4.5 Article

Salt-assisted acetonitrile extraction and HPLC-QTOF-MS/MS detection for residues of multiple classes of pesticides in human serum samples

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 43, 期 17, 页码 3534-3545

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201901223

关键词

high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; multi-classes pesticides; pesticide residues; serum; tandem mass spectrometry

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFC1601803]
  2. Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission project [D171100008017003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Detecting pesticide residues in human serum is a challenging process. In this study we developed and validated a method for the extraction and recovery of residues of multiple classes of pesticides from serum using one reagent. Salt-assisted acetonitrile extraction and high-performance liquid chromatography with quadrupole time of flight tandem mass spectrometry were used to quantitate 34 pesticides classified in nine groups of chemicals in human serum samples, which are frequently detected in food. The recoveries for 33 of analyzed pesticides ranged from 86 to 112% with relative standard deviations below 15%. The limits of quantitation and linearity of 31 of the pesticides were 1 mu g/L and >0.990, respectively. The lower limit of quantitation has been reported in the literature particularly for multi-classes pesticide mixtures in human serum. The salt-acetonitrile reagent was allowed to achieve good recoveries and detection limits, which could be attributed to salt altering the solvent polarity, preferentially collecting the organic phase in the solution, and promoting the extraction. The developed method was applied for two organophosphate pesticide metabolites, diethylphosphate and 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol, in serum from rats that were fed a nonlethal quantity of chlorpyrifos. The concentrations of these two were 252.18 +/- 15.47 and 0.63 +/- 0.23 mu g/L, respectively.

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

4.5
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