Impact of four different extraction methods and three different reconstitution solvents on the untargeted metabolomics analysis of human and rat urine samples.

Extraction methods Human urine Rat urine Reconstitution Sample preparation Untargeted metabolomics

Journal

Journal of chromatography. A
ISSN: 1873-3778
Titre abrégé: J Chromatogr A
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9318488

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
24 Apr 2024
Historique:
received: 01 03 2024
revised: 08 04 2024
accepted: 21 04 2024
medline: 3 5 2024
pubmed: 3 5 2024
entrez: 2 5 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Unsuitable sample preparation may result in loss of important analytes and consequently affect the outcome of untargeted metabolomics. Due to species differences, different sample preparations may be required within the same biological matrix. The study aimed to compare the in-house sample preparation method for urine with methods from literature and to investigate the transferability of sample preparation from human urine to rat urine. A total of 12 different conditions for protein precipitation were tested, combining four different extraction solvents and three different reconstitution solvents using an untargeted liquid-chromatography high resolution mass spectrometry (LC-HRMS) metabolomics analysis. Evaluation was done based on the impact on feature count, their detectability, as well as the reproducibility of selected compounds. Results showed that a combination of methanol as extraction and acetonitrile/water (75/25) as reconstitution solvent provided improved results at least regarding the total feature count. Additionally, it was found that a higher amount of methanol was most suitable for extraction of rat urine among the tested conditions. In comparison, human urine requires significantly less volume of extraction solvent. Overall, it is recommended to systematically optimize both, the extraction method, and the reconstitution solvent for the used biofluid and the individual analytical settings.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38696889
pii: S0021-9673(24)00304-2
doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2024.464930
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

464930

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Auteurs

Selina Hemmer (S)

Department of Experimental and Clinical Toxicology, Institute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Center for Molecular Signaling (PZMS), Saarland University, Homburg, Germany.

Sascha K Manier (SK)

Department of Experimental and Clinical Toxicology, Institute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Center for Molecular Signaling (PZMS), Saarland University, Homburg, Germany.

Lea Wagmann (L)

Department of Experimental and Clinical Toxicology, Institute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Center for Molecular Signaling (PZMS), Saarland University, Homburg, Germany.

Markus R Meyer (MR)

Department of Experimental and Clinical Toxicology, Institute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Center for Molecular Signaling (PZMS), Saarland University, Homburg, Germany. Electronic address: markus.meyer@uks.eu.

Classifications MeSH