Comparison of Extraction and Clean-up Methods Modified in Different Ways for the Determination of Pesticide Residues in Bees

Orhan Dincay, H. Civelek
{"title":"Comparison of Extraction and Clean-up Methods Modified in Different Ways for the Determination of Pesticide Residues in Bees","authors":"Orhan Dincay, H. Civelek","doi":"10.58465/natprobiotech.2022.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As a result of the unconscious use of pesticides, honeybees are adversely affected, thus causing colony losses all over the world. In this research, different extraction and clean-up methods were compared on bee samples based on the QuEChERS method which is the most widely used pesticide analysis method in food. This research includes application studies for the multi residue method (MRM), which allows analysis of more than one pesticide. During the extraction phase, 7 different methods were compared, while the method with the most suitable repeatability and recovery values among these methods was taken to the clean-up phase. In the clean-up phase, 5 different clean-up methods were tried on the method which yielded the best values in extraction. In terms of average percentage recovery values, the 1stextraction method ranks first with 72 active substances between 70-120%, and the 3rd clean-up method with 92 active substances. Thus, while the number of active substances with suitable recovery values in the selected extraction method was 72, it increased to 92 with the continuation of the clean-up method, achieving a success rate of 92%. It is recommended to use this method in pesticide residue analyzes in bees with its outstanding features such as completing the analyzes in a short time, working easily with the infrastructure that can be found in all control laboratories, low analysis costs, ease of use, and reliability.","PeriodicalId":346817,"journal":{"name":"Natural Products and Biotechnology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Natural Products and Biotechnology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58465/natprobiotech.2022.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As a result of the unconscious use of pesticides, honeybees are adversely affected, thus causing colony losses all over the world. In this research, different extraction and clean-up methods were compared on bee samples based on the QuEChERS method which is the most widely used pesticide analysis method in food. This research includes application studies for the multi residue method (MRM), which allows analysis of more than one pesticide. During the extraction phase, 7 different methods were compared, while the method with the most suitable repeatability and recovery values among these methods was taken to the clean-up phase. In the clean-up phase, 5 different clean-up methods were tried on the method which yielded the best values in extraction. In terms of average percentage recovery values, the 1stextraction method ranks first with 72 active substances between 70-120%, and the 3rd clean-up method with 92 active substances. Thus, while the number of active substances with suitable recovery values in the selected extraction method was 72, it increased to 92 with the continuation of the clean-up method, achieving a success rate of 92%. It is recommended to use this method in pesticide residue analyzes in bees with its outstanding features such as completing the analyzes in a short time, working easily with the infrastructure that can be found in all control laboratories, low analysis costs, ease of use, and reliability.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
不同提取和净化方法对测定蜜蜂体内农药残留量的影响
由于无意识地使用杀虫剂,蜜蜂受到了不利影响,从而导致世界各地的蜂群损失。本研究以食品中应用最广泛的农药分析方法——QuEChERS法为基础,对蜜蜂样品进行了不同提取和清理方法的比较。本研究包括多残留法(MRM)的应用研究,该方法可以分析多种农药。在提取阶段,比较了7种不同的方法,并将其中重复性和回收率值最合适的方法带入净化阶段。在净化阶段,对5种不同的净化方法进行了试验,得到了最佳的萃取值。从平均百分比回收率来看,提取方法1以72种活性物质排名第一,在70-120%之间;清理方法3以92种活性物质排名第三。由此可知,所选提取方法中具有适宜回收率的活性物质为72种,而随着清理方法的继续,其回收率增加到92种,提取率达到92%。该方法具有分析时间短、易于使用所有对照实验室的基础设施、分析成本低、易于使用、可靠等优点,推荐用于蜜蜂的农药残留分析。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Conservation in Tissue Culture of Malacocarpus crithmifolius (Retz.) Fisch. C.A.Mey. - Relict Species from Mangyshlak Investigation of Viburnum opulus L. Apoptotic Effect on LNCaP Prostate Cancer Cell Line Comparison of the Therapeutic Effect of Sinapic Acid in Drug-Resistant and Non-Resistant Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells Status of Bacterial Entomopathogens Used for Microbial Control of Arthropod Pests in Iran and Turkey Biological Evaluation of Azide Derivative as Antibacterial and Anticancer Agents
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1