4.6 Article

Determination of multi-class pesticides in wines by solid-phase extraction and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1216, 期 31, 页码 5856-5867

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2009.06.031

关键词

Liquid chromatography; Tandem mass spectrometry; Pesticides; Wines; SPE

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work reports a new sensitive multi-residue liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method for detection, confirmation and quantification of forty-six pesticides and transformation products belonging to different chemical classes in wines. The proposed method makes use of a solid-phase extraction (SPE) procedure with Oasis HLB cartridges that combines isolation of the pesticides and sample clean-up in a single step. Analysis is performed by liquid chromatography-electrospray ionisation-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) operated in the selected reaction monitoring (SRM) mode, acquiring two specific precursor-product ion transitions per target compound. An investigation of matrix effects has been performed during method validation showing medium to low effects for the majority of the compounds. Limits of detection (LODs) were in the range 0.0003-0.003 mg L-1 and limits of quantification (LOQs) were in the range 0.001-0.01 mg L-1. The average recoveries, measured at two concentration levels (0.010 and 0.050 mg L-1). were in the range 70-110% for most of the compounds tested with % relative standard deviations below 20%, while a value of 0.010 mg L-1 has been established as the method limit of quantification (MLOQ) for all target species. Expanded uncertainty values were in the range 10-40% while the Horrat ratios were below 1. The method has been successfully applied to the analysis of 60 wine samples in the course of an annual monitoring study with carbendazim-benomyl, thiophanate-methyl and carbaryl being the most frequently determined pesticides. (C) 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据