4.7 Article

Optimized combination of dilution and refined QuEChERS to overcome matrix effects of six types of tea for determination eight neonicotinoid insecticides by ultra performance liquid chromatography-electrospray tandem mass spectrometry

Journal

FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 210, Issue -, Pages 26-34

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.04.097

Keywords

Tea matrix; Matrix effect; Dilution; Refined QuEChERS; Neonicotinoids; LC-ESI-MS/MS

Funding

  1. National Natural Scientific Foundation of China [31270728]
  2. project of Nutrition and Quality & Safety of Agricultural Products, Universities Leading Talent Team of Anhui Province
  3. Anhui Major Demonstration Project for Leading Talent Team on Tea Chemistry and Health, National Modern Agriculture Technology System [CARS-23]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-MS/MS) is a primary tool for analysis of low volatility compounds in complex matrices. However, complex matrices, such as different types of tea, complicate analysis through ionization suppression or enhancement. In this study, sample preparation by a refined QuEChERS method combined with a dilution strategy removed almost all matrix effects caused by six types of tea. Tea samples were soaked with water and extracted with acetonitrile, cleaned up with a combination of PVPP (160 mg) and GCB (20 mg), and dried. Dried extracts were diluted with 20 mL acetonitrile/water (15:85, v/v) before analysis by UPLC-MS/MS. The average recoveries of eight neonicotinoid insecticides (dinotefuran, nitenpyram, thiamethoxam, imidacloprid, clothianidin, imidaclothiz, acetamiprid, and thiacloprid) ranged from 66.3 to 108.0% from tea samples spiked at 0.01-0.5 mg kg(-1). Relative standard deviations were below 16% for all recovery tests. The limit of quantification ranged from 0.01 to 0.05 mg kg(-1). (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available