Entity

Time filter

Source Type


Skretteberg L.G.,Norwegian Institute for Agricultural And Environmental Research Bioforsk | Lyran B.,Moerveien 12 As | Holen B.,Norwegian Institute for Agricultural And Environmental Research Bioforsk | Jansson A.,National Food Agency | And 4 more authors.
Food Control | Year: 2015

Fruits and vegetables from Souteast Asia were analysed for the presence of pesticide residues. A total of 721 samples of 63 different commodities were collected in 2011. The products were imported to Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden from ten countries; about 80% were imported from Thailand. The reason for the increased control for certain food products from Southeast Asia was that the official control had revealed many products with too high levels of pesticide residues. In 60% of the samples we did not find any residues, while 28% had residues below or at the MRLs. Results above the MRLs were found in 12% of the samples. In comparison 6% of surveillance samples from third countries and 1.5% of surveillance samples from the EU and EFTA countries exceeded the MRL in the EU monitoring program in 2011. The estimated acute intake was higher than 100% of the ARfD in several samples and some of the products were assessed to represent possible acute health risk for consumers. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Source


Hjorth K.,Technical University of Denmark | Johansen K.,Bioforsk | Holen B.,Bioforsk | Andersson A.,National Food Administration | And 3 more authors.
Food Control | Year: 2011

The aim of this study was to investigate the amount of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables from South America. A total of 724 samples of 46 different fruits and vegetables from eight South American countries were collected in 2007. In 19% of the samples no residues were found, 72% of samples contained pesticide residues at or below MRL, and 8.4% of samples contained pesticide residues above MRL. Thiabendazole, imazalil and chlorpyrifos were the pesticide most frequently found. Thirty-seven pesticides were found with frequencies higher that 1% in the samples. The results emphasize the need for continuous monitoring of pesticide residues, especially in imported fruits and vegetables. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Source


Rasanen I.,University of Helsinki | Kyber M.,Finnish Customs Laboratory | Szilvay I.,Finnish Customs Laboratory | Rintatalo J.,National Bureau of Investigation | Ojanpera I.,University of Helsinki
Forensic Science International | Year: 2014

Sixty-one different psychoactive substances were quantified by liquid chromatography-chemiluminescence nitrogen detection (LC-CLND) in 177 samples, using a single secondary standard (caffeine), in a trial concerning the quantitative purity assessment of drug-related material seized by the police in 2011-2012 and customs in 2011-2013 in Finland. The substances found were predominantly substituted phenethylamines, cathinones, tryptamines and synthetic cannabinoids, which were identified by appropriate methods prior to submitting the samples for quantification by LC-CLND. The equimolarity and expanded uncertainty of measurement by LC-CLND were on average 95% and 13%, respectively, based on 16 different substances. The median (mean) purity of stimulant/hallucinogenic drug samples seized at the border was 92.9% (87.6%) and in the street 82.0% (64.5%). The corresponding figures for powdery synthetic cannabinoid samples seized at the border and in the street were 99.0% (96.8%) and 90.0% (92.2%), respectively. There was generally only one active drug to be quantified in each sample. Seized herbal samples contained 0.15-9.2% of between one and three components. LC-CLND was found to be suitable for quantification of the nitrogen-containing drugs encountered in the study, showing sufficient N-equimolarity for both stimulant/hallucinogenic drugs and synthetic cannabinoids. The technique possesses great potential as a standard technique in forensic laboratories. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Source


Kruve A.,University of Tartu | Rebane R.,University of Tartu | Kipper K.,University of Tartu | Oldekop M.-L.,University of Tartu | And 4 more authors.
Analytica Chimica Acta | Year: 2015

This is the part I of a tutorial review intending to give an overview of the state of the art of method validation in liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and discuss specific issues that arise with MS (and MS/MS) detection in LC (as opposed to the "conventional" detectors). The Part I briefly introduces the principles of operation of LC-MS (emphasizing the aspects important from the validation point of view, in particular the ionization process and ionization suppression/enhancement); reviews the main validation guideline documents and discusses in detail the following performance parameters: selectivity/specificity/identity, ruggedness/robustness, limit of detection, limit of quantification, decision limit and detection capability. With every method performance characteristic its essence and terminology are addressed, the current status of treating it is reviewed and recommendations are given, how to determine it, specifically in the case of LC-MS methods. © 2015 Elsevier B.V.. Source


Kruve A.,University of Tartu | Rebane R.,University of Tartu | Kipper K.,University of Tartu | Oldekop M.-L.,University of Tartu | And 4 more authors.
Analytica Chimica Acta | Year: 2015

This is the part II of a tutorial review intending to give an overview of the state of the art of method validation in liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS) and discuss specific issues that arise with MS (and MS-MS) detection in LC (as opposed to the "conventional" detectors). The Part II starts with briefly introducing the main quantitation methods and then addresses the performance related to quantification: linearity of signal, sensitivity, precision, trueness, accuracy, stability and measurement uncertainty. The last section is devoted to practical considerations in validation. With every performance characteristic its essence and terminology are addressed, the current status of treating it is reviewed and recommendations are given, how to handle it, specifically in the case of LC-MS methods. © 2015 Elsevier B.V.. Source

Discover hidden collaborations