Clean-up Procedure Development and Method Validation for Pesticide Residues Analysis in Carrots
In this work, a method was developed, validated, and applied to determination of ten pesticide residues (trifluralin, carbofuran, chlorothalonil, pendimethalin, captan, tebuconazole, pyraclostrobin, difenoconazole, deltamethrin, and azoxystrobin), from seven distinct classes, in carrot samples, employing a QuEChERS procedure for the analyte extraction and gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC-MS) for quantification. The dispersive clean-up step was optimized using different sorbents at different concentrations and mixings. The method proved to be efficient and robust, showing recoveries in the range 72–117%, and RSD ranging from 4.9 to 16.6% (except for chlorothalonil and captan) at fortification levels of 45, 90, 180, and 450 μg kg−1 with seven replicates analyzed for each level (n = 28). Chlorothalonil and captan could not be validated due to analyte stability problems. Detection limits were between 15 and 45 μg kg−1, and the quantification limits were between 45 and 90 μg kg−1. The method was successfully applied to real samples.
KeywordsPesticide residues Carrot QuEChERS Clean-up GC-MS
The authors would like to thank to the Federal University of Rio Grande and to the Post Graduate Program in Technological and Environmental Chemistry for free and high quality education, as well as to the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development for the fellowship provided to Juliana L. da S. Batista.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Márcia H. S. Kurz declares that she has no conflict of interest. Juliana L. da S. Batista declares that she has no conflict of interest. Lenise G. de Oliveira declares that she has no conflict of interest. Rodrigo Hoff declares that he has no conflict of interest. Manoel L. Martins declares that he has no conflict of interest. Fábio F. Gonçalves declares that he has no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional informed consent was obtained from all individual participants for whom identifying information is included in this article.
- ANVISA. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária (2003) Resolução RE n° 899, de 29 de maio de 2003, Guia para validação de métodos analíticos e bioanalíticos. Diário Oficial da União de 02 de junho de 2003. Brasília (Brazil)Google Scholar
- ANVISA (2016) Relatório das analises de amostras monitoradas no período de 2013 a 2015. Available from: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/documents/111215/0/Relat%C3%B3rio+PARA+2013-2015_VERS%C3%83O-FINAL.pdf/494cd7c5-5408-4e6a-b0e5-5098cbf759f8. Accessed 27 March 2018
- ANVISA (2018a) Monografias de agrotóxicos. Available from: http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/registros-e-autorizacoes/agrotoxicos/produtos/monografia-de-agrotoxicos. Accessed 27 March 2018
- ANVISA (2018b) Programa de Análise de Resíduos de Agrotóxicos em Alimentos, http://portal.anvisa.gov.br/programa-de-analise-de-registro-de-agrotoxicos-para. Accessed 27 March 2018
- CEASA Campinas (2018) Cenoura: Informações Nutricionais. Available from: http://www.ceasacampinas.com.br/novo/Serv_Hortifrutis_Cenoura.asp. Accessed 27 March 2018
- Chasin AADM, Nascimento EDS, Ribeironeto LM, Siqueira MEPBD, Andraus MH, Salvadori MC, Fernícola NAGD, Gorni R, Salcedo S (1998) Validação de métodos em análises toxicológicas: uma abordagem geral. Rev Bras Toxicol 11:1–6Google Scholar
- Cherta L, Portolés T, Beltran J, Pitarch E, Mol JGJ, Hernández F (2013a) Application of gas chromatography-(triple quadrupole) mass spectrometry with atmospheric pressure chemical ionization for the determination of multiclass pesticides in fruits and vegetables. J Chromatogr A 1314:224–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- EURL – SRM – Analytical Observations Report (2017) Quantification of residues of folpet and captan in QuEChERS extracts, version 3.1, CVUA Stuttgart, Germany, Available from: http://www.eurl-pesticides.eu/userfiles/file/EurlSRM/meth_CaptanFolpet_EurlSRM.pdf. Accessed 20 June 2018
- Gallagher ML (2005) Vitaminas. In: Mahan LK, Escott-stump S (eds) Krause, alimentos, nutrição & dietoterapia, 11th edn. Roca, São Paulo, pp 72–114Google Scholar
- García-Olmo J, De Pedro E, Garrido A, Paredes A, Sanabria C, Santolalla M, Salas J, García-Hierro JR, González I, García-Cachan MD, Guirao J (2002) Determination of the precision of the fatty acid analysis of Iberian pig fat by gas chromatography. Results of a mini collaborative study. Meat Sci 60:103–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Guimarães JA, Filho, MM, Moura, AP, Carvalho, ADF (2012) Technical Release 82 – ISSN 1414.9850. Available from: http://www.cnph.embrapa.br/paginas/serie_documentos/publicacoes2012/cot_82.pdf. Accessed 27 March 2018
- INMETRO, Instituto Nacional de Metrologia, Normalizacão e Qualidade Industrial (2017) Orientacões sobre validação de métodos de ensaios químicos, DOQ-CGCRE-008, Rev 6, Nov 2017Google Scholar
- Kuhn ER (2002) Water injections in GC – how wet can you get? LCGC N Am 20:474–478Google Scholar
- Lehotay SJ, de Kok A, Hiemstra M, Van Bodegraven P (2005) Validation of a fast and easy method for the determination of residues from 229 pesticides in fruits and vegetables using gas and liquid chromatography and mass spectrometric detection. J AOAC Int 88:595–614Google Scholar
- Orso D, Martins ML, Donato FF, Rizzetti TM, Kemmerich M, Adaime MB, Zanella R (2014) Multiresidue determination of pesticide residues in honey by modified QuEChERS method and gas chromatography with electron capture detection. J Braz Chem Soc 25:1355–1364Google Scholar
- SANTE 11813/2017, European Comission (2017) Guidance document on analytical quality control and method validation procedures for pesticide residues and analysis in food and feedGoogle Scholar
- Viera MS, Rizzetti TM, de Souza MP, Martins ML, Prestes OD, Adaime MB, Zanella R (2017) Multiresidue determination of pesticides in crop plants by the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe method and ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry using a calibration based on a single level standard addition in the sample. J Chromatogr A 1526:119–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar