1991
DOI: 10.1007/bf01688938
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of sampling methods for determination of pesticide residue on leaf surfaces

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

1995
1995
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…No previous studies have evaluated the extent to which bifenthrin persists on vegetation from treated residential properties using GC‐FID analysis to quantify the pesticide's presence. Our study demonstrates successful detection/quantification of bifenthrin using a wiping method adapted from Bissell et al and GC analysis. With the limited sample size of the present study and low bifenthrin quantities detected on foliage, we were unable to provide a detailed model of the environmental persistence of bifenthrin.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…No previous studies have evaluated the extent to which bifenthrin persists on vegetation from treated residential properties using GC‐FID analysis to quantify the pesticide's presence. Our study demonstrates successful detection/quantification of bifenthrin using a wiping method adapted from Bissell et al and GC analysis. With the limited sample size of the present study and low bifenthrin quantities detected on foliage, we were unable to provide a detailed model of the environmental persistence of bifenthrin.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…For each property, samples were taken from approximately the same locations (north, south, east and west corners of each property) each week, and new growth vegetation was not removed. Samples of bifenthrin residue were obtained using methodology adapted from Bissell et al that incorporated both collection of the whole leaf and leaf wiping, but not leaf punch samples. Each leaf was wiped 6 times over each side with cotton gauze (one‐quarter of a 9 × 9 cm gauze pad) moistened with acetone.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Existing sampling and analytical methods for assessing pesticides on foliage were identified and reviewed. (1,2,3,4) To determine the optimum method, two techniques (leaf punch and leaf wipe) for sample collection and analysis were field tested in February 1995 at a greenhouse where applications of known pesticides had occurred. The sampling and analytical methodology was further refined after a June 1995 survey at the USDA Plant Inspection and Quarantine Service facility in Miami, Florida (HETA 95-0353-2629).…”
Section: Foliage Residuementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Methods for sampling dislodgeable pesticide residue from leaf surfaces have been previously developed and generally consist of leaf punch, whole leaf, or leaf wipe sampling. (1,2) Measuring dislodgeable residue is useful for worker exposure assessments (estimation of the amount of dislodgeable pesticide residue that could be transferred to workers) and for the establishment of re-entry intervals. (3,4,5,6) Studies investigating the relationship between dislodgeable foliar residue and dermal exposure have been conducted and in some cases transfer factors (from leaves to hands) have been calculated.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently a comparison between different leaf sampling methods was performed including procedures similar to those mentioned above * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed. (Bissell et al, 1991). Since the absolute amount of fungicide sprayed on the leaves was not known, this comparison could only be relative.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%