4.6 Article

Simultaneous determination of pesticides, biopesticides and mycotoxins in organic products applying a quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe extraction procedure and ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1218, 期 11, 页码 1477-1485

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2011.01.034

关键词

Pesticides; Biopesticides; Mycotoxins; Simultaneous extraction; UHPLC-MS/MS

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation-FEDER [AGL2006-12127-C02-01, CTQ2009-07686]
  2. Spanish Ministry of Education and Science-EFS
  3. CAPES-Brazil [1849-0903]
  4. Spanish Agency for International Development Cooperation (AECID) (Spanish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cooperation)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A method for the simultaneous determination of pesticides, biopesticides and mycotoxins from organic products was developed. Extraction of more than 90 compounds was evaluated and performed by using a modified QuEChERS-based (acronym of Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe) sample preparation procedure. The method was based on a single extraction with acidified acetonitrile, followed by partitioning with salts, avoiding any clean-up step prior the determination by ultra-high performance liquid chromatography/tandem quadrupole mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). Validation studies were carried out in wheat, cucumber and red wine as representative matrixes. Recoveries of the spiked samples were in the range between 70 and 120% (with intra-day precision, expressed as relative standard deviation, lower than 20%) for most of the analysed compounds, except picloram and quinmerac. Inter-day precision, expressed as relative standard deviation, was lower than 24%. Limits of quantification were lower than 10 mu g kg(-1) and the developed method was successfully applied to the analysis of organic food products, detecting analytes belonging to the three types of compounds. (C) 2011 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