination of AFM1 in Milk and Nonfat Dry Milk. J.<br />

Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66: 913-917.<br />

Chemistry Department, Ministry of Science Technology and Innovation. (2000).<br />

Standard Procedure for Determination of Aflatoxins (unpublished paper),<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

Chiavaro, E., Asta, D., Galaverna, G., Biancardi, A., Gambarelli, E., Dossena, A.<br />

and Marchelli, R. (2001). New Reversed-phase Liquid Chromatography Method<br />

to Detect Aflatoxins in Food and Feed with Cyclodextrins as Fluorescence<br />

Enhancers Added to the Eluent. J of Chromatogr. A. 937: 31-40.<br />

Chu, F.S., Fan, T.S.L., Zhang, G.S., Xu, Y.S. Faust, S. and Mac Mohan, P.L.<br />

(1987). Improved Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay for Aflatoxin B1 in<br />

Agricultural Commodities. J. Assoc. Anal. Chem. 70: 854-857.


Ciucu, A.A., Neguleseus, C. and Beldwin, R. P. (2003). Detection of Pesticides<br />

Using an Amperometric Biosensor Based on Ferophthalocyanine Chemically<br />

Modified Carbon Paste Electrode and Immobilised Enzymetic System.<br />

Biosensors and Bioelectronic.18: 303-310.<br />

Cole, R.O., Holland, R.D. and Sepaniak, M.J. (1992). Factors Influencing<br />

Performance in the Rapid Separation of Aflatoxins by Micellar Electrokinetics<br />

Capillary Chromatography. Talanta.39: 1139-1147.<br />

Colombo, C. and van den Berg, C.M.G. (1998). In-line Deoxygenated for Flow<br />

Analysis With Voltammetric Detection. Anal. Chim. Acta. 377: 229-240.<br />

Conesa, A. J., Pinilla, J. M. and Hernandez, L. (1996). Determination of<br />

Metbendazole in Urine by Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta.<br />

331: 111-116.<br />

Creepy, E.E. (2002). Update of Survey, Regulation and Toxic Effect of Mycotoxins<br />

in Europe. Toxicology Letter. 127: 19-28.<br />

Czae, M. Z. and Wang, J. (1999). Pushing the Detectibility of Voltammetry: How<br />

Low Can Go ?. Talanta. 50: 921-928.<br />

Dahmen, E.A.M.F. (1986). Electroanalysis: Theory and Application in Aqueous and<br />

Non-aqeuous Media and in Automated Chemical Control. New York: Elsevier.<br />

Davies, N.D. and Diener, U.L. (1980). Confirmatory Test for the High Pressure<br />

Liquid Chromatographic Determination of Aflatoxin B1. J. Assoc. Off. Anal.<br />

Chem. 63 (1): 107- 109.<br />

217


De Botono, S.F., Moreda, J.M., Arranz, A. and Arranz, J.F. (1996). Study of the<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric Behaviour of the Antihypertensive Drug<br />

Doxazosin. Anal. Chim. Acta. 329: 25-31.<br />

De Vries, J. (1996). Food Safety and Toxicity. New York: CRC.<br />

Dean, J.A. (1995). Analytical Chemistry Handbook. USA: Mc Graw Hill.<br />

Demetriades, D., Economou, A. and Voulgaropoulos, A. (2004). A Study of Pencil-<br />

Lead Bismuth-film Electrodes for the Determination of Trace Metals by Anodic<br />

Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta. 519: 167-172.<br />

Dhavan, A.S. and Choudry, M.R. (1995). Incidence of Aflatoxins in Animal<br />

Feedstuffs: A decade’s Scenario in India. J. AOAC Int. 78 (3): 693 – 698.<br />

Dragacci, S., Gleizes, E., Fremy, J.M. and Candlish A.A.G. (1995). Use of<br />

Immunoaffinity Chromatography as a Purification Step for the Determination of<br />

AFM1 in Cheese. Food Additives and Contaminants. 12(1): 59-65.<br />

Duhart, B.T., Shaw, S., Wooley, M., Allen, T. and Grimes, C. ( 1988a).<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins B1, B2, G1 and G2 by High Performance Liquid<br />

Chromatography With Electrochemical Detector. Anal. Chim. Acta. 208: 343-<br />

346.<br />

Eaton, D.L and Groopman, J.D. (1994).The Toxicity of Aflatoxin. United Kingdom:<br />

Academic Press.<br />

Economou, A. (2005). Bismuth-film Electrode: Recent Development and<br />

Potentialities for Electroanalysis. Trends Anal. Chem. 24(4): 334-340.<br />

218


Economou, A. and Fielden, P.R. (1995). A Study of Riboflavin Determination by<br />

Squarw-Wave Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry on Mercury Film Electrode,<br />

Electroanalysis. 7: 447 – 453.<br />

Economou, A., Bolis, S.D., Efstathiou, C.E. and Volikakis, G.J. (2002). A Virtual<br />

Electroanalytical Instrument for Square-wave Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta.<br />

467: 179-188.<br />

Edinboro, L.E. and Karnes, H.T. (2005). Determination of Aflatoxin B1 in<br />

Sidestream Cigarette Smoke by Immunoaffinity Column Extraction Coupled<br />

With Liquid Chromatography/mass Spectrometry. J of Chrom. A. 1083: 127-<br />

132.<br />

Egner, P.A., Munoz, A and Kensler, T.W. (2003). Chemoprevention With<br />

Chlorophylin in Individuals Exposed to Dietary Aflatoxins. Mutation Research.<br />

523: 209-216.<br />

El-Desoky, H.S. and Ghoneim, M.M. (2005). Assay of the Anti-psychotic Drug<br />

Haloperidol in Bulk Form, Pharmaceutical Formulation and Biological Fluids<br />

Using Square-wave Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry at a Mercury Electrode.<br />

J Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 38: 543-550.<br />

El-Hady, D.A., Abdel-Hamid, M.I., Seliem, M.M., Andrisano, V. and El-Maali,<br />

N.A. (2004). Osteryoung Square Wave Stripping Voltammetry at Mercury Film<br />

Electrode for Monitoring Ultra Levels of Tarabine PFS and its Interaction With<br />

SsDNA. J Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 34: 879-890.<br />

219<br />

El-Hafnawey, G.B., El-Hallag, I.S., Ghoneim, E.M. and Ghoniem, M.M. (2004),<br />

Voltammetric Behavior and Quantification of the Sedative-hypnotic Drug<br />

Chlordiazepoxide in Bulk Form, Pharmaceutical Formulation and Human Serum<br />

at a Mercury Electrode. J of Pharm. And Biomed Anal. 34: 75-86.


El-Maali, N.A., Osman, A.H., Aly, A.A.A., Al-Hazmi, G.A.A. (2005).<br />

Voltammetric Analysis of Cu(II), Cd(II) and Zn(II) Complexes and Their Cyclic<br />

Voltammetry with Several Cephalosporin Antibiotics. Bioelectrochemistry. 65:<br />

95-104.<br />

Enker, C.G. (2003). The Art and Science of Chemical Analysis. New York: John<br />

Wiley and Sons.<br />

Ensafi, A.A., Khayamian, T. and Khaloo, S.S. (2004). Application of Adsorptive<br />

Cathodic Differential Pulse Stripping Method for Simultaneous Determination<br />

of Copper and Molybdenum Using Pyrogallol Red. Anal. Chim. Acta. 505: 201-<br />

207.<br />

Erdogan, A. (2004). The Aflatoxin Contamination of Some Pepper Types Sold in<br />

Turkey. Chemosphere. 56: 321-325.<br />

Erk, N. (2004). Voltammetric Behaviour and Determination of Moxifloxacin in<br />

Pharmaceutical Products and Human Plasma. Anal. Bioanal.Chem. 378: 1351-<br />

1356.<br />

Etzel, R.A. (2002). Mycotoxin. J of Am.Med.Assoc. 287: 425-427.<br />

220<br />

EU Commision, Commision Regulation (EC) No 466/2001 of 8 March 2001 Setting<br />

Maximum Levels for Certain Contamination Foodstuffs. (2001). J European<br />

Community. L7.1<br />

Ewing, G.W (Ed). (1997). Analytical Instrumentation Handbook: Revised and<br />

Expanded, 2 nd Ed. New York: Marcel Dekker.


Fang, Y., Gong, F., Fang, X. and Fu, C. (1998). Separation and Determination of<br />

Cyclodextrins by Capillary Electrophoresis With Aperometric Detection. Anal.<br />

Chim. Acta. 369: 39-45.<br />

Faraj, M.K., Smith, J.E. and Harren, G. (1991). Introduction of Water Activity and<br />

Temperature on Aflatoxin Production by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus<br />

parasiticus in Irradiated Maize Seeds. Food Additives Contaminants. 6(6): 731-<br />

736.<br />

Farghaly, O.A. and Ghandour, M.A. (2005). Square Wave Stripping Voltammetry<br />

for Direct Determination of Eight Heavy Metals in Soil and Indoor-airborne<br />

Particulate Matter. Environ. Research. 97: 229-235.<br />

221<br />

Farghaly, O.A., Taher, M.A., Naggar, A.H. and El-Sayed,A.Y., (2005). Square<br />

Wave Anodic Stripping Voltammetric Determination of Metoclopramide in<br />

Tablets and Urine at Carbon Paste Electrode. J Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 38: 14-20.<br />

Farias, P.A.M., Wargener, A.L.R., Bastos, M.B.R., de Silva, A.T. and Castro,<br />

A.G.(2004). Cathodic Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric Behavior of Guanine<br />

in the Presence of Copper at the Static Mercury Drop Electrode. Talanta. 61:<br />

829-835.<br />

Feroncova, A., Korgova, E., Miko, R. and Labuda, J., (2001). Determination of<br />

Tricyclic Antidepressent Using a Carbon Paste Electrode Modified with β-<br />

Cyclodextrin. J. of Electroanalytical Chem. 492: 74-77.<br />

Ferreira, V.S., Zanoni, M.V.B. and Fogg, A.G. (1999). Cathodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetric Determination of Ceftazidine With Reactive Accumulation at a<br />

Poly-L-lysine Modified Hanging Mercury Drop Electrode. Anal. Chim. Acta.<br />

384: 159-166.


Fifield, F.W. and Kealey, D. (2000). Principle and Practice of Analytical<br />

Chemistry 3 rd Edition. UK: Blackwell science.<br />

Fifield, F.W. and Haines, P.J. (2000).Environmental Analytical Chemistry 2 nd Ed,<br />

UK: Blackwell Science.<br />

Foog, A.G. and Wang, J. (1999).Terminology and Convention for Electrochemical<br />

Stripping Analysis. Pure Appl. Chemistry. 71: 891-897.<br />

Fraga, J.M.G., Abizanda, A.I.J., Moreno, F.J. and Leon, J.J.A. (1998). Application<br />

of Principal Component Regression to the Determination of Captopril by<br />

Differential Pulse Polarography With no Prior Removal of Dissolved Oxygen.<br />

Talanta. 46: 73-82<br />

Franco, C.M., Fente, C.A., Vazquez, B.T., Cepede, A., Mahuzier, G. and Prognon,<br />

P. (1998). Interaction Between Cyclodextrin and Alatoxins Q1, M1 and P1<br />

Flourescence and Chromatographic Studies. J of Chromatogr. A. 815: 21-29.<br />

Fremy, J.M. and Chang, B. (1983). Rapid Determination of AFM1 in Whole Milk<br />

by Reversed-phase High Performance Liquid Chromatography. J of<br />

Chromatogr. A. 219: 156-161.<br />

222<br />

Fremy, J.M. and Chu, F.S. (1984). Direct Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay for<br />

Determining Aflatoxin M1 at Picogram Levels in Dairy Products. J. Assoc.<br />

Anal. Chem. 67: 1098 – 1101.<br />

Fukayama, M. Winterli, W. and Hsieh, D.P.H (1980). Rapid Method for Analysis of<br />

Aflatoxin M1 in Dairy Products. J. Assoc. Anal. Chem. 63: 927 – 930.


Gao, W., Song, J. and Wu, N. (2004). Voltammetric Behavior and Square-wave<br />

Voltammetric Determination of Trepibutone at a Pencil Graphite Electrode. J.<br />

Electroanalytical Chem. 576(1): 1-7.<br />

Garcia-Villanova, R.J., Cordon, C., Parama,s A.M.G., Aparicio, P. and Rosales,<br />

M.E.G. (2004). Simultaneous Immunoaffinity Column Clean up and HPLC<br />

Analysis of Aflatoxins and Ochratoxin A in Spanish Bee Pollen. J Agric. Food<br />

Chem.52: 7235-7239.<br />

Garden, S.R. and Strachan, N.J.C. (2001). Novel Colorimetric Immunoassay for the<br />

Detection of Aflatoxin B1, Anal. Chim. Acta. 444: 187-191.<br />

Gauch, R., Leuenberger, U. and Baumgartne, E. (1979). Rapid and Simple<br />

Determination of Aflatoxin M1 in Milk in the Low Parts per 10 12 range. J of<br />

Chromatogr. A. 178: 543-549.<br />

Garner, R.C., Whattam, M.M. , Taylor, P.J.L. and Stow, M.W. ( 1993). Analysis of<br />

United Kingdom Purchased Spices for Aflatoxins Using Immunoaffinity<br />

Column Clean up Procedure Followed up by High-performance Liquid<br />

Chromatographic Analysis and Post-column Derivatization with Pyridium<br />

Bromide Perbromide. J. Chromatography. 648: 485-490.<br />

Gazy, A.A.K. (2004). Determination of Amlodipine Besylate by Adsorptive Square-<br />

Wave Anodic Stripping Voltammetry on Glassy Carbon Electrode in Tablets<br />

and Biological Fluids. Talanta. 62: 575-582.<br />

Ghoneim, M.M. Hassanein, A.M., Hamman, E. and Beltagi, A.M. (2000).<br />

Simultanoues Determination of Cd, Pb, Cu, Sb, Bi, Se, Zn, Mn, Ni, Cr and Fe in<br />

Water Sample by Differential Pulse Stripping Voltammetry at a Hanging<br />

Mercury Drop Electrode. Fresenius J. Anal. Chem. 367: 378-383.<br />

223


Ghoneim, M. M., Tawfik, A. and Khashaba, P.Y. (2003a). Cathodic Adsorptive<br />

Stripping Square-wave Voltammetric Determination of Nifedipine Drug in<br />

Bulk, Pharmaceutical Formulation and Human Serum. Anal. Bioanal. Chem.<br />

375: 369-375.<br />

Ghoneim, M.M., and Tawfik, H.(2004). Assay of Anti-coagulant Drug Warfarin<br />

Sodium in Pharmaceutical Formulation and Human Biological Fluids by<br />

Square-wave Adsorptive Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta.<br />

511: 63-69.<br />

Ghoneim, M.M., El Reis, M.A., Hamman, E. and Beltagi, A.M. (2004). A Validated<br />

Stripping Voltammetric Procedure for Quantification of the Anti-hypertensive<br />

and Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Drug Terazosine in Tablets and Human<br />

Serum. Talanta. 64(3): 703-710.<br />

Ghoneim, M.M., El-Baradie, K.Y. and Tawfik, H. (2003b). Electrochemical<br />

Behavior of the Antituberculosis Drug Isonianid and its Square-wave<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric Estimation in Bulk Form, Tablets and<br />

Biological Fluids at a Mercury Electrode. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 33: 673-685.<br />

Ghoniem, M.M. and Beltagi, A.M. (2003). Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric<br />

Determination of the Anti-inflammatory Drug Celecoxib in Pharmaceutical<br />

Formulation and Human Serum. Talanta, 60: 911-921.<br />

Ghoniem, M.M. and Tawfik A. (2004). Assay of Anti-coagulant Drug Warfarin<br />

Sodium in Pharmaceutical Formulation and Human Biological Fluids by<br />

Square-wave Adsorptive Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta.<br />

511: 63-69.<br />

224


Gimeno, A. and Martins, M. L (1983). Rapid Thin Layer Chromatographic<br />

Determination of Patulin, Citrinin and Aflatoxin in Apples and Pears and Their<br />

Juices and Jams. J. Assoc. Anal. Chem., 66: 85-91.<br />

Goldblatt L.A (1969) Aflatoxin. New York: Academic Press.<br />

Gonzalez, M.P.E., Mattusch, J. and Wennrich, R. ( 1998). Stability and<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins by High-performance Liquid Chromatography<br />

With Amperometric Detection. J.Chromatography A. 828: 439-444.<br />

Gonzalez, G., Hinojo, M.J., Mateo, R., Medina, A. and Jimenez, M. (2005).<br />

Occurrence of Mycotoxin Producing Fungi in Bee Pollen. Int. J. Food<br />

Microbiology. Article in press.<br />

Gooding, J.J., Compton, R.G., Brennan, C.M. and Atherton, J.H. (1997). A New<br />

Electrochemical Method for the Investigation of the Aggregation of Dyes in<br />

Solution. Electroanalysis. 9(10): 759-764.<br />

Gosser, D.K (1993). Cyclic Voltammetry. New York: Wiley-VCH.<br />

Goto, T., Matsui, M. and Kitsuwa, T. (1988). Determination of Aflatoxins by<br />

Capillary Column gas Chromatography. J of Chromatography. 447: 410-414.<br />

Gourama, H. and Bullerman, L. (1995). Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus<br />

parasiticus: Aflatoxigenic Fungi of Concern in Foods and Feeds: a Review. J of<br />

Food Protection. 58: 1395-1404.<br />

Gowda, N.K.S., Malathi, V. and Suganthi, R.U. (2004). Effect of Some Chemical<br />

and Herbal Compounds on Growth of Aspergillus parasiticus and Aflatoxin<br />

Production. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 116(3-4): 281- 291.<br />

225


Grigoriadou, I.K., Eleftheriadou, A., Mouratidou, T. and Katikou, P. (2005).<br />

Determination of Aflatoxin M1 in Ewe’s Milk Samples and the Produced Curd<br />

and Feta Cheese. Food Control. 16: 257-261.<br />

Guiberteau, A., Galcano, T., More, N., Parilla, P. and Salinas, F., (2001). Study and<br />

Determination of the Pesticide Imidacloprid by Square-wave Adsorptive<br />

Stripping Voltammetry. Talanta. 53: 943-949.<br />

Gurbay, A., Aydin, S., Girgin, G., Engin, A.B. and Sahin, G. (2004). Assessment of<br />

Aflatoxin M1 Levels in Milk in Ankara, Turkey. Food Control. Article in press.<br />

Haghighi, B., Thorpe, C., Pohland, A.E. and Barnette, R. (1981). Development of a<br />

Sensitive High performance Liquid Chromatographic Method for Detection of<br />

Aflatoxins in Pistachio Nuts. J. of Chromatography. 206: 101-108.<br />

Hall, A.J. and Wild, C.P. (1994). The toxicity of aflatoxin: Human, Health,<br />

Veterinary and Agriculture Significance. New York: Academic.<br />

Hamilton, F.W. and Ellis, J. (1980). Determination of Arsenic and Antimony in<br />

226<br />

Electrolytic Copper by Anodic Stripping Voltammetry at a Gold Film Electrode.<br />

Anal. Chim. Acta. 119: 225-233.<br />

Harvey, D. (2000). Modern Analytical Chemistry. USA: McGraw Hill.<br />

Heathcote, J.G. (1984). Aflatoxins and Related Toxins. In: Betina, V. (Ed).<br />

Mycotoxins – Production, Isolation, Separation and Purification. Netherland:<br />

Elsevier Science.<br />

Heathcote, J.G. and Hibbert, J.R (1984) Aflatoxin: Chemical and Biological Aspect.<br />

New York: Elsevier.


Heberneh, G.G. (2004). Highlight on Plant Toxin in Toxicon. Toxicon. 44: 341-344.<br />

Hernandez, P., Dabrio-Ramos, M., Paton, F., Ballesteros, Y. and Hernandez, L.<br />

(1997). Determination of Abscisic Acid by Cathodic Stripping Square Wave<br />

Voltammetry. Talanta. 44: 1783-1792.<br />

Herrman, T. (2004). Mycotoxin in feed grains and ingredient in www.<br />

oznet.ksu.edu. Quote dated: 18 th April 2004<br />

Heyrovsky, J. and Zuman, P. ( 1968). Practical Polarography; An Intoduction for<br />

Chemistry Students. New York: Academic Press.<br />

Hilali, A., Jimenez, J.C., Callejon, M., Bello, M.A. and Guirem, A. (2003).<br />

.Electrochemical Reduction of Cefminox at the Mercury Electrode and its<br />

Voltammetric Determination in Urine. Talanta. 59(1): 137-146.<br />

Hocevar, S.B., Svancara, I., Vytras, K. and Ogorevc, B. (2005). Novel Electrode for<br />

Electrochemical Stripping Analysis Based on Carbon Paste Modified With<br />

Bismuth Powder. Electrochim. Acta. Article in press.<br />

Holcomb, M. , Wilson, D.M., Truckess, M. W. and Thompson, H. C. (1992).<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins in Food Products by Chromatography. J. of<br />

Chromatography A. 624: 341-352.<br />

Hourch, M.E., Dudoit, A. and Amiard, J-C. (2003). Optimization of New<br />

Voltammetric Method for the Determination of Metallothionein.<br />

Electrochim.Acta, 48: 4083-4088.<br />

Hussien, H.S. and Brasel, J.M. (2001). Mycotoxin, Metabolism and Impact on<br />

Humans and Animals. J Toxicology. 167(2): 101-134.<br />

227


228<br />

Hutton, E.A., Hocevar, S.B. and Ogorevc, B. (2005). Ex situ Preparation of Bismuth<br />

Film Microelectrode for Use in Electrochemical Stripping Microanalysis. Anal.<br />

Chim. Acta. 537: 285-292.<br />

Ibrahim, M.S., Kamal, M.M. and Temerk. Y.M. (2003). Comparison of the<br />

Voltammetric Studies at Mercury Electrode and Glassy Carbon Electrodes for<br />

the Interaction of Lumichrome with DNA and Analytical Application. Anal.<br />

Bioanal.Chem. 375: 1024-1030.<br />

Ibrahim, M.S., Shehatta I.S. and Sultan, M.R. (2002). Cathodic Adsorptive<br />

Stripping Voltammetric Determination of Nalidixic Acid in Pharmaceuticals,<br />

HumanUrine and Serum. Talanta. 56: 471-579.<br />

Illkovic, D. (1934). Polarography Study With the Dropping Mercury Cathode. Part<br />

XLIV- The Dependence of Limiting Currents on the Diffusion Constant, on the<br />

Rate of Dropping on the Size Electrode. Collection of Czechoslovak chemical<br />

communication. 6: 498-513.<br />

Inam, R. and Somer, G. (1998). Simultaneous Determination of Selenium and Lead<br />

in Whole Blood Samples by Differential Pulse Polarography. Talanta. 46: 1347-<br />

1355.<br />

International Agency for Research on Cancer (1993). IARC Monographs on the<br />

Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risk to Humans, vol. 56. World Health<br />

Organisation, Lyon.<br />

IUPAC. (1978). Nomenclature: Symbols, Units and Their Usage in Spectrochemical<br />

Analysis-II. Spectrochim. Acta, Part B. 32: 242.


Iwamoto, M., Webber, A. and Osteryoung, A. (1984). Cathodic Reduction of<br />

Thyroxine and Related Compounds on Silver Electrode. Anal. Chem. 56: 1203-<br />

1206.<br />

Jaimez, J., Fente, C.A., Vazquez, B.I., Franco, C.M., Cepeda, A., Mahuzier, G. and<br />

Prognon, P. (2000). Application of the Assay of Aflatoxins by Liquid<br />

Chromatography with Fluorescence Detection in Food Analysis. J.<br />

Chromatography A.. 882: 1-10.<br />

Janssens, M. M. T., Put, H. M. C. and Nout, M. J. R. (1996). In Vries, Food Safety<br />

and Toxicity. New York: CRC Press.<br />

Jeffrey, A.M. and Williams, G.M. (2005). Risk Assessment of DNA-reactive<br />

Carcinogens in Food. Toxicology and Appl. Pharmacology. 207(2): 628-635.<br />

Jeffery, H.W., Lenorich, L.M and Martin, R. Jr. (1982). Liquid Chromatography<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins in Artificially Contaminated Cocoa Beans. J.<br />

Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 80: 1215-1219.<br />

Jelen, F., Tomschik, M. and Palecek, E. (1997). Adsorptive Striping Square-wave<br />

Voltammetry of DNA. J. Electroanal. Chem. 423: 141-148.<br />

Ji, Z., Yuan, G., Cai, S., Liu, J. and Liu, G. (2004). Electrochemical Studies of the<br />

Oxidation Mechanism of Polyamide on Glassy Carbon Electrode, J. of<br />

Electroanalytical Chem. 570: 265-273.<br />

Jin, G-P. and Lin, X-Q. (2005). Voltammetric Behavior and Determination of<br />

Estrogens at Carbamylcholine Modified Paraffin-impregnated Graphite<br />

Electrode. Electrochim. Acta. 50: 3556-3562.<br />

229


230<br />

Johnson, W.W., Harris, T.M. and Guyerich V.P. (1996). Kinetics and Mechanism of<br />

Hydrolysis of AFB1 exo-8-9-epoxide and Rearrangement of the Dihydrodiol. J.<br />

Am. Chem. Soc. 118: 672-676.<br />

Joshua, H. (1993). Determination ofAflatoxin by Reversed-phase High Performance<br />

Liquid Chromatography with Post-column in-line Photochemical Derivatization<br />

and Fluorescence Detection. J. Chromatography A. 654: 247-254.<br />

Jurado-Gonzalez, A. J., Galindo-Riano, M. D. and Garcia-Vargas, M. (2003).<br />

Experimental Designs in the Development of a New Method for the Sensitive<br />

Determination of Cadmium in Sea Water by Adsorptive Cathodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta. 487: 229-241.<br />

Kamal, M.M., Abu Zuhri, A.Z. and Nasser, A.A. O. (1996). Adsorptive Stripping<br />

Voltammetric Analysis of 2,4,6-tri(2 ’ -pyridyl)-1,3,5-triazine at a Mercury<br />

Electrode. Fresenius J Anal Chem. 356: 500-503.<br />

Kamimura, H., Nishijima, M., Yasuda, K., Ushiyama, H., Tabata, S., Matsumoto, S.<br />

and Nishima, T. (1985). Simple, Rapid Clean-up Method for Analysis of<br />

Aflatoxins and Comparison with Various Methods. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem.<br />

68: 458-461.<br />

Kamkar A. (2004) A Study on the Occurence of Aflatoxin M1 in Raw Milk<br />

Produced in Sarab City of Iran. Food Control. 16(7): 593-599.<br />

Kamkar, A. (2005). A Study of the Occurrence of Aflatoxin M1 in Iranian Feta<br />

Cheese. Food Control. Article in press.<br />

Karadjova, I., Girousi, S. , Illadou, E. and Stratis, I. (2000). Determination of Cd,<br />

Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Ni and Pb in Milk, Cheese and Chocolate. Mikrochim. Acta.<br />

134: 185-191.


Kefala, G., Economou, A., Voulgaropoulos, A. and Sofoniou, M.(2003). A Study of<br />

Bismuth-film Electrode for the Detection of Trace Metals by Anodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetry and Their Application to the Determination of Pb and Zn in<br />

Tapwater and Human Hair. Talanta. 61: 603-610.<br />

Khodari, M., Ghandour, M. and Taha, A.M. (1997). Cathodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetric of the Anticancer Agent 5-fluorouracil and Determination in<br />

Urine. Talanta. 44: 305-310.<br />

Kim, H. J., Chang, S-C. and Shim, Y-B., (2002). α-cyclodextrin Modified Screen<br />

Printed Graphite Electrodes for Detection of Phenols. Bull, Korean Chem. Soc.<br />

23: 427-431.<br />

Kizek, R., Masarik, M., Kramer, K.J., Potesil, D., Bailey, M., Howard, J.A.,<br />

Klejdus, B., Mikelova, R., Adam, V., Trimkova, L. and Jelan, F. (2005). An<br />

Analysis of Avidin, Biotin and Their Interaction at Attomole Levels by<br />

Voltammetric and Chromatographic Techniques. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 381:<br />

1167-1178.<br />

Koehler, P.E., Benchat, L.R. and Chhinnan, M.S. (1985). Influence of Temparature<br />

and Water Activity on Aflatoxin Production by Aspergillus flavus in Cowpea<br />

(Vigna Ungiculata) Seeds and Meal. J of Food Protection. 48: 1040-1043.<br />

Kok, W. T., Van Neer, T.C.H., Traag, W.A. and Tuinstra, L.G.M.T. (1986).<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins in Cattle Feed by Liquid Chromtography and Postcolumn<br />

Derivatization with Electrochemically Generated Bromine. J.<br />

Chromatogr. 367: 231 – 236.<br />

231<br />

Kok, W.Th. (1994). Derivatization Reactions for the Determination of Aflatoxins by<br />

Liquid Chromatography With Fluorescence Detection. J Chromatography B<br />

659: 127 – 137.


Komorsky-Lovric, S., Lovric, M. and Branica, M. (1992). Peak Current–frequency<br />

Relationship in Adsorptive Stripping Square-wave Voltammetry. J. Electroanal.<br />

Chem. 335(1-2): 297-308.<br />

Kontoyannis, C. G., Antimisianis, S.G. and Douromis, D. (1999). Simultaneous<br />

Quantitative Determination of Diazepan and Liposomes using Differential Pulse<br />

Polarography. Anal. Chim. Acta. 391: 83-88.<br />

Kotoucek, M. Skopilova, J. and Michalkova, D. (1997). Electroanalytical Study of<br />

Salozosulfapyridine and Biseptol Components at the Mercury Electrode. Anal.<br />

Chim.Acta. 353: 61-69.<br />

Kubiak, W.W., Latonen, R.M., and Ivaska, A. (2001). The Sequential Injection<br />

System With Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry Detection. Talanta. 53: 1211-<br />

1219.<br />

Kussak, A., Anderson, B. and Anderson, K. (1995a). Determination of Aflatoxins in<br />

Airborne Dust From Feed Factories by Automated Immunoaffinity Column<br />

Clean-up and Liquid Chromatography. J Of Chromatogr. A. 708: 55-60.<br />

Kussak, A., Anderson, B. and Anderson, K. (1995b). Immunity Column Clean-up<br />

for the High Performance Liquid Chromatographic Determination of Aflatoxins<br />

B1, B2, G1, G2, M1 and Q1 in Urine. J Of Chromatogr. B. 672: 253-259<br />

Kutner, W., Wang, J., L’Her, M. and Buck, R. (1998). Analytical Aspects of<br />

Chemically Modified Electrode: Classification, CriticalEvaluation and<br />

Recommendation. (IUPAC Recommendation 1998). Pure and Appl. Chem. 70:<br />

1301-1318.<br />

Lafleur, R.D., Myland, J.C. and Oldham, K.B. (1990). Analytical Microelectrode<br />

Voltammetry with Minimal Instrumentation. Electroanalysis. 2: 223-238.<br />

232


Lafont, P. and Siriwardana, M. C. (1981). Assay Method for Aflatoxin in Milk. J of<br />

Chromatogr. 219: 162-166.<br />

Lam, G.K., Kalvoda, R. and Kaponica, M. (1983). Determination of Uranium by<br />

Adsorption Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta. 154: 79-83.<br />

Lau, P.H. and Chu, F.S. (1983). Preparation and Characterisation of Acid<br />

Dehydration Product of Aflatoxicol. J. Assoc. Off. Anal Chem. 66(1): 98-101..<br />

Lee, L.S., Wall, J.H., Cotty, P.J. and Bayman, P. (1990). Interpretation of Enzymelinked<br />

Immunosorbent Assay with Conventional Chromatography Procedures<br />

for Quantitation of Aflatoxin in Individual Cotton Bolls, Seeds and Seeds<br />

Sections. J. Assoc. Anal. Chem. 73(4): 581-584.<br />

Leontopoulos, D., Siafaka, A. and Markaki, P. (2003). Black Olives as Substrate for<br />

Aspergillus parasiticus Growth and Aflatoxin B1 Production. Food<br />

Microbiology. 20: 119-126.<br />

Leszezynska, J. Kucharska, U. and Zegota, H. (2000). Aflatoxin in Nuts Assayed by<br />

Immunological Methods. Eur Food Res Technol. 210: 213-215.<br />

Levi, C. (1980). Mycotoxins in Coffee. J Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 63(6): 1282-<br />

1285.<br />

Lin, L., Lawrence, N.S., Thongngamdee, S., Wang, J. and Lin, Y. (2005). Catalytic<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Determination of Trace Chromium (VI) at the Bismuth<br />

Film Electrode. Talanta. 65: 144-148.<br />

Lin, L., Thongngamdee S., Wang, J., Lin, Y., Sadik, O.A. and Ly, S-Y. (2005).<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric Measurements of Trace Uranium at the<br />

Bismuth Film Electrode. Anal. Chim. Acta. 535: 9-13.<br />

233


Lin, L., Zhang, J., Wang, P., Wang, Y. and Chen, J. (1998). Thin-layer<br />

Chromatography of Mycotoxins and Comparison with Other Chromatographic<br />

Methods. J of Chromatogr. A. 815: 3-20.<br />

Liu, J.H., Lin, W.F. and Nicol, J.D. (1980). The application of Anodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetry to Forensic Science. II. Anodic Stripping Voltammetric Analysis<br />

of Gunshot Residues. Forensic Sci Int. 16: 53-62.<br />

Liu, Y., Jiang, Y., Song, W., Lu, N., Zou, M., Xu, H. and Yu, Z. (2000).<br />

Voltammetric Determination of 5-hydroxydole-3-acetic Acid in Human Gastric<br />

Juice. Talanta. 50: 1261-1266.<br />

234<br />

Locatelli, C. (2005). Overlapping Voltammetric Peaks – an Analytical Procedure for<br />

Simultaneous Determination of Trace Metals. Application to Food and<br />

Environmental Matrices. Anal Bioanal Chem. 381: 1073-1081.<br />

Loftsson, T. and Brewster, M.E. (1996) Pharmaceutical Applications of<br />

Cyclodextrins. 1. Drug Solubilisation and Stabilisation. J. Pharm. Sci. 85: 1017-<br />

1025.<br />

Lopez, C.E, Ramos, L.L., Ramadan, S.S. and Bulacio, L.C. (2002). Presence of<br />

Aflatoxin M1 in Milk for Human Consumption in Argentina. Food Control.<br />

14(1): 31-34.<br />

Lupu, A., Compagnone, D. and Palleschi, A. (2004). Screen-printed Enzyme<br />

Electrodes for the Detection of Marker Analytes During Wine Making. Anal.<br />

Chim. Acta. 513: 67-72.<br />

Ly, S-Y, Kim,D-H. and Kim, M-H. (2002). Square-wave Cathodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetry Analysis of RDX Using Mercury-film Plated Glassy Carbon<br />

Electrode. Talanta. 58: 919-926.


235<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act (1983) Act No 281, Reviewed 2002, Food Quality Control<br />

Dept, Ministry of Health, <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

Mackson, J., Wright, G., Rachaputi, N.C., Krosch, S. and Tatnell, J. (1999).<br />

Aflatoxin Research Update Workshop Proceeding. Kingaroy, Queensland.<br />

August 1999.<br />

Martins, M.L. and Martin, H.M.,(2004). Aflatoxins M1 in Yoghurts in Portugal. Int.<br />

J of Food Microbiology. 91: 315-317.<br />

Manetta, A.C., Giuseppe, L.D., Giammarco, M.,Fusaro, I., Simonella, A.,<br />

Gramenzi, A. and Formigoni, A. (2005). High-performance Liquid<br />

Chromatography With Post-column Derivatisation and Fluorescence Detection<br />

for Sensitive Determination of Aflatoxin M1 in Milk and Cheese. J Chrom. A.<br />

1083: 219-222.<br />

Mendez-Albores J.A., Arambula-Villa G., Preciado-Ortiz R.E. and Moreno-<br />

Martinez E., (2004). Aflatoxins in Pozol, a Nixtamalized Maize-based Food. Int<br />

J of Food Microbiology. 94: 211-215.<br />

Metrohm (2005). Introduction to Polarography and Voltammetry Monograph,<br />

Metrohm Ltd, Switzerland.<br />

Micheli, L. Grecco, R., Moscone, D. and Palleschi, G. (2005). An Electrochemical<br />

Immunosensor for Aflatoxin M1 Determination in Milk Using Screen-printed<br />

Electrodes. Biosensors and Bioelectronic. 21(4): 588-596.<br />

Miller, N. (1987). Toxicology Aspects of Food. New York: Elsevier Science.<br />

Miller, J.C. and Miller, J.N. (1993). Statistic for Analytical Chemistry. London: Ellis<br />

Horwood.


Miller, N., Pretorius,H.E. and Trinder, D.W. (1985). Determination of Aflatoxins in<br />

Vegetable Oils. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 68: 136-137.<br />

Mohd. Yusoff, A.R., Ahamad, R. and Azman, S. (1998). Kaedah Voltammetri<br />

Dalam Penentuan Pewarna reaktif dan Hasil Hidrolisisnya. Malays. J. Anal. Sci.<br />

4(1): 139-146.<br />

Molina, M. and Gianuzzi, L. (2002). Modelling of Aflatoxin Production by<br />

Aspergillus parasticus in a Solid Medium at Different Temperature, pH and<br />

Propionic Acid Concentration. Food Res. Int. 35: 585-594.<br />

Moressi, M.B., Andreu, R., Calvente, J.J, Fernandez, H. and Zon, M. A. (2004).<br />

Improvement of Alterneriol Monomethyl Ether Detection at Gold Electrode<br />

Modified With a Dedocanethiol Self-assembled Monolayer. J. of<br />

Electroanalytical Chem. 570: 209-217.<br />

236<br />

Morfobos, M., Economou, A. and Voulgaropoulos, A. (2004). Simultaneous<br />

Determination of Nickel(II) and cobalt(II) by Square Wave Adsorptive Stripping<br />

Voltammetry on a Rotating-disc Bismuth-film Electrode. Anal Chim Acta. 519:<br />

57-64.<br />

Mouley, Y. (1984). Biochemical Effects of Mycotoxin. In Betina, V (Ed.).<br />

Mycotoxin – Producton, Isolation, Separation and Purification. Netherland:<br />

Elsevier Science.<br />

Nawaz, S., Coker, R.D and Haswell, S.J. (1992). Development and Evaluation of<br />

Analytical Methodology for Determination of Aflatoxins in Palm Kernel.<br />

Analyst. 117: 67 – 71.


Navalion, A., Blanc, R., Reyes, L., Navas, N. and Vikches, J.K. (2002).<br />

Determination of the Antibacterial Enrofloxacin by Differential Pulse<br />

Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry. Anal. Chim. Acta. 454: 83-91.<br />

Neal, G.E. (1987). Influence of Metabolism: AflatoxinMetabolism and its Possible<br />

Relationships With Disease. In: Watson D.H. Natural Toxicants in Foods:<br />

Progress and prospects. London: VCH.<br />

Niedwetzki, G. Lach, G. and Ceschwill, K. (1994). Determination of Aflatoxin in<br />

Food by Use of an Automatic Work Statio. .J.Of Chromatography A. 661: 175-<br />

180.<br />

Nilufer, D. and Boyacio, D. (2002). Comparative Study of Three Different Methods<br />

for the Determination of Aflatoxins in Tahini. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 50: 3375-<br />

3379.<br />

Nouws, H.P.A., Delerue-Matos, C., Barros, A.A. and Rodrigues, J.A., (2005a).<br />

Electroanalytical Study of the Antidepressant Sertraline. J. Pharm. Biomed.<br />

Anal. 39(1-2): 290-293.<br />

Nouws, H.P.A., Delerue-Matos, C., Barros, A.A., Rodrigues, J.A. and Silva, A.S.<br />

(2005b). Electroanalytical Study of Fluvoxamine. Anal and Bioanal. Chem.<br />

382(7): 1662-1668.<br />

Official Methods of Analysis 14 th Ed. (1984) AOAC, Washington D.C.<br />

Ohfuji, K., Sato, N., Hamadansoto, N., Kabayashi, T., Imada, N., Okura, H. and<br />

Watanabe, E., (2004). Construction of a Glucose Based on a Screen-printed<br />

Electrode and a Novel Mediator Pyocyanin From Pseudomonos Aeruginosa.<br />

Biosensors and Bioelectronic. 19: 1237-1244.<br />

237


Orinakova, R., Tankova, L., Galova, M. and Supicova, A. (2004). Application of<br />

Elimination Voltammetry in the Study of Electroplating Processes on the<br />

Graphite Electrode. Electrochimica Acta. 49: 3587-3594.<br />

Ortiz, M.Z., Arcos, J., Juarros, J.V., Lopez-Palacios, J. and Sarabia, L.A. (1993).<br />

Robust Procedure for Calibration and Calculation of the Detection Limit of<br />

Trimipramine by Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry at a Carbon Paste<br />

Electrode. Anal. Chem. 65: 678-682.<br />

Ozkan, S.A. and Uslu, B. (2002). Electrochemical Study of Fluvastatin Sodium –<br />

Analytical Application to Pharmaceutical Dosage Forms, Human Serum and<br />

Simulated Gastric Juice. Anal. Bioanal.Chem. 372: 582-586.<br />

Ozkan, S.A., Uslu, B., Aboul-Enein, H.Y. (2003). Voltammetric Investigation of<br />

Tamsulosin. Talanta. 61: 147-156.<br />

238<br />

Pacheco, W.F., Farias, P.A.M. and Aucelio, R.Q. (2005). Square-wave Adsorptive<br />

Stripping Voltammetry for the Determination of Cyclofenil After Photochemical<br />

Derivatisation. Anal. Chim. Acta. 549(1-2): 67-73.<br />

Padano, M. L. and Rivas, G. A., (2000). Amperometric Biosensor for the<br />

Quantification of Gentisic Acid using Poliphenol Oxidase Modified Carbon<br />

Paste Electrode. Talanta. 53: 489-495.<br />

Papp E., Otta K.H., Zaray G. and Mincsvics (2002). Liquid Chromatographic<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins. Microchemical J . 73(1-2): 39-46.<br />

Pare, J.R.J and Belanger, J.M.R. (1997). Instrumental Methods in Food Analysis.<br />

N.York : Elsevier.


Parham, H and Zargar, B. (2001). Determination of Isosorbic Dinitrate in Arterial<br />

Plasma, Synthetic Serum and Pharmaceutical Formulations by Linear Sweep<br />

Voltammetry on a Gold Electrode. Talanta. 55: 255-262.<br />

239<br />

Park, K.Y. and Bullerman. L.B. (1983). Effects of Cycling Temperature on<br />

Aflatoxins Production by Aspergillus parasiticus and Aspergillus flavous in Rice<br />

and Cheese. J of Food Science. 48: 889-896.<br />

Park, D.L. and Rua, S.M. (1991). Sample Collection and Preparation Techniques<br />

for Aflatoxin Determination in Whole Cottonseed. J Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 74:<br />

73-75.<br />

Parlim, A. and Zerger, S. (2003). Determination of Isosorbide Synthetic Serum and<br />

Pharmaceutical Formulation by Linear Sweep Voltammetry on a Gold<br />

Electrode. Talanta. 55: 255-262.<br />

Patey A.L., Sharman M. and Gilbert J (1990). Determination of Aflatoxin B1 Levels<br />

in Peanut Butter Using an Immunoaffinity Column Cleanup Procedure:<br />

Interlaboratory Study. Food Addit. Contam. 7; 515-520.<br />

Patey, A.L., Sharman, M. and Gilbert, J. (1991). Liquid Chromatographic<br />

Determination of Aflatoxin Levels in Peanut Butters Using an Immunoaffinity<br />

Column Clean up Method: International Collaborative Trial. J. Assoc. Off. Anal.<br />

Chem. 74: 76-81.<br />

Pavlova V., Mirceski V., Lovric S.K, Javanovic S.P. and Mitrevski B. (2004).<br />

Studying Electrode Mechanism and Analytical Determination of Cocaine and its<br />

Metabolites at the Mercury Electrode Using Square-wave Voltammetry. Anal<br />

Chim.Acta. 512: 49-56.


Pena, R. Alcaraz, M.C., Arce, L., Rios, A. and Valcarcel, M. (2002). Screening of<br />

Aflatoxins in Feed Samples Using a Flow System Coupled to Capillary<br />

Electrophoresis. J Of Chromatography A. 967: 303-314.<br />

Perez-Ruiz, T., Martinez-Lozano, C., Sanz, A. and Guillen, A. (2004). Successive<br />

Determination of Thiamine and Ascorbic Acid in Pharmaceuticals by Flow<br />

Injection Analysis. J.Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 34: 551-557.<br />

Pesavento, M., Domagala, S., Baldini, E. and Cucca, L. (1997). Characterisation of<br />

Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay for Aflatoxin B1 Based on Commercial<br />

Reagents. Talanta. 45: 91-104.<br />

Pestka, J. and Bundy, G. (1990). Alteration of Immune Function Following Dietary<br />

Mycotoxin Exposures. Canadian J. of Physilogy and Pharmacology. 68: 1009-<br />

1016.<br />

Pezzatini, G., Midili, I., Toti, G., Loglio, F. and Innoceti, M. (2004). Determination<br />

of Chlorite in Drinking Water by Differential Pulse Voltammetry on Graphite.<br />

Anal. Bioanal.Chem. 380: 650 - 657.<br />

Pildain, M.B., Vaamonde, G. and Cabral, D. (2004). Analysis of Population<br />

Structure of Aspergillus flavus From Peanut Based Vegetative Compatibility,<br />

Geographic Origin, Mycotoxin and Sclerotia Production. Int. J. Food Microb.<br />

93: 31- 40.<br />

Plattner, R.D., Bennett, G.A. and Stubblefield, R.D. (1984). Identification of<br />

Aflatoxins by Quadrupole Mass Spectrometry/Mass Spectrometry. J. Assoc.<br />

Anal. Chem. 67(4): 734 -738.<br />

240


Pons, W.A. Jr. and Franz, A.O. Jr. (1977). High Performance Liquid<br />

Chromatography of Aflatoxins in Cottonseed Products. J Assoc off Anal Chem.<br />

60: 89 - 95.<br />

241<br />

Pournaghi-Azar, M.H. and Dastango, H. (2002). Differential Pulse Anodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetry of Copper in Dichloromethane: Application to the Analysis of<br />

Human Hair. Anal. Chim. Acta. 405:135 - 144.<br />

Rachaputi, N.C., Wright, G.C., Krosch, S. and Tatnell,J. (2001). Management<br />

Practice to Reduce Aflatoxin Contamination in Peanut. Proceedings of the 10 th<br />

Australian Agronomy Conference, Hobart. 2001.<br />

Radi, A. (2003). Square-wave Adsorptive Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry of<br />

Pantoprazole. J of Pharmaceutical and biomedical analysis. 33: 687 – 692.<br />

Radi, A. and El-Sherif, Z. (2002). Determination of Levofloxacin in Human Urine<br />

by Adsorptive Square-wave Anodic Stripping Voltammetry on a Glassy Carbon<br />

Electrode. Talanta. 58: 319 - 324.<br />

Radi, A., Beltagi, A.M. and Ghoniem, M.M. (2001). Determination of Ketorolac in<br />

Human Serum by Square-wave Adsorption Stripping Voltammetry. Talanta. 54:<br />

283 - 289.<br />

Rasooli, I. and Abnayeh, M.R.(2004). Inhibitory Effect of Thyme Oils on Growth<br />

and Aflatoxin Production by Aspergillus parasiticus. Food Control. 15: 479 -<br />

483.<br />

Rastogi, S., Das, M. and Khanna, S.K. (2001). Quantitative Determination of<br />

Aflatoxin B1-oxime by Column Liquid Chromatography With Utraviolet<br />

Detection. J Of Chromatography A. 933: 91 - 97.


Rastogi, S., Dwivedi, P.D., Khanna, S.K. and Das, M. (2004). Detection of<br />

Aflatoxin M1 Contamination in Milk and Infant milk Products From Indian<br />

Market by ELISA. Food Control. 15: 287 - 290.<br />

Reif, K. and Metzger, W. (1995). Determination of Aflatoxins in Medicinal Herbs<br />

and Plant Extracts. J Of Chromatography A. 692: 131 - 136.<br />

Reinke, R. and Simon, J. (2002). The Online Removal of Dissolved Oxygen From<br />

Aqueous Solutions Used in Voltammetric Technique by Chromatomembrane<br />

Method. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 374: 1256 - 1260.<br />

Riley, T. and Tomlinson, C. (1984). Principles of Electroanalytical Methods<br />

(Analytical Chemistry by Open Learning). London: John Wiley.<br />

Risk assesment studies report No. 5 (1991). Chemical Hazrad – Evaluation<br />

Aflatoxin in Food. Food and Environmental Hygeine Department, Hong Kong.<br />

Rizk, M., Belal, F., Aly, F.A. and El-Enany, N.M. (1998). Differential Pulse<br />

Polarographic Determination of Ofloxacin Pharmaceuticals and Biological<br />

Fluids. Talanta. 46: 83 - 89.<br />

Rizzo I., Vedoya G., Maurutto S., Haidukowski M. and Varsavsky E., (2004).<br />

Assessment of Toxigenic Fungi on Argentinean Medicinal herbs.<br />

Microbiological Research. 159: 113 - 120.<br />

Rodriguez, J., Berzas, J.J., Castanada, G. and Rodrigues, N., (2005). Voltammetric<br />

Determination of Imanitib (Gleevec) and its Main Metabolite Using Square-<br />

wave and Adsorptive Stripping Square-wave Technique in Urine Samples.<br />

Talanta. 66: 202 - 209.<br />

242


Rodriguez, J., Berzas, J.J., Castanada, G. and Rodrigues, R. (2004). Determination<br />

of Seldenafil Citrate (Viagra) and its Metabolite (UK-103,320) by Square-wave<br />

and Adsorption Stripping Square-wave Voltammetry. Total Determination in<br />

Biological samples. Talanta. 62: 427 - 432.<br />

Sabry, S.M. and Wahbi, A.A.M. (1999). Application of Orthogonal Functions to<br />

Differential Pulse Voltammetric Analysis: Simultanuoes Determination of tin<br />

and Lead on Soft Drinks. Anal. Chim. Acta, 401: 173 - 183.<br />

Safavi, A., Maleki, N. and Shahbaazi, H.R.(2004). Indirect Determination of<br />

Cyanide Ion and Hydrogen Cyanide by Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry at a<br />

Mercury Electrode. Anal.Chim.Acta. 503: 213 - 221.<br />

Salavagione. H.J., Arias. J., Garces. P., Marallon. E., Barbero. C. and Vazguez. J.L,<br />

(2004). Spectroelectrochemical Study of the Oxidation of Aminophenols on<br />

Platinum Electrode in Acid Medium. J. Of Electroanalytical Chem. 565: 375 -<br />

383.<br />

Saleemullah, Iqbal, A., Khalil, I.A. and Shah H. (2005). Aflatoxin Contents of<br />

Stored andArtificially Inoculated Cereals and Nuts. Food Chemistry. Article in<br />

press.<br />

Salleh, B. (1998). Mikotoksin- Implikasi Terhadap Kesihatan Manusia dan Haiwan.<br />

Pulau Pinang: <strong>Universiti</strong> Sains <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

Samajpathi, N. (1979) .Aflatoxin Produced by Five Species of Aspergillus on Rice.<br />

Naturwissenschaften. 66: 365 - 366.<br />

Sandulescu, R., Mirel, S. and Oprean, R. (2000). The Development of<br />

Spectrophotometric and Electroanalytical Methods for Ascorbic Acid and<br />

243


Acetaminophen and Their Application in the Analysis of Effervescent Dosage<br />

Form. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 23: 77 - 87.<br />

Sanna, G., Pilo, M.I., Pin, P.C. Tapparo, A. and Seeber, R. (2000). Determination of<br />

Heavy Metals in Honey by Anodic Stripping Voltammetry at Microelectrode.<br />

Anal. Chim. Acta. 415: 165 - 173.<br />

Santos, M.C. and Machado, S.A.S. (2004). Microgravimetric, Rotating Ring-disc<br />

and Voltammetric Studies of the Underpotential Deposition of Selenium on<br />

Polycrystalline Platinum Electrode. J. of Electroanalytical Chem. 567: 203 -<br />

210.<br />

244<br />

Sarimehmetoglu, B., Kuplulu, O. and Celik, T.H. (2004). Detection of Aflatoxin M1<br />

in CheeseSamples by ELISA. Food Control. 15: 45 - 49.<br />

Sassahara, M., Netto, D.P. and Yanaka, E.K. (2005). Aflatoxin Occurence in<br />

Foodstuff Supplied to Dairy Cattle and Aflatoxin M1 in Raw Milk in the North<br />

of Parana State. Food and Chemical Technology. 43: 981 - 984.<br />

Scholten, J.M and Spanjer, M.C. (1996). Determination of Aflatoxin B1 in<br />

Pastachio Kernels and Shells. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 79: 1360 - 1364.<br />

Scott, P.M. and Lawrence, G.A. (1997). Determination of Aflatoxins in Beer. J.<br />

Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 80: 1229 - 1233.<br />

Setamou, M.K., Gardwell, F., Schulthess, S. and Hell, K. (1997). Aspergillus flavus<br />

Infection and Aflatoxin Contaminants of Preharvest Maize in Benin. Plant<br />

Disease. 81: 1327 - 1327.<br />

Shahrokhian, S. and Karimi, M. (2004). Voltammetric Studies of a cobalt(II)-4-<br />

Methylsalophen Modified Carbon-paste Electrode and its Application for the


Simultaneous Determination of Cysteine and Ascorbic Acid. Electrochim. Acta.<br />

50: 77 - 84.<br />

Shams, E., Barbei, A. and Soltaninezhad,M. (2004). Simultaneous Determination of<br />

Copper, Zinc and Lead by Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetry in the Presence of<br />

Morin. Anal. Chim. Acta. 501: 119 - 124.<br />

245<br />

Shannon, G.M., Shotwell, O.L and Kwole, W.F. (1983). Extraction and Thin Layer<br />

Chromatography of Aflatoxin B1 in Mixed Feeds. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66:<br />

582 - 586<br />

Shenasi, M., Aidoo, K.E. and Candlish, A.A.G. (2002). Microflora of Date Fruits<br />

and Production of Aflatoxins at Various Stages of Maturation. Int.J Food<br />

Microbiology. 79(1-2): 113 - 119.<br />

Shi K. and Shiu K.K. (2004). Adsorption of Some Quinone Derivatives at<br />

Chemically Activated Glassy Carbon Electrode. J. of Electroanalytical Chem.<br />

574(1): 63 - 70.<br />

Shotwell, O.L and Goulden, M.L (1977). Aflatoxins: Comparison of Analysis of<br />

Corn by Various Methods. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 60: 83 - 88.<br />

Shotwell, O.L, Goulden, M.L., Benntt, G.A., Plattner, R.D. and Hesseltine, C.W<br />

(1977). Survey of 1975 Wheat and Soybeans for Aflatoxins, Zeralenone and<br />

Ochratonin, J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 60: 778 - 783.<br />

Shotwell, O.L., Hesseltin,e C. and Stubblefield, R.D. (1966). Production of aflatoxin<br />

on rice. Appl. Microbiol. 14: 425 - 428.


Simon, P., Delsaut, P., Lafontaine, M. Morele, Y. and Nicol, T. (1998). Automated<br />

Column-switching High-performance liquid chromatography for the<br />

determination of aflatoxin M1. J of Chromatogr. B. (1998). 712: 95 - 104.<br />

Skoog, D.A., West, D.M. and James, F. (1996) Fundamentals of Analytical<br />

Chemistry. 7 th Ed. New York; Saunders College Publishing,<br />

Skrzypek S., Ciesielski W., Sokolowski A., Yilmaz S. and Kazmierczak A. (2005).<br />

Square Wave Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric Determination of Famotidine<br />

in Urine. Talanta. 66:1146 - 1151.<br />

Smith, J.E. and Moss M.O. (1985). Mycotoxins – Formation, Analysis and<br />

Significance. Chichester: John Wiley.<br />

Smyth, M. R., Lawellin, D. W. and Osteryoung, J.G (1979) Polarographic Study of<br />

Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1 and G2: Application of Differential-pulse polarography to<br />

the determination of Aflatoxin B1 in Various Foodstuff. Analyst. 104: 73 - 78.<br />

Smyth, M.R. and Vos, J.G., (1992). In Shevla, G. (Ed). Analytical Voltammetry in<br />

Comprehensive Analytical Chemistry. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.<br />

246<br />

Smyth, M.R. and Smyth, W.F. (1978). Voltammetric Methods for the Determination<br />

of Foreign Organic Compounds of Biological Significance. A review. Analyst.<br />

103(1227): 103 - 122.<br />

Sonthalia, P., McGaw, E., Show, Y. and Swain, G.M. (2004). Metal Ion Analysis in<br />

Contaminated Water Samples Using Anodic Stripping Voltammetry and a<br />

Nanocrystalline Diamond Thin-film Electrode. Anal Chim Acta. 522: 35 - 44.


Sorensen, L.K. and Elbaek, T. (2005). Determination of Mycotoxins Bovine Milk<br />

by Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry. J Chrom. B. 820:183-<br />

196.<br />

Stack, M. E. and Pohland, A.E. (1975). Collabration Study of a Method for<br />

Chemical Confirmation of the Identify of Aflatoxin. J. Assoc.Off. Anal.Chem.<br />

58: 110 - 113.<br />

Stroka, J. and Anklem, E (2002). New Strategies for the Screening and<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins and Detection of Aflatoxin-producing Moulds in<br />

Food and Feed. Trend In Anal. Chem. 21: 90 - 95.<br />

Stroka, J., Elke, A., Urban, J., John, G., Anna, B., Carlo, B., Per-Erik, C., Fiona, G.,<br />

John, G., and Loius, S. (2000). Immunoaffinity Column Cleanup With Liquid<br />

Chromatograhpy Using Post-column Bromination for Determination of<br />

Aflatoxins in Peanut Butter, Pistachio Paste, Fig Paste and Paprika Powder.<br />

Collaborative Study. J. of AOAC International. 83: 320 - 340.<br />

Stubblefield, R.D and Showell, O.L (1977). Reverse Phase Analytical and<br />

Preparative High Performance Liquid Chromatography of Aflatoxins. J. Assoc.<br />

Off. Anal. Chem. 60: 784 - 790.<br />

Stubblefield, R.D., Kwolek, W.F. and Stoloff, L (1982). Determination and Thin<br />

Layer Chromatographic Confirmation of Identity of AFB1 and AFM1 in<br />

Artificially Contaminated Beef Livers: Collaborative Study. J. Assoc. Off. Anal.<br />

Chem. 65: 1435 - 14.<br />

Sturm, J.C., Canelo, H., Nunez-Vergara, L.J. and Squella, J.A. (1997).<br />

Voltammetric Study of Ketorolac and its Differential Pulse Polarographic<br />

Determination in Pharmaceuticals. Talanta. 44: 931 - 937.<br />

247


Sun, N., Mo, W-M. Shen, Z-L and Hu, B-X. (2005). Adsorptive Stripping<br />

Voltammetric Technique for the Rapid Determination of Tobramycin on the<br />

Hanging Mercury Electrode. J. Pharm. Biomed. Anal. 38(2): 256 - 262.<br />

Sun, W. and Jiao, K. (2002). Linear Sweep Voltammetric Determination of Protein<br />

Based on its Interaction With Alizarin Red S. Talant. 56: 1073 - 1080.<br />

Taguchi, S., Fukushima, S., Summoto, T., Yoshida, S. and Nishimune, T. (1995).<br />

Aflatoxins in Foods Collected in Osaka, Japan. J AOAC Int. 78: 325 – 327.<br />

Takahashi, D.M. (1977a). Reverse Phase High Pressure Liquid Chromatographic<br />

Analytical System for Aflatoxins in Wine With Fluorescence Detection. J<br />

Chromatograph. 131: 147 - 156.<br />

Takahashi, D.M. (1977b). Reverse Phase High Pressure Liquid Chromatographic<br />

Analytical System for Aflatoxins in Wine and Fruit Juices. J. Assoc. Off. Anal.<br />

Chem. 60: 799 – 804.<br />

Tarin, A, Russell, M.G. and Guardino, X. (2004). Use of High Performance Liquid<br />

Chromatography in Assess Airborne Mycotoxins. J of Chromatogr. A. 1047(2):<br />

235 - 240.<br />

Thompson, M. (1998). Do We Really Need Detection Limit?. Analyst. 123: 405 -<br />

407.<br />

Torriero, A.A.J., Luco, J.M., Sereno, L. and Raba, J. (2004). Voltammetric<br />

Determination of Salicylic Acid in Pharmaceuticals Formulations of<br />

Acetylsalicylic Acid. Talanta. 62: 247- 254.<br />

248


Tozzi, C., Anfossi, L. Baggiani, C., Giavanalli, C. and Girandi, G. (2003). A<br />

Combinatorial Approach to Obtain Affinity Media With Binding Properties<br />

Towards the Aflatoxins. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 375: 994 - 999.<br />

Trucksess, M. W. and Stollof, L. (1980). Thin Layer Chromatographic<br />

Determination of Alatoxins in Dry Ginger Root and Ginger Oleoresin. J. Assoc.<br />

Off. Anal. Chem.63: 1052 - 1054.<br />

Trucksess, M. W., Stack, M. E., Nesheim, S., Page, S.W. , Albert, R.H., Hansen,<br />

T.J. and Donahue, K.F. (1991). Immunoaffinity Column Coupled with Solution<br />

Fluometry or Liquid Chromatography Postcolumn Derivatization for<br />

Determination of Aflatoxins in Corn, Peanuts and Peanut butter: Collaborative<br />

Study. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 74: 81 - 88.<br />

249<br />

Trucksess, M. W., Stollof, L., Pons, W.A., Cucullu, A.F. Lee, L.S. and Franz, A.O.<br />

(1977). Thin Layer Chromatography of AFB1 in Egg. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem.<br />

60: 795 - 798.<br />

Tuinstra L.G.M. and Hassnott, W. (1983). Rapid Determination of Aflatoxin B1 in<br />

Dutch Feedingstuffs by High Performance Liquid Chromatography and Postcolumn<br />

Derivatisation. J of Chromatogr. 282: 457 - 462.<br />

Tuinstra, L.G.M., Kienhuis, P.G.M. and Dols, P. (1990). Automated Liquid<br />

Chromatographic Determination of Aflatoxin M1 in Milk Using on-line Dialysis<br />

for Sample Preparation. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 73: 969 - 973.<br />

Turner, P.C., Sylla, A., Gong, Y.Y., Diallo, M.S., Surcliffer, A.E., Hall, A. J. and<br />

Wild, C.P. (2005). Reduction in Exposure to Carcinogenic Aflatoxins by<br />

Postharvest Intervention Measures in West Africa: Community Based<br />

Intervention Study. Lancet. 365: 1950 - 1956.


Tutour, L.B., Elaraki, A. T. and Aboussalim, A.(1984). Simultaneous Thin Layer<br />

Chromatographic Determination of Aflatoxin B1 and Ochratoxin A in Black<br />

Olives, J Assoc Off Anal Chem. 67: 611 - 620.<br />

Urano, T., Trucksess ,M.W. and Page, S.W., (1993). Automated Affinity Liquid<br />

Chromatography Sstem for On-line Isolation, Separation and Quantitation of<br />

Aflatoxins in Methanol-water Extracts of Corn or Peanuts. J.Agric. Food Chem.<br />

41: 1982 - 1985.<br />

Vahl, M. and Jorgensen, F. (1998). Determination of Aflatoxins in Food Using<br />

LC/MS/MS. Z Lebensm Unters Forsch A.. 206: 243 - 245.<br />

Van Egmond, H.P. (1989). Introduction of Mycotoxins in Dairy Products. London:<br />

Elsevier Applied Science.<br />

Verma, K.K., Jain, A., Verma, a. and Chaurasia, A. (1991). Spectrophotometric<br />

Determination of Ascorbic Acid in Pharmaceuticals by Background Correction<br />

and Flow Injection. Analyst. 116: 641 - 645.<br />

250<br />

Versantroort, C.H.M., Oomen, A.G., and Sips, A.J.A.M. (2005). Applicability of an<br />

in Vitro Digestion Model in Assessing the Bioaccessibility of Mycotoxins From<br />

Food. Food and Chemical Toxicology. 43: 31- 40.<br />

Volke, J. and Liska, F. (1994). Electrochemistry in Organic Synthesis. New York:<br />

Springer-Verlag.<br />

Volkov, A.G. and Mwesigwa, S. (2001). Electrochemistry of Soyabean: Effect of<br />

Uncouplers, Pollutant and Pesticides. J. Of Electroanalytical Chemistry. 496:<br />

153 - 157.


Wang, H. S., Huang, D. H. and Liu, R.M. (2004). Study on the Electrochemical<br />

Behavior of Epinephrine at a Poly(3-methylthiophene) Modified Glassy Carbon<br />

Electrode. J. of Electroanalytical Chem. 570: 83 - 90.<br />

Wang, J. (1985): Stripping analysis: Principles, Instrumentation and Application.<br />

USA: VCH Publishers.<br />

Wang, J., Cai, X., Fernandes, J. R., Ozsoz, M. and Grant, D. H., (1997). Adsorptive<br />

Potentiometric Stripping Analysis of Trace Tomoxifen at a Glassy Carbon<br />

Electrode, Talanta. 45: 273 - 278.<br />

Wang, J. (1988). Electroanalytical Technique in Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory<br />

Medicine. USA: VCH publisher.<br />

Wang, J. (2000). Analytical Electrochemistry. USA: WILEY-VCH.<br />

Weast, R.C and Astle, M.J. (1981). Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. 61 th Ed.<br />

Flourida: CRC Press.<br />

Wasiak, W, Cissewska, W. and Ciszewski, A. (1996). Hair Analysis Part I:<br />

Differentrial Pulse Anodic Stripping Voltammetry Determination of Lead,<br />

Cadmium, Zinc and Copper in Human Hair Samples of Persons in Permanent<br />

Contact With a Polluted Workplace Environment. Anal. Chim. Acta. 335: 201 -<br />

207.<br />

Weast, R.C and Astle, M.J. (1987). CRC Handbook of Data On Organic<br />

Compounds, Vol II. Flourida: CRC Press.<br />

Wei, R.D., Chang, S.Ch. and Lee, S.S. (1980). High Pressure Liquid<br />

Chromatography Determination of Aflatoxins in Soy Sauces anf Fermented<br />

Soybean Paste. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 63:1269- 1274.<br />

251


White, C.E. and Argauer, R.J. (1970). Fluorescence Analysis- A Practical<br />

Approach. New York: Marcell Dekker.<br />

Wilson, T.J. and Romer, T.R (1991). Use of the Mycosep Multifunctional Clean-up<br />

Column for Liquid Chromatography Determination of Aflatoxins in Agriculture<br />

Products. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem.74 : 951 - 956.<br />

Wogan, G.N., Hecht, S. S., Felton, J. S., Conney, A.H. and Loeb, L.A. (2004).<br />

Environmental and Chemical Carcinogenesis. Seminars In Cancer Biology. 14:<br />

473 - 486.<br />

Woolever, C.A. and Dewald,H.D. (2001). Differential Pulse Anodic Stripping<br />

Voltammetry of Barium and Lead in Gunshot Residues. Forensic Sci Int. 117:<br />

185-190.<br />

World Health Organisation (1987) in: IARC Monograph on the Evaluation of<br />

Carcinogenic Risk to Human, WHO, Lyon, pp 82 Supl. I.<br />

Wring S. A., Hart J.P. and Birck B.J. (1991). Voltammetric Behaviour of Screen-<br />

printed Carbon Electrode, Chemically Modified With Selected Mediatiors and<br />

Their Applications as Sensor for Detection of Reduced Gluthathione. Analyst.<br />

116 : 123-129.<br />

www.ansci.cornell.edu/toxicagents/aflatoxin. Quoted date - 30 th . July 2002.<br />

www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals. Quoted date – 5 th February 2006<br />

www.copdockmill.co.uk/aflatoxin Quoted date – 26 th August 2001<br />

Ximenes, M.I.N., Rath, S. and Reyes, F.G.R. (2000). Polarographic Determination<br />

of Nitrate in Vegetable. Talanta. 51: 49 - 56.<br />

252


Xiulan S., Xiaolian, Z., Jian, T., Xiaohong, G., jun, Z. and Chu, F.S. (2006).<br />

Development of an Immunochromatographic Assay for Detection of Aflatoxin<br />

B1 in Foods. Food Control. 17: 256 - 262.<br />

Yardimer, C. and Ozaltin, N. (2001). Electrochemical Studies and Differential Pulse<br />

Polarographic Analysis of Lansoprazole in Pharmaceuticals. Analyst. 126: 361-<br />

366.<br />

Yardimer, C. and Ozaltin, N. (2004). Electrochemical Studies and Square-wave<br />

Voltammetric Determination of Fenofibrate in Pharmacetical Formulations.<br />

Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 378: 495 - 498.<br />

Yaacob, M.H. (1993). Polarographic Determination of Sn(II) in<br />

Radiopharmaceutical Samples. University of Manchester, Institute of Science<br />

and Technology (UMIST), United Kingdom. MSc Thesis.<br />

Yilmaz, S., Uslu, B. and Ozkan, S.A. (2001). Anodic Oxidation of Etodolac and its<br />

Square Wave and Differential Pulse Voltammetric Determination in<br />

Pharmaceuticals and Human Serum. Talanta. 54: 351 - 360.<br />

Youmens, H.L. (1973). Statistics for Chemistry. USA: Bells and Howell Publishers.<br />

Yousef, A.E and Marth, E.H. (1985). Rapid Reverse Phase Liquid Chromatography<br />

Determination of AFM1 in Milk. J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 68: 462 - 465.<br />

Zahir, M.H. and Abd. Ghani, S. (1997). Fabrication of Directly Polymerized 4vinylpyridine<br />

onto a Pencil 2B Graphite Paste Electrode for Glucose<br />

Monitoring, Anal Chim Acta, 354: 351 - 358.<br />

253


Zayed, S.I.M. and Habib, I.H.I. (2005). Adsorptive Stripping Voltammetric<br />

Determination of Triprolidine Hydrochloride in Pharmaceutical Tablets. I1<br />

Farmaco. 60(6-7): 621 - 625.<br />

254<br />

Zhang, Z.Q., Zhang, H. and H,e G. F. (2002). Preconcentration with Membrane Cell<br />

and Adsorptive Polarographic Determination of Formaldehyde in Air. Talanta.<br />

57: 317 - 322.<br />

Zhang, Z.Q, Li, Y.F., He, X.M. and Zhang, H. (1996). Electroanalytical<br />

Characteristics of Enoxican and Their Analytical Application. Talanta.43: 635 -<br />

641.<br />

Zhao, C., Pan, Y., Su, Y., Zhang, Z., Guo, Z. and Sun, L. (2003). Determination of<br />

EDTA Species in Water by Square-wave Voltammetry using a Chitosan-coated<br />

Glassy Carbon Electrode. Water Research. 37: 4270 - 4274.<br />

Zima, J., Barek, J., Moriera, J.C., Mejstrik, V. and Fogg, A.G. (2001).<br />

Electrochemical Determination of Trace Amounts of Environmentally Important<br />

Dyes. Fresenius. J. Anal. Chem. 369: 567 - 570.<br />

Zimmermann, S., Menzel A., Bernaz Z., Eckhardt J-D., Stubens D., Alt F.,<br />

Messerschmidt H., Taraschewski H. and Sures B.(2001). Trace Analysis of<br />

Platinum in Biological Samples: A Comparison Between Sector field ICP-MS<br />

and Adsorptive Cathodic Stripping Voltammetry Following Different Digestion<br />

Procedures. Anal. Chim. Acta. 439: 203 - 209.


APPENDIX A<br />

Relative fluorescence of aflatoxins in different solvents<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

B1<br />

B2<br />

G1<br />

G2<br />

Methanol<br />

0.6 (430 nm)<br />

5.3 (430 nm)<br />

1.0 (450 nm)<br />

8.7 (450 nm)<br />

Ethanol<br />

1.0 (430 nm)<br />

2.7 (430 nm)<br />

1.4 (450 nm)<br />

4.7 (450 nm)<br />

Chloroform<br />

0.20 (413 nm)<br />

0.25 (413 nm)<br />

6.2 (430 nm)<br />

6.8 (430 nm)<br />

255


APPENDIX B<br />

256


APPENDIX C<br />

257


APPENDIX D<br />

Calculation of concentration of aflatoxin stock solution<br />

Formula used for calculation of concentration of aflatoxin stock solution by UV-<br />

VIS spectrometric technique<br />

[Aflatoxin] / µg/ml = Abs x MW x 1000<br />

ε<br />

Where<br />

Abs = absorbance value<br />

MW = molecular weight<br />

ε = molar absorbtivity (cm -1 M -1 )<br />

Parameters used in this calculation;<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Example: AFB1<br />

MW<br />

312<br />

314<br />

328<br />

330<br />

Solvent<br />

Benzene:acetonitrile<br />

(98:2)<br />

Abs = 0.640 MW = 312 ε = 19,800<br />

ε<br />

19,800<br />

20,900<br />

17,100<br />

18,200<br />

Λ (nm)<br />

[AFB1] = 0.640 x 312 x 1000 = 10.08 µg / ml = 10.08 ppm<br />

19,800<br />

353<br />

355<br />

355<br />

357<br />

258


APPENDIX E<br />

Extraction procedure for aflatoxins in real samples<br />

Extraction procedure for aflatoxins in real samples: Chemistry Dept. Penang<br />

Branch, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation;<br />

259<br />

1. Groundnut with shell: remove shell of entire sample. Coarse grind.<br />

Remove 50 g and regrind this portion to finer size for drawing analytical sample.<br />

2. Transfer 25 gm analytical sample into a waring blender and add 125 ml<br />

of MeOH-0.1N HCl (100:25) and blend for 2 min (timing). Stand for 5 min<br />

(timing).<br />

3. Filter through whatman No. 1 paper or equivalent. Complete filtration as<br />

soon as possible<br />

4. Collect 50 ml of filtrate in a stoppered container.<br />

(Equivalent weight: 125 ml / 25 g sample)<br />

5. Pipette 20 ml of filtrate into a stoppered or screw cap bottle<br />

(Equivalent weight: 20 ml / 4 g sample)<br />

6. Add exactly 20 ml of 15% ZnSO4 solution. Stopper or cap tightly and<br />

shake vigorously for 30 sec. Filter through diatomaceous earth into another<br />

container. (Equivalent weight: 40 ml / 4 g sample)<br />

7. Pipette 20 ml of this filtrate into a small separating funnel and add<br />

exactly 5 ml of chloroform. Stopper or cap tightly and shake vigorously for 30<br />

sec. (Equivalent weight: 20 ml / 2 g sample).Equivalent weight: 5 ml chloroform<br />

/ 2 g sample)<br />

8. Stand for a few minute to let layers separate. After separated, draw<br />

chloroform layer into a suitable container and pipette 1 ml extract accurately<br />

into amber bottle for preparation of final sample before injecting into<br />

voltammetric cell.


APPENDIX F<br />

Calculation of individual aflatoxin in groundnut sample<br />

Aflatoxin, ng/g (ppb) =<br />

where;<br />

P x C x 1000 µl x 125 ml x 1<br />

P ’ 100 µl V W<br />

P = peak height of sample (nA)<br />

P ’ = peak height of standard (after substract with peak height of sample) (nA)<br />

C = amount of aflatoxin injected into voltammetric cell (ng)<br />

V = effective volume;<br />

= 20 x volume of chloroform used for sample preparation = 20 x 1 = 2 ml<br />

2 total volume of chloroform added 2 5<br />

W = weight of sample (25 g)<br />

===> P x C x 1000 µl x 125 ml x 1<br />

P ’ 100 µl 2 ml 25 g<br />

===> P x C x 25 ( for injected volume = 100 µl)<br />

P ’<br />

260


Notes;<br />

For other injection volume;<br />

Volume (µl) Formula<br />

200 P x C x 12.5<br />

P ’<br />

300 P x C x 8.33<br />

P ’<br />

400 P x C x 6.25<br />

P ’<br />

From first equation;<br />

1000 µl = Volume of final solution prepared in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

100 µl = Injection volume of sample<br />

125 ml = Volume of solvent for mixing and blending groundnut<br />

261


APPENDIX G<br />

Cyclic voltammograms of AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 with increasing of their<br />

concentrations<br />

Figure G-1 Effect of increasing AFB1 concentrations on the Ip of cathodic cyclic<br />

voltammetric curves in BRB at pH 9.0. (a) 1.30 µM, (b) 2.0 µM (c) 2.70 µM and (d)<br />

3.40 µM. Parameters conditions are Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0, scan rate = 200<br />

mV/s.<br />

262


Figure G-2 Effect of increasing AFG1 concentrations on the Ip of cathodic cyclic<br />

voltammetric curves in BRB at pH 9.0. (a) 1.30 µM, (b) 2.0 µM (c) 2.70 µM and (d)<br />

3.40 µM. Parameters conditions are Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0, scan rate = 200<br />

mV/s.<br />

Figure G-3 Effect of increasing AFG2 concentrations on the Ip of cathodic cyclic<br />

voltammetric curves in BRB at pH 9.0. (a) 1.30 µM, (b) 2.0 µM (c) 2.70 µM and (d)<br />

3.40 µM. Parameters conditions are Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0, scan rate = 200<br />

mV/s.<br />

263


Ip (nA)<br />

120<br />

90<br />

60<br />

30<br />

0<br />

APPENDIX H<br />

Dependence of the peak heights of AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 on their concentrations<br />

y = 22.451x + 10.989<br />

R 2 = 0.9899<br />

1 1.5 2 2.5<br />

[AFB1] / uM<br />

3 3.5 4<br />

Figure H-1 Dependence of the Ip of AFB1 on concentration of AFB1 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0.<br />

264


Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

120<br />

90<br />

60<br />

30<br />

0<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

y = 24.756x + 13.072<br />

R 2 = 0.9812<br />

1 1.5 2 2.5<br />

[AFG1] / uM<br />

3 3.5 4<br />

Figure H-2 Dependence of the Ip of AFG1 on concentration of AFG1 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0.<br />

y = 28.757x + 1.4407<br />

R 2 = 0.9914<br />

1 1.5 2 2.5<br />

[AFG2] / uM<br />

3 3.5 4<br />

Figure H-3 Dependence of the Ip of AFG2 on concentration of AFG2 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0.<br />

265


APPENDIX I<br />

Repetitive cyclic voltammograms and their peak height of AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2<br />

in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Figure I-1 Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 µM AFB1 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0. Parameter conditions are Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0 and scan<br />

rate = 200 mV/s<br />

266


Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1 2 3<br />

No of cycle<br />

4 5<br />

Figure I-2 Increasing Ip of AFB1 cathodic peak obtained from repetitive cyclic<br />

voltammetry<br />

Figure I-3 Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 µM AFG1 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0. Parameter conditions are Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0 and scan<br />

rate = 200 mV/s<br />

267


Ip (nA)<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1 2 3<br />

No of cycle<br />

4 5<br />

Figure I-4 Increasing Ip of AFG1 cathodic peak obtained from repetitive cyclic<br />

voltammetry<br />

Figure I-5 Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 µM AFG2 in BRB<br />

solution at pH 9.0. Parameter conditions are Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V, Ehigh = 0 and scan<br />

rate = 200 mV/s<br />

268


Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1 2 3 4 5<br />

No of cycle<br />

Figure I-6 Increasing Ip of AFG2 cathodic peak obtained from repetitive cyclic<br />

voltammetry<br />

269


Ep (-mV)<br />

APPENDIX J<br />

Voltammetric plot Ep-log υ for the reduction of AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at<br />

pH 9.0<br />

y = 61.415x + 1171.6<br />

R2 1350<br />

1340<br />

1330<br />

1320<br />

1310<br />

1300<br />

1290<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

1260<br />

1250<br />

1240<br />

= 0.9987<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log v<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Figure J-1 The voltammetric plot Ep – log υ for the reduction of 1.3 µM AFB1 in<br />

BRB solution at pH 9.0<br />

270


Ep (-mV)<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

1260<br />

1250<br />

1240<br />

1230<br />

1220<br />

1210<br />

1200<br />

1190<br />

1290<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

1260<br />

1250<br />

1240<br />

1230<br />

1220<br />

1210<br />

y = 48.484x + 1134.8<br />

R 2 = 0.9978<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log v<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Figure J-2 The voltammetric plot Ep – log υ for the reduction of 1.3 µM AFG1 in<br />

BRB solution at pH 9.0<br />

y = 49.297x + 1146<br />

R 2 = 0.9984<br />

1200<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log v<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Figure J-3 The voltammetric plot Ep – log υ for the reduction of 1.3 µM AFG2 in<br />

BRB solution at pH 9.0<br />

271


Ip (nA)<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

APPENDIX K<br />

Plot of peak height versus scan rate for AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

0 100 200 300 400 500 600<br />

v ( mV/sec)<br />

Figure K-1 Plot of Ip versus scan rate (υ) for 1.3 µM AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

272


Ip (nA)<br />

110<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 100 200 300 400 500 600<br />

v ( mV/s )<br />

Figure K-2 Plot of Ip versus scan rate (υ) for 1.3 µM AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

I p (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 100 200 300 400 500 600<br />

v ( mv/sec)<br />

Figure K-3 Plot of Ip versus scan rate (υ) for 1.3 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

273


APPENDIX L<br />

Voltammograms of AFB2 with increasing concentrations<br />

Figure L-1 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of increasing concentration of AFB2<br />

in (a) BRB at pH 9.0, (b) 0.02 µM (c) 0.06 µM (d) 0.10 µM (e) 0.14 µM, (f) 0.18 µM<br />

(g) .22 µM (h) 0.26 µM and (i) 0.32 µM. Parameter conditions; Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4<br />

V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

274


APPENDIX M<br />

Voltammograms of 0.1 µM and 0.2 µM AFB2 obtained on the same day<br />

measurements<br />

Figure M-1 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2<br />

obtained in the same day (n= 8) with RSD = 2.83% Eacc = -6.0 V, tacc= 80 s,<br />

υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV<br />

275<br />

Figure M-2 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of 0.2 µM AFB2<br />

obtained in the same day (n= 8) with RSD = 0.72%. Eacc = -6.0 V, tacc= 80 s,<br />

υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV


APPENDIX N<br />

Voltammogramms of AFB2 at inter-day measurements<br />

Figure N-1 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2<br />

obtained at day 1 ( n= 8) with RSD = 2.83% .Eacc = -6.0 V, tacc= 80 s, υ = 50<br />

mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV<br />

276


Figure N-2 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2<br />

obtained at day 2 (n= 8) with RSD = 2.39% Eacc = -6.0 V, tacc= 80 s, υ = 50<br />

mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV<br />

Figure N-3 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of 0.1µM AFB2<br />

obtained at day 3 (n= 8) with RSD = 1.31% Eacc = -6.0 V, tacc= 80 s, υ = 50<br />

mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV<br />

277


APPENDIX O<br />

F test for robustness and ruggedness tests<br />

a) Two tailed F test was used to observe any significant different of variance by using<br />

small variation of a few important parameters such pH of buffer solution, Eacc and tacc..<br />

Optimum parameters Variation<br />

pH of BRB = 9.0 8.5 and 9.5<br />

Eacc = -0.60 V -0.59 V and -0.61 V<br />

tacc = 80 s 75 and 85 s<br />

0.1 µM AFB2 (n =5):<br />

For optimum and small variation in pH of BRB (as an example)<br />

pH n Ip SD<br />

9.0 5 60.62 0.88<br />

8.5 5 58.82 0.79<br />

F = (0.88) 2 / (0.79) 2 = 0.7744/ 0.6241 = 1.24 (< F tabulated at 95 % confidential level;<br />

9.60).<br />

No significant different for pH 9.0 and 8.5 at 95% confidential level.<br />

278


pH n Ip SD<br />

9.0 5 60.62 0.88<br />

9.5 5 59.30 0.44<br />

F = (0.88) 2 / (0.44) 2 = 0.7744 / 0.1936 = 4.00 (< F tabulated at 95 % confidential level;<br />

9.60).<br />

No significant different for pH 9.0 and 9.5 at 95% confidential level.<br />

b) Two tailed F test was used to observe any significant different of variance by<br />

using different voltammetric analyser which are BAS and Metrohm under optimum<br />

parameters (AFB1 as an example).<br />

AFB1<br />

Voltammetric analyser n Ip SD<br />

Metrohm 5 59.88 0.94<br />

BAS 5 58.28 2.79<br />

F(4,4) at 95% confidence level = 9.60<br />

F = (2.79) 2 / (0.94) 2 = 7.78 / 0.88 = 8.84 (< F tabulated; 9.60)<br />

279<br />

No significant difference between the results obtained for 0.1 µM AFB1 by two types of<br />

voltammetric analyser.


APPENDIX P<br />

Voltammograms of AFB1 with increasing concentration<br />

Figure P-1 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of increasing concentration of AFB1<br />

in (a) BRB at pH 9.0, (b) 0.02 µM (c) 0.04 µM (d) 0.14 µM (e) 0.18 µM, (f) 0.22 µM<br />

(g) 0.26 µM (h) 0.30 µM and (i) 0.32 µM. Parameter conditions; Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4<br />

V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

280


APPENDIX Q<br />

Voltammograms of AFG1 with increasing concentrations<br />

Figure Q-1 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of increasing concentration of AFG1<br />

in (a) BRB at pH 9.0, (b) 0.02 µM, (c) 0.04 µM, (d) 0.06 µM, (e) 0.08 µM, (f) 0.10<br />

µM, (g) 0.14 µM, (h) 0.18 µM, (i) 0.26 µM (j) 0.30 µM and (k) 0.32 µM. Parameter<br />

conditions; Ei = -0.95 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

281


APPENDIX R<br />

Voltammograms of AFG2 with increasing concentrations<br />

Figure R-1 Cathodic stripping voltammograms of increasing concentration of AFG2<br />

in (a) BRB at pH 9.0, (b) 0.02 µM, (c) 0.04 µM, (d) 0.06 µM, (e) 0.10 µM, (f) 0.14<br />

µM, (g) 0.18 µM, (h) 0.26 µM, (i) 0.28 µM and (j) 0.30 µM. Parameter conditions; Ei<br />

= -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80<br />

mV.<br />

282


APPENDIX S<br />

LOD determination according to Barek et al. (2001a)<br />

By standard addition of lower concentration of analyte (AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and<br />

AFG2) until obtaining the sample response that is significantly difference from blank<br />

sample<br />

a) AFB1; 0.5 x 10 -8 M or 1.56 ppb gave Ip = 4.3 nA at Ep = -1.250 V<br />

Figure S-1 Voltammogram of 0.5 x 10 -8 M of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

283


) AFB2; 0.78 x 10 -8 M or 2.5 ppb gave Ip = 5.7 nA at Ep = -1.260 V<br />

Figure S-2 Voltammogram of 0.78 x 10 -8 M of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

c) AFG1; 1.0 x 10 -8 M or 3.28 ppb gave Ip = 4.34 nA at Ep = -1.160 V<br />

Figure S-3 Voltammogram of 1.0 x 10 -8 M of AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

284


d) AFG2; 0.76 x 10 -8 M or 2.5 ppb gave Ip = 6.19 nA at Ep = -1.190 V<br />

Figure S-4 Voltammogram of 0.76 x 10 -8 M of AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

From the results, LOD for AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 are 0.5 x 10 -8 M (1.56 ppb),<br />

0.78 x 10 -8 M (2.50 ppb), 1.0 x 10 -8 M (3.28 ppb) and 0.76 x 10 -8 M (2.50 ppb),<br />

respectively.<br />

285


APPENDIX T<br />

LOD determination according to Barek et al. (1999)<br />

The limit of detection is calculated as threefold standard deviation from seven analyte<br />

determinations at the concentration corresponding to the lowest point on the appropriate<br />

calibation curve.<br />

AFB1 (as an example);<br />

concentration for lowest point on calibration curve is 2.0 x 10 -8 M.<br />

Ip values from seven determinations of this concentration;<br />

11.76, 12.00, 12.40, 11.80, 11.85, 11.92, 11.92<br />

Mean = 11.95 Standard deviation = 0.2142<br />

0.2142 x 3 = 0.642 x 10 -8 M or 2.00 ppb<br />

LOD for determination of AFB1 = 0.64 x 10 -8 M or 2.00 ppb.<br />

286


APPENDIX U<br />

LOD determination according to Zhang et al. (1996)<br />

The LOD is the concentration giving a signal equal to three times the standard deviation<br />

of the blank signal divided by slope from calibration curve.<br />

AFB1 as an example<br />

Regression equation for calibration curve is y = 5.4363x + 3.7245<br />

Slope = 5.4363<br />

Ip for blank from seven measurements;<br />

40.86, 42.24, 40.22, 38.53, 42.52, 41.04, 41.64<br />

standard deviation of blank (SDblk) = 1.3533<br />

3SDblk / m = (3 x 1.3533) / 5.4363 = 0.7468 x 10 -8 M or 2.35 ppb<br />

LOD for determination of AFB1 = 0.75 x 10 -8 M or 2.35 ppb.<br />

287


APPENDIX V<br />

LOD determination according to Miller and Miller (1993)<br />

LOD is the concentration giving a signal three times the standard error plus the yintercept<br />

divided by the slope of calibration curve<br />

Regression equation for peak height of analyte with their concentrations is;<br />

yi = mx + b<br />

where; yi = peak height<br />

m = slope<br />

b = y-intercept<br />

y value for calculation of standard error is y ’ i = mx + b where x is the concentration of<br />

analyte.<br />

Standard error is calculated based on following equation;<br />

Sy/x = √( ∑ (yi – yi ’ ) 2 ) / n -2<br />

LOD = (3 x Sy/x ) / m<br />

288


As example, LOD for AFB1 is calculated as below;<br />

Regression equation for AFB1; y = 5.4363x + 3.7245<br />

[AFB1] = x Peak height = y yi ’ = mx + b y – yi ’ (y – yi ’ ) 2<br />

2 11.86 14.597 -2.737 7.491<br />

4 23.77 25.470 -1.70 2.89<br />

6 36.34 36.342 -0.002 4 x 10 -6<br />

10 60.4 58.088 2.312 5.345<br />

14 82.12 79.833 2.287 5.230<br />

18 103 101.578 1.422 2.022<br />

22 125.1 123.323 1.777 3.158<br />

26 145.6 145.068 0.532 0.283<br />

30 165.2 166.814 -1.614 2.605<br />

32 175.4 177.686 -2.286 5.226<br />

(x in 10 -8 M and peak height is in nA)<br />

n = 10, m = 5.4363, ∑ (yi – yi ’ ) 2 = 34.250<br />

Sy/x = √34.250/ 8 = 2.069<br />

LOD = (3 x 2.069) / 5.4363 = 1.142 x 10 -8 M or 3.56 ppb<br />

====> LOD for AFB1 is 1.14 x 10 -8 M or 3.56 ppb.<br />

∑ (yi – yi ’ ) 2 34.250<br />

289


APPENDIX W<br />

ANOVA test (Youmens, 1973)<br />

Table W-1 LOD (in ppb) of aflatoxins obtained from three different method<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

Method 1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

Totals<br />

B1 B2 G1 G2<br />

1.56 2.50 3.28 2.50<br />

2.00 2.80 3.50 3.02<br />

2.35 2.86 3.60 2.84<br />

5.91 8.16 10.38 8.36<br />

Totals<br />

9.84<br />

11.32<br />

11.65<br />

32.81<br />

Four sums of squares were calculated in order to make up the ANOVA table. They are<br />

total, sample, method and error sums of squares. The sums of squares were calculated<br />

in five steps as follows;<br />

a) Calculation of C = (∑ Xij) 2 / kn = (32.81) 2 / 12 = 89.71<br />

b) Calculation of total sum of squares = ∑ (Xij) 2 – C = 93.63 – 89.71 = 3.92<br />

c) Calculation of sample or block sum of squares = 1 ∑ 2 j – C = 1 x 279.15 – 89.71<br />

n 3<br />

= 3.34<br />

d) Calculation of method or process sum of squares =1 ∑ 2 i– C<br />

k<br />

= 1 x 360.69 – 89.71 = 0.46<br />

4<br />

290


e) Calculation of error sum of squares<br />

Error sum of squares = total sum of squares – (block sum of squares + process sum<br />

of squares)<br />

= 3.92 – (3.34 + 0.46) = 0.12<br />

The ANOVA table was constructed as follows:<br />

Table W-2 Analysis of variance<br />

Source<br />

Total<br />

Block<br />

Process<br />

Error<br />

f) Calculation of F<br />

Degrees of freedom (f)<br />

kn – 1 = 11<br />

n – 1 = 2<br />

k – 1 = 3<br />

kn – n – k + 1 = 6<br />

F = process mean square / error mean square<br />

= 0.153 / 0.02 = 7.65<br />

g) Test of null hypothesis<br />

Sum of squares (SS)<br />

3.92<br />

3.34<br />

0.46<br />

0.12<br />

Mean squares<br />

(SS / f = MS)<br />

0.153<br />

0.02<br />

Tabular F from Fisher’s F table is 8.94 for f1 = 6 and f2 = 3. This is larger than<br />

the calculated value of F. The hypothesis was not disproved, hence the<br />

experiment indicates that the methods are not giving significantly different of<br />

LOD of aflatoxins at 95% probability level.<br />

This ANOVA test indicates that all three methods can be selected in<br />

determination of LOD of aflatoxins using proposed technique.<br />

291


Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

APPENDIX X<br />

Peak height of AFB2 obtained from modification of mercury electrode with PLL<br />

Table X-1 Ip of 10 ppb all aflatoxins in BRB at pH 9.0 in presence and absence of<br />

poly-L-lysine (PLL)<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

15.70<br />

14.83<br />

18.77<br />

17.60<br />

No PLL<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.26<br />

-1.26<br />

-1.19<br />

-1.22<br />

5 6 9 11<br />

pH of BRB<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

10.22<br />

12.20<br />

16.20<br />

13.90<br />

With PLL<br />

No PLL<br />

With PLL<br />

Ep (V)<br />

-1.22<br />

-1.26<br />

-1.19<br />

-1.22<br />

Figure X-1 Ip of 0.1 µM AFB2 (31.4 ppb) in different pH of BRB with and without<br />

PLL coated on mercury electrode.<br />

292


APPENDIX Y<br />

SWSV voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Figure Y-1 SWS voltammograms of AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 (n =10). Experimental<br />

parameters; Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, υ = 3750 mV/s,<br />

frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 s and amplitude = 50 mV. Blank is<br />

represented by broken line.<br />

Figure Y-2 SWS voltammograms of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0 (n=10). All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in the Figure Z-2.<br />

293


Figure Y-3 SWS voltammograms of AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0 (n=10). All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in the Figure Z-2 except for Ei = -0.95 V.<br />

Figure Y-4 SWSV voltammograms of AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0 (n=10). All<br />

experimental conditions are the same as in the Figure Z-2.<br />

294


APPENDIX Z<br />

SWSV voltammograms of 0.1 µM of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB at pH<br />

9.0<br />

Figure Z-1 SWSV voltammograms of 0.10 µM of AFB1 (n =3) in BRB at pH 9.0. Ei<br />

= -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.8 V, tacc = 100 s, υ = 3750 mV/s, frequency = 125 Hz,<br />

voltage step = 0.03 V and amplitude = 50 mV.<br />

Figure Z-2 SWSV voltammograms of 0.10 µM of AFB2 (n = 3) in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

All experimental parameters are the same as in Figure Z-1.<br />

295


Figure Z-3 SWSV voltammograms of 0.10 µM of AFG1 (n=3) in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

All experimental parameters are the same as in Figure Z-1 except for Ei = -0.95 V.<br />

Figure Z-4 SWSV voltammograms of 0.10 µM of AFG2 (n =3) in BRB at pH 9.0.<br />

All experimental parameters are the same as in Figure Z-1.<br />

296


APPENDIX AA<br />

UV-VIS spectrums of 10 ppm AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 stock solutions<br />

Figure AA-1 UV-VIS spectrums (n=3) of 10 ppm AFB1 in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%)<br />

Figure AA-2 UV-VIS spectrums (n=3) of 10 ppm AFB2 in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%)<br />

297


Figure AA-3 UV-VIS spectrums (n=3) of 10 ppm AFG1 in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%)<br />

Figure AA-4 UV-VIS spectrums (n=3) of 10 ppm AFG2 in benzene: acetonitrile<br />

(98%)<br />

298


APPENDIX AB<br />

Voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 obtained from 0 to 6 months<br />

storage time in the cool and dark conditions<br />

Figure AB-1 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained from<br />

difference storage time of 0 to 6 months in the dark and cool conditions. DPCSV<br />

parameter conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s<br />

and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

299


Figure AB-2 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained from<br />

difference storage time of 0 to 6 months in the dark and cool conditions. DPCSV<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure AB-1.<br />

Figure AB-3 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained from<br />

difference storage time of 0 to 6 months in the dark and cool conditions. DPCSV<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure AB-1 except for Ei = -0.95 V.<br />

300


Figure AB-4 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0 obtained from<br />

difference storage time of 0 to 6 months in the dark and cool conditions. DPCSV<br />

parameter conditions are the same as in Figure AB-1.<br />

301


APPENDIX AC<br />

Voltammograms of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 obtained from 0 to 8 hours<br />

exposure time<br />

Figure AC-1 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB1 in BRB at pH 9.0 exposed to normal<br />

laboratory conditions from 0 to 8 hrs. Experimental conditions: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4<br />

V, Eacc = -0.60 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

302


Figure AC-2 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFB2 in BRB at pH 9.0 exposed to normal<br />

laboratory conditions from 0 to 8 hrs. Experimental conditions are the same as in<br />

Figure AC-1.<br />

Figure AC-3 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG1 in BRB at pH 9.0 exposed to normal<br />

laboratory conditions from 0 to 8 hrs. Experimental conditions are the same as in<br />

Figure AC-1 except for Ei = -0.95 V.<br />

303


Figure AC-4 Voltammograms of 0.10 µM AFG2 in BRB at pH 9.0 exposed to normal<br />

laboratory conditions from 0 to 8 hrs. Experimental conditions are the same as in<br />

Figure AC-1.<br />

304


APPENDIX AD<br />

UV-VIS spectrums of AFB2 and AFG2 in BRB at pH 6.0 and 11.0<br />

Figure AD-1 UV-VIS spectrums of 1.0 ppm AFB2 in BRB at pH 6.0 from 0 to 3 hrs<br />

exposure time<br />

Figure AD-2 UV-VIS spectrums of 1.0 ppm AFB2 in BRB at pH 11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs<br />

exposure time<br />

305


Figure AD-3 UV-VIS spectrums of 1.0 ppm AFG2 in BRB at pH 6.0 from 0 to 3 hrs<br />

exposure time<br />

Figure AD-4 UV-VIS spectrums of 1.0 ppm AFG2 in BRB at pH 11.0 from 0 to 3 hrs<br />

exposure time<br />

306


APPENDIX AE<br />

Voltammograms of AFB1 and AFG1 in 1.0 M HCl and 1.0 M NaOH<br />

Figure AE-1 DPCSV voltammograms of AFB1 in 1.0 M HCl from 0 to 6 hours<br />

Figure AE-2 DPCSV voltammograms of AFB1 in 1.0 M NaOH from 0 to 6 hours.<br />

307


Figure AE-3 DPCSV voltammograms of AFG1 in 1.0 M HCl from 0 to 6 hours.<br />

Figure AE-4 DPCSV voltammograms of AFG1 in 1.0 M NaOH from 0 to 4 hours.<br />

308


APPENDIX AF<br />

DPCS voltammograms of real samples added with various concentrations of AFG1<br />

(i) (ii)<br />

(iii)<br />

Figure AF-1 DPCSV voltammograms of real samples (b) added with 3 ppb (i), 9 ppb<br />

(ii) and 15 ppb (iii) AFG1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank on the first day<br />

measurement.<br />

309


APPENDIX AG<br />

SWSV voltammograms of real samples added with various concentrations of<br />

AFB1<br />

(i) (ii)<br />

(iii)<br />

Figure AG-1 SWSV voltammograms of real samples (b) added with 3 ppb (i), 9 ppb<br />

(ii) and 15 ppb (iii) AFB1 obtained in BRB at pH 9.0 (a) as the blank on the first day<br />

measurement.<br />

310


% recovery<br />

% recovery<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

APPENDIX AH<br />

Percentage of recoveries of 3 ppb and 9 ppb of all aflatoxins in real samples<br />

obtained by SWSV method.<br />

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3<br />

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure AH-1 Percentage of recoveries of 3 ppb of all aflatoxins in real samples<br />

obtained by SWSV method for one to three days of measurements.<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure AH-2 Percentage of recoveries of 9 ppb of all aflatoxins in real samples<br />

obtained by SWSV method for one to three days of measurements.<br />

311


APPENDIX AI<br />

Calculation of percentage of recovery for 3.0 ppb AFG1 added into real sample.<br />

From voltammograms of real sample added with 3.0 ppb AFG1;<br />

Peak height = 5.85 nA, 6.53 nA, 6.09 nA Average = 6.16 nA<br />

Peak height for 10 ppb AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0 = 20.60 nA * . So for 1 ppb = 2.060 nA<br />

For peak height = 6.16 nA ===> (6.16 / 2.060) x 1.0 ppb = 2.99 ppb<br />

Injected AFG1 = 3.0 ppb<br />

From the above calculation, found AFG1 = 2.99 ppb<br />

Recovery (%) = (2.99 / 3.0) x 100 % = 99.67%.<br />

Summary:<br />

AFG1 added = 3. 0 ppb<br />

AFG1 found = 2.99 ppb<br />

% recovery of AFG1 in real sample = 99.67 %<br />

* Notes; For other aflatoxins, the peak heights for 10 ppb of AFB1, AFB2 and AFG2 in<br />

BRB pH 9.0 is 21.93 nA, 21.33 nA and 20.23 nA respectively.<br />

312


APPENDIX AJ<br />

HPLC chromatograms of real samples: S10 and S07<br />

Figure AJ-1 HPLC chromatogram for S10 which contains 36.00 ppb total aflatoxins.<br />

Figure AJ-2 HPLC chromatogram for S07 which contains 3.67 ppb total aflatoxins.<br />

313


1 st analysis<br />

From voltammograms of real sample ;<br />

APPENDIX AK<br />

Calculation of aflatoxin in real sample; S13<br />

Peak height = 1.78 nA, 1.80 nA, 1.79 nA Average = 1.79 nA<br />

From voltammograms of real sample added with 10 ppb AFB1 standard solution.<br />

Peak height = 22.5 nA, 22.6 nA, 22.8 nA Average = 22.63 nA<br />

From equation as stated in Appendix F;<br />

Aflatoxin content = [(1.79) / (22.63 – 1.79)] x 12.5 = 10 .74 ppb<br />

2 nd analysis<br />

From voltammograms of real sample ;<br />

Peak height = 1.80 nA, 1.79 nA, 1.82 nA Average = 1.80 nA<br />

From voltammograms of real sample added with 10 ppb AFB1 standard solution.<br />

Peak height = 22.7 nA, 22.5 nA, 22.8 nA Average = 22.67 nA<br />

From equation as stated in Appendix F;<br />

Aflatoxin content = [(1.80) / (22.67 – 1.80)] x 12.5 = 10 .78 ppb<br />

Average for duplicate analysis = (10.74 + 10.78) / 2 = 10.74 ppb<br />

Total aflatoxins content in S13 = 10.76 ppb<br />

314


APPENDIX AL<br />

List of papers presented or published to date resulting from this study<br />

1. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Cylic voltammetry study of<br />

AFB2 at the mercury electrode. Paper presented at SKAM -16, Kucing, Sarawak, 9 –<br />

11 th September 2003.<br />

2. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Cylic voltammetry study of<br />

AFB2 at the mercury electrode. <strong>Malaysia</strong>n J. Anal. Sci. In press.<br />

3. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Differential pulse stripping<br />

voltammetric technique for determination of AFB2 at the mercury electrode. J. Collect.<br />

Czech. Chem. Common. In press<br />

4. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Stability studies of<br />

aflatoxin G1 (AFG1) using differential pulse stripping voltammetric technique. Paper<br />

presented at Symposium Life Science II, USM Penang. 31 st to 3 rd April 2004.<br />

5. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Developement of<br />

differential pulse stripping voltammetric (DPCSV) technique for determination of<br />

AFG1 at the mercury electrode. Chemical Analysis (Warsaw). In press<br />

6. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Cyclic voltammetry study<br />

of AFG1 at the mercury electrode. Paper presented at KUSTEM 3 rd Annual Seminar on<br />

Sustainability Science and Management, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu. 4 – 5 th May<br />

2004.<br />

7. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Stability studies of<br />

aflatoxins using differential pulse stripping voltammetric (DPCSV) technique. Paper<br />

presented at SKAM-17, Kuantan, Pahang, 24 – 26 th August 2004.<br />

315


8 Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Stability studies of<br />

aflatoxins using differential pulse stripping voltammetric (DPCSV) technique.<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>n J. Anal. Sci. In press.<br />

9. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Voltammetric<br />

determination of aflatoxins: Differential pulse voltammetric (PCSV) versus Squarewave<br />

stripping voltammetry (SWSV) techniques. Paper presented at KUSTEM 4 th<br />

Annual Seminar on Sustainibility Science and Management, Kuala Terengganu, 2 nd –<br />

3 rd May 2005.<br />

10. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. , Ahamad, R. and Misni, M. Determination<br />

of the aflatoxin B1 in groundnut samples by differential pulse cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetry (DPCSV) technique. Paper presented at Seminar Nasional Kimia II,<br />

<strong>Universiti</strong> Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia. 14 th April 2005.<br />

11. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. Ahamad, R., and Misni, M. Development of<br />

differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) technique for the<br />

determination of aflatoxin B1 in groundnut samples. J Sains Kimia. 9(3): 31-36.<br />

12. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Application of differential<br />

pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) technique in studying stability of<br />

aflatoxins. J Sains Kimia. 9(3): 64-70.<br />

13. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Square-wave cathodic<br />

stripping voltammetric (SWSV) technique for determination of aflatoxin B1 in<br />

groundnut samples. Paper presented at SKAM-18, JB, Johor. 12 – 14 th September<br />

2005.<br />

14. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. Square-wave cathodic<br />

stripping voltammetric (SWSV) technique for determination of aflatoxin B1 in<br />

groundnut samples. <strong>Malaysia</strong>n J. Anal. Sci. In press.<br />

316


APPENDIX AM<br />

ICP-MS results on analysis of BRB at pH 9.0<br />

Figure AM-1 ICP-MS results on analysis of BRB at pH 9.0<br />

317


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

PRESENTED AT<br />

1 st ASSESMENT<br />

SEMINAR.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 1


STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC STUDY FOR DETERMINATION<br />

OF AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI YAACOB (PS023001)<br />

SUPERVISOR:<br />

AP DR ABDUL RAHIM HJ MOHD YUSOFF<br />

CO-SUPERVISOR:<br />

PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION<br />

� INTRODUCTION<br />

AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

RESEARCH BACKGROUND<br />

OBJECTIVES<br />

SCOPE OF RESEARCH<br />

� EXPERIMENTAL<br />

� RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

� CONCLUSION<br />

� PROBLEMS<br />

� SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE<br />

WORKS<br />

� FLOW CHART OF FUTURE<br />

PLANNING<br />

� ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

AFLATOXINS<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 3


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

� AFLATOXINS:<br />

Mycotoxin group<br />

Produced by two fungi;<br />

Aspergillus flavus and<br />

Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

Types of aflatoxins:<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFM1<br />

AFM2<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Raw peanuts, peanuts products,<br />

wheat, maize, vegetable oils, dried<br />

fruites, barley, pear, cocoa, coffee,<br />

herbs, spices, wine, cottonseeds.<br />

Cow milk and its products, eggs<br />

and meat product<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 4


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

INTRODUCTION …cont<br />

� AFLATOXINS:<br />

Occurs naturally in commodities used for animal and human<br />

Carcinogenic, teratogenic and mutagenic<br />

IARC (1988): Class I carcinogenic materials<br />

Dangerous to health: will cause aflatoxicosis disease.<br />

Effect the economy of commodities export countries<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 5


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

INTRODUCTION…cont<br />

� AFLATOXINS<br />

Its growth depends on temperature and medium (acidity)<br />

Contamination of feed through infection and seed damaged by insects<br />

Enter into human body through consumption of contaminated food<br />

and skin absorption.<br />

Regulatory level in <strong>Malaysia</strong>:<br />

Raw peanuts < 15 ppb<br />

Milk < 0.5 ppb<br />

Others < 5 ppb<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 6


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

� CHEMICAL STRUCTURES<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

AFB1<br />

INTRODUCTION… cont<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1 AFG2<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 7<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESEARCH BACKGROUND<br />

� Very dangerous to human health<br />

� Its actual amount must be determined by<br />

fast, accurate and relatively low cost<br />

technique / method.<br />

� Analytical level must be at ppb or ppt ( In<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>: HPLC with LOD:2.0 ppb and<br />

analysis time: 20 mins)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 8


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESEARCH BACKGROUND…cont<br />

Methods that have been used:<br />

� TLC ( 0.03 – 5.0 ppb)<br />

� HPLC (UVD, AD or FD) ( 0.014 – 7.0 ppb)<br />

� Enzyme linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA):<br />

( 0.01 – 5.0 ppb)<br />

� Immunoaffinity chromatography (IAC):<br />

( 0.2 – 2.0 ppb)<br />

� Micellar electrokinetic’s capillary chromatography (MECC):<br />

( 0.02 – 0.09 ppb)<br />

� Differential pulse polagoraphy (DPP): ( 25 ppb)<br />

LOD of aflatoxins depends on the type of:<br />

aflatoxins, samples and extraction techniques<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 9


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESEARCH BACKGROUND… cont<br />

� Problems/disadvantages:<br />

TLC<br />

HPLC<br />

ELISA<br />

RIA<br />

Longer analysis time, accuracy problem,<br />

aflatoxins absorption problem<br />

Longer analysis time, need a lot of toxic<br />

organic solvents, high cost for instruments,<br />

and maintenance<br />

Reagents /kits are costly. Suitable for screen<br />

test.<br />

Antibodies are costly, using dangerous<br />

radioisotopes, need special precaution for<br />

dealing with radioisotopes and its waste. It<br />

has certain half life.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 10


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESEARCH BACKGROUND… cont<br />

VOLTAMMETRY<br />

Until now, no study has been performed<br />

using voltammetric techniques either cyclic<br />

voltammetry, cathodic/anodic stripping<br />

voltammetry or absorption stripping<br />

Voltammetric technique has been chosen as an alternative method<br />

to be studied for determination of aflatoxins<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 11


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESEARCH BACKGROUND …cont<br />

� Voltammetric technique: sensitive, high<br />

accuracy, low cost and easy to use<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 12


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

OBJECTIVES OF RESEARCH<br />

(1)<br />

TO STUDY<br />

ELECTROCHEMICAL<br />

PROPERTIES OF<br />

AFLATOXINS (AFB1, AFB2,<br />

AFG1 AND AFG2) USING<br />

VOLTAMMETRIC<br />

TECHNIQUE TOGETHER<br />

WITH CONTROL GROWTH<br />

MERCURY ELECTRODE<br />

(CGME) AS THE WORKING<br />

ELECTRODE<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 13<br />

(2)<br />

TO DEVELOPE A<br />

DETECTION METHOD FOR<br />

DETERMINATION OF<br />

AFLATOXINS IN FOOD<br />

SAMPLES WHICH IS<br />

SENSITIVE, SIMPLE,<br />

ACCURATE AND<br />

ECONOMIC TECHNIQUE.<br />

CV DPSV


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

SCOPE OF STUDY<br />

� Using cyclic voltammetry (CV):-<br />

� Determine the type of aflatoxins reaction at<br />

mercury electrode when anodic or cathodic<br />

scanning is performed.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 14


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

SCOPE OF STUDY…cont<br />

� Identify the peak or peaks obtained either<br />

oxidation peak or reduction peak or both for<br />

developing a technique for analysis of<br />

aflatoxins.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 15


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

SCOPE OF STUDY…cont<br />

� Using voltammetric technique:<br />

� study the effect of pH of electrolyte<br />

solution on reduction/oxidation<br />

aflatoxin peaks.<br />

� determine the best electrolyte for the<br />

process of reduction / oxidation of<br />

aflatoxins at mercury electrode.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 16


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

SCOPE OF STUDY…cont<br />

�Parameters optimisation to obtain<br />

maximum peak height and linear with<br />

addition of aflatoxins concentration.<br />

�Use optimum parameters for<br />

determination of AFB2, AFB1, AFG1 and<br />

AFG2<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 17


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

1) Literature survey<br />

PLANNING ACTIVITIES<br />

2) Cyclic voltammetric study of AFB2<br />

3) Stripping voltammetric study of<br />

AFB2<br />

4) Parameters optimisation:<br />

4a) using high concentration<br />

4b) using low concentration<br />

Activity 2002<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 18<br />

M<br />

J<br />

J<br />

O<br />

S<br />

O<br />

N<br />

D


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

PLANNING ACTIVITIES…cont<br />

1) Determination of<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1<br />

and AFG2<br />

1a) Prepare<br />

calibration curve<br />

1b) Determine<br />

analytical parameters<br />

2) Interference study<br />

3) Complexing of<br />

aflatoxins study<br />

Activity 2003<br />

J F M A M J J O<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 19<br />

S<br />

O<br />

N<br />

D


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

1) Determination of mixing<br />

aflatoxins<br />

4)Determination by HPLC<br />

5) Study using different<br />

working electrodes<br />

5) Comparison study<br />

6) Thesis writting up<br />

1) Analysis of contaminated<br />

food samples<br />

2) Thesis writting up<br />

PLANNING ACTIVITIES…cont<br />

2)Determination of aflatoxins<br />

in artificially contaminated<br />

samples<br />

3)Determination of aflatoxins<br />

in real samples<br />

Activity 2004<br />

J F M A M J J O<br />

Activity 2005<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 20<br />

S<br />

O<br />

N<br />

D


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

STUDY FLOW CHART<br />

AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

AFB1 AFB2 AFG1 AFG2<br />

Cyclic voltammetric, voltammetric,<br />

anodic/cathodic<br />

anodic/ cathodic<br />

Direct measurement<br />

Complexing with metals<br />

(Zn, Pb, Pb,<br />

Cu) or<br />

Organic materials<br />

(Cystein Cystein)<br />

Method optimisation<br />

Differential pulse stripping<br />

Voltammetric, Voltammetric,<br />

anodic / cathodic<br />

Modified electrode /<br />

Screen printed electrode<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 21


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

Optimise;E acc, tacc,<br />

Ei, Ef, scan rate,<br />

pulse amplitude<br />

STUDY FLOW CHART…cont<br />

Method validation<br />

Limit of detection Linearity Precision Accuracy<br />

By<br />

experiment<br />

By<br />

graph Intra-day Intra day<br />

Inter-day Inter day<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 22


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

Mixing aflatoxins std<br />

(AFB1,AFB2,AFG1,AFG2)<br />

STUDY FLOW CHART…cont<br />

Method testing<br />

Real samples<br />

Compare the results with that obtained by HPLC<br />

Method is tested at different laboratory / analyser<br />

Method is accepted<br />

Artificially contaminated<br />

samples<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 23


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

EXPERIMENTAL: INSTRUMENTS AND REAGENTS<br />

� INSTRUMENTS: BAS CGME<br />

(consist of Ag/AgCl as RE, Pt<br />

wire as AE and HMDE as WE)<br />

interface with BAS C50W<br />

Voltammetric Analyser<br />

� Electrolyte solutions: BRB 0.04M<br />

at various pH (2.0,3.0, 4.0, 5.0,<br />

6.0, 7.0, 8.0, 9.0,10.0,11.0, 12.0<br />

dan 13.0). 0.1M HCl for pH 1.0<br />

� Standard solutions: AFB1,<br />

AFB2, AFG1 dan AFG2<br />

10 ppm (10ml) – SIGMA<br />

� Techniques: CV dan DPCSV<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 24


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

EXPERIMENTAL FLOW CHART<br />

10 ML BRB SOLUTION<br />

BLANK SOLUTION<br />

BLANK<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

SPIKE INTO 20 ML<br />

VOLTAMMETRIC CELL<br />

SOLUTION IS<br />

DEGASSED<br />

SOLUTION IS<br />

SCANNED<br />

OBTAINED<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

NITROGEN GAS IS FLOWED IN AFLATOXINS<br />

SOLUTION, REDISSOLVED IN BRB SOLUTION<br />

BLANK SOLUTION +<br />

AFLATOXIN<br />

SAMPEL<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 25


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

� CV STUDY ( [AFB2] = 1.3 x 10 -6 M in BRB pH 9.0)<br />

Scan rate = 200mV/s<br />

1 = cathodic direction 2 = anodic direction<br />

No anodic peak<br />

Ip for AFB2 = 30 nA<br />

Ep = -1315 1315 mV<br />

Irreversible reaction<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 26


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� CV : to confirm the cathodic peak<br />

� [AFB2] = 1.3 x 10 -6 M in BRB pH = 9.0<br />

1. Anodic direction<br />

2. Cathodic direction<br />

Ip AFB2 = 35 nA<br />

Ep = -1311 1311 mV<br />

No anodic peak<br />

Irreversible reaction<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 27


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� CV : to confirm the cathodic peak<br />

� By [AFB2] standard addition and cathodic scanning in BRB pH 9.0<br />

(a) 1.3 uM 30nA, -1315 1315 mV<br />

(b) 2.0 uM 47 nA, nA,<br />

-1313 1313 mV<br />

(c) 2.7 uM 67 nA, nA,<br />

-1306 1306 mV<br />

(d) 3.4 uM 79 nA, nA,<br />

-1303 1303 mV<br />

y = 26.541x - 3.035<br />

R 2 = 0.9895<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 28<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 1 2<br />

[AFB2] X 10-6M<br />

3 4


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Repeatitive cathodic<br />

scanning using single<br />

mercury drop, 1.3 x 10 -6 M<br />

AFB2 in BRB pH = 9.0<br />

O<br />

AFB2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

i p cath o d ic ( nA)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 29<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1 3 5<br />

no of cycle<br />

7 9<br />

No of<br />

cycle<br />

Adsorption process at mercury electrode<br />

1<br />

3<br />

5<br />

7<br />

9<br />

Diffusion current is influenced<br />

by adsorption process at<br />

mercury electrode<br />

E p<br />

(-mV)<br />

1314<br />

1310<br />

1309<br />

1307<br />

1304


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of scan rate (V) on I p and E p of AFB2<br />

log Ep<br />

1.9<br />

1.7<br />

1.5<br />

1.3<br />

1.1<br />

0.9<br />

0.7<br />

0.5<br />

(1) Log E p vs log V<br />

y = 0.5097x + 0.4115<br />

R 2 = 0.995<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log V<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Linear with m >0.5:<br />

�Diffusion current produced<br />

by reduction process of<br />

aflatoxins which is influenced<br />

by adsorption process at<br />

mercury electrode.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 30


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of scan rate (V) on I p and E p of AFB2<br />

(2) E p vs log V<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1340<br />

1330<br />

1320<br />

1310<br />

1300<br />

1290<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

y = 40.065x + 1223.3<br />

R 2 = 0.9936<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log V<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Linear :<br />

E p AFB2 changing with<br />

Increasing of V.<br />

�Irreversible reaction<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 31


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of scan rate (V) on I p<br />

of AFB2<br />

(3) I p vs V<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550<br />

V (mv/s)<br />

Linear : two different regions<br />

due to different scan rate<br />

(1) 100 – 500 mV/s (fast) :<br />

m = 0.076 R = 0.9917<br />

(2) 20 – 100 mV/s (slow):<br />

m = 0.264 R = 0.9979<br />

Linear for both regions: AFB2 is<br />

adsorped at mercury electrode.<br />

� Reduction and adsorption<br />

processes at electrode are<br />

influenced by the rate of<br />

reaction which prefers the slow<br />

reaction.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 32


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� AFB2 reduction<br />

reaction:<br />

: Irreversible<br />

: Diffusion<br />

current is<br />

influenced by<br />

adsorption<br />

process with<br />

prefer the slow<br />

reaction<br />

1. CV produces only<br />

cathodic peak.<br />

2. Graph Ep vs log V: linear<br />

Cathodic Stripping Volltammetric is selected<br />

1. graph log Ep vs log V: linear,<br />

m = >0.5<br />

2. graph Ip vs V: linear with<br />

higher m at slow V compare<br />

to the m at fast V<br />

3. I p increases with repeatitive<br />

cathodic scanning.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 33


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Differential Pulse Cathodic<br />

Stripping Voltammetric<br />

(DPCSV) technique<br />

(1)Scan [AFB2] = 1.0 nM<br />

Ei = 0, Ef = -1500 mV, Eacc =0 mV<br />

T acc = 0, v = 50 mv/s, pulse<br />

amplitude: 100 mV (in BRB pH<br />

=9.0)<br />

(2)Scan [AFB2] = 1.0 nM<br />

Ei = 0, Ef = -1500 mV, Eacc =0 mV<br />

T acc = 30s, v = 50 mv/s, pulse<br />

amplitude: 100 mV (In BRB pH =<br />

9.0)<br />

Accumulation time greatly effect on<br />

peak height (Ip ) of AFB2<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 34<br />

(1)<br />

(2)<br />

-1256mV, 5nA<br />

-1244mV, 25nA


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Study effect of pH of supporting electrolyte ( BRB )<br />

Aims:<br />

a) To study the pH of BRB that gives maximum I p of AFB2<br />

without giving any extra peak.<br />

b) To study either hidrogen ion is greatly involved in the<br />

reduction reaction of AFB2 or not.<br />

[AFB2] = 2.0 uM, BRB with pH = 2.0 to 13.0, use 0.1M HCl<br />

for pH = 1.0<br />

Method: DPCSV<br />

Parameters:<br />

Ei = 0, E f = -1500 mV, E acc = 0, t acc = 15 s, v = 50 mV/s<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 35


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

[AFB2] = 2.0 uM, BRB with pH = 2.0 to 13.0, 0.1 M HCl for pH=1.0<br />

Method: DPCSV<br />

Parameters:<br />

E i = 0, E f = -1500 mV, E acc = 0, t acc = 15s, v = 50 mV/s<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

4 6 8 10 12<br />

pH<br />

BRb pH 9.0 is selected<br />

pH =9.0, optimum pH<br />

� I p = 48 nA, E p = -1192 mV<br />

pH < 5.0, > 12.0 : no AFB2 peak<br />

pH: 5.0 – 9.0: I p increased<br />

pH: 9.0 – 12.0: I p decreased<br />

The reaction is effected by pH of<br />

supporting electrolyte.<br />

=� proton ion is greatly involve in<br />

reduction reaction of AFB2.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 36


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Voltammograms of AFB2 with changing pH<br />

pH = 4.0<br />

No peak<br />

pH = 7.0<br />

( - 1168 mV, 42 nA)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 37


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Voltammograms of AFB2 with changing pH<br />

Interfered by blank<br />

( BRb pH = 9.0 )<br />

pH = 9.0 ( -1192 mV, 48 nA) pH = 11.0 (-1193 mV, 32 nA)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 38


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of pH of BRB on E p of AFB2<br />

Ep (-m V)<br />

1250<br />

1200<br />

1150<br />

1100<br />

4 6 8 10 12 14<br />

pH<br />

pH: 5.0 – 8.0: linear:<br />

R = 0.9777<br />

pH: 9.0 – 12.0: nearly constant<br />

E p shifted towards more negative<br />

direction<br />

=� At or before optimum pH (9.0),<br />

reaction is effected by H + ion<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 39


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Parameters optimisation:<br />

� Scan rate (v)<br />

� Accumulation potential ( E acc)<br />

� Accumulation time (t acc)<br />

� Scanning potential window( E i and E f)<br />

� Pulse amplitude<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 40


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Parameters optimisation steps<br />

Using two different concentrations of AFB2<br />

(1) High:<br />

[AFB2] = 2.0 uM<br />

(2) Low:<br />

[AFB2] = 0.06 uM<br />

Optimum parameters for determination<br />

of AFB2 using DPCSV technique<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 41


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Initial parameters:<br />

E i = 0,E f = -1500 mV,E acc = 0, t acc = 15 s, V = 20 mv/s and<br />

P.A = 100 mV. [AFB2] = 2.0 uM<br />

Effect of Hg oxidation<br />

-1240 mV , 29 nA<br />

H2 overpotential<br />

Interfered by blank<br />

( BRb pH 9.0 )<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 42


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of scan rate (v)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1320<br />

1290<br />

1260<br />

1230<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100 120<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

0 30 60 90 120<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

V = 40 mV/s<br />

Optimum V : 40 mv/s<br />

I p = 36 nA, E p = -1256 mV<br />

Initial I p : 29 nA<br />

1) At higher v, I p decreased due to<br />

uncomplete reaction.<br />

2) Higher v caused E p linearly<br />

( R 2 = 0.9868) shifted to more<br />

negative direction.<br />

reduction reaction of AFB2 at<br />

mercury electrode prefered slow<br />

reaction<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 43


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of accumulation time (t acc )<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 20 40 60<br />

Accumulation time (s)<br />

Optimum t acc : 40s<br />

Ip = 45 nA, Ep = -1256 mV<br />

Initial I p : 36 nA<br />

T acc > 40s: I p decreased due to<br />

the formation of saturated<br />

layer at mercury electrode.<br />

2. Amount of analyte (AFB2)<br />

in the bulk solution is lower<br />

due to the adsorption process<br />

at mercury electrode<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 44


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of accumulation potential(E acc )<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 400 800 1200 1600<br />

Accumulation potential (-mV)<br />

Optimum E acc : -800 mv<br />

Ip = 51nA, Ep = -1248 mV<br />

Initial I p : 45 nA<br />

When:<br />

E acc = E i ( 0 mV): I p lower<br />

E acc = E f ( -1500 mV): no peak<br />

was observed<br />

At E acc = -800 mV, AFB2 maximum adsorped at mercury electrode<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 45


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of initial potential<br />

Ip (n A )<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 300 600 900 1200<br />

Ei (-mV)<br />

Optimum E i : -1000 mv<br />

I p = 53 nA, Ep = -1256 mV<br />

Initial I p : 51 nA<br />

Scanning from E i =-1000 mV increasing<br />

I p of AFB2 because it can minimised<br />

the effect of blank (which give a peak<br />

around -950mV)<br />

E i at -1000 mV will save scanning time<br />

E i = -1000 mV and E f = -1500 mV is selected as an opimum<br />

potential window.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 46


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Effect of pulse amplitude (P.A)<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 30 60 90 120 150<br />

Pulse amplitude (mV)<br />

Optimum P.A: 100 mv<br />

Ip = 53 nA, Ep = -1256 mV<br />

Initial I p : 53 nA (same P.A)<br />

Not selected eventhough I p<br />

increased because:<br />

a) Very small increment of I p, only<br />

1nA ( 54nA)<br />

b) Peak broader and produces<br />

higher noise level<br />

P.A =100 mV is selected as the optimum P.A<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 47


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

2.0 µM AFB2<br />

in BRB pH 9.0<br />

E i = -1000 mV, E f = -1500 mV,<br />

E acc =-800 mV, t acc = 40 s,<br />

Scan rate = 40 mV/s and<br />

P.A = 100 mV,<br />

Initial parameters<br />

E i = 0, E f = -1500 mV, E acc = 0, t acc = 15 s,<br />

scan rate = 20 mv/s and P.A = 100 mV<br />

I p = 29 nA, E p = -1240 mV<br />

Optimum parameters<br />

I p = 53 nA (↑83%) , E p = -1208 mV<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 48


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Using lower concentration of AFB2<br />

0.06µM AFB2<br />

In BRB pH 9.0<br />

Reoptimisation steps<br />

Obtained new optimum<br />

parameters<br />

E i = -1000 mV, E f = -1400 mV,<br />

E acc =-600 mV, t acc = 80 s,<br />

s.rate = 50 mV/s and P.A = 80 mV<br />

( Final optimum parameters)<br />

Using previous optimum parameters<br />

E i = -1000 mV, E f = -1500 mV,<br />

E acc =-800 mV, t acc = 40 s,<br />

s.rate = 40 mV/s and P.A = 100 mV<br />

13.9nA, -1232 mV<br />

38.18 nA, ( ↑200%), -1220mV<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 49


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Before optimised:<br />

E i = -1000 mV, E f = -1500 mV,<br />

E acc =-800 mV, t acc = 40 s,<br />

s.rate = 40 mV/s and P.A = 100 mV<br />

After optimised:<br />

E i = -1000 mV, E f = -1400 mV,<br />

E acc =-600 mV, t acc = 80 s,<br />

s.rate = 50 mV/s and P.A = 80 mV<br />

Optimum parameters for<br />

determination of AFB2<br />

-1232 mV, 13.90 nA<br />

-1220 mV, 38.18 nA<br />

[AFB2] = 0.06 µM<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 50


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Preparation of calibration curve ( AFB2 in BRB pH 9.0)<br />

E i = -1000 mV, E f = -1400 mV,<br />

E acc =-600 mV, t acc = 80 s,<br />

s.rate = 50 mV/s and P.A = 80 mV<br />

E p AFB2 (0.1 uM) = -1230 mV<br />

y = 5.55x + 3.6435<br />

R 2 = 0.9978<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 51<br />

ip (nA)<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 10 20<br />

[AFB2] X10-8M<br />

30 40<br />

Linear range: 0.02 – 0.32 µM<br />

LOD: 0.0159 µM ( 5.0 ppb)<br />

Sensitivity: 0.555 µA / µM


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� From calibration curve:<br />

1) Precision :<br />

Determine the AFB2 with concentrations of (1) 0.06 µM and (2)<br />

0.10 µM. Calculate relative standard deviation (RSD) for each<br />

determination.<br />

( repeatibility ) ( RSD < 5%)<br />

2) Accuracy:<br />

Determine the recovery by scanning a known amount of AFB2<br />

and calculate the actual amount of AFB2 using regression<br />

equation which was obtained from the calibration curve. The<br />

obtained value is compared with amount of spiked AFB2.<br />

(recovery)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 52


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Precision:<br />

(1)<br />

[AFB2] =0.06 µM, n = 8, RSD = 2.80%<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 53<br />

(2)<br />

[AFB2] =0.20 µM, n = 8, RSD = 2.53%<br />

RSD = < 5%: Proposed method is high precision


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Precision: (inter-day)<br />

[AFB2] = 0.1 uM<br />

Day 1<br />

Day 1: 72.70 +/- 0.521 ( 0.72% ) , n = 8<br />

Day 2: 72.22 +/- 0.533 ( 0.74% ) ,,<br />

Day 3: 72.91 +/- 0.706 ( 0.97% ) ,,<br />

Average: 72.61 +/- 0.587 ( 0.81% ) ,,<br />

High precision for intra and inter day measurements<br />

Day 2<br />

Day 3<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 54


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Accuracy (recovery) n = 3<br />

No of<br />

experiment<br />

1<br />

2<br />

Amount<br />

added<br />

(x 10-8M) 10.0<br />

25.0<br />

Peak<br />

current<br />

(nA)<br />

51.70<br />

52.77<br />

51.03<br />

134.4<br />

133.3<br />

135.6<br />

Amount<br />

found<br />

(x 10-8M) 8.66<br />

8.84<br />

8.55<br />

23.56<br />

23.36<br />

23.77<br />

Recovery (%)<br />

(RSD)<br />

86.83 +/- 1.46<br />

( 1.68%)<br />

94.26 +/- 0.81<br />

(0.86%)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 55


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Application to determine AFG2, AFB1 and AFG1<br />

AFG2, AFB1 and AFG1 :<br />

CV � In BRB pH 9.0, all aflatoxins are reduced at mercury electrode<br />

produced single cathodic peak and the reactions are irreversible. Diffusion<br />

currents are effected by adsorption process at electrode surface<br />

=AFB2<br />

DPCSV � used the same optimum parameters as used for AFB2 to<br />

determine AFG2, AFB1 dan AFG1<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 56


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Voltammograms of AFB1 (A), AFB2 (B), AFG1 (C) and AFG2 (D)<br />

obtained from individual measurement at concentration of 0.1 uM<br />

in BRB pH 9.0<br />

E i =-1000 mV ( except for AFG1 = -950 mV), E f = -1400 mV,<br />

E acc = -600 mV, t acc = 80 s, v = 50 mV/s and p.amplitude = 80 mV<br />

(A) AFB1 = -1220 mV ( 62.57 nA ), (B) AFB2 = -1230 mV ( 63.79 nA )<br />

(C) AFG1 = -1150 mV ( 62.29 nA ), (D) AFG2 = -1170 mV ( 63.14 nA )<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 57


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� AFG2:<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90<br />

[AFG2] / X10-8M<br />

y = 6.3464x + 9.8329<br />

R 2 = 0.999<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 58<br />

E p = -1170mV<br />

Saturation effect at electrode surface<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35<br />

[AFB2]X10-8M<br />

y = 6.346x + 9.8329 ( R =0.9990)<br />

Linear range: 0.024 uM – 0.288 uM<br />

LOD: 0.0160 uM (5.28 ppb)<br />

Sensitivity: 0.635 uA/uM<br />

Ei = -1000 mV, Ef = -1400 mV,<br />

Eacc =-600 mV, tacc = 80 s,<br />

s.rate = 50 mV/s and P.A = 80 mV


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� AFB1<br />

Ip (n A )<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100<br />

[AFB1]X10-8M<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

y = 4.4296x + 3.0034<br />

R 2 = 0.9972<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 59<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50<br />

[AFB1]X10-8M<br />

Y = 4.4296x + 3.0034 ( R =0.9972)<br />

Linear range : 0.0321 uM – 0.5778 uM<br />

LOD: 0.0161 uM ( 5.00 ppb)<br />

Sensitivity: 0.443 uA/uM<br />

Parameters for AFB1 = AFG2 = AFB2<br />

E p = -1220 mV


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� AFG1<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

200<br />

175<br />

150<br />

125<br />

100<br />

75<br />

50<br />

25<br />

0<br />

0 10 20 30 40 50 60<br />

[AFG1] X 10-8M<br />

y = 5.5958x + 3.7725<br />

R 2 = 0.998<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 60<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

160<br />

140<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 5 10 15 20 25 30<br />

[AFG1]X10-8M<br />

y = 5.5958x + 3.7725<br />

Linear range: 0.02 uM – 0.260 uM<br />

LOD: 0.0150 uM ( 4.92 ppb)<br />

Sensitivity: 0.560 uA/uM<br />

Ei = -950 mV, Ef = -1400 mV,<br />

Eacc =-600 mV, tacc = 80 s,<br />

s.rate = 50 mV/s and P.A = 80 mV Ep = -1150mV


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� Voltammograms of AFG1<br />

E i = -950 mV, E f = -1400 mV,<br />

E acc =-600 mV, t acc = 80 s,<br />

s.rate = 50 mV/s and P.A = 80 mV<br />

E p AFG1 (0.1 uM) = -1150 mV<br />

y = 5.5958x + 3.7725<br />

R 2 = 0.998<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 61<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

160<br />

140<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 5 10 15 20 25 30<br />

[AFG1]X10-8M<br />

y = 5.5958x + 3.7725<br />

R = 0.9980


Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

� AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 dan AFG2:<br />

E p (mV) *<br />

-1220<br />

-1230<br />

-1150<br />

-1170<br />

Y = mx + c<br />

(y = nA, x = x 10 -8 M,<br />

c = nA)<br />

Y = 4.4296x + 3.0034<br />

Y =5.5500x + 3.6435<br />

Y = 5.5958x + 3.7725<br />

Y = 6.3464x + 9.8329<br />

Sensitivity<br />

(uA/uM)<br />

0.443<br />

0.555<br />

0.560<br />

0.635<br />

* [aflatoxins] = 0.1 uM<br />

1.606/<br />

5.00<br />

1.580/<br />

5.00<br />

1.500/<br />

4.92<br />

1.600/<br />

5.28<br />

Linear range<br />

(x 10-8M) /<br />

ppb<br />

3.00 – 45.00/<br />

10 - 150<br />

2.00 – 32.00/<br />

6 - 100<br />

2.00 – 26.00/<br />

6 - 90<br />

2.00 – 29.00/<br />

6 -96<br />

0.9972<br />

0.9976<br />

0.9980<br />

0.9990<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 62<br />

LOD<br />

( x 10 -8 M)/<br />

ppb<br />

R 2


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

� From the CV study, AFB1, AFB2, AFG1<br />

and AFG2 have reduced at a mercury<br />

electrode which produced diffusion<br />

current that controlled by adsorption<br />

process at electrode surface. The<br />

reduction reaction was totally irreversible<br />

and prefered the slow reaction.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 63


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

CONCLUSION…cont<br />

� From the DPCSV, in BRB pH 9.0, AFB1,<br />

AFB2, AFG1, AFG2 have reduced at<br />

peak potentials of -1220 mV, -1230 mV, -<br />

1150 mV and -1170 mV ( versus<br />

Ag/AgCl) respectively.<br />

� The proposed method provides high<br />

precision and accuracy for determination<br />

of AFB2.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 64


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

PROBLEMS<br />

1. Blank BRB pH 9.0 gives a peak ( around -950 mV to -1100 mV)<br />

with unconsistent I p (15 nA – 40 nA)<br />

(a)<br />

E i = 0, E f = -1500 mv<br />

E acc = 0 t acc = 20 s<br />

E i = 0, E f = -1500 mv<br />

E acc = 0 t acc = 20 s<br />

E i = -1000 mv, E f = -1400 mv<br />

E acc = -600 mv t acc = 80 s<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 65<br />

(b)<br />

(c)


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

PROBLEMS…cont<br />

2. Initial analysis of mixing aflatoxins sample:<br />

: AFB2 + AFG2 � 1 overlap peak<br />

: AFB1+ AFB2 � 1 overlap peak<br />

3. Initial analysis of real sample (uncontaminated<br />

green nut powder ):<br />

The sample supress AFB2 standard peak<br />

almost 50%. ( recovery: 50%)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 66


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

FUTURE WORKS<br />

� Further study on suitable technique to<br />

reduce LOD / enhance sensitivity.<br />

� Analysis of accuracy ( recovery) at interday<br />

for AFB2.<br />

� Analysis of precision and accuracy at<br />

intra-day and inter-day for AFG2, AFB1<br />

dan AFG1<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 67


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

FUTURE WORKS…cont<br />

�Complexing of aflatoxin for the<br />

selectivity of analysis.<br />

�Study interference effect;<br />

1. Analysis the mixing of aflatoxins<br />

sample.<br />

2. Standard aflatoxin solution will be<br />

mixed with other ketone compounds.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 68


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

FUTURE WORKS…cont<br />

� Study the stability of aflatoxins ( shelf life<br />

study) and the effect of exposure time to the<br />

aflatoxins peak current ( aflatoxins will be left<br />

in voltammetric cell subject to the laboratory<br />

conditions for 8 hrs and measurement will be<br />

carried out for every hour)<br />

� Study other type of working electrodes such as<br />

carbon paste and screen printed electrodes.<br />

� Robustness test of the proposed method.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 69


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

FUTURE WORKS…cont<br />

� Analysis an artificially and real<br />

contaminated samples.<br />

� Compare the results with that obtained<br />

using accepted technique such as<br />

HPLC-FD.<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 70


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

1) Determination of<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1<br />

and AFG2<br />

1a) Prepare<br />

calibration curve<br />

1b) Determine<br />

analytical parameters<br />

2) Interference study<br />

3) Complexing of<br />

aflatoxins study<br />

FUTURE WORKS…cont<br />

Activity 2003<br />

J F M A M J J O<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 71<br />

S<br />

O<br />

N<br />

finished<br />

D


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

1) Determination of mixing<br />

aflatoxins<br />

2)Determination of aflatoxins<br />

in artificially contaminated<br />

samples<br />

3)Determination of aflatoxins<br />

in real samples<br />

4)Determination by HPLC<br />

5) Study using different<br />

working electrodes<br />

5) Comparison study<br />

6) Thesis writting up<br />

1) Analysis of contaminated<br />

food samples<br />

2) Thesis writting up<br />

FUTURE WORKS…cont<br />

Activity 2004<br />

J F M A M J J O<br />

Activity 2005<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 72<br />

S<br />

O<br />

N<br />

D


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

WHAT EXPERTS SAID ABOUT VOLTAMMETRY?<br />

Prof Barek (2001):<br />

“Polarographic and voltammetric methods can play a useful role<br />

in the analysis as an alternative to chromatographic and<br />

spectrophotometric techniques, however, their relationship to<br />

other methods is complimentry rather than competitive”<br />

Prof Wang (1999):<br />

“Stripping analysis to the 21th century: faster, smaller,<br />

cheaper, simpler and better”.<br />

Jaroslav Heyrovsky (1890-1967)<br />

Hopefully this will come true!!!<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 73


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

SUPERVISOR:<br />

AP DR ABDUL RAHIM MOHD YUSOFF<br />

CO-SUPERVISORS:<br />

1. PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD<br />

2. DR ABD. RAHIM YAACOB<br />

STAFF OF CHEMISTRY DEPT, UTM<br />

CHEM. DEPT, MOSTE ( EN.RODWAN )<br />

ELECTROANALYSIS GROUP,<br />

CHEM. DEPT, UTM<br />

USM ( STUDY LEAVE UNDER<br />

ASHES)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 74


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

THANK YOU<br />

Wassalam<br />

Mohd Hadzri, Hadzri<br />

PPSains Kesihatan<br />

20 Ogos 2003/<br />

22 Rejab 1424H<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 75


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 76


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 77


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

LOD DETERMINATION<br />

LOD = limit of detection<br />

LOD of an analyte is the concentration<br />

which gives an instrumental signal (y)<br />

significantly different from the blank or<br />

background signal<br />

( Miller J. C. and Miller J. N. 1993)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 78


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

LOD DETERMINATION…cont<br />

� By Barek’s and Miller’s methods<br />

� Barek’s method: a) experiment<br />

b) graph<br />

1a) Experiment:<br />

By standard addition of lower<br />

concentration of analyte until obtaining<br />

the sample response that is significantly<br />

difference from blank signal<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 79


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

LOD DETERMINATION…cont<br />

� 1b)By graph: The limit of determination<br />

was calculated as the tenfold standard<br />

deviation from seven analyte<br />

determinations at the concentration<br />

corresponding to the lowest point on<br />

the appropriate calibration straight line<br />

� Miller’s method: By graph; 3SD/b<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 80


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

Aflatoxin<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

LOD DETERMINATION…cont<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

1.606<br />

1.580<br />

1.500<br />

1.600<br />

By Barek’s Method<br />

Experiment<br />

ppb<br />

5.00<br />

5.00<br />

4.92<br />

5.28<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

2.160<br />

1.837<br />

2.050<br />

1.345<br />

Graph<br />

ppb<br />

6.70<br />

5.77<br />

6.72<br />

4.44<br />

By Miller’s<br />

Method<br />

Graph; 3SD/b<br />

x 10 -8 M<br />

45.36<br />

28.59<br />

23.88<br />

27.47<br />

ppb<br />

141.5<br />

89.0<br />

78.33<br />

90.67<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 81


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

BLANK PEAK PROBLEM<br />

� Attempt to illiminate;<br />

1. Used dionised water from different lab;<br />

(Analytical, biological, FKKKSA,<br />

Biotechnology) and R.O water from<br />

personal used….failed<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 82


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

BLANK PEAK PROBLEM…cont<br />

2. Add 1.0 M HCl … failed<br />

3. Add 1.0 M EDTA…failed<br />

4. Used different voltammetry model<br />

(Metrohm) peak still existed<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 83


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

STABILITY STUDY OF AFLATOXINS<br />

� AFB1, hour to hour stability study<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

60<br />

58<br />

56<br />

54<br />

52<br />

50<br />

Stability study of AFB1 in BRb pH=9.0<br />

[AFB1] = 10 x 10-8M<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

I p=58.53 +/- 0.62 nA<br />

( 1.06%)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 84


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

STABILITY STUDY OF AFLATOXINS…cont<br />

� AFB2, hour to hour stability study<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

73.5<br />

73<br />

72.5<br />

72<br />

71.5<br />

71<br />

70.5<br />

70<br />

Stability study of AFB2 in BRB pH 9.0<br />

[AFB2] =12 x 10-8M<br />

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

I p = 72.74 +/- 0.94<br />

( 1.29 % )<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 85


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

CV OF AFB1<br />

� Cyclic voltammogram of AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0,<br />

scan rate 200 mV/s<br />

I p = 50 nA, E p = -1305 mV<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 86


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

CV OF AFG1<br />

� Cyclic voltammogram of AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0,<br />

scan rate 200 mV/s<br />

I p = 48 nA, E p = -1245 mV<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 87


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

CV OF AFG2<br />

� Cyclic voltammogram of AFG2 in BRB pH 9.0,<br />

scan rate 200 mV/s<br />

I p = 52 nA, E p = -1254 mV<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 88


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAMS OF AFB2<br />

� DPSV voltammograms of AFB2 in BRB pH<br />

9.0 (blank), scan rate 50 mV/s<br />

AFB2 ( 2.0 uM )<br />

Blank, BRB pH 9.0<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 89


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAMS OF STD AFB2 AND REAL SAMPLE<br />

USED OPTIMISED PARAMETERS FOR AFB2<br />

AFB2, 0.07 uM<br />

( 35.83 nA, -1240 mV<br />

AFB2 + REAL SAMPLE<br />

( 16.90 nA, -1245 mV)<br />

BLANK<br />

REAL SAMPLE: EXTRACT FROM GREEN NUT POWDER<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 90


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM OF MIXED AFLATOXINS<br />

� AFG2 + AFB2<br />

0.1 uM AFG2 ( before mix)<br />

( 64 nA, -1170 mV)<br />

+ 0.1 uM AFB2 ( 61.5 nA, -1170mV)<br />

+ 0.2 uM AFB2 (60.8 nA, -1200 mV)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 91


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM OF MIXED AFLATOXINS…cont<br />

� AFG2 + AFB2<br />

+ 0.3 uM AFB2<br />

( 76 nA, -1210)<br />

+ 0.4 uM AFB2<br />

( 79 nA, -1210 mV)<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 92


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM OF MIXED AFLATOXINS…cont<br />

0.1 uM AFG2 ( before mixed): -1170 mV, 64.0 nA<br />

+ 0.05 uM AFB2: -1170 mV, 62.7 nA<br />

+ 0.10 uM AFB2: -1170 mV, 61.5 nA<br />

+ 0.15 uM AFB2: -1170 mV, 58.2 nA<br />

+ 0.20 uM AFB2: -1200 mV, 60.8 nA<br />

+ 0.25 uM AFB2: -1210 mV, 69.9 nA<br />

+ 0.30 uM AFB2: -1210 mV, 76.0 nA<br />

+ 0.35 uM AFB2: -1210 mV, 79.0 nA<br />

+ 0.40 uM AFB2: -1210 mV, 79.0 nA<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 93


Introduction Experimental Results & Discussion Problem Future Works<br />

3/1/2007 1st ASSESSMENT REPORT 94


WILL BE<br />

PRESENTED FOR<br />

PhD VIVA<br />

PRESENTATION<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC<br />

METHOD TO DETERMINE<br />

AFLATOXIN COMPOUNDS<br />

BY<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI YAACOB<br />

PS 023001


Mycotoxin group<br />

Produced by two fungi;<br />

Aspergillus spergillus flavus flavus<br />

and<br />

Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

Types of aflatoxins: aflatoxins<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, AFG2<br />

AFM1 and AFM2<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation<br />

Aspergillus spergillus flavus flavus<br />

Contaminated<br />

corn


INTRODUCTION…cont<br />

Chemical structures;<br />

AFB1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

AFG1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

AFB2<br />

O<br />

AFG2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O


OBJECTIVE<br />

• To study electroanalytical properties of aflatoxin<br />

compounds (AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2) at<br />

the working electrode.<br />

• To develop a new alternative technique for high<br />

sensitive determination of aflatoxin compounds<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


SCOPE OF STUDY<br />

• Studies on the voltammetric behaviour of<br />

aflatoxins using cyclic voltammetric (CV)<br />

technique.<br />

• Studies on the differential pulse cathodic and<br />

anodic stripping voltammetry of all aflatoxins<br />

and parameters optimisation<br />

• Studies on the effect of increasing concentration<br />

of the aflatoxins to their peak height<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


SCOPE OF STUDY…cont<br />

• Interference studies by metal ions and organic<br />

compounds<br />

• Studies on the square wave stripping voltammetry<br />

technique for the determination of aflatoxin<br />

compounds<br />

• Application of the proposed methods for the<br />

determination of aflatoxin compounds in real samples.<br />

The results were compared with HPLC results<br />

• Stability studies of aflatoxin solutions<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

• By CV technique;<br />

�� Britton Robinson<br />

Buffer (BRB) at pH 9.0<br />

was the best supporting<br />

electrolyte<br />

For 0.6 µM AFB1;<br />

pH = 9.0, Ip = 24.5 nA<br />

I p (nA)<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13<br />

pH of BRB


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• Suggested mechanism (Smyth et al.,1979) al., 1979)<br />

2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

2 H 2O<br />

Dimer + 2 OH -<br />

O


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

�� All aflatoxin compounds are undergo irreversible<br />

reduction reaction at mercury electrode<br />

For 1.3 µM M AFB2;<br />

Ip = 30 nA<br />

Ep = -1.315 1.315 V (Ag/AgCl (Ag/ AgCl)<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

�� All aflatoxin compounds adsorb on the surface of the mercury<br />

electrode.<br />

Repetitive CV; Ip increased with the number of cycle<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation<br />

I p (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

1 2 3 4 5<br />

No of cycle


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• From DPCSV experiment<br />

�� Optimised parameters:<br />

Ei = -1.0 1.0 V (except for AFG1; -0.95 0.95 V), Ef = -1.4 1.4 V, Eacc acc<br />

= -0.6 0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

0.06 0.06 µM µM AFB2 0.06 µM AFB2 in BRB at<br />

AFB2<br />

pH 9.0<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation<br />

(a) Unoptimised<br />

(b)Optimised


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

�� Method validation<br />

AFB1 AFB2 AFG1 AFG2<br />

LOD/ppb 1.56 2.50 3.28 2.50<br />

LOQ/ppb 5.20 8.33 10.93 8.33<br />

Linearity Range/ ppb<br />

6 – 100 6 – 100 6 – 105 6 – 105<br />

R2 0.9989 0.9980 0.9992 0.9989<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

��Method Method validation<br />

Accuracy:<br />

% Recovery > 95% �� High accuracy<br />

Precision:<br />

%RSD for n = 8 < 3.0% �� High precsion<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Robustness;<br />

Small influences of important conditions (pH of BRB,<br />

Eacc acc and tacc ) were not significantly affect the peak<br />

height � Method is robust<br />

Ruggedess;<br />

No significant different in the peak heights obtained by<br />

using two different voltammetric analysers (BAS vs<br />

Metrohm) � Method is rugged<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• Interference studies;<br />

Metal ions (Al, Cu, Pb, Pb,<br />

Ni and Zn) and organic<br />

compounds (ascorbic acid, β-cyclodextrin cyclodextrin and L-<br />

cysteine) cysteine)<br />

were not interfere up to 10 times<br />

concentration as compared with aflatoxin<br />

compounds<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Using SWSV technique<br />

• For all aflatoxins, aflatoxins,<br />

the peak heights were<br />

increased > 10 times �� More sensitive<br />

• Analysis can be completed within a few second<br />

�� Faster technique<br />

• LOD and LOQ lower than DPCSV technique<br />

�� More sensitive<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• Voltammograms of aflatoxins (DPCSV vs SWSV)<br />

AFB1 AFB2 AFG1 AFG2<br />

<strong>Text</strong>: page no - 191<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• From stability studies;<br />

10 ppm aflatoxin stock solutions (in benzene:acetonitrile,<br />

benzene:acetonitrile,<br />

98%) stored in the dark and cool condition: stable up to 1<br />

year.<br />

1 ppm aflatoxin standard solutions (in BRB pH 9.0 ) stored<br />

in the dark and cool conditions: stable up to 3 months for<br />

AFB1 and AFB2 while for AFG1 and AFG2 stable up to 2<br />

months..<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

1 ppm aflatoxins in BRB pH 9.0 exposed to<br />

normal laboratory condition; AFB1 and AFB2<br />

were stable up to 8 hrs but for AFG1 and AFG2<br />

were stable up to 3 hrs.<br />

Aflatoxin prepared in basic condition were less<br />

stable as compared to those prepared in acidic<br />

and neutral media.<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• Analysis real sample (groundnuts)<br />

Followed extraction and clean-up clean up procedure as applied by<br />

Chem. Dept. MOSTI.<br />

Recovery studies: studies:<br />

Aflatoxins standard solutions were<br />

spiked into the groundnut eluates; eluates<br />

80-99% 80 99% for 1 st day analysis, 80 -90% 90% for 2 nd day and 75- 75<br />

85% for 3 rd day analysis.<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

• Analysis of 15 samples by DPCSV, SWSV and HPLC (result: total<br />

aflatoxins in ppb level)<br />

Sample DPCSV SWSV HPLC Notes<br />

S01 12.73 13.02 14.34 -ve ve<br />

S02 7.12 8.36 8.83 -ve ve<br />

S03 n.d n.d 0.50 -ve ve<br />

S04 21.46 29.72 19.08 +ve ve<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Sample DPCSV SWSV HPLC Notes<br />

S05 9.90 8.95 5.34 -ve ve<br />

S06 n.d n.d n.d -ve ve<br />

S07 5.90 8.17 3.67 -ve ve<br />

S08 n.d n.d n.d -ve ve<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Sample DPCSV SWSV HPLC Notes<br />

S09 n.d n.d 1.84 -ve ve<br />

S10 31.93 35.63 36.00 +ve ve<br />

S11 n.d n.d 0.42 -ve ve<br />

S12 n.d n.d 1.75 -ve ve<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

Sample DPCSV SWSV HPLC Notes<br />

S13 10.76 9.21 8.25 -ve ve<br />

S14 n.d n.d n.d -ve ve<br />

S15 n.d n.d n.d -ve ve<br />

+ve ve : > 15 ppb ( 2 out of 15 samples: 13%)<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


CONCLUSIONS<br />

The study has achieved the objective;<br />

A sensitive, accurate, robust, rugged, fast and<br />

low cost technique was successfully developed<br />

and applied for the determination of aflatoxins<br />

in groundnut samples<br />

The hypothesis regarding electroanalytical<br />

properties of aflatoxins was also proven.<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


SUGGESTIONS<br />

• Use other types of the working electrode (CPE,<br />

GCE or BFE)<br />

• Study the reagents that can be complexed with<br />

aflatoxins<br />

• Study the effect of storage time and conditions<br />

of groundnuts to the level of aflatoxins<br />

• Analyse aflatoxins in other type of samples (rice,<br />

bread, fish, vegetables and cigarretes tobacco)<br />

using the proposed technique.<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

• Supervisors: AP Dr Abdull Rahim Hj. Hj.<br />

Mohd. Mohd.<br />

Yusoff and Prof Rahmalan Ahamad<br />

• USM: study leave and fellowship<br />

• UTM: Short term grant (Vot ( Vot No: 75152/2004)<br />

• Chemistry Dept staff<br />

3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


3/1/2007 PhD viva presentation


ORAL PRESENTED AT<br />

KUSTEM 3 rd ANNUAL<br />

SEMINAR ON<br />

SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE<br />

AND MANAGEMENT<br />

(TERENGGANU; 4 - 5 th<br />

MAY 2004)


CYCLIC VOLTAMMETRIC STUDY OF<br />

AFLATOXIN G1 (AFG1) AT THE MERCURY<br />

ELECTRODE<br />

BY<br />

Mohd Hadzri Yaacob, Abd.Rahim Yusoff and<br />

Rahmalan Ahamad<br />

UTM, SKUDAI


• INTRODUCTION<br />

• OBJECTIVE<br />

• EXPERIMENTAL<br />

• RESULTS AND<br />

DISCUSSION<br />

• CONCLUSION<br />

TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION<br />

• ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

AFLATOXINS


• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Mycotoxin group.<br />

Produced by two fungi;<br />

Types of aflatoxins:<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1<br />

and AFG2:<br />

AFM1 and AFM2<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Aspergillus flavus Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

Raw peanuts, peanuts products, wheat,<br />

maize, corn, vegetable oils, dried fruites,<br />

barley, pear, cocoa, coffee, herbs, spices,<br />

wine, cottonseeds.<br />

Cow milk and its products, eggs<br />

and meat product


INTRODUCTION …cont<br />

• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Occurs naturally in commodities used for animal and<br />

human<br />

Carcinogenic, teratogenic and mutagenic<br />

IARC (1988): Class I carcinogenic materials<br />

Dangerous to health: causes aflatoxicosis disease.<br />

Effect the economy of commodities export countries


AFLATOXIN G1 ( AFG1):<br />

Chemical and physical properties<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

Chemical name: 3,4,7a, 10a-tetrahydro-5-methoxy-1H,<br />

12H furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h]pyrano[3,4-c][l]-benzopyran-<br />

1,12-dione<br />

Yellowish crystal.<br />

C 17 H 12 O 7<br />

MW = 328<br />

Odorless, tasteless and colorless solution ( in organic<br />

solvent).


AFLATOXIN G1 ( AFG1):<br />

Chemical and physical properties…cont<br />

Solubility: Dissolve in methanol, water:acetonitrile (9:1),<br />

trifluoroactic acid, DMSO and acetone. In water: 10-20 mg /<br />

liter<br />

m.p; 244 – 246 0 C<br />

Produces green color under UV light<br />

UV abs (max) in methanol: 216, 242, 265 and 362 nm<br />

IR spectrum ( in chloroform): 1760, 1695, 1630 and 1595<br />

cm -1


Stability of AFG1<br />

In crystal form: extremely stable in the absence of<br />

light or UV radiation, even at T = > 100 0 C<br />

Solution in water, DMSO, 95% acetone or ethanol<br />

stable for 24 hrs under normal condition. Stable for<br />

years if kept in cool and dark place<br />

Stable in most food process; not destroy by normal<br />

cooking process since it heat stable


ELECTROCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF AFG1<br />

Based on chemical structure:<br />

Ketone groups in lactone ring can be reduced and<br />

produce cathodic wave.<br />

Unsaturated terminal furan ring can be reduced<br />

and produce cathodic wave.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

Can forms<br />

anionic<br />

radical


WHAT AND WHY CYLIC VOLTAMMETRY (CV)?<br />

CV: Voltammetric technique that consist of scanning<br />

linearly the potential of a stationary working electrode<br />

( forward and reverse ) and the current flowing through<br />

the cell is measured as a function of that potential.<br />

Three parameters needed to be characteristiced; starting<br />

potential of the scan, finishing / switching potential and<br />

scan rate ( rate of change of potential with the time)<br />

A plot of current as a function of applied potential is<br />

called a voltammogram ( as in figure below)


Typical cyclic voltammogram for a reversible redox<br />

process<br />

O = oxidised form R = reduced form


Why CV?<br />

1. To aquire qualitative information about<br />

electrochemical reactions<br />

2. Ability to rapidly provide information on;<br />

@ thermodynamic of redox process<br />

@ the kinetic of heterogeneous electron-transfer<br />

@ coupled chemical reactions<br />

@ adsorption processes at electrode surface<br />

3. Offer a rapid location of redox potentials of the<br />

electroactive species and convenient for evaluation<br />

of the effect of media upon the redox process<br />

� Initial experiment performed in electroanalytical<br />

study


OBJECTIVE<br />

1) To get information about electrochemical<br />

properties of aflatoxin G1 (AFG1) on the mercury<br />

electrode.<br />

2) From this information, other voltammetric<br />

technique can be developed ( such as differential<br />

pulse stripping voltammetric ) for quantitatively<br />

determination of AFG1 ( AFG1 standard or AFG1<br />

in real samples)


EXPERIMENTAL: INSTRUMENTS AND REAGENTS<br />

BAS C50W<br />

Voltammetric<br />

Analyser<br />

BAS CGME consist of<br />

Ag/AgCl as RE, Pt wire as<br />

AE, CGME as WE, 20 ml<br />

cell and magnetic stirrer.<br />

Reagents: AFG1 ( MERCK); 10 ppm in benzene:<br />

acetonitrile (98%), 1 ppm: prepared in BRb pH 9.0.


EXPERIMENT<br />

A) Cathodic and anodic scan of AFG1<br />

1. 10 ml of supporting electrolyte (BRb pH = 9.0 ) in voltammetric<br />

cell was degassed for at least 10 min.<br />

2. Scanned using CV technique; Ei = 0 mV, E high = 0 mV, E low = -<br />

1500 mV, scan rate = 200 mV/s to obtain voltammogram of blank.<br />

3. The AFG1 standard solution was spiked into the cell (<br />

concentration of AFG1 in the cell = 1.5 uM), was degassed for at<br />

least 3 min and scanned follows the same procedure as 2.0 to<br />

obtain voltammogram of AFG1 in BRb solution.<br />

4. Experiment no 2 and 3 were repeated with different parameters (<br />

Ei = -1500 mV, E high = 0 mV and E low = -1500 mV ). Other<br />

parameters remain unchanged.


B) Repeatitive scan<br />

EXPERIMENT…Cont<br />

Repeatitive scan ( n = 5 ) for cathodic direction was<br />

performed and the peak height of AFG1 was observed<br />

C) Standard Addition of AFG1<br />

Using the same parameters as no 2, the concentration of<br />

AFG1 was added ( 1.5, 2.25 , 3.0, 3.75 and 4.5 M). The<br />

peak current and peak potential of AFG1 was observed.<br />

D) Effect of scan rate<br />

The scan rate was changed ( 25, 50, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300,<br />

400, 500, 700 mV/s ) while other parameters remain<br />

unaltered. The peak current and peak potential of AFG1<br />

was observed due to the various applied scan rate.


EXPERIMENT…Cont<br />

E) Effect of pH of BRb solution<br />

The pH of supporting electrolyte (BRb solution ) was<br />

adjusted from 3.0 to 13.0 ( using 1.0 M NaOH or 1.0<br />

M HCl ) and the AFG1 standard solution was<br />

scanned in various pH of BRB. The peak current and<br />

peak potential of AFG1 was observed.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

A) Cathodic and anodic scan of AFG1<br />

Ip = 45.2 nA, Ep = -1245 mV<br />

Ei = 0 mV, E high = 0 mV, E low = -1500<br />

mV, s.rate = 200 mV/s, [AFG1] = 1.5 uM<br />

in BRb pH =9.0<br />

Ip = 58.5 nA, Ep = -1243 mV<br />

Ei = -1500 mV, E high = 0 mV, E low<br />

= -1500 mV, s.rate = 200 mV/s,<br />

[AFG1] = 1.5 uM<br />

Both scan directions gave only single cathodic peak ( no anodic<br />

wave ) �AFG1 undergoes irreversible reduction reaction at<br />

mercury electrode.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

B) Repeatitive cathodic scan ( n = 5 or 10 segments)<br />

Peak heights of AFG1 increased with the number of scans with<br />

no extra peak neither anodic nor anodic peak was observed.<br />

Peak potentials of AFG1 were – 1245 to -1220 mV.<br />

=� Progressive adsorptive accumulation of AFG1 at the<br />

mercury electrode surface<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

1 2 3 4 5<br />

No of cycle


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

C) Standard Addition of AFG1<br />

Ei = 0 mV, E high = 0 mV, E low = -1500<br />

mV, s.rate = 200 mV/s, [AFG1] = 1.5, 2.25,<br />

3.0, 3.75 and 4.5 uM in BRB pH =9.0<br />

The peak potential at –1245 mV was confirmed due to the<br />

reduction of AFG1 in BRB pH =9.0.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

150<br />

120<br />

90<br />

60<br />

30<br />

0<br />

y = 24.756x + 13.072<br />

R 2 = 0.9812<br />

1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5<br />

[AFG1] / uM<br />

Ip of AFG1 increased and peak<br />

potentials shifted toward less<br />

negative direction with<br />

increasing of AFG1<br />

concentration.


D) Effect of scan rate<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

i) Log peak height versus log scan rate, [AFG1] = 1.5 uM<br />

Lop Ip<br />

2.1<br />

1.9<br />

1.7<br />

1.5<br />

1.3<br />

1.1<br />

0.9<br />

0.7<br />

0.5<br />

y = 0.5623x + 0.446<br />

R 2 = 0.9919<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

log scan rate<br />

Linear relationship was observed between log Ip versus log<br />

scan rate with the slope of 0.56 ( > 0.5 ) =� Diffusion current<br />

is influenced by an adsorption of AFG1 on the electrochemical<br />

process at mercury electrode surface.


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

ii) Peak potential versus log scan rate, [AFG1] = 1.5 uM<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1275<br />

1260<br />

1245<br />

1230<br />

1215<br />

1200<br />

1185<br />

y = 48.484x + 1134.8<br />

R 2 = 0.9978<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

log scan rate<br />

Plot of peak potential versus log scan rate is a linear graph ( R 2 = 0.9978)<br />

=� confirmed that the reduction of AFG1 on the electrode surface is<br />

totally irreversibe.


Ip (nA)<br />

110<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

iii) Peak height versus scan rate, [AFG1] = 1.5 uM<br />

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550<br />

Scan rate ( m V/s )<br />

1) Slow scan rate:<br />

Ip = 0.2298x + 14.164 ( R 2 = 0.9757, n = 5)<br />

2) Fast scan rate:<br />

Ip = 0.1598x + 19.18 ( R2 = 0.9892, n = 5)<br />

Based on the slopes of the regression equations for two different<br />

regions, the reduction and adsorption of AFG1 on the electrode<br />

surface is governed by the speed of reaction which preferred slow<br />

reaction.


Ip (nA )<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

E) Effect of different pH of BRb solution, [AFG1] = 1.5 uM<br />

i) Effect on peak height<br />

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12<br />

pH<br />

Peak height and peak potential<br />

of AFG1 are pH dependent<br />

except for pH 6,7, 8 and 9, peak<br />

potential are unchanged at -1245<br />

mV<br />

At pH = 9.0, highest peak<br />

current was observed<br />

ii) Effect on peak potential<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1270<br />

1250<br />

1230<br />

1210<br />

1190<br />

1170<br />

1150<br />

2 3 4 5 6 7<br />

pH<br />

8 9 10 11 12


CONCLUSION<br />

1. AFG1 is reduced at mercury electrode. The<br />

reduction reaction is totally irreversible reaction<br />

which gives maximum peak height in BRb at pH<br />

of 9.0. The diffusion current produced by this<br />

reaction is affected by adsorption process of<br />

AFG1 at the mercury electrode surface which<br />

prefer a slow reaction.<br />

2. All information on electrochemical properties of<br />

AFG1 are useful for development of other<br />

voltammetric technique for determination of<br />

AFG1 in standard solution and real samples.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

SUPERVISOR:<br />

AP DR ABDUL RAHIM MOHD YUSOFF<br />

CO-SUPERVISORS:<br />

1. PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD<br />

2. AP DR ABD. RAHIM YAACOB<br />

ELECTROANALYSIS GROUP AND<br />

STAFF OF CHEMISTRY DEPT<br />

SCHOOL OF HEALTH SCIENCES, USM ,<br />

HEALTH CAMPUS, KUBANG KRIAN,<br />

KELANTAN


THANK YOU


2<br />

O<br />

Proposed mechanisme of the reduction of AFG1 that<br />

may take place at mercury electrode as reported by<br />

Smyth et al. (1979);<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Θ<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

2H 2 O<br />

Dimer + 2OH -


ORAL PRESENTED AT<br />

SYMPOSIUM LIFE SCIENCE II<br />

(USM PENANG; 31 st MAC – 3 rd<br />

APRIL 2004)<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 1


STABILITY STUDY OF AFLATOXIN G1<br />

(AFG1) USING DIFFERENTIAL PULSE<br />

STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC TECHNIQUE<br />

BY<br />

Mohd Hadzri Yaacob, Abd.Rahim Yusoff and<br />

Rahmalan Ahamad<br />

UTM, SKUDAI<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 2


• INTRODUCTION<br />

• OBJECTIVE<br />

• EXPERIMENTAL<br />

• RESULTS AND<br />

DISCUSSION<br />

• CONCLUSION<br />

TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION<br />

• ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

AFLATOXINS<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 3


• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Mycotoxin group.<br />

Produced by two fungi;<br />

Types of aflatoxins:<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1<br />

and AFG2:<br />

AFM1 and AFM2<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Aspergillus flavus Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

Raw peanuts, peanuts products, wheat,<br />

maize, corn, vegetable oils, dried fruites,<br />

barley, pear, cocoa, coffee, herbs, spices,<br />

wine, cottonseeds.<br />

Cow milk and its products, eggs<br />

and meat product<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 4


INTRODUCTION …cont<br />

• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Occurs naturally in commodities used for animal and<br />

human<br />

Carcinogenic, teratogenic and mutagenic<br />

IARC (1988): Class I carcinogenic materials<br />

Dangerous to health: causes aflatoxicosis disease.<br />

Effect the economy of commodities export countries<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 5


AFLATOXIN G1 ( AFG1):<br />

Chemical and physical properties<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

Chemical name: 3,4,7a, 10a-tetrahydro-5-methoxy-1H,<br />

12H furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3-h]pyrano[3,4-c][l]-benzopyran-<br />

1,12-dione<br />

Yellowish crystal.<br />

C 17 H 12 O 7<br />

MW = 328<br />

Odorless, tasteless and colorless solution ( in organic<br />

solvent).<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 6


AFLATOXIN G1 ( AFG1):<br />

Chemical and physical properties…cont<br />

Solubility: Dissolve in methanol, water:acetonitrile (9:1),<br />

trifluoroactic acid, DMSO and acetone. In water: 10-20 mg /<br />

liter<br />

m.p; 244 – 246 0 C<br />

Produces green color under UV light<br />

UV abs (max) in methanol: 216, 242, 265 and 362 nm<br />

IR spectrum ( in chloroform): 1760, 1695, 1630 and 1595<br />

cm -1<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 7


Stability of AFG1<br />

In crystal form: extremely stable in the absence of<br />

light or UV radiation, even at T = > 100 0 C<br />

Solution in water, DMSO, 95% acetone or ethanol<br />

stable for 24 hrs under normal condition. Stable for<br />

years if kept in cool and dark place<br />

Stable in most food process; not destroy by normal<br />

cooking process since it heat stable<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 8


Based on chemical structure:<br />

In strong alkali: lactone ring- susceptible to<br />

alkaline hydrolysis<br />

In acid: acid catalytic addition of water across the<br />

double bond of the furan ring.<br />

O<br />

Stability of AFG1… cont<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 9<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O


OBJECTIVE<br />

To study the stability of AFG1 in;<br />

a) Britton-Robinson buffer (BRB) pH 9.0; AFG1<br />

prepared in BRB pH 9.0, measured in same<br />

buffer, exposed to normal condition ( 0 to 6<br />

hrs).<br />

b) BRB pH 9.0: kept in cool and dark place ( 0 to<br />

6 months )<br />

c) AFG1 prepared in BRB pH 9.0, measured in<br />

BRB with different pH, expose to normal<br />

condition ( 0 to 3 hrs).<br />

Using Differential pulse cathodic stripping<br />

voltammetric technique (DPCSV)<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 10


VOLTAMMETRY:<br />

From Voltage- Amperometry<br />

-Measure amount of current at different voltage<br />

-Electroanalytical technique : sensitive, high accuracy, low cost<br />

and easy to use<br />

-2 important parameters; peak height (Ip) and peak potential (Ep)<br />

-result: voltammogram ( e.g; Differential Pulse Cathodic Stripping<br />

Voltammogram of AFG1)<br />

[AFG1] = 0.1 uM = 30 ppb in<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ep = -1150 mV<br />

Ip = 55.45 nA<br />

Analysis date: 26 th Jan 2004<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 11


EXPERIMENTAL: INSTRUMENTS AND REAGENTS<br />

BAS C50W<br />

Voltammetric<br />

Analyser<br />

BAS CGME consist of<br />

Ag/AgCl as RE, Pt wire as<br />

AE, CGME as WE, 20 ml<br />

cell and magnetic stirrer.<br />

Reagents: AFG1 ( MERCK); 10 ppm in benzene:<br />

acetonitrile (98%), 1 ppm: prepared in BRB pH 9.0. BRB<br />

pH ( 3.0 to 13.0)<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 12


EXPERIMENTAL FLOW CHART<br />

10 ML BRB SOLUTION<br />

BLANK SOLUTION<br />

BLANK<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

SPIKE INTO 20 ML<br />

VOLTAMMETRIC CELL<br />

SOLUTION IS<br />

DEGASSED<br />

SOLUTION IS<br />

SCANNED<br />

OBTAINED<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

NITROGEN GAS IS FLOWED IN AFLATOXIN G1<br />

SOLUTION, REDISSOLVED IN BRB SOLUTION<br />

BLANK SOLUTION +<br />

AFLATOXIN<br />

SAMPEL<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 13


RESULTS<br />

a) 0.1 uM AFG1 in BRB pH =9.0, exposed to normal<br />

condition<br />

0 to 3 hrs: Peak current: 60.26 to 57.7 nA<br />

4 hrs: 43.67 nA ( 78%)<br />

6 hrs: 33.56 nA ( 56%)<br />

8 hrs: 29.02 nA ( 45%)<br />

Stability study of AFG1 in BRB pH 9<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 14<br />

Ip (n A )<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

AFG1 stable up to 3 hrs in<br />

BRB pH 9.0, exposed to<br />

normal condition


) 0.1 uM AFG1 from 1 ppm AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0 kept in cool and<br />

dark place, measured in BRB pH 9.0<br />

(a) 0 (b) 1 m (c) 2 m (d) 3 m<br />

(e) 4 m (f) 5 m (g) 6 m<br />

0 to 3 m : 57.50 – 39.50 nA ( 70%)<br />

4 m : 36.5 nA (60%) 6 m ( 25%)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 15<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6<br />

Storage time (month)<br />

AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0,<br />

kept in cool and dark<br />

place �stable up to 3<br />

m keeping time


c) 0.1 uM AFG1 ( from 1 ppm AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0)<br />

measured in different pH of BRB and exposed to normal<br />

condition<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

pH = 6.0<br />

pH = 7.0<br />

pH = 9.0<br />

pH = 11.0<br />

Stability order for<br />

AFG1 in different pH of<br />

BRB exposed to<br />

normal condition up to<br />

3 hrs;<br />

pH 11.0 < 9.0 < 6.0 < 7.0<br />

In BRB pH = 6.0, 7.0 : peak current increases with time<br />

In BRB pH = 9.0: peak current slowly decreases with<br />

time<br />

In BRB pH = 11.0 peak current sharply decreases with<br />

time where after 2 hrs no peak was observed<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 16


CONCLUSION<br />

1) AFG1 stable up to 3 hrs in BRB pH 9.0 when<br />

exposed to normal condition.<br />

2) AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0, stable up to 3 m when<br />

kept in cool and dark place<br />

3)Stability order for AFG1 in different pH of BRB<br />

exposed to normal condition up to 3 hrs;<br />

pH 11.0 < 9.0 < 6.0 < 7.0<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 17


FURTHER WORKS<br />

1. Stability study of AFG1 using different<br />

concentration of AFG1 ( 0.05 uM and 1.0 uM)<br />

2. Stability study of AFG1, keep in room<br />

temperature and expose to light from 0 to 6<br />

months.<br />

3. Stability study of other aflatoxins (AFB1, AFB2<br />

and AFG2)<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 18


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

SCHOOL OF HEALTH SCIENCES, USM<br />

( STUDY LEAVE AND FELLOWSHIP<br />

UNDER ASHES: May 2002 – May 2005)<br />

MR RODWAN MAT AIL, CHEM<br />

DEPT, MOSTE, PENANG.<br />

SUPERVISOR:<br />

AP DR ABDUL RAHIM MOHD YUSOFF<br />

CO-SUPERVISORS:<br />

1. PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD<br />

2. AP DR ABD. RAHIM YAACOB<br />

ELECTROANALYSIS GROUP AND<br />

STAFF OF CHEMISTRY DEPT<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 19


THANK YOU<br />

Wassalam<br />

Mohd Hadzri, Hadzri<br />

Sains Forensik, Forensik,<br />

PPSains Kesihatan<br />

USM KELANTAN<br />

3/1/2007 2nd Life PostCon USM Penang 20


ORAL PRESENTED AT<br />

SKAM-17<br />

(KUANTAN, 24-26 th<br />

AUGUST 2004)


STABILITY STUDIES OF AFLATOXINS<br />

USING DIFFERENTIAL PULSE CATHODIC<br />

STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC (DPCSV)<br />

TECHNIQUE<br />

BY<br />

Mohd Hadzri Yaacob, Abd.Rahim Yusoff and<br />

Rahmalan Ahamad<br />

UTM, SKUDAI


C=O groups<br />

Electroactive<br />

property of<br />

aflatoxins<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

AFLATOXINS<br />

Electroactive<br />

species can be<br />

determined<br />

using<br />

voltammetric<br />

technique


• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Mycotoxin group.<br />

Produced by two fungi;<br />

Types of aflatoxins:<br />

AFB1, AFB2, AFG1<br />

and AFG2:<br />

AFM1 and AFM2<br />

INTRODUCTION…cont<br />

Aspergillus flavus Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

Raw peanuts, peanuts products, wheat,<br />

maize, corn, vegetable oils, dried fruites,<br />

barley, pear, cocoa, coffee, herbs, spices,<br />

wine, cottonseeds.<br />

Cow milk and its products, eggs<br />

and meat product


INTRODUCTION …cont<br />

• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Occurs naturally in commodities used for animal and<br />

human<br />

Carcinogenic, teratogenic and mutagenic<br />

IARC (1988): Class I carcinogenic materials<br />

Dangerous to health: causes aflatoxicosis disease.<br />

Effect the economy of commodities export countries


O<br />

O<br />

AFB1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

AFLATOXIN:<br />

Chemical and physical properties<br />

O<br />

O<br />

C 17H 12O 6, MW = 312<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

C 17H 12O 7 MW = 328<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

AFB2<br />

O<br />

C 17 H 14 O 6<br />

AFG1 AFG2<br />

O<br />

C 17 H 14 O 7<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

MW = 314<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

MW = 330


AFLATOXIN:<br />

Chemical and physical properties…cont<br />

Solubility: Dissolve in methanol, water:acetonitrile (9:1),<br />

trifluoroactic acid, DMSO and acetone. In water: 10-20<br />

mg / liter<br />

Yellowish crystal<br />

Odorless, tasteless and colorless solution ( in organic<br />

solvent).


AFLATOXIN:<br />

Chemical and physical properties…cont<br />

AFB1 AFB2 AFG1 AFG2<br />

m.point 269 0 C 287 0 C 245 0 C 237 0 C<br />

UV abs (max) 360 362 362 362<br />

in methanol/<br />

nm<br />

IR spectrum 1760, 1684 1760, 1684 1760, 1695 1760, 1695<br />

( in chloroform) 1632, 1598 1632, 1598 1630, 1595 1630, 1595<br />

/ cm -1 1562 1562


Stability of aflatoxins<br />

In crystal form: extremely stable in the absence of<br />

light or UV radiation, even at T = > 100 0 C<br />

Solution in water, DMSO, 95% acetone or ethanol:<br />

stable for 24 hrs under normal condition. Stable for<br />

years if kept in cool and dark place<br />

Stable in most food process; not destroy by normal<br />

cooking process since it heat stable.


OBJECTIVE<br />

To study the stability of aflatoxins which were;<br />

a) exposed to normal laboratory condition for 8 hours in<br />

BRb pH=9.0.<br />

b) exposed to normal laboratory condition for 3 hours in<br />

BRb pH=6.0, 7.0, 9.0 and 11.0<br />

c) stored under cool temperature for 6 months in BRb<br />

pH =9.0<br />

using DPCSV technique<br />

( a small portion of my research study in developing<br />

voltammetric technique for determination of aflatoxins)


EXPERIMENTAL: INSTRUMENTS AND REAGENTS<br />

BAS C50W<br />

Voltammetric<br />

Analyser<br />

BAS CGME consist of<br />

Ag/AgCl as RE, Pt wire as<br />

AE, CGME as WE, 20 ml<br />

cell and magnetic stirrer.<br />

Reagents: AFB1, B2, G1, G2 ( MERCK); 10 ppm in<br />

benzene: acetonitrile (98%), 1 ppm: prepared in BRb at<br />

required pH.


EXPERIMENT<br />

A) General procedure for DPCSV analysis<br />

1. 10 ml of supporting electrolyte (BRb pH = 9.0 ) in<br />

voltammetric cell was degassed for at least 15 min.<br />

2. Scanned using DPCSV technique; Ei = -1000 mV, Ef = -<br />

1400 mV, Eacc = -600 mV, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50<br />

mV/s, pulse amplitude = 80 mV and rest time = 10 s to<br />

obtain voltammogram of blank ( for all aflatoxins<br />

except for AFG1, Ei = -950 mV)<br />

3. The aflatoxins standard solution was spiked into the cell<br />

( concentration of aflatoxins in the cell = 0.1 uM),<br />

redegassed for at least 2 min and rescanned follows the<br />

same procedure as no 2.0 to obtain voltammograms of<br />

aflatoxins in BRb solution.


EXPERIMENT…Cont<br />

B) Procedures for stability studies<br />

1) 8 hours exposed to normal condition<br />

Each aflatoxin was scanned every hour from 0 to<br />

8 hours. ( aflatoxin in BRb pH =9.0 solution<br />

remained in the voltammetric cell).<br />

2) 3 hours exposed to normal condition<br />

Each aflatoxin was scanned every hour from 0 to<br />

3 hours in different pH of BRb ( 6.0, 7.0, 9.0 and<br />

11.0)<br />

3) Shelf life of aflatoxins ( 1 ppm) stored in freezer<br />

Each aflatoxin ( 0.1 uM) was scanned every<br />

month from 1 st to 6 th month storage period in<br />

BRb pH =9.0


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

A) Voltammograms of aflatoxins<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

blank<br />

blank<br />

[AFB1] = 0.1 uM / 31.2 ppb<br />

In BRb pH =9.0<br />

Ep = -1210 mV<br />

Ip = 63.19 +/- 1.64 nA<br />

n = 8 RSD = 2.60%<br />

[AFB2] = 0.1 uM / 31.5 ppb<br />

In Brb pH 9.0<br />

Ep = -1230 mV<br />

Ip = 65.67 +/- 1.28 nA<br />

n = 8 RSD = 1.95%


AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

blank<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…cont<br />

blank<br />

[AFG1] = 0.1 uM / 32.8 ppb<br />

In BRb pH 9.0<br />

Ep = -1150 mV<br />

Ip = 60.76 +/- 0.99 nA<br />

n = 8 RSD = 1.63%<br />

[AFG2] = 0.1 uM / 33.0 ppb<br />

In BRb pH 9.0<br />

Ep = -1170 mV<br />

Ip = 58.88 +/- 0.88 nA<br />

n = 8 RSD = 1.50%


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

( STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

A) 8 hours exposed to normal laboratory condition<br />

Peak height (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Peak currents of AFB1 and AFB2 remained unchanged up to 8<br />

hours but for AFG1 and AFG2 peak currents started decrease<br />

after 1 st hour exposure time. After 3 hours it gradually<br />

decreased with AFG2 gave lower peak current compared to<br />

AFG1.<br />

�Up to 8 hrs, AFB1=AFB2 > AFG1, AFG2. AFG1> AFG2


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

( STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

Voltammograms of aflatoxins at 0 to 8 hours in BRb pH 9.0.<br />

0.1 uM AFB1 0.1 uM AFB2


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

( STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

Voltammograms of aflatoxins at 0 to 8 hours in BRb pH 9.0...cont<br />

AFG1 = 0.1 uM AFG2 = 0.1 uM


Peak height (nA)<br />

50<br />

45<br />

40<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

(STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

B) In different pH of BRb ( pH 6.0 and (7.0)<br />

pH = 6.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

In pH 6.0 and 7.0, all aflatoxins are stable within<br />

3 hours in the cell.<br />

Peak height (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

pH = 7.0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

In BRb pH = 6.0 In BRb pH = 7.0<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2


Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

(STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

B) In different pH of BRb ( pH 9.0 and 11.0)<br />

Stability of aflatoxins in BRB pH 9<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

In BRb pH 9.0<br />

In pH 9.0, all aflatoxins stable<br />

within 3 hours in the cell.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

45<br />

40<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

Stability of aflatoxins in BRB pH 11<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

In BRb pH11.0<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

In pH 11.0, AFG1 and AFG2<br />

significantly decreased within<br />

3 hours compared to AFB1<br />

and AFB2.


AFB2<br />

AFB1<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

(STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

B) 6 months kept in freezer<br />

Peak height (nA)<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7<br />

Storage time in freezer (months)<br />

Stability order:<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1=AFB2>AFG2>AFG1<br />

( in BRb pH =9.0)<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2


Peak height (nA)<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION… cont<br />

(STABILITY STUDIES)<br />

B) 6 months kept in freezer<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7<br />

Storage time in freezer (months)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Peak height vs time Percent left vs time<br />

3 rd MONTH: AFB1 (72%), AFB2 (83%), AFG1 (66%), AFG2 (56%)<br />

6 th MONTH: AFB1 (50%), AFB2 (59%), AFG1 (42%), AFG2 (37%)<br />

Percent left<br />

100<br />

90<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

0.1 uM in BRb pH = 9.0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7<br />

Storage time in freezer (months)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2


CONCLUSION<br />

1. In BRb pH 9.0, AFB1 and AFB2 are stable up to<br />

8 hours while AFG1 and AFG2 are stable up to 3<br />

hours when exposed to normal condition in<br />

voltammetric cell.<br />

2. Within 3 hours exposed to normal condition, all<br />

aflatoxins are stable in BRb pH 6, 7 and 9.0 but<br />

in BRb pH 11.0, AFG1 is very unstable<br />

compared to other aflatoxins. The proposed<br />

stability order for aflatoxins in BRb pH 11.0 is:<br />

AFB2 > AFB1 > AFG2 > AFG1


CONCLUSION…. cont<br />

3. AFB1 and AFB2 solution in BRb pH 9.0 kept in freezer have<br />

shelf life of 3 months while AFG1 and AFG2 only 2 months.<br />

After this period of time, the new aflatoxins solution should<br />

be prepared.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

SUPERVISOR:<br />

AP DR ABDUL RAHIM MOHD YUSOFF<br />

CO-SUPERVISORS:<br />

1. PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD<br />

2. AP DR ABD. RAHIM YAACOB<br />

ELECTROANALYSIS GROUP AND<br />

STAFF OF CHEMISTRY DEPT<br />

SCHOOL OF HEALTH SCIENCES, USM ,<br />

HEALTH CAMPUS, KUBANG KRIAN,<br />

KELANTAN


THANK YOU


Based on chemical structure:<br />

In strong alkali: lactone ring- susceptible to<br />

alkaline hydrolysis<br />

In acid: acid catalytic addition of water across the<br />

double bond of the furan ring.<br />

O<br />

Stability of AFG1… cont<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O


ELECTROCHEMICAL PROPERTIES OF AFG1<br />

Based on chemical structure:<br />

Ketone groups in lactone ring can be reduced and<br />

produce cathodic wave.<br />

Unsaturated terminal furan ring can be reduced<br />

and produce cathodic wave.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

Can forms<br />

anionic<br />

radical


2<br />

O<br />

Proposed mechanisme of the reduction of AFG1 that<br />

may take place at mercury electrode as reported by<br />

Smyth et al. (1979);<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

2H +<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Θ<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

2H 2 O<br />

Dimer + 2OH -


UV-VIS SPECTRUM OF AFB1<br />

BRb pH 6.0 BRb pH 7.0<br />

BRb pH 9.0<br />

BRb pH 11.0


UV-VIS SPECTRUM OF AFB2<br />

BRb pH 6.0 BRb pH 7.0<br />

BRb pH 9.0<br />

BRb pH 11.0


UV-VIS SPECTRUM OF AFG1<br />

BRb pH 6.0 BRb pH 7.0<br />

BRb pH 9.0<br />

BRb pH 11.0


UV-VIS SPECTRUM OF AFG2<br />

BRb pH 6.0 BRb pH 7.0<br />

BRb pH 9.0<br />

BRb pH 11.0


ORAL PRESENTED AT<br />

SKAM-18<br />

(JOHOR BAHRU, JOHOR ;<br />

12 -14 th SEPTEMBER 2005)


SQUARE-WAVE STRIPPING<br />

VOLTAMMETRIC TECHNIQUE FOR THE<br />

DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN B1 IN<br />

GROUNDNUT SAMPLES<br />

BY<br />

MOHAMAD HADZRI YAACOB<br />

AP DR ABDULL RAHIM MOHD YUSOFF<br />

PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD<br />

(UTM)


OBJECTIVE OF THIS STUDY<br />

TO DEVELOP SWSV TECHNIQUE FOR<br />

THE DETERMINATION OF AFB1


• AFLATOXINS:<br />

Mycotoxin group<br />

Produced by two fungi;<br />

Aspergillus flavus and<br />

Aspergillus parasiticus<br />

Types of aflatoxins:<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFM1<br />

AFM2<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Raw peanuts, peanuts products,<br />

wheat, maize, vegetable oils, dried<br />

fruites, barley, pear, cocoa, coffee,<br />

herbs, spices, wine, cottonseeds.<br />

Cow milk and its products, eggs<br />

and meat product


Carcinogenic, teratogenic and mutagenic<br />

IARC (1988): Class I carcinogenic materials<br />

Regulatory level in <strong>Malaysia</strong>:<br />

Groundnuts < 15 ppb<br />

Milk < 0.5 ppb<br />

Others < 5 ppb


Chemical structure of AFB1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

(2,3,6a,9a-tetrahydro-4-methoxycyclo penta[c] furo<br />

[3 ’ ,2 ’ :4,5] furo [2,3-h][1] benzopyran-1,11-dione)<br />

Produces blue colour under UV light<br />

MW = 312<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O


INSTRUMENTS;<br />

VA 757 Metrohm Voltammetry<br />

analyser + MME Stand<br />

Working electrode = HMDE<br />

Ref electrode: Ag/AgCl, 3M KCl<br />

REAGENTS;<br />

a) Britton-Robinson buffer(BRB) pH = 9.0 and AFB1 std<br />

b) Methanol, 0.1 N HCl, 15% ZnSO 4, diatomoceus earth<br />

powder, chloroform (for extraction and clean-up)<br />

SAMPLES:<br />

EXPERIMENTAL<br />

Groundnut from different shops


EXPERIMENTAL FLOW CHART<br />

1) Scan a blank 2) Scan AFB1 std<br />

10 ML BRB SOLUTION<br />

BLANK SOLUTION<br />

BLANK<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

SPIKE INTO 20 ML<br />

VOLTAMMETRIC CELL<br />

SOLUTION IS<br />

DEGASSED<br />

SOLUTION IS<br />

SCANNED<br />

OBTAINED<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM<br />

NITROGEN GAS IS FLOWED IN AFLATOXINS<br />

SOLUTION, REDISSOLVED IN BRB SOLUTION<br />

BLANK SOLUTION +<br />

AFB1<br />

SAMPEL<br />

VOLTAMMOGRAM


Study effect of<br />

Method optimisation;<br />

pH of BRB (6.0 to 13.0)<br />

potential window (E i and E f ) (0.4 to -1.2 V)<br />

Accumulation potential (E acc ) (0 to -1.4 V)<br />

Accumulation time (t acc ) (0 to 150 s)<br />

Frequency (25 to 125 Hz)<br />

Voltage step (0.01 to 0.04 V)<br />

Amplitude (0.025 to 0.1 V)<br />

Scan rate<br />

to peak height (I p ) and peak potential (E p )<br />

of AFB1


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

Initial parameters (from optimum DPCSV parameters):<br />

E i = -1.0 V, E f = -1.4 V, E acc = -0.6 V, t acc = 80 s, scan<br />

rate = 50 mV/s and pulse amplitude = 80 mV.<br />

Supporting electrolyte = BRB pH 9.0. [AFB1] = 0.1 uM<br />

Single cathodic peak<br />

Ep = -1.23 1.23 V<br />

Ip = 230 nA<br />

Compare to DPCSV;<br />

E p = -1.24 V; I p = 60 nA


I p (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

a) Effect of pH of BRB (use 0.1 uM AFB1)<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14<br />

pH of BRB<br />

1. pH 9.0 gave maximum Ip 2. Ep shifted towards negative direction at higher<br />

pH �� Hydrogen ion involves in reduction process<br />

Ep (-V)<br />

1.34<br />

1.32<br />

1.3<br />

1.28<br />

1.26<br />

1.24<br />

1.22<br />

1.2<br />

1.18<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11<br />

pH


Proposed mechanism;<br />

a) pH 6-8<br />

O<br />

b) pH 9-12<br />

2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

2H +<br />

(Ref: Smyth et al. (1979): used DPP<br />

technique)<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

2e -<br />

2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

H H<br />

O<br />

OCH 3<br />

2 H 2O<br />

Dim er + 2 OH -<br />

O


I p (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

b) Effect of Ei 50<br />

0<br />

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4<br />

E i (-V)<br />

Ei = -1.0 1.0 V gave highest Ip ( 285 nA) nA)<br />

��<br />

optimum Ei for further experiments<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ei = -1.0 1.0 V


Ip (nA)<br />

400<br />

350<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

c) Effect of Eacc acc<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6<br />

Eacc (-V)<br />

Eacc acc = - 0.8 V gave highest Ip (366 nA). nA).<br />

�� Eacc acc - 0.8 V was selected as optimum Eacc acc<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ei= = -1.0 1.0 V<br />

Eacc acc = -0.8 0.8 V


Ip (nA)<br />

450<br />

400<br />

350<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

d) Effect of tacc acc<br />

0 40 80 120 160 200<br />

T acc (s)<br />

100 s is optimum tacc. acc.<br />

It gave<br />

maximum Ip (400 nA) nA<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ei= = -1.0 1.0 V<br />

Eacc acc = -0.8 0.8 V<br />

tacc acc = 100 s


e) Effect of frequency<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

0 25 50 75 100 125 150<br />

Frequency (Hz)<br />

Frequency = 125 gave maximum<br />

Ip(820 (820 nA). nA).<br />

> 125 Hz, not possible due to<br />

instrument limitation. Too fast.<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ei= = -1.0 1.0 V<br />

Eacc acc = -0.8 0.8 V<br />

tacc acc = 100 s<br />

Freq = 125 Hz


Ip is depend linearly on the square root of frequency<br />

( 5 to 125 Hz);<br />

y = 107.91x - 424.7 R 2 = 0.9919, n = 5.<br />

�� AFB1 absorbed on the mercury electrode<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

y = 107.91x - 424.7<br />

R 2 = 0.9919<br />

3 5 7 9 11<br />

(Frequency) 1/2


f) Effect of voltage step<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05<br />

Voltage step (V)<br />

Voltage step = 0.03 V which gave maximum Ip (956 nA) nA)<br />

was selected as the optimum v.step<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ei= = -1.0 1.0 V<br />

Eacc acc = -0.8 0.8 V<br />

tacc acc = 100 s<br />

Freq = 125 Hz<br />

V.Step = 0.03 V


g) Effect of pulse amplitude<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 0.125<br />

Amplitude (V)<br />

Amplitude = 0.05 V gave<br />

maximum Ip (956 nA) nA)<br />

BRB pH 9.0<br />

Ei= = -1.0 1.0 V<br />

Eacc acc = -0.8 0.8 V<br />

tacc acc = 100 s<br />

Freq = 125 Hz<br />

V.Step = 0.03 V<br />

Amplitude = 0.05 V


Square-wave Square wave frequency, voltage step and<br />

scan rate are interrelated;<br />

For frequency = 125 Hz and voltage step =<br />

0.030 V �� scan rate = 3750 mV/s<br />

Optimum parameters for the SWSV<br />

determination of AFB1<br />

BRB pH 9.0, Ei = -1.0 1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 1.4 V, Eacc acc = -0.8 0.8 V, tacc acc =<br />

100 s, Freq = 125 Hz, V.Step = 0.03 V, Amplitude = 0.05<br />

V and scan rate = 3750 mV/s


Optimum SWSV parameters<br />

I p= 956 nA (E p = -1.30 V)<br />

Non-optimum Non optimum SWSV<br />

Ip= = 230 nA (Ep= = 1.23 V)<br />

Increases 4 times<br />

Compare to optimum DPCSV<br />

parameters<br />

I p= 60 nA ( E p= -1.24 V).<br />

Increases 16 times.<br />

��SWSV SWSV more sensitive and faster<br />

(scan rate = 3750 mV/s) compare<br />

to DPCSV.<br />

(* For DPCSV: 50 mV/s)<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

(a) DPCSV (b) SWSV


Calibration curve for AFB1 and method validation<br />

I p ( nA)<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

y = 70.97x + 76.588<br />

R 2 = 0.9984<br />

0 5 10 15 20<br />

[AFB1] x 10-8 M<br />

Linearity range: 0.01 µM to 0.15<br />

µM / 3.12 ppb to 46.8 ppb AFB1<br />

LOD; 0.125 x 10-8 M / 0.39 ppb /<br />

390 ppt<br />

* By DPCSV; LOD: 0.5 x 10-8 M / 1.56 ppb.


Precision / repetibility;(0.1 µM / 31.2 ppb) (n =5)<br />

I p ±SD / nA(RSD) E p (V)<br />

Day 1: 932 ± 7.92 (0.85%) -1.30<br />

Day 2: 933 ± 7.74 (0.83%) -1.30<br />

Day 3: 933 ± 7.84 (0.84%) -1.30<br />

SWSV voltammograms of AFB1 (n=5): Day 1


Accuracy / Recovery:<br />

0.05 uM: 99.67 ± 0.48% (n=3) -1.30 V<br />

0.10 uM: 100.47 ± 0.34% (n=3) -1.30 V<br />

(a)<br />

(b)<br />

Voltammograms of (a) 0.05 and (b) 0.10 uM AFB1 (n=3)


Analysis of AFB1 in groundnut sample<br />

1) Extracted and cleaned-up: follows Chemistry<br />

Dept, MOSTI procedure.<br />

2) Recovery studies – AFB1 in groundnut eluate<br />

Result;<br />

Amount added / ppb Amount found /ppb Recovery (%), n=3<br />

3.00 2.82 ± 0.02 94.00 ± 0.67<br />

9.00 8.21 ± 0.14 91.22 ± 1.56<br />

15.00 13.88 ± 0.30 92.53 ± 2.00<br />

Recovery: > 90 % is considered good recovery.


SAMPLE<br />

INJECT 200 ul<br />

SAMPLE INTO CELL<br />

(+10 Ml BRB pH = 9.0)<br />

SCAN USING<br />

SWSV TECHNIQUE<br />

FLOW CHART OF SAMPLE ANALYSIS<br />

EXTRACTION<br />

AND CLEAN UP<br />

(FOLLOW CHEM DEPT, MOSTI<br />

PROCEDURE)<br />

STD ADDITION OF<br />

10 ppb OF AFB1<br />

PREPARE FINAL<br />

SOLUTION IN BRB<br />

pH = 9.0<br />

RESCAN<br />

USING SWSV<br />

TECHNIQUE


Voltammogram of real sample + 10 ppb AFB1,<br />

compare with HPLC result<br />

(a)<br />

(c)<br />

(b)<br />

(a) Blank (b) 200 ul real sample (c) real<br />

sample + 10 ppb afb1<br />

SWSV; 36.30 ppb HPLC; 36.00 ppb


Voltammogram of real sample + 10 ppb afb1 compare with HPLC<br />

result<br />

(a) Blank (b) 200 ul real sample (c) real<br />

sample + 10 ppb afb1<br />

SWSV; ND HPLC; ND<br />

No peak for AFB1: Not detected.


Results; AFB1 in groundnut samples (duplicate analysis)<br />

No of sample By SWSV/ ppb By HPLC/ppb<br />

1 ND ND<br />

2 ND ND<br />

3 ND ND<br />

4 9.21 8.25<br />

5 13.92 14.34<br />

6 36.30 36.00<br />

t test: No significant different between both<br />

techniques (t cal = 0.51 < t cri (p : 0.05) = 2.57)


CONCLUSION<br />

SWSV technique for the determination of<br />

AFB1 in groundnut sample was<br />

successfully developed. The technique<br />

is precise, accurate, high sensitive, fast<br />

and low cost technique.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

SUPERVISORS:<br />

AP DR ABDUL RAHIM MOHD YUSOFF<br />

PROF RAHMALAN AHAMAD<br />

SHORT TERM GRANT: 75152/2004<br />

SCHOOL OF HEALTH SCIENCES, USM ,<br />

HEALTH CAMPUS, KUBANG KRIAN,<br />

KELANTAN<br />

MR RADWAN, CHEM DEPT. MOSTI,<br />

PENANG BRANCH.


CV result for 1.3 uM AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0<br />

Single cathodic peak at E p = -1.310 V �<br />

Irreversible reduction reaction at mercury electrode


FORMULA FOR CALCULATION AMOUNT<br />

OF AFB1 IN GROUNDNUT SAMPLE;<br />

ppb aflatoxin =<br />

P ’ / P x C x * 12.5 ( for injection vol = 200 ul)<br />

( P’ = I p of sample (nA), P = I p of std (nA)<br />

C = conc of injected std, 10 ppb)<br />

*For other injection volume;<br />

100 ul = x 25 300 ul = x 8.33<br />

400 ul = x 6.25 500 ul = x 5


Voltammogram of real sample+ 10 ppb afb1, compare<br />

with HPLC result<br />

(a) Blank (b) 200 ul real sample (c) real<br />

sample + 10 ppb afb1<br />

SWSV; 36.30 ppb<br />

Afb1 (ppb) = 94.3 x 10 x 12.5 = 36.30 ppb<br />

419 – 94.3<br />

(c)<br />

(b)<br />

(a)<br />

HPLC; 36.00 ppb


ces, herbs,<br />

uces blue<br />

anol : 360<br />

tor.<br />

assed with<br />

1.1<br />

l o<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

I p ( n A )<br />

30<br />

20<br />

0.9<br />

0.7<br />

0.5<br />

y = 0.5097x + 0.4115<br />

R 2 = 0.995<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

log scan rate<br />

nEp<br />

of AFB2 chang<br />

r<br />

eincreasing<br />

scan ra<br />

wp<br />

a�Reduction<br />

of AF<br />

ie<br />

rirriversible<br />

reactio<br />

td<br />

h<br />

g<br />

4.3) I vs Va<br />

p r<br />

t<br />

a<br />

h<br />

pL<br />

em<br />

h i<br />

e<br />

n<br />

nr<br />

( e<br />

uc<br />

Ra<br />

mu<br />

2�AFB2<br />

r was adso


TION<br />

xin, dangerous<br />

ype I carcinogen<br />

tures;<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

OCH 3<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

OCH 3<br />

AFG1 AFG2<br />

measures<br />

applied. Simple,<br />

and low cost<br />

IMENT<br />

6 processor and<br />

e electrode (MME)<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

4.<br />

a) DPCSV voltammogr<br />

i p = 61.71 nA ip = 59.97n<br />

b) SQWSV voltammogr<br />

ip = 833 nA ip = 816nA<br />

c) DPCSV and SQWSV


Paper will be published in<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Journal of Analytical Science<br />

1


SQUARE WAVE CATHODIC STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC TECHNIQUE FOR<br />

DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN B1 IN GROUND NUT SAMPLE<br />

Mohamad Hadzri Yaacob 1 , Abdull Rahim Hj. Mohd. Yusoff 2 and Rahmalan Ahamad 2<br />

1 School of Health Sciences, USM, 16150 Kubang Krian, Kelantan, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

2 Chemistry Dept., Faculty of Sciences, UTM, 81310 Skudai, Johor, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

Abstract An electroanalytical method has been developed for the detection and determination of the<br />

2,3,6a,9a-tetrahydro-4-methoxycyclo penta[c] furo[3’,2’:4,5] furo [2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione<br />

(aflatoxin B1, AFB1) by a square wave cathodic stripping voltammetric (SWSV) technique on a hanging<br />

mercury drop electrode (HMDE) in aqueous solution with Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB) at pH 9.0 as<br />

the supporting electrolyte. Effect of instrumental parameters such as accumulation potential (Eacc),<br />

accumulation time (tacc), scan rate (v), square wave frequency, step potential and pulse amplitude were<br />

examined. The best condition were found to be Eacc of -0.8 V, tacc of 100 s, v of 3750 mV/s, frequency of<br />

125 Hz, voltage step of 30 mV and pulse amplitude of 50 mV. Calibration curve is linear in the range of<br />

0.01 to 0.15 uM with a detection limit of 0.125 x 10 -8 M. Relative standard deviation for a replicate<br />

measurements of AFB1 (n = 5) with a concentration of 0.01 uM was 0.83% with a peak potential of -1.30<br />

V (against Ag/AgCl). The recovery values obtained in spiked ground nut elute sample were 94.00 +/-<br />

0.67 % for 3.0 ppb, 91.22 +/- 1.56 % for 9 ppb and 92.56 +/- 2.00 % for 15.0 ppb of AFB1. The method<br />

was applied for determination of the AFB1 in ground nut samples after extraction and clean-up steps. The<br />

results were compared with that obtained by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) technique.<br />

Abstrak Satu kaedah elektroanalisis telah dibangunkan untuk mengesan dan menentukan 2,3,6a,9atetrahydro-4-methoxycyclo<br />

penta[c] furo[3’,2’:4,5] furo [2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione (aflatoxin B1,<br />

AFB1) menggunakan teknik voltammetri perlucutan katodik denyut pembeza di atas elektrod titisan raksa<br />

tergantung (HMDE) di dalam larutan akuas dengan larutan penimbal Britton-Robinson (BRB) pada pH<br />

9.0 bertindak sebagai larutan penyokong. Kesan parameter peralatan seperti keupayaan pengumpulan<br />

(Eacc), masa pengumpulan (tacc), kadar imbasan (v), frekuensi gelombang bersegi, kenaikan keupayaan dan<br />

amplitud denyut telah dikaji. Keadaan terbaik yang diperolehi adalah Eacc; -0.8 V, tacc; 100 s, v; 3750<br />

mV/s, frekuensi; 125 Hz, kenaikan keupayaan; 30 mV dan amplitud denyut; 50 mV. Keluk kalibrasi<br />

adalah linear pada julat di antara 0.01 ke 0.15 uM dengan had pengesan pada 0.125 x 10 -8 M. Sisihan<br />

piawai relatif untuk 5 kali pengukuran AFB1 dengan kepekatan 0.01uM ialah 0.83 %. Nilai perolehan<br />

semula di dalam larutan elusi sampel kacang yang disuntik dengan 3.0 ppb, 9 ppb dan 15.0 ppb AFB1<br />

adalah 94.00 +/- 0.67 %, 91.22 +/- 1.56 % dan 92.56 +/- 2.00 % masing-masingnya. Kaedah ini telah<br />

digunakan untuk menentukan kandungan AFB1 di dalam sampel kacang tanah selepas proses<br />

pengekstraksian dan pembersihan dijalankan. Keputusan yang diperolehi telah dibanding dengan<br />

keputusan dari kaedah kromatografi cecair berprestasi tinggi.<br />

Keywords: square wave stripping voltammetry, HMDE, aflatoxin B1, ground nut<br />

Introduction<br />

Aflatoxins (AF), the mycotoxin produced mainly by Aspergillus flavus and parasiticus and<br />

display strong carcinogenicity [1]. They are dangerous food and contaminants and represent a worldwide<br />

threat to public health. AFB1, B2, G1 and G2 and their metabolites M1 and M2 are the most common,<br />

1 Corresponding address:<br />

Chemistry Dept, Faculty of Science, UTM,<br />

81310 Skudai, Johor, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

tel: 07-553 4492<br />

2


and of these, AFB1 and AFG1 are observed most frequently in food [2]. Of these, researches have shown<br />

AFB1 (Fig 1) exhibits most toxic [3] with the order of toxicity is AFB1 > AFG1 > AFB2 > AFG2<br />

indicates that the terminal furan moiety of AFB1 is a critical point for determining the degree of<br />

biological activity of this group of mycotoxins [4]. Many countries including <strong>Malaysia</strong> have stringent<br />

regulatory demands on the level of aflatoxins permitted in imported and traded commodities.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Figure 1 Chemical structure of AFB1<br />

O<br />

O<br />

One of the foodstuffs which is most occurrence of AFB1 is ground nut. In <strong>Malaysia</strong>, the AFB1<br />

level in peanut is regulated with maximum level that cannot be greater than 15 ppb [5]. Several analytical<br />

techniques for quantitative determination of the AFB1 in ground nut have been proposed such as thin<br />

layer chromatograhpy [6], high performance liquid chromatography[ 7,8,9 ]and an enzyme-linked<br />

immunosorbent assay, ELISA [10], All these methods, however, require specialist equipment operated<br />

by skilled personel and expensive instruments and high maintenance cost [11].<br />

Due to all these reasons, a voltammetric technique which is fast, accurate and require low cost<br />

equipment [12,13] is proposed. A square wave cathodic stripping which is presented in this paper is one<br />

of the voltammetric technique that in particularly, has a few advantages compared to other voltammetric<br />

technique such as high speed, increased analytical sensitivity and relative insensitivity to the presence of<br />

dissolved oxygen [14]. Previous experiment using cyclic voltammetric technique showed that AFB1<br />

reduced at mercury electrode and the reaction is totally irreversible [15]. This work aimed to study and<br />

develop a SWSV method for determination of AFB1 at trace levels and to determine this aflatoxin in<br />

ground nut samples. No such report has been published regarding this experiment until now.<br />

Experiment<br />

Apparatus<br />

Square-wave voltammograms were obtained with Metrohm 693 VA Processor coupled with a<br />

Metrohm 694 VA stand. Three electrode system consisted of a hanging mercury drop electrode (HMDE)<br />

was used as the working electrode, Ag/AgCl/3 M KCl reference electrode and a platinum wire auxiliary<br />

electrode. A 20 ml capacity measuring cell was used for placing supporting electrolyte and sample<br />

analytes. All measurements were carried out at room temperature. All pH measurements were made<br />

with Cyberscan pH meter, calibrated with standard buffers at room temperature.<br />

Reagents<br />

AFB1 standard (1mg per bottle) was purchased from Sigma Co. and was used without further<br />

purification. Stock solution (10 ppm or 3.21 x 10 -5 M) in benzene:acetonitrile (98:2) were prepared and<br />

stored in the dark at 14 0 C. The diluted solution were prepared daily by using certain volume of stock<br />

solution, degassed by nitrogen until dryness and redissolved in Britton-Robinson buffer (BRB) solution at<br />

O<br />

O<br />

3


pH 9.0. Britton-Robinson buffer solutions (prepared from a stock solution 0.04 M phosphoric (Merck),<br />

boric (Merck) and acetic (Merck) acids; and by adding sodium hydroxide (Merck) 1.0 M up to pH of 9.0.<br />

All solutions were prepared in double distilled dionised water (~ 18M Ω cm). All chemicals were of<br />

analytical grade reagents.<br />

Procedure<br />

For voltammetric experiments, 10 ml of Britton-Robinson buffer solution with pH 9.0 was placed<br />

in a voltammetric cell, through which a nitrogen stream was passed for 600 s before recording the<br />

voltammogram. The selected Eacc = - 800 mV was applied during the tacc = 100 s while the solution was<br />

kept under stirring. After the accumulation time had elapsed, stirring was stopped and the selected<br />

accumulation potential was kept on mercury drop for a rest time (tr = 10 s), after which a potential scan<br />

was performed between -1.00 as initial potential (Ei) and finished at -1.400 V as final potential (Ef ) by<br />

SWSV technique.<br />

Procedure for the determination in ground nut samples<br />

AFB1 was extracted according to the standard procedure developed by Chemistry Department,<br />

Penang Branch, Ministry Of Science, Technology and Innovation, <strong>Malaysia</strong> [16]. 1ml of the final<br />

solution from extraction and clean-up steps in chloroform was pipette into amber bottle, degassed with<br />

nitrogen and redissolved in 1ml of BRB solution. 200 ul of this solution was spiked into 10 ml supporting<br />

electrolyte in volumetric cell. After that, the general procedure was applied and voltammogram of sample<br />

was recorded. This experiment was followed by a standard addition of 10 ppb of AFB1 standard addition<br />

and voltammogram of sample with AFB1 standard was recorded.<br />

Result and discussion<br />

Using previous differential pulse stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) optimum parameters [17],<br />

SWSV was run to determine 0.1 uM AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0. It gave a single reduction signal with peak<br />

height (Ip) of 250 nA at peak potential (Ep) of -1.26 V (against Ag/AgCl). The SWS voltammograms<br />

shows improved Ip compared to that obtained bt DPCSV where the Ip was increased almost 4 times as<br />

shown in Figure 2.<br />

Cyclic voltammogram of AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0 is shown in Figure 3 which only produced a<br />

cathodic peak that indicates the non-reversibility of the electrode process [18].<br />

Figure 2 Voltammograms of 0.1 uM AFB1 obtained by (a) DPCSV and (b) SWSV techniques.<br />

Experimental condition; for DPCSV: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s and<br />

4


pulse amplitude = 80 mV and for SWSV: Ei = -1.0 V, Ef = -1.4 V, Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, frequency =<br />

50 Hz, voltage step = 0.02, amplitude = 50 mV and υ = 1000 mV/s.<br />

Figure 3 Cyclic voltammogram of AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0. Experimental conditions: Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5<br />

V, Ehigh = 0 and scan rate = 200 mV/s.<br />

The effect of the pH of the BRB on the stripping was studied in a pH range of 6 – 13 (Figure 4).<br />

The Ip increased slowly with increasing pH up to 8.0 followed with sharply increased for pH 8.0 to 9.0,<br />

then decreased in pH 10.0 and continuously decreased in a range of 10 – 13. Thus pH 9.0 was chosen for<br />

the analysis. This result is not contradicted with that found by Smyth et al. (1979) when they performed<br />

polarographic study of AFB1 [19].<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14<br />

pH of BRB<br />

Figure 4 Influence of pH of BRB on the Ip of 0.10 uM AFB1 using SWSV technique. The instrumental<br />

parameters are the same as in Figure 2.0.<br />

Figure 5 shows a dependence of the Ep on pH. Shifting of the Ep towards the negative direction at<br />

higher pH implies that the reduction process takes up hydrogen ions [20]. A double bond in aromatic ring<br />

conjugates with ketone group, in general, undergoes a reduction at mercury electrode. The suggested<br />

mechanism of this reaction in BRB pH 9.0 is illustrated in Figure 6 as reported by Smyth et al. (1979)<br />

[21].<br />

5


Ep (-V)<br />

1.34<br />

1.32<br />

1.3<br />

1.28<br />

1.26<br />

1.24<br />

1.22<br />

1.2<br />

1.18<br />

5 6 7 8 9 10 11<br />

Figure 5 Relationship between Ep of AFB1 with pH of BRB<br />

2<br />

O<br />

O<br />

CH 3<br />

O<br />

2e -<br />

2H +<br />

pH<br />

O<br />

2 H 2O<br />

O<br />

Dimer + 2 OH -<br />

Figure 6 Mechanism for reduction of AFB1 at mercury electrode in BRB pH 9.0<br />

Optimisation of condition for the stripping analysis<br />

The voltammetric determination of analytes at trace levels normally involves very small current<br />

response. For that reason it is important to optimise all those parameters which may have an influence on<br />

the measured current. The effect of Ei , Eacc , tacc, frequency, voltage step and amplitude were studied.<br />

Square-wave voltammetric technique was used with stirring. For this study, 1.0 x 10 -7 M of AFB1 was<br />

spiked into supporting electrolyte.<br />

A study of the influence of Ei showing a peak height (Ip) was obtained for Ei = -1.0 V (Figure 7).<br />

The Ip was slowly decreased for Ei more negative than -1.0 V. This value was chosen for subsequent<br />

studies further optimisation step. Influence of Eacc to Ip of AFB1 was investigated where the Eacc was<br />

varied between 0 to -1.4 V. The maximum value of Ip obtained at -0.8 V (366 nA) as shown in Figure 8.<br />

This value was selected for subsequent experiments.<br />

2<br />

CH 3<br />

O<br />

6


The dependence of Ip on tacc was studied. The effect of tacc on the Ip was studied where tacc was<br />

varied from 0 to 160 s. The result is shown in Figure 9 which reveals that there is linearly up to 100s<br />

according to equation y = 3.8557x + 21.383 (n=6) with R 2 = 0.9936, then it increased rather slowly<br />

leveling off at about 140 s. At 160 s, Ip decreased which may be due to the electrode saturation [21].<br />

Thus, 100 s was appeared to be an optimum tacc for the pre-concentration prior to stripping.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

I p (nA)<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8<br />

Ei (-V)<br />

1 1.2 1.4<br />

Figure 7 Effect of Ei on the Ip of 0.1 uM AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0<br />

I p (nA)<br />

400<br />

350<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6<br />

Eacc (-V)<br />

Figure 8 Effect of Eacc on the Ip of 0.1 uM AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0<br />

450<br />

400<br />

350<br />

300<br />

250<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

50<br />

0<br />

0 40 80 120 160 200<br />

Tacc (s)<br />

Figure 9 Effect of tacc on the Ip of 0.1 uM AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0<br />

7


For other instrumental condition such as square wave frequency, step potential and pulse<br />

amplitude were examined, varying one of them and maintaining constant others. The variable ranges<br />

were: 25 to 125 Hz for the frequency, 0.01 to 0.04 for the voltage step and 25 – 100 mV for pulse<br />

amplitude. Generally, the Ip increase by increasing all of these instrumental parameters [22]. At higher<br />

potential values the peak width increase; at higher frequency values the current background increases.<br />

Finally, the condition selected were: frequency = 125 Hz, voltage step = 0.03 V and pulse amplitude = 50<br />

mV (Figures 10 to 12). Under optimised parameters, Ip of AFB1 was 956 nA which is 16 times higher<br />

compared to that obtained by DPCSV. Figure 13 shows voltammograms of 0.1 uM AFB1 obtained by<br />

SWSV and DPCSV techniques.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

0 25 50 75 100 125 150<br />

Frequency (Hz)<br />

Figure 10 Dependence of the Ip of AFB1 on SWSV frequency<br />

I p (nA)<br />

0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05<br />

Voltage step (V)<br />

Figure 11 Dependence of the Ip of AFB1 on SWSV voltage step<br />

8


I p (nA)<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

0 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 0.125<br />

Amplitude (V)<br />

Figure 12 Dependence of the Ip of AFB1 on SWSV pulse amplitude<br />

Figure 13 Voltammograms of AFB1 obtained by (a) DPCSV and (b) SWSV techniques in BRB pH 9.0.<br />

Voltammetric determination of AFB1 and analytical characteristics of the method<br />

Using the selected conditions already mentioned, a study was made of the relationship between Ip<br />

and concentration. There is a linear relationship in the concentration range 0.01 to 0.15 uM as shown in<br />

Figure 14. Limit of detection (LOD) was 0.389 ppb (0.125 x 10 -8 M) which was determined by standard<br />

addition of low concentration of AFB1 until obtaining the sample response that is significantly difference<br />

from blank [23]. Relative standard deviation (RSD) of the analytical signals at several measurement<br />

(n=5) of 0.10 uM was 0.83%.<br />

I p (nA)<br />

1400<br />

1200<br />

1000<br />

800<br />

600<br />

400<br />

200<br />

0<br />

y = 62.373x + 246.15<br />

R 2 = 0.9956<br />

0 5 10<br />

[AFB1] / 10<br />

15 20<br />

-8 M<br />

Figure 14 Calibration plot of AFB1 in BRB pH 9.0 obtained by SWSV technique.<br />

9


Determination of AFB1 in ground nut samples<br />

The proposed method was applied to the analysis of the AFB1 in ground nut samples. Recovery<br />

studies were performed by spiked with difference concentration levels of AFB1 standard into eluate of<br />

ground nut sample. In this case the concentrations used were 3 ppb (0.963 x 10 -8 M), 9 ppb (2.889 x 10 -8<br />

M) and 15 ppb (4.815 x 10 -8 M). The results of these studies are shown in Table 1. For analysis of AFB1<br />

in ground nut samples, the standard addition method was used in order to eliminate the matrix effects.<br />

Figure 15 show voltammograms of real sample together with spiked AFB1 standard. Table 2 listed the<br />

content of AFB1 in 6 samples obtained by proposed technique compared with that obtained by HPLC.<br />

The results show that there are no significant different of AFB1 content obtained by both techniques.<br />

Table 1 Percent recovery of AFB1 spiked in real samples (n=3)<br />

Amount added (ppb)<br />

3.00<br />

9.00<br />

15.00<br />

Amount found (ppb)<br />

2.82 +/- 0.02<br />

8.21 +/- 0.14<br />

13.88 +/- 0.30<br />

Recovery (%) n=3<br />

94.00 +/- 0.67<br />

91.22 +/- 1.56<br />

92.53 +/- 2.00<br />

Figure 15 SWS voltammograms of real sample (b) and spiked AFB1 (c) obtained in BRB pH 9.0 as the<br />

supporting electrolyte (a)<br />

10


Table 2 AFB1 content in ground nut samples by proposed technique compared with those obtained by<br />

HPLC.<br />

Conclusion<br />

No of sample<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

5<br />

6<br />

By SWSV<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

9.21<br />

13.92<br />

36.30<br />

AFB1 content in real sample<br />

By HPLC<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

8.25<br />

14.34<br />

36.00<br />

A SWSV technique was successfully developed for the determination of AFB1 in ground nut as<br />

an alternative method for determination of AFB1 which is sensitive, accurate and fast technique. The<br />

results are not significant different with that obtained by accepted technique used for routine analysis of<br />

AFB1.<br />

Acknowledgement<br />

One of the author would like to thank University Science <strong>Malaysia</strong> for approving his study leave<br />

and financial support to carry out his further study at Chemistry Dept., UTM. We also indebt to UTM for<br />

short term grant (Vot No 75152/2004) and to Chemistry Department, Penang Branch, Ministry of<br />

Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI) for their help in analysis of aflatoxin in ground nut<br />

samples using HPLC technique.<br />

References<br />

1. Akiyama, H. Goda, Y. Tanaka, T and Toyoda, M. (2001). “Determination of aflatoxinsB1, B2,<br />

G1 and G2 in spices using a multifunctional column clean-up” J. Of Chromatography A, 932.<br />

153-157.<br />

2. Yoruglu, T, Oruc, H.H. and Tayar, M. (2005) “Aflatooxin M1 levels in cheese samples from<br />

some provinces of Turkey” Food Control. 16(10): 883-895.<br />

3. World Health Organisation in: IARC Monograph on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to<br />

human, WHO, Lyon, 1987.<br />

11


4. Hall, A.J., Wild, C.P in: Eaton, D.L., Groopman, J.D. (Eds). “The toxicology of aflatoxins:<br />

Human Health, Veterrinary and Agricultural Significance” Academic, New York, 1994.<br />

5. <strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act (1983) Act No 281, Reviewed 2002, Food Quality Control Dept, Ministry of<br />

Health, <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

6. Bicking,M.K.L., Kniseley, R.N and Svec, H.J (1983) “Coupled-Column for quantitating low<br />

levels of aflatoxins” J . Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66, 905-908.<br />

7. Beebe, B.M. (1978). “Reverse phase high pressure liquid chromatographic determination of<br />

aflatoxins in foods” J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 81. 1347-1352.<br />

8. Cepeda, A., Franco, C.M., Fente, C.A., Vazquez, B.I., Rodriguez, J.L., Prognon, P. and<br />

Mahuzier, G. (1996) “Postcolumn excitation of aflatoxins using cyclodextrins in liquid<br />

chromatography for food analysis” J Of Chrom A. 721. 69-74.<br />

9. Garner, R.C., Whattam, M.M. , Taylor, P.J.L. and Stow, M.W ( 1993) “Analysis of United<br />

Kingdom purchased spices for aflatoxins using immunoaffinity column clean up procedure<br />

followed up by high-performance liquid chromatographic analysis and post-column derivatization<br />

with pyridium bromide perbromide” J. Chromatography, 648. 485-490<br />

10. Beaver, R.W., James, M.A. and Lin ,T.Y. (1991). “ELISA-based screening test with liquid<br />

chromatography for the determination of aflatoxin in corn” J. Assoc.Off. Anal. Chem , 74: 827 –<br />

829<br />

11. Garden, S.R. and Strachan, N.J.C.(2001). “Novel colorimetric immunoassay for the detection of<br />

aflatoxin B1” Anal Chim Acta, 444. 187-191.<br />

12. Braitina, Kh. Z., Malakhova, N.A. and Stojko, Y. (2000) “Stripping voltammetry in<br />

environmental and food analysis” Fresenius J Anal Chem 368. 307-325<br />

13. Skrzypek, S., Ciesielski, W., Sokolowski, A., Yilmaz, S. and Kazmierczak, D. (2005) “Square<br />

wave adsorption stripping voltammetric determination of famotidine in urine”Talanta. Article in<br />

press.<br />

14. Economou, A., Bolis, S.D., Efstathiou, C.E. and Volikakis, G.J (2002) “A virtual electrochemical<br />

instrument for square wave voltammetry”.Anal. Chim. Act. 467. 179-188.<br />

15. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd Yusoff, A.R. and Ahmad, R. (2003). “Cyclic voltammetry of AFB2 at the<br />

mercury electrode”. Paper presented at Simposium Kimia <strong>Malaysia</strong> ke 13 (SKAM-13), 9 – 11 th<br />

September 2003, Kucing, Sarawak, <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

16. Standard procedure for determination of aflatoxins (2000). Chemistry Dept. Penang Branch,<br />

Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), <strong>Malaysia</strong> – unpublished paper.<br />

17. Yaacob, M.H., Mohd Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. (2005). “Determination of the aflatoxin B1 in<br />

ground nut by differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry technique”. Paper presented at<br />

2 nd National Seminar On Chemistry, 14 th April 2005, <strong>Universiti</strong> Sumatera Utara, Medan,<br />

Indonesia.<br />

12


18. Rodriguez, J., Berzas, J.J., Casteneda, G. and Rodriguez, N. (2005). “Voltammetric determination<br />

of Imatinib (Gleevec) and its main metabolite using square-wave and adsorptive stripping squarewave<br />

techniques in urine samples”. Talanta. 66. 202-209.<br />

19. Smyth, M. R., Lawellin, D. W. and Osteryoung, J.G. (1979). “Polarographic study of Aflatoxin<br />

B1, B2, G1 and G2: Application of differential pulse polarography to the determination of<br />

Aflatoxin B1 in various foodstuffs” Analyst. 104. 73-78<br />

20. Sun, N., Mo, W-M., Shen, Z-L. and Hu, B-X. (2005). “Adsorptive stripping voltammetric<br />

technique for the rapid determination of tobramycin on the hanging mercury electrode”. J Pharm.<br />

Biomed. Anal. Article in press.<br />

21. Wang J. (1994) “Analytical Electrochemistry” VCH Publisher, USA.<br />

22. Komorsky-Lovric, S., Lovric, M. and Branica, M. (1992). “Peak current-frequency relationship in<br />

adsorptive stripping square-wave voltammetry”. J of Electroanal. Chem. 335(1-2). 297-308.<br />

23. Barek, J. , Fogg, A. G., Muck, A. and Zima, J. (2001). “Polarography and Voltammetry at<br />

Mercury Electrodes”, Critical Reviews In Analytical Chemistry, 31. 291-309<br />

13


PAPER SENT TO PROF BAREK<br />

TO BE PUBLISHED IN<br />

J. COLLECT. CZECH. CHEM. COMMON<br />

( IN PRESS )<br />

1


DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENTIAL PULSE STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC<br />

(DPSV) TECHNIQUE FOR DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN G1 AT THE<br />

MERCURY ELECTRODE<br />

Mohamad Hadzri Yaacob 1 , Abdull Rahim Hj. Mohd. Yusoff 2 and Rahmalan<br />

Ahamad 2<br />

1 School of Health Sciences, USM, 16150 Kubang Krian, Kelantan<br />

2 Chemistry Dept., Faculty Of Sciences, UTM, 81310 Skudai, Johor<br />

Abstract<br />

DPSV technique was developed for determination of aflatoxin G1 (AFG1) in<br />

Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB). Controlled Growth Mercury Electrode (CGME)<br />

and Ag/AgCl have been used as working and reference electrodes respectively.<br />

In this experiment, the analyte was initially scanned from -200 mV to -1500 mV in<br />

BRB from pH 2.0 to 9.0. The effect of pH of supporting electrolyte, scan rate,<br />

accumulation potential, accumulation time and pulse amplitude on the peak<br />

potential and peak current of the analyte were studied. The results showed that<br />

AFG1 compound undergoes reduction at potential -1175 mV ( versus Ag / AgCl ).<br />

Maximum peak height was observed in BRB pH 9.0 with the optimised<br />

parameters such as scan rate; 50 mV/s, accumulation potential; -600 mV,<br />

accumulation time; 80s and pulse amplitude; 80 mV . Under the optimum<br />

condition, the peak height of AFG1 was proportional to the concentrations of the<br />

AFG1 in the range of 0.02 to 0.26 uM with a limit of detection of 0.015 uM.<br />

Relative standard deviation for a replicate measurements of AFG1 ( n= 8) with<br />

the concentrations of 0.06 and 0.20 uM were 3.52% and 1.54% respectively.<br />

Recoveries of the different AFG1 concentrations in prepared standard solutions<br />

were found to be 85% to 95% with the precision around 0.4% to 1.0%.<br />

1 Correspondence address;<br />

Chemistry Dept, Faculty Of Science,<br />

UTM 81310 Skudai Johor<br />

2


O<br />

O<br />

Introduction<br />

Aflatoxin G1 ( 3,4,7a,10a-tetrahydro-5-methoxy-1H, 12H furo[3’,2’:4,5]furo[2,3h]pyrano[3,4-c][1]-benzopyran-1,12-dione),<br />

structural formula is shown in Figure<br />

1.0, is one of the type of aflatoxin which is naturally occurance (1). It is one of the<br />

compound in mycotoxin group (2) that is produced by Aspergillus flavus and<br />

Aspergillus parasticus fungi (3,4). It is found in various contaminated food such<br />

as peanuts and peanut products, barley, maize, cottonseed, coffee beans and<br />

others (5). It produces green color under ultraviolet light (6,7). In health aspect, it<br />

is considered as human carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on<br />

Cancer (IARC) as reported in World Health Organisation (WHO)’s monograph<br />

(8). It has been reported to be teratogenic, tremorogenic, and haemorrhagic to<br />

wide range of organisms and to cause hepatic carcinoma in man (9)<br />

Consequently, AFG1 level in animal feed and various human food is now<br />

monitored and tightly regulated by various countries. In this country, regulatory<br />

level for AFG1 and total aflatoxins is 15 ppb in raw peanuts and 5 ppb for others<br />

(10). Due to all these reasons, selecting appropriate and accurate method of<br />

analysis of AFG1 is absolutely necessary to determine AFG1 at the part-of-billion<br />

(ppb) level.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

Figure 1.0 Chemical structure of AFG1<br />

There have been several reports for the determination of AFG1 including thin<br />

layer chromatography (11,12), high performance liquid chromatography with<br />

various type of detectors ( 13,14,15, 16 ) and polarographic technique (17) but<br />

O<br />

3


no report has been published concerning the use of stripping voltammetric<br />

technique. The development of new method capable of determining AFG1 in<br />

food sample is important. Stripping voltammetric technique was selected for this<br />

study due to its simple, easy to use, sensitive and accurate technique (18). This<br />

technique applies pre-concentration step that will increase sensitivity of the<br />

method (19). This paper will describe the development of DPSV technique for<br />

determination of AFG1 using CGME as the working electrode.<br />

Materials and Methods<br />

All reagents employed were of analytical grade. Water purified from a Nano Pure<br />

Ultrapure water system ( Branstead / Thermolyne) was used for all dilution and<br />

sample preparation. AFG1 was purchased from SIGMA: 1 mg was dissolved in<br />

hexane: acetonitrile (98:2) to produce 10 ppm solution. A stock of Britton-<br />

Robinson buffer (BRB) solution 0.04 M was prepared as follows: 2.47 g boric<br />

acid (Fluka), 2.30 ml acetic acid (MERCK) and 2.70 ml orthophosphoric acid (<br />

Ashland Chemical ) were dissolved in 1 l deionised water. The pH of the solution<br />

was adjusted to the desired values by adding 1 M sodium hydroxide (BDH) or 1<br />

M hydrochloric acid ( MERCK). Hexadistilled mercury, grade 9N, used for<br />

working electrode was purchased from MERCK.<br />

All voltammograms were recorded with a BAS CV-50W Voltammetric Analyser<br />

in connection with a Controlled Growth Mercury Electrode (CGME) stand<br />

equipped with a three-electrode system consisting of an Ag / AgCl reference<br />

electrode, a platinum wire counter electrode and the CGME as working<br />

electrode. A 20 ml capacity BAS MR-1208 cell was used. In all voltammetric<br />

analysis, the supporting electrolyte solution was deaerated by a stream of<br />

nitrogen for at least 10 min. A pH meter Cyber-scan model equipped with a<br />

glass electrode combined with an Ag / AgCl reference electrode, was employed<br />

for the pH measurements.<br />

Differential pulse stripping voltammograms (DPSVs) of AFG1 were run after<br />

purging the test solution for at least 5 min. The DPSVs were scanned from -200<br />

to -1500 mV with scan rate of 40 mV/s, accumulation potential ( Eacc ) -800 mV,<br />

4


accumulation time ( tacc ) 40 s, pulse amplitude 50 mV, pulse width 50-ms and<br />

pulse period 200-ms.<br />

Results and Discussion<br />

From our previous studies on the cyclic voltammograms of AFG1 in BRB pH 9.0,<br />

a reduction peak was observed at -1245 mV ( against Ag / AgCl) and no anodic<br />

peak at oxidation wave. The results of this CVs showed that AFG1 underwent<br />

irreversible reduction reaction at the mercury electrode (20). Due to this<br />

electroanalytical properties, differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetric<br />

technique was applied in this study using the same supporting electrolyte. By<br />

using initial parameters as mentioned before, the peak potential ( Ep ) of 0.15 uM<br />

AFG1 was obtained at -1175 mV with peak current ( Ip ) of 34.73 nA ( Figure<br />

2.0 ). Several parameters have been optimised so as to obtain a more<br />

symmetrical and higher reduction peak.<br />

Figure 2.0 Voltammograms of 0.15 uM AFG1 (b) in BRb pH 9.0 (a) . Condition;<br />

scan rate; 40 mV/s, accumulation potential ( Eacc ); -800 mV, accumulation time<br />

( tacc ); 40 s, pulse amplitude; 50 mV, pulse width; 50-ms and pulse period; 200ms.<br />

Effect of pH of BRB<br />

The effect of different pH medium of BRB have been studied. The results<br />

showed that a reduction peak was first observed at pH 5.0 which increases in<br />

5


peak height as the pH increases. It reaches its optimum height at pH 9.0. At pH<br />

more than 9.0, the peak height decreases rapidly and no peak was observed at<br />

pH more than 12.0 ( Fig 3.0 ). This results suggested that proton ion played a<br />

significant role in the reduction of AFG1 on mercury electrode. Hence, BRB with<br />

pH 9.0 was applied in this experiment..<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

4 6 8<br />

pH of BRb<br />

10 12<br />

Figure 3.0 The effect of pH of BRB on peak current of AFG1. [AFG1] = 0.15 uM<br />

Condition: scan rate; 40 mV/s, accumulation potential ( Eacc ); -800 mV,<br />

accumulation time ( tacc ); 40 s, pulse amplitude; 50 mV, pulse width; 50-ms and<br />

pulse period; 200-ms.<br />

Effect of potential windows, accumulation potential ( Eacc ) and<br />

accumulation time ( tacc) )<br />

The influence of potential windows on the cathodic peak current of AFG1 was<br />

studied by varying the potential windows from -200 to -1000 mV and from -1400<br />

to -1500 mV for initial ( Ei ) and final potential ( Ef ) respectively. The results<br />

showed that with Ei = -950 mV and Ef = -1400 mV, the peak current at Ep = -<br />

1160 mV was 41.50 nA which is higher than using initial potential windows as<br />

described in previous experiment. Therefore, this potential window was used for<br />

all subsequent measurements. The dependence of the cathodic peak current on<br />

Eacc was also studied. The highest peak current was found when Eacc was -600<br />

mV and when Eacc changed to more negative than -600 mV, the Ip decreases<br />

6


( Figure 4.0 ) which indicated that maximum accumulation of AFG1 at mercury<br />

electrode occurred when potential of -600 mV was applied on it in BRB pH 9.0.<br />

The effect of tacc on Ip of AFG1 also was studied. The Ip of AFG1 was found to<br />

increase with increasing tacc ( Figure 5.0 ) indicating continueous accumulation<br />

of AFG1 at the electrode surface with increasing accumulation time. Normally,<br />

the increase in the response current continued until a maximum signal level<br />

presumable corresponding to a saturation electrode surface was attained (21).<br />

The results thus obtained indicated that the optimum tacc for AFG1 was 80 s.<br />

Hence 80 s accumulation time was employed throughout this experiment.<br />

I p ( nA)<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

ip (nA)<br />

0 200 400 600 800<br />

Eacc (-mV)<br />

1000 1200 1400 1600<br />

Figure 4.0 Effect of accumulation potential on Ip of AFG1<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

0 50 100<br />

tacc (s)<br />

150 200<br />

Figure 5.0 Effect of accumulation time on Ip of AFG1<br />

7


Effect of instrumental parameters<br />

As the scan rate was varied from 20 to 100 mV s -1 , the Ip increases and reached<br />

it maximum value at scan rate of 50 mV s -1 , after which the peaks became<br />

broader with undesired tail at their end. A similar pattern for Ip was obtained with<br />

increasing pulse amplitude ( from 30 to 120 mV ). A pulse amplitude of 80 mV<br />

with scan rate of 50 mV s -1 were chosen for further studies. Using all optimised<br />

parameters ( Ei = -950 mV, Ef = 1400 mV, Eacc = -600 mV, tacc = 80 s, scan rate =<br />

50 mV s -1 , pulse amplitude = 80 mV ) the Ip of 0.15 uM AFG1 was 75.10 nA<br />

with Ep at -1150 mV was obtained<br />

Calibration graph, detection limit, precision and recovery<br />

The differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammograms at different<br />

concentrations of AFG1 under optimum conditions are shown in Fig. 6.0. The Ip<br />

of AFG1 increased linearly with increasing concentration up to 0.26 uM. A linear<br />

calibration graph was obtained in the concentration range 0.02 to 0.26 uM AFG1<br />

( n = 10, r = 0.9980). At higher concentrations Ip tend to level off which may be<br />

due to electrode surface saturation (20). The detection limit ( three times signalto-noise<br />

) was found to be 0.015 uM AFG1. For eight successive determinations<br />

of 0.06 and 0.20 uM AFG1, relative standard deviations were 3.52 and 1.54 %<br />

respectively which indicated that the precision of the method was good.<br />

Recovery of the different AFG1 concentrations in prepared standard solutions<br />

were found to be 85 to 95% with precision around 0.4 to 1.0 % as listed in Table<br />

1.0.<br />

8


Ip (nA )<br />

160<br />

140<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

y = 5.5958x + 3.7725<br />

R 2 = 0.998<br />

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3<br />

[AFG1] / uM<br />

(A) (B)<br />

Figure 6.0 (A) : Differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammograms of AFG1 at<br />

mercury electrode. AFG1 concentrations in (a) BRB pH 9.0; (b) 0.02 uM, (c)<br />

0.04 uM, (d) 0.06 uM, (e) 0.08 uM, (f) 0.1 uM, (g) 0.12 uM, (h) 0.14 uM, (i) 0.18<br />

uM, (j) 0.22 uM, (k) 0.26 uM. (B) The related calibration graph. Conditions: Ei = -<br />

950 mV, Ef = -1400 mV, Eacc = -600 mV, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV s -1 , pulse<br />

amplitude = 80 mV .<br />

9


Table 1.0 Recovery of spiked AFG1 standard in BRB pH 9.0<br />

[AFG1]<br />

injected<br />

0.10 uM<br />

0.15 uM<br />

0.20 uM<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

56.35<br />

56.84<br />

56.62<br />

78.21<br />

77.19<br />

77.20<br />

98.42<br />

99.23<br />

98.14<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1150<br />

1150<br />

1150<br />

1140<br />

1140<br />

1140<br />

1140<br />

1140<br />

1140<br />

[AFG1]<br />

obtained<br />

0.0940 uM<br />

0.0948 uM<br />

0.0942 uM<br />

0.1330 uM<br />

0.1313 uM<br />

0.1313 uM<br />

0.1691 uM<br />

0.1705 uM<br />

0.1686 uM<br />

% recovered<br />

94.00<br />

94.80<br />

94.20<br />

x = 94.50 +/- 0.41<br />

(RSD = 0.43%)<br />

88.68<br />

87.51<br />

87.51<br />

x = 87.91 +/- 0.58<br />

(RSD = 0.77%)<br />

84.57<br />

85.75<br />

84.30<br />

x = 84.87 +/- 0.77<br />

(RSD = 0.91%<br />

10


Conclusion<br />

A differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetric technique using mercury<br />

electrode as the working electrode for determination of AFG1 has been<br />

developed. The method presented here is fast, reliable and sensitive technique<br />

for analysis of AFG1 with good precision and recovery. Further study is currently<br />

been carried out for analytical application of this method for quantitation of AFG1<br />

in food sample.<br />

Acknowledgement<br />

The author gratefully acknowledge the University Science <strong>Malaysia</strong> for giving me<br />

a study leave together with a scholarship under the Academic Staff For Higher<br />

Education Scheme (ASHES). Also we would like to thank all Electroanalytical<br />

group and Chemistry Department staff, UTM for their fully cooperation.<br />

References<br />

[1] Goldblatt L.A. 1969. Aflatoxin:Scientific background, control and implication.<br />

Academic Press, New York, pp 5-10<br />

[2] Salleh B. 1998. Mikotoksin: Implikasinya terhadap kesihatan manusia dan<br />

haiwan, USM, Penang, pp 32 - 49<br />

[3] Begum F and Samajpathi N. 2000. Mycotoxin production in rice, pulses and<br />

oilseeds, Naturwissenschaften, 87: 275-277.<br />

[4] Ordaz J.J., Fente C.C., Vazquez B.I., Franco C.M. and Cepeda A. 2003.<br />

Development of a method for direct visual determination of aflatoxin production<br />

by colonies of the Asperfillus flavus group, Int. J. Food Microbiology, 83, 219-<br />

225.<br />

[5] Batista L. R., Chalfoun S.M., Prado G. Schwan R.F. and Wheals A. E. 2003.<br />

Toxigenic fungi associated with processed (green) coffee beans ( Coffea arabica<br />

L.) . Int. J. Food Microbiology, 85, 293-300.<br />

11


[6] Akiyama H. Goda Y. Tanaka T and Toyoda M. 2001. Determination of<br />

aflatoxins B1, B2, G1 and G2 in spices using a multifunctional column clean-up,<br />

J. Of Chromatography A, 932. 153-157<br />

[7] Aziz N.H., Youseff Y.A., El-Fouly M.Z. and Mousse L.A. 1998. Contamination<br />

of some common medicinal plant samples and spices by fungi and their<br />

mycotoxins. Bot. Bull. Acad. Sin 39, 279-285.<br />

[8] World Health Organisation 1987 in: IARC Monograph on the Evaluation of<br />

Carcinogenic Risk to Human, WHO, Lyon , pp 82 Supl. I<br />

[9] Refai M.K. 1988. Aflatoxins and aflatoxicosis. J. Egypt Vet. Med. Ass. 48, 1-<br />

19<br />

[10] Ministry of Health, <strong>Malaysia</strong>, Food Act No 231. 1983. Reviewed 2003<br />

[11] Shotwell O.L and Goulden M.L. 1977. Aflatoxins: Comparison of analysis of<br />

corn by various methods, J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem 60: 83-88<br />

[12] Gimeno A. and Martins M. L. 1983 Rapid thin layer chromatographic<br />

determination of patulin, citrinin and aflatoxin in apples and pears and their juices<br />

and jams, J. Assoc. Anal. Chem, 66, 85-91.<br />

[13] Scholten J.M and Spanjer M.C. 1996. Determination of aflatoxin B1, B2, G1<br />

and G2 in pastachio kernels and shells, , J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem 79: 1360-<br />

1364<br />

[14] Jeffery H.W., Lenorich L.M and Martin R. Jr. 1982. Liquid chromatography<br />

determination of aflatoxins in artificially contaminated cocoa beans. , J. Assoc.<br />

Off. Anal. Chem 80: 1215-1219<br />

[15] Joshua, H. 1993 Determination of aflatoxin by reversed-phase high<br />

performance liquid chromatography with post-column in-line photochemical<br />

derivatization and fluorescence detection, J. Chromatography A, 654: 247-254<br />

[16] Gonzalez M.P.E., Mattusch J. and Wennrich R 1998. Stability and<br />

determination of aflatoxins by high-performance liquid chromatography with<br />

amperometric detection, J. Chromatography A, 828: 439-444<br />

[17] Smyth M. R., Lawellin D. W. and Osteryoung J.G 1979. Polarographic<br />

Study of Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1 and G2: Application of Differential-pulse<br />

12


Polarography to the Determination of Aflatoxin B1 in Various Foodstuffs, Analyst,<br />

104: 73-78<br />

[18] Braitina Kh. Z., Malakhova N.A. and Stojko Y. 2000 Stripping voltammetry<br />

in environmental and food analysis, Fresenius J Anal Chem 368: 307-325<br />

[19] Fifield, F.W. and Haines, P.J. 2000. .Environmental Analytical Chemistry<br />

2 nd Ed, Balckwell Science UK, pp 241-242<br />

[20] Yaacob M.H., Mohd Yusof A.R., Ahamad R. and Yakob A.R. 2004. Cyclic<br />

Voltammetry of AFG1 at mercury electrode, Paper will be presented at 3rd<br />

Annual Seminar on Sustainable Science and Management, KUSTEM,<br />

Terengganu, 4 – 5 May 2004.<br />

[21] Wang. 2000. Analytical Electrochemistry. Wiley-VCH, USA.<br />

13


PAPER SENT TO PROF BAREK<br />

TO BE PUBLISHED IN<br />

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS (WARSAW)<br />

( IN PRESS)


DIFFERENTIAL PULSE STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC TECHNIQUE FOR<br />

THE DETERMINATION OF AFLATOXIN B2 AT THE MERCURY<br />

ELECTRODE<br />

Mohamad Hadzri Yaacob, Abdull Rahim Hj. Mohd. Yusoff and Rahmalan Ahamad<br />

Chemistry Dept., Faculty Of Sciences, UTM, 81310 Skudai, Johor<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

Differential pulse voltammetric technique was developed for determination of aflatoxin<br />

B2 standard (AFB2) in Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB). Hanging mercury drop electrode<br />

and Ag/AgCl have been used for working and reference electrodes respectively. In this<br />

experiment, the analyte was initially scanned from -1000 mV to -1500 mV in BRB pH<br />

9.0. The effect of pH of supporting electrolyte, scan rate, accumulation potential,<br />

accumulation time and pulse amplitude on the peak potential and peak current of the<br />

analyte were observed. The results showed that AFB2 compound undergoes reduction<br />

reaction at a potential of -1230 mV ( versus Ag/AgCl ). BRB pH 9.0 was the best<br />

supporting electrolyte with the optimised parameters such as scan rate; 50 mV/s,<br />

accumulation potential; -800 mV, accumulation time; 80s and pulse amplitude; 80 mV<br />

which gave the maximum peak height. Under the optimum condition, the peak height of<br />

AFB2 was proportional to the concentrations of the AFB2 in the range of 0.02 to 0.32 uM<br />

with a limit of detection was 0.0159 uM. Relative standard deviation for a eplicate<br />

measurements of AFB2 ( n= 8) with the concentrations of 0.06 and 0.20 uM were 2.80%<br />

and 2.53% respectively. Recoveries of the different AFB2 concentrations in prepared<br />

standard solutions were found to be 85% to 95% with the precision around 0.7% to 2.0%.<br />

Keywords: aflatoxin B2 compound, differential pulse stripping voltammetry, Britton-Robinson buffer and<br />

hanging mercury drop electrode (HMDE)<br />

1. INTRODUCTION<br />

Aflatoxins are mycotoxins produced by certain fungi, especially, Aspergillus flavus and<br />

Aspergillus parasiticus which are found on crops and foodstuffs under certain conditions<br />

(1). They display strong carcinogenicity. Therefore, they are dangerous food<br />

contaminants. They were first identified as the causative agent of the severe outbreak of<br />

“Turkey X” disease, a toxicosis that killed more than 100,000 turkey poults in England in<br />

1960 (2) There are a major concern as human hepatocarcinogens and are considered to<br />

play an important role in the high incidence of human hepatocellular carcinoma in certain<br />

areas of the world. Due to this reason, many countries including <strong>Malaysia</strong> have set<br />

regulatory demands on the level of aflatoxins permitted in imported and trade<br />

commodities.<br />

2


There are six main aflatoxin compounds such as Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1 and G2 (<br />

designated as AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 ) and aflatoxin M1 and M2 ( designated as<br />

AFM1 and AFM2). The former four compounds are naturally prevalent and the others are<br />

hydroxylated metabolite of AFB1 and AFB2 and were found in the milk of lactating<br />

animals following ingestion of B1 and B2- contaminated feeds (3)<br />

Among them AFB1 exhibits potent carcinogenic and mutagenic characteristics in a<br />

numbers of human and animals. AFB2 has a similar chemical structure with AFB1<br />

whereby the presence of an 8,9-double bond in the form of a vinyl ether at the terminal<br />

furan ring in AFB1, but not in AFB2. The chemical structure of AFB2 is shown in Figure<br />

1.0. This small difference in structure is associated with very significant change in<br />

activity; whereby AFB1 is more toxic than AFB2 (4).<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Figure 1.0: Chemical structure of AFB2<br />

Due to their toxicity, it is important that the level of these contaminants be controlled in<br />

food, soils and water to prevent toxic effect. The way to achieve this is by monitor<br />

samples so that any problem can be identified and dealt with, by doing analysis of<br />

aflatoxins using the analytical techniques at the parts-per-billon (ppb) level. Current<br />

analysis is done by various methods including thin-layer chromatography (TLC) (5),<br />

liquid chromatography (LC) and high-performance liquid chromatography (6,7) and<br />

microtitre plate enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay (ELISA) (8). All these methods<br />

require special equipments operated by skilled personnel and time consume. With the aim<br />

of rapid, simple, accurate and relative low cost analysis, the voltammetric technique is<br />

proposed for this purposes (9).<br />

Voltammetric technique generally refer to a system that combines a triple electrodes<br />

system with a potentiostate for controlling applied potential. It measures the current<br />

response generated by mass transport of electroactive species in the solution to the<br />

working electrode while potential is scanned. The total current response is proportional<br />

to the amount of analyte present in the solution (10). This paper reports the differential<br />

pulse voltammetric determination of AFB2 at a mercury electrode using a cathodic<br />

stripping voltammetric technique.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

3


2.1 Reagents<br />

2. EXPERIMENT<br />

All reagents employed were of analytical grade. Water purified from a Nano Pure<br />

Ultrapure water system ( Barnstead / Thermolyne) was used for all dilution and sample<br />

preparation. AFB2 was purchased from SIGMA ( 1 mg per bottle ) and dissolved in<br />

hexane:acetonitrile (98:2) produced 10 ppm standard solution. The stock solutions were<br />

placed in small amber glass tubes and kept in a freezer at -4.0 o C.<br />

A stock solution of 0.04 M Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB) solution was prepared as<br />

follows: 2.47 g boric acid (Fluka), 2.30 ml acetic acid (MERCK) and 2.70 ml<br />

orthoposphoric acid ( Ashland Chemical ) were diluted to 1 l with deionised water.<br />

Britton-Robinson Buffer of pH 2.0 to 13.0 were prepared by adding sodium hydroxide<br />

1.0 M (MERCK) into the stock solution and was used as the supporting electrolyte.<br />

Hexadistilled mercury, grade 9 N, used in a control growth mercury electrode ( CGME )<br />

stand, was purchased from MERCK. The purging was carried out with 99.99% nitrogen.<br />

2.2 Instruments<br />

A BAS CV-50W voltammetric analyser in connection with a CGME stand equipped with<br />

a three-electrode system and a 20 ml capacity BAS MR-1208 cell were used for all the<br />

voltammetric determination. The working electrode was a hanging mercury drop<br />

electrode ( HMDE ). A silver-silver chloride (Ag / AgCl ) and a platinum wire were used<br />

as the reference and counter-electrode respectively. BAS CV-50W was connected to a<br />

computer for data processing. A pH meter Cyber-scan model equipped with a glass<br />

electrode combined with an Ag/AgCl reference electrode, was used for all pH<br />

measurements.<br />

2.3 Procedure<br />

2.3.1 General procedure<br />

The general procedure used to obtain cathodic stripping voltammograms was following<br />

this procedure. A 10 ml aliquot of supporting electrolyte solution was put in a<br />

voltammographic cell. The stir was switched on and the solution was purged with<br />

nitrogen gas for 25 minutes. After forming a new HMDE, accumulate was effected for<br />

the required time at the appropriate potential while stirring the solution. At the end of the<br />

accumulation time the stirring was switched off and after 10 s had elapsed to allow the<br />

solution to become quiescent, the negative going potential was initiated. Ag/AgCl<br />

saturated was used as the reference electrode throughout this study.<br />

4


2.3.2 Procedure for determination of aflatoxin<br />

For the aflatoxin stock standard solution, organic solvent was removed by flowing<br />

nitrogen to dryness followed by addition of the BRB supporting electrolyte solution. The<br />

solution was placed in small amber tube. This solution has been freshly prepared before<br />

voltammetric experiment started. When further volume of aflatoxin were added using a<br />

micropipette into the cell, the solution was redegassed with nitrogen for another 5<br />

minutes before further voltammetric experiment was carried out.<br />

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

3.1 The effect of pH of supporting electrolyte<br />

From our previous cyclic voltammetric studies of AFB2 compound, it was capable of<br />

undergoing reduction process at the mercury electrode in BRB pH 9.0 (11). In the present<br />

study, 2.0 uM AFB2 was cathodically scanned in BRB solution in the pH range of 3.0 to<br />

13.0. This study was carried out with the aim to determine if protons are directly<br />

involved in the reduction process of AFB2. The result showed that in the BRB with pH <<br />

4.0 , no peak was observed. The single and characteristic AFB2 peak was initially<br />

observed starting from pH 5.0 with Ip and Ep were 11.0 nA and -1119mV respectively.<br />

The effect of the pH of supporting electrolyte on the Ip of the AFB2 peak is shown in<br />

Figure 1.0<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

4 6 8 10 12<br />

pH<br />

Figure 1.0: Dependence of the peak height of AFB2 on the pH of 0.04 M BRB<br />

solution. AFB2 concentration: 2.0 uM, Ei = 0, Ef = -1.5 V, Eacc = 0, tacc =<br />

15 s and υ = 50 mV/s.<br />

The Ip increased with increasing pH and the highest peak ( 52 nA at Ep of -1192 mV) was<br />

obtained in pH 9.0. The Ip sharply decreased at pH 10.0 to 12.0 and no peak was<br />

significantly appeared the pH 13.0. These results show that the reduction of AFB2 was<br />

totally depends on the pH of supporting electrolyte. The Ep of AFB2 was shifted toward<br />

5


more negative direction with increasing of the pH of the BRB solution which indicates<br />

that in more alkali solution, the reduction of AFB2 was much difficult to take place.<br />

3.2 Optimisation of conditions for the stripping analysis<br />

The voltammetric determination of analyte at trace level normally involves very small<br />

current response. For that reason it is important to optimise all the parameters which may<br />

have influence on the measured current. The effect of initial potential ( Ei), final potential<br />

(Ep) accumulation potential (Eacc ), accumulation time (tacc ), scan rate (υ ) and pulse<br />

amplitude to the Ep and Ip of the AFB2 peak have been studied in BRB pH 9.0. In this<br />

optimisation procedures, 0.06 uM AFB2 was used with initial parameters as follows; Ei<br />

= -1000 mV, Ef = -1500 mV, Eacc = -800 mV, tacc = 80 s, υ = 40 mV/s and pulse<br />

amplitude = 100 mV/s. Using these parameters, the Ip and Ep of 0.06 uM AFB2 were<br />

found to be 13.90 nA and -1250 mV ( vs Ag/AgCl ) respectively.<br />

Effect of Eacc, Ei and Ef<br />

For Ei = -1000 mV and Ef = -1500 mV, the effect of Eacc on the Ip and Ep of AFB2 was<br />

studied. The results revealed that the Ip of AFB2 obtained by using Eacc of -200 mV, -400<br />

mV, -600 mV, -800 mV and -1000 mV were not significantly different which were about<br />

14 nA. To get the maximum response, the Ef was changed from -1500 mV to -1400<br />

mV. The result is shown in Figure 2.0<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

A B<br />

200 400 600 800 1000<br />

Accumulation potential (-mV)<br />

Figure 2.0: Effect of Eacc on the Ip of 0.06 uM AFB2 obtained using different<br />

scan potential windows. (A) Ei = -1000 mV, Ef = -1500 mV and<br />

(B) Ei = -1000 mV, Ef = -1400mV.<br />

Using Ef = -1400 mV, the optimum Eacc was -600mV which gave the Ip of 16.84 nA.<br />

The Ep of AFB2 was not changed with different Eacc used in this experiment.<br />

Effect of tacc<br />

6


The effect of the tacc to the Ip of AFB2 (Figure 3.0) shows that by increasing tacc , the Ip<br />

linearly increases following this equation:-<br />

Ip (nA) = 0.4038x ( x s ) - 0.2847 ( R 2 = 0.9990, n = 5)<br />

for the range of 20 to 80 s. The maximum peak current ( 31.86 nA) was obtained when<br />

tacc = 80 s. When AFB2 was longer deposited at mercury electrode, the Ip was not<br />

significantly increased, hence the tacc at 80s was chosen as the optimum tacc. The Ep of<br />

AFB2 shifted toward less negative direction with increasing tacc.<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

Ip (nA )<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)<br />

0<br />

[AFB2]=0.6X10-7M<br />

[AFB2]=0.6X10-7M<br />

0 30 60 90 120 150<br />

Accumulation time (s)<br />

Figure 3.0: Effect of tacc on the Ip of 0.06 uM, Ei = - 1000 mV, Ef = -1400 mV,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 40 mV/s and P.A = 100 mV.<br />

Effect of υ<br />

Relationship between υ and the Ip of the AFB2 also was investigated which revealed that<br />

when the υ increased, the Ip increased as shown in Figure 4a. The Ip was not significantly<br />

different when the υ was more than 60 mV/s. Therefore, 50 mV/s has been selected as<br />

the best υ for determination of AFB2 in BRB pH 9.0. The peak potential of AFB2 has<br />

linearly shifted toward more negative direction for the range of 20 to 50 mV/s and<br />

became level off for the υ of 60 and 80 mV/s as shown in Figure 4b. For the υ of 50<br />

mV/s, the pulse amplitude has to be changed to 80 mV instead of 100 mV otherwise, the<br />

Ip cannot be calculated by software. The maximum Ip obtained from this optimisation was<br />

38.18 nA which was about 200% higher than before being optimised. Figure 6.0<br />

illustrates the voltammogramms of 0.06 uM AFB2 obtained under optimum and<br />

unoptimum conditions.<br />

Ep (-mV)<br />

1225<br />

1220<br />

1215<br />

1210<br />

1205<br />

1200<br />

[AFB2]=0.6X10-7M<br />

7<br />

0 20 40 60 80 100<br />

Scan rate (mV/s)


(a) (b)<br />

Figure 4.0: Effect of υ on the Ip (a) and Ep (b) of AFB2. Ei = - 1000 mV,<br />

Ef = -1400 mV, Eacc = -600 mV, tacc = 80s and P.A = 100 mV<br />

Figure 5.0: Voltammogramms of 0.06 uM AFB2 obtained under<br />

unoptimum (a) and optimum (b) parameters.<br />

From this optimisation procedures, the selected optimum parameters for determination of<br />

AFB2 compound in BRb pH 9.0 were Ei = -1000 mV, Ef = -1400 mV, Eacc = -600 mV,<br />

tacc = 80 s, υ = 50 mV/s, pulse amplitude = 80 mV and quite time = 10 sec.<br />

3.2.4 Calibration curve of AFB2<br />

Using the optimum parameters, a calibration curve has been prepared by a series of<br />

standard addition of AFB2 as shown in Figure 6.0. The range of linearity was found to be<br />

from 0.02 u M to 0.32 u M with the limit of detection of 0.0158 uM. Figure 7.0 shows<br />

the voltammograms of AFB2 obtained by this standard addition.<br />

8


ip (nA)<br />

200<br />

180<br />

160<br />

140<br />

120<br />

100<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

y = 5.55x + 3.6435<br />

R 2 = 0.9978<br />

0 10 20<br />

[AFB2] X10-8M<br />

30 40<br />

Figure 6.0: Linear plot of Ip versus concentration of AFB2 in BRb pH=9.0<br />

Figure 7.0: Cathodic stripping voltammograms for increasing concentration<br />

of AFB2 (1) background (2) 0.02 (3) 0.06 (4) 0.10 (5) 0.14 (6) 0.18<br />

(7) 0.22 (8) 0.26 and (9) 0.32 uM. E acc = -600 mV, t acc = 80 s, υ = 50<br />

mV/s, P.A = 80 mV and BRB of pH 9.0<br />

For determination of accuracy of the proposed method, the reproducibility was calculated<br />

from 8 independent runs of 0.06 uM and 0.20 uM of AFB2 solution, obtaining the<br />

relative standard deviation (RSD) of 2.80 % and 2.53 % respectively. In order to check<br />

the precision of the method, a recovery study has also been carried out by adding of the<br />

different concentration of AFB2 (0.10 uM and 0.25 uM) into the voltammetric cell and<br />

measuring the peak currents of the respective concentrations. The actual amount of AFB2<br />

found in the cell were calculated using a regression equation obtained from prepared<br />

calibration curve. The recovery obtained were 86% to 95% with RSD of 1.68% and<br />

0.86% ( n = 3) respectively as shown in Table 3.1. The recovery study using real sample<br />

will be performed in future work..<br />

9


Table 1.0: Mean values for the recovery of AFB2 (n =3) in prepared AFB2 standard<br />

solution ( n = 3 )<br />

No of experiment Amount added<br />

( uM)<br />

Peak current<br />

(nA)<br />

Amount found<br />

(uM)<br />

Recovery (%)<br />

1 0.10 51.85 8.683 86.83 +/- 1.46<br />

2 0.25 134.43 23.56 94.26+/0.81<br />

4. CONCLUSION<br />

The use of the DPCSV technique has been proved to be a useful, simple, accurate and<br />

efficient alternative in the quantitative assay of trace amounts of AFB2. The sensitivity of<br />

this approach is much greater than obtained by differential pulse polarographic technique<br />

(12). The optimised parameters will be applied to determine other aflatoxin compounds<br />

such as AFB1, AFG1 and AFG2. Further experiment will be performed to increase it’s<br />

sensitivity in future work together with a recovery study of AFB2 using real samples such<br />

as ground nut and nut products. An alternative approach will also be studied by using<br />

different working electrode such as screen print electrode.<br />

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<br />

The author gratefully acknowledge the <strong>Universiti</strong> Sains <strong>Malaysia</strong> (USM) for granting a<br />

study leave together with a scholarship under the Academic Staff For Higher Education<br />

Scheme (ASHES). Also we would like to thank all Chemistry Department staff, UTM<br />

for their fully cooperation.<br />

6. REFERENCES<br />

1. Eaton D.L and Groopman J.D. (Eds) (1994), The toxicity of aflatoxin. Academic<br />

Press, United Kingdom.<br />

2. Goldblatt L.A (1972) Aflatoxin: Scientific background, control and implication,<br />

Academic Press, New York (1972)<br />

3. Andeou V.G., Nikolelis D. and Tarus B. (1997). Electrochemistry investigation of<br />

transduction of interactions of alfatoixin M1 with bilayer lipid membranes (BLMs),<br />

Anal. Chim. Acta, 350. 121-127.<br />

10


4. Jaimez J., Fente C.A., Vazquez B.I., Franco C.M., Cepeda A., Mahuzier G. and<br />

Prognon P (2000). Application of the assay of aflatoxins by liquid chromatography<br />

with fluorescence detection in food analysis. J. Chromatography A.” 882: 1-10<br />

5. Gimeno A. and Martins M. L (1983) Rapid thin layer chromatographic determination<br />

of patulin, citrinin and aflatoxin in apples and pears and their juices and jams, J.<br />

Assoc. Anal. Chem, 66, 85-91.<br />

6. Vahl M. and Jorgensen (1998). Determination of aflatoxins in food using LC/MS/MS,<br />

Z Lebensm Unters Forsch A , 206. 243-245<br />

7. Kussak A., Anderson B and Anderson K. (1995). Determination of aflatoxins in<br />

airborne dust from feed factories by automated immunoaffinity column clean-up and<br />

liquid chromatography, J Of Chromatography A, 708. 55-60<br />

8. Pesavento M., Domagala S., Baldini E. and Cucca L. (1997). Characterisation of<br />

enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for aflatoxin B1 based on commercial reagents,<br />

Talanta, 45. 91-104.<br />

9. Braitina Kh.Z Malakhova N.A. and Stojko Y. (2000) Stripping voltammetry in<br />

environmental and food analysis, Fresenius J Anal Chem 368: 307-325<br />

10 Fifield F.W. and D. Kealey (2000), Principle and practice of analytical chemistry 3 rd<br />

Edition, Blackwell science, UK<br />

11.Yaacob M.H, Yusoff A.R, Ahamad R and Yaakob A.R (2003), Cyclic voltammetric<br />

study of aflatoxin B2 at the mercury electrode, Paper presented at 16 th Symposium Of<br />

Chemical Analysis, 9-11 th September 2003, Kucing, Sarawak, <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

12. Smyth M. R., Lawellin D. W. and Osteryoung J.G (1979) Polarographic Study of<br />

Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1 and G2: Application of Differential-pulse Polarography to the<br />

Determination of Aflatoxin B1 in Various Foodstuffs, Analyst, 104: 73-78<br />

11


Paper will be published in<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>n Journal of Analytical Science


CYCLIC VOLTAMMETRIC STUDY OF AFLATOXIN B2 AT THE MERCURY<br />

ELECTRODE<br />

Mohamad Hadzri Yaacob a , Abdull Rahim Hj. Mohd. Yusoff b and Rahmalan<br />

Ahamad b<br />

a School Of Health Sciences, USM, 16150 Kubang Krian, Kelantan<br />

b Chemistry Dept., Faculty Of Sciences, UTM, 81310 Skudai, Johor<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

A cyclic voltammetry (CV) study of aflatoxin B2 (AFB2) in Britton-Robinson<br />

buffer using a HMDE is described. CV was carried out by anodic and cathodic potential<br />

scan through within the range of 0 to -1500 mV with no accumulation time. The effect of<br />

the different scan rate on the peak height and peak potential of the analyte were also<br />

studied. The results from this study showed that the reduction process on the hanging<br />

mercury electrode gives a single characteristic cathodic peak at -1315 mV ( versus<br />

Ag/AgCl ) in pH of 9.0. Effect of the scan rate on both responses has proved that the<br />

reduction of AFB2 is irreversible reaction and the limiting current is adsorption<br />

controlled.<br />

Keywords: aflatoxin B2 compound, cyclic voltammetry, Britton-Robinson buffer and hanging mercury<br />

drop electrode (HMDE)<br />

1. INTRODUCTION<br />

Aflatoxins are mycotoxins produced by certain fungi, especially, Aspergillus<br />

flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus which are found on crops and foodstuffs under certain<br />

conditions (1). They were first identified as the causative agent of the severe outbreak of<br />

“Turkey X” disease, a toxicosis that killed more than 100,000 turkey poults in England in<br />

1960 (2) They display strong carcinogenicity. Therefore, they are dangerous food<br />

contaminants and many countries including <strong>Malaysia</strong> have set regulatory demands on the<br />

level of aflatoxins permitted in imported and trade commodities.<br />

Aflatoxin B2 (AFB2) is one of the naturally occurrence aflatoxins. The chemical<br />

structure of this compound is shown in Figure 1.0.<br />

a Corresponding Address:<br />

Chemistry Dept, Faculty of Science, UTM, 81300 Skudai, Johor<br />

Tel: 07- 553 4540 e-mail: mhy02psk@yahoo.com<br />

2


O<br />

O<br />

Figure 1.0: Chemical structure of AFB2<br />

O<br />

Due to its toxicity, it is important that the level of this contaminant be controlled<br />

in food, soils and water to prevent toxic effect. The way to achieve this is to monitor<br />

samples so that any problem can be identified and dealt with by doing analysis of<br />

aflatoxin using the analytical techniques that are necessary to determine aflatoxin at the<br />

parts-per-billon (ppb) level. Currently, analysis is done by various methods including<br />

thin-layer chromatography (TLC) (3), liquid chromatography (LC) and high-performance<br />

liquid chromatography (4,5) and microtitre plate enzyme-linked immunosorbant assay<br />

(ELISA) (6). All these methods are time consuming and require special equipments<br />

operated by skilled personnel.<br />

The proposed voltammetric technique generally refer to a system that combines a<br />

triple electrodes system with potentiostat for controlling applied potential. This technique<br />

is rapid, simple and relative low cost (7). It measures the current response generated by<br />

mass transport of electroactive species in solution to the working electrode while<br />

potential is scanned The total current response is proportional to the amount of analyte<br />

present in the solution (8). This paper reports the results from the cyclic voltammetric<br />

study of AFB2 at a mercury electrode.<br />

2.1 Reagents<br />

O<br />

2. EXPERIMENT<br />

All reagents employed were of analytical grade. Water purified from a Nano Pure<br />

Ultrapure water system ( Barnstead / Thermolyne) was used for all dilution and sample<br />

preparation. AFB2 was purchased from SIGMA: 1 mg was dissolved in hexane:<br />

acetonitrile (98:2) to produce 10 ppm each. The stock solutions were placed in small<br />

glass tubes covered with an aluminum foil and kept in a freezer at -4.0 o C. A stock of<br />

Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB) solution 0.04 M was prepared as follows: 2.47 g boric<br />

acid (Fluka), 2.30 ml acetic acid (MERCK) and 2.70 ml orthoposphoric acid ( Ashland<br />

Chemical ) and were diluted to 1 l with deionised water. Hexadistilled mercury, grade<br />

O<br />

O<br />

3


9N, used by the Controlled Growth Mercury Electrode (CGME) stand, was purchased<br />

from MERCK. The purging was carried out with nitrogen gas with purity 99.99%.<br />

2.2 Instruments<br />

A BAS CV-50W voltammetric analyser in connection with a Control Growth<br />

Mercury Electrode (CGME) stand equipped with a three-electrode system and a 20 ml<br />

capacity BAS MR-1208 cell was used for all the voltammetric determination. The<br />

working electrode was a Hanging Mercury Drop Electrode (HMDE). As reference and<br />

counter-electrode, a silver-silver chloride (Ag / AgCl) and a platinum wire were used,<br />

respectively. All potentials are quoted relative to this reference electrode. BAS CV-50W<br />

was connected to a computer for data processing. A pH meter Cyber-scan model<br />

equipped with a glass electrode combined with an Ag/AgCl reference electrode, was<br />

employed for the pH measurements.<br />

2.3 Procedure<br />

Cyclic voltammetry was studied within the range of 0 to -1500 mV with different<br />

scan rate from 20 to 500 mV/s in BRB pH 9.0 as the supporting electrolyte. The HMDE<br />

and Ag/AgCl were used as the working and reference electrode respectively through out<br />

this experiment . The general procedure used to obtain cyclic voltammograms was as<br />

follows. A 10 ml aliquot of buffer solution was placed in a voltammographic cell using a<br />

micropipette. The stir was switched on and the solution was purged with nitrogen gas for<br />

10 minute. After forming a new HMDE, potential scan was effected using different scan<br />

rate while stirring the solution. For the aflatoxin standard stock solution, organic solvent<br />

was removed by flowing nitrogen gas to dryness followed by adding of the BRB<br />

supporting electrolyte solution. When further volume of aflatoxin were added to the cell,<br />

the solution was redeoxygenated with nitrogen gas for 5 minute before carried out further<br />

voltammetry followed the mentioned procedures.<br />

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

Cathodic cyclic voltammogrammes of 1.3 X 10 -6 M AFB2 in BRB solution at<br />

pH=9.0 and a scan rate (υ) of 200 mV/s can be observed in Figure 2.0. A sharp and well<br />

defined cathodic wave around -1.315 V ( against Ag/AgCl ) with a peak current of 30 nA<br />

is observed due to the reduction of the AFB2. No oxidation wave appears in the anodic<br />

branch, which indicates that the AFB2 reduction is irreversible. This was confirmed by<br />

anodic cyclic voltammetric that gave the same results as shown in Figure 3.0<br />

4


Figure 2.0: Cathodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 X10 -6 M AFB2,<br />

obtained at υ of 200 mV/s, Ei = 0, Elow = -1.5 V and Ehigh = 0<br />

in BRB solution at pH=9.0. ( 1 ) cathodic and (2) anodic scans<br />

Figure 3.0: Anodic cyclic voltammogram for 1.3 X10 -6 M AFB2, obtained at υ<br />

of 200 mV/s, Ei = -1.5, Elow = -1.5 V and Ehigh = 0 in BRB solution at<br />

pH=9.0. ( 1 ) anodic and (2) cathodic scans<br />

Standard additions of AFB2 was carried out to confirm that the observed peak is<br />

related to the reduction of AFB2. Figure 4.0 shows that the Ep at around -1.315 V is<br />

referred to the AFB2 peak since there are no significant change in location of the peak<br />

and the Ip increases with increasing of the AFB2 concentration. There are no extra peak<br />

apparently observed with this standard addition. The corresponding equation of this<br />

5


dependence of Ip to concentration of AFB2 for cathodic cyclic voltammetric is at pH<br />

=9.0,<br />

Ip (nA) = 23.839 x ( x 10 -6 M) + 4.44 ( r = 0.9817, n = 4 )<br />

The regression equation shows that the Ip of AFB2 does not very linearly with the<br />

concentration of AFB2 suggesting formation of a compact film on the electrode surface<br />

(9).<br />

Figure 4.0 Effect of AFB2 concentration on the Ip of cathodic cyclic<br />

voltammetric curve in BRB at pH =9.0. (a) 1.3 X10 -6 M ,<br />

(b) 2.0 X 10 -6 M (c) 2.7 X10 -6 M and (d) 3.4 X 10 -6 M.<br />

A result from repetitive cathodic stripping voltammetry experiment is shown in<br />

Figure 5.0. The result showed that the reduction peak of AFB2 increases with number of<br />

cycles indicating irreversible reduction with adsorption of AFB2 at the mercury electrode<br />

surface. No other cathodic peak was observed.<br />

6


Figure 5.0: Repetitive cathodic cyclic voltammograms of 1.3 X 10 -6 M AFB2 in<br />

BRB solution at pH of 9.0.<br />

The adsorption of AFB2 on the electrode surface is expected due to the AFB2<br />

chemical structure, that consists of functional groups such as ketone, ester and ether. The<br />

presence of these groups increases the polarity and enhance absorption of molecules at<br />

the electrode surface (10). Ip increases with the number of cycle. However, a further<br />

increases in the repetitive cycle tend to slow down the increment of the Ip due to the<br />

deformation of double layer at the mercury electrode surface (11).<br />

The effect of increasing scan rate from 20 to 500 mV/s to the Ep and Ip of AFB2<br />

cathodic peak were observed under the same experiment conditions. Linear relationship<br />

was observed between the log Ip versus log υ with a slope of 0.5097 ( R 2 = 0.995, n = 9 )<br />

as shown in Figure 6.0. The slope of more than 0.5 indicates that the diffusion current is<br />

influenced by an adsorption on the electrochemical process at the electrode surface (12,<br />

13). The plot of Ep versus log scan rate which is a linear graph as shown in Figure 7.0<br />

( R 2 = 0.9936, n = 9 ) confirmed that the reduction of AFB2 on the electrode surface is<br />

totally irreversible. This irreversible reaction is also confirmed by observing the shifted<br />

of Ep towards more negative direction when the υ is increased, according to the following<br />

equation:<br />

Ep (-mV) = 40.065log υ + 1223.2 ( R = 0.9936, n = 9)<br />

log Ep<br />

1.9<br />

1.7<br />

1.5<br />

1.3<br />

1.1<br />

0.9<br />

0.7<br />

y = 0.5097x + 0.4115<br />

R 2 = 0.995<br />

0.5<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log V<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Figure 6.0: Plot of log Ip versus log υ for 1.3 X10 -6 M AFB2 in BRB solution at pH 9.0<br />

7


Ep (-mV)<br />

1340<br />

1330<br />

1320<br />

1310<br />

1300<br />

1290<br />

1280<br />

1270<br />

y = 40.065x + 1223.3<br />

R 2 = 0.9936<br />

1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2<br />

log V<br />

2.2 2.4 2.6 2.8<br />

Figure 7.0: Plot of Ep versus log υ for 1.3 X10 -6 M AFB2 in BRB solution at pH 9.0<br />

4. CONCLUSION<br />

From the CV study the AFB2 reduced at the mercury electrode produced a single<br />

and well characteristic cathodic peak at -1.315 V ( versus Ag/AgCl) . The reduction is<br />

totally irreversible reaction and the diffusion current is controlled by adsorption process.<br />

Further work on stripping voltammetric study of this compound will be carried out.<br />

5. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<br />

The author gratefully acknowledge the University Science <strong>Malaysia</strong> for giving me a<br />

study leave together with a scholarship under the Academic Staff For Higher Education<br />

Scheme (ASHES). Also we would like to thank all Chemistry Department staff, UTM for<br />

their fully cooperation.<br />

6. REFERENCES<br />

1. Eaton D.L and Groopman J.D. (Eds) (1994), The toxicity of aflatoxin. Academic<br />

Press, United Kingdom.<br />

2. Goldblatt L.A (1972) Aflatoxin: Scientific background, control and implication,<br />

Academic Press, New York (1972)<br />

8


3. Gimeno A. and Martins M. L (1983) Rapid thin layer chromatographic determination<br />

of patulin, citrinin and aflatoxin in apples and pears and their juices and jams, J.<br />

Assoc. Anal. Chem, 66, 85-91.<br />

4. Vahl M. and Jorgensen (1998). Determination of aflatoxins in food using LC/MS/MS,<br />

Z Lebensm Unters Forsch A , 206. 243-245<br />

5. Kussak A., Anderson B and Anderson K. (1995). Determination of aflatoxins in<br />

airborne dust from feed factories by automated immunoaffinity column clean-up and<br />

liquid chromatography, J Chromatography A, 708. 55-60<br />

6. Pesavento M., Domagala S., Baldini E. and Cucca L. (1997). Characterisation of<br />

enzyme linked immunosorbent assay for aflatoxin B1 based on commercial reagents,<br />

Talanta, 45. 91-104.<br />

7. Braitina Kh.Z Malakhova N.A. and Stojko Y. (2000) Stripping voltammetry in<br />

environmental and food analysis, Fresenius J Anal Chem, 368. 307-325<br />

8. Harvey, D (2000). Modern Analytical Chemistry, McGraw Hill, USA<br />

9. Laviron E in Bard A (Eds) (1982) Electroanalytical Chemistry, Marcell Decker, New<br />

York .<br />

10. Volke J and Liska F (1994) Electrochemistry In Organic Synthesis, Springer-<br />

Verlag, New York.<br />

11. Fifield F.W. and Kealey D (2000) Principle and Practice of Analytical Chemistry 3 rd<br />

Edition, Balckwell Science, U.K<br />

12. Gosser D.K (1993) Cyclic voltammetry, Wiley-VCH, New York<br />

13. Yaridimer C. and Ozaltin N. (2001) Electrochemical studies and differential pulse<br />

polarographic analysis of lansoprazole in pharmaceuticals, Analyst, 126. 361-366<br />

9


PAPER WAS PUBLISHED IN<br />

J. Kimia Analisis (<strong>Universiti</strong> Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia)<br />

Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. (2005). Application of Differential<br />

Pulse Cathodic Stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) Technique in Studying Stability of<br />

Aflatoxins. J. Sains Kimia. 9(3): 64-70.<br />

1


APPLICATION OF DIFFERENTIAL PULSE CATHODIC<br />

STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRIC TECHNIQUE IN STUDYING<br />

STABILITY OF AFLATOXINS<br />

Mohamad Hadzri Yaacob 1 , Abdull Rahim Hj. Mohd. Yusoff 2 and Rahmalan Ahamad 2<br />

1 School Of Health Sciences, USM, 16150 Kubang Krian, Kelantan, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

2 Dept of Chemistry , Faculty of Sciences, UTM, 81310 UTM, Skudai, Johor, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

Abstract A stability studies of aflatoxins (AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 ) in Britton-Robinson buffer (BRb) using a<br />

Differential Pulse Cathodic Stripping Voltammetric (DPCSV) technique is described. The DPCSV was performed by<br />

cathodic potential scan through within the range of -950 to -1400 mV with 80s accumulation time using a BRb at pH<br />

9.0 as the supporting electrolyte. The samples were exposed for 0 to 8 hrs to normal laboratory condition before being<br />

scanned under optimised voltammetric parameters. Using the same procedure, aflatoxins in different pH of BRb were<br />

also studied after 0 to 3 hours exposed to the same condition. Other stability study was performed by scanning<br />

aflatoxins in BRb solution which were kept in freezer from first to six months of storage time. The results from these<br />

studies showed that AFB1 and AFB2 in BRb pH 9.0 were stable within 8 hours exposure time while AFG1 and AFG2<br />

were stable up to a few hours. All aflatoxins scanned in BRB pH 6.0, 7.0 and 9.0 were more stable as compared when<br />

there were scanned in BRB pH 11.0 within 3 hours exposure time. The results also showed that the stability of the<br />

samples which were prepared in BRB pH 9.0 was affected by longer storage time in freezer.<br />

Abstrak Satu kajian terhadap kestabilan aflatoksin (AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 ) di dalam larutan penimbal<br />

Britton-Robinson (BRb) menggunakan teknik Voltammetri Perlucutan Kethodik Denyut Pembeza (DPCSV) adalah<br />

dilaporkan. Kaedah ini dijalankan dengan cara mengimbas keupayaan katodik di dalam julat di antara -950 ke -1400<br />

mV dengan masa penjerapan 80 s menggunakan larutan penimbal pada pH 9.0 sebagai larutan penyokong. Sampel<br />

didedahkan kepada persekitaran makmal dari 0 hingga 8 jam sebelum diimbas menggunakan parameter voltammetri<br />

yang optimum. Menggunakan prosedur yang sama, aflatoksin yang disediakan di dalam larutan penimbal yang<br />

berbeza pH juga dikaji kestabilan dari 0 hingga 3 jam terdedah kepada kondisi yang sama. Kajian kestabilan yang lain<br />

yang dijalankan termasuk mengimbas aflatoksin yang disediakan di dalam larutan penimbal dan disimpan di dalam<br />

penyejukbeku dari bulan pertama hingga ke bulan keenam. Keputusan dari kajian ini menunjukkan bahawa AFB1 dan<br />

AFB2 di dalam larutan BRb stabil di dalam tempuh 8 jam terdedah kepada keadaan biasa makmal dan AFG1 serta<br />

AFG2 hanya stabil di dalam tempuh beberapa jam sahaja. Semua aflatoksin yang diimbas di dalam pH 6.0, 7.0 dan 9.0<br />

di dalam tempuh 3 jam masa pendedahan adalah lebih stabil berbanding jika ianya diimbas di dalam pH 11.0.<br />

Keputusan juga menunjukkan bahawa kestabilan sampel yang disediakan di dalam BRb dengan pH 9.0 adalah<br />

dipengaruhi oleh jangkamasa simpanan di dalam penyejukbeku.<br />

Keywords: AFB1, AFB2, AFG1, AFG2 compounds, stability studies and differential pulse cathodic<br />

stripping voltammetry<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Aflatoxins are a group of secondary metabolites produced by Aspergillus flavus and Aspergillus<br />

parisiticus, which are found on crops and foodstuffs under certain conditions [[1]. Aflatoxins B1, B2, G1<br />

and G2 have been found to be naturally and they display strong carcinogenicity. There are dangerous food<br />

contaminants and have been classified as Type I toxic materials by International Agency for Research<br />

1 Corresponding Address:<br />

Chemistry Dept, Faculty of Science, UTM, 81300 Skudai, Johor<br />

Tel: 07- 553 4540 or 019-939 2440 or e-mail: mhy02psk@yahoo.com<br />

( Note: A part of this paper was presented in Simposium Kimia Analisis <strong>Malaysia</strong> ke 17 (SKAM-17), 24 –<br />

26 th August 2004 at Kuantan, Pahang, <strong>Malaysia</strong>)<br />

2


Cancer (IARC) in 1984 [2]. Due to its toxicity, many countries have set stringent regulatory demands on<br />

the level of aflatoxins permitted and traded commodities. In our country, the regulatory levels for total<br />

aflatoxins in raw peanuts are 15 ppb and 5 ppb for other foodstuffs [3].Aflatoxins are not totally diminished<br />

by normal and cooking temperatures [4,5]. The chemical structures of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 are<br />

shown in Figure 1.0 [6].<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

(a) (b)<br />

(c) (d)<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O O<br />

Figure 1.0: Chemical structures of (a) AFB1, (b) AFB2, (c) AFG1 and (d) AFG2<br />

Many methods have been used for quantitative determination of aflatoxins includes thin layer<br />

chromatography (TLC) [7-9], high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with different type of<br />

detectors such as ultra-violet [10-12], fluorescence [13-15] and amperometer detectors [ 16]<br />

In this study, all aflatoxins have been investigated for its stability in BRB pH 9.0 using DPSV<br />

technique. This technique was chosen rather than UV-VIS spectrophotometer because it uses the principle<br />

of the measurement of peak height of electro active species in sample solution when potential was applied<br />

into it [17]. It can avoid problem arise from weak fluorescence property of AFB1 and AFG1 [16]. This<br />

technique also offers shorter time analysis compare to the HPLC technique [17].<br />

In the present paper, we describe the results of stability studies on AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2<br />

which were prepared in BRB pH 9.0 and underwent hour to hour monitoring and also for shelf life of all<br />

aflatoxins in BRB pH 9.0 which was kept in fridge for six months.<br />

O<br />

O<br />

O<br />

3


Reagents<br />

EXPERIMENTAL<br />

All reagents employed were of analytical grade. Water purified from a Nano Pure Ultrapure water<br />

system ( Barnstead / Thermolyne) was used for all dilution and sample preparation. Aflatoxins were<br />

purchased from SIGMA ( 1 mg per bottle ) and dissolved in benzene:acetonitrile (98:2) to produce 10 ppm<br />

standard solution each. The stock solutions were placed in small amber glass tubes and kept in a freezer at -<br />

4.0 o C. The solution was measured under UV-VIS spectrometer for it absorbance at 365 +/- nm before<br />

being used for voltammetric analysis.<br />

A stock solution of 0.04 M Britton-Robinson Buffer (BRB) solution was prepared as follows: 2.47<br />

g boric acid (Fluka), 2.30 ml acetic acid (MERCK) and 2.70 ml orthophosphoric acid ( Ashland Chemical )<br />

were diluted to 1 l with deionised water. Britton-Robinson Buffer of pH 5, 7.0 and 11.0 were prepared by<br />

adding sodium hydroxide 1.0 M (MERCK) into the stock solution.. Hexadistilled mercury, grade 9 N, used<br />

in a control growth mercury electrode ( CGME ) stand, was purchased from MERCK. The purging was<br />

carried out with 99.99% nitrogen.<br />

Instruments<br />

A BAS CV-50W voltammetric analyser in connection with a CGME stand equipped with a threeelectrode<br />

system and a 20 ml capacity BAS MR-1208 cell were used for all the voltammetric<br />

determination. The working electrode was a hanging mercury drop electrode (HMDE). A silver-silver<br />

chloride (Ag / AgCl) and a platinum wire were used as the reference and counter-electrode respectively.<br />

BAS CV-50W was connected to a computer for data processing. A pH meter Cyber-scan model equipped<br />

with a glass electrode combined with an Ag/AgCl reference electrode, was used for all pH measurements.<br />

Procedure<br />

General procedure<br />

The general procedure used to obtain cathodic stripping voltammograms was as follows. A 10 ml<br />

aliquot of supporting electrolyte solution was put in a voltammographic cell. The stir was switched on and<br />

the solution was purged with nitrogen gas for at least 10 minutes. After forming a new HMDE, accumulate<br />

was effected for the required time at the appropriate potential while stirring the solution. At the end of the<br />

accumulation time the stirring was switched off and after 10 s had elapsed to allow the solution to become<br />

quiescent, the negative going potential was initiated. Ag/AgCl saturated was used as the reference electrode<br />

throughout this study.<br />

Procedure for determination of aflatoxin<br />

The aflatoxin standard solutions have been freshly prepared by removing of organic solvent in<br />

aflatoxin stock solutions until dryness followed by the addition of the BRb supporting electrolyte solution.<br />

The solution was placed in small amber bottles. When further volume of aflatoxin were added using a<br />

micropipette into the voltammetric cell, the solution was purged with nitrogen for another 2 minutes before<br />

further voltammetric experiment was carried out.<br />

Procedure for stability studies<br />

For hour to hour stability studies, 312 ul, 315 ul, 328 ul and 330 ul of 1 ppm AFB1, AFB2,<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 standard solution in BRB pH 9.0 respectively were injected into 10 ml supporting<br />

electrolyte in the voltammetric cell separately and were scanned following the above stated procedures.<br />

4


Eight measurements have been made. The peak heights and peak potential of each aflatoxins were<br />

recorded. After these measurements, the aflatoxins standard solutions in voltammetric cell were exposed to<br />

normal laboratory condition without purging. Measurements were taken every hour up to 8 hours exposure<br />

time.<br />

For shelf life stability studies, all aflatoxin standard solutions which were kept in freezer were<br />

subjected to the voltammetric measurement in BRb pH 9.0 every month up to 6 months keeping period.<br />

For aflatoxins in different pH of BRB, the stability studies were performed by scanning aflatoxins<br />

solution (prepared in BRB pH 9.0) in four difference pH of BRB as the supporting electrolytes which were<br />

6.0, 7.0, 9.0 and 11.0. The voltammetric determination procedures were followed the same procedures as<br />

for the hour to hour stability studies except the exposure time was limited up to 3 hours.<br />

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />

From our previous experiment using a cyclic voltammetry technique , AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and<br />

AFG2 show an irreversible reduction peak at -1235 +/- 10 mV, ( all against Ag/AgCl) respectively [18,<br />

19]. Based on this electro active property, differential pulse cathodic stripping voltammetry (DPCSV)<br />

technique was applied in this study.<br />

Voltammograms of aflatoxins<br />

The voltamograms of 0.1 uM AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 scanned in BRb pH = 9.0 are<br />

shown in figures 2.0a -2.0d. Replicate measurements of peak height of respective aflatoxins give the<br />

repeatability results of 63.19 nA, 65.67 nA, 60.76 nA and 61.79 nA respectively with coefficient variation<br />

of 1.50 to 2.60 % for all aflatoxins. The results show that the DPSV technique give high consistent results<br />

with very small error and could be applied in stability studies of aflatoxins.<br />

(a) (b)<br />

(c) (d)<br />

Figure 2.0 :Voltammograms ( n = 8) of 0.1 uM AFB1 (a), AFB2 (b), AFG1 (c) and AFG2 (d) in BRb pH = 9.0.<br />

5


Hour to hour stability studies;<br />

The results of these studies using 0.10 uM AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRB pH 9.0 are<br />

represented in Figure 3.0.<br />

Peak height (nA)<br />

80<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

Peak height (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9<br />

Exposure time (hrs)<br />

10<br />

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7<br />

Storage time in freezer (months)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

Figure 3.0: Peak heights of AFB1, AFB2, AFG1 and AFG2 in BRb pH = 9.0 exposed to normal condition up to 8<br />

hours.<br />

The results show that AFB1 and AFB2 in BRb pH 9.0 were stable within 8 hours exposure time<br />

where the peak heights for both aflatoxins were reduced only 15%. In contrast, AFG1 and AFG2 gave<br />

significant reduced of peak heights within the same period of exposure time where the peak height of<br />

AFG1 and AFG2 were reduced to 50% and 58% respectively. The results show that AFG1 and AFG1 were<br />

less stable in BRb pH 9.0 as compared to AFB1 and AFB2. Based on their chemical structures, the most<br />

reactive functional groups for ease of attack by chemical reagents are two lactones rings of AFB1 and<br />

AFG1 and cyclopentanone rings in AFB2 and AFG2. These lactones can be readily opened by hydrolysis<br />

with strong alkalis such as sodium hydroxide. Other functional group of this aflatoxin is less readily<br />

attacked by chemical reagents. The methyl ether and furan ether groups would be cleaved only by very<br />

strong acids such as hydriodic acid. The double bond of terminal furan rings of AFB1 and AFG1 are<br />

susceptible to attack by electrophilic reagents and can be reduced or oxidised [20].<br />

Shelf life stability studies<br />

For shelf life stability studies, the results are shown in Figure 4.0<br />

Figure 4.0: Peak heights of aflatoxins in BRb pH 9.0 which were kept up to 6 months in freezer.<br />

6


The results showed that after three months storage in freezer, the peak heights of AFG1 and AFG2<br />

in BRB pH 9.0 were decreased to about 70% from original peak height measured at first day of preparation.<br />

AFB2 was the most stable within 2 months keeping period. These results revealed that AFB1 and AFB2<br />

were stable within 3 months kept in fridge but gradually decreased after that time. Peak heights of AFG1<br />

and AFG1 were gradually decreased since first month keeping time up to 6 months.<br />

Stability studies in different buffer solutions<br />

The results for these studies are shown in Figure 5.0a to 5.0d. The results show that in acid and<br />

neutral conditions, peak heights of all aflatoxins were increased when the exposure time were longer. In<br />

BRb pH 9.0, the peak heights were not significantly affected by longer exposure time. This phenomenon<br />

may be because of all aflatoxins need enough time to be completely dissolved in acid and neutral condition<br />

compared in basic medium. In strong base, the peak height was significantly decreased where AFG2 has<br />

not given any peak after 3 hours exposure time. These results indicate that in neutral and acid conditions,<br />

aflatoxins take time to stabilise themselves and at strong base, it was slowly reacted while cyclopentanone<br />

and lactone groups slowly damaged (21). AFG1 and AFG2 show decreasing in peak height faster than<br />

aFB1 and AFB2. This was due to the easy of lactones group in both compounds attacked in strong basic<br />

condition compared to acidic condition. Other chemical group was not affected in acid or neutral medium<br />

as can be observed from the peak heights of all aflatoxins in BRB pH 6.0 and 7.0 within 3 hours standing<br />

time. At 0 hrs standing time, the peak heights of all aflatoxins in BRB pH 6.0, 7.0 and 11.0 were lower as<br />

compared in BRb pH 9.0 due to those pH were not an optimum pH for DPCSV analysis of aflatoxins as<br />

found in our previous experiment [22].<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

(a) (b)<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

(c) (d)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

45<br />

40<br />

35<br />

30<br />

25<br />

20<br />

15<br />

10<br />

5<br />

0<br />

70<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Standing tim e (hrs)<br />

0 1 2 3<br />

Standing time (hrs)<br />

Figure 4.0: Peak heights of 0.1 uM aflatoxins in BRb at pH (a) 6.0, (b) 7.0, (c) 9.0 and (d) 11.0 exposed to normal<br />

laboratory condition up to 3 hrs standing time.<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

AFB1<br />

AFB2<br />

AFG1<br />

AFG2<br />

7


CONCLUSION<br />

Using DPCSV technique, stability studies of aflatoxins have been successfully performed. It was<br />

concluded that AFB1 and AFB2 in BRb pH 9.0 which were exposed to normal condition were more stable<br />

as compared to AFG1 and AFG2 in the same medium. Shelf life of AFB1 and AFB2 keeping in freezer<br />

were longer compared to AFG1 and AFG2. All aflatoxins in BRb pH 6.0, 7.0 and 9.0 which were exposed<br />

to normal condition up to three hours were stable but in BRb pH 11.0, their peak heights were<br />

significantly decreased.<br />

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

One of the author is gratefully acknowledge the University Science <strong>Malaysia</strong> for approved him a<br />

study leave and financial support for his study at UTM. Also we would like to thank UTM for a<br />

fundamental research grant (Vot No 75152) to carry out this study.<br />

REFERENCES<br />

1. Begum F and Samajpathi N (2000), Mycotoxin production in rice, pulses and oilseeds,Naturwissenschaften, 87:<br />

275-277<br />

2. International Agency for Research on Cancer (1993) IARC monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risk to<br />

humans, vol. 56. World Health Organisation, Lyon.<br />

3. <strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act (1983) Act No 281, Reviewed 2002, Food Quality Control Dept, Ministry Of Health,<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

4. Creepy E.E (2002). Update of survey, regulation and toxic effect of mycotoxins Europe, Toxicology Letter, 127:<br />

19-28<br />

5 Samarajeewa U., Sen A.C., Cohen M.D. and Wei C.L (1990). Detoxification of Aflatoxins in foods and feeds by<br />

physical and chemical methods Food Protection, 53, 489-501.<br />

6. Goldblatt L.A (1969) Aflatoxin: Scientific background, control and implication, Academic Press, New York<br />

7. Gimeno A. and Martins M. L (1983) Rapid thin layer chromatographic determination of patulin, citrinin and<br />

aflatoxin in apples and pears and their juices and jams, J. Assoc. Anal. Chem, 66, 85-91.<br />

8. Bicking M.K.L., Kniseley R.N and Svec H.J (1983), Coupled-Column for quantitating low levels of aflatoxins, J .<br />

Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66, 905-908.<br />

9. Tutour L.B., Elaraki A. T. and Aboussalim A.,(1984). Simultaneous thin layer chromatographic determination of<br />

aflatoxin B1 and ochratoxin A in black olives, J Assoc Off Anal Chem 67: 611-620.<br />

10. Rastogi S., Das M. and Khanna S.K. (2001). Quantitative determination of aflatoxin B1-oxime by column liquid<br />

chromatography with ultraviolet detection. J Of Chromatography A, 933: 91-97<br />

11. Joshua, H (1993) Determination of aflatoxin by reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography with<br />

post-column in-line photochemical derivatization and fluorescence detection, J. Chromatography A, 654: 247-254<br />

12 Miller N, Pretorius H.E. and Trinder D.W (1985). Determination of aflatoxins in vegetable oils, J. Assoc. Off. Anal.<br />

Chem, 68 : 136-137<br />

13. Scholten J.M and Spanjer M.C (1996) Determination of aflatoxin B1 in pistachio kernels and shells, , J. Assoc. Off.<br />

Anal. Chem 79: 1360-1364<br />

8


14. Brera C., Caputi R., Miraglia M., Iavicoli I., Salerno A. and Carelli G. (2002). Exposure assessment to mycotoxins<br />

in workplace: aflatoxins and ochratoxin A occurrence in airborne dusts and human sera, Micro chemical J<br />

(uncorrected proof).<br />

15. Garcia-Villanova R.J., Cordon C., Paramas A.M.G., Aparicio P. and Rosales M.E.G., (2004). Simultaneous<br />

immunoaffinity column clean up and HPLC analysis of aflatoxins and ochratoxin A in Spanish bee pollen, J<br />

Agric. Food Chem.52; 7235-7239<br />

16. Gonzalez M.P.E., Mattusch J. and Wennrich R ( 1998) Stability and determination of aflatoxins by highperformance<br />

liquid chromatography with amperometric detection, J.Chromatography A, 828: 439-444<br />

17. Fifield F.W. and Kealey D (2000) Principle and practice of analytical chemistry 3 rd Edition, Blackwell science,<br />

UK<br />

18. Yaacob M.H., Mohd Yusof A.R., and Ahamad R (2003), Cyclic Voltammetry of AFB2 at mercury electrode,<br />

Paper presented at SKAM –VI, Unimas, Kucing, Sarawak, <strong>Malaysia</strong>, 9-11 September 2003<br />

19. Yaacob M.H., Mohd Yusof A.R., and Ahamad R. (2004), Cyclic Voltammetry of AFG1 at mercury electrode,<br />

Paper presented at 3rd Annual Seminar on Sustainable Science and Management, KUSTEM, Terengganu,<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>, 4 – 5 May 2004.<br />

20. Jaimez J., Fente C.A., Vazquez B.I., Franco C.M., Cepeda A., Mahuzier G. and Prognon P (2000). “Application of<br />

the assay of aflatoxins by liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection in food analysis.” J.<br />

Chromatography A.” 882: 1-10<br />

21. Miller K (1987) Toxicology aspects of food. Elsevier Applied Science, New York<br />

2.2. Yaacob M.H., Mohd Yusof A.R. and Ahamad R (2005). Differential pulse stripping voltammetric (DPSV)<br />

technique for determination of AFB2 at the mercury electrode. To be published in Collection of Czechoslovak<br />

Chemical Communication. In process.<br />

9


PAPER WAS PUBLISHED IN<br />

J. Kimia Analisis (<strong>Universiti</strong> Sumatera Utara, Medan, Indonesia)<br />

Yaacob, M.H., Mohd. Yusoff, A.R. and Ahamad, R. (2005). Development of Differential<br />

Pulse Cathodic Stripping voltammetry (DPCSV) Technique for the Determination of<br />

AFB1 in Ground Nut Samples. J. Sains Kimia. 9(3): 31-36.<br />

1


DETERMINATION OF THE AFLATOXIN B1 IN GROUND NUT BY<br />

DIFFERENTIAL PULSE CATHODIC STRIPPING VOLTAMMETRY (DPCSV)<br />

TECHNIQUE<br />

Mohamad Hadzri Yaacob 1 , Abdull Rahim Hj. Mohd. Yusoff 2 , Rahmalan Ahamad 2<br />

and Marpongahton Mismi 3<br />

1 School of Health Sciences, USM, 16150 Kubang Krian, Kelantan, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

2 Dept. of Chemistry, Faculty of Sciences, UTM, 81310 UTM, Skudai, Johor, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

3 Dept. of Chemistry, Faculty of Mathematic and Science, USU, Medan, Indonesia<br />

ABSTRACT<br />

An electro analytical method has been developed for the detection and<br />

determination of the 2,3,6a,9a-tetrahydro-4-methoxycyclo penta[c] furo[3’,2’:4,5] furo<br />

[2,3-h][l] benzopyran-1,11-dione (aflatoxin B1, AFB1) by a differential pulse cathodic<br />

stripping voltammetry on a hanging mercury drop electrode (HMDE) in aqueous solution<br />

with Britton-Robinson buffer (BRb) as supporting electrolyte. Effect of instrumental<br />

parameters such as accumulation potential (Eacc), accumulation time (tacc) and scan rate<br />

(v) were examined. The best condition were found to be pH 9.0, Eacc of -0.6 V, tacc of 80<br />

s and v; 50 mV/s. Calibration curve is linear in the range of 0.02 to 0.32 uM with a<br />

detection limit of 0.75 x 10 -8 M (3SDblank/m). Relative standard deviation for a replicate<br />

measurements of AFB1 ( n= 8) with the concentrations of 0.02 and 0.20 uM were 1.27%<br />

and 0.83% respectively. The method is applied for determination of the AFB1 in ground<br />

nut samples after extraction and clean-up steps. The recovery values obtained in spiked<br />

ground nut sample are 90.93 +/- 2.53 % for 3.0 ppb and 86.15 +/- 2.03 % for 15.0 ppb of<br />

AFB1.<br />

ABSTRAK<br />

Satu kaedah elektroanalisis telah dibangunkan untuk mengesan dan menentukan<br />

2,3,6a,9a-tetrahydro-4-methoxycyclo penta[c] furo[3’,2’:4,5] furo [2,3-h][l] benzopyran-<br />

1,11-dione (aflatoxin B1, AFB1) menggunakan teknik voltammetri perlucutan katodik<br />

denyut pembeza di atas elektrod titisan raksa tergantung (HMDE) di dalam larutan akuas<br />

dengan larutan penimbal Britton-Robinson bertindak sebagai larutan penyokong. Kesan<br />

parameter peralatan seperti keupayaan pengumpulan (Eacc), masa pengumpulan (tacc) dan<br />

kadar imbasan (v) telah dikaji. Keadaan terbaik yang diperolehi adalah pH 9.0, Eacc; -0.6<br />

V, tacc; 80 s dan v; 50 mV/s. Keluk kalibrasi adalah linear pada julat di antara 0.02 ke<br />

0.32 uM dengan had pengesan pada 0.75 x 10 -8 M (3SDblank/ m). Sisihan piawai relatif<br />

1 Corresponding address:<br />

Chemistry Dept, Faculty of Science, UTM,<br />

81300 Skudai, Johor, <strong>Malaysia</strong><br />

tel: 07-553 4492 or 016-926 0354<br />

or e-mail address: mhy02psk@yahoo.com<br />

2


untuk pengukuran AFB1 dengan kepekatan 0.02 dan 0.2 M sebanyak 8 kali ialah 1.27 %<br />

dan 0.83 % masing-masingnya. Kaedah ini telah digunakan untuk menentukan<br />

kandungan AFB1 di dalam sampel kacang tanah selepas proses pengekstraksian dan<br />

pembersihan. Nilai perolehan semula di dalam sampel kacang yang disuntik dengan 3.0<br />

ppb dan 15.0 ppb AFB1 adalah 90.93 +/- 2.53 % dan 86.15 +/- 2.03 % masingmasingnya.<br />

Keywords: Cathodic stripping voltammetry; aflatoxin B1; ground nut<br />

O<br />

INTRODUCTION<br />

Aflatoxins are mycotoxin produced by certain fungi especially, Aspergillus flavus<br />

and parasiticus , and they display strong carcinogenicity [1]. Therefore, they are<br />

dangerous food contaminants and many countries have stringent regulatory demands on<br />

the level of aflatoxins permitted in imported and traded commodities. Aflatoxin B1, B2,<br />

G1 and G2 are the main toxins and may be present in many foodstuff or animal feed<br />

such as maize, peanuts, nuts, copra and cottonseeds [2]. Of these, AFB1 (Fig 1) is the<br />

most commonly occurring variety and one of the most toxic [3]. The order of toxicity ,<br />

AFB1 > AFG1 > AFB2 > AFG2, indicates that the terminal furan moiety of AFB1 is a<br />

critical point for determining the degree of biological activity of this group of mycotoxins<br />

[4].<br />

O<br />

O<br />

Figure 1. Structural formula of AFB1<br />

O<br />

One of the foodstuff which is most occurrence of AFB1 is ground nut. In<br />

<strong>Malaysia</strong>, the AFB1 level in peanut is regulated with maximum level that cannot be<br />

greater than 15 ppb [5]. Several analytical techniques for quantitative determination of<br />

the AFB1 in ground nut have been proposed such as thin layer chromatography [6], high<br />

performance liquid chromatography, where a derivatisation is required either using<br />

trifluoroacetic acid [7], iodine [8] or bromine [9], and an enzyme-linked immunosorbent<br />

assay, ELISA [10], All these methods, however, require specialist equipment operated<br />

by skilled personnel and expensive instruments and high maintenance cost [11].<br />

Due to all these reasons, a voltammetric technique which is fast, accurate and<br />

requires low cost equipment [12] is proposed. This technique uses the concept where the<br />

O<br />

O<br />

3


peak height of reduction peak of AFB1 is measured when a certain potential is applied<br />

[13]. Previous experiment using cyclic voltammetric technique showed that AFB1<br />

reduced at mercury electrode and the reaction is totally irreversible [14]. This work aimed<br />

to study and develop a DPCSV method for determination of AFB1 at trace levels and to<br />

determine this aflatoxin in ground nut samples. No such report has been published<br />

regarding the determination of AFB1 in ground nut using this technique until now.<br />

Apparatus<br />

EXPERIMENTAL<br />

Voltammetric measurements were performed using BAS CV-50W voltammetric<br />

analyzer with Control Growth Mercury Electrode (CGME) stand. The three-electrode<br />

system consisted of a CGME as working electrode, Ag/AgCl2 reference electrode and<br />

platinum wire as the auxiliary electrode. A 20 ml capacity measuring cell was used for<br />

placing supporting electrolyte and sample analytes. All measurements were carried out at<br />

room temperature. All pH measurements were made with Cyberscan pH meter,<br />

calibrated with standard buffers (pH 4, 7 and 10) at room temperature.<br />

Reagents<br />

AFB1 standard. (1mg per bottle) was purchased from Sigma Co. and was used<br />

without further purification. Stock solution ( 10 ppm) in hexane:acetonitrile (98:2) were<br />

prepared and was stored in the dark at -4 0 C. The diluted solution were prepared daily<br />

by using certain volume of stock solution, degassed by nitrogen until dryness and<br />

redissolved in Britton-Robinson solution at pH 9.0.<br />

Britton-Robinson buffer solution was prepared from a stock solution 0.04 M<br />

phosphoric (Merck), boric (Merck) and acetic (Merck) acids. BRb solution with other<br />

pH also was prepared by adding sodium hydroxide (Merck) 1.0 M up to pH value<br />

required. All solutions were prepared in double distilled dionised water. All chemicals<br />

were of analytical grade reagents.<br />

General procedure<br />

For voltammetric experiments, 10 ml of Britton-Robinson buffer solution was<br />

placed in a voltammetric cell, through which a nitrogen stream was passed for 600 s<br />

before recording the voltammogram. The selected Eacc = - 600 mV was applied during<br />

the tacc = 80 s while the solution was kept under stirring. After the accumulation time had<br />

elapsed, stirring was stopped and the selected accumulation potential was kept on<br />

mercury drop for a rest time (tr = 10 s), after which a potential scan was performed<br />

between -0.950 and -1.500 V by DPCSV.<br />

4


Procedure for the determination in ground nut samples<br />

Four batches of ground nut included an artificial contaminated have been<br />

analysed for AFB1 content. AFB1was extracted from ground nut samples according to<br />

the standard procedure developed by Chemistry Department, Penang Branch, Ministry<br />

Of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), <strong>Malaysia</strong> [15]. 1ml of the final<br />

solution from extraction and clean-up steps in chloroform was pipette into an amber<br />

bottle, degassed with nitrogen and re-dissolved in 1ml of Britton-Robinson. 200 ul of<br />

this solution was spiked into 10 ml supporting electrolyte in volumetric cell. After that,<br />

the general procedure was applied and voltammogram of sample was recorded. A 10 ppb<br />

of AFB1 standard solution was then spiked into the sample solution before general<br />

procedure for voltammetric analysis The content of AFB1 in ground nut sample was<br />

calculated based on standard addition method to minimize any matrix effect.<br />

Cyclic voltammetric determination of AFB1<br />

RESULT AND DISCUSSION<br />

Cyclic voltammogram of 1.3 uM AFB1 in Britton-Robinson buffer solution as<br />

shown in Figure 2.0 indicates the non-reversibility of the electrode process. It is also<br />

confirmed by the study of the influence of the scan rate in this technique, where a linear<br />

relationship between peak potential (Ep ) and log scan rate was found as Ep (-mV) =<br />

61.41x + 1171.6 (R 2 = 0.9967).<br />

Figure 3.0 Typical repetitive cyclic voltammogram of 1.3 uM AFB1 in BRb<br />

pH 9.0; scan rate = 200 mV/s.<br />

5


Effect of pH<br />

The influence of pH on the voltammetric behaviour of AFB1 has been studied<br />

using DPCSV. AFB1 gave a single reduction signal in the pH range of 5.0 to 12.0 where<br />

at pH 9.0, the highest peak height has been obtained as shown in Figure 3.0. This can be<br />

assigned to the reduction of the ketone group to give the corresponding alcohol [19].<br />

Ip (nA)<br />

60<br />

50<br />

40<br />

30<br />

20<br />

10<br />

0<br />

4 6 8 10 12<br />

pH<br />

Figure 3.0 Effect of pH of BRb on peak height of 1.0 uM AFB1<br />

Optimisation of condition for the stripping analysis<br />

The voltammetric determination of analytes at trace levels normally involves very<br />

small current response. For that reason it is important to optimise all those parameters<br />

which may have an influence on the measured peak height. The effect of various<br />

parameters such as accumulation potential (Eacc ), accumulation time (tacc) and scan rate<br />

on the peak height of AFB1 have been studied. The results of these optimization were<br />

Eacc; -0.6 V, tacc ; 80 s and scan rate 50 mV/s. Other parameters are initial potential (Ei )<br />

= -0.1 V, final potential (Ef ) = -1.4 V and pulse amplitude = 80 mV. Using these<br />

optimized parameters, 0.1 uM of AFB1 has produced a single and sharp peak at Ep of -<br />

1.21 V with Ip of 60 +/- 5 nA ( n=5) as shown in Figure 4.0.<br />

Figure 4.0 Voltammogram of 0.1 uM AFB1 in BRb pH 9.0 (n=5). Condition;<br />

Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s and scan rate = 50 mV/s<br />

6


Effect of standard addition of AFB1 and analytical characteristics of the method<br />

Using the optimized conditions that already mentioned, a study was made of the<br />

relationship between peak current and concentration. There is a linear relationship in the<br />

concentration range 0.02 uM and 0.32 uM with a regression equation of y = 5.4363x +<br />

3.7245 ( R 2 = 0.9989) as shown in Figure 5.0a and 5.0b. The relative standard deviations<br />

(RSD) of the analytical signals at several concentration values were 1.27% and 0.83% for<br />

AFB1 at concentration of 0.02 uM and 0.20 uM respectively. The analytical sensitivity<br />

has been calculated as 3SDblank / m (16) and was found as 0.75 x 10 -8 M. SDblank is the<br />

standard deviation from 8 measurements of blank and m is slope from calibration curve.<br />

ip (n A )<br />

200<br />

150<br />

100<br />

(i) (ii)<br />

50<br />

0<br />

y = 5.4363x + 3.7245<br />

R 2 = 0.9989<br />

0 10 20 30 40<br />

[AFB1] x 10-8M<br />

Figure 5.0 (i) Voltammograms of AFB1 with increasing concentration (b) 0.02 uM ,<br />

(c) 0.04 uM, (d) 0.06 uM, (e) 0.10 uM, (f) 0.14 uM, (g) 0.18 uM (h) 0.22 uM, (i) 0.26<br />

uM, (j) 0.30 uM and (k) 0.32 uM in (a) BRb pH 9.0; (ii) it’s calibration curve.<br />

Conditions: Eacc= -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s, scan rate = 50 mV/s.<br />

Determination of AFB1 in ground nut samples<br />

The proposed method was applied to the analysis of the AFB1 in eluate of ground<br />

nut samples, spiked with different concentration of AFB1 for recovery studies. In this<br />

7


study, the concentrations used were 3.0 ppb and 15.0 ppb The results of this studies are<br />

represented in Table 1.0. The results show that the accuracy of the method is good.<br />

Table 1.0 Recovery study of AFB1 spiked in eluate of ground nut<br />

samples (n = 3)<br />

No<br />

1<br />

2<br />

Amount added<br />

(ppb)<br />

3.00<br />

15.00<br />

Amount found<br />

(ppb)<br />

2.73 +/- 0.08<br />

12.92 +/- 0.30<br />

% of recovery<br />

90.93 +/- 2.53<br />

88.15 +/- 2.03<br />

Analyses of AFB1 content in ground nut samples were determined by standard<br />

addition in order to eliminate the matrix effects. Voltammograms of ground nut samples<br />

are shown in Figures 6(i) to 6(iv). AFB1 was not detected in three samples while in<br />

artificial contaminated sample, 333 ppb of AFB1 was found. The results were compared<br />

to that obtained by HPLC technique as stated in Table 2.0 which show a good agreement<br />

between them. It was concluded that the proposed technique is good, accurate and<br />

reliable for determination of AFB1 in ground nut samples.<br />

Table 2.0 The results of DPCSV analysis of AFB1 in ground nut samples<br />

compared with HPLC technique.<br />

Sample<br />

1<br />

2<br />

3<br />

4<br />

Note: ND = not detected<br />

By DPCSV technique<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

333 ppb<br />

By HPLC technique<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

ND<br />

337 ppb<br />

8


(i) (ii)<br />

(iii) (iv)<br />

Figure 6.0 Voltammograms of ground nut sample No. 1 (i), sample No. 2 (ii),<br />

sample No. 3 (iii) and sample No. 4 with standard addition of 10 ppb AFB1 (iv) in<br />

BRb pH 9.0 as the blank. Condition; Eacc = -0.6 V, tacc = 80 s and scan rate = 50<br />

mV/s.<br />

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT<br />

One of the author would like to thank University Science <strong>Malaysia</strong> for approving<br />

his study leave and financial support to carry out his further study at Dept of Chemistry,<br />

UTM. We also indebt to UTM for fundamental short term grant (Vot No 75152) and to<br />

Chemistry Department, Penang Branch, Ministry of Science, Technology and<br />

Innovation(MOSTI), <strong>Malaysia</strong> for the procedure of extraction and clean-up of ground nut<br />

samples.<br />

9


REFERENCES<br />

1. Akiyama H. Goda Y. Tanaka T and Toyoda M. (2001). Determination of<br />

aflatoxinsB1, B2, G1 and G2 in spices using a multifunctional column clean-up,<br />

J. Of Chromatography A, 932. 153-157.<br />

2. Chiavaro E., Dall’Asta C., Galaverna G., Biancardi A., Gambarelli E., Dossena A.<br />

and Marchelli R. (2001). New reversed-phase liquid chromatographic method to<br />

detect aflatoxins in food and feed with cyclodextrins as fluorescence enhancers<br />

added to the eluent, J Of Chromatography A, 937. 31-40.<br />

3. World Health Organisation in: IARC Monograph on the evaluation of<br />

carcinogenic risk to human, WHO, Lyon, 1987.<br />

4. Hall A.J., Wild C.P in: Eaton D.L., Groopman J.D. (Eds). The toxicology of<br />

aflatoxins: Human Health, Veterinary and Agricultural Significance, Academic<br />

New York, 1994.<br />

5. <strong>Malaysia</strong>n Food Act (1983) Act No 281, Reviewed 2002, Food Quality Control<br />

Dept, Ministry of Health, <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

6. Bicking M.K.L., Kniseley R.N and Svec H.J (1983), Coupled-Column for<br />

quantization low levels of aflatoxins, J . Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 66, 905-908.<br />

7. Beebe B.M. (1978). Reverse phase high pressure liquid chromatographic<br />

determination of aflatoxins in foods, J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 81. 1347-1352.<br />

8. Cepeda A., Franco C.M., Fente C.A., Vazquez B.I., Rodriguez J.L., Prognon P.<br />

and Mahuzier G. (1996). Post column excitation of aflatoxins using cyclodextrins<br />

in liquid chromatography for food analysis. J Of Chrom A. 721. 69-74.<br />

9. Garner R.C., Whattam, M.M. , Taylor, P.J.L. and Stow M.W ( 1993) Analysis of<br />

United Kingdom purchased spices for aflatoxins using immunoaffinity column<br />

clean up procedure followed up by high-performance liquid chromatographic<br />

analysis and post-column derivatization with pyridium bromide per bromide, J.<br />

Chromatography, 648: 485-490<br />

10. Blesa J., Soriano J.M., Molto J.C., Marin R. and Manes J. (2003). Determination<br />

of aflatoxins in peanuts by matrix solid-phase dispersion and liquid<br />

chromatography. J Of Chrom A. 1011. 49-54.<br />

11. Garden S.R. and Strachan N.J.C.(2001). Novel colorimetric immunoassay for the<br />

detection of aflatoxin B1, Anal Chim Acta, 444. 187-191.<br />

10


12. Braitina Kh. Z., Malakhova N.A. and Stojko Y. (2000) Stripping voltammetry in<br />

environmental and food analysis, Fresenius J Anal Chem 368: 307-325<br />

13. Fifield F.W. and Kealey D (2000) Principle and practice of analytical chemistry<br />

3 rd Edition, Blackwell science, UK<br />

14. Yaacob M.H., Mohd Yusoff A.R. and Ahmad R. (2003). Cyclic voltammetry of<br />

AFB2 at the mercury electrode. Paper presented at Simposium Kimia <strong>Malaysia</strong> ke<br />

13 (SKAM-13), 9 – 11 th September 2003, Kucing, Sarawak, <strong>Malaysia</strong>.<br />

15. Standard procedure for determination of aflatoxins (2000). Chemistry<br />

Department, Penang Branch, Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation<br />

(MOSTI), <strong>Malaysia</strong> (unpublished paper).<br />

16. Smyth M. R., Lawellin D. W. and Osteryoung J.G (1979) Polarographic Study of<br />

Aflatoxin B1, B2, G1 and G2: Application of Differential-pulse Polarography to<br />

the Determination of Aflatoxin B1 in Various Foodstuffs, Analyst, 104: 73-78<br />

17. Sabry S.M. (1999). Adsorptive stripping voltammetric assay of phenazopyridine<br />

hydrochloride in biological fluids and pharmaceutical preparation, Talanta 50:<br />

133-140.<br />

11

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!