Subscriber access provided by University of Florida | Smathers Libraries
Article
Evaluation of Endocrine Disrupting Compounds Migration in Household Food Containers under Domestic Use Conditions Jorge Sáiz, and Belén Gomara J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.7b02479 • Publication Date (Web): 22 Jul 2017 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on July 23, 2017
Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.
Page 1 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
1
Evaluation of Endocrine Disrupting Compounds Migration in Household Food Containers under Domestic
2
Use Conditions
3 4
Jorge Sáiz, Belen Gómara*
5 6
Institute of General Organic Chemistry, Spanish National Research Council (IQOG-CSIC). Calle Juan de la
7
Cierva, 3, 28006 Madrid, Spain.
8 9
*Corresponding author:
10
Tel: +34 91 5622900
11
Fax: +34 91 5644853
12
E-mail address:
[email protected] (B. Gómara).
13 14 15 16
1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
17
Page 2 of 28
ABSTRACT
18 19
Plasticizers and plastic monomers are commonly used in packaging. Most of them act as endocrine
20
disrupters and are susceptible to migrate from the packaging to the food. We evaluated the migration of
21
endocrine disrupting compounds from three different household food containers to four food simulants
22
under different domestic treatments and for different periods of time, with the aim of reproducing real
23
domestic conditions. The results showed that the migration to the simulants increased with the storage
24
time, up to more than 50 times in certain cases. The heating power seemed to increase the migration
25
processes (up to more than 30 times) and reusing containers produced an increase or decrease of the
26
concentrations depending on the container type and the simulant. The concentrations found were lower
27
than other concentrations reported (always less than 4000 pg/mL, down to less than 20 pg/mL), which
28
might be a consequence of the domestic conditions used.
29 30
Keywords: endocrine disrupting compounds; migration; food containers; food simulants; UHPLC-MS/MS.
31
2 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 3 of 28
32
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
INTRODUCTION
33 34
The presence of contaminants in food due to migration processes from packaging material is a well-known
35
issue1,2. These migration processes have been proved to occur in many different packaging of different
36
materials, such as recycled paperboard packaging,2 baby bottles,3 canned foods,4,5 or water bottles,6 among
37
many others. Nowadays, the majority of food packaging used in food industry and for home-cooked meals
38
are made of organic polymers, such as polyethylene (PE) bags, polyethylene terephthalate (PET), or
39
polypropylene (PP). In the manufacturing of these plastics, plasticizers are used as additives, which provide
40
certain characteristics to the final product, such as plasticity, viscosity, transparency, thickness, or increased
41
durability. Most of these plasticizers are phthalates, which can migrate to food and are considered to act as
42
endocrine disrupters.1 Besides, other plastic monomers, such as bisphenols and bisphenol derivatives, are
43
being used as constituent of some plastics and epoxy resins and could, therefore, also migrate to the food.
44
These compounds are also not exempt from controversy and their migration processes have also been
45
studied.4,7-11
46 47
Although the migration of plasticizers and monomers to real food samples for human consumption has
48
been studied by some authors,12-14 food simulants are commonly used in order to simplify testing and for
49
regulatory compliance purposes, since the simulants are less complex than foods.15 Moreover, their use
50
allows to easily compare results obtained in different laboratories. According to the European Union,16 food
51
simulants mimic the use of foods of different nature, such as oily food, alcoholic drinks, foods with
52
hydrophilic character, or foods with specific pH values. Commonly, migration tests are performed with
53
samples consisting of small pieces of the plastic packaging of study, which are totally immersed in the food
54
simulant. Some authors17 used four different food simulants in order to study the migration of sixteen
55
phthalic acid esters. The experimental setup consisted of cutting a piece of plastic from bottles, bags, or
56
films and soaking them with the selected simulants for a pre-defined time and temperature. Similarly,
57
other authors18 performed a study of plasticizer migration with pieces of bottles and total immersion in
58
food simulants. Another work19 studied the migration of phthalates from cork stoppers also by soaking the
3 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 4 of 28
59
corks in a food simulant. Other groups20-23 cut cling film in pieces, which were added to the selected food
60
simulant. The total immersion test was also performed10 for the evaluation of the migration of some
61
plasticizers from plastic bottles, caps, and septa to food simulants. Although the total immersion test is
62
widely performed for the evaluation of chemical migration to food, it does not faithfully reproduce real
63
storing and/or cooking conditions, since both sides of the container are in contact with the simulant and
64
because, frequently, the surface-to-volume ratio differs from real storage situations. In these regards, other
65
authors have focused their studies in reproducing specific storage conditions using the entire container for
66
it. Plastic baby bottles have attracted the interest of several authors, who studied bottles of different
67
materials filled with a milk simulant,24-27 while other food containers, such as cans, tetra-packs, or yogurt
68
containers have been studied less frequently.9 However, there is still a need for more tests that emulate
69
certain uses of specific food containers. Regarding the storage conditions, some authors kept the samples
70
at high temperatures, up to 121 ºC, in order to accelerate the experiments.19,21,22,28,29 Other studies also
71
used elevated temperatures following the indications stablished in ISO 10106,9,17,19,20,23 which simulate
72
storage at room temperature for indefinite time,30 while other authors used a combination of high
73
temperatures and long periods of time, such as 1.5 years at 40 ºC.31 Although these situations simulate
74
extreme conditions and are of interest in certain cases, they hardly simulate real domestic conditions of
75
food storage or cooking, such as freezing or heating.
76 77
While plastic baby bottles have been widely studied9, 24-27 for migration tests, in homes one of the most
78
used food packaging are household food containers. They are used to store food in the refrigerator or in
79
the freezer and also to transport food, for example to the work place. Household food containers are also
80
frequently used to heat the food and they are repeatedly reused over time. While the effects of these
81
preservation and cooking actions are relatively unknown in terms of plasticizer and monomer migration,
82
the possible adverse effects of these practices on health has become a growing concern for society. There
83
exist, in fact, the general idea that food should not be heated in the food container and that quality food
84
containers should be used in order to avoid “bad” plastics. Actually, there is a big market for household
85
food containers, which offer many types of containers. The user can purchase food containers of different
4 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 5 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
86
materials at very different prices, from cheap disposable containers made of plastic to very expensive glass
87
food containers. The decision on which product will be purchased will depend on economic aspects but
88
also on health concerns, based on the prejudices of the customer.
89 90
In view of this discussion, it seems important to perform new studies on the endocrine disrupting
91
compound (EDC) migration. For this reason, present paper is focused on commercially available household
92
food containers, which have scarcely been studied previously, instead of industrial packaging materials
93
such as plastic bottles, cans, stoppers, etc. Besides, the migration conditions propose in this work mimic
94
conventional domestic storing and cooking conditions instead of using accelerated conditions based on
95
high temperatures and long periods of time. Therefore, the aim of this work was to evaluate the plasticizer
96
and monomer migration from different types of household food containers to food simulants of varied
97
natures under specific conditions that simulate real situations at home, depending on different storage
98
type, times, and cooking processes. The EDCs selected for the study were dimethyl phthalate (DMP), 1,
99
diethyl phthalate (DEP), 2, dibutyl phthalate (DBP), 3, butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), 4, diethyl hexyl
100
phthalate (DEHP), 5, and di-iso-nonyl phthalate (DiNP), 6, bisphenol A (BPA), 7, bisphenol B (BPB), 8,
101
bisphenol F (BPF), 9, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (BADGE), 10, bisphenol F diglycidyl ether (BFDGE), 11,
102
BADGE·HCl, 12, BADGE·H2O, 13, BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, and BADGE·2H2O, 15. In addition, three different food
103
containers (i.e. hermetic semi-disposable containers, BPA-free hermetic containers, and glass hermetic
104
containers) were also investigated.
105 106
MATERIAL AND METHODS
107 108
· Reagents and standards
109 110
Native standards of dimethyl phthalate (DMP), 1, diethyl phthalate (DEP), 2, dibutyl phthalate (DBP), 3,
111
butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), 4, diethyl hexyl phthalate (DEHP), 5, di-iso-nonyl phthalate (DiNP), 6,
112
bisphenol A (BPA), 7, bisphenol B (BPB), 8, bisphenol F (BPF), 9, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (BADGE), 10,
5 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 6 of 28
113
bisphenol F diglycidyl ether (BFDGE), 11, BADGE·HCl, 12, BADGE·H2O, 13, BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, and
114
BADGE·2H2O, 15, were supplied by AccuStandard (New Haven, CT,). Chemical structures are gathered in
115
Figure 1.The isotopically labeled standards DMP-D4, DEP-D4, DBP-D4, BBP-D4, DEHP-D4, and BPA-13C12 were
116
supplied by Cambridge Isotope Laboratories (Andover, MA).
117 118
Water, acetonitrile, ethanol, and methanol, all of LC–MS Ultra CHROMASOLV® grade, formic acid, acetic
119
acid, and ammonium formate (purity ≥ 99.0%) were supplied by Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO).
120 121
· Apparatus
122 123
The ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC–MS/MS)
124
experiments were carried out in a UPLC Acquity system (Waters, Milford, MA) coupled to a Xevo TQ-S triple
125
quadrupole mass spectrometer (Waters) using an electrospray ionization (ESI) interface. A 2.1 mm × 50 mm
126
i.d., 1.7 µm, Acquity UPLC® BEH Phenyl column (Waters) was used as separation column and a 2.1 mm × 30
127
mm i.d., 1.7 µm, Kinetex C18 delay column (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) was placed between the LC pump
128
and the injection valve, in order to retard the phthalates coming from the mobile phase and separate them
129
from the analytical peaks. Nitrogen (99.5% purity) was used as desolvation and cone gases for the MS
130
experiments, at 16.7 L/min and 2.5 L/min, respectively, and argon (99.999% purity) was used as collision
131
gas (0.17 mL/min). The ESI source was operated in the fast polarity switching mode. Phthalates, BFDGE,
132
BADGE, and derivatives were detected in the positive mode, while BPA, BPB, and BPF were recorded in the
133
negative mode. Optimization and quantitative analysis were carried out in the multiple reaction monitoring
134
(MRM) mode, using two precursor-product ion transitions for each compound. The most intense ion of the
135
ESI spectra of each analyte was selected as precursor ion. After that, the two most intense product ions
136
formed at their optimum collision energies were chosen, obtaining the two most abundant ion transitions.
137
The most abundant transition was used for quantitative purposes and the second most abundant one for
138
confirmatory purposes. The compounds, along with their retention times, ion transitions, transition ratios,
139
optimized collision energies, and polarities are shown in Table 1. The instrumental determination of DMP,
6 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 7 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
140
DEP, DBP, BBP, DEHP, and BPA was already optimized,32 while the instrumental conditions for DiNP, 6, BPB,
141
8, BPF, 9, BADGE, 10, BFDGE, 11, BADGE·HCl, 12, BADGE·H2O, 13, BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, and BADGE·2H2O, 15,
142
were optimized and characterized in this work. The first transition indicated in the table corresponds to the
143
quantitative transition and the second one to the confirmatory transition. The value of dwell time used
144
during the analysis was 0.001 s for all analytes.
145
The determinations of pH values were carried out using a pH meter that was calibrated using aqueous
146
buffers of pH 4.01, 7.00, and 9.21. Values of pH were taken in aqueous solution.
147
The confirmation of the nature of the plastic containers was carried out with a Spectrum One FT-IR
148
Spectrometer (Perkin Elmer, Shelton, CT) using a Universal Attenuated Total Reflectance (ATR) sampling
149
accessory scanning from 4000 to 650 cm-1 with a resolution of 4 cm-1.
150 151
· Migration tests and samples
152 153
Three different types of household food containers were purchased in a local supermarket (Madrid, Spain)
154
and used for the evaluation of EDC migration to food simulants: hermetic semi-disposable containers, BPA-
155
free hermetic containers, and glass hermetic containers. The food containers were washed with soap and
156
warm water before their first use, according to the manufacturers’ recommendations for their domestic
157
use. Then, they were rinsed with ultrapure water three times. Four different food simulants (A, B, C, and
158
D1) were employed, according to the Official Journal of the European Union.16 Simulant A consisted of
159
ethanol 10% (v/v), simulant B was prepared with acetic acid 3% (w/v), simulant C was ethanol 20% (v/v),
160
and simulant D1 consisted of ethanol 50% (v/v), all of them in water. All the simulants were daily prepared
161
and a volume of 250 mL of each simulant was introduced in each household food container, which were
162
then stored or treated under different experimental conditions, according to Table 2. Different sets of food
163
containers were prepared: each set was composed of three different containers (one semi-disposable, one
164
BPA-free, and another one made of glass) and each type of container was filled with the four simulants
165
described above, making a total of 12 different containers per set. Each set was kept in the refrigerator at 4
166
ºC for 1, 3, and 7 d, respectively. Another set of food containers was stored in the freezer at -18 ºC for 1, 4,
7 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 8 of 28
167
and 12 w, respectively. The experiments of heating in a microwave were as follows. The food containers
168
were heated for 2 min at 800 W. Then, each food container was heated for 1 min more at 800 W. This set
169
of food containers was reused in the same conditions (2 min + 1 min at 800 W). One more set of household
170
food containers was prepared and kept in the freezer for 1 w. Then, the defrosting of their contents was
171
carried out in a microwave at 180 W for 5 min, according to the manufacturer’s indications. A total of 132
172
experiments were carried out. After the treatments, 1 mL of the simulants were transferred to glass vials
173
for UHPLC and a volume 20 µL of a solution of 5 mg/L of the isotopically labeled standards was added to
174
the vial. The vials were kept at -18 ºC until their analysis and each sample was injected in the
175
chromatographic system without any further pre-treatment. Blank samples were prepared every day of
176
sample preparation and the EDC signals (if any) were subtracted from the signal of the samples.
177 178
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
179 180
· MRM method development and analytical characterization
181 182
As previously mentioned, the instrumental determination of DMP, DEP, DBP, BBP, DEHP, and BPA was
183
already optimized and characterized previously,32 so here the same procedure was followed for DiNP, 6,
184
BPB, 8, BPF, 9, BADGE, 10, BFDGE, 11, BADGE·HCl, 12, BADGE·H2O, 13, BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, and
185
BADGE·2H2O, 15, optimization. Two different ion transitions were selected for each analyte, in order to use
186
the most abundant as the quantitative transition and the other transition as the confirmatory one. In the
187
case of bisphenol derivatives (BADGE, 10, BFDGE, 11, BADGE·HCl, 12, BADGE·H2O, 13, BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14,
188
and BADGE·2H2O, 15), ammonium adducts were selected as precursor ions for showing higher intensities,
189
as experienced previously.33 The energy in the collision cell was optimized for all the transitions
190
independently, in order to gain in signal intensity. First, the energies were studied in the range from 5 to 30
191
eV (5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 eV). Then a fine optimization was done around the optimal energy in a range of
192
10 eV, one by one (Table 1). Two detection windows were programmed for different groups of analytes,
193
according to their retention times, in order to enhance the global sensitivity of the analysis. The first
8 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 9 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
194
detection window was from 0 to 2.3 min and included DMP, 1, BPF, 9, and BADGE·2H2O, 15. The second
195
window included the compounds eluted between 2.1 and 6.0 min and included DEP, 2, DBP, 3, BBP, 4,
196
DEHP, 5, DiNP, 6, BPA, 7, BPB, 8, BADGE, 10, BFDGE, 11, BADGE·HCl, 12, BADGE·H20, 13, and
197
BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14.
198
As previously reported,32 once the MRM method was developed for DiNP, 6, BPB, 8, BPF, 9, and bisphenol
199
derivatives, 10-15, it was characterized in terms of precision, instrumental limits of detection and
200
quantitation (iLODs and iLOQs), and linear dynamic ranges. Precision was evaluated at two different levels,
201
the repeatability (calculated as the relative standard deviation, RSD (%), of three consecutive injections)
202
and the intermediate precision (calculated as the RSD of four injections carried out on different days
203
covering two different weeks), at three different concentration levels, i.e. 5, 50, and 500 pg on column for
204
all the compounds except DiNP, 6, (50, 500, and 5000 pg on column) and BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, (10, 100, and
205
1000 pg on column). RSD values were lower than 12% and 16% for repeatability and intermediate
206
precision, respectively, except in the case of DiNP, 6, BADGE·HCl, 12, and BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, which RSD
207
values were quite higher. iLOD and iLOQ calculations were based on the measure of the standard deviation
208
(sb) of the signal of a standard in which the analytes are spiked at a concentration close to iLOQ and the
209
slope of the calibration equation for each compound (m) using the formulas 3sb/m and 10sb/m for iLOD and
210
iLOQ, respectively.32 iLOD values were between 0.12 and 2.2 pg on column, for all the compounds
211
characterized, except for BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, and DiNP, 6, which presented higher iLOD (6.4 and 12 pg on
212
column, respectively). Dynamic ranges were tested using nine calibration points in the interval from 5 to
213
2500 pg on column, and different linear ranges were observed for the different compounds. Calibration
214
curves adjusted to a linear fit between 5 and 500 pg on column for all the compounds, except BPF (5-2500
215
pg on column) and DiNP, 6, and BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, (50-2500 pg on column). In all cases, correlations
216
coefficients were higher than 0.98.
217
Characterization parameters for DMP, 1, DEP, 2, DBP, 3, BBP, 4, DEHP, 5, and BPA, 7, can be found in the
218
previous paper .32
219 220
· Migration test
9 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 10 of 28
221 222
In order to test the migration of EDCs, food simulants were used in accordance with the European Union
223
regulations.16 Simulants A, B, and C were used to simulate foods with hydrophilic character. Food simulant
224
B simulated the use of foods with pH values below 4.5. Simulant C was for those foods containing a
225
relevant amount of organic ingredients, which make the food to show a more lipophilic character and for
226
foods with alcohol content of up to 20%. Simulant D1 simulated the use of food that has lipophilic
227
character. In particular, this simulant was for oil-in-water emulsions and alcoholic foods with alcohol
228
content above 20%. Food simulant A was used to simulate the rest of general foods.
229 230
Three different food containers (semi-disposable plastic, bisphenol A-free plastic, and glass) were selected
231
for this work, which form a representative sample of commercially available household containers found in
232
supermarkets to be used for food storage and transportation. ATR-IR analyses showed that semi-disposable
233
food containers were made of flexible polypropylene (PP), both body and lid, and, according to the
234
manufacturer’s specification, they should not be used more than five times. BPA-free food containers were
235
made of rigid PP (the body of the container as well as the lid), with a piece of ethylene propylene diene
236
monomer (EPDM) rubber in the lid to guarantee the hermetic sealing and, according to the manufacturer,
237
BPA is not used in their fabrication. These containers were 15 times more expensive than the semi-
238
disposable ones. Glass food containers had a glass body, while the lid was made of rigid PP with an EPDM
239
rubber piece to ensure a hermetic closing, similar to the BPA-free food containers. Glass food containers
240
were 25 times more expensive than semi-disposable food containers. Figure 2 shows, as an example, the
241
ATR-IR spectra of the body of semi-disposable and BPA-Free containers compared to PP library spectra. The
242
household food containers were filled with 250 mL of simulant, which is the approximate volume of a meal
243
portion.
244 245
For the common population, household food containers are usually employed to store food in the
246
refrigerator for short periods of time or in the freezer for longer periods, in order to preserve it. They are
247
also used to transport food, the work place being the most common. Then, the food is heated up, most of
10 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 11 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
248
the times inside the food container and using microwave ovens. Food containers are repeatedly used over
249
time for the same purposes. In certain cases, microwaves are also employed to defrost the food inside the
250
food container, before using it. In order to reproduce, as faithfully as possible, the use that consumers
251
make of the food containers, all these situations were covered in the experimental design (Table 2), in
252
which all the possible combinations of food containers with food simulants were prepared. Therefore, the
253
household food containers were stored in the refrigerator for three different periods of time within a
254
normal use, from 1 d to 7 d, and inside the freezer also for three different typical times, from 1 w to 12 w,
255
with the aim of studying the effect of the time of storage on the migration of EDCs. The food simulants
256
were also heated, firstly, for 2 min and then it was heated for 1 min more in a microwave at maximum
257
power (800 W), in order to study the migration of EDCs depending on the temperature reached and the
258
same food containers were used again to study the migration depending on the aging of the container. The
259
microwave was also used to defrost the simulants stored in the freezer at the power specified by the
260
manufacturer (180 W) during 5 min, with the aim of evaluating the effect of the microwave when it is used
261
for longer periods of time with lower power.
262 263
Most of the studies reviewed in the introductory part of this manuscript have focused on specific food
264
containers under extreme conditions. Unlike those references, the experiments performed in this work
265
were designed to consider the most common food containers used daily by regular users and their habitual
266
practices. The aim was to reproduce real situations that any user might experience at home every day in
267
order to offer valuable information about the EDC migration occurring during these habitual practices.
268 269
· Concentration levels of EDCs
270 271
Tables 3 and 4 show the total concentration of EDCs found in the migration tests, expressed in pg/mL of
272
simulant and calculated as the sum of the concentrations of the fifteen compounds included in the study.
273
BPB, 8, BFDGE, 11, and BADGE·HCl, 12, were not detected in any of the analyzed samples. DMP, 1, DiNP, 6,
274
BBP, 4, BADGE·H2O, 13, and BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14, were found in less than 1% of the experiments. On the
11 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 12 of 28
275
other hand, DEP, 2, and DBP, 3, were the most frequently detected EDCs, being present in more than 33%
276
and 63% of the experiments, respectively. This might be due to the extensive use of these EDCs in the
277
formulations of plastics for household food containers. It is also remarkable that BPA-free containers did
278
not show the use of BPA or other alternative bisphenols, such as BPB, 8, and BPF, 9, which was in
279
agreement with the specifications from the manufacturer.
280 281
The migration of EDCs depended on the type of simulant, the type of food container, as well as the type of
282
storage, time, and use in the microwave. However, some general trends can be drawn from the results
283
obtained in the present study. Considering the storage experiments (in the refrigerator and in the freezer),
284
an increasing tendency along the storage time was observed for all the containers tested. In Figure 3A it
285
can be seen this increase in the EDCs concentration, which behaved similarly in the three types of food
286
container and that was more intense in simulants B and C after the storage. The total EDC concentrations
287
found in each particular experiment and time are quite similar for the three containers investigated (i.e.,
288
semi-disposable, BPA-free, and glass) showing a similar behavior independently of the nature of the
289
container (plastic of different characteristics or glass). Although it was not expected to find plasticizers in
290
glass containers, their presence might be explained by the plastic lids with the EPDM rubber sealing used to
291
close the glass body. This could indicate that, although the body is made of glass, the lids also contribute to
292
EDC migration. A similar trend can be observed for the different simulants in the storage experiments
293
(Figure 3B). The total migration increases with the storage time for all the simulants tested, mainly for
294
those with a low percentage of ethanol and acetic acid (simulants A, B, and C). This increase is less
295
pronounced in the case of simulant D1, which corresponds to food with highly lipophilic character.
296 297
In the case of the heating experiments carried out in the microwave, a wide variation was observed for
298
both, the type of container used and the simulant employed (Figure 4A and 4B, respectively). In the first
299
case (Figure 4A), semi-disposable containers showed higher migration after the first use, the total ECD
300
concentrations decreasing after the second use. This might indicate that, although the migration of EDCs to
301
food simulants can be prolonged in time, the intensity of this migration is different and might be more
12 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 13 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
302
intense after the first stages of heating than after subsequent uses of the containers. On the other hand,
303
although for all types of containers the concentrations of EDCs found decreased after the 2 min of reuse,
304
the concentrations of EDCs were increased again after the 2+1-min-reuse experiments. This seems to
305
indicate that the EDC migration will be increased at the high temperatures reached during the experiments
306
and longer heating times. In all cases, the lowest migration was observed for the defrosting experiments,
307
which used lower heating energies. As it has been stated above, an increase in the microwave power will
308
lead to more intense EDC migrations into the food simulants. When the different simulants are considered
309
(Figure 4B), the most remarkable finding is that, contrary to that observed in the storage experiments, the
310
highest migration was produced when simulant D1 was used. Simulants B and C showed a similar behavior,
311
the migration increasing with the heating time in the first use, then decreasing in the experiments of 2-min-
312
reuse and increasing again, reaching the maximum concentrations in the experiments of 2+1-min-reuse.
313
Simulant D1 behaved similarly. However, the concentrations of EDCs found in this simulant were much
314
higher in general than in simulants B and C. On the other hand, the migration processes found for simulant
315
A were completely different. The total concentrations found in this case were the lowest among all the
316
food simulants used. Moreover, after the first heating for 2 min, the concentrations of EDCs decreased
317
after the following experiments. This indicates that simulant A is the simulant with least extracting capacity
318
and, therefore, the foods simulated by simulants B, C, and D1 (foods with pH below 4.5 and foods with
319
lipophilic characters) have more extracting capacity of EDCs from household food containers and might be
320
less appropriate for their storage in these types of food containers.
321
In general, the concentration levels for the analytes found in the present work were lower than those
322
reported in previous works where the migration of the same endocrine disruptors were evaluated10, 12, 17, 24-
323
29
324
comparison with the milder but real domestic conditions used in this work.
. This is probably due the strong conditions (temperature, storage time, etc.) used in those works in
325 326
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
327
Authors thank Mrs. Sagrario Calvarro for instrumental maintenance and control and Enrique Blázquez for
328
ATR-IR analyses.
13 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 14 of 28
329 330
ABBREVIATIONS USED
331
ATR, attenuated total reflectance; BADGE, bisphenol A diglycidyl ether; BADGE·2H2O, bisphenol A bis(2,3-
332
dihydroxypropyl) glycidyl ether; BADGE·H2O, bisphenol A (2,3-dihydroxypropyl) glycidyl ether; BADGE·HCl,
333
bisphenol A (3-chloro-2-hydroxypropyl) (2,3-dihydroxypropyl) ether; BADGE·HCl·H2O, bisphenol A (3-
334
chloro-2-hydroxypropyl) (2,3-dihydroxypropyl) ether; BBP, butyl benzyl phthalate; BFDGE, bisphenol F
335
diglycidyl ether; BPA, bisphenol A; BPB, bisphenol B; BPF, bisphenol F; DBP, dibutyl phthalate; DEHP, diethyl
336
hexyl phthalate; DEP, diethyl phthalate; DiNP, di-iso-nonyl phthalate; DMP, dimethyl phthalate; EDCs,
337
endocrine disrupting compounds; EPDM, ethylene propylene diene monomer; iLODs, instrumental limits of
338
detection; iLOQs, instrumental limits of quantitation; PE, polyethylene; PET, polyethylene terephthalate;
339
PP, polypropylene; RSD, relative standard deviation.
340 341
FOUNDING SOURCES
342
Financial support was obtained from MICINN (project AGL2012-37201) and Community of Madrid (Spain),
343
and European funding from FEDER program (project S2013/ABI-3028-AVANSECAL).
344 345
SUPPORTING INFORMATION DESCRIPTION
346
Analytical characteristics of the developed UHPLC-QqQ(MRM) method in terms of instrumental
347
repeatability (relative standard deviation, RSD), instrumental intermediate precision, and instrumental
348
limits of detection (iLOD) and quantitation (iLOQ), for the analytes characterized in the present study (Table
349
S.1.).
350 351
REFERENCES
352
1. Giulivo, M.; Lopez de Alda, M.; Capri, E.; Barceló, D. Human exposure to endocrine disrupting
353
compounds: Their role in reproductive systems, metabolic syndrome and breast cancer. A review. Environ.
354
Res. 2016, 151, 251–264.
14 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 15 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
355
2. Arvanitoyannis, I. S.; Bosnea, L. Migration of substances from food packaging materials to foods. Crit.
356
Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2004, 44, 63-76.
357
3. Benhamada, M.; Bouzid, D.; Boyron, O.; Taam, M. The relationship between the aging of polycarbonate
358
characterized by SEC and the release of bisphenol A quantified by HPLC–UV. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2016,
359
242, 227-232.
360
4. Geens, T.; Apelbaum, T. Z.; Goeyens, L.; Neels, H.; Covaci, A. Intake of bisphenol A from canned
361
beverages and foods on the Belgian market. Food Addit. Contam., 2010, 27, 1627–1637.
362
5. Theobald, A.; Simoneau, C.; Hannaert, P.; Roncari, P.; Roncari, A.; Rudolph, T.; Anklam, E. Occurrence of
363
bisphenol-F-diglycidyl ether (BFDGE) in fish canned in oil. Food Addit. Contam. 2000, 17, 881-887.
364
6. Cooper, J. E.; Kendig, E. L.; Belcher, S. M. Assessment of bisphenol A released from reusable plastic,
365
aluminium and stainless steel water bottles. Chemosphere 2011, 85, 943–947.
366
7. Hoekstra, E. J.; Simoneau, C. Release of bisphenol A from polycarbonate - A review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci.
367
Nutr. 2013, 53, 386-402.
368
8. González-Castro, M. I.; Olea-Serrano, M. F.; Rivas-Velasco, A. M.; Medina-Rivero, E.; Ordoñez-Acevedo, L.
369
G.; de León-Rodríguez, A. Phthalates and bisphenols migration in Mexican food cans and plastic food
370
containers. B. Environ. Contam. Tox. 2011, 86, 627–631.
371
9. Fasano, E.; Bono-Blay, F.; Cirillo, T.; Montuori, P.; Lacorte, S. Migration of phthalates, alkylphenols,
372
bisphenol A and di(2-ethylhexyl)adipate from food packaging. Food Control 2012, 27, 132-138.
373
10. Guart, A.; Bono-Blay, F.; Borrell, A.; Lacorte, S. Migration of plasticizersphthalates, bisphenol A and
374
alkylphenols from plastic containers and evaluation of risk. Food Addit. Contam. 2011, 28, 676–685.
375
11. Goodson, A.; Robin, H.; Summerfield W.; Cooper, I. Migration of bisphenol A from can coatings—effects
376
of damage, storage conditions and heating. Food Addit. Contam. 2004, 21, 1015–1026.
377
12. Avelino Moreira, M.; Coelho André, L.; de Lourdes Cardeal, Z. Analysis of plasticiser migration to meat
378
roasted in plastic bags by SPME–GC/MS. Food Chem. 2015, 178, 195–200.
379
13. Fasano, E.; Cirillo, T.; Esposito, F.; Lacorte, S. Migration of monomers and plasticizers from packed foods
380
and heated microwave foods using QuEChERS sample preparation and gas chromatography/mass
381
spectrometry. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 64, 1015-1021.
15 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 16 of 28
382
14. Lambertini, F.; Catellani, D.; Vindigni M.; Suman, M. Multiresidual LC–MS analysis of plasticizers used in
383
PVC gaskets of lids and assessment of their migration into food sauces. J. Mass Spectrom. 2016, 51, 805–
384
813.
385
15. Bhunia, K.; Sablani, S. S.; Tang, J.; Rasco, B. Migration of chemical compounds from packaging polymers
386
during microwave, conventional heat treatment, and storage. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2013, 12,
387
523-545.
388
16. European Union. Commission Regulation (EU) No. 10/2011 of 14 January 2011 on plastic materials and
389
articles intended to come into contact with food. Off. J. Eur. Union, 2011, L12, 1-89.
390
17. Li, X.; Xiong, W.; Lin, H.; Zhuo, L.; Lv, S.; Tang, X.; Chen, M.; Zou, Z.; Lin, Z.; Qiu, B.; Chen, G. Analysis of
391
16 phthalic acid esters in food simulants from plastic food contact materials by LC-ESI-MS/MS. J. Sep. Sci.
392
2013, 36, 477–484.
393
18. Li, B.; Wang, Z-W.; Lin, Q-B.; Hu, C-Y. Study of the migration of stabilizer and plasticizer from
394
polyethylene terephthalate into food simulants. J. Chromatogr. Sci. 2016, 54, 939–951.
395
19. Sendón, R.; Sanches-Silva, A.; Bustos, J.; Martín, P.; Martínez, N.; Cirugeda. Mª. E. Detection of
396
migration of phthalates from agglomerated cork stoppers using HPLC-MS/MS. J. Sep. Sci. 2012, 35, 1319–
397
1326.
398
20. Morelli-Cardoso, M. H. W.; Lachter, E. R.; Tabak, D. Determination of the specific migration of DEHP into
399
food simulants using high performance liquid chromatography. J. High Resolut. Chromatogr. 1999, 22, 70–
400
72.
401
21. Wang, S.; Yang, W.; Shi, M.; Sun, X.; Pang, W.; Wang, G. GC-MS assisted with chemometric methods
402
applied for investigation of migration behavior of phthalate plasticizers in fatty foods simulant.
403
Chromatographia 2013, 76, 529–534.
404
22. Xia, Y.; Rubino, M. Kinetic study of bisphenol A migration from low-density polyethylene films into food
405
simulants. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2015, 54, 3711−3716.
406
23. Coltro, L.; Borghetti Pitta, J.; Afonso da Costa, P.; Ângela Fávaro Perez, M.; Aparecida de Araújo, V.;
407
Rodrigues, R. Migration of conventional and new plasticizers from PVC films into food simulants: A
408
comparative study. Food Control 2014, 44, 118-129.
16 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 17 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
409
24. Onghena, M.; Negreira, N.; van Hoeck, E.; Quirynen, L.; van Loco, J.; Covaci, A. Quantitative
410
determination of migrating compounds from plastic baby bottles by validated GC-QqQ-MS and LC-QqQ-MS
411
methods. Food Anal. Methods 2016, 9, 2600–2612.
412
25. Onghena, M.; van Hoeck, E.; Negreira, N.; Quirynena, L.; Van Loco, J.; Covaci, A. Evaluation of the
413
migration of chemicals from baby bottles under standardised and duration testing conditions. Food Anal.
414
Methods 2016, 2012, 33, 893–904.
415
26. Simoneau, C.; Van den Eede, L.; Valzacchi, S. Identification and quantification of the migration of
416
chemicals from plastic baby bottles used as substitutes for polycarbonate. Food Addit. Contam. 2012, 29,
417
469–480.
418
27. Onghena, M.; van Hoeck, E.; Vervliet, P.; Scippo, M. L.; Simon, C.; van Loco J.; Covaci, A. Development
419
and application of a non-targeted extraction method for the analysis of migrating compounds from plastic
420
baby bottles by GC-MS. Food Addit. Contam.: Part A 2014, 31, 2090–2102.
421
28. Oca, M. L.; Sarabia, L. A.; Herrero, A.; Ortiz, M. C. Optimum pH for the determination of bisphenols and
422
their corresponding diglycidyl ethers by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Migration kinetics of
423
bisphenol A from polycarbonate glasses. J. Chromatogr. A 2014, 1360, 23–38.
424
29. Xie, Y.; Bao, Y.; Wang, H.; Cheng, Y.; Qian, H.; Yao, W. Release of bisphenols from can coatings into
425
canned beer in China market. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2015, 95, 764–770.
426
30. Grob, K. The future of simulants in compliance testing regarding the migration from food contact
427
materials into food, Food Control 2008, 19, 263–268
428
31. Vaclavikova, M.; Paseiro-Cerrato; R., Vaclavik, L.; Noonan, G. O.; DeVries, J.; Begley, T. H. Target and
429
non-target analysis of migrants from PVC-coated cans using UHPLC-Q-Orbitrap MS: evaluation of long-term
430
migration testing, Food Addit. Contam. 2016, 33, 352–363.
431
32. Esteve, C.; Herrero, L.; Gómara, B.; Quintanilla-López, J. E. Fast and simultaneous determination of
432
endocrine disrupting compounds by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography– tandem mass
433
spectrometry. Talanta 2016, 146, 326–334.
17 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 18 of 28
434
33. Gallart-Ayala, H.; Moyano, E.; Galceran, M. T. Multiple-stage mass spectrometry analysis of bisphenol A
435
diglycidyl ether, bisphenol F diglycidyl ether and their derivatives. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2010,
436
24, 3469–3477.
437
18 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 19 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
438
FIGURE CAPTIONS
439
Figure 1. Chemical structures of EDC studied.
440
Figure 2. ATR-IR spectra of the body of semi-disposable and BPA-Free containers compared to PP library
441
spectra.
442
Figure 3. Variation of total EDC concentrations (pg/mL of simulant) with time in storage experiments
443
(refrigerator and freezer) considering A, the container and B, the simulant used.
444
Figure 4. Variation of total EDC concentrations (pg/mL of simulant) with time in heating experiments
445
(defrost and heat in the microwave) considering A, the container and B, the simulant used.
446
19 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 20 of 28
Table 1. MRM parameters for the studied analytes. Compound DMP, 1
Retention time (min) 1.44
Transitiona
Ion transitionb
162.9-76.9
4.2
162.9-91.9 DEP, 2
2.50
223.1-177.0
1.3
223.1-148.9 DBP, 3
3.60
279.2-205.1
3.5
279.2-149.0 BBP, 4
3.63
313.2-149.0
2.6
313.2-90.9 DEHP, 5
4.04
391.3-279.1
10.3
391.3-149.0 DiNP, 6
4.10
419.6-85.0
1.05
419.6-149.2 BPA, 7
2.33
227.0-211.9
3.1
227.0-132.9 BPB, 8
2.72
241.1-212.1
2.3
241.1-211.1 BPF, 9
1.58
199.1-93.0
1.6
199.1-105.0 BADGE, 10
3.51
358.2-191.1
5.3
358.2-135.1 BADGE·H2O, 13
2.87
376.2-209.1
1.6
376.2-135.1 BADGE·2H2O, 15
1.92
394.2-209.1
1.6
394.2-135.1 BADGE·HCl, 12
3.54
394.2-227.3
1.7
394.2-167.2 BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14
3.09
412.2-167.4
1.2
412.2-131.0 BFDGE, 11
3.34
330.2-163.3
1.1
330.2-133.1
CID voltage (eV) 23
ESI mode
26
POS
17
POS
7
POS
7
POS
13
POS
20
POS
22
POS
7
POS
23
POS
13
POS
28
POS
21
NEG
19
NEG
18
NEG
29
NEG
20
NEG
20
NEG
11
POS
28
POS
12
POS
31
POS
15
POS
33
POS
13
POS
22
POS
26
POS
31
POS
11
POS
16
POS
POS
a
The first transition corresponds to the quantitation transition and the second one to the confirmatory transition. b Calculated as quantitation transition/confirmatory transition intensities.
20 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 21 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Table 2. Different food containers, food simulants, treatments, and times used in the 132 experiments carried out. Experimental conditions Containera S-Dis BPA-Free Glass S-Dis BPA-Free Glass S-Dis BPA-Free Glass S-Dis BPA-Free Glass
Simulant
Refrigerator
Refrigerator
Refrigerator
Freezer
Freezer
Freezer
Defrost
Heat (800 W)
Heat (800 W)b
Heat (800 W)
Heat (800 W) b
A
1d
3d
7d
1w
4w
12 w
180 W 5 min
First use 2 min
First use +1 min
Reuse 2 min
Reuse +1 min
B
1d
3d
7d
1w
4w
12 w
180 W 5 min
First use 2 min
First use +1 min
Reuse 2 min
Reuse +1 min
C
1d
3d
7d
1w
4w
12 w
180 W 5 min
First use 2 min
First use +1 min
Reuse 2 min
Reuse +1 min
D1
1d
3d
7d
1w
4w
12 w
180 W 5 min
First use 2 min
First use +1 min
Reuse 2 min
Reuse +1 min
a b
S-Dis, semi-disposable food container; BPA-Free, BPA-free food container; Glass, glass food container. Containers were firstly heated in the microwave for 2 min at 800 W and then they were heated for 1 more min at 800 W.
21 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 22 of 28
Table 3. Total EDC content in food simulants stored in refrigerator or freezer in different containers for three different periods of time.
Containera
Refrigerator Refrigerator Refrigerator 1d 3d 7d
Freezer 1w
Freezer 4w
Freezer 12 w
pg/mL of simulant
Simulant A
Simulant B
Simulant C
S-Dis
114
393
250
1025
-
1652
BPA-Free
295
113
34
478
-
1435
Glass
203
-
101
995
-
1268
S-Dis
50
-
-
448
772
2602
BPA-Free
51
146
59
814
816
3140
Glass
94
69
35
611
-
2441
S-Dis
37
-
126
361
469
1981
BPA-Free
112
138
28
396
1057
2600
Glass
77
84
99
38
488
3747
S-Dis
464
90
217
112
37
431
63
107
215
336
348
633
286
160
106
216
-
1412
Simulant D1 BPA-Free Glass a
S-Dis, semi-disposable food container; BPA-Free, BPA-free food container; Glass, glass food container.
22 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 23 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Table 4. Total EDC content in food simulants after heating the different containers in the microwave oven.
Containera
Defrost (180 W)
First use (800 W) 2 min
First use (800 W) 3 min
Reuse (800 W) 2 min
Reuse (800 W) 3 min
pg/mL of simulant
Simulant A
Simulant B
Simulant C
Simulant D1
a
S-Dis
118
284
200
124
55
BPA-Free
76
419
106
176
53
Glass
14
242
130
52
33
S-Dis
-
338
207
219
531
BPA-Free
-
29
-
196
182
Glass
-
263
352
278
1309
S-Dis
54
518
649
270
555
BPA-Free
559
200
135
84
361
Glass
54
147
277
147
440
S-Dis
376
412
1374
805
549
BPA-Free
56
483
763
404
1059
Glass
22
739
952
787
818
S-Dis, semi-disposable food container; BPA-Free, BPA-free food container; Glass, glass food container.
23 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 24 of 28
TOC Graphic
24 ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Page 25 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 1.
Bisphenol B (BPB), 8
Dimethyl phthalate (DMP), 1
Bisphenol F (BPF), 9 Diethyl phthalate (DEP), 2
Bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (BADGE), 10 Dibutyl phthalate (DBP), 3
Bisphenol F diglycidyl ether (BFDGE), 11
Butyl benzyl phthalate (BBP), 4
BADGE·HCl, 12
Diethyl hexyl phthalate (DEHP), 5
BADGE·H2O, 13
Di-iso-nonyl phthalate (DiNP), 6
BADGE·HCl·H2O, 14
Bisphenol A (BPA), 7 BADGE·2H2O, 15
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 26 of 28
Figure 2.
100
80
T (%)
60
40
20
PP (library) S-Dis BPA-Free
0 1000
1500
2000
2500
cm
3000
-1
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
3500
4000
Page 27 of 28
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Figure 3.
A
Total EDC concentration (pg/mL of simulant)
S-Dis
BPA-Free
Glass
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0 1d Refrigerator
3d Refrigerator
7d Refrigerator
1w Freezer
4w Freezer
12 w Freezer
Storage experiments
B
Total EDC concentration (pg/mL of simulant)
Simulant A
Simulant B
Simulant C
Simulant D1
3000 2500
2000 1500 1000 500 0
1d Refrigerator
3d Refrigerator
7d Refrigerator
1w Freezer
Storage experiments
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
4w Freezer
12 w Freezer
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Page 28 of 28
Figure 4.
A
Total EDC concentration (pg/mL of simulant)
S-Dis
BPA-Free
Glass
700 600 500 400 300
200 100 0 (180 W) Defrost
2 min First use (800 W)
3 min (800 W) First use
2 min (800 W) Reuse
3 min (800 W) Reuse
Heating experiments
B
Total EDC concentration (pg/mL of simulant)
Simulant A
Simulant B
Simulant C
Simulant D1
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 (180 W) Defrost
2 min First use (800 W)
3 min (800 W) First use Heating experiments
ACS Paragon Plus Environment
2 min (800 W) Reuse
3 min (800 W) Reuse