摘要
目的:通过不同前处理方法对大米中敌敌畏残留量的测定比较,为检测大米中敌敌畏方法提供更多选择性参考。方法:采用国标GB/T 5009.20-2003改进法及QuEchERS两种不同前处理方法,用气相色谱对敌敌畏进行检测,对两种处理方法的线性相关性、稳定性及添加回收率等参数测定结果进行比较。结果:线性范围为0.008~0.2μg/mL时,两种处理方法检测结果与敌敌畏浓度都呈良好的线性关系,相关系数都大于0.999。在0.01、0.05、0.1 mg/kg加标水平下,每个浓度做6个平行样,采用国标GB/T 5009.20-2003改进法,敌敌畏回收率为84.8%~85.43%,RSD为2.18%~2.61%;采用QuEchERS法,敌敌畏的回收率为81.53%~84.51%,RSD为1.17%~4.91%。结论:两种前处理方法没有明显的差异,完全达到对大米中敌敌畏残留检测要求。
Objective： Though different pretreatment methods for the determination of dichlorvos residues in rice, in order to supply more selective reference for the detection of rice dichlorvos method. Method： Two kinds of different pretreatment methods by using national standard GB/T 5009.20-2003 improved and QuEchERS method, the sample was detected by GC, and then the liners relevancy, stsability and adding recovery rate of these two method were compared. Result： The linear range were between 0.008 μg/mL and 0.2 μg/mL, Two methods of processing and dichlorvos concentration had good linear relationship, with correlation coefficient is greater than 0.999. At three spiked concentration levels （0.01, 0.05,0.1 mg/kg）, 6 parallel sample per concentration, the recoveries of dichlorvos in rice by method 1 ranged from 84.8% to 85.4%, with relative standard deviations （RSD） of 2.18% ～ 2.61%; the recoveries of dichlorvos in rice by method 2 ranged from 84.8% to 85.4%, with relative standard deviations （RSD） of 1.17% ～ 4.91%. Conclusion： There no obvious difference between two methods, and the detection of the dichlorvos residue in rice.
出处
《现代食品》
2018年第2期56-59,共4页
Modern Food
