Table 3. Comparison of the methodologies and BMAA quantitative results of environmental and food samples used in this study and previous publications.
| Methodology | Reference | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Analytical method | Isomers included | Quantification method | Instrument LOD/LOQ | Method LOD/LOQ | |
| LC-FD | DAB | BMAA | NR | 2.0 ng/8.8 ng | Brand 2010 |
| LC-MS/MS | DAB | BMAA | 70 fmol, i.e., 8.3 pg (S/N = 9.2)/NR | NR | Jonasson 2010 |
| LC-FD and LC-MS/MS | DAB and AEG | BMAA in matrix | NR | 2.7 ng/7.0 ng (LC-FD method) | Mondo 2012 |
| LC-MS/MS | DAB and AEG | BMAA in matrix | 5 pg (S/N = 3)/17 pg(S/N = 10) | 0.5 μg/g (S/N = 3)/1.7 μg/g (S/N = 10)*** | Christensen 2012 |
| LC-MS/MS | No | BMAA | NR | NR | Jiao 2013 |
| LC-MS/MS | BAMA, AEG and DAB | d3-BMAA | NR | <0.01 μg/g (S/N = 14)/<0.01 μg/g (S/N = 44)*** | this study |
*Values in μg BMAA/g wet weight of tissues, others in μg BMAA/g dry weight of tissues.
**Samples from Swedish west coast.
***For comparison with other studies, the method LOD/LOQ in μg/g used in these two studies can be converted into BMAA amount by multiplying by the tissue weight, about 10 mg.
ND: not detectable; NA: not analyzed; NR: not reported; FD: fluorescent detector.