Quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe sample preparation approach for pesticide residue analysis using traditional detectors in chromatography: A review

Abstract

In pesticide residue analysis, relatively low-sensitivity traditional detectors, such as UV, diode array, electron-capture, flame photometric, and nitrogen-phosphorus detectors, have been used following classical sample preparation (liquid-liquid extraction and open glass column cleanup); however, the extraction method is laborious, time-consuming, and requires large volumes of toxic organic solvents. A quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe method was introduced in 2003 and coupled with selective and sensitive mass detectors to overcome the aforementioned drawbacks. Compared to traditional detectors, mass spectrometers are still far more expensive and not available in most modestly equipped laboratories, owing to maintenance and cost-related issues. Even available, traditional detectors are still being used for analysis of residues in agricultural commodities. It is widely known that the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe method is incompatible with conventional detectors owing to matrix complexity and low sensitivity. Therefore, modifications using column/cartridge-based solid-phase extraction instead of dispersive solid-phase extraction for cleanup have been applied in most cases to compensate and enable the adaptation of the extraction method to conventional detectors. In gas chromatography, the matrix enhancement effect of some analytes has been observed, which lowers the limit of detection and, therefore, enables gas chromatography to be compatible with the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe extraction method. For liquid chromatography with a UV detector, a combination of column/cartridge-based solid-phase extraction and dispersive solid-phase extraction was found to reduce the matrix interference and increase the sensitivity. A suitable double-layer column/cartridge-based solid-phase extraction might be the perfect solution, instead of a time-consuming combination of column/cartridge-based solid-phase extraction and dispersive solid-phase extraction. Therefore, replacing dispersive solid-phase extraction with column/cartridge-based solid-phase extraction in the cleanup step can make the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe extraction method compatible with traditional detectors for more sensitive, effective, and green analysis.

Dynamic residual pattern of azoxystrobin in Swiss chard with contribution to safety evaluation

“…Because it provides lower‐purity extracts, the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, safe ‘QuEChERS’ method is suitable for MS detectors. However, LC detectors have been employed less frequently with this methodology owing to interference problems and poor sensitivity resulting in higher detection limits (Rahman et al, ).…”

Acetonitrile as tops solvent for liquid chromatography and extraction

“…The key point of this method is sample extraction by water acetonitrile or ethylacetate in the presence of the salting-out complex, purification by the method of disperse SPE and chromatographic analysis. Recently this method has been used to simultaneously determine not only residual pesticide content, but veterinary products, natural toxins in the food raw material with minimal costs due to application of various QuEChERS modifications at the stage of sample preparation [39,43] . In this method MeCN is used in the presence of buffering salts (sodium citrate) for component extraction.…”

“…Currently acetonitrile is widely applied as a pure hydrophilic extra agent and as an extra agent modificator in various methods of extraction: solid-phase extraction (SPE); micro-SPE; low temperature SPE; liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) with desalination and desugaring; micro-LLE; disperse micro-LLE; liquid extraction under pressure; fluid extraction, liquid-liquid extraction with partition at low temperature (LLE-PLT), extraction freezing (QuEChERS), (quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, safe) [5][6][7][8][9][10]12,14,[29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] .…”

Analytical approach, dissipation pattern and risk assessment of pesticide residue in green leafy vegetables: A comprehensive review

“…PHRLs have been established by the National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service (Gimcheon, Republic of Korea) and incorporated with pesticide MRLs to prevent the distribution of agricultural products that exceed the MRLs (Chang et al, ). The PHRL uses an estimate of the pesticide residual quantity applied during the pre‐harvest period and determines the pesticide residual quantity at the time of harvest by calculating the biological half‐life and dissipation constant (Al Mahmud et al, ; Chang et al, ; Chung et al, ; Farha, Rahman, Abd El‐Aty, Jung, et al, ; Farha, Rahman, Abd El‐Aty, Kim, et al, ; Kabir et al, ; Kabir et al, ; S. W. Kim, Abd El‐Aty, et al, ; Namgung et al, ; Park et al, ; Rahman, Na, et al, , , ; Truong et al, ). The PHRL was computed by an automatic computational method using a statistical procedure in SPSS ().…”