Evaluation of cost-effective methods in the pesticide residue analysis of non-fatty baby foods

Organophosphorus Pesticides Analysis

“…Other methods aimed to ensure a high sensitivity of the determination, in concert with the reliable sample preparation technique, apart of the mentioned above, are: gas chromatography with nitrogen-phosphorus detection (Fenoll et al, 2007;Georgakopoulos et al, 2009;Pagliuca et al, 2005;Ravelo-Pérez et al, 2008), gas chromatography with flame thermionic detection (Tsoutsi et al, 2006), gas chromatography with electron capture detection (Chai & Tan, 2009;Guardia-Rubio et al, 2007;Ibrahim et al, 2010;Pinho et al, www.intechopen.com 2010; Ramos et al, 2009), gas chromatography with flame photometric detection (Ahmadi et al, 2006;Wang & Du, 2010;Xiao et al, 2006;Zhao et al, 2011), gas chromatography with flame ionization detection (Pinheiro, & Andrade, 2009), liquid chromatography with electrochemical flow detection (Trojanowicz, 2010), liquid chromatography with UV detection (Buonasera et al, 2009), high performance liquid chromatography with UV detection (Zhu et al, 2007), high performance liquid chromatography with fluorimetric detection (Pérez-Ruiz et al, 2005), and high performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (Wu et al, 2010). Relevant data collected for the period 2010-2011, revealing the analytical performances of some selected chromatographic methods are summarized in Table 3.…”

Factors Affecting the Accurate Quantification of Pesticide Residues in Non-Fatty Matrices

“…the extreme polar methamidophos of negative logk ow (-0.8) to non-polar ethion of high logk ow (5.1) may be successfully analysed by simple, cost-effective MRMs, such as EtOAc and acetone partition. It should be reminded that polars are better extracted by EtOAc in comparison with medium-and non-polars better extracted by the acetone partition method (van Zoonen, 1996;Mol et al, 2003;Maštovská & Lehotay, 2004;Georgakopoulos et al, 2009). The selection of the more appropriate MRM should be based on the physicochemical properties of target compounds.…”

“…A peak in orange extracts appeared in every fruit (by GC-NPD), either of organic produce or of conventional crops, and detected in the peel orange extract analysed itself compared with the analysis of orange juice (Georgakopoulos et al, 2007) may be the reason why citrus peels require an extract cleanup, described by Dorea et al (1996). EtOAc fruit purée and cocktail extracts, presenting more complicated components and higher co-extract amounts, influenced negatively both the NPD response and the accurate determination in contrast to the respective fruit juice extract (Georgakopoulos et al, 2009). To overcome these co-extracts effects, additional cleanup steps, compatible with pesticides analysed and solvent(s) applied, have been proposed (Tekel & Hatrik, 1996;Schenck & Lehotay, 2000;Schenck & Wong, 2008).…”

“…EtOAc extraction provided better average %R, with satisfactory validation parameters, than dichloromethane extraction for 16 organochlorine pesticides (OCs) (Yenisoy-Karakaş, 2006). EtOAc non-fatty, fruit-based baby food extracts provided (a) higher recoveries for polar dimethoate, (b) lower recoveries for semi-and non-polar chlorpyrifos, methidathion, diazinon and phosalone and (c) higher amount of lipophilic compounds affecting the measurement than the relevant acetone partition extracts (Georgakopoulos et al, 2009). Among different extraction solvents, known to result in acceptable %R for a wide range of pesticides, ACN was chosen to the modern method named QuEChERS, as an acronym of quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe (Anastassiades et al, 2003a).…”

“…The polar, miscible with water acetone, requiring a series of liquid-liquid partition steps with non-polar solvents, seems to give accurate analysis results for a more wide range of pesticides, except for extremely polar OPs (Majors, 2007), in the analysis of non-fatty matrices containing or not non-volatile components. Thus, there is elimination of undesirable interference effects in the final residue result even if no further clean-up is applied (van Zoonen, 1996;Georgakopoulos et al, 2009). The new approach of QuEChERS, employing shaking of the matrix with ACN, followed by the addition of salts and dSPE with appropriate sorbent amounts (Anastassiades et al, 2003a;Majors, 2007;Schenck & Wong, 2008) represents the most suitable MRM for the analysis of polar, semi-and non-polar analytes in non-fatty and low-fatty matrices (e.g., containing 2 to 20% of fat) with large amounts of non-volatile compounds.…”