Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ultrasound-assisted extraction based on QuEChERS of pesticide residues in honeybees and determination by LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this work, 260 pesticide residues, including insecticides, acaricides, fungicides, and herbicides, were extracted from honeybees using the QuEChERS methodology modified by applying an ultrasonic probe, which avoided the homogenization step and reduced the extraction time. Gas and liquid chromatography, both coupled to triple-quadrupole mass spectrometry, allowed the determination of the pesticide residues extracted from the samples. The optimization of the main ultrasonic conditions (sonication amplitude, number of cycles, and time of each cycle) was performed using a Box–Behnken experimental design involving 15 experimental samples. The results obtained with this approach showed that the recoveries were not affected by these experimental parameters for 95 pesticide residues whereas the sonication amplitude was the main factor affecting the recoveries of 107 pesticide residues. The extraction time and the number of cycles affected four and one pesticide residues, respectively. The effectiveness of the ultrasonic-assisted extraction without homogenization of the honeybee samples compared favorably with that for the conventional QuEChERS methodology applied to the same previously homogenized samples. The proposed methodology was validated according to the SANTE/11945/2015 guidelines, with a 5 μg/kg limit of quantitation. Recoveries between 70 and 120% and relative standard deviations lower than 20% were obtained for most analytes. Thirty honeybee samples taken from Spanish apiaries were analyzed using this new methodology. The results revealed the presence of 30 different pesticide residues in the honeybee samples, the highest concentration levels corresponding to certain insecticides/acaricides used by beekeepers to control Varroa destructor. Permethrin, thiabendazole, carbendazim, and coumaphos were the most frequently detected pesticide residues in the selected samples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Simon-Delso N, San Martin G, Bruneau E, Minsart LA, Mouret C, Hautier L. Honeybee colony disorder in crop areas: the role of pesticides and viruses. PLoS One. 2014;9:e103073.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Klein A, Vassiére BE, Cane JH, Steffan-Dewenter I, Cunningham SA, Kremen C, et al. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proc R Soc B. 2007;274:303–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Goulson D, Nicholls E, Botías C, Rotheray EL. Bee declines driven by combined stress from parasites, pesticides, and lack of flowers. Science. 2015;374(6229):1255957.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Rortais A, Arnold G, Dorne JL, More SJ, Sperandio G, Streissl F, et al. Risk assessment of pesticides and other stressors in bees: principles, data gaps and perspectives from the European Food Safety Authority. Sci Total Environ. 2017;587-588:524–37.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Towards holistic approaches to the risk assessment of multiple stressors in bees. Summary Report of the EFSA Scientific Colloquium XVIII. Parma, Italy. 2013. p. 76.

  6. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Towards an integrated environmental risk assessment of multiple stressors on bees: review of research projects in Europe, knowledge gaps and recommendations. EFSA J. 2014;12(3):3594. 1-102

    Google Scholar 

  7. Walorczyk S, Gnusowski B. Development and validation of a multi-residue method for the determination of pesticides in honeybees using acetonitrile-based extraction and gas chromatography-tandem quadrupole mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A. 2009;1216:6522–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wiest L, Buleté A, Giroud B, Fratta C, Amic S, Lambert O, et al. Multi-residue analysis of 80 environmental contaminants in honeys, honeybees and pollens by one extraction procedure followed by liquid and gas chromatography coupled with mass spectrometric detection. J Chromatogr A. 2011;1218:5743–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kiljanek T, Niewiadowska A, Semeniuk S, Gaweł M, Borzecka M, Posyniak A. Multi-residue method for the determination of pesticides and pesticide metabolites in honeybees by liquid and gas chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry—honeybee poisoning incident. J Chromatogr A. 2016;1435:100–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Bargańska Ż, Ślebioda M, Namieśnik J. Determination of pesticide residues in honeybees using modified QUEChERS sample work-up and liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Molecules. 2014;19(3):2911–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kasiotis KM, Anagnostopoulos C, Anastasiadou P, Machera K. Pesticide residues in honeybees, honey and bee pollen by LC–MS/MS screening: reported death incidents in honeybees. Sci Total Environ. 2014;485-486:633–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Filgueiras AV, Capelo JL, Lavilla I, Bendicho C. Comparison of ultrasound-assisted extraction and microwave-assisted digestion for determination of magnesium, manganese and zinc in plant samples by flame atomic absorption spectrometry. Talanta. 2000;53:433–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Priego-Capote F, Luque de Castro MD. Analytical uses of ultrasound I. Sample preparation. Trends Anal Chem. 2014;23:644–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Morales-Muñoz S, Vreuls RJJ, Luque de Castro MD. Dynamic ultrasound-assisted extraction of environmental pollutants from marine sediments for comprehensive two-dimensional gas chromatography with time-of-flight mass spectrometric detection. J Chromatogr A. 2005;1086:122–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Roldán-Gutiérrez JM, Ruiz-Jiménez J, Luque de Castro MD. Ultrasound-assisted dynamic extraction of valuable compounds from aromatic plants and flowers as compared with steam distillation and superheated liquid extraction. Talanta. 2008;75:1369–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. SANTE/11945/2015. Guidance document on analytical quality control and method validation procedures for pesticides residues analysis in food and feed. 2015.

  17. Box GEP, Behnken DW. Some new three level designs for the study of quantitative variables. Technometrics. 1969;2:455–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Mullin CA, Frazier M, Frazier JL, Ashcraft S, Simonds R, vanEngelsdorp D, et al. High levels of miticides and agrochemicals in North American apiaries: implications for honey bee health. PLoS One. 2010;5:1–19.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chauzat MP, Martel AC, Cougoule N, Porta P, Lachaize J, Zeggane S, et al. An assessment of honeybee colony matrices, Apis mellifera (Hymenoptera Apidae) to monitor pesticide presence in continental France. Environ Toxicol Chem. 2011;30:103–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Daniele G, Giroud B, Jabot C, Vulliet E. Exposure assessment of honeybees through study of hive matrices: analysis of selected pesticide residues in honeybees, beebread, and beeswax from French beehives by LC-MS/MS. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9227-7.

  21. Pohorecka K, Szczęsna T, Witek M, Miszczak A, Sikorski P. The exposure of honey bees to pesticide residues in the hive environment with regard to winter colony losses. J Apic Sci. 2017;61:105–25.

  22. Kiljanek T, Niewiadowska A, Gaweł M, Semeniuk S, Borzecka M, Posyniak A, et al. Multiple pesticide residues in live and poisoned honeybees—preliminary exposure assessment. Chemosphere. 2017;175:36–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors acknowledge funding support from the National Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation 2013-2016; National Institute for Agricultural and Food Research and Technology – INIA, Ref. Project RTA2013-00042-C10-01 and RTA2013-00042-C10-02.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Agrifood Campus of International Excellence (ceiA3), Department of Chemistry and Physics, European Union Reference Laboratory for Pesticide Residues in Fruit & Vegetables, University of Almeria, Ctra. Sacramento, S/N, 04120, Almería, Spain

    María D. Gil García, Maria Martínez Galera, Samanta Uclés, Ana Lozano & Amadeo R. Fernández-Alba

Authors
  1. María D. Gil García
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Maria Martínez Galera
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Samanta Uclés
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ana Lozano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Amadeo R. Fernández-Alba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amadeo R. Fernández-Alba.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(PDF 397 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gil García, M.D., Martínez Galera, M., Uclés, S. et al. Ultrasound-assisted extraction based on QuEChERS of pesticide residues in honeybees and determination by LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS. Anal Bioanal Chem 410, 5195–5210 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-018-1167-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-018-1167-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation