Loading…

Guidelines for the validation of qualitative multi-residue methods used to detect pesticides in food

There is a current trend for many laboratories to develop and use qualitative gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) based multi‐residue methods (MRMs) in order to greatly increase the number of pesticides that they can target. Before these q...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Drug testing and analysis 2012-08, Vol.4 (S1), p.10-16
Main Authors: Mol, H. G. J., Reynolds, S. L., Fussell, R. J., Štajnbaher, D.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3
container_end_page 16
container_issue S1
container_start_page 10
container_title Drug testing and analysis
container_volume 4
creator Mol, H. G. J.
Reynolds, S. L.
Fussell, R. J.
Štajnbaher, D.
description There is a current trend for many laboratories to develop and use qualitative gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) based multi‐residue methods (MRMs) in order to greatly increase the number of pesticides that they can target. Before these qualitative MRMs can be used for the monitoring of pesticide residues in food, their fitness‐for‐purpose needs to be established by initial method validation. This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. As expected, the ease of detection was often dependent on the particular pesticide/commodity combinations that were targeted, especially at the lowest concentrations tested (0.01 mg/kg). The two examples also clearly demonstrated that the percentage of pesticides detected was dependent on many factors, but particularly on the capabilities of the automated software/library packages and the parameters and threshold settings selected for operation. Another very important consideration was the condition of chromatographic system and detector at the time of analysis. If the system was relatively clean, then the detection rate was much higher than if it had become contaminated over time from previous injections of sample extracts. The parameters and criteria suggested for method validation of qualitative MRMs are aimed at achieving a 95% confidence level of pesticide detection. However, the presence of any pesticide that is ‘detected’ will need subsequent analysis for quantification and, depending on the qualitative method used, further evidence of identity. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. There is a current trend to use qualitative multi‐residue methods (MRMs) for the detection of pesticide residues in food based on gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS). This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. The most important factors influencing the effectiveness of the methods, in terms of their selectivity and sensitivity, are highlighted and discussed.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/dta.1364
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wagen</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wageningen_narcis_oai_library_wur_nl_wurpubs_433389</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1032737880</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kUtv3CAUhVHVqHlVyi-IWHbjFIxtcHZR2k4qjdIuJuoSgblOSBgz4ZHHvy-jONNVWXC50rkf5-ogdELJGSWk_mqSOqOsaz6gA9o3dcU7Sj_u3oTto8MY7wnpmpq1n9B-XYuWsrY9QGaRrQFnJ4h49AGnO8BPylmjkvUT9iN-zKVNpX0CvM4u2SpAtCaXDtKdNxHnCAYnjw0kGBLeQEx2KNSI7VSg3hyjvVG5CJ_neoRufnxfXV5Vy1-Ln5cXy2poyqmEZrRldNCjaNTYjYLqumwlulqThhKmhW4E4W3b814JrqkZdS8EEcoQrbuBHaHzN-6zuoXJTuWSkwqDjdIrK53VQYVX-ZyDnNy2bLKOsmGMib4Mf3kb3gT_mMsOcm3jAM6pCXyOshioOePlv3_SIfgYA4xyE-x6i6ZEbgORJRC5DaRIT2dq1mswO-F7AkVQzZ6tg9f_guS31cUMnPU2JnjZ6VV4kF2x18o_1wu5Wv7mnC-7MvoXJuWlMA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1032737880</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Guidelines for the validation of qualitative multi-residue methods used to detect pesticides in food</title><source>Wiley:Jisc Collections:Wiley Read and Publish Open Access 2024-2025 (reading list)</source><creator>Mol, H. G. J. ; Reynolds, S. L. ; Fussell, R. J. ; Štajnbaher, D.</creator><creatorcontrib>Mol, H. G. J. ; Reynolds, S. L. ; Fussell, R. J. ; Štajnbaher, D.</creatorcontrib><description>There is a current trend for many laboratories to develop and use qualitative gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) based multi‐residue methods (MRMs) in order to greatly increase the number of pesticides that they can target. Before these qualitative MRMs can be used for the monitoring of pesticide residues in food, their fitness‐for‐purpose needs to be established by initial method validation. This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. As expected, the ease of detection was often dependent on the particular pesticide/commodity combinations that were targeted, especially at the lowest concentrations tested (0.01 mg/kg). The two examples also clearly demonstrated that the percentage of pesticides detected was dependent on many factors, but particularly on the capabilities of the automated software/library packages and the parameters and threshold settings selected for operation. Another very important consideration was the condition of chromatographic system and detector at the time of analysis. If the system was relatively clean, then the detection rate was much higher than if it had become contaminated over time from previous injections of sample extracts. The parameters and criteria suggested for method validation of qualitative MRMs are aimed at achieving a 95% confidence level of pesticide detection. However, the presence of any pesticide that is ‘detected’ will need subsequent analysis for quantification and, depending on the qualitative method used, further evidence of identity. © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd. There is a current trend to use qualitative multi‐residue methods (MRMs) for the detection of pesticide residues in food based on gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS). This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. The most important factors influencing the effectiveness of the methods, in terms of their selectivity and sensitivity, are highlighted and discussed.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1942-7603</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1942-7611</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/dta.1364</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22851355</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods ; food ; Food Analysis - methods ; Food Contamination - analysis ; Fruit - chemistry ; fruits ; Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry - methods ; gas-chromatography ; Limit of Detection ; liquid-chromatography ; Mass Spectrometry - methods ; mass-spectrometric detection ; method validation ; multi-residue methods ; Pesticide Residues - analysis ; pesticides ; Pesticides - analysis ; qualitative ; Reproducibility of Results ; vegetables ; Vegetables - chemistry</subject><ispartof>Drug testing and analysis, 2012-08, Vol.4 (S1), p.10-16</ispartof><rights>2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>Wageningen University &amp; Research</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22851355$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mol, H. G. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, S. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fussell, R. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Štajnbaher, D.</creatorcontrib><title>Guidelines for the validation of qualitative multi-residue methods used to detect pesticides in food</title><title>Drug testing and analysis</title><addtitle>Drug Test. Analysis</addtitle><description>There is a current trend for many laboratories to develop and use qualitative gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) based multi‐residue methods (MRMs) in order to greatly increase the number of pesticides that they can target. Before these qualitative MRMs can be used for the monitoring of pesticide residues in food, their fitness‐for‐purpose needs to be established by initial method validation. This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. As expected, the ease of detection was often dependent on the particular pesticide/commodity combinations that were targeted, especially at the lowest concentrations tested (0.01 mg/kg). The two examples also clearly demonstrated that the percentage of pesticides detected was dependent on many factors, but particularly on the capabilities of the automated software/library packages and the parameters and threshold settings selected for operation. Another very important consideration was the condition of chromatographic system and detector at the time of analysis. If the system was relatively clean, then the detection rate was much higher than if it had become contaminated over time from previous injections of sample extracts. The parameters and criteria suggested for method validation of qualitative MRMs are aimed at achieving a 95% confidence level of pesticide detection. However, the presence of any pesticide that is ‘detected’ will need subsequent analysis for quantification and, depending on the qualitative method used, further evidence of identity. © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd. There is a current trend to use qualitative multi‐residue methods (MRMs) for the detection of pesticide residues in food based on gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS). This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. The most important factors influencing the effectiveness of the methods, in terms of their selectivity and sensitivity, are highlighted and discussed.</description><subject>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods</subject><subject>food</subject><subject>Food Analysis - methods</subject><subject>Food Contamination - analysis</subject><subject>Fruit - chemistry</subject><subject>fruits</subject><subject>Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry - methods</subject><subject>gas-chromatography</subject><subject>Limit of Detection</subject><subject>liquid-chromatography</subject><subject>Mass Spectrometry - methods</subject><subject>mass-spectrometric detection</subject><subject>method validation</subject><subject>multi-residue methods</subject><subject>Pesticide Residues - analysis</subject><subject>pesticides</subject><subject>Pesticides - analysis</subject><subject>qualitative</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>vegetables</subject><subject>Vegetables - chemistry</subject><issn>1942-7603</issn><issn>1942-7611</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kUtv3CAUhVHVqHlVyi-IWHbjFIxtcHZR2k4qjdIuJuoSgblOSBgz4ZHHvy-jONNVWXC50rkf5-ogdELJGSWk_mqSOqOsaz6gA9o3dcU7Sj_u3oTto8MY7wnpmpq1n9B-XYuWsrY9QGaRrQFnJ4h49AGnO8BPylmjkvUT9iN-zKVNpX0CvM4u2SpAtCaXDtKdNxHnCAYnjw0kGBLeQEx2KNSI7VSg3hyjvVG5CJ_neoRufnxfXV5Vy1-Ln5cXy2poyqmEZrRldNCjaNTYjYLqumwlulqThhKmhW4E4W3b814JrqkZdS8EEcoQrbuBHaHzN-6zuoXJTuWSkwqDjdIrK53VQYVX-ZyDnNy2bLKOsmGMib4Mf3kb3gT_mMsOcm3jAM6pCXyOshioOePlv3_SIfgYA4xyE-x6i6ZEbgORJRC5DaRIT2dq1mswO-F7AkVQzZ6tg9f_guS31cUMnPU2JnjZ6VV4kF2x18o_1wu5Wv7mnC-7MvoXJuWlMA</recordid><startdate>201208</startdate><enddate>201208</enddate><creator>Mol, H. G. J.</creator><creator>Reynolds, S. L.</creator><creator>Fussell, R. J.</creator><creator>Štajnbaher, D.</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>QVL</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201208</creationdate><title>Guidelines for the validation of qualitative multi-residue methods used to detect pesticides in food</title><author>Mol, H. G. J. ; Reynolds, S. L. ; Fussell, R. J. ; Štajnbaher, D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods</topic><topic>food</topic><topic>Food Analysis - methods</topic><topic>Food Contamination - analysis</topic><topic>Fruit - chemistry</topic><topic>fruits</topic><topic>Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry - methods</topic><topic>gas-chromatography</topic><topic>Limit of Detection</topic><topic>liquid-chromatography</topic><topic>Mass Spectrometry - methods</topic><topic>mass-spectrometric detection</topic><topic>method validation</topic><topic>multi-residue methods</topic><topic>Pesticide Residues - analysis</topic><topic>pesticides</topic><topic>Pesticides - analysis</topic><topic>qualitative</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>vegetables</topic><topic>Vegetables - chemistry</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mol, H. G. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reynolds, S. L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fussell, R. J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Štajnbaher, D.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>NARCIS:Publications</collection><jtitle>Drug testing and analysis</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mol, H. G. J.</au><au>Reynolds, S. L.</au><au>Fussell, R. J.</au><au>Štajnbaher, D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Guidelines for the validation of qualitative multi-residue methods used to detect pesticides in food</atitle><jtitle>Drug testing and analysis</jtitle><addtitle>Drug Test. Analysis</addtitle><date>2012-08</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>4</volume><issue>S1</issue><spage>10</spage><epage>16</epage><pages>10-16</pages><issn>1942-7603</issn><eissn>1942-7611</eissn><abstract>There is a current trend for many laboratories to develop and use qualitative gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS) based multi‐residue methods (MRMs) in order to greatly increase the number of pesticides that they can target. Before these qualitative MRMs can be used for the monitoring of pesticide residues in food, their fitness‐for‐purpose needs to be established by initial method validation. This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. As expected, the ease of detection was often dependent on the particular pesticide/commodity combinations that were targeted, especially at the lowest concentrations tested (0.01 mg/kg). The two examples also clearly demonstrated that the percentage of pesticides detected was dependent on many factors, but particularly on the capabilities of the automated software/library packages and the parameters and threshold settings selected for operation. Another very important consideration was the condition of chromatographic system and detector at the time of analysis. If the system was relatively clean, then the detection rate was much higher than if it had become contaminated over time from previous injections of sample extracts. The parameters and criteria suggested for method validation of qualitative MRMs are aimed at achieving a 95% confidence level of pesticide detection. However, the presence of any pesticide that is ‘detected’ will need subsequent analysis for quantification and, depending on the qualitative method used, further evidence of identity. © 2012 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd. There is a current trend to use qualitative multi‐residue methods (MRMs) for the detection of pesticide residues in food based on gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC‐MS) and liquid chromatography‐mass spectrometry (LC‐MS). This paper sets out to assess the performances of two such qualitative MRMs against a set of parameters and criteria that might be suitable for their effective validation. The most important factors influencing the effectiveness of the methods, in terms of their selectivity and sensitivity, are highlighted and discussed.</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd</pub><pmid>22851355</pmid><doi>10.1002/dta.1364</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1942-7603
ispartof Drug testing and analysis, 2012-08, Vol.4 (S1), p.10-16
issn 1942-7603
1942-7611
language eng
recordid cdi_wageningen_narcis_oai_library_wur_nl_wurpubs_433389
source Wiley:Jisc Collections:Wiley Read and Publish Open Access 2024-2025 (reading list)
subjects Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods
food
Food Analysis - methods
Food Contamination - analysis
Fruit - chemistry
fruits
Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry - methods
gas-chromatography
Limit of Detection
liquid-chromatography
Mass Spectrometry - methods
mass-spectrometric detection
method validation
multi-residue methods
Pesticide Residues - analysis
pesticides
Pesticides - analysis
qualitative
Reproducibility of Results
vegetables
Vegetables - chemistry
title Guidelines for the validation of qualitative multi-residue methods used to detect pesticides in food
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T01%3A51%3A26IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wagen&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Guidelines%20for%20the%20validation%20of%20qualitative%20multi-residue%20methods%20used%20to%20detect%20pesticides%20in%20food&rft.jtitle=Drug%20testing%20and%20analysis&rft.au=Mol,%20H.%20G.%20J.&rft.date=2012-08&rft.volume=4&rft.issue=S1&rft.spage=10&rft.epage=16&rft.pages=10-16&rft.issn=1942-7603&rft.eissn=1942-7611&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/dta.1364&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wagen%3E1032737880%3C/proquest_wagen%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4444-8b31531cbf84af6f81b2136862b04103b8b480755979a87b1dfb98808ad0bb6c3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1032737880&rft_id=info:pmid/22851355&rfr_iscdi=true