MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1588867865 · doi:10.1080/03601234.2015.1028833

Validation of QuEChERS method for the determination of 36 pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables from Ghana, using gas chromatography with electron capture and pulsed flame photometric detectors

2015· article· en· W1588867865 on OpenAlexaff
Augustine Donkor, Paul Osei-Fosu, Stephen Nyarko, Robert Kingsford-Adaboh, Brajesh Dubey, I. K. Asante

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part B · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersUniversity of Ghana
KeywordsQuechersChromatographyElectron capture detectorChemistryMass spectrometryGas chromatographyExtraction (chemistry)Detection limitPesticideEthyl acetateGas chromatography–mass spectrometryPesticide residue

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, "Quick, Easy, Cheap, Effective, Rugged and Safe" 'QuEChERS' method was modified for the determination of 36 pesticides fortified at (0.01-1.0) mg kg(-1) in three vegetables and a fruit (lettuce, carrot, tomatoes and pineapples respectively) from Ghana. The method involved extraction with acetonitrile, phase separation with primary secondary amine and magnesium sulfate; the final injection solution was reconstituted in ethyl acetate. Organochlorine and synthetic pyrethroids residues were detected with electron capture detector whereas organophosphorus, pulsed flame photometric detector was used. The recoveries at different concentration levels (0.01, 0.1 and 1.0 mg kg(-1)) were in the range of 83% and 93% with relative standard deviation ranging from 2% to 10% (n = 5) and the coefficient of determination (R(2)) was greater than 0.99 for all the 36 pesticides. The method was successfully tested on 120 real samples from Accra markets and this proved to be useful for monitoring purposes particularly in laboratories that have no gas chromatography-mass spectrometry and liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.488
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part BSame topicPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyFrench-language works237,207