4.6 Article

Application of ultra-high pressure liquid chromatography linear ion-trap orbitrap to qualitative and quantitative assessment of pesticide residues

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1328, 期 -, 页码 66-79

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2013.12.082

关键词

UHPLC; LTQ-Orbitrap-MS; Pesticide quantification; Food samples; Environmental samples; Contaminants identification

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness
  2. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) [CSD2009-00065, GCL2011-29703-C02-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The analysis of pesticides residues using a last generation high resolution and high mass accuracy hybrid linear ion trap-Orbitrap mass spectrometer (LTQ-Orbitrap-MS) was explored. Pesticides were extracted from fruits, fish, bees and sediments by QuEChERS and from water by solid-phase with Oasis HLB cartridges. Ultra-high pressure liquid chromatography (UHPLC)-LTQ-Orbitrap mass spectrometer acquired full scan MS data for quantification, and data dependent (dd) MS2 and MS3 product ion spectra for identification and/or confirmation. The regression coefficients (r(2)) for the calibration curves (two order of magnitude up to the lowest calibration level) in the study were >= 0.99. The LODs for 54 validated compounds were <= 2 ng mL(-1) (analytical standards). The relative standard deviation (RSD), which was used to estimate precision, was always lower than 22%. The recovery of extraction and matrix effects ranged from 58 to 120% and from -92 to 52%, respectively. Mass accuracy was always <= 4 ppm, corresponding to a maximum mass error of 1.6 millimass units (mmu). This procedure was then successfully applied to pesticide residues in a set of the above-mentioned food and environmental samples. In addition to target analytes, this method enables the simultaneous detection/identification of non-target pesticides, pharmaceuticals, drugs of abuse, mycotoxins, and their metabolites. (C) 2013 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