Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10362/179814
Title: Extraction of pesticides from soil using direct-immersion SPME LC-Tips followed by GC–MS/MS
Author: Brinco, João
Carvalho, Raquel
Silva, Marco Gomes da
Guedes, Paula
Ribeiro, Alexandra B.
Mateus, Eduardo P.
Keywords: Analysis
Direct immersion SPME
Pesticide
Soil
soil pesticide extraction
Issue Date: Oct-2024
Abstract: A new method was evaluated and developed for the analysis of pesticides in sandy-loam soil by direct-immersion solid phase microextraction (DI-SPME) followed by gas chromatography tandem-mass spectrometry (GC–MS/MS) determination. Ten pesticides were selected based on a literature survey of the compounds reported to be present in EU soils. The extraction was performed using SPME LC-Tips, a new SPME configuration with the coated fibers attached to a disposable and easy-to-handle micropipette tip, which was immersed into a soil slurry made by the addition of an aqueous solution to the soil sample. Ten experimental parameters were evaluated with a Plackett-Burman design, after which the extraction time and percentage of organic solvent in the aqueous extraction were optimized separately. The two fiber chemistries available (PDMS/DVB and C18) were evaluated in parallel for the entire work. In the final method, slurry samples were made by adding an aqueous solution (6 % methanol v/v) to 2 g of soil. The fiber was conditioned and then inserted, for extraction, into the samples, stirred by a magnetic bar. Afterwards, the analytes were desorbed onto 100 µL of methanol. After the addition of analyte protectants (ethylglycerol, gulonolactone, and sorbitol) the extract was injected into the GC–MS/MS system. Isotopically labelled penconazole was used as internal standard. A calibration was performed by extracting spiked soil with analyte concentrations of 0.1–50 µg/kg. Coefficients of determination of the linear calibration were between 0.94–0.98 for the PDMS/DVB and 0.92–0.99 for the C18. Limits of detection range between 0.01–10 µg/kg for the PDMS/DVB and 0.1–10 µg/kg for the C18. Overall, the C18 analytically outperformed the PDMS/DVB but required a longer extraction time (120 min vs 75 min for the PDMS/DVB). This method allows automation and generates low residual toxic waste, having the potential to be introduced as a greener and simpler alternative to currently used sample preparation methodologies.
Description: LAQV/REQUIMTE (UID/QUI/50006/2020). UI/BD/150867/2021. CEECIND/01969/2020. © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer review: yes
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10362/179814
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2024.465295
ISSN: 0021-9673
Appears in Collections:Home collection (FCT)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1-s2.0-S0021967324006691-main.pdf2,02 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


FacebookTwitterDeliciousLinkedInDiggGoogle BookmarksMySpace
Formato BibTex MendeleyEndnote 

Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.