PubMed HealthSearch

PubMed · 3425550

Environmental sampling and analysis for zeranol.

Abstract

Due to concern over health effects associated with the use of zeranol, a sampling and analytical method to monitor zeranol in the work environment was developed. The collection strategy included air samples on FHLP filters, area samples on gauze pads, hand/dermal samples on gauze pads and bulk samples. The sampling method evaluation included choice of media, flow rate and duration for air samples, sample preparation, extraction efficiencies and sample stability. Analysis of the samples was accomplished by high performance liquid chromatography with identification and quantification by UV and fluorescence detection. The analytical method evaluation included separation of possible interfering compounds, calibration curves, limits of detection (LOD), limits of quantitation (LOQ), precision and accuracy. The tested analytical range was 0.01 to 150 micrograms/mL with a LOD of 0.007 microgram/mL and a LOQ of 0.02 microgram/mL using UV detection. For the fluorescence detector, the LOD was 0.05 microgram/mL and the LOQ was 0.15 microgram/mL. Peak confirmation was achieved by retention time and comparing the two detector responses. Use of this method provided the sensitivity and specificity to analyze environmental samples for zeranol in the workplace environment.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C E Neumeister. 1987. Environmental sampling and analysis for zeranol.. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298668791385813

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in air samples of meat smokehouses.

In a screening programme nine Danish meat smokehouses were randomly selected for measurements on concentration of airborne polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH). A total of 23 stationary air samples were collected during the entire working period of the kiln either above the kiln doors or approximately 2 m in front of the kiln doors (i.e. total exposure on the day of sampling). Three of these samples had a PAH content below the detection limit of the highly sensitive assay employed. Furthermore, eight personal air samples were collected during the periods of tending the kiln (i.e. peak exposure measurement). Three of these samples were below the detection limit. Total airborne PAH concentration of the stationary air samples calculated as the sum of the concentration of 16 selected PAH compounds, was in general far lower than the total airborne PAH concentration measured in the same manner in smokehouses curing fish (Nordholm et al., 1986). In contrast to the study on PAH exposure in smokehouses curing fish, the present study revealed no significant difference between total PAH content in air samples collected above the kilns compared with samples collected approximately 2 m in front of the kiln doors. Calculation of the relative content of the individual PAH compounds in the stationary air samples collected in meat smokehouses showed naphthalene to be the major compound in (70% +/- 26% of total PAH), whereas the relative content of carcinogenic PAH compounds in average represented 4.0% of the total PAH content. However, only approximately 15% of the stationary air samples with detectable content of total PAH contained detectable amounts of carcinogenic PAH compounds. Hence it was concluded that PAH exposure during cold meat curing might be considered a limited health hazard compared with PAH exposure during hot fish curing.

Air Pollutants, Occupational