Use of Onion Extract as a Dairy Cattle Feed Supplement: Monitoring

Subscriber access provided by Fudan University

Article

USE OF ONION EXTRACT AS DAIRY CATTLE FEED SUPPLEMENT: MONITORING OF PROPYL PROPANE THIOSULFONATE AS MARKER OF ITS EFFECT ON MILK ATTRIBUTES Paloma Abad, Natalia Arroyo-Manzanares, Lidia Gil, and Ana M. García-Campaña J. Agric. Food Chem., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b04395 • Publication Date (Web): 31 Dec 2016 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on January 2, 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 30

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

USE OF ONION EXTRACT AS DAIRY CATTLE FEED SUPPLEMENT: MONITORING OF PROPYL PROPANE THIOSULFONATE AS MARKER OF ITS EFFECT ON MILK ATTRIBUTES

Paloma Abad †, Natalia Arroyo-Manzanares‡, Lidia Gil † and Ana M. García-Campaña‡*

† DMC Research Center S.L.U., Camino de Jayena nº82, E-18620 Alhendín, Spain ‡ Department of Analytical Chemistry, Faculty of Sciences, University of Granada, Campus Fuentenueva s/n, E-18071 Granada, Spain *Corresponding author, (Tel: +34 958 242 385; Fax: +34 358 243 398; E-mail: [email protected])

1 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 2 of 30

1

ABSTRACT

2

Onion extract is used as feed supplement for dairy cows diet, acting as inhibitor of

3

methane production; however its properties could alter sensory attributes of milk. In this

4

work, we propose a method to evaluate the influence of this extract on milk properties,

5

using propyl propane thiosulfonate (PTSO) as marker. PTSO is extracted using a

6

QuEChERS procedure and monitored by HPLC with UV detection. The method was

7

applied to milk samples obtained from 100 dairy cows fed during two months with

8

enriched feed. In addition, a milk tasting panel was established to evaluate the PTSO

9

residue that should not be exceeded in order to guarantee milk sensory attributes. It was

10

established that a value of PTSO lower than 2 mg Kg-1 does not alter milk organoleptic

11

properties. This fact makes onion extract an interesting alternative as feed supplement to

12

control the methane emissions without any influence on milk attributes.

13 14

Keywords: onion extract, propyl propane thiosulfonate, milk, feed flavors, HPLC-UV

15


Page 3 of 30


16

INTRODUCTION

17

Agricultural animal production is a source of gases that has been on the rise in recent

18

years, thus becoming a potential ecological risk.1 Global emissions of methane (CH4), a

19

potent greenhouse gas, represent 18% of total emissions to the atmosphere, contributing

20

to global warming. The main sources of CH4 emissions are natural sources like

21

wetlands, oceans, lakes, rivers and anthropoids followed by agricultural sources such as

22

manure or enteric fermentation.2,3,4

23

Recent studies indicate that changes in rumen ecosystem as a mitigating strategy could

24

reduce CH4 emission as well as improve the efficiency of converting plant material into

25

milk and meat.5 Ruminants in different production systems have access to different

26

types and quantities of feed so the spatial distribution of produced greenhouse gases is

27

expected to vary considerably depending on their location. In Europe, most of livestock-

28

related CH4 emissions arise from fermentation in the digestive tract of herbivorous

29

animals. The main actions for the reduction of ruminant CH4 emissions can be classified

30

into three broad categories: addition of rumen modifiers (using specific substances that

31

inhibit methanogenesis or biological control directed at reducing methanogens), use of

32

diets that decrease H2 production which would be converted to CH4 (feeds, feeding

33

management and nutrition), or increase of animal production and efficiency (fewer cows

34

are needed to produce the same amount of milk).3

35

The reduction of enteric CH4 production in ruminants is of environmental and a

36

nutritional interest. The most promising strategy, an important objective for ruminant

37

nutritionists, is the development of new feed additives that act as rumen modifiers.6 The

38

correct choice of feed ingredients could modify microbial fermentation and hence the

39

produced amount of CH4 and volatile fatty acids (VFA) such as propionate, acetate or

40

butyrate. VFA generation also affects the amount of CH4 produced, since propionate 3 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 4 of 30

41

formation consumes H2, whereas acetate and butyrate formation generate it for

42

methanogenesis.7 Thus, a ruminant diet that increases propionate production will

43

reduces CH4 generation and consequently atmospheric emissions, whereas a shift in

44

favor of acetate and butyrate production will increase ruminant CH4 production.8,9

45

In recent years, essential oils or plant extracts have been widely studied as dairy cows

46

feed supplement and they have proven to act on the reduction of CH4 emissions by

47

alteration of VFA (acetate, propionate and butyrate) generation. Moreover, it has been

48

demonstrated that their use improves feed efficiency and milk production.10,11 As a

49

consequence, the interest towards natural products like garlic, onion, cinnamon, yucca,

50

anise, oregano or capsicum extracts has increased. These natural alternatives have

51

previously shown antimicrobial activity and antioxidant properties and present an

52

important effect in a positive alteration of rumen fermentation by VFA

53

modification.12,13 Specifically, Allium spp. extracts, including onion extract (OE), have

54

shown an important reduction of CH4 emissions by alteration of rumen VFA and this

55

fact has been associated with the presence of organosulfur compounds characteristic of

56

the alliaceous family.14,15,16

57

Despite the beneficial effects of the use OE,17,18 its dosage in cattle feed should be

58

controlled in order to preserve organoleptic properties (mainly odor and flavor) of milk

59

or its derivative products as yoghurt and cheese. Several studies have demonstrated the

60

transmission of onion flavor to milk after the intake indicating that it can be transferred

61

to the udder via vascular routes from the digestive system.19,20 Propyl propane

62

thiosulfonate (PTSO), an organosulfur compound characteristic of the Allium genus,

63

mainly of onion, and responsible of the odor of freshly cut onion,21 has been proposed

64

as OE residue marker in milk samples. Previously, in our lab, several analytical

65

methods for PTSO analysis in animal feed were developed but none of them for milk or


Page 5 of 30


66

its derivative products.22,23 Thus, analytical methods for dairy products quality control

67

should be developed.

68

As stated above, the presence of PTSO in milk samples could alter its organoleptic

69

properties, such as taste and flavor. Consequently, in this paper an analytical method for

70

the control of OE residues in milk has been developed and validated. The method

71

consisted of a sample treatment based on the extraction of PTSO with a QuEChERS

72

(Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged and Safe) procedure. PTSO is then monitored

73

in the extract by high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection

74

(HPLC-UV). The method has been applied for the control of milk samples from 100

75

dairy cows that ate feed enriched with OE for two months. In addition, a milk tasting

76

panel was carried out in order to determine the maximum content of PTSO residue in

77

milk that should not be exceeded to guarantee its quality in relation to preserve its

78

organoleptic properties.

79

MATERIALS AND METHODS

80

Chemicals and reagents

81

All reagents were of analytical reagent grade. HPLC-grade solvents methanol (MeOH)

82

and acetonitrile (MeCN) were purchased from VWR BDH Prolabo (West Chester,

83

Pennsylvania, USA). Perchloric acid (70%), sodium chloride (NaCl) and magnesium

84

sulfate (MgSO4) were supplied by Panreac (Madrid, Spain). Formic acid (FA) and

85

sodium phosphate monobasic monohydrate were obtained from Sigma Aldrich (St

86

Louis, MO, USA). HPLC mobile phases were filtered using a vacuum system with

87

Millipore (Milford, MA, USA) filters (nylon, 0.20 µm, 47 mm). Samples were filtered

88

through PET Chromafil® (Macherey-Nagel, Germany) filters (polyester, 25 mm, 0.20

89

µm). 5 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 6 of 30

90

Kits of SampliQ QuEChERS consisting of buffered QuEChERS extraction packet (4 g

91

MgSO4, 1 g NaCl, 1 g sodium citrate, 0.5 g disodium hydrogen citrate sesquihydrate)

92

and non-buffered QuEChERS extraction packet (4 g MgSO4, 1 g NaCl) were supplied

93

by Agilent Tecnologies Inc (Wilmington, DE, USA). C18 and primary secondary amine

94

(PSA) sorbents were also supplied by Agilent Tecnologies Inc. and Supelclean LC

95

Alumina-N (Al) and SupelTM QuE Z-Sep (Z-Sep) sorbents by Supelco (Bellefonte, PA,

96

USA).

97

Ultrapure water (18.2 MΩ cm-1, Milli–Q Plus system, Millipore Bedford, MA, USA)

98

was used throughout the trials.

99

PTSO standard (min 95% of purity) and Garlicon®, an onion commercial extract

100

containing PTSO as main active ingredient, were kindly provided by DOMCA S.A.

101

(Alhendín, Granada, Spain).

102

Individual stock standard solution containing 2 g L-1 of PTSO was prepared in MeOH

103

and stored in a dark bottle at -20 ºC. It was stable for at least 3 months. Working

104

solutions were prepared by diluting the stock solution in MeOH to the desired

105

concentration prior to use.

106

Instrumentation and equipment

107

The Agilent 1260 Infinity HPLC (Agilent Technologies Inc) system was used for the

108

proposed HPLC method, which includes a quaternary pump, an online degasser, an

109

autosampler (injection volume from 0.1 – 900 µL, capacity: 100 vials), a column

110

thermostat and a diode array detector (DAD). A C18 column Zorbax BONUS RP

111

Analytical (150x4.6 mm, 5 µm) from Agilent Tecnologies Inc. was used.

112

Additionally, confirmation of the presence of trace amounts of PTSO was carried out

113

using an ultra-high performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC) system (Agilent 1290


Page 7 of 30


114

Infinity LC, Agilent Technologies Inc) equipped with a binary pump, on line degasser,

115

autosampler (5 µL loop) and a column thermostat. Mass-spectrometer measurements

116

were performed on a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer API3200 (AB Sciex, Toronto,

117

ON, Canada) with electrospray ionization (ESI). A Zorbax Eclipse Plus RRHD (50 x

118

2.1 mm, 1.8 µm) chromatographic column from Agilent Tecnologies Inc was used. The

119

instrumental data were collected using the Analysts Software version 1.5 with Schedule

120

multiple reaction monitoring (MRM)TM Algorithm (AB Sciex).

121

A Universal 320R centrifuge (Hettich Zentrifugen, Tuttlingen, Germany) and a vortex-2

122

Genie (Scientific Industries, Bohemia, NY, USA) were also used in the sample

123

treatment procedure.

124

Chromatographic conditions

125

HPLC-UV analysis of PTSO

126

The determination of PTSO was performed in a C18 column, previously described,

127

using a mobile phase consisting of 30 mM aqueous perchloric acid solution (solvent A)

128

and MeCN (solvent B), at a flow rate of 0.7 mL min−1. The injection volume was 20 µL

129

and the gradient elution program was as follows: 50% B (0-3 min), 50-100% B (3-9

130

min), 100% B (9-14 min). The initial conditions were re-established by 2 min of linear

131

gradient, followed by equilibration time of 4 min. The total chromatographic run time

132

was 20 min and detection wavelength was set at 200 nm (band width = 4 nm).

133

UHPLC-MS/MS analysis of PTSO and its derivatives

134

The sensitive quantification and confirmation of the presence/absence of PTSO and its

135

typical derivatives (s-propylmercaptocysteine, CSSP and s-propyl mercaptoglutathione,

136

GSSP) in milk samples was carried out by UHPLC-MS/MS. The analysis was

137

performed according to the method previously development in our lab.23 Under these



Page 8 of 30

138

conditions PTSO, CSSP and GSSP were determined in 5.5 min, being characterized by

139

two precursor-product ion transitions.

140

Sample treatment for PTSO extraction

141

A 5 ± 0.05 g milk sample was placed into a 50 mL conical bottom screw tube.

142

Subsequently, 10 mL of 6.4% of FA in MeCN was added to the tube and vortexed for 1

143

min. An extraction packet non-buffered QuEChERS was added and shaken vigorously

144

for 1 min and then, the tube was vortexed for 1 min. The sample was centrifuged at

145

5000 rpm for 5 min and afterwards an aliquot of the supernatant was filtered through a

146

PET Chromafil® syringe filter and transferred to an Agilent CrossLab Vial. Finally it

147

was injected into the HPLC.

148

Experimental study

149

The experiment was carried out at a local farm located in Reus, Tarragona (Spain). A

150

total of 200 cows (11-months-old) were selected and isolated from the rest. All cows

151

were maintained for 90 days with ad libitum access to feed and water. The feed intake

152

was antibiotic-free.

153

At the beginning of the experiment, cows were randomly allocated to two groups: 100

154

cows were selected as control group (CG) and the other 100 cows were considered as

155

treated group (TG). The diet of TG was supplemented with OE containing PTSO. OE

156

was introduced gradually in feed. Dosage was increased by 5 g per animal and per day

157

during a period of 5 days. During the experiment, the intake per day and per animal was

158

established in 25 g of commercial OE (Garlicon®) to avoid rumen alterations derived

159

from high concentrations of PTSO.14 The diet of CG had not any additional supplement.

160

The field trial was extended for 2 months. In this period, the access of CG and TG to

161

feed was controlled whereas the access to water was ad libitum.


Page 9 of 30


162

The presence of off-flavor depends on the time elapsed between cow consumption and

163

milking. Previous studies indicated that onion flavors can persist in milk for longer than

164

12 h, moreover, the stronger taste and flavor appears within 2 and 4 h after onion intake

165

so milk samples were collected 3 h after eating cattle feed.24

166

Once per week, milk samples from both groups were collected, homogenized and

167

immediately pasteurized in two different tanks. Milk samples were stored at -20 ºC

168

before analysis.

169

Procedure for sensory evaluation of real milk samples containing PTSO

170

Milk must have a good flavor and an attractive appearance, among other nutritional

171

parameters in order to be acceptable to consumers. Organoleptic properties of milk may

172

be affected by several external factors, such as feeds and weeds consumed or odors

173

inhaled by the cow, internal infections of the cow or microbiological or chemical

174

alterations of the milk. Consequently, color, odor and flavor of milk containing OE

175

residues were evaluated in order to establish the maximum level of PTSO residue that

176

could be present without causing any alteration to the organoleptic properties of milk.

177

Sensory evaluation was carried out using a triangle test.

178

Triangle test

179

The triangle test is a discriminating test consisting of checking whether a difference

180

exists between two products. Panelists taste a similar amount of three milk samples at

181

the same temperature and they should recognize the differences. In a triangle test, the

182

probability of getting the right result is 1/3. This methodology was applied following

183

the methodology described in the ISO 4120:2004.25



Page 10 of 30

184

Panelist selection

185

26 candidates were pre-selected as panelists and 16 of them were chosen for the triangle

186

tests. Subsequently, panelists underwent a training session. Training for the formation

187

of sensory memory was carried out by direct contact with PTSO (the evaluated

188

attributes were odor, taste and flavor). The panel was trained in two sessions of 0.5 h at

189

room temperature (20 ºC). The panelists (53% female and 47% male, from Granada,

190

Spain) were daily consumers of milk all of them and the ages were between 25 and 60

191

years old (average age 37 years old).

192

Samples evaluation

193

The tests were carried out at DOMCA S.A. laboratories, simulating the conditions

194

described in the General Guidance for the design of test rooms (ISO 8589:2007).26 The

195

design and analysis (using Thurstonian model) of sensory discrimination tests were

196

carried out using XLSTAT software version 2016.1.

197

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

198

Influence of the presence of cysteine and glutathione on the PTSO content in milk

199

It has been demonstrated that PTSO reacts with cysteine (CYS) and glutathione (GSH),

200

both present in a wide range of feed and food, resulting in CSSP and GSSP as products.

201

23

202

κ-casein), α−lactoalbumin and β−lactoglobuline. Although some of these proteins

203

contribute to the presence of small amounts of CYS in milk, it is in its oxidized form,

204

namely cystine (C6H12N2O4S2), which does not trigger a reaction with PTSO.27,28 The

205

amount of PTSO could also be affected by the presence of GSH (a tripeptide with

206

antioxidant properties which contains CYS) which is found in cellular tissues but it is

207

expected that PTSO will not react with GSH because it is converted in oxidized

The most abundant proteins in milk are casein (αs1-casein, αs2-casein, βs1-casein and


Page 11 of 30


208

glutathione by the reaction with glutathione peroxidase.29,30 This is an important aspect

209

to be taken into account when considering this molecule as a marker for OE residues in

210

milk. Regardless of this issue, the absence of derivative compounds from PTSO (CSSP

211

and GSSP) in milk was tested by applying a previously proposed UHPLC-MS/MS

212

method23. As it can be seen in Figure 1, which shows a chromatogram from a cow

213

whole milk sample spiked with 20 mg kg-1 of PTSO neither CSSP nor GSSP are

214

detected.

215

Development of the HPLC-UV method

216

HPLC-UV chromatographic method was adapted from a method for PTSO

217

determination in feed, previously developed in our laboratory.22 Gradient program, flow

218

rate, injection volume and column temperature were re-optimized for PTSO

219

determination in milk. All the experiments were performed using whole dairy milk

220

samples spiked with 50 mg kg-1 of PTSO.

221

The mobile phase consisted of 30 mM aqueous perchloric acid solution (A) and MeCN

222

(B) and the final gradient program was as follows: 50% B (0-3 min), 50-100% B (3-9

223

min), 100% B (9-14 min). The initial conditions were re-established by 2 min of linear

224

gradient, followed by an equilibration time of 4 min. The total run time was 20 min.

225

Different injection volumes (5, 10, 20 and 30 µL) were evaluated in order to select the

226

optimum for obtaining the highest signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) and satisfactory peak

227

efficiency. It was observed that peaks were not symmetrical from 30 µL, so a volume of

228

20 µL was chosen. Results are shown in table S1. Column temperature was studied

229

between 20 °C and 40 °C and an optimum of 25 ºC was selected as a compromise

230

between retention time and column shelf life, since no significance differences were

231

observed among all tested temperatures (see table S2). Finally, flow rate was evaluated



Page 12 of 30

232

from 0.6 to 1.2 mL min-1 and 0.7 mL min-1 was selected (see table S3) as a compromise

233

between signal intensity and run time.

234

Optimization of the sample treatment

235

Sample treatment based on QuEChERS procedure has already been developed for the

236

extraction of several food contaminants like antibiotics31, mycotoxins32 or pesticides33

237

in milk but to the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that a QuEChERS

238

procedure is used for the extraction of PTSO in Allium spp. The optimization was

239

carried out using 5 g of whole dairy milk (ultra-high temperature, UHT) spiked at 50

240

mg kg-1 with PTSO. Different extraction solvents were evaluated: MeOH, ethyl acetate,

241

acetone, and MeCN (10 mL in all cases). Using MeOH, no protein precipitation was

242

observed, with ethyl acetate no PTSO was detected and recovery values for acetone and

243

MeCN were 19.8 and 76.2 % respectively. The best results in terms of recovery values

244

were obtained with MeCN so it was selected for the rest of experiments.

245

Thus, the extraction/partitioning process of the QuEChERS procedure was optimized

246

for the analysis of PTSO in milk by using different solvents and Agilent SampliQ

247

QuEChERS extraction kits: (a) 10 mL of MeCN, (b) 10 mL of MeCN + non-buffered

248

QuEChERS kit, (c) 8 mL of H2O + 10 mL of MeCN + non-buffered QuEChERS kit,

249

(d) 10 mL of MeCN + buffered QuEChERS kit, (e) 8 mL of H2O + 10 mL of MeCN +

250

buffered QuEChERS kit, and (f) 8 mL of 30 mM NaH2PO4, buffer pH 7.1 + 10 mL of

251

MeCN + buffered QuEChERS kit. The best recovery percentages and lower losses of

252

analyte were obtained for the option (b) (see table S4).

253

The second step of the QuEChERS procedure, based on a dispersive solid-phase

254

extraction (dSPE) for cleaning up, was also evaluated and different commercial sorbents

255

(C18, Al, Z-Sep and PSA) were tested. However, this step did not show any

256

improvement on the analytical signal intensity so it was discarded. 12 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 13 of 30


257

Once the sample treatment was selected, the amount of each salt (MgSO4 and NaCl) in

258

the extraction kit and the influence of the presence of acid (FA) in the extracting solvent

259

(10 mL of MeCN) were optimized by a multivariable approach to improve the PTSO

260

recovery, using an experimental design and taking into account possible interactions

261

among the chosen variables. A central composite design (23+ star, faced centered) with

262

three spaced central points (17 runs) was used to generate the response surface, using

263

the recovery percentage of PTSO in the extraction process as analytical response. These

264

variables were studied in the following ranges: amount of NaCl (0-2 g), amount of

265

MgSO4 (0-5 g) and percentage of FA in MeCN (0-10%).

266

A Pareto chart (Figure 2a) was obtained from the screening experimental design

267

showing that some of the studied variables and/or the interactions between them have a

268

significant effect (positive or negative) on the response when their value changed inside

269

the selected experimental domain. The length of each bar is proportional to the value of

270

the corresponding effect (main effects or interactions between factors) statistically

271

estimated by STATGRAPHICS. The vertical line shows the limit of decision to

272

consider the significance of the factors and or of the interactions between them (based

273

on the standardized effect = estimated effect/standard error; p-value 0.05 at 95% of

274

confidence level).

275

In this case, two main significant effects were observed: NaCl and MgSO4 amounts (B

276

and C). Both of them have a positive effect on the response. There is also a significant

277

interaction between NaCl amount and FA percentage (AB). This interaction causes a

278

positive effect on PTSO recovery. Another interaction, with negative effect in this case,

279

is the observed between NaCl and MgSO4 amount (BC).

280

Based on the information obtained from Pareto chart, the three selected variables

281

(amount of NaCl and MgSO4 and FA percentage) were simultaneously optimized by a



Page 14 of 30

282

response surface design. Optimum conditions were obtained (Figure 2b): NaCl = 1.9 g,

283

MgSO4= 2.5 g and FA in MeCN = 6.4%. The p-value of the lack-of-fit test was 0.089

284

and the determination coefficient (r2) was 84.1%, proving the suitability of this design.

285

To verify the selected optimum values for the studied variables, several milk samples

286

(n=5) were treated with the proposed method. A mean value of 97.5 ± 1.1% was

287

obtained for PTSO recovery.

288

Finally, the extraction volume (MeCN with 6.4 % FA) was evaluated in the range of 2.5

289

to 10 mL and a volume of 10 mL was chosen as optimum since a decrease of the

290

volume amount involved lower recovery percentages (see table S5). Sample size was

291

also evaluated between 1 and 10 g, selecting 5 g in order to obtain better signal intensity

292

and therefore lower limits of detection (LOD) (see table S6).

293

Characterization of the method

294

In order to check the suitability of the proposed method, linear dynamic range, limits of

295

detection (LOD) and limits of quantification (LOQ) were evaluated for milk samples

296

from different ruminants: pasteurized dairy milk, UHT dairy milk (whole, semi-

297

skimmed and skimmed), UHT semi-skimmed goat milk and UHT semi-skimmed sheep

298

milk. In addition, studies of precision and recovery for PTSO content in each matrix

299

were carried out. Figure 3 shows a chromatogram of a whole milk sample spiked with

300

50 mg Kg-1 of PTSO.

301

Calibration curves and performance characteristics

302

Matrix-matched calibration curves were established by spiking milk blank samples at

303

six different concentration levels of PTSO (ranging from 5 to 500 mg kg−1 for

304

pasteurized dairy cow milk, UHT semi-skimmed goat milk and UHT semi-skimmed

305

sheep milk and from 10 to 500 mg kg−1 for whole, semi-skimmed and skimmed dairy

306

cow milk). Each level was prepared in duplicate and injected in triplicate. Statistical 14 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 15 of 30


307

parameters were calculated by least-square regression. Obtained values for LOD (3xS/N

308

ratio) and LOQ (10xS/N ratio), linear dynamic range and linearity are shown in Table 1.

309

Precision study

310

The precision of the whole method was evaluated in terms of repeatability (intraday

311

precision) and intermediate precision (interday precision). Repeatability was assessed

312

by applying the whole procedure to six types of milk samples on the same day

313

(experimental replicates) spiked at three different concentration levels of PTSO: 10, 300

314

and 500 mg kg-1 and each sample was injected in triplicate (instrumental

315

replicates). Intermediate precision was evaluated with a similar procedure, but in this

316

case, five samples of each concentration level were analyzed five different days. The

317

results, expressed as relative standard deviation (RSD) of peak areas, are shown in

318

Table 2. Satisfactory precision was obtained, with RSDs lower than 10% in all cases.

319

Recovery study

320

Three milk samples were spiked at three different concentration levels of PTSO,

321

submitted to the QuEChERS procedure and injected per triplicate. Recoveries were

322

calculated as 100 × [(signal of a spiked sample / signal of spiked extract]; additionally

323

in all cases blank samples were previously analyzed and none of them gave a positive

324

result for PTSO. Results are shown in Table 3, demonstrating the trueness of the

325

proposed method (all of the recovery were higher than 82%).

326

Analysis of real milk samples

327

The validated method was applied for the analysis of milk samples from CG and TG.

328

All samples were prepared following the proposed sample treatment and analyzed in

329

triplicate by the HPLC-UV method. None of them gave a positive result of PTSO levels

330

above the LODs. To confirm the absence of PTSO, a more sensitive and confirmatory



Page 16 of 30

331

UHPLC-MS/MS method previously developed in our lab was applied to all samples

332

(LOQ=250 µg Kg-1).23 As it was expected, negative results were obtained from samples

333

belonging to CG. However, in all samples from TG the presence of PTSO was detected

334

and confirmed. Thus, a sensory evaluation was carried out in order to confirm that the

335

detected amount of PTSO did not affect to organoleptic properties of the milk samples.

336

Sensory evaluation of real milk samples containing PTSO

337

Three different tests were performed in three consecutive days. Test 1 and test 2 were

338

performed in order to establish a sensorial limit for PTSO in milk samples whereas test

339

3 was performed to check organoleptic properties in real milk samples. In all cases, 100

340

g of milk were offered to the panelists at a temperature of 20 ±1 °C in a transparent

341

plastic vessel coded with a two-digit number. The first test consisted of free-PTSO milk

342

samples versus milk samples containing 10 mg kg-1 of PTSO. Test samples for each

343

panelist were randomly selected by XLSTAT program. Milk samples containing PTSO

344

were correctly identified by 88% of panelists and therefore it can be said that this

345

concentration of PTSO modifies milk organoleptic properties (p-value < 0.0001). The

346

second test consisted of the comparison of milk samples containing 2 mg kg-1 of PTSO

347

versus free-PTSO milk samples. In this case, 87.5% of panelist did not find any

348

significant differences among the tested samples showing that a concentration of 2 mg

349

kg-1 of PTSO does not alter organoleptic properties of milk (p-value = 0.661). All

350

samples were prepared with pasteurized dairy milk.

351

Finally, the test 3 was carried out with real milk samples from TG at the end of the

352

experiment (results shown in table S7). In this case, samples from CG were faced to

353

samples from TG. None of the panelists found significant differences among the tested

354

samples (p-value= 0.661).


Page 17 of 30


355

Hence, although small traces of PTSO were found in milk samples from TG by

356

UHPLC-MS/MS, the identified concentration does not alter organoleptic properties of

357

milk and Garlicon® can therefore be used as supplement feed at doses of 25 g per day.

358

This positive result allows us to draw a strategy to reduce CH4 emissions without

359

compromising milk quality. Moreover, the proposed analytical method is suitable for

360

controlling the presence of residues of PTSO in milk as marker of OE, at concentrations

361

that could alter organoleptic properties of milk (above 2 mg kg-1).

362

ABBREVIATIONS USED

363

CH4, methane; VFA, volatile fatty acids; PTSO, propyl propane thiosulfonate; HPLC,

364

high performance liquid chromatography; UV, ultraviolet detection system; CYS,

365

cysteine; GSH, glutathione; CSSP, s-propyl mercaptocysteine; GSSP, s-propyl

366

mercaptoglutathione; UHT, ultra-high temperature.

367

SUPPORTING INFORMATION DESCRIPTION

368

Table S1. Effect of The Injection Volume on Area Values and S/N Ratio for the

369

Proposed HPLC-UV.

370

Table S2. Effect of Column Temperature on Peak High and Retention Time for

371

the Proposed HPLC-UV Method.

372

Table S3. Effect of Flow Rate on Peak Area and Width and Retention Time for

373

the Proposed HPLC-UV Method.

374

Table S4. Influence of QuEChERS Procedure on PTSO Recovery Values for the

375

Proposed HPLC-UV Method.

376

Table S5. Effect of the Extraction Volume of MeCN (6.4 % FA) on PTSO

377

Recovery Values for the Proposed HPLC-UV Method.

378

Table S6.

379

Proposed HPLC-UV Method.

380

Table S7a. Samples Assigned to Each Judge to Perform the Triangular Test.

Effect of Sample Size on PTSO Extraction Efficiency Using the

Table S7b. Results of Sensory Analysis of Real Milk Sample. 17 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


381

Page 18 of 30

REFERENCES 1

Hartung, J.; Phillips, V.R. Control of gaseous emissions from livestock buildings and

manure stores. J. Agric. Eng. Res. 1994, 57, 173-189. 2

Climate Change Knowledge. GHG sources. URL (http://www.climate-change-

knowledge.org/ghg_sources.html) (Friday, October 21, 2016). 3

Knapp, J.P.; Laur, G.L.; Vadas, P.A.; Weiss, W.P.; Tricarico, J.M. Invited review:

Enteric methane in dairy cattle production: Quantifying the opportunities and impact of reducing emissions. J. Dairy Sci. 2014, 97, 3231–3261. 4

Morgavi, D.P.; Forano, E.; Martin, C.; Newbold, C.J. Microbial ecosystem and

methanogenesis in ruminants. Animal. 2010, 4, 1024–1036. 5

Hook, E.S.; Wright, A-D. G.; McBride, B.W. Methanogens: Methane producers of the

rumen and mitigation strategies. Archaea. 2010, Article ID 945785. 6

Herrero, M.; Thornton, P.K.; Kruska, R.; Reid, R.S. Systems dynamics and the spatial

distribution of methane emissions from African domestic ruminants to 2030. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2008, 126, 122–137. 7

Hungate, R.E. The rumen and its microbes, edition nº 2. Academic Press: New York,

USA. 1968. 8

Van Nevel, C.J.; Demeyer, D.I. Control of rumen methanogenesis. Environ. Monit.

Assess. 1996, 42, 73–97. 9

Czerkawski, J.W. Energetics of rumen fermentation. In an introduction to rumen

studies, edition nº 1. Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK, 1986, 85-106. 10

Patra, A. K.; Yu, Z. Effects of essential oils on methane production and fermentation

by and abundance and diversity of rumen microbial populations. Environ. Microbiol. Appl. 2012, 78, 4271-4280.


Page 19 of 30


11

Castillejos, L.; Calsamigliaa, S.; Ferret, A.; Losa, R. Effects of dose and adaptation

time of a specific blend of essential oil compounds on rumen fermentation. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 2007, 132, 186–201. 12

Cowan, M. M. Plant products as antimicrobial agents. Clin. Microbiol. 1999, 12, 564–

582. 13

Cardozo, P.W.; Calsamiglia, S.; Ferret, A.; Kamel, C. Screening for the effects of

natural plant extracts at different pH on in vitro rumen microbial fermentation of a highconcentrate diet for beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 2004, 83, 2572-2579. 14

Martín-García, A.I.; Molina Alcaide, E.; García-Pareja, M.P. Effects of garlic

compounds on the in vitro ruminal fermentation promoted by diets based on alfalfa hay. In: Ranilla, M.J., Carro, M.D., Ben Salem, H., Moran d-Fehr, P. (eds.). Challenging strategies to promote the sheep and goat sector in the current global context. Zaragoza : CIHEAM / CSIC / Universidad de León / FAO, 2011. p. 115-119 (Options Méditerranéennes: Série A. Séminaires Méditerranéens; n. 99). 15

Martínez-Fernández, G.; Abecia, L.; A. Martín-García, A.I.; Ramos-Morales, E.;

Denman, S.E.; Newbold, C.J.; Molina-Alcaide, E.; Yáñez-Ruiz, D.R. Response of the rumen archaeal and bacterial populations to anti-methanogenic organosulphur compounds in continuous-culture fermenters. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol. 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/femsec/fiv079. 16

Busquet, M.; Calsamiglia, S.; Ferret, A.; Carro, M.D.; Kamel, C. Effect of garlic oil

and four of its compounds on rumen microbial fermentation. J. Dairy Sci. 2005, 12, 4393–4404. 17

Martínez-Fernández, G. Study of the mechanisms of action of compounds that modify

ruminal fermentation in small ruminants. 2013. Doctoral Thesis. Supervisor: Dr. David



Page 20 of 30

Rafael Yáñez Ruiz. Instituto de Nutrición Animal Departamento de Fisiología y

Bioquímica de la Nutrición Animal Estación Experimental del Zaidín. 18

Martínez-Fernández, G.; Abecia, L.; Ramos-Morales, E.; Martin-García, A.I.;

Molina-Alcaide, E.; Yáñez-Ruiz, D.R. Effects of propyl propane thiosulfinate on nutrient utilization, ruminal fermentation, microbial population and methane emissions in goats. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 2014, 191, 16-25. 19

Provenza, F.D.; Lynch, J.J.; Cheney, C.D. Effects of a flavor and food restriction on

the response of sheep to novel foods. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 1995, 43, 83-93. 20

Manella, J.A.; Beauchamp, G.K. The ontogeny of human flavor perception. In

Tasting and Smelling, edition nº 1; Beauchamp, G. K., Bartos, L. Academic Press: San Diego, California, USA, 1997; 199. 21

Pruthi, J.S. Quality assurance in spices and spice products: Modern methods of

analysis. Allied Published Limited: New Delhi. 1998. 22

Abad, P.; Lara, F.J.; Arroyo-Manzanares, N.; Baños, A.; Guillamón, E.; García-

Campaña, A.M. High-performance liquid chromatography method for the monitoring of the allium derivative propyl propane thiosulfonate used as natural additive in animal feed. Food Anal. Method. 2015, 8, 916-921. 23

Abad, P.; Arroyo-Manzanares, N.; García-Campaña, A.M. A rapid and simple

UHPLC-ESI-MS/MS method for the screening of propyl propane thiosulfonate, a new additive for animal feed. Anal. Method. 2016, 8, 3730-3739. 24

Alvárez, V.B. Sensory evaluation of milk products. In dairy processing and quality

assurance, edition nº 2; John Wiley & Sons Ltd: River Street, Hoboken, USA. 2016; 467. 25

ISO 4120:2004 - Sensory analysis - Methodology - Triangle test. Last revision 2012.

URL: 20 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 21 of 30


http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=33495. (Friday, October 21, 2016). 26

ISO 8589:2007 - Sensory analysis - General guidance for the design of test rooms.

Last revision 2011. URL: http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=36385. (Friday, October 21, 2016) 27

Kailasapathy, K.; Pritchard, S.R. Chemical, physical and functional characteristic of

dairy ingredients. In Dairy ingredients for food processing, edition nº 1; Blackwell Publishing: Ames, Lowa, USA. 2011. 28

Belitz, H.D.; Grosch, W.; Schieberle, P. Milk and dairy products, in Food Chemistry,

edition nº 4; Springer-Verlag: Berlin-Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; 498. 29

Lindmark-Månsson, H.; Åkesson, B. Antioxidative factors in milk. Brit. J. Nutr.

2000, 84, 103-110. 30

Stagsted, J. Absence of both glutathione peroxidase activity and glutathione in bovine

milk. Int. Dairy J. 2006, 16, 662–668. 31

Arroyo-Manzanares, N.; Gámiz-Gracia, L.; García-Campaña, A.M. Alternative

sample treatments for the determination of sulfonamides in milk by HPLC with fluorescence detection. Food Chem. 2014, 143, 459-464. 32

Aguilera-Luiz, M.M.; Plaza-Bolaños, P.; Romero-González, R.; Martínez-Vidal, J.L.;

Garrido- Frenich, A. Comparison of the efficiency of different extraction methods for the simultaneous determination of mycotoxins and pesticides in milk samples by ultra high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Anal, Bioanal. Chem. 2011, 399, 2863-2875. 33

Determination of pesticide residues in milk using a QuEChERS-based method

developed by response surface methodology. Food Chem. 2012, 133, 473-481. 21 ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 22 of 30

NOTE: The authors are thankful for the financial support from DOMCA S.A., the Campus of International Excellence – BioTic Granada (Project- mP_BS_2, CAPRILACT) and the research group FQM-302 (University of Granada, Spain).


Page 23 of 30


FIGURE CAPTIONS

Figure 1. Chromatogram of a milk sample spiked with 20 mg Kg-1 of PTSO extracted with the optimized extraction procedure and analyzed by UHPLC-MS/MS.

Figure 2. (a) Pareto chart showing the effects of the studied variables on the recovery percentage. Vertical line shows the limit of decision to consider the significance of the factors (based on the effect = estimated effect/standard error, P-value = 0.05 at 95% of confidence); (b) Response surface plot showing the effect of FA concentration on MeCN and NaCl and MgSO4 on PTSO recovery.

Figure 3. Chromatograms from (a) a blank whole milk sample and (b) a whole milk sample spiked with PTSO at 10 mg kg-1(b).



Page 24 of 30

TABLES

Table 1. Statistical and Performance Characteristics of the Proposed HPLC-UV Method. LOD

LOQ

(mg kg-1)

(mg kg-1)

Linear dynamic R2

Matrix range (mg kg−1) A

6.0-500

0.9957

1.8

6.0

B

6.3-500

0.9987

1.9

6.3

C

6.0-500

0.9997

1.8

6.0

D

4.7-500

0.9996

1.4

4.7

E

2.7-500

0.9995

0.8

2.7

F

3.7-500

0.9994

1.1

3.7

A: UHT skimmed dairy milk; B: UHT semi-skimmed dairy milk; C: UHT whole dairy milk; D: Pasteurized whole dairy milk; E: UHT semi-skimmed goat milk; F: UHT semi-skimmed sheep milk.


Page 25 of 30


Table 2. Precision Study (% RSD of Peak Areas) of the Proposed HPLC-UV Method. Repeatability

Intermediate precision

(n = 9)

(n = 15)

Matrix/Level

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

A

3.01

0.97

2.56

7.94

1.57

3.23

B

8.61

1.83

1.22

8.66

2.08

4.46

C

4.45

0.82

1.67

6.57

1.52

1.29

D

5.43

0.68

0.26

6.82

1.50

1.61

E

4.97

1.10

0.39

7.29

3.63

0.98

F

5.28

3.22

1.03

5.78

1.73

1.01

Level 1: 10 mg kg−1; level 2: 300 mg kg−1; level 3: 500 mg kg−1 A: UHT skimmed dairy milk; B: UHT semi-skimmed dairy milk; C: UHT whole dairy milk; D: Pasteurized whole dairy milk; E: UHT semi-skimmed goat milk; F: UHT semi-skimmed sheep milk.



Page 26 of 30

Table 3. Recovery Study of the HPLC-UV Proposed Method. Recovery (n = 9) Matrix/Level

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

A

82.5 (8.8)

93.1 (1.8)

92.5 (1.2)

B

82.4 (4.5)

92.2 (0.8)

95.7 (1.7)

C

84.0 (5.4)

92.0 (0.7)

96.3 (0.3)

D

84.3 (5.3)

93.3 (3.2)

91.9 (1.0)

E

82.5 (8.8)

93.1 (1.8)

92.5 (1.2)

F

89.4 (5.0)

96.5 (1.1)

97.5 (0.4)

Level 1: 10 mg kg−1; level 2: 300 mg kg−1; level 3: 500 mg kg−1 A: UHT skimmed dairy milk; B: UHT semi-skimmed dairy milk; C: UHT whole dairy milk; D: Pasteurized whole dairy milk; E: UHT semi-skimmed goat milk; F: UHT semi-skimmed sheep milk.


Page 27 of 30


FIGURE GRAPHICS Figure 1

PTSO 2.3e6 2.2e6 2.1e6 2.0e6 1.9e6 1.8e6 1.7e6 1.6e6 1.5e6 1.4e6

Intensity, cps

1.3e6 1.2e6 1.1e6 1.0e6 9.0e5 8.0e5 7.0e5 6.0e5 5.0e5 4.0e5 3.0e5 2.0e5 1.0e5 0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

Time, min

27

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


Page 28 of 30

Figure 2


Page 29 of 30


Figure 3



Page 30 of 30

GRAPHIC FOR TABLE OF CONTENTS


Use of Onion Extract as a Dairy Cattle Feed Supplement: Monitoring

Recommend Documents