Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar a este item: http://hdl.handle.net/10261/150381
COMPARTIR / EXPORTAR:
logo share SHARE logo core CORE BASE
Visualizar otros formatos: MARC | Dublin Core | RDF | ORE | MODS | METS | DIDL | DATACITE

Invitar a revisión por pares abierta
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorLópez-Blanco, Rafael-
dc.contributor.authorGilbert-López, Bienvenida-
dc.contributor.authorMolina-Díaz, Antonio-
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-25T08:52:12Z-
dc.date.available2017-05-25T08:52:12Z-
dc.date.issued2016-
dc.identifierdoi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2016.06.019-
dc.identifiere-issn: 1873-3778-
dc.identifierissn: 0021-9673-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Chromatography A 1456: 89-104 (2016)-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10261/150381-
dc.description.abstractIn this article we have evaluated the performance of different sorbents for the cleanup step in multiresidue pesticide analysis in fatty vegetable matrices using QuEChERS methodology. The three different matrices tested (olive oil, olives and avocado) were partitioned using acetonitrile prior to cleanup step. Afterwards, the supernatant was purified using different sorbents: C18+PSA (primary secondary amine), Z-Sep (zirconium oxide and C18 dual bonded to silica), Z-Sep (zirconium oxide bonded to silica) and a novel sorbent Enhanced Matrix Removal-Lipid (EMR) whose composition has not been disclosed. The different cleanup strategies were compared for a group of 67 representative pesticides in terms of recovery rates, matrix effects, extract cleanliness and precision using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC–MS/MS). The best extraction efficiencies in olive oil matrix were obtained using EMR, while the results for olives and avocado were pretty similar amongst the different sorbents with an overall lower performance in terms of matrix effects and recovery rates compared to olive oil data, particularly in olives due to the higher complexity and concentration of coextracted species. On the other hand, the average reproducibility was clearly better when EMR sorbent was employed in all selected matrices for most pesticides (RSD < 10% for 45, 52, and 56 pesticides in avocado, olives and olive oil respectively). The best results in terms of matrix effects were also obtained with EMR; with signal suppression lower than 20% for 79%, 16% and 51% of pesticides tested in olive oil, olives and avocado respectively. Using EMR as cleanup sorbent, limits of quantitation using UHPLC–MS/MS, ranged from 0.10 to 90 μg kg, allowing their determination at the low concentration levels demanded by current olive oil regulations in most cases.-
dc.description.sponsorshipThe authors acknowledge funding support from the Regional Government of Andalusia (Spain), Junta de Andalucía (Projects AGR-6066, AGR-6182 and Research Group FQM-323). D.M.G. thanks the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (MINECO) for a Juan de la Cierva postdoctoral contract. J.R.M. acknowledges funding from Plan Propio de Investigacion of Universidad de Jaén (Ref. 2015/00018/001). B.G.L. acknowledges MINECO for her Juan de la Cierva postdoctoral research contract (ref. JCI-2012-12972).-
dc.publisherElsevier-
dc.rightsclosedAccess-
dc.subjectPesticides-
dc.subjectAvocados-
dc.subjectLiquid chromatography-
dc.subjectdSPE-
dc.subjectQuEChERS-
dc.subjectClean-up-
dc.subjectSample treatment-
dc.subjectFatty vegetables-
dc.subjectOlive oil-
dc.subjectOlives-
dc.titleEvaluation of different cleanup sorbents for multiresidue pesticide analysis in fatty vegetable matrices by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry-
dc.typeartículo-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.chroma.2016.06.019-
dc.date.updated2017-05-25T08:52:12Z-
dc.description.versionPeer Reviewed-
dc.language.rfc3066eng-
dc.contributor.funderJunta de Andalucía-
dc.contributor.funderMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad (España)-
dc.contributor.funderUniversidad de Jaén-
dc.relation.csic-
dc.identifier.funderhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003329es_ES
dc.identifier.funderhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100007064es_ES
dc.identifier.funderhttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100011011es_ES
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501es_ES
item.openairetypeartículo-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
Aparece en las colecciones: (CIAL) Artículos
Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato
accesoRestringido.pdf15,38 kBAdobe PDFVista previa
Visualizar/Abrir
Show simple item record

CORE Recommender

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

70
checked on 15-mar-2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

63
checked on 21-feb-2024

Page view(s)

324
checked on 28-mar-2024

Download(s)

102
checked on 28-mar-2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


NOTA: Los ítems de Digital.CSIC están protegidos por copyright, con todos los derechos reservados, a menos que se indique lo contrario.