Non-targeted analysis of lipidic extracts by high-resolution mass spectrometry to characterise the chemical exposome: Comparison of four clean-up strategies applied to egg.

Biota samples are used to monitor chemical stressors and their impact on the ecosystem and to describe dietary chemical exposure. These complex matrices require an extraction step followed by clean-up to avoid damaging sensitive analytical instruments based on chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry. While interest for non-targeted analysis (NTA) is increasing, there is no versatile or generic sample preparation for a wide range of contaminants suitable for a diversity of biotic matrices. Among the contaminants' variety, persistent contaminants are mostly hydrophobic (mid- to non-polar) and bio-magnify through the lipidic fraction. During their extraction, lipids are generally co-extracted, which may cause matrix effect during the analysis such as hindering the acquired signal. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of four clean-up methods to selectively remove lipids from extracts prior to NTA. We evaluated (i) gel permeation chromatography (GPC), (ii) Captiva EMR-lipid cartridge (EMR), (iii) sulphuric acid degradation (H2 SO4 ) and (iv) polydimethyl siloxane (PDMS) for their efficiency to remove lipids from hen egg extracts. Gas and liquid chromatography coupled with high-resolution mass spectrometry fitted with either electron ionisation or electrospray ionisation sources operating in positive and negative modes were used to determine the performances of the clean-up methods. A set of 102 chemicals with a wide range of physico-chemical properties that covers the chemical space of mid- to non-polar contaminants, was used to assess and compare recoveries and matrix effects. Matrix effects, that could hinder the mass spectrometer signal, were lower for extracts cleaned-up with H2 SO4 than for the ones cleaned-up with PDMS, EMR and GPC. The recoveries were satisfactory for both GPC and EMR while those determined for PDMS and H2 SO4 were low due to poor partitioning and degradation/dissociation of the compounds, respectively. The choice of the clean-up methods, among those assessed, should be a compromise that takes into account the matrix under consideration, the levels and the physico-chemical properties of the contaminants.