Pesticide residues analysis for commercial food testing laboratories

Significance of the topic

Pesticide residue analysis in food is critical to ensure consumer safety and regulatory compliance with maximum residue levels (MRLs). Commercial testing laboratories face the challenge of detecting hundreds of pesticides across diverse food matrices and achieving robust, high‐throughput, and cost‐effective workflows.

Objectives and overview of the compendium

This compendium presents a collection of application notes from Thermo Fisher Scientific, showcasing the latest instrument and software innovations for pesticide residue testing. The objective is to highlight methods designed for global compliance, enhanced productivity, and analytical robustness in commercial food testing laboratories.

Methodology and used instrumentation

Across the studies, the QuEChERS extraction protocol (citrate‐ or acetate‐buffered) is widely used, often followed by dispersive SPE (dSPE) or automated µSPE clean‐up. Key chromatographic and mass spectrometric platforms include:

• Gas Chromatography–MS/MS: TRACE 1310 GC, TSQ 8000 Evo/9000, TriPlus RSH autosampler, Advanced Electron Ionization (AEI) or ExtractaBrite sources.
• High-Resolution GC-Orbitrap MS: Exactive GC Orbitrap, TraceGOLD TG-5SilMS columns.
• Liquid Chromatography–MS/MS: Vanquish Flex UHPLC, TSQ Quantis/Fortis, Hypersil GOLD and Accucore aQ columns, HESI ionization.
• Orbitrap Tribrid MS: Orbitrap ID-X with AcquireX intelligent workflow for targeted and non-targeted profiling.
• Ion Chromatography–MS/MS and HRAM: Dionex Integrion RFIC, IonPac CS17/AS19 columns, Q Exactive Focus Orbitrap.
• Data systems and software: TraceFinder, Chromeleon CDS, Compound Discoverer, Freestyle.

Main results and discussion

Validated methods achieved limits of quantification (LOQs) well below regulatory MRLs (often ≤0.001–0.01 mg/kg) for over 100–400 pesticides in matrices including baby food, cereals, fruits, vegetables, eggs, milk, rice, wheat, chili powder, wine, and polar anionic/cationic analytes. Full‐scan HRAM workflows enabled accurate mass screening and post‐acquisition identification. Automated µSPE and fast GC methods delivered up to three‐fold increases in sample throughput and extended injection series with minimal downtime.

Benefits and practical applications

These methods provide:

• Regulatory compliance with EU SANTE/11813/2017 guidelines and global MRL requirements.
• High sensitivity and selectivity, reducing matrix interferences and instrument maintenance.
• Enhanced laboratory productivity through automation, rapid run times, and simplified data processing.
• Flexible workflows accommodating both targeted quantitation and non‐targeted screening.

Future trends and opportunities

Advances in workflow automation (µSPE, online clean-up), the integration of AI-driven data analysis, and further miniaturization of sample preparation will expand screening capabilities. High-resolution Tribrid and Orbitrap systems with intelligent acquisition strategies (AcquireX) will enable comprehensive, untargeted residue profiling in complex matrices.

Conclusion

The presented application notes form a comprehensive toolbox for commercial food testing laboratories, balancing the demands of compliance, analytical performance, and operational efficiency, and paving the way for future innovations in pesticide residue analysis.

References

• European Commission SANTE/11813/2017: Guidance on analytical quality control and method validation procedures for pesticide residues in food and feed.
• Lozano A, Kiedrowski B, Scholten J, de Kroon M, de Kok A, Fernández-Alba AR (2016). Miniaturisation and optimisation of the Dutch mini-Luke extraction method for multi-residue analysis of pesticides in fruits and vegetables. Food Chemistry 192, 668–681.