1988
DOI: 10.1016/0003-2697(88)90161-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

New preparation method for 9-anthryldiazomethane (ADAM) as a fluorescent labeling reagent for fatty acids and derivatives

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
28
0

Year Published

1990
1990
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One method that is widely used is liquid chromatography (LC) with fluorometric detection of 9-anthryldiazomethane (ADAM) derivatives, initially proposed by Lee et al (1987). Several laboratories have reported improvements to the method, such as the in situ method for preparation of the reagent (Yoshida et al, 1988;Quilliam et al, 1998) and better cleanup procedures (Quilliam, 1995;Stabell et al, 1991). LC combined with mass spectrometry (LC/ MS) is another method that is gaining acceptance as a good quantitative and confirmatory method for toxins (Quilliam, 1995;Quilliam et al, 1989).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One method that is widely used is liquid chromatography (LC) with fluorometric detection of 9-anthryldiazomethane (ADAM) derivatives, initially proposed by Lee et al (1987). Several laboratories have reported improvements to the method, such as the in situ method for preparation of the reagent (Yoshida et al, 1988;Quilliam et al, 1998) and better cleanup procedures (Quilliam, 1995;Stabell et al, 1991). LC combined with mass spectrometry (LC/ MS) is another method that is gaining acceptance as a good quantitative and confirmatory method for toxins (Quilliam, 1995;Quilliam et al, 1989).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The conditions previously optimized for application of "in situ" ADAM as derivatization reagent for DSP toxins [11] were applied in this work and the mobile phase was modified slightly with the aim of improving chromatographic resolution. Figure 3 (a and b) shows the chromatograms obtained after "in situ" ADAM derivatisation of a phytoplankton extract contaminated with DSP toxins.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Decomposition of the reagent can result in incomplete derivatization, and decomposition products can interfere in the analysis. Yoshida and co-workers [11] reported a method for "in situ" synthesis of ADAM. Improvements to the reaction conditions have been made in order to achieve the same reaction efficiency as with the commercial reagent [12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, derivatization of these analytes with labeling reagents has been widely adopted by HPLC with UV, especially fluorescence detection. The common reagents are as the following: (1) bromomethanes, such as 4-bromomethyl-7-methoxycoumarin(Br-Mmc) [23] and 4-bromomethyl-7-acetoxycoumarin (Br-Mac) [24]; (2) diazomethanes, such as 9-anthryldiazomethane (ADAM) [25,26] and 1-pyrenyldiazomethane (PDAM) [27]; (3) amines, such as 9-aminophenanthrene (9-AP) [28] and 5-(dimethylamino)-l-naphthalenesulponyl-semipiperazide (dansyl-semipiperazide) [29]; (4) hydrazides, such as 4-(1-methylphenanthro [9,10-d]imidazol-2-y1)benzohydrazide (MPIB-hydrazide) [30] and 4-(5,6-dimethoxy-2-benzimidazoyl)-benzohydrazide) (DMBI-hydrazide) [31]; (5) sulfonate ester reagents, such as 2-(2,3-naphthalimino)ethyl trifluoromethanesulphonate (NE-OTF) [32], 2-(2-naphthoxy)-ethyl-2-(piperidino)-ethanesulfonate (NOEPES) [33] and 2-(2,3-anthracene-dicarboximido) ethyl trifluoromethanesulfonate (AE-OTF) [34]. Nevertheless, Toyo'oka [35] has reported that many of these reagents have limitations in their applications such as low detection sensitivity, short detection wavelengths, poor stability, tedious analytical procedure and serious interferences in the biological sample analyses.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%