4.2 Article

FaPEx® Multipesticide Residues Extraction Kit for Minimizing Sample Preparation Time in Agricultural Produce

Journal

JOURNAL OF AOAC INTERNATIONAL
Volume 102, Issue 6, Pages 1864-1876

Publisher

AOAC INT
DOI: 10.5740/jaoacint.18-0271

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe method, generally applied to the determination of pesticide residues in food, has been recently modified and adopted for the analysis of pesticide residues worldwide, including Taiwan. Objective: The method still needs to be improved, particularly in efficiency and normalization, because the time costs 20-30 min for extraction and cleanup of multiple pesticides in every food. Methods: In this study, we present a highly efficient and simple sample preparation method that was developed for the determination of 380 pesticide residues in food, including mangoes, scallions, bok choy, apples, carrots, and pea seedlings. The homogenized 1 g samples mixed with 5 mL 1.0% acetic acid in acetonitrile were pushed through the FaPEx (R) (fast pesticide extraction) kits in a dropwise manner to obtain sample extracts. The total processing time was less than 15 min. The extracts were subject to chromatographic separation followed by GC tandem MS (MS/MS) and LC-MS/MS analysis. Results: For more than 270 pesticide residues in these foods, the test gave acceptable mean recoveries, ranging between 70 and 120%, and relative SDs below 20%. The LOQ was at least 0.01 mg/kg for 380 pesticides. Conclusions: The developed method can greatly reduce the time needed for multiple pesticide residues analysis, Highlights: FaPEx is used for the extraction of pesticide residues that relies on single-use pre-filled sealed cartridges. FaPEx diminishes operation time, glassware demand, and laboratory space requirement. It also significantly decreases the amount of chemical solvents.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available