This Application note demonstrates accurate and reliable determination of sugar content in food and animal feed samples.
Monosaccharides fructose, galactose, and glucose, and disaccharides sucrose, lactose, and maltose are common sugar ingredients in foods. With the increasing concerns of obesity and diabetes in many countries, the need to monitor sugar intake has grown in recent years. Consequently, now there are requirements to provide accurate information about added sugar content on food product labels in order to comply with current FDA food labeling regulation.1
High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) is the method of choice for the analysis of sugars. However, the HPLC analysis of sugars is not a simple task. The main concern is the co-eluting compounds that may interfere with sugar quantification. For example, galactose often co-elutes with glucose. Recently a new method has been developed in which the six common sugars were separated on an XBridge BEH Amide XP Column (2.5 µm, 3.0 × 150 mm), and were quantified with an ACQUITY QDa Detector.2 In this work, we improved the method and applied it to a wide range of foods, including a chicken feed sample. Figure 1 shows the SIR (Single Ion Recording) chromatograms of a sugar mixture solution. All six sugars are baseline separated.
A stock solution of (six) mono and disaccharide standard mixture was prepared at 500 mg/L. An internal reference standard solution of the stable isotope labeled glucose-13C6 and lactose-13C6 was prepared at 1000 mg/L. Standard solutions at seven levels (0.2, 0.5, 2, 5, 20, 50, and 100 mg/L) were prepared by serial dilution of stock solutions. The internal reference standards were added and kept at 20 mg/L in all standard solutions and sample solutions. The solvent used in all standard and sample solutions was 1:1 (v/v) acetonitrile:water.
Samples of non-fat dry milk powder, milk based infant formula (IF), soy based IF, oatmeal, lactose-free milk, chicken feeds, and cocoa powder were prepared as follows based on the procedure that was described elsewhere:2,3
* Carrez 1 reagent - dissolve 0.36 g K4[Fe(CN)6]∙3H20 in 10 mL water
**Carrez 2 reagent - dissolve 0.72 g ZnSO4∙7H2O in 10 mL water
The supernatant was then diluted with water:acetonitrile mixture at various ratios to fit into the calibration range. Aliquot of the internal reference standard mix solution (glucose-13C6 and lactose-13C6) was added to all sample solutions at 20 mg/L.
System: |
ACQUITY Arc System |
Runtime: |
25 min |
Column: |
XBridge BEH Amide XP, 2.5 μm, 3.0 × 150 mm (p/n: 186006725) |
Column temp.: |
90 °C |
Mobile phase: |
90:6:4 acetonitrile:water:methanol with 0.05 v/v% diethylamine and 0.5 mg/L guanidine hydrochloride |
Flow rate: |
0.8 mL/min |
Injection volume: |
1.0 μL |
New columns need to be properly conditioned to ensure optimal chromatographic performance. This is especially required for hydrophilic interaction liquid chromatography (HILIC) columns, for which a careful and thorough column conditioning prior to the initial use is recommended.4 All new XBridge BEH Amide XP Columns used in this study were flushed with 50 column volumes of 80:20 acetonitrile:water, followed by 100 column volumes of the 90:6:4 acetonitrile:water:methanol mixture with 0.05 v/v% diethylamine and a higher guanidine hydrochloride concentration of 5 mg/L. Once the new column was conditioned, no further conditioning was conducted.
System: |
ACQUITY QDa (Performance) |
Ionization mode: |
ESI- |
Capillary voltage: |
0.8 kV |
Cone voltage: |
5.0 V |
Probe temp.: |
600 °C |
Acquisition rate: |
2 Hz |
Full scan: |
100–500 m/z |
Curve fit: |
Quadratic, 1/x weighting |
Smoothing: |
Mean, level 7 |
SIR [M+Cl]-: |
215.1 Da for fructose, glucose, galactose 221.1 Da for glucose-13C6 377.1 Da for sucrose, lactose, maltose 383.1 Da for lactose-13C6 |
The main issue in the sugar analysis is co-elution interference from sample matrix and fromsugar isomers. Compare to refractive index (RI) detection and evaporative light scattering (ELS) detection, the ACQUITY QDa Mass Detector, a single quadrupole mass spectrometer, is a highly selective detector. It has significantly less background signal noise from co-eluting food matrix.
The co-elution issue from sugar isomers was evaluated by examining the isomers’ retention factors (k') under the same LC conditions. The common mono and disaccharides’ K' and their monoisotopic masses are shown in Table 1. Some sugars did elute closely to the sugars of interest. For example, lactulose partially co-eluted with sucrose, mannose partially co-eluted with galactose, and cellobiose co-eluted with lactose (chromatograms not shown). Fortunately, these sugar pairs rarely co-exist in the same samples.5
Foods may contain high levels of salts. It is well known that salt can cause issues in the peak shape and the separation of some early eluting sugars in HPLC. The effect of salt was evaluated, and it was found that even at high concentrations of 450 and 500 mM in sample solutions, sodium chloride (NaCl), ammonium formate (HCOONH4), and potassium chloride (KCl) did not cause any noticeable change in chromatograms (Figure 2). The effect of salt on the sugar separation in this method is minimal.
It is a common practice in mass spectrometry (MS) to use stable isotope labeled standards as references to normalize the variation in signal intensity. In this method, the 13C-labeled glucose-13C6 and the lactose-13C6 were used as references. The glucose-13C6 was used as the reference for fructose, galactose, and glucose, and the lactose-13C6 was used for sucrose, lactose, and maltose. Figure 3 shows typical calibration curves for these sugars. These calibration curves were obtained by the least square regression to quadratic models with 1/x weighting. The R2 values of at least 0.995 were obtained.
Table 2 shows the recovery results for the sugar analysis in spiking experiments on IF and soy-based IF samples. The spiking levels in these samples were from 3 to 7 mg/g. Recovery values were between 90% to 125%. Measurement of the NIST standard reference material (SRM) 1849a showed a lactose (lactose monohydrate) concentration of 519 mg/g, which was 109% of the SRM reference value (Table 4).
Table 3 shows repeated measurement results on the sugar content in samples. The measurements were conducted on two different days with replicated measurements on each day. Relative standard deviation (RSD) values of less than 5.8% were obtained.
Table 4 shows the sugar analysis results for various samples. The samples include oatmeal, non-fat milk powder, IF, milk, chicken feeds, cocoa powder, and NIST IF standard reference material (NIST 1849a). It was found that the non-fat dry milk (powder) and IF samples contained high levels of lactose, while the lactose-free milk (liquid) contained relatively high levels of galactose and glucose. Sucrose was the main sugar in oatmeal, soy-based IF, chicken feed, and cocoa powder. Figure 4 shows the SIR chromatograms of selected food samples.
This sugar analysis method offers scientists an accurate and reliable way to determine the content of fructose, galactose, glucose, sucrose, lactose, and maltose in food and animal feed samples.
The key features of this method include:
This method could be a suitable method for the routine sugar analysis in foods and animal feeds.
720006575, June 2019