“…For instance, GC [15] and LC‐MS [3,9,16,17] are sensitive and reliable techniques but their high cost, nonportable characteristics, need of skilled technicians, matrix effect, and need of chemical derivatization of polar analytes, such as ATP in GC, make these unsuitable for the routine analysis of pesticide residues in various matrices [2,4,5,7,18]. Whereas, conventional HPLC equipped with UV or DAD is a commonly used alternative technique because of its low cost and versatility [3,8,10,14]. But its successful application is impeded by poor selectivity and sensitivity of UV detector for the accurate quantification of neonicotinoids in the sample matrices [6,7,12,19,20].…”