Preparation of a reference material for tea containing five pesticide residues and its evaluation in an interlaboratory comparison study in China
Accreditation and Quality Assurance, ISSN: 1432-0517, Vol: 27, Issue: 2, Page: 93-101
2022
- 4Citations
- 5Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
Monitoring pesticide residues is a key item in the field of food safety. Tea matrices represent a challenge in pesticide analysis due to the high content of coextracts. An interlaboratory comparison was organized to assess the performance of 73 laboratories, from 28 regions in China, on the quantification of five pesticide residues in tea matrix reference material in order to ensure the accuracy, reliability and comparability of monitored pesticide residues in foods. The tea matrix reference material spiked with pesticides was prepared according to ISO 17034. Briefly, blank green tea was spiked with bifenthrin, permethrin, fenpropathrin, buprofezin and imidacloprid, smashed, sieved, homogenized and bottled. It was assessed to be sufficiently homogeneous and stable. Participant laboratories were requested to submit quantification results with detailed analytical protocols. Assigned values were obtained from consensus values by robust analysis, and the results were assessed using z scores. The robust standard deviations for five pesticides were lower than the expected standard deviations in our interlaboratory comparison. In total, 93.8 % (255/272) of the results were acceptable (|z|≤ 2.0) and 82.2 % (60/73) of participant laboratories had satisfactory performance in pesticide residues quantification. Analytical protocols of extraction, cleanup and quantification methods were reviewed to assess their impacts on the results. Overall, a tea matrix reference material was successfully prepared for an interlaboratory comparison, and the results indicate that most of domestic laboratories have acceptable capability in pesticides quantification, while a few of them need to further optimize their protocols to improve performance.
Bibliographic Details
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know