Cargando…

Korean Proficiency Tests for Pesticide Residues in Rice: Comparison of Various Proficiency Testing Evaluation Methods and Identification of Critical Factors for Multiresidue Analysis

Establishing pesticide safety management for agricultural products necessitates accurate pesticide analysis at analytical laboratories. Proficiency testing is regarded an effective method for quality control. Herein, proficiency tests were carried out for residual pesticide analysis in laboratories....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Hyosub, Jung, Gunhee, Min, Juhyeon, Kim, Hyanghee, Jeong, Wontae, Kim, Taekkyum
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10217400/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37238903
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods12102085
Descripción
Sumario:Establishing pesticide safety management for agricultural products necessitates accurate pesticide analysis at analytical laboratories. Proficiency testing is regarded an effective method for quality control. Herein, proficiency tests were carried out for residual pesticide analysis in laboratories. All samples satisfied the homogeneity and stability criteria of the ISO 13528 standard. The obtained results were analyzed using the ISO 17043 z-score evaluation. Both individual pesticide and multiresidue proficiency evaluations were performed, and the proportion of z-scores within the ±2 range (“Satisfactory” rating) obtained for seven pesticides ranged 79–97%. Of the laboratories, 83% were classified as Category A using the category A/B method, and these also received AAA ratings in the triple-A evaluations. Furthermore, 66–74% of the laboratories were rated “Good” via five evaluation methods based on their z-scores. The sum of weighted z-scores and scaled sum of squared z-scores were considered as the most suitable evaluation techniques, as they compensated for the drawbacks of good results and corrected the poor results. To identify the main factors affecting laboratory analysis, the experience of the analyst, sample weight, calibration curve preparation method, and cleanup status were considered. A dispersive solid phase extraction cleanup significantly improved the results (p < 0.01).