These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of SPE/d-SPE and QuEChERS-Based Extraction Procedures in Terms of Fungicide Residue Analysis in Wine Samples by HPLC-DAD and LC-QqQ-MS.
    Author: Tuzimski T, Rejczak T, Pieniążek D, Buszewicz G, Teresiński G.
    Journal: J AOAC Int; 2016 Nov 01; 99(6):1436-1443. PubMed ID: 27634101.
    Abstract:
    Two different extraction and clean-up protocols, based on either the SPE/dispersive SPE (d-SPE) or the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe approach, were optimized and compared for determination of six selected fungicides (benalaxyl, metalaxyl, triadimenol, tebuconazole, diniconazole, and epoxiconazole) in wine samples. The pilot study was performed by applying HPLC with diode-array detection, and optimized procedures were easily transferred to the LC triple-quadrupole MS system. Both extraction procedures presented good performance for all the analytes, with recoveries in the range of 70-132% and SDs ≤20%. The d-SPE clean-up step included in both procedures allows obtaining colorless extracts with the majority of coextracted matrix compounds removed. LC with electrospray ionization and tandem MS operating in the multiple reaction monitoring mode provide high sensitivity and selectivity for trace analysis. Both developed procedures were evaluated in terms of commercial wine sample analysis. In three wine samples, metalaxyl and tebuconazole residues were detected at concentrations from 0.14 to 30.7 ng/mL. Both approaches showed satisfactory feasibility for fungicide residue analysis in wine samples.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]