Off-Line SFE-MEKC Determination of Diuron in Sugar Cane and Orange Samples

Lanças, Fernando Mauro; Rissato, Sandra Regina; Galhiane, Mário Sérgio

doi:10.1002/(sici)1521-4168(19980901)21:9<519::aid-jhrc519>3.0.co;2-s

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…CE has been combined with a considerable number of alternative extraction techniques as liquid-liquid extraction (LLE) (Goodwin, Startin, Keely, & Goodall, 2003;Lanças, Rissato, & Galhiane, 1998), solid-phase extraction (SPE) Juan-García et al, 2004), solid-phase microextraction (SPME) (Ollanketo, Peltoketo, Hartonen, Hiltunen, & Riekkola, 2002), stir-bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) Juan-García et al, 2004) and pressurised liquid extraction (PLE) (Font, Juan-García, & Picó, 2007;Herrero, Simó, Ibáñez, & Cifuentes, 2005;Rodríguez, Mañes, & Picó, 2003;Rodríguez, Picó, Font, & Mañes, 2002;Simó et al, 2005) based in a relative wide variety of analytes as pesticide, antibiotics, antioxidants, proteins, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Pressurised liquid extraction and capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry for the analysis of pesticide residues in fruits from Valencian markets, Spain

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Pressurised liquid extraction and capillary electrophoresis–mass spectrometry for the analysis of pesticide residues in fruits from Valencian markets, Spain

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Several methods based on supercritical fluid extraction [9,10], solidphase extraction [11,12], solid-phase microextraction [13], stir bar sorptive extraction [14][15][16] and matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) [1,5,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] have been developed to overcome the drawbacks caused by using high amounts of glassware and toxic solvents in the classical liquid extraction methods.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Matrix effects observed during pesticides residue analysis in fruits by GC

Freitas¹,

Lanças²

2009

J of Separation Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of the sample matrix in the GC-electron-capture detection analysis of the pesticides dimethoate, diazinon, chlorothalonil, parathion methyl and fenitrothion in fruits samples has been studied. Experiments have been carried out where the pesticide responses in standard solutions prepared in selected solvent were compared with their response when present in apple, mango, papaya, banana, pineapple and melon extracts. The presence of matrix effects (MEs) and their extent were shown to be simultaneously influenced by several factors (matrix concentration, matrix type, pesticide concentration, analytical range). Pronounced MEs were observed particularly for dimethoate and diazinon in all matrices tested; in lower concentrations, all pesticides presented significant ME. The other pesticides presented variable ME. Higher ME enhancement was detected at lower pesticide concentration levels of and/or at higher matrix concentration solutions. The ME detected for fenitrothion, in the analytical range evaluated, were dependent on matrix type. For each pesticide, solvent and matrix-matched calibrations were compared for all fruit samples, and it could be concluded that quantitation based on standard solutions prepared in blank matrix extract (matrix-matched calibration) should be used to compensate the MEs and to obtain more accurate results for the pesticides studied. IntroductionMost of the pesticide determination in food samples is usually performed using GC in combination with electroncapture detection (ECD) [1,2], nitrogen-phosphorus detection [2,3] or MS detection [4][5][6].Analytical procedures for determination of pesticides in fruit matrices are usually based on an extraction step, using conventional liquid-liquid extraction, followed by a clean-up procedure prior to chromatographic analysis [7,8]. Several methods based on supercritical fluid extraction [9, 10], solidphase extraction [11,12], solid-phase microextraction [13], stir bar sorptive extraction [14][15][16] and matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD) [1,5,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] have been developed to overcome the drawbacks caused by using high amounts of glassware and toxic solvents in the classical liquid extraction methods.MSPD has proven useful as an extraction technique for the determination of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables by GC [1,4] or LC [18,19]. The MSPD procedure allows the extraction and cleanup of analytes in a single step and is based on the dispersion of the sample on an adsorbent, such as florisil, C18, alumina or silica, followed by eluting with a small amount of solvent [24]. However, in spite of the fact that most of these modern methods provide a simple and rapid procedure for the determination of pesticides in fruits matrices, they do not avoid the presence of co-extracted matrix components that can result in a matrix effect (ME) in the pesticide analysis [25][26][27].MEs are notoriously variable in occurrence and intensity, the GC technique being particularly prone to them [5,28]. The ME is a phenomenon th...

show abstract