2013
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.02.027
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development and method validation for determination of 128 pesticides in bananas by modified QuEChERS and UHPLC–MS/MS analysis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
47
0
5

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 116 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
3
47
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…So, the approach of using a clean-up step was discarded. Other studies in the literature support that QuEChERS procedure can also be applied without clean up steps (Madureira et al 2012;Carneiro et al 2013). …”
Section: −1mentioning
confidence: 89%
“…So, the approach of using a clean-up step was discarded. Other studies in the literature support that QuEChERS procedure can also be applied without clean up steps (Madureira et al 2012;Carneiro et al 2013). …”
Section: −1mentioning
confidence: 89%
“…These procedures were selected considering that they were previously used for the extraction of a wide range of pesticides from fruits and vegetables. [34][35][36] Figure 2 shows that the QuEChERS procedure using the acetate buffered version at pH 4.8 presented higher and more consistent recoveries for most compounds, including the pH dependent pesticides cyprodinil, myclobutanil and tebuconazol. 5 Natural pigments does not interfere directly in the chromatographic analysis of pesticides, but can remained in the injector liner and the chromatographic column, shortening the useful life of this devices.…”
Section: Extraction and Clean-up Optimizationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In all cases, blank samples were extracted and analyzed by the proposed method; however, none of the target analytes was detected in these samples. Recoveries were calculated by comparing the concentration of the extracted analytes with the initial concentration of the target analytes spiked to the alcoholic beverage samples [44]. Recoveries and the corresponding %RSD (n = 6) of each target analyte in beer, wine and Tej samples are shown in Table 3.…”
Section: Applications and Recovery Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%