| Literature DB >> 36235099 |
Xingang Meng1, Lu Wang1, Niao Wang2, Luting Chen1, Qian Huang3.
Abstract
In order to understand the basic situation of pesticide residues in vegetables in China's porcelain capital, four kinds of common vegetables on the market were selected in this study for detection and analysis of pesticide residues. The pesticide residues in vegetables were analyzed through sample selection, optimization of instrument and equipment conditions, and comparison of detection pass rates. The sampling locations were common vegetables purchasing places such as large and medium-sized supermarkets. QuEChERS method was used as the sample pretreatment, and gas chromatography (GC-MS/MS) was used for quantitative analysis. Finally, the exposure risk of pesticides was assessed according to the test results. The results showed that all the pesticides were detected in four kinds of vegetables, but the detected pesticides did not exceed the national standard (GB 2763-2014, China). Moreover, the target risk coefficient (THQ) and risk index (HI) values of four vegetables were less than one, indicating that the combined and toxic effect of pesticide residual mixed contamination was smaller in four vegetables. Therefore, there was no significant harm from people using these vegetables.Entities:
Keywords: GC-MS/MS; ceramic capital; dietary assessment; pesticide residues; vegetables
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36235099 PMCID: PMC9571922 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27196562
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
The standard curve, LOD, LOQ of different pesticide in the four vegetables.
| Vegetable Species | Name of Pesticide | Standard Curve | r2 | LOD (µg/kg) | LOQ (µg/kg) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leeks | Methamidophos | y = 100.4x + 641.2 | 0.9993 | 3.50 | 10.00 |
| Ethoprophos | y = 999.1x + 1617.1 | 0.9991 | 2.00 | 5.00 | |
| Sulfotep | y = 959.5x + 1585.9 | 0.9950 | 1.80 | 10.00 | |
| Chlorpyrifos-methyl | y = 1007.6x + 631.3 | 0.9998 | 0.60 | 1.00 | |
| Chlorpyrifos | y = 1049.4x + 1159.7 | 0.9979 | 0.30 | 1.00 | |
| Dichlorvos | y = 953.4x + 687.8 | 0.9939 | 2.20 | 10.00 | |
| Pyridaben | y = 1167.7x − 471.0 | 0.9961 | 0.60 | 1.00 | |
| Fenethanil | y = 973.2x + 1229.9 | 0.9926 | 4.90 | 10.00 | |
| Cabbage | Dichlorvos | y = 1.2925x + 0.7572 | 0.9949 | 2.00 | 6.67 |
| Omethoate | y = 1.1614x + 1.7412 | 0.9656 | 4.00 | 13.39 | |
| Diazinon | y = 1.0426x + 1.6495 | 0.9726 | 0.25 | 0.84 | |
| Monocrotophos | y = 1.2682x + 0.8314 | 0.9858 | 0.25 | 0.84 | |
| Chlorpyrifos | y = 1.1254x + 1.3404 | 0.9495 | 0.25 | 0.84 | |
| Malathion | y = 0.9084x + 0.9941 | 0.9938 | 0.50 | 1.67 | |
| Methidathion | y = 1.004x + 0.6412 | 0.9993 | 0.12 | 0.41 | |
| Fenethanil | y = 0.9991x + 1.6171 | 0.9991 | 0.01 | 0.02 | |
| Cucumber | Omethoate | y = 1007.6x + 631.3 | 0.9998 | 0.60 | 1.00 |
| Pirimicarb | y = 959.5x + 1585.9 | 0.9950 | 1.80 | 10.00 | |
| Metalaxyl | y = 100.4x + 641.2 | 0.9993 | 3.50 | 10.00 | |
| Triazolone | y = 1007.6x + 631.3 | 0.9998 | 0.40 | 1.00 | |
| Malathion | y = 1049.4x + 1159.7 | 0.9979 | 0.20 | 1.00 | |
| Fenitrothion | y = 953.4x + 687.8 | 0.9939 | 2.20 | 10.00 | |
| Pendimethalin | y = 973.2x + 1229.9 | 0.9926 | 4.90 | 10.00 | |
| Methidathion | y = 1167.7x − 471.0 | 0.9961 | 0.60 | 1.00 | |
| Murphy | Pirimicarb | y = 906.9x + 1239.6 | 0.9956 | 1.50 | 5.00 |
| Triazolone | y = 1292.5x + 757.2 | 0.9949 | 1.70 | 5.00 | |
| Malathion | y = 1161.4x + 174.12 | 0.9656 | 1.00 | 2.00 | |
| Butachlor | y = 1042.6x + 1649.5 | 0.9926 | 0.20 | 1.00 | |
| Posfolan-methyl | y = 1268.2x + 831.4 | 0.9958 | 0.30 | 1.00 | |
| Bifenthrin | y = 1125.4x + 1340.4 | 0.9995 | 0.10 | 1.00 | |
| Triazophos | y = 616.7x + 1543.3 | 0.9932 | 0.20 | 1.00 | |
| Etoxazole | y = 1023.0x + 744.6 | 0.9972 | 0.20 | 1.0 |
Notes: “r2” is the correlation coefficient, “LOD” is the lowest detection limit, “LOQ” indicates the lowest limit of quantification.
Detection results of pesticides residue in leek.
| Order Number | Name of Pesticide | Detection Amount | The Detection Rate (%) | Excessive Scalar | Over Standard Rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Methamidophos | 4 | 20 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 2 | Ethoprophos | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 3 | Sulfotep | 2 | 10 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 4 | Chlorpyrifos-methyl | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 5 | Chlorpyrifos | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 6 | Dichlorvos | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 7 | Pyridaben | 1 | 5 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 8 | Fenethanil | 7 | 35 | N.D. | N.D. |
Notes “N.D.” that means the maximum value of no target pesticide, or the target pesticide did not exceed the national standard in the testing process.
Detection results of pesticides residue in cabbage.
| Order Number | Name of Pesticide | Detection Amount | The Detection Rate (%) | Excessive Scalar | Over Standard Rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dichlorvos | 5 | 25 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 2 | Omethoate | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 3 | Diazinon | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 4 | Monocrotophos | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 5 | Chlorpyrifos | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 6 | Malathion | 8 | 30. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 7 | Methidathion | 4 | 20 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 8 | Fenethanil | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
Notes: “N.D.” that means the maximum value of no target pesticide, or the target pesticide did not exceed the national standard in the testing process.
Detection results of pesticides residue in cucumber.
| Order Number | Name of Pesticide | Detection Amount | The Detection Rate (%) | Excessive Scalar | Over Standard Rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Omethoate | 4 | 20 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 2 | Pirimicarb | 1 | 5 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 3 | Metalaxyl | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 4 | Triazolone | 2 | 10 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 5 | Malathion | 3 | 15 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 6 | Fenitrothion | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 7 | Pendimethalin | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 8 | Methidathion | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
Notes: “N.D.” that means the maximum value of no target pesticide, or the target pesticide did not exceed the national standard in the testing process.
Detection results of pesticides residue in potato.
| Order Number | Name of Pesticide | Detection Amount | The Detection Rate (%) | Excessive Scalar | Over Standard Rate (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pirimicarb | 1 | 5 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 2 | Triazolone | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 3 | Malathion | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 4 | Butachlor | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 5 | Posfolan-methyl | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 6 | Bifenthrin | 6 | 30 | N.D. | N.D. |
| 7 | Triazophos | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. |
| 8 | Etoxazole | 2 | 10 | N.D. | N.D. |
Notes: “N.D.” that means the maximum value of no target pesticide, or the target pesticide did not exceed the national standard in the testing process.
Assessment of each pesticide intake and associated health risks among the four vegetables.
| Vegetable Species | Name of Pesticide | ADI | Ave EDI (×10−3) | Ave THQ | Ave HI | Max EDI (×10−3) | Max THQ | Max HI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Leeks | Methamidophos | 0.2 | 0.803 | 0.0040 | 0.460 | 18.945 | 0.0947 | 0.919 |
| Sulfotep | 0.08 | 1.494 | 0.0187 | 4.210 | 0.0526 | |||
| Pyridaben | 0.005 | 0.398 | 0.0796 | 1.235 | 0.2470 | |||
| Fenethanil | 0.0004 | 0.143 | 0.3575 | 0.210 | 0.5250 | |||
| Cabbage | Dichlorvos | 0.1 | 4.451 | 0.045 | 0.069 | 17.580 | 0.1758 | 0.221 |
| Malathion | 0.07 | 0.745 | 0.011 | 2.085 | 0.0298 | |||
| Methidathion | 0.03 | 0.402 | 0.013 | 0.458 | 0.0153 | |||
| Cucumber | Omethoate | 0.3 | 0.064 | 0.0002 | 0.040 | 0.095 | 0.0003 | 0.082 |
| Pirimicarb | 0.08 | 0.098 | 0.0012 | 0.237 | 0.0030 | |||
| Triazolone | 0.02 | 0.318 | 0.0159 | 0.418 | 0.0209 | |||
| Malathion | 0.004 | 0.092 | 0.0230 | 0.231 | 0.0578 | |||
| Murphy | Pirimicarb | 0.02 | 1.352 | 0.0676 | 0.252 | 3.158 | 0.1579 | 0.685 |
| Bifenthrin | 0.002 | 0.316 | 0.1580 | 0.832 | 0.4160 | |||
| Etoxazole | 0.02 | 0.524 | 0.0262 | 2.225 | 0.1113 |
Notes: “ADI” is allowable daily intake, “EDI” is estimated daily intake, “THQ” indicates the target hazard quotient, “HI” is Hazard Index, “Ave” is Average, “Max” is Maximum.