GEN-MKT-18-7897-A
Jul 23, 2019 | Blogs, Food / Beverage | 0 comments
When it comes to protecting people from harmful pesticide residues in food, standards around the world are anything but consistent. While the European public has a reasonable level of confidence that their food is below the maximum limits for pesticide residues, it’s a different story for consumers in the United States.
The recent annual EU report on pesticide residues in food found that 95.9% of 88,247 samples from 28 EU states were free of pesticide residues, or contained traces that were below the legally permitted maximum levels. Jump across the Atlantic and America is lagging behind! The nation is using a shocking number of pesticides (1 in 10) that contain ingredients either banned or not approved in not only Europe but also in China and Brazil.
Unfortunately, the difference in pesticide use is typical of many countries around the world, where the guidelines continue to vary considerably. But it’s important to remember that our food supply is global and that the US is the largest exporter of food products worldwide. Regardless of where the produce is grown, there are global standards to consider. While regulatory processes catch up, testing remains the most effective way to protect our food supply from hundreds of pesticides used around the world.Screening Food for Pesticides to Meet Global StandardsFood testing laboratories have traditionally relied on gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (GC–MS) for rapid pesticide detection in large numbers of samples. However, the regulated pesticide list is expanding while the highest permitted levels of pesticide residues in food and feed are becoming even more restrictive. For example, the EU legislation sets a general default maximum residue level (MRL) of 0.01 mg/kg when a pesticide is not specifically mentioned.
What this means is that, to be on the safe side, laboratories need tools that allow them to analyze thousands of substances at low concentrations, in a variety of food and feed samples, such as fruit, vegetables, and animal byproducts. This is where liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) methods serve as an alternative to GC-MS for comprehensive screening.
LC-MS/MS offers food researchers:
Unfortunately, mass spectrometry systems are typically perceived as expensive and complex–but we’re busting the myth! The SCIEX Triple Quad™ 3500 System provides labs with robust and reliable mass spectrometry technology at an affordable price to efficiently and effectively screen for pesticides.
A Robust and Reliable Pesticide Screening MethodTo demonstrate the capabilities of the Triple Quad 3500 System in pesticide screening, our team developed a method that uses simple, generic extraction procedures and MRM mode to screen food samples for hundreds of pesticides in a single injection.
See how we met a detection limit of 2 ng/mL or lower for these pesticides, with good linearity across 4 orders of magnitude. Download the SCIEX Triple Quad 3500 compendium by filling out the form on your right.
As an analytical strategy, middle-down mass spectrometry (MS) workflows characterize biotherapeutic proteins by analyzing large, digested protein fragments or defined subunits, rather than fully intact proteins (top-down) or digested peptides (bottom-up). A middle-down strategy combines the strengths of top-down and bottom-up approaches by delivering high sequence coverage and structural specificity while maintaining relatively simple sample preparation. In practice, middle-down analysis enables accurate mass measurement, rapid sequence confirmation, and localization of key post-translational modifications (PTMs) on protein subunits that are directly relevant to product quality.
In biopharmaceutical development, sequence variants (SV) are considered an inherent risk of producing complex proteins in living systems. Sequence variants are unintended changes to the amino acid sequence of a biotherapeutic and can be caused by errors in transcription or translation in the host cell, or cell culture and process conditions. Detailed analysis of SVs is important in process and product development to ensure the drug’s safety and efficacy. Even low‑level sequence variants can have significant implications for product quality, safety, and efficacy, making their accurate detection and characterization a critical requirement across development, process optimization, and regulatory submission.
CE‑SDS remains a cornerstone assay for characterizing fragmentation, aggregation, and product‑related impurities in therapeutic proteins. UV detection has been the long‑standing standard. However, it frequently struggles with baseline noise, limited sensitivity for minor fragments, and subjective integration.
Posted by
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Share this post with your network