Vol 78, No 7 (2023)

This review is dedicated to the application of capillary electrophoresis to assess the quality and safety of food products.

A method of dispersive liquid–liquid microextraction, based on the dispersion of an extractant by the gas phase formed as a result of a phase transition, i.e., the evaporation of a highly volatile nonpolar organic solvent (dispersant) upon heating the extraction,—is developed. The analytical capabilities of the method are shown in the determination of preservatives (sorbic and benzoic acids) in soft drinks for baby food by high-performance liquid chromatography with photometric detection. The extractant and the dispersant for the microextraction of preservatives are chosen a terpenoid and a highly volatile organochlorine solvent, respectively, which excluded the use of polar organic solvents for dispersing phases, with which the distribution coefficients are reduced. The limits of detection (3σ) for sorbic and benzoic acids are 0.3 mg/L. The developed method does not require centrifugation for phase separation

A voltammetric sensor was developed based on a glassy carbon electrode with aluminophosphate zeolite finely dispersed on its surface, modified with a polyelectrolyte complex of chitosan with succinyl chitosan and betulinic acid, for the selective detection and determination of naproxen enantiomers. The electrochemical and analytical characteristics of the sensor were studied, and the effective electrode surface area (A = 9.8 ± 0.5 mm2) and charge transfer resistance (Ret = 649.9 ± 0.4 Ω) were calculated. In determining naproxen enantiomers, calibration characteristics are linear in the range from 2.5 × 10–5 to 1 × 10–3 M with limits of detection of 1.1 × 10–7 and 1.5 × 10–7 M and limits of quantification of 3.6 × 10–7 and 4.9 × 10–7 M for R- and S-naproxen, respectively. The sensor is more sensitive to R-naproxen (∆Ep = 60 mV, ipR/ipS = 1.40). The proposed sensor was used to recognize and determine naproxen enantiomers in human urine and plasma samples. Statistical evaluation of the results by the standard addition method showed that there was no systematic error.