Modeling a pesticide remediation strategy for preparative liquid chromatography using high-performance liquid chromatography

Springer Science and Business Media LLC - Tập 5 - Trang 1-9 - 2023
Jamie Cuchiaro, James Baumgartner1, Melissa M. Reynolds2,3,4
1Panacea Life Sciences, Golden, USA
2Department of Chemistry, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA
3School of Biomedical Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA
4Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, USA

Tóm tắt

Cannabis sativa L. also known as industrial hemp, is primarily cultivated as source material for cannabinoids cannabidiol (CBD) and ∆9-tetrahydrocannabinol (∆9-THC). Pesticide contamination during plant growth is a common issue in the cannabis industry which can render plant biomass and products made from contaminated material unusable. Remediation strategies to ensure safety compliance are vital to the industry, and special consideration should be given to methods that are non-destructive to concomitant cannabinoids. Preparative liquid chromatography (PLC) is an attractive strategy for remediating pesticide contaminants while also facilitating targeted isolation cannabinoids in cannabis biomass. The present study evaluated the benchtop-scale suitability of pesticide remediation by liquid chromatographic eluent fractionation, by comparing retention times of 11 pesticides relative to 26 cannabinoids. The ten pesticides evaluated for retention times are clothianidin, imidacloprid, piperonyl butoxide, pyrethrins (I/II mixture), diuron, permethrin, boscalid, carbaryl, spinosyn A, and myclobutanil. Analytes were separated prior to quantification on an Agilent Infinity II 1260 high performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (HPLC-DAD). The detection wavelengths used were 208, 220, 230, and 240 nm. Primary studies were performed using an Agilent InfinityLab Poroshell 120 EC-C18 3.0 × 50 mm column with 2.7 μm particle diameter, using a binary gradient. Preliminary studies on Phenomenex Luna 10 μm C18 PREP stationary phase were performed using a 150 × 4.6 mm column. The retention times of standards and cannabis matrices were evaluated. The matrices used were raw cannabis flower, ethanol crude extract, CO2 crude extract, distillate, distillation mother liquors, and distillation bottoms. The pesticides clothianidin, imidacloprid, carbaryl, diuron, spinosyn A, and myclobutanil eluted in the first 3.6 min, and all cannabinoids (except for 7-OH-CBD) eluted in the final 12.6 min of the 19-minute gradient for all matrices evaluated. The elution times of 7-OH-CBD and boscalid were 3.44 and 3.55 min, respectively. 7-OH-CBD is a metabolite of CBD and was not observed in the cannabis matrices evaluated. Thus, the present method is suitable for separating 7/11 pesticides and 25/26 cannabinoids tested in the six cannabis matrices tested. 7-OH-CBD, pyrethrins I and II (RTA: 6.8 min, RTB: 10.5 min), permethrin (RTA: 11.9 min, RTB: 12.2 min), and piperonyl butoxide (RTA: 8.3 min, RTB: 11.7 min), will require additional fractionation or purification steps. The benchtop method was demonstrated have congruent elution profiles using preparative-scale stationary phase. The resolution of pesticides from cannabinoids in this method indicates that eluent fractionation is a highly attractive industrial solution for pesticide remediation of contaminated cannabis materials and targeted isolation of cannabinoids.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Aizpurua-Olaizola O, Omar J, Navarro P, Olivares M, Etxebarria N, Usobiaga A. Identification and quantification of Cannabinoids in Cannabis Sativa L. plants by high performance Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2014;406(29):7549–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-014-8177-x. Altiero P. An Introduction to Chromatography Equations. Agil Train Webinar. 2018. p. 37. Atapattu SN, Johnson KRD. Pesticide analysis in Cannabis Products. J Chromatogr A. 2020;1612:460656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2019.460656. Bączek T, Kaliszan R, Novotná K, Jandera P. Comparative characteristics of HPLC Columns based on quantitative Structure–Retention Relationships (QSRR) and hydrophobic-subtraction model. J Chromatogr A. 2005;1075(1–2):109–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2005.03.117. Bonini SA, Premoli M, Tambaro S, Kumar A, Maccarinelli G, Memo M, Mastinu A. Cannabis Sativa: a Comprehensive Ethnopharmacological Review of a Medicinal Plant with a long history. J Ethnopharmacol. 2018;227:300–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2018.09.004. Brenneisen R. Chemistry and Analysis of Phytocannabinoids and Other Cannabis Constituents. In: ElSohly M. A., editor. Marijuana and the Cannabinoids. Totowa: Forensic Science And Medicine; Humana Press; 2007. p. 17–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-947-9_2. Citti C, Ciccarella G, Braghiroli D, Parenti C, Vandelli MA, Cannazza G. Medicinal Cannabis: principal cannabinoids concentration and their Stability evaluated by a high performance liquid chromatography coupled to diode array and quadrupole time of Flight Mass Spectrometry Method. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2016;128:201–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpba.2016.05.033. Craven CB, Wawryk N, Jiang P, Liu Z, Li X-F. Pesticides and Trace Elements in Cannabis: Analytical and Environmental Challenges and Opportunities. J Environ Sci. 2019;85:82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jes.2019.04.028. De Luca C, Buratti A, Krauke Y, Stephan S, Monks K, Brighenti V, Pellati F, Cavazzini A, Catani M, Felletti S. Investigating the Effect of Polarity of Stationary and Mobile Phases on Retention of Cannabinoids in Normal Phase Liquid Chromatography. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-021-03862-y. do Amaral B, Peralta-Zamora P, Nagata N. Simultaneous Multi-Residue Pesticide Analysis in Southern brazilian soil based on chemometric tools and QuEChERS-LC-DAD/FLD method. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-18292-7. Geesaman J. Code of Colorado Regulations. n.d. p. 210. Gould J, The Cannabis Crop. Nature. 2015;525(7570):2–S3. https://doi.org/10.1038/525S2a. Hazekamp A, Fischedick JT. Cannabis - from Cultivar to Chemovar. Drug Test Anal. 2012;4(7–8):660–7. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.407. King JW. The relationship between Cannabis/Hemp Use in Foods and Processing Methodology. Curr Opin Food Sci. 2019;28:32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2019.04.007. López-Ruiz R, Marín-Sáez J, Garrido Frenich A, Romero-González R. Recent applications of Chromatography for Analysis of Contaminants in Cannabis Products: a review. Pest Manag Sci. 2022;78(1):19–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6599. Luca SV, Roehrer S, Kleigrewe K, Minceva M. Approach for Simultaneous Cannabidiol isolation and pesticide removal from hemp extracts with liquid-liquid chromatography. Ind Crops Prod. 2020;155:112726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2020.112726. Marijuana Tax Data. Colorado Department of Revenue. https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/revenue/colorado-marijuana-tax-data (Accessed 24 July 2020). McPartland JM, Guy GW. Models of Cannabis Taxonomy, Cultural Bias, and conflicts between scientific and vernacular names. Bot Rev. 2017;83(4):327–81. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12229-017-9187-0. McPartland JM, McKernan KJ. Contaminants of concern in Cannabis: Microbes, Heavy Metals and Pesticides. In: Chandra S, Lata H, ElSohly MA, editors. Cannabis sativa L. - Botany and Biotechnology. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2017. p. 457–74. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54564-6_22. Molnár I. Searching for Robust HPLC Methods – Csaba Horváth and the Solvophobic Theory. Chromatographia. 2005;62(S13):7–s17. https://doi.org/10.1365/s10337-005-0645-1. Morley R, Minceva MO. Mode and Parameter Selection in Liquid–Liquid Chromatography. J Chromatogr A. 2020;1617:460479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2019.460479. Moulins JR, Blais M, Montsion K, Tully J, Mohan W, Gagnon M, McRitchie T, Kwong K, Snider N, Blais DR. Multiresidue Method of Analysis of Pesticides in Medical Cannabis. J AOAC Int. 2018;101(6):1948–60. https://doi.org/10.5740/jaoacint.17-0495. Mudge EM, Murch SJ, Brown PN. Leaner and greener analysis of cannabinoids. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2017;409(12):3153–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-017-0256-3. Neue UDHPLC, Columns. Theory, Technology, and practice. 1st ed. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH, Inc.; 1997. Neue UD, Kele M. Performance of idealized column structures under high pressure. J Chromatogr A. 2007;1149(2):236–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2007.03.042. Nie B, Henion J, Ryona I. The role of Mass Spectrometry in the Cannabis Industry. J Am Soc Mass Spectrom. 2019;30(5):719–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13361-019-02164-z. Pesticide Use in Cannabis Production Information: Pesticides Allowed for Use on Cannabis; Colorado Department of Agriculture. 2022; pp. 1–47. https://ag.colorado.gov/plants/pesticides/pesticide-use-in-cannabis-production-information (Accessed 18 May 2022). Rustichelli C, Ferioli V, Baraldi M, Zanoli P, Gamberini G. Analysis of Cannabinoids in Fiber Hemp Plant Varieties (Cannabis Sativa L.) by high-performance liquid chromatography. Chromatographia. 1998;48(3–4):215–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02467674. Sandler LN, Beckerman JL, Whitford F, Gibson KA. Cannabis as Conundrum. Crop Prot. 2019;117:37–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2018.11.003. Small E, Beckstead H. Common Cannabinoid Phenotypes in 350 Stocks of Cannabis. LLoydia. 1973;36(2):144–65. Subritzky T, Pettigrew S, Lenton S. Into the void: regulating Pesticide Use in Colorado’s Commercial Cannabis Markets. Int J Drug Policy. 2017;42:86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2017.01.014. Wu Y, Trejo HX, Chen G, Li S. Phytoremediation of contaminants of emerging concern from Soil with Industrial Hemp (Cannabis Sativa L.): a review. Environ Dev Sustain. 2021;23(10):14405–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01289-0. Wylie PL, Westland J, Wang M, Radwan MM, Majumdar CG, ElSohly MA, Med. Cannabis Cannabinoids. 2020;3(1):14–24. https://doi.org/10.1159/000504391.