Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 460

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Evaluation of Two Fast and Easy Methods for Pesticide Residue Analysis in Fatty Food Matrixes

Lehotay, Steven J, Maštovská, Kateřina, Yun, Seon Jong·2005·Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL

Abstract

Two rapid methods of sample preparation and analysis of fatty foods (e.g., milk, eggs, and avocado) were evaluated and compared for 32 pesticide residues representing a wide range of physicochemical properties. One method, dubbed the quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged, and safe (QuEChERS) method for pesticide residue analysis, entailed extraction of 15 g sample with 15 mL acetonitrile (MeCN) containing 1% acetic acid followed by addition of 6 g anhydrous magnesium sulfate and 1.5 g sodium acetate. After centrifugation, 1 mL of the buffered MeCN extract underwent a cleanup step (in a technique known as dispersive solid-phase extraction) using 50 mg each of C18 and primary secondary amine sorbents plus 150 mg MgSO4. The second method incorporated a form of matrix solid-phase dispersion (MSPD), in which 0.5 g sample plus 2 g C18 and 2 g anhydrous sodium sulfate was mixed in a mortar and pestle and added above a 2 g Florisil column on a vacuum manifold. Then, 5 × 2 mL MeCN was used to elute the pesticide analytes from the sample into a collection tube, and the extract was concentrated to 0.5 mL by evaporation. Extracts in both methods were analyzed concurrently by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. The recoveries of semi-polar and polar pesticides were typically 100% in both methods (except that basic pesticides, such as thiabendazole and imazalil, were not recovered in the MSPD method), but recovery of nonpolar pesticides decreased as fat content of the sample increased. This trend was more pronounced in the QuEChERS method, in which case the most lipophilic analyte tested, hexachlorobenzene, gave 27 ± 1% recovery (n = 6) in avocado (15% fat) with a <10 ng/g limit of quantitation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/jaoac/88.2.630

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 460

Metadata

Authors
Lehotay, S. J., Maštovská, K., & Yun, S. J.
Venue
Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL
Published
2005-03-01
Volume
88
Issue
2
Pages
630-638
ISSN
  • 1060-3271 (ISSN-L)
  • 1944-7922
OpenAlex
W1512476261
Cited by
460
References
0
FWCI
23.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evaluation of Two Fast and Easy Methods for Pesticide Residue Analysis in Fatty Food Matrixes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jaoac/88.2.630
The paper
Lehotay, S. J., Maštovská, K., & Yun, S. J. (2005). Evaluation of Two Fast and Easy Methods for Pesticide Residue Analysis in Fatty Food Matrixes. Journal of AOAC INTERNATIONAL. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaoac/88.2.630

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.