The Challenges of Pesticide Analysis - LC or GC Triple Quadrupole?

Transcript #

Thank you very much for the introduction here. Now, my first question to both experts is, well, we know that a large number of testing laboratories using triple quadrupole, GC and LC instruments for high throughput for targeted pesticide analysis. Now, based on your experience, what are the main challenges of triple quadrupole analysis, especially when you look at a comprehensive list of pesticides and many different sample types of varying complexity, and you still have to meet the regulatory requirements? And the fast turnaround times? Who would like to start? Well,Katie? Sure.

Katie
So I guess, I guess, um, from my, from my perspective, no matter the technique, if we’re talking about GC and LC, triple quad approach, I think the best the biggest challenge is, is meeting those ever growing expectations. So we are continuously being asked for faster turnaround times and higher sensitivity, and the high demand the permanent high demand from our customers, leads the development of methods that are more sensitive and robust, and allow us to obtain the results and have the time because you know, the time time is money, you know, and especially in, in production in industry, where we need to meet those, you know, expectations and really, really quick turnaround times. So, we’ve been continuously working on improving our methodology. So that comes to GC and LC a mass spectrometry, but it’s not as easy as it sounds. There’s a very fine line between science and art in developing a multiresidue testing, testing method and as I’ve said, you know, we do have other options. However, majority of laboratories are still focusing on LC and NGS. The triple quad mass spec approaches for multiresidue methods. The attempt to detect and identify and quantitate hundreds of residues, while satisfying the regulatory requirements sometimes require some very innovative approach and when methods call for hundreds and hundreds of pesticides, it’s quite difficult to, to navigate through those residues and and bundle them into into two different methods and hope for the best and I agree they’re different approaches. However, most of the laboratories are still focusing on the termination of multiresidue pesticide testing using GC and LC. So employing two simultaneous approaches LC and GC. and fine tuning the method parameters allows for efficient way of screening large number of residues, and the orthogonal approach for the analysis of either LC or GC unmountable compounds definitely helps. However, with even the meticulously optimized methods, when it comes to difficult matrices and analysis of those matrices, we’re still having multiple, multiple challenges. So oftentimes, various matrices require specialized sample preparation and even though catcher still remains the main technique for sample preparation, modifications of those of those methodologies need to be implemented to allow for low detection limits. Katie for that insight, lookers? Well, as Katie said, time is money and if we want to achieve fast turnaround times, if we want to provide the results to the customer in a relatively short time, we need fast chromatography, but not only fast, but also selective and robust, it means that we cannot go to the Method Editor and you know design a short steep gradient because if we want to work with long target lace with difficult mattresses, short chromatographed Very steep gradient will not work because we will have a lot of problems related to solutions, because we because we will have collisions between pesticide between pesticide and matrix compounds. It means that we we may expect some interferences ion suppression also we have a very short gradient probably will have very short was worse time by which time, I mean the time where we have the part of the gradient, where we have 100% of the stroke mobile phase, so, it means that the will not win the column correctly and we may expect some late looting matrix compounds in the next injection. So, I think that something very interesting to improve the the productivity is a multi channel chromatography, I myself have been working for 18 months with a dual channel system and is something extremely useful, especially for the for the routine work because in the dual channel system, we have two columns, two injection lines, and we can design synchronize the injections on both columns. And by that we are able to eliminate the the idle time of the mass spectrometer So, the mass spectrometer is constantly acquiring the data, we don’t have the situation that we know from the single sound system that at the beginning of the gradient the mass spec is waiting for the illusion of the first analyte after the illusion of the last analyte the instrument is waiting for the end of the gradient then is waiting during the column re calibration working with the external systems. We eliminate all those steps and we can improve the productivity or about 50% easily and what is very important here that we do not affect the selectivity because we have normal gradient normal gradient dragging the same single channel system. And also the autonomous system gives us possibility to extend the column the watch time so instead of three minutes with 100% of the storm or face we can have five or six Minutes. And by that we improve the robustness of the system. So to work to analyze routine samples to have good sample throughput, I think that an extremely interesting option is dual channel chromatography. I think because you have two types of challenges there. First of all, of course, you have the challenge of being more rapid and more efficient. But then at the same time, you have to develop method that if push comes to shove up courtroom safe, because you’re developing methods for the competent authorities that are being used in the country than the EU member countries for enforcement. So you have to ensure that those methods not only are rapid, but also robust and reproducible and in line with what the court would accept. Yes, yes, absolutely. All the methods must meet those all those criteria. Thank you. So moving on to my next question here for you. That is, in your opinion, we start with Katie first, in your opinion, what do you think is the most challenging sample matrix you already mentioned that some of the matrices that you’re dealing with are very tricky for pesticide analysis, and what should let professionals take note when analyzing with triple quadrupole ms, either GCR LC Sorry, I have not had a chance to deal with all matrices that that could be possibly analyzed for pesticide residue contamination. But based on my experience, botanical matrices are probably most difficult to deal with the complexity of botanical powders and extracts create a difficult to deal with challenges. An example is cannabis. And although we don’t deal with cannabis, per se, but there are plenty of botanical matrices that create similar challenges. Anything that is heavily pigmented or terpene, heavy, is very difficult to clean and leave the matrix without removing the potentially present incurred residue. So there is, again, a little bit of art in making sure that we clean up just enough without removing the possibly present and current residues. And for lab professionals, they should understand the nature of the matrix that they’re dealing with before they choose the appropriate sample preparation approach. There are multiple references and resources that can guide professionals towards a suggested approach for sample preparation. For example, for fatty matrices for highly pigmented may have matrices for high water content matrices. So those are good options to start with. However, looking into the chemical composition of the matrix, that that we’re trying to, to deal with is is very, very important to understand the properties and perceive potential issues, if it comes to two matrix interferences, difficult matrices. What was your most difficult matrix? And what is your advice to the users? Well, I could give you some examples of very challenging matrix and some dry commodities like tea, or maybe some spices like black pepper. But I think that if we want to find out the real challenging matrix, we have to take into account two factors. One factor is the difficulty but by itself, so everything what is related to the eye on separation interferences. And the second factor, which is also very important, is the number of the samples of that commodities that your lab is going to analyze. And we have to find some kind of crossover point between the difficulty and the number of the of the samples because let’s say that your laboratory is going is performing performs 10,000 analysis 10,000 samples per year. And let’s say that you analyze on the 20 samples and in the same time you analyze say 3000 on your samples on is a challenging matrix, but obviously is not such a disarray. It’s not so difficult as the but I expect that for you more problematic will be Anyang because of the because of the total amount of the samples that you are going to analyze. So I think that each laboratory will have its own difficult matrix that display a set a crossover point between the difficulty and the and the number of the samples of each commodity. and advice is well, here, I think that is, obviously, what is very important is chromatography, something what I mentioned before the gradient cannot be very short, and also the MS method, because I think that still there are some people who are obsessed with the sensitivity when they optimize campaigns for the for the triple quads, and they forget about the selectivity, which is also something extremely important that some people simply they’re chasing the highest possible sensitivity and they, they are able to use transitions that are non selective, like some neutral losses or transitions with very small product ions. And it’s something quite dangerous when you work with with difficult matrices, because if you use non selective transitions, maybe you will not have false positives, because it’s difficult to find a pulse false positives, because you need the retention time to translate to and translations and the volume ratio. But if you have the retention time and the ion transition, that is the same as one of your analyte, you may obtain a false negative because it will affect the volume ratio. And besides, besides that, besides the selectivity of the transitions, also, when the method is ready, is very important to evaluate the method, you know, globally, that okay, I have my all my transitions, I don’t see any, any coiltek isobaric transitions, but it’s very important also to think about isotopes because, you know, some pesticides, especially those with chloride, bromide are high number of carbon atoms. They have very, very intensive isotopes and the isotopes that you don’t see in the metal, maybe isobaric with with some your of your analytes. So I think that this is a something that is very important to, to, to have the method that is selective. Thank you very much, both of you for the advice. Katie, did you want to add something or? Yes, I wanted to, I wanted to touch upon what was woocash mentioned regarding the volume of samples and the possible challenges that come come with that I agree that the volume of certain matrix can can create challenges. But I think, and I’m speaking from from experience, and what we do in our laboratory, the inconsistency and different matrices, because we never know what’s coming our way, right, we have over 400 Different botanical matrices that we need to be able to analyze in our lab. So in our case, the difficulty doesn’t come with the volume of any given matrix, but the versatility and the different matrices that we can receive every day. So we need to be ready to to make a decision and come up with the best possible solution to mitigate the matrix and appearances, the issues and perhaps modify the method as we go to accommodate those those challenges to to mitigate those challenges. So, to your point, I understand that yes, if we’re if we’re dealing with many samples of any given matrix, it’s difficult however, you can streamline the process or come up with a solution that will help you get through those multitude of samples in our particular case, the difficulty is in in those multitudes of matrices that we have to have solutions for. So, our approach to that is again looking into the matrix and looking at those possible issues. And perhaps Yes, we do have to modify the methodologies to remove some of those matrix interferences and change those ions and and switch things around to reach that specificity of the method that we need in order to accurately assess the the incurred residues and our matrix. So the difficulty is in, in the nature of the botanical matrix, and we have to be prepared, we have to have those solutions ready for when we need to use them. Thank you very much Lukash any any comments to that or are we good? No. Thank you, then we move on. When you look around the world, you will see She’ll be the fruit and vegetable producing major producing countries, you will find that not all the production and also not all the use of pesticide that alone their authenticity is controlled in a way that we may see that in the US or in Europe. So, my question for you is, you know, we can see from from the media reports that there are counterfeit counterfeit products and they becoming more prevalent in the market, what are your thoughts on the prevalence issue of counterfeit products on the market and can or how can GC MSMS or LC ms ms or high resolution accurate maths such as orbitrap technology address those challenges? Again, the since Katie was the last to speak, I’m giving the first time first option to answer to Lucas Well, I agree that all the issues related to food frauds are are very important today and they for sure, they they will be even more important in the future because the the market for some special types of food is constantly growing a special type of food I understand organic food or food with some specific geographical origin and is something very important to protect the customer because if you go to the supermarket and then and you decide to pay more, because you see the label that stands for organic food, you must be sure that you are already paying for the for organic products and well how can we distinguish between food from different types of production? Or how can we confirm the origin the geographical origin of food, well, we need some some markers and means that substances that are characteristics characteristic for for example, for the organic food and here obviously on the on the on the frontline, we have high resolution mass spectrometry because it’s a it’s an excellent technique to work with unknown compounds, because high resolution mass spectrometry is very sensitive and selective in the scanning boat, people think that people possess sensitive they are sensitive, because they are operated in the in the target mode. However, in nontarget mode, high resolution mass spectrometry is much better and this is very helpful in identification of the substances and here what is very important in my opinion the very good handwarmer we must be also supported by very good software extremely especially in this in this type of applications. Because well, if you work in with some target samples, with some you analyze pesticides, you spend relatively short time the data processing No in fact, the data processing whether the target analysis is short term the data acquisition, however, if you work with a noun compounds, now, you inject one sequence and then you you spend weeks processing the data. So, here for this purpose to find the markers that help us to distinguish between different types of foods to find those fingerprints, for example of geographical origin, while we need high resolution mass spectrometry supported by by very good software. Thank you. So, we have these different facets of looking at counterfeit products. So you have either the food product, but also there is a certain number of counterfeit pesticides in the market, they may have different active ingredient V the pesticide may be the same or similar slightly modified. Are you seeing that in your laboratory? Well, you mean no because we don’t analyze the pesticide like you know, because you refer to the to the products that are that are applied in the field. Yes. Now, we Anna we analyzed on the pesticide residues. So I cannot add anything to that because because we we don’t analyze the the products. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you very much, Katie. We can define counterfeit products, different ways. And similarly to what Lucas said. We’re not looking at counterfeit pesticides, but from the industry standpoint We’re looking at different counterfeit cases. So we may look at, let’s say steroid contamination of botanical ingredients that we would not even expect that would be there. Also, we’re looking at adulterations have a count of feet. I’m compounds and I have a really good example I’m going to talk about that. It’s not really related to pesticides. But it’s really important to bring up from the counter fades standpoint, and highlights the issues that we have to deal with not only in the pesticide residue testing world, but in general in addressing adulteration and contamination in in the natural product industry, or food industry. So in December of 2019, we had received a complaint from our Canadian distribution center, but there’s a plus possible natural dietary supplement that supports sleep, that people are reporting very interesting side effects from it, we looked at the components of that it was all botanical. And what really caught our attention was people were reporting this metallic taste after they, they woke up in the morning, and that made us think, what could cause that because this is one of the side effects of Lunesta, right? So people were reporting that they can sleep through the night after taking just one pill. And we started that investigation. So not having the high resolution, mass spec at that time, we had to employ different techniques to find out and come to a conclusion of what that that supplement contains. Long story short, we’ve employed some HPLC UV techniques combined with some LC Tov analysis, and we determined that what we found was a version or initially we thought it was the speaker sound as as a peak loan as a peak loan, which is Lunesta. But then digging a little bit deeper, we found out that it is really not because chlorine in that compound was substituted with bromine. And we nicknamed it Bo P cologne, because that was a completely novel compound that was created to prevent laboratories like us from targeted analysis of this compound. Because if we if we employed a target analysis, we would never find it. And and our findings, the next day were confirmed by by the FDA and that supplement was was pulled from from a shelf. Later, we were able to employ the high resolution mass spec to confirm our findings. So we took the long way. Yes, there. There are easier ways of finding those, those counterfeit products. But this is just an example of us trying to constantly play this patch with a quite sophisticated scientific approach to fool us into believing that this product is a natural product and it helps you sleep. Thank you for sharing that story with us, Katie, that was very interesting, how you discovered that there was some adulteration in the in the product. I think there are plenty of stories around and I think now, what you find is that especially LC ms ms. Also high resolution accurate mass is used for more the screening approaches also for non target in a non targeted way. Now, that brings us also to the next question. So, there is an interest in the non target acquisition using high resolution accurate methods such as orbitrap technology to increase the analyte scope of the methods. My first part of the question is can you give an assessment of your experience with this instrument and a prediction on when and how that might impact on the workflow? for pesticides and we’ll start with Lucas. Well, I have very positive experience with high resolution mass spectrometry in the routine pesticide analysis because well I work with with an orbitrap that is accredited under 17 Oh 25 under ISO 17 Oh 25 And we are analyzing routine sample with with this instrument and we have very good results. But well, let’s be honest that if you want to start pesticide residue analysis, the first place you need an LC triple quad and GC triple quad, because of the sensitivity issues, because for sure, you will have to analyze some some samples that will require very high sensitivity because of the because the ion suppression or maybe it will be some special application where the MRLS are very low, like for example, maybe food. So for those special tasks, we will need a table quads. But if you if you have those two instruments, you may start to think about the high resolution instrument because we have high resolution and mass spectrometry you can analyze the easy matrix or matrices with moderate difficulty and Well, I think that still some people have a little bit false image of the high resolution because they think that you cannot quantify with high resolution mass spectrometry, that’s only technology that is good for screening application. Well, it’s not true anymore, it was maybe it was true 15 years ago, but today modern instrument we quantify very good. And you know, as the instrument is accredited, we participate in proficiency test and with high resolution mass spectrometry always we have very good results, very low SAT scores. And while also and the other part of the false image of the high resolution mass spectrometry is that people think that it’s something difficult that may high resolution mass spectrometry is more difficult than triple quadrupole mass spectrometry? Well, it can be it’s a very versatile technique that you have different applications that you have very, very difficult application like for example, some unknown analysis, but you have something less difficult like suspect screen. When you screen your samples against the databases or spectral libraries, you don’t have the standard you don’t know the retention time you don’t know the behavior of the company or system. So, you need some experience you need to experience in mass spectrometry and pesticide analysis and finally, you have target routine analysis pesticide and hear my opinion there is no difference between triple quads and high resolution mass spectrometry because if you want to have a triple quad, you have you have two peaks in the calibration line and the calibration curve and a high resolution mass spectrometry also you have to patient the calibration curve. So, the data processing data is in both types of of mass spectrometry is is the same and you know the method development is easier with with high resolution with private solution because there is no optimization you have non target acquisition. And I also think that you know, for newcomer high resolution mass spectrometry maybe even easier to understand because the concept of full scan or even full scan combined with all I’m trying meditation is something much easier to understand the concept of the of the ion transition. So, high resolution mass spectrometry is not so it’s not so difficult as as some people may think. Thank you very much. Look at Katie, do you share Lucas view on that or Absolutely I could not agree with you more. I think the biggest misconception if it comes to high resolution mass spec was the the inability of the lab staff to handle that topology and I agree that is a simpler approach comes to to the screen as the analysis using the GC or LC triple quad and I also agree with starting with the GC or LC or both and establishing a program that way and then jumping into into a high res analysis and this is exactly that started with a we are fairly new to this high resolution accurate mass analysis and the pesticide world have been exploring the possibility of using utilizing the orbitrap technology for the non targeted data acquisition. And and I agree that this this can streamline the process tremendously and, and is also more cost effective LC GC Mass Spec requires, you know, much more input as far as you know, standards, optimization of the methodology, right, you have mentioned that the high resolution accurate mass methodology doesn’t need to be optimized specifically for or the compounds that we’re trying to, to look at, contrary to the GC or LC there’s a substantial amount of work that needs to go into optimization of the method. And really, we don’t need trained professionals to be able to run those those instruments in the quality control setting, that’s why a decision was made with with a now to pursue that technology to streamline the process to be able to screen for more residues and expand the scope outside of just the targeted data dependent acquisition into you know, hundreds of more compounds within a single shot. Thank you, me to follow up just with a second half my question, because I think that fits very well. So, do you first see that triple quadrupole and high resolution accurate math is used in a complementary approach? Or are you moving or do you think that labs will make more moving towards the high resolution accurate as well and I think that the it depends who will work faster the engineers from the mass spec companies that are improving the systems because still we know that the high resolution mass spectrometry is less sensitive than the triple quadrupole mass spectrometry. So, cool work faster the engineers from the mass spec companies or the people from the legislation bodies that are constantly decreasing the MRLS in if the if the engineers will work faster than the bureaucrats, I think that the future belongs to the high resolution mass spectrometry and I would like to add that you know, there is some is a very good approach from from the from the side of mass spec companies that now there are on the market, high resolution mass instruments that are dedicated for the for the residue market, and well the advantage of those instruments is that they are affordable, that you can, you can get a high risk instrument that in the price of of a of a triple quad. So, it’s something is something very important obviously, those instruments are not like, you know, high end high res instruments that are for example necessary for for proteomic studies, however, we for in the in the residue analysis, we don’t need all the all the features we we don’t need extreme resolutions, we we don’t need all the all the acquisition modes. However, we need high resolution because it helps it can help us a lot to solve a lot of problems. The screening that a Katie has mentioned in the screening is something quite interesting because it helps you to control your your target scope, because for example, you have a 350 pesticide in your triple quad and you don’t know if your scope is is correct, yes, you can bet with high resolution math instrument, you can easily double that number and simply screen for six 700 compounds and okay you can compare the results from your target scope and with screening against the shield’s database and for example, if you find tricky with your target scope, one or two positive per samples, but then with with your high resolution instrument you find Three or four more, it means that you should extend your your target scope, because you are you’re missing some some important compounds. And also something what is very nice in high resolution instruments is that you have an orthogonal technique for confirmation in your laboratory. Because obviously, there is a lot of orthogonality between LC and GC because the chromatography is different the dynamization is completely different, but not all the compounds can be analyzed by both by both techniques. And for example, if you have a problem with with some compounds in your LC, triple quad, for sure you are able to see to reanalyze that sample with your LC high resolution instrument. Thank you, Lucas, you share the view? KB. Yes, I agree. I agree with the with the fact that we can quickly screen for a larger number of compounds. And we’re not just limited to the targeted list that is either on our LLC or or do you see we’re expanding the scope. We’re also chasing something new, right we screening for, for hundreds and hundreds of pesticides, we’re talking 700 800 pesticides, we have a bigger chance of catching something that’s novel, right? Even if it’s if it’s just some some peak that we don’t identify. If, if there’s a completely new pesticide that is being used, we have a bigger chance of catching it as opposed to going with strictly to targeted analysis. Yes, the sensitivity is not the same. But again, there’s a trade off between a huge scope of looking at everything that is that is possible in the food or natural product industry. So I think this is a trade off that is worth making, for the sake of looking at the bigger scope of pesticides, but also the fact that with the Oh, the full screen, you’re you’re capable of retrospectively looking at, at some data, right? If you’re looking only at a targeted analysis, there’s no way you can go back to that data, and you can reanalyze it. And let’s say we’re dealing with a novel residue that just became hot and everybody’s talking about it, we have no way of of looking at our data and assessing whether that residue was there before or this is completely new. So I think that’s another ability that the accurate mass, the high resolution approach allows us to do. Yeah, I think that was a great point to make, that you can always go back to your data and analyze what you may have had maybe potentially already, hopefully not but may have had for 30 months in your products, you know, so so that that is a very valuable aspect. So first of all, thank you very much for very patiently asking a very answering all the questions that I had, I have one more for you. And Lucas already mentioned that the manufacturer constantly improve the instrument performance. My question again to both of you and we start with Katie, if you have the one wish, what you would like to see as an improved future, what would that be? If I can choose one, we’re constantly asking for, you know, improved sensitivity and speed, because those will always be the number ones that analysts and end users are asking for. Right? Because this is not just for us, I think we’re pushing an insane performance already if it comes to target analysis and becomes to to sensitivity and speed. So those will always be there. I think from if we’re talking just in terms of the instrument performance, I think from the quality control standpoint, what we are focusing on or counting on is robustness. And what I mean by that is the IS is the frequency of needing to bring the instrument down for planned maintenance. Okay. So I think it may sound silly, but from the productivity standpoint, again, you know, speed time is very important. So, improving the instrument performance or decreasing the frequency of planned maintenance, because that is just that that’s something that’s really important to quality. control laboratory. And of course, you know, we always have those those wish lists. So, you know, we spend a lot of time on sample preparation and optimizing. You know, our chromatography. So, techniques that I’m hoping to, to have more explored over time are the ambient ionization techniques. Dust, the dark hyphenated with high res mass spec would also allow us for minimum treatment of a sample. And those could be potentially good solutions for pesticide residues, meaning Thank you look at your wish list. Well, if I get if I can choose only one, I want more sensitivity, because, you know, especially in the triple quad sensitivity is a resource is like a currency that you can exchange for something else. And you know, someone, right, someone could say that, okay, I have a good triple quad, all my ello Q’s are below MRLS, I don’t need more sensitive instrument. Well, it’s not true, because if you have a more sensitive instrument, you don’t have to exchange the sensitivity for lower MOQ for example, you can exchange higher sensitivity for lower injection volume, and if you inject less well, you introduce less matrix into the system. So, you reduce necessity of the maintenance, you reduce the matrix effects, you prolong your your column lifetime, you improve your peak shape. So, there is a lot of benefits from from lower injection volume or if you have a more sensitive instrument, you can extend your method you can include more compounds, because more sensitive instrument will give you good response with shorter dwell times you can exchange higher sensitivity for better selectivity, because for example, you can go for more selective but less sensitive transitions, or maybe you can also decrease the quadruple isolation window instead of working with one or 1.2 you can go down to point seven or or point five, but Well, I would like to highlight that sensitivity is not something unconditional. The other aspects that you know, the sensitivity must be accompanied by other features. Know, for example, for us, we analyze pesticide residues, so, we have to quantify. So, for example, we need also broad dynamic range, because in the European Union, a huge number of pesticides, they have Mrs. MPVs, but they are pesticide with 20 that they have their Mrs. 20 or 50 or 100 500 PVS, even in the PPM levels. So, you know, if you have a very sensitive instrument, but we’ve narrow in our dynamic range, it means that some, some amount of your of your positives will be outside of your calibration curve. So, you will have to dilute and drain jugs your sample, so, you will waste that a lot of time. And also the issue that Katie mentioned the robustness, okay, you can offer me a very sensitive instrument, but the sensitivity is achieved by introduction of huge amount of matrix and the instrument becomes dirty, very, very fast. And you know, you start your sequence with this level of sensitivity and 30 samples later you are here. So I don’t want that instrument but because the the issue that Katie mentioned that you will have to stop, you will have to vent the instrument when the instrument and you waste a lot of time.

Ice-breaking #

Hello, everyone. I’m David hills from separation science, and I’m delighted to be able to welcome you to the first installment of that instrument selection discussion series developed in collaboration with Thermo Fisher Scientific. This series will take a look at a variety of different analysis challenges. And with the help of some expert panelists examine the pros and cons of instrumentation available to address these workflows, and to provide valuable insights based on real world experience and technical excellence. Today, we’re addressing the challenges of pesticide analysis LC or GC triple quadrupole. Through conversation between our three industry experts, but popping Katie Bella Shecky and Lucas Reishi and their experiences using triple quad and high resolution accurate mass instruments in conjunction with both LC and GC for the analysis and determination of pesticide residues. It’s a real pleasure to have such a distinguished group of panelists with us, and I’m sure you’re all going to enjoy the next hour and learn a lot from their combined experiences. But Katie, and Luke cash will also be happy to answer your questions as a follow up to this discussion. So please do use the Ask a Question button below to address any issues you may have, or comments you’d like to make, based on what you hear during the discussion today. I’m now going to hand you over to the very capable hands of our moderator for today’s discussion. But popping. Those of you who don’t know, but is managing director of the strategic food consulting company focus is company advisors, technology providers, food manufacturers, startup companies, not for profit organizations, investors and laboratories on strategic food safety solutions, and emerging technologies. Burt previously worked as chief scientific officer and Director of Scientific Development and Regulatory Affairs for global contract laboratories. He has over 25 years of experience in the food testing industry, and has authored over 75 peer reviewed publications on topics of food safety analysis, food allergens, food authenticity, validation and regulatory assessments. And he’s a member of the editorial boards of Journal of Food additives and contaminants and the journalist food analytical methods. He serves as scientific adviser to the EOSC international food authenticity taskforce and is co chair of the ALC food authenticity Task Force and vice chair of the USP food ingredients expert committee. Burt is also active in numerous national and international standardization organizations, including cn ISO, and several German official method working groups. And so, over to you but a very warm welcome to the separation science webinar challenges of pesticide analysis LC or GC triple quadrupole. The webinar is sponsored by thermo scientific while the use of pesticides contributes to ensure there is a high level of food supply, there are only considered safe if only small amounts remain in the fruit to be consumed. So the number of pesticides that could have potentially been used is very high. And detecting and quantifying them can be a significant challenge, particularly in widely different environments under a variety of regulatory framework. So the question is always, which is the instrument best suited for this task? Then the first part of the instrument selection discussion series, I have the pleasure of discussing that with two very well known experts in the field. And I think this kind of discussion is really important and useful. And I do recall when I had to decide on the instrumentation to buy we always only heard from the suppliers about the wonderful thing that their instruments can do and in some cases, how poorly the competition performs. So here separation science really closes the gap, an important gap with SEO As that now you can hear from the experts that use particular instrumentation on a daily basis. And they know best the ins and outs, pros and cons of their instruments. So today we take a look at the pros and cons of LC and GC triple quadrupole for the analysis of pesticides in food and agricultural matrices. And allow me to give you a short introduction to set the scene. First of all, I would like to briefly introduce myself my name is Bert popping, I was focused for consulting strategically, we have expertise in a number of specific areas in food safety testing at a global level, which includes allergens, gluten food fraud, but also the topic of today, the food residues like pesticides. Now the knowledge is combined with verticals for example, regulatory environment risk analysis was management, as well as technology development. So with these skills, we support food manufacturers, retailers, regulators, and technology providers ethical level. If you click the QR code, it will take you to a website. So now allow me to give you a background information. And I would like you to follow me on a very short journey through time. The practice of agriculture first began about 10,000 years ago in the fertile crescent of Mesopotamia. The area that today is part of Iraq, Turkey, Syria, and Jordan. Hunters and gatherers planted edible seeds from wheat, barley and peas, and started to cultivate land. But where you have monoculture pest will move in to take advantage of the plentiful offer of food. And who would have thought that even four and a half 1000 years ago, it is documented that they use pesticides to fight these pests. Back then they already use sulfur and 2000 years ago, there are records showing the use pirate drum, which is derived from the dry chrysanthemum flowers. Of course, synthetic pesticides, the likes that we see today started more recently. The first ones were used in the 1940s. And for the next 20 years or so consumers and most policymakers were not overly concerned with the potential health of pesticides. Food was cheaper because of the use of these pesticides. Now as research continued, it became obvious that pesticides did not only bring benefits. This was a time when regulation for the use of pesticides were introduced. In Europe, if so the European Food Safety Authority makes the assessment which level the so called maximum residue levels or MRLS are considered safe. These MRL so then placed into the regulatory framework by the European Commission. Irrespective of these regulatory action data within consumer concern. Many consumers simply do not like the idea of having pesticide residues in their food they’re eating no matter at which level and we also saw lobby groups campaigning to abolish the use of pesticide. Now in the current time, on top of everything else we are facing a significant challenge was Corona and corona puts a strain on the food supply chain. Most of you will remember in early 2020 People were panic shopping and bought a year’s worth of supply not only of durable foods, but strangely enough also of toilet paper. We saw empty shelves in March in Europe and also in the West. The food industry went to extraordinary lengths to restock a year’s worth of supply that consumers have bought only in a few weeks. And retailers and logistic companies did a fantastic job. They were able to restock shelves within a few weeks. What is very noticeable during the corona crisis is the uptake of organic produce. Consumers try to avoid what they consider unhealthy foods including those that contain pesticide residues. So the demand for organic flour, fruits and vegetables skyrocketed. Other organic produce categories that picked up significantly were meat, milk, potatoes and Vegetable oil. But how can it be reassured that the products really are organic, because when demand significantly outpaces supply, there is a very good chance that there is fraud, and in this case, organic fraud. And Europol stated in one of its reports from 2020, that they see organic fraud on the rise during Corona. So how would you know if your incoming goods are truly organic, especially when in person audits are often no longer possible. This is where all the burden is on the Food Testing Laboratory and the analyst conducting the test. And there is an increasing pressure from food manufacturers and other stakeholders in the food supply chain to test for more and more pesticides in a single run, to get more sensitive, and to get the results faster. So that was the introduction to the overall webinar of today. Now, it’s my absolute pleasure to introduce at ANA Chesky. She has 15 years of experience in the food industry, including the Institute of Food Safety and Health and Mars snack food in the US. She supervises a team of analytical chemist and method developed scientist and in her current position at NOW Foods, she works with a team of analytical chemists and method developers. And her and her team have led to the implementation of a routine pesticide monitoring program. Katie focuses on mass spectrometry and elemental analysis for food development, and has has authored multiple manuscripts in that field. So Katie, over to you. Thank you, Barry, it’s it’s an absolute pleasure to be able to participate in this webinar. As Brad mentioned, I’ve spent about 15 years in the food industry across different roles. And currently am I in my position, I oversee a few groups of analytical chemists and scientists and we work together on implementing multiple methodologies. That would make us make sure that the raw materials and the finished products that now foods are the highest quality that we possibly can can get. I would like to think that our laboratories and now our state of the art laboratories, we are definitely a unique company that focuses on bringing testing capabilities in house. Some may think that this is a biased approach. However, we are working in a GMP environment, and we are communicating openly with our vendors and our customers. And honestly, I take pride in what we do and how we do and because the level of science that we are capable of doing in house is is a very high high level. Currently, I overlook not only the analytical and physical laboratories to implement various testing in house, we test roughly 4000 samples a month, it is a very high throughput laboratory. So majority of what we do is testing potency identity of raw materials and finished products. But we also do a lot of contamination testing screening to to ensure the safety of our ingredients. And as I mentioned, we were probably one of the few, if not only a laboratory in our industry that is capable of performing pesticide testing. In house we have the technology and we have the team that is skilled and trained on performing that type of analysis in house. So like I said, I’m very fortunate to be the leader of a fantastic group of scientists, and continuing what we do and taking, taking pride in our work and our outcome. Thank you so much, Katie. I’m now going to introduce Lukash. So, Dr. Luca Rach key is from the European reference laboratory for fruits and vegetables and Maria and Spain. The institute that is headed by Mr. Diaz Fernandez Alba, and their focus are pesticide residues and Lucas is an expert in the development and validation of analytical methods for pesticide detection, and quantification using advanced mass spectrometric technique. which includes both the high resolution and the triple quadrupole. Ms. So his focus and interest is the application of orbital banners, and time of flight commands for pesticide analysis. Lucas is also involved in the organization of European proficiency tests. And like Katie Lucas has published in numerous high impact journals, and contributed book chapters dedicated to pesticide residue analysis. So I couldn’t have wished for more competent partners in discussing the questions with so what maybe Lucas, you want to give a little bit of intro to yourself? Okay, thank you very much, Burt, thank you very much for the for the introduction and for the invitation. So my name is Katerina iski. Since 2011, I have been working at European Union reference laboratory for pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables in an in our laboratory, I’m responsible for the LCMS analysis by And hereby LCMS, I understand a whole bunch of instrumentation because I work with triple quads, I work with high resolution with both Jivox instrumentation with orbitrap with time of flight on the LC side, I use reverse phase chromatography, and also ion chromatography, my scientific work is focused on the application of high resolution mass spectrometry for the pesticide residue analysis, because, well, in the case of triple quads, the situation is quite well established, we know how to analyze pesticide with with triple quads and all the labs use the triple quads in the same more or less in the same way. However, in the case of high resolution instruments, we have more possibilities, we have more acquisition modes, we can create very interesting workflows. So this is something what what I’m investigating beside my scientific work, I’m also involved in on the on the typical activities of the European Union reference laboratory. So I analyze routine samples. I take part in the organization proficiency tests, because our laboratory every year organize PTS for the official laboratories that we have in the in the European Union. And also I participate in other activities like a collaboration with national reference laboratories, official, official laboratories, where some collaborations with third countries. So my work is, you know, includes a lot of a lot of aspects of pesticide residue analysis.

Post comments #

Thank you so much for both sharing your wish list. And I’m very sure that the instrument manufacturer listened very closely to what you have said just now. They were all very valid points to raise. So with that, we’re coming to the end of our question and answer session. Again, thank you for patiently answering all the questions. I’m sure that we’re very valuable to the audience that is now listening to us. And I would like to thank you wish you well stay safe and healthy. I’ll hand back to separation science. Thank you, Bert. Well, what an excellent discussion. I’m sure we’re all You watching and listening, have enjoyed the conversation. And hopefully you’ve learned something from our experts today. Talking of which, Thank you Katie and Lukash for taking part today and openly sharing your thoughts, insights and experiences into instrument selection and analytical challenges for pesticide residue analysis. Don’t forget if you have a question and haven’t already submitted it, you can do so by clicking the Ask a Question button below. And we’ll forward them to Bert Katie and Lukash. Thank you also to our scientific partners in this event being Thermo Fisher Scientific for all their technical input and support. This discussion is due in significant part to their involvement, and particularly that of Ruby on in Singapore and Richard for so here in the UK. I would encourage you all to visit the Thermo Fisher Scientific website to find out more about the company’s triple quadrupole solutions for pesticide analysis, or to contact your local representative. As I mentioned earlier, this event is the first installment of our instrument Selection series. So do keep an eye on future separation science promotions and social media posts to find out when the next event in the series is taking place. Finally, I’d like to thank you all for attending this event today. I appreciate that there are many things competing for your time. So for you to spend an hour of yours with us is really appreciated. I hope you’ve enjoyed our discussion, and I look forward to welcoming you to our next installment later in the year. Goodbye for now.