摘要
Agricultural contamination with pesticides is a challenging problem for both human and bee health. Consequently, a number of laboratories performing pesticides residues analyse in honey and honey products has gradually increased in recent years. In the framework of their accreditations according to ISO 17025 standard, these laboratories must control their performances through interlaboratory comparison. Interprofessional Bureau of Analytical Studies (BIPEA) organizes regular proficiency testing schemes (PTS) in many analytical domains, including the analysis of pesticides in honey, to compare the performances of the laboratories. As an example, one test was conducted in October 2015 using an organic honey spiked with 21 pesticides, at levels between 15 ^g/kg and 200 ^g/kg, with 27 participating laboratories. This test was intended for the identification and quantification of 21 molecules of pesticides residues. The techniques used by the laboratories were GC-MS-MS, LC-MS-MS, GC-MS and GC-ECD, according to the molecules. Participating laboratories were required to return their results on a dedicated website after a period of one month, and a statistical treatment of the data was performed according to ISO 13528 standard. Assigned (consensus) values were calculated from the participants’ results and the performances of the laboratories could then be evaluated individually and collectively according to ISO 17043 standard. The results of this test were satisfactory for detection and quantification, whatever the analytical technique. The molecules were correctly identified by the laboratories and the recovery rates ranged from 56% up to 88%. The dispersions of the results, studied through the coefficients of variation, were also satisfactory ranging from 7% to 30%. This test showed that the laboratories participating routinely in this kind of tests are very competent in the analysis of pesticides residues in honey. It also allowed the participating laboratories to draw up a general inventory of their analytical skills, and it was a very useful tool to detect bias or non-compliant results. It acted as a warning signal for the implementation of corrective and/or curative actions in the laboratories.
