Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged, and Safe (QuEChERS) Extraction

A simple, fast, and inexpensive method for the determination of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables is introduced. The procedure involves initial single-phase extraction of 10 g sample with 10 mL acetonitrile, followed by liquid–liquid partitioning formed by addition of 4 g anhydrous MgSO4 plus 1 g NaCl. Removal of residual water and cleanup are performed simultaneously by using a rapid procedure called dispersive solid-phase extraction (dispersive-SPE), in which 150 mg anhydrous MgSO4 and 25 mg primary secondary amine (PSA) sorbent are simply mixed with 1 mL acetonitrile extract. The dispersive-SPE with PSA effectively removes many polar matrix components, such as organic acids, certain polar pigments, and sugars, to some extent from the food extracts. Gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS) is then used for quantitative and confirmatory analysis of GC-amenable pesticides. Recoveries between 85 and 101% (mostly >95%) and repeatabilities typically <5% have been achieved for a wide range of fortified pesticides, including very polar and basic compounds such as methamidophos, acephate, omethoate, imazalil, and thiabendazole. Using this method, a single chemist can prepare a batch of 6 previously chopped samples in <30 min with approximately $1 (U.S.) of materials per sample.

This article describes the comparison of different versions of an easy, rapid and low-cost sample preparation approach for the determination of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables by concurrent use of gas and liquid chromatography (GC and LC) coupled to mass spectrometry (MS) for detection. The sample preparation approach is known as QuEChERS, which stands for "quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe". The three compared versions were based on the original unbuffered method, which was first published in 2003, and two interlaboratory validated versions: AOAC Official Method 2007.01, which uses acetate buffering, and European Committee for Standardization (CEN) Standard Method EN 15662, which calls for citrate buffering. LC-MS/MS and GC-MS analyses using each method were tested from 50 to 1000ng/g in apple-blueberry sauce, peas and limes spiked with 32 representative pesticides. As expected, the results were excellent (overall average of 98% recoveries with 10% RSD) using all 3 versions, except the unbuffered method gave somewhat lower recoveries for the few pH-dependent pesticides. The different methods worked equally well for all matrices tested with equivalent amounts of matrix co-extractives measured, matrix effects on quantification and chemical noise from matrix in the chromatographic backgrounds. The acetate-buffered version gave higher and more consistent recoveries for pymetrozine than the other versions in all 3 matrices and for thiabendazole in limes. None of the versions consistently worked well for chlorothalonil, folpet or tolylfluanid in peas, but the acetate-buffered method gave better results for screening of those pesticides. Also, due to the recent shortage in acetonitrile (MeCN), ethyl acetate (EtOAc) was evaluated as a substitute solvent in the acetate-buffered QuEChERS version, but it generally led to less clean extracts and lower recoveries of pymetrozine, thiabendazole, acephate, methamidophos, omethoate and dimethoate. In summary, the acetate-buffered version of QuEChERS using MeCN exhibited advantages compared to the other tested methods in the study. Published by Elsevier B.V.