Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35564359›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

A Method for the Analysis of Glyphosate, Aminomethylphosphonic Acid, and Glufosinate in Human Urine Using Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry.

Zhong-Min Li, Kurunthachalam Kannan

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The MAK collection for occupational health and safety · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Zhong-Min LiDepartment of Pediatrics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9054-1235
Kurunthachalam KannanDepartment of Pediatrics, New York University Grossman School of Medicine, New York, NY 10016, USA.
King Abdulaziz University · SANew York University · US

Funding

Wadsworth Center's Human Health and Exposure Analysis Resource (WC-HHEAR)U2CES026542 · NIEHS · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI KANNAN, KURUNTHACHALAM, KANNAN, KURUNTHACHALAM · 2015 to 2025
$15.6M
NIEHS NIH HHS U2C ES026542
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The extensive use of herbicides, such as glyphosate and glufosinate, in crop production during recent decades has raised concerns about human exposure. Nevertheless, analysis of trace levels of these herbicides in human biospecimens has been challenging. Here, we describe a method for the determination of urinary glyphosate, its degradation product aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), and glufosinate using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC−MS/MS). The method was optimized using isotopically labelled internal standards (13C2, 15N-glyphosate, 13C, 15N, D2-AMPA, and D3-glufosinate) and solid-phase extraction (SPE) with cation-exchange and anion-exchange cartridges. The method provides excellent chromatographic retention, resolution and peak shape of target analytes without the need for strong acidic mobile phases and derivatization steps. The instrument linearity was in the range of 0.1−100 ng/mL, with R > 0.99 in the matrix for all analytes. The method detection limits (MDLs) and the method quantification limits (MQLs) were in the ranges of 0.12 (AMPA and glufosinate)−0.14 (glyphosate) ng/mL and 0.40 (AMPA)−0.48 (glyphosate) ng/mL, respectively. The recoveries of analytes spiked into urine matrix ranged from 79.1% to 119%, with coefficients of variation (CVs) of 4−10%. Repeated analysis of samples for over 2 weeks showed intra-day and inter-day analytical variations of 3.13−10.8% and 5.93−12.9%, respectively. The matrix effects for glyphosate, AMPA, and glufosinate spiked into urine matrix averaged −14.4%, 13.2%, and 22.2%, respectively. The method was further validated through the analysis of external quality assurance proficiency test (PT) urine samples. The method offers optimal sensitivity, accuracy, and precision for the urine-based assessment of human exposure to glyphosate, AMPA, and glufosinate.

Indexed as

HerbicidesTandem Mass Spectrometryalpha-Amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic AcidAminobutyratesChromatography, LiquidGlycineGlyphosateHumansOrganophosphonatesalpha-Amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic AcidAminobutyratesaminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA)GlycineGlyphosateHerbicidesOrganophosphonatesphosphinothricinaminomethylphosphonic acidglufosinateglyphosateLC–MS/MSurine

Identifiers

PMID35564359
PMCPMC9104544
OpenAlexW4224302568

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.