{"id":45258,"date":"2020-10-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-10-28T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/discover.restek.com\/uncategorized\/analysis-of-pesticides-and-mycotoxins-in-cannabis-brownies\/"},"modified":"2026-01-28T16:50:20","modified_gmt":"2026-01-28T16:50:20","slug":"analysis-of-pesticides-and-mycotoxins-in-cannabis-brownies","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/discover.restek.com\/de\/application-notes\/ffan3149\/analysis-of-pesticides-and-mycotoxins-in-cannabis-brownies","title":{"rendered":"Analysis of Pesticides and Mycotoxins in Cannabis Brownies"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Abstract<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Government regulations in California require the cannabis industry to test edible products for an extensive list of pesticides and mycotoxins. Here, an effective workflow for this complex analysis was developed in brownies, and optimization strategies are detailed in order to provide a starting point for similar matrices. Both LC-MS\/MS and GC-MS\/MS were employed and excellent results for LOQ, linearity, accuracy, and precision were attained for all the target compounds.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Introduction<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Legalization of cannabis (marijuana) for recreational and medical purposes demands accurate, reliable analytical methods to assess the quality and safety of any cannabis-derived product. Developing effective methods requires careful consideration of analyte properties and matrix effects, and testing is further complicated because requirements vary by country and state for different product types. Among the various commercially available cannabis products, edibles constitute one of the most popular categories. Edibles encompass a broad variety of products, including several types of beverages, chocolates, baked goods, and candy among others. Currently, the state of California demands the analysis of an extensive list of pesticides and mycotoxins not only in cannabis flower but also in cannabis-derived goods [1]. For this reason, methods capable of tackling challenges for different matrices are highly desired.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The work presented here describes the development of a test method for the analysis of pesticides and mycotoxins in cannabis brownies using the California list. We selected brownies as a model matrix due to their popularity among cannabis edibles users, and also because they contain high levels of potential interferences (carbohydrates and fats). We discuss the development work that was necessary to optimize this method for brownies as a point of reference for labs developing methods for similar edibles (e.g., cookies or other baked goods). The final method established here for the analysis of pesticides and mycotoxins in cannabis brownies provided excellent results in terms of linearity, accuracy, precision, and limits of quantitation (LOQs).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Experimental<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Initially, method development work was performed to optimize the sample preparation procedure and to assess the impact of matrix effects on quantitative analysis. The outcome of those experiments is discussed in the results section, and the final recommended methodology for the analysis of pesticides and mycotoxins in cannabis brownies is presented here.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Sample Preparation<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

For a solid sample like brownies, the first step in sample preparation is matrix homogenization. We used a SPEX Freezer\/Mill grinder to pulverize the sample into a fine powder. Samples were precooled for 2 min, then, three cycles of 2 min grinding (at 15 cps) and 1 min cooling produced a loose, homogeneous powder that was easy to work with. (Alternatively, a food processor with dry ice could be used.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Pulverized blank brownie matrix (0.5 g) was weighed into 4.0 mL glass vials (cat.# 24654) and fortified with pesticides and mycotoxins at the levels defined in Table I. A mixture of internal standards was added at 200 ng\/g (compounds listed in Table II). 1.5 mL of acetonitrile acidified with 1% acetic acid was added to the sample. The sample was vortexed and sonicated for 5 min (no centrifugation required), and then the supernatant was passed through a 100 mg Resprep C18 SPE cartridge (cat.# 26030). An additional 1.5 mL of extraction solvent (acidified acetonitrile) was added to the sample pellet, and then the sample was vortexed again. The supernatant was passed through the same C18 cartridge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For LC-MS\/MS analysis, 750 \u00b5L of supernatant was mixed with 250 \u00b5L of water, and then centrifuged for 5 min at a low temperature (~7 \u2070C). A 2 \u03bcL aliquot of final extract was injected into the LC-MS\/MS system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

For GC-MS\/MS analysis, the remaining supernatant was transferred to a Q-sep QuEChERS dSPE tube containing pre-weighed magnesium sulfate and PSA (cat.# 26215). After vortexing and centrifuging, 500 \u03bcL of extract was mixed with 500 \u03bcL of acidified acetonitrile. A 1 \u03bcL aliquot of final extract was injected into the GC-MS\/MS system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Calibration Standards and Quality Control (QC) Samples<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

A nine-point calibration curve ranging from 5 to 700 ng\/g was prepared in matrix in triplicate to assess linearity and allow quantitative analysis. To evaluate method accuracy and precision, three different QC concentration levels (10, 100, and 500 ng\/g) were prepared in quadruplicate. For both the calibration standards and the QC samples, 0.5 g of pulverized blank brownie samples were weighed in 4 mL vials. Table I summarizes the \u00b5L of stock solution added to each vial to obtain different concentrations in matrix.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Table I<\/strong>: Preparation of calibration standard and QC sample concentration levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Description<\/strong><\/th>Concentration in
Matrix (ng\/g)<\/strong><\/th>		Volume of Fortification
Solution Added (\u00b5L)<\/strong><\/th>		Concentration of
Fortification Solution (ng\/mL)<\/strong><\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
Calibration 1<\/td>5<\/td>10<\/td>250<\/td><\/tr>
QC Low<\/td>10<\/td>20<\/td>250<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 2<\/td>25<\/td>50<\/td>250<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 3<\/td>50<\/td>25<\/td>1000<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 4<\/td>75<\/td>37.5<\/td>1000<\/td><\/tr>
QC Medium<\/td>100<\/td>50<\/td>1000<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 5<\/td>150<\/td>15<\/td>5000<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 6<\/td>200<\/td>20<\/td>5000<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 7<\/td>300<\/td>30<\/td>5000<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 8<\/td>400<\/td>40<\/td>5000<\/td><\/tr>
QC High<\/td>500  <\/td>50<\/td>5000<\/td><\/tr>
Calibration 9<\/td>700<\/td>70<\/td>5000<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Table II<\/strong>: Internal standards (ISTD) and target compounds for LC analysis (atrazine-D5 was used for GC analysis shown in Figure 2.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Compound<\/strong><\/td>Type<\/strong><\/td>ISTD Group<\/strong><\/td><\/tr>
Daminozide-D6<\/td>ISTD<\/td>8<\/td><\/tr>
Daminozide<\/td>Target<\/td>8<\/td><\/tr>
Acephate<\/td>Target<\/td>3<\/td><\/tr>
Oxamyl<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Flonicamid<\/td>Target<\/td>3<\/td><\/tr>
Methomyl<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Thiamethoxam<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Imidacloprid<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Mevinphos I<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Mevinphos II<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Acetamiprid<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Dimethoathe-D6<\/td>ISTD<\/td>3<\/td><\/tr>
Dimethoate<\/td>Target<\/td>3<\/td><\/tr>
Thiacloprid<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Aldicarb<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Dichlorvos<\/td>Target<\/td>4<\/td><\/tr>
Dichlorvos-D6<\/td>ISTD<\/td>4<\/td><\/tr>
Imazalil<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Carbofuran<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Propoxur<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Carbaryl-D7<\/td>ISTD<\/td>5<\/td><\/tr>
Carbaryl<\/td>Target<\/td>5<\/td><\/tr>
Diuron-D6<\/td>ISTD<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Atrazine-D5<\/td>ISTD<\/td>7<\/td><\/tr>
Naled<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Metalaxyl<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Spiroxamin<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Chlorantraniliprole<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Phosmet<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Azoxystrobin<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Linuron-D6<\/td>ISTD<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Fludioxonil<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Methiocarb<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Boscalid<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Dimethomorph I<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Paclobutrazol<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Dimethomorph II<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Malathion<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Myclobutanil<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Bifenazate<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Fenhexamid<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Spirotetramat<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Fipronil<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Ethoprophos<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Fenoxycarb<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Kresoxim methyl<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Tebuconazole<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Diazinon-D10<\/td>ISTD<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Diazinon<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Spinosad A<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Pyridaben<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Coumaphos<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Propiconazole<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Clofentezine<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Spinosad (Spinosyn D)<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Spinetoram (Spinosyn J)<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Prallethrin<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Trifloxystrobin<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Pyrethrin II<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Spinetoram (Spinosyn L)<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Piperonyl butoxide<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Chlorpyrifos<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Hexythiazox<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Etoxazole<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Spiromesifen<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Pyrethrin I<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Cyfluthrin<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
(E)-Fenpyroximate<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Cypermethrin<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Abamectine<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Permethrin-trans<\/em><\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Permethrin-cis<\/em><\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Etofenprox<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Bifenthrin<\/td>Target<\/td>2<\/td><\/tr>
Acequinocyl 343<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Acequinocyl 402<\/td>Target<\/td>6<\/td><\/tr>
Aflatoxin G2<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Aflatoxin G1<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Aflatoxin B2<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Ochratoxin A<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr>
Aflatoxin B1<\/td>Target<\/td>1<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Instrument Conditions<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

LC-MS\/MS analysis of pesticides and mycotoxins in cannabis brownies was performed using a 2.7 \u00b5m x 100 mm x 2.1 mm Raptor ARC-18 analytical column (cat.# 9314A12) and a Shimadzu LCMS-8060 LC-MS\/MS. General instrument conditions, compound-specific ESI polarity, and analyte transitions are provided in Figure 1.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

GC-MS\/MS analysis was performed using a 30 m x 0.25 mm x 0.25 \u00b5m Rxi-5ms (cat.# 13423) analytical column and a Thermo Scientific TSQ 8000 triple quadrupole GC-MS\/MS. Instrument conditions and analyte transitions are provided in Figure 2. Note that it was important to use a single taper inlet liner with wool (cat.# 23447) for this application. The wool packing enhances vaporization and mixing\/homogenization with the carrier gas for better reproducibility, and the taper at the bottom of the liner funnels analytes onto the column, reducing the potential for interactions with the inlet seal. In addition, a 10 min hold time was used at the end of each run in order to ensure that compounds would not carry over and interfere with subsequent analyses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Results and Discussion<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Chromatographic Performance<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

In order to cover all of the compounds regulated by the state of California, we developed both LC-MS\/MS and GC-MS\/MS methods. Although the majority of pesticides are easily analyzed using LC-MS\/MS, hydrophobic pesticides, such as chlordane, methyl parathion, captan, chlorfenapyr, and pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB), are either not detectable or are very poorly ionized under electrospray ionization conditions. Other pesticides, such as cyfluthrin and cypermethrin, have rather low responses in ESI, but they can be analyzed using both GC-MS\/MS and LC-MS\/MS instrumental methods. In order to achieve an acceptable ESI response for these two analytes, ionization source temperatures should be set at relative low values. In our case, the interface, desolvation line, and heating block temperatures were all set at 100 \u00b0C. In this work, chlordane, methyl parathion, captan, chlorfenapyr, and pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB) were analyzed using GC-MS\/MS; cyfluthrin and cypermethrin were analyzed using both instrumental platforms; and the rest of the pesticides and mycotoxins were run using only LC-MS\/MS. Figures 1 and 2 show the LC and GC chromatograms for the target analytes, respectively. One of the main advantages of our LC gradient conditions is that all mycotoxins elute between 2.4 and 3.6 minutes, while the main cannabinoids, such as CBD, CBG, CBN, THC, and THCA-A, will start to elute after 5.6 min. Based on a comparison to a mixed cannabinoids standard analyzed under the same conditions used here, the only coelutions between the target analytes and the main cannabinoids would be between CBD and piperonyl butoxide (5.7 min); CBG and chlorpyrifos (5.8); and cyfluthrin and CBN (6.5 min). THC (delta 8 and 9) and THCA-A did not coelute with any of the target compounds.<\/p>\n\n\n

Figure 1:<\/strong>\u00a0LC-MS\/MS analysis of pesticides and mycotoxins in cannabis brownies.<\/div>
\n
\"California<\/div>

LC_GN0602<\/p>

Peaks<\/h4>\n
<\/th>Peaks<\/th>tR<\/sub> (min)<\/th>Precursor Ion<\/th>Product Ion 1<\/th>Product Ion 2<\/th>Polarity<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>\n
1.<\/td>Daminozide-d6<\/td>0.6<\/td>167.0<\/td>149.3<\/td>49.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
2.<\/td>Daminozide<\/a><\/td>0.7<\/td>161.1<\/td>44.1<\/td>143.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
3.<\/td>Acephate<\/a><\/td>1.5<\/td>184.0<\/td>143.1<\/td>95.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
4.<\/td>Oxamyl<\/a><\/td>1.8<\/td>237.1<\/td>72.1<\/td>90.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
5.<\/td>Flonicamid<\/a><\/td>1.9<\/td>230.1<\/td>203.1<\/td>174.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
6.<\/td>Methomyl<\/a><\/td>1.9<\/td>163.1<\/td>88.1<\/td>106.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
7.<\/td>Thiamethoxam<\/a><\/td>1.9<\/td>292.0<\/td>211.1<\/td>181.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
8.<\/td>Imidacloprid<\/a><\/td>2.2<\/td>256.1<\/td>209.1<\/td>175.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
9.<\/td>Mevinphos I<\/a><\/td>2.2<\/td>225.1<\/td>127.1<\/td>193.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
10.<\/td>Acetamiprid<\/a><\/td>2.2<\/td>223.0<\/td>126.1<\/td>56.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
11.<\/td>Dimethoathe-d6<\/td>2.2<\/td>236.1<\/td>205.1<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
12.<\/td>Dimethoate<\/a><\/td>2.3<\/td>230.0<\/td>199.1<\/td>125.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
13.<\/td>Thiacloprid<\/a><\/td>2.4<\/td>253.0<\/td>126.0<\/td>90.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
14.<\/td>Mevinphos II<\/a><\/td>2.4<\/td>225.1<\/td>127.1<\/td>193.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
15.<\/td>Aflatoxin G2<\/a><\/td>2.4<\/td>331.2<\/td>189.3<\/td>115.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
16.<\/td>Aflatoxin G1<\/a><\/td>2.4<\/td>329.2<\/td>243.2<\/td>215.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
17.<\/td>Aldicarb<\/a><\/td>2.5<\/td>116.0<\/td>89.2<\/td>70.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
18.<\/td>Aflatoxin B2<\/a><\/td>2.5<\/td>315.3<\/td>287.2<\/td>243.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
19.<\/td>Dichlorvos<\/a><\/td>2.6<\/td>220.9<\/td>109.1<\/td>79.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
20.<\/td>Dichlorvos-d6<\/td>2.6<\/td>227.0<\/td>115.1<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
21.<\/td>Aflatoxin B1<\/a><\/td>2.6<\/td>313.2<\/td>241.2<\/td>128.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
22.<\/td>Imazalil<\/a><\/td>2.6<\/td>297.0<\/td>159.0<\/td>201.0<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
23.<\/td>Carbofuran<\/a><\/td>2.6<\/td>222.1<\/td>123.1<\/td>165.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
24.<\/td>Propoxur<\/a><\/td>2.6<\/td>210.1<\/td>111.1<\/td>93.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
25.<\/td>Carbaryl-d7<\/td>2.7<\/td>209.2<\/td>152.2<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
26.<\/td>Carbaryl<\/a><\/td>2.7<\/td>202.1<\/td>145.1<\/td>127.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
27.<\/td>Diuron-d6<\/td>2.9<\/td>239.1<\/td>78.2<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
28.<\/td>Atrazine-d5<\/a><\/td>2.9<\/td>221.2<\/td>179.1<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
29.<\/td>Naled<\/a><\/td>2.9<\/td>397.8<\/td>127.1<\/td>109.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
30.<\/td>Metalaxyl<\/a><\/td>2.9<\/td>280.2<\/td>220.2<\/td>192.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
31.<\/td>Spiroxamine<\/a><\/td>2.9<\/td>298.3<\/td>144.2<\/td>100.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
32.<\/td>Chlorantraniliprole<\/a><\/td>3.0<\/td>483.9<\/td>452.9<\/td>285.9<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
33.<\/td>Phosmet<\/a><\/td>3.0<\/td>318.0<\/td>160.1<\/td>77.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
34.<\/td>Azoxystrobin<\/a><\/td>3.1<\/td>404.0<\/td>372.1<\/td>344.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
35.<\/td>Linuron-d6<\/a><\/td>3.1<\/td>255.1<\/td>160.1<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
36.<\/td>Fludioxonil<\/a><\/td>3.2<\/td>247.0<\/td>180.0<\/td>126.0<\/td>–<\/td><\/tr>\n
37.<\/td>Methiocarb<\/a><\/td>3.2<\/td>226.1<\/td>169.1<\/td>121.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
38.<\/td>Dimethomorph I<\/a><\/td>3.2<\/td>388.2<\/td>301.2<\/td>165.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
39.<\/td>Boscalid<\/a><\/td>3.2<\/td>342.9<\/td>307.1<\/td>140.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
40.<\/td>Paclobutrazol<\/a><\/td>3.3<\/td>294.3<\/td>70.1<\/td>125.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
41.<\/td>Malathion<\/a><\/td>3.3<\/td>331.0<\/td>127.2<\/td>285.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
42.<\/td>Dimethomorph II<\/a><\/td>3.4<\/td>388.2<\/td>301.2<\/td>165.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
43.<\/td>Myclobutanil<\/a><\/td>3.4<\/td>289.1<\/td>70.1<\/td>125.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
44.<\/td>Bifenazate<\/a><\/td>3.4<\/td>301.0<\/td>198.1<\/td>170.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
45.<\/td>Ochratoxin A<\/a><\/td>3.5<\/td>404.2<\/td>239.1<\/td>358.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
46.<\/td>Fenhexamid<\/a><\/td>3.5<\/td>302.1<\/td>97.1<\/td>55.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
47.<\/td>Spirotetramat<\/a><\/td>3.7<\/td>374.2<\/td>302.1<\/td>216.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
48.<\/td>Ethoprophos<\/a><\/td>3.8<\/td>243.1<\/td>131.1<\/td>97.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
49.<\/td>Fipronil<\/a><\/td>3.8<\/td>436.8<\/td>331.8<\/td>251.9<\/td>–<\/td><\/tr>\n
50.<\/td>Fenoxycarb<\/a><\/td>3.9<\/td>302.1<\/td>88.1<\/td>116.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
51.<\/td>Kresoxim-methyl<\/a><\/td>4.1<\/td>314.2<\/td>267.2<\/td>222.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
52.<\/td>Tebuconazole<\/a><\/td>4.2<\/td>308.1<\/td>70.1<\/td>125.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
53.<\/td>Diazinon-d10 <\/td>4.2<\/td>315.2<\/td>170.2<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
54.<\/td>Spinosyn A (spinosad)<\/a><\/td>4.3<\/td>732.4<\/td>142.2<\/td>98.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
55.<\/td>Diazinon<\/a><\/td>4.3<\/td>305.1<\/td>169.2<\/td>153.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
56.<\/td>Coumaphos<\/a><\/td>4.4<\/td>363.1<\/td>227.1<\/td>307.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
57.<\/td>Pyridaben<\/a><\/td>4.4<\/td>365.1<\/td>309.2<\/td>147.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
58.<\/td>Propiconazole<\/a><\/td>4.4<\/td>342.0<\/td>159.0<\/td>69.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
59.<\/td>Clofentezine<\/a><\/td>4.5<\/td>303.0<\/td>138.1<\/td>102.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
60.<\/td>Spinosyn D (spinosad)<\/a><\/td>4.8<\/td>746.5<\/td>142.3<\/td>98.4<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
61.<\/td>Spinosyn J (spinetoram)<\/a><\/td>4.8<\/td>748.5<\/td>142.3<\/td>98.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
62.<\/td>Trifloxystrobin<\/a><\/td>4.9<\/td>409.2<\/td>186.1<\/td>145.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
63.<\/td>Prallethrin<\/a><\/td>4.9<\/td>301.2<\/td>123.2<\/td>105.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
64.<\/td>Pyrethrin II<\/a><\/td>5.2<\/td>373.1<\/td>161.1<\/td>133.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
65.<\/td>Spinosyn L (spinetoram)<\/a><\/td>5.4<\/td>760.5<\/td>142.2<\/td>98.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
66.<\/td>Piperonyl butoxide<\/a><\/td>5.7<\/td>356.3<\/td>177.2<\/td>119.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
67.<\/td>Chlorpyrifos<\/a><\/td>5.8<\/td>349.9<\/td>198.0<\/td>97.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
68.<\/td>Hexythiazox<\/a><\/td>5.9<\/td>353.1<\/td>228.1<\/td>168.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
69.<\/td>Etoxazole<\/a><\/td>6.4<\/td>360.2<\/td>141.1<\/td>304.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
70.<\/td>Spiromesifen<\/a><\/td>6.4<\/td>273.2<\/td>255.2<\/td>187.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
71.<\/td>Pyrethrin I<\/a><\/td>6.6<\/td>329.2<\/td>161.2<\/td>105.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
72.<\/td>Cyfluthrin (qualifier)<\/a><\/td>6.6<\/td>453.1<\/td>193.2<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
73.<\/td>Cyfluthrin<\/a><\/td>6.6<\/td>451.1<\/td>191.2<\/td>–<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
74.<\/td>Cypermethrin<\/a><\/td>6.8<\/td>433.1<\/td>191.0<\/td>416.0<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
75.<\/td>(E)-Fenpyroximate<\/a><\/td>6.8<\/td>422.2<\/td>366.1<\/td>138.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
76.<\/td>trans-Permethrin<\/a><\/td>7.4<\/td>408.3<\/td>183.2<\/td>355.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
77.<\/td>cis-Permethrin<\/a><\/td>7.7<\/td>408.3<\/td>183.2<\/td>355.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
78.<\/td>Avermectin B1a<\/a><\/td>7.7<\/td>890.5<\/td>305.4<\/td>567.4<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
79.<\/td>Etofenprox<\/a><\/td>7.8<\/td>394.3<\/td>177.2<\/td>359.3<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
80.<\/td>Bifenthrin<\/a><\/td>8.0<\/td>440.0<\/td>181.2<\/td>166.2<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
81.<\/td>Acequinocyl (precursor ion 1)<\/a><\/td>9.3<\/td>402.3<\/td>343.2<\/td>189.0<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n
82.<\/td>Acequinocyl (precursor ion 2)<\/a><\/td>9.3<\/td>386.0<\/td>344.2<\/td>189.1<\/td>+<\/td><\/tr>\n<\/tbody><\/table><\/div>

Conditions<\/h4>
Column<\/th>Raptor ARC-18 (cat.# 9314A12<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
Dimensions:<\/th>100 mm x 2.1 mm ID<\/td><\/tr>
Particle Size:<\/th>2.7 \u00b5m<\/td><\/tr>
Pore Size:<\/th>90 \u00c5<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>
Guard Column:<\/th>Raptor ARC-18 EXP guard column cartridge 5 mm, 2.1 mm ID, 2.7 \u00b5m (cat.# 9314A0252<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
Temp.:<\/th>40 \u00b0C<\/td><\/tr>
Standard\/Sample<\/th><\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #1 (cat.# 34124<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #2 (cat.# 34125<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #3 (cat.# 34126<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #4 (cat.# 34127<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #5 (cat.# 34128<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #6 (cat.# 34129<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Dimethoate-d6 (cat.# 31988<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Dichlorvos-d6 (cat.# 31987<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Carbaryl-d7 (cat.# 31985<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Diazinon-d10 (cat.# 31986<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Atrazine-d5 (cat.# 31984<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Diuron-d6 (cat.# 31989<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Liuron-d6 (cat.# 31990<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Aflatoxins standard (cat.# 34121<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Ochratoxin A (cat.# 34122<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Compounds not present in these mixes were obtained separately.<\/td><\/tr>\n
Diluent:<\/th>75:25 Acetonitrile:water<\/td><\/tr>
Conc.:<\/th>5-15 ng\/mL (Expected concentration range in extract of brownie initially spiked at 100 ng\/g.)<\/td><\/tr><\/td><\/tr>
Inj. Vol.:<\/th>2 \u00b5L <\/td><\/tr>
Mobile Phase<\/th><\/td><\/tr>
A:<\/th>Water, 2 mM ammonium formate, 0.1% formic acid <\/td><\/tr>
B:<\/th>Methanol, 2 mM ammonium formate, 0.1% formic acid <\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>
Time (min)<\/th>Flow (mL\/min)<\/th>%A<\/th>%B<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>
0.00<\/td>0.5<\/td>95<\/td>5<\/td><\/tr>
1.5<\/td>0.5<\/td>35<\/td>65<\/td><\/tr>
8.5<\/td>0.5<\/td>5<\/td>95<\/td><\/tr>
9.5<\/td>0.5<\/td>0<\/td>100<\/td><\/tr>
10.5<\/td>0.5<\/td>0<\/td>100<\/td><\/tr>
10.6<\/td>0.5<\/td>95<\/td>5<\/td><\/tr>
12<\/td>0.5<\/td>95<\/td>5<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/td><\/tr><\/table>
Detector<\/th>MS\/MS<\/td><\/tr>
Ion Mode:<\/th>ESI+\/ESI- <\/td><\/tr>
Mode:<\/th>MRM <\/td><\/tr>
Instrument<\/th>UHPLC<\/td><\/tr>
Sample Preparation<\/th>Brownies were pulverized using a SPEX Freezer\/Mill grinder and 0.5 g samples were fortified with pesticides and mycotoxins at 100 ng\/g. A mix of internal standards was added at 200 ng\/g. 1.5 mL of acetonitrile acidified with 1% acetic acid was added to the sample. The sample was vortexed and sonicated for 5 min, and then the supernatant was passed through a 100 mg Resprep C18 SPE cartridge (cat.# 26030<\/a>). An additional 1.5 mL of extraction solvent (acidified acetonitrile) was added to the sample pellet, and then the sample was vortexed again. The supernatant was passed through the same C18 cartridge. 750 \u00b5L of extract was mixed with 250 \u00b5L of water, and then centrifuged for 5 min at low temperature (~7 \u2070C). 2 \u03bcL of final extract was injected into the LC-MS\/MS system.<\/td><\/tr>
Notes<\/th>Want even better performance when analyzing metal-sensitive compounds? Check out Inert LC columns at www.restek.com\/inert<\/a>.<\/td><\/tr><\/table><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/path><\/g><\/path><\/g><\/svg>Download PDF<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n
Figure 2:<\/strong>\u00a0GC-MS\/MS analysis of pesticides and mycotoxins in cannabis brownies.<\/div>
\n
\"GC<\/div>

GC_GN1206<\/p>

Peaks<\/h4>\n
<\/th>Peaks<\/th>tR<\/sub> (min)<\/th>Polarity<\/th>Precursor Ion<\/th>Product Ion<\/th>Transition Type<\/th><\/tr><\/thead>\n
1.<\/td>Atrazine-D5<\/a><\/td>7.5<\/td>Positive<\/td>220.0<\/td>58.0<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
2.<\/td>Atrazine-D5<\/a><\/td>7.5<\/td>Positive<\/td>205.0<\/td>127.0<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
3.<\/td>Quintozene<\/a><\/td>7.8<\/td>Positive<\/td>294.9<\/td>236.9<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
4.<\/td>Quintozene<\/a><\/td>7.8<\/td>Positive<\/td>236.8<\/td>118.9<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
5.<\/td>Methyl parathion<\/a><\/td>8.2<\/td>Positive<\/td>263.0<\/td>109.0<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
6.<\/td>Methyl parathion<\/a><\/td>8.2<\/td>Positive<\/td>263.0<\/td>79.0<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
7.<\/td>Captan<\/a><\/td>9.1<\/td>Positive<\/td>184.0<\/td>149.1<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
8.<\/td>Captan<\/a><\/td>9.1<\/td>Positive<\/td>184.0<\/td>134.1<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
9.<\/td>trans-Chlordane<\/a><\/td>9.1<\/td>Positive<\/td>271.9<\/td>237.0<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
10.<\/td>trans-Chlordane<\/a><\/td>9.1<\/td>Positive<\/td>372.9<\/td>265.9<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
11.<\/td>cis-Chlordane<\/a><\/td>9.3<\/td>Positive<\/td>372.9<\/td>265.9<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
12.<\/td>cis-Chlordane<\/a><\/td>9.3<\/td>Positive<\/td>271.9<\/td>237.0<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
13.<\/td>Chlorfenapyr<\/a><\/td>9.5<\/td>Positive<\/td>247.1<\/td>227.1<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
14.<\/td>Chlorfenapyr<\/a><\/td>9.5<\/td>Positive<\/td>59.1<\/td>31.1<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
15.<\/td>Cyfluthrin<\/a><\/td>11.5<\/td>Positive<\/td>163.0<\/td>127.1<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
16.<\/td>Cyfluthrin<\/a><\/td>11.5<\/td>Positive<\/td>199.1<\/td>170.1<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
17.<\/td>Cypermethrin<\/a><\/td>11.7<\/td>Positive<\/td>163.0<\/td>127.1<\/td>Quantifier<\/td><\/tr>\n
18.<\/td>Cypermethrin<\/a><\/td>11.7<\/td>Positive<\/td>181.1<\/td>152.1<\/td>Qualifier<\/td><\/tr>\n<\/tbody><\/table><\/div>

Conditions<\/h4>
Column<\/th>Rxi-5ms, 30 m, 0.25 mm ID, 0.25 \u00b5m (cat.# 13423<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
Standard\/Sample<\/th><\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #1 (cat.# 34124<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #2 (cat.# 34125<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #3 (cat.# 34126<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #4 (cat.# 34127<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #5 (cat.# 34128<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>California pesticide standard #6 (cat.# 34129<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
<\/td>Atrazine-d5 (cat.# 31984<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>\n
Diluent:<\/th>Acetonitrile <\/td><\/tr>
Conc.:<\/th>5-7.5 ng\/mL Expected concentration range in extract after extracting from brownie fortified at 100 ng\/g (final extract was diluted in half with acetonitrile).<\/td><\/tr>
Injection<\/th><\/td><\/tr>
Inj. Vol.:<\/th>1 \u00b5L splitless<\/td><\/tr>
Liner:<\/th>Topaz 4.0 mm ID single taper inlet liner w\/wool (cat.# 23447<\/a>)<\/td><\/tr>
Inj. Temp.:<\/th>250 \u00b0C<\/td><\/tr>
Purge Flow:<\/th>5 mL\/min<\/td><\/tr>
Oven<\/td><\/tr>
Oven Temp.:<\/th>90 °C (hold 1 min) to 310 °C at 25 °C\/min (hold 10 min)<\/td><\/tr>
Carrier Gas<\/th>He, constant flow<\/td><\/tr>
Flow Rate:<\/th>1.4 mL\/min<\/td><\/tr><\/table>
Detector<\/th>MS\/MS<\/td><\/tr>
Transfer Line Temp.:<\/th>290 \u00b0C<\/td><\/tr>
Analyzer Type:<\/th>Quadrupole <\/td><\/tr>
Source Temp.:<\/th>330 \u00b0C<\/td><\/tr>
Electron Energy:<\/th>70 eV<\/td><\/tr>
Tune Type:<\/th>PFTBA <\/td><\/tr>
Ionization Mode:<\/th>EI <\/td><\/tr>
Instrument<\/th>Thermo Scientific TSQ 8000 Triple Quadrupole GC-MS<\/td><\/tr>
Sample Preparation<\/th>Brownies were pulverized using a SPEX Freezer\/Mill grinder and 0.5 g samples were fortified with pesticides and mycotoxins at 100 ng\/g. A mix of internal standards was added at 200 ng\/g. 1.5 mL of acetonitrile acidified with 1% acetic acid was added to the sample. The sample was vortexed and sonicated for 5 min, then the supernatant was passed through a 100 mg Resprep SPE C18 cartridge (cat.# 26030<\/a>). An additional 1.5 mL of extraction solvent (acidified acetonitrile) was added to the sample pellet, and the sample was vortexed again. The supernatant was passed through the same C18 cartridge. After reserving 750 \u03bcL for LC-MS analysis, the remaining supernatant was transferred to a Q-sep QuEChERS dSPE tube containing pre-weighed magnesium sulfate and PSA (cat.# 26215<\/a>). After vortexing and centrifuging, 500 \u03bcL of extract was mixed with 500 \u03bcL of acidified acetonitrile. 1 \u03bcL of final extract was injected into the GC-MS\/MS system.<\/td><\/tr><\/table><\/div><\/div><\/div>
<\/path><\/g><\/path><\/g><\/svg>Download PDF<\/a><\/div><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Method Development Considerations: Sample Preparation Optimization<\/h3>\n\n\n\n

Because our list of target compounds comprises a broad range of analytes with diverse physical\/chemical properties and polarities, it is essential that the sample preparation methodology be nonselective and to also ensure that major interferences are effectively removed without losing any of the target analytes. Acetonitrile, which is the extraction solvent traditionally used in QuEChERS methods, was employed here because it allows for the recovery of a broad range of polar and nonpolar compounds. Initially, we conducted experimental trials using 1 g of sample and at least 5 mL of acetonitrile per extraction. However, by reducing the sample size to 0.5 g, we were able to cut the extraction solvent volume to 3 mL per sample and still comply with the California regulations. Decreasing solvent waste allows for greener analytical practices and reduces the costs associated with sample analysis and waste disposal. Based on these benefits, acetonitrile extraction solvent and 0.5 g samples were used for further optimization experiments.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Of all the target analytes, daminozide is one of the most challenging, and additional adjustment of the extraction procedure was required to accommodate this pesticide. Daminozide is highly polar (log P = -1.5), so it is difficult to extract completely from the brownie matrix, and it is not easily retained under reversed-phase conditions. Additionally, low molecular weight compounds, such as daminozide, are more prone to interferences and high background noise when using MS, especially when having poor chromatographic retention. Several strategies were tested to enhance the recovery of daminozide at conditions that were also favorable for the rest of the target analytes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The first parameter that was evaluated was the acidification of the extraction solvent. To this end, we compared the effect of using acetonitrile with acetic acid (AA) at 1% (v\/v) against extracting with pure acetonitrile. Figure 3 shows the results for those target compounds that exhibited at least a 40% difference between treatments. When extracting with acidified acetonitrile, the relative response of daminozide increased by about 80%, whereas spiroxamine and ochratoxin A showed an improvement of 45 and 47% in response, respectively. Based on these findings, and the fact that none of the target compounds showed a significant decrease in response, we used acetonitrile with 1% acetic acid as the extraction solvent in our final sample preparation workflow. This provides an additional benefit in that acidification of the extracts avoids the degradation of captan, a pesticide suitable for GC-MS\/MS analysis that easily degrades at neutral to high pH values [2].<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The second sample preparation parameter we evaluated was the application of a single 3 mL extraction versus a two-step (1.5 mL each) extraction. Figure 4 summarizes the results for those analytes that exhibited statistical differences (t-test, p-value <0.05 at a 95% confidence) between the two extraction conditions (both of which used acidified acetonitrile). Interestingly, daminozide exhibited the most significant improvement, with 40% increase in its relative response. The other analytes in the figure showed improvements in response ranging from 10 to 20%. The increase in relative responses seen here when using a second extraction step should result in higher sample extraction recoveries in real-world samples. As this effect depends on the analyte, matrix, and extraction solvent, an evaluation at the desired experimental conditions is always recommended.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Following extraction with acidified acetonitrile, a simple cleanup step with C18 SPE cartridges was used for all samples to remove major hydrophobic interferences that were coextracted from brownies. After this, samples for LC-MS\/MS and GC-MS\/MS analysis were processed differently. LC-MS\/MS samples were diluted in water and centrifuged, which permitted the separation of any remaining lipids that were not retained in the SPE cartridge because they are less soluble in the final extract once water is added. GC-MS\/MS samples were treated with magnesium sulfate and primary secondary amine (PSA) dSPE cleanup to remove moisture and sugars prior to analysis. Note that because PSA can bind to pesticides such as daminozide and spiroxamine, dSPE was conducted only for the GC amenable pesticides.<\/p>\n\n\n

Figure 3:<\/strong>\u00a0Effect of acidification of the extraction solvent (n=3). Error bars correspond to standard deviations.<\/div>
\n