4.6 Article

Multiresidue Pesticide Analysis in Tea Using GC-MS/MS to Determine 12 Pesticide Residues (GB 2763-2021)

Journal

MOLECULES
Volume 27, Issue 23, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/molecules27238419

Keywords

gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; solid-phase extraction; pesticide residues; multiple reaction monitoring; GB 2763-2021

Funding

  1. Tokyo Biochemical Research Foundation (TBRF)
  2. [TBRF-RF-21-129]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study developed a reliable and sensitive method for detecting pesticide residues in tea. By optimizing the sample preparation process and using GC-MS/MS, the concentrations and detection limits of 12 pesticide residues in tea were successfully determined. This study fills the gap in the current national standards for detecting pesticide residues in tea.
Pesticides are widely used on tea plants, and pesticide residues are of significant concern to consumers. The National Food Safety Standard Maximum Residue Limits for Pesticides in Food (GB 2763-2021) was recently amended. However, detection methods for pesticides newly added to the list of residues in beverages have not yet been established. For that reason, this study developed a solid-phase extraction (SPE) and gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (GC-MS/MS) method for determining the residues of 12 pesticides, including four newly added, in black and green tea. Sample preparation processes (sample extraction, SPE clean-up, elution solvent, and elution volume) were optimized to monitor these residues reliably. Multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) was used for GC-MS/MS electron impact (EI) mode determination. Finally, satisfactory recoveries (70.7-113.0% for green tea and 72.0-99.1% for black tea) were achieved at three concentrations (10 mu g/kg, 20 mu g/kg, and 100 mu g/kg). The LOQs were 0.04-8.69 mu g/kg, and the LODs were 0.01-3.14 mu g/kg. This study provides a reliable and sensitive workflow for determining 12 pesticide residues in tea, filling a gap in the newly revised National Standards.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available