Validation of a modified QuEChERS method for the quantification of residues of currently used pesticides in Cuban agricultural soils, using gas chromatography tandem mass spectrometry.

We present an analytical method to detect and quantify residues of currently used pesticides (CUPs), which include 31 active ingredients (ai) and seven transformation products (TPs) in tropical and agricultural soils of Cuba. Ten isotopically labeled analogous compounds served as internal standards (IL-IS). The novelty of this research is the inclusion of different tropical soils type scarcely studied for CUPs and TPs, based on the QuEChERS (quick, easy, cheap, effective, rugged and safe) method, followed by chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. All figures of merit proved to be satisfactory according to SANTE guidelines 2020 and 2021. Matrix effects (ME) calculated by the external standard method were significant (|ME| > 20% for almost all compounds; grand mean ± standard deviation (STD) 104 ± 108%) in all soils. The internal standard method compensated ME to non-significant levels (8 ± 50%), even for analytes with a non-structure identical IL-IS (STD, 13 ± 57%). Repeatability (relative standard deviation, RSDr) and reproducibility (RSDR) for skeletic regosol (SR) were 7.5 ± 2.8% and 11.7 ± 4.7%, respectively. Absolute (quantified for 11 analytes with structure identical IL-IS) and relative recovery from SR was 92 ± 13% (mean ± STD) and 90 ± 12%, respectively. Limits of quantification for SR ranged from 0.1 to 10 ng/g, except metalaxyl and oxyfluorfen (25 ng/g each). Linearity of matrix-matched (MM) calibration curves (5 to 100 ng/g) had an R2 of ≥ 0.99 for all soils and almost all analytes. The method was successfully applied to 30 real soil samples.

A critical evaluation of nanopesticides and nanofertilizers against their conventional analogues.

Among a wide range of possible applications of nanotechnology in agriculture, there has been a particular interest in developing novel nanoagrochemicals. While some concerns have been expressed regarding altered risk profile of the new products, many foresee a great potential to support the necessary increase in global food production in a sustainable way. A critical evaluation of nanoagrochemicals against conventional analogues is essential to assess the associated benefits and risks. In this assessment, recent literature was critically analysed to determine the extent to which nanoagrochemicals differ from conventional products. Our analysis was based on 78 published papers and shows that median gain in efficacy relative to conventional products is about 20-30%. Environmental fate of agrochemicals can be altered by nanoformulations, but changes may not necessarily translate in a reduction of the environmental impact. Many studies lacked nano-specific quality assurance and adequate controls. Currently, there is no comprehensive study in the literature that evaluates efficacy and environmental impact of nanoagrochemicals under field conditions. This is a crucial knowledge gap and more work will thus be necessary for a sound evaluation of the benefits and new risks that nanoagrochemicals represent relative to existing products.