4.7 Article

Simultaneous Determination of Neonicotinoid and Carbamate Pesticides in Freeze-Dried Cabbage by Modified QuEChERS and Ultra-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry

期刊

FOODS
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/foods12040699

关键词

carbamate; freeze-dried cabbage; modified QuEChERS; neonicotinoid; ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This research developed and validated a modified QuEChERS method combined with ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to determine pesticide residues in freeze-dried cabbage. The method achieved acceptable validation results with low limits of quantification and good recovery rates. The developed method was applied to real freeze-dried cabbages and detected four pesticides in the samples.
Dehydrated vegetables are popular in instant foods, but few reports have focused on their pesticide residues. This research developed and validated a modified QuEChERS method combined with ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry to determine 19 kinds of neonicotinoid and carbamate pesticides in freeze-dried cabbage. Herein, acetonitrile/water (v/v = 2:1) was selected in the extraction step. Meanwhile, 4 g anhydrous magnesium sulfate and 1 g sodium chloride were applied to the partitioning step. Dispersive solid-phase extraction sorbents were selected, and liquid chromatography conditions were further optimized for dealing with the matrix effect. The limits of quantification ranged from 1.0 to 10.0 mu g/kg. The validation results were acceptable, with average recoveries of 78.7-114.0% and relative standard deviations below 14.2%. The method recoveries were closely related to the volume proportion of water in the extractant. Finally, the developed method was applied to real freeze-dried cabbages and four pesticides (propamocarb, imidacloprid, acetamiprid, and thiacloprid) were detected in six samples.

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

4.7
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