Interview with Mr. Eric Capodanno
Vol.11 Issue 2 / Interview 2鈥淯nderstand the specifics of our analytical needs and provide reliable, tailor-made solutions.鈥�
We had the pleasure of interviewing Mr. Eric Capodanno, the co-founder of Phytocontrol,based in N卯mes, France. Since its establishment in 2006, Phytocontrol has been at the forefront of analyzing contaminants in both food and the environment.
Mr. Eric Capodanno, thank you very much for spending some time for this interview.First, could you provide an overview of Phytocontrol鈥檚 mission and the role your laboratory plays in ensuring food safety?
Phytocontrol is a group of laboratories specializing in the foodtesting and environmental contaminants. We work primarily with all players in the agri-food industry: producers of fruit and vegetables, cereals, importers, exporters,processors and supermarkets. We provide a service that enables manufacturers to know whether the foodstuffs they put on the market comply with regulations. We intervene within the framework of self-controls required of manufacturers by the authorities.
What are some of the key challenges you face in your daily operations, and how do you address them?
Today, our customers demand not only reliable results, but also rapid analysis results that meet regulatory requirements.That鈥檚 why the challenges we face today naturally lie in the automation of analytical processes and digitalization,which are key points. This enables us to meet our customers鈥� industrial needs, and just like our customers,we need to industrialize our analytical laboratories.
Could you introduce the automatic pretreatment robots?
To meet these automation needs, we decided a few years ago with Shimadzu to work on the design of a robot capable of carrying out the entire analytical process of a method for screening pesticides in foodstuffs: the Quechers method is the most widely used method in the laboratory today for the detection of pesticide residues in foodstuffs, not only in our laboratory, but also in all other laboratories. In our laboratory, it鈥檚 the method we use most every day. That鈥檚 why we decided to focus on automating this process, to gain maximum efficiency, reliability and analysis time. So this method has been automated from A to Z with a robot developed under contract after several years of collaborative work with Shimadzu. It enables us to automate the entire extraction process: solid-liquid extractions on pre-weighed samples, addition of internal standards and purification reagents, right through to vial filling of the final extract, with QR code of course. The robot now enables us to process up to 500 extractions a day, depending on customer requirements.
-
Could you describe the benefits you鈥檝e observed from using our automatic pretreatment robots in your sample analysis processes?
The main benefits, of course, are first and foremost the avoidance of the various human errors we used to see when this analysis was carried out manually in the laboratory. The robot has enabled us, for example, to avoid forgetting to add reagents or internal standards,or inverting vials in relation to the QR code, which means fewer customer complaints,greater analytical reliability and much more robust results. Automation enables us to achieve a higher analytical throughput, i.e. around 500 samples per 8 hours.
How has the integration of our instruments and automatic pretreatment robots impacted your workflow and efficiency?
The advantage of the robot is that it can be fed with samples continuously throughout the day. Once the samples have been weighed, they are placed on the robot, which can carry out continuous processing all day long, freeing up technicians for higher value-added tasks. It can also be run at night, to boost productivity if samples are received at the end of the day and have to be returned the following morning.
There is a trend for analysts鈥� operations to become simpler.Will this trend result in changes to the demands on the equipment(including consumables)?
Indeed, today we ask our teams in charge of developing our methods to provide the production department with the simplest and most efficient methods possible, so that technicians have as few critical points as possible to control on a daily basis. On the analytical side,this of course implies using technologies that enable us to search for traces with extracts that have undergone as little treatment as possible: the ideal case, of course, is that of the 鈥渄ilute and shoot鈥� process, with which we would simply extract and dilute the extract and eject it directly onto the analysis equipment. Of course, this process is not feasible in all cases, but we are tending towards this type of analytical process. So, when preparing samples,we try to use as few extraction and purification steps as possible,or at least to have extraction and purification processes that are as easy to use and automate as possible. For example,dSPE purification is preferred to conventional SPE, and cost and environmental considerations mean that we also try as far as possible to miniaturize analyses and consumables,to limit the discharge of plastics, reagents and solvents into the environment.
How do these instruments and robots contribute to the accuracy and reliability of your test results?
When we validated the routine method on the robot through accuracy and above all reproducibility tests, we found that we had lower coefficients of variation than those established during manual method validation. This was essentially due to the fact that the addition of solvents and, above all, internal standards was much more repeatable than when these steps were carried out by technicians at the bench, but the main gain for us was above all to avoid the occasional errors we could have made in certain steps by forgetting to add certain reagents or internal standards. Since the robot was installed,we鈥檝e had far fewer repeat analyses due to human error.
Which specific instruments from our company are currently being used in your laboratory, and what are their primary applications?
For the past fifteen years or so, we鈥檝e been using just about every chromatography instrument in the Shimadzu range, including HPLC-fluo, UV, GC-MS/MS and LC-MS/MS,including the latest and highest-performance models on the market, such as the LC-MS/MS 8060 NX and GC-MS/MS 8050. In addition to these instruments, which are present in large numbers in the laboratory (we have over a hundred LC GC instruments in our analytical park), we also have occasional needs for more specific applications, such as a recent instrument dedicated to the analysis of PFAS,which requires a specific chromatographic adaptation, or more recently, an upgrade to the GC-MS/MS 8050 for dioxin analysis, in order to meet regulatory quantification limits and reprocess results on an interface adapted to the specificities of this analysis.
What advantages does the GCMS-TQ system offer in terms of sensitivity and specificity for detecting dioxins compared to other methods?
Shimadzu鈥檚 TQ GCMS, specifically designed for dioxin analysis and featuring a new high-performance filament,enables us to achieve the same sensitivities as before on GC-HRMS. The advantage here is that we keep the same configuration as the other GC-MS/MS used in the rest of the laboratory.
The incorporation of this filament on the GC-MS/MS together with a parameterization and adaptation of the software on certain functions enabled us to analyze all PCBs and dioxins and to meet all regulatory criteria in terms of sensitivity, reproducibility and mass identification on quality controls.
Shimadzu also responded specifically to our needs in terms of functionalities on the reprocessing interface: integration of peaks, export of results to our database, calculations and quality controls on dioxins.
What advancements or improvements would you like to see in your industry?
The most important thing for us at the laboratory is, of course, the reliability of the results and the ability to respond to regulatory changes,where we are required to have increasingly high-performance equipment and technologies for trace analysis.What鈥檚 also very important is to be able to take results in a highly reproducible way with very short turnaround times; of course,to do this today, there鈥檚 a tool that鈥檚 proving indispensable:artificial intelligence. For several years now, we鈥檝e been turning this corner by using these tools via the reprocessing of chromatographic results, linked of course to the history of our databases. This enables our experts to use these reprocessing tools to produce the most reliable results possible, and to meet the specific needs of our customers and their food analysis history.
Could you tell us why you chose Shimadzu as your partner when you started this project?
Historically, we started working with Shimadzu when we wanted to differentiate ourselves in mycotoxin analysis:some fifteen years ago, we were analyzing these contaminants on an individual basis, and we wanted to screen as widely as possible. Shimadzu helped us a great deal in R&D to set up this type of method on their equipment.
Shimadzu has always supported us in R&D with ever more innovative technologies and very robust equipment, a crucial point in our business.
Are there any upcoming projects or research areas where you anticipate further collaboration with our company?
Coupling sample preparation with on-line analysis would also be an avenue worth exploring, to limit human intervention on simple protocols. With a modular automaton,we could design the automation ourselves, selecting modules for extraction, centrifugation, filtration, purification... in short, all the steps traditionally found in an analytical protocol.
I also believe that AI-assisted method design tools would be an essential complement to current routine analysis tools.
Thank you for sharing your insights and feedback. We are committed to exceeding your expectations moving forward.Thank you very much.
You鈥檙e welcome! I鈥檓 glad I could provide valuable insights. I appreciate your commitment and look forward to seeing how things progress. Thank you again!
鈻燛ric CAPODANNO, co-founder of Phytocontrol, set up the laboratory in 2006, specializing in the analysis of contaminants in food and the environment.Currently Scientific Director, he is in charge of developing analytical methods for contaminants in food and water. He is also GLP Test Facility Manager, managing pesticide residue studies requested by phytopharmaceutical companies as part of their marketing authorization.
A Cofrac technical assessor since 2012 in the field of pesticides,process contaminants and heavy metals, Eric plays an active role in AFNOR standardization commissions in these fields.
Prior to Phytocontrol, Eric CAPODANNO worked in various control laboratories, including the SCL in Montpellier (DGCCRF) in the department of pesticide residue analysis in foodstuffs.
Eric trained as a chemical engineer at the Ecole Nationale Sup茅rieure de Chimie de Montpellier.
