↓ Skip to main content

Use of a quality control approach to assess measurement uncertainty in the comparison of sample processing techniques in the analysis of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, February 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
Use of a quality control approach to assess measurement uncertainty in the comparison of sample processing techniques in the analysis of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, February 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00216-018-0905-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Steven J. Lehotay, Lijun Han, Yelena Sapozhnikova

Abstract

In routine monitoring of foods, reduction of analyzed test portion size generally leads to higher sample throughput, less labor, and lower costs of monitoring, but to meet analytical needs, the test portions still need to accurately represent the original bulk samples. With the intent to determine minimal fit-for-purpose sample size, analyses were conducted for up to 93 incurred and added pesticide residues in 10 common fruits and vegetables processed using different sample comminution equipment. The commodities studied consisted of apple, banana, broccoli, celery, grape, green bean, peach, potato, orange, and squash. A Blixer® was used to chop the bulk samples at room temperature, and test portions of 15, 10, 5, 2, and 1 g were taken for analysis (n = 4 each). Additionally, 40 g subsamples (after freezing) were further comminuted using a cryomill device with liquid nitrogen, and test portions of 5, 2, and 1 g were analyzed (n = 4 each). Both low-pressure gas chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LPGC-MS/MS) and ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography (UHPLC)-MS/MS were used for analysis. An empirical approach was followed to isolate and estimate the measurement uncertainty contribution of each step in the overall method by adding quality control spikes prior to each step. Addition of an internal standard during extraction normalized the sample preparation step to 0% error contribution, and coefficients of variation (CVs) were 6-7% for the analytical steps (LC and GC) and 6-9% for the sample processing techniques. In practice, overall CVs averaged 9-11% among the different analytes, commodities, batches, test portion weights, and analytical and sample processing methods. On average, CVs increased up to 4% and bias 8-12% when using 1-2 g test portions vs. 10-15 g. Graphical abstract Efficient quality control approach to include sample processing.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 12%
Other 2 8%
Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Other 5 19%
Unknown 9 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 15%
Chemistry 4 15%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 8%
Engineering 2 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 9 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,688,303
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#6,621
of 9,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#341,212
of 446,248 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#120
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,635 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 446,248 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.