Kruve Anneli, Künnapas Allan, Herodes Koit, Leito Ivo
Institute of Chemistry, University of Tartu, Jakobi 2, 51014 Tartu, Estonia.
J Chromatogr A. 2008 Apr 11;1187(1-2):58-66. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2008.01.077. Epub 2008 Feb 6.
Three sample preparation methods: Luke method (AOAC 985.22), QuEChERS (quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe) and matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) were applied to different fruits and vegetables for analysis of 14 pesticide residues by high-performance liquid chromatography with electrospray ionization-mass spectrometry (HPLC/ESI/MS). Matrix effect, recovery and process efficiency of the sample preparation methods applied to different fruits and vegetables were compared. The Luke method was found to produce least matrix effect. On an average the best recoveries were obtained with the QuEChERS method. MSPD gave unsatisfactory recoveries for some basic pesticide residues. Comparison of matrix effects for different apple varieties showed high variability for some residues. It was demonstrated that the amount of co-extracting compounds that cause ionization suppression of aldicarb depends on the apple variety as well as on the sample preparation method employed.
卢克方法(美国官方分析化学师协会方法985.22)、QuEChERS方法(快速、简便、廉价、高效、耐用且安全)和基质固相分散法(MSPD),对不同水果和蔬菜进行处理,通过高效液相色谱-电喷雾电离质谱联用仪(HPLC/ESI/MS)分析14种农药残留。比较了应用于不同水果和蔬菜的样品制备方法的基质效应、回收率和处理效率。发现卢克方法产生的基质效应最小。平均而言,QuEChERS方法获得的回收率最佳。MSPD方法对某些碱性农药残留的回收率不理想。不同苹果品种的基质效应比较表明,某些残留存在高度变异性。结果表明,导致涕灭威电离抑制的共萃取化合物的量取决于苹果品种以及所采用的样品制备方法。