Instrument Used: LCMS-8050
We asked Eisuke Toriumi, Fumiko Watanabe, Mao Koga, and Kazuhiko Ogura of the Japan Food Research Laboratories (JFRL) about using their new triple quadrupole LCMS-8050 system for residual pesticide analysis.
During the interview, we also asked about the various pesticide analyses they perform, the reasons for choosing the Shimadzu system for those applications, their impressions of using the Shimadzu system, and what they would like from Shimadzu in the future.
Chief, Fumiko Watanabe (bottom right)
Mao Koga (bottom left)
Kazuhiko Ogura (top left)
Section of Testing Agricultural Chemicals, Department of Trace Testing,
Japan Food Research Laboratories
The JFRL website indicates an extremely wide variety of contract testing areas.
What type of contract testing is your group, the Pesticide Testing Section, involved in?
We perform both simultaneous analysis of several hundred pesticide components, which has become our main work, and analysis of specifically targeted components.
Fundamentally, we are involved in quantitative analysis. Therefore, we generally use simultaneous analysis as a means of quantifying a large number of components at the same time, rather than as a screening method.
What type of analysis is typically requested by your customers?
With such a wide variety of samples, analyses, and customer requirements, what sort of analysis does testing involve?
What types of analytical instruments do you use?
To avoid not being able to analyze a particular item because of a problem encountered with a single method available for analyzing that item, we make sure each item can be analyzed using at least two different instruments. Therefore, though we generally specify a particular instrument for analysis, we also specify conditions that allow the item to be analyzed using a different instrument. Particularly for simultaneous analysis, analytical conditions are always prepared for multiple instruments.
With so much analysis accomplished using mass spectrometers, have you mostly stopped using HPLC and GC systems?
GC and HPLC detectors sometimes offer better selectivity and sensitivity for other components as well, so we still use them in cases where mass spectrometers are not necessary. We use mass spectrometers for multi-component analysis, but we still use GC and HPLC systems frequently to analyze specific target components.
In other words, you select the optimal instrument depending on the pesticide components being analyzed, right?
You mentioned that your LC-MS/MS system has the highest usage rate, but as the frequency of use has increased, what instrument performance requirements have you had?
Software ease-of-operation is also important. In addition to simultaneous multi-component analysis, we also analyze pesticides individually if they are difficult to analyze simultaneously. That often involves considering various alternative conditions, such as mobile phases specialized for certain pesticides or samples, which requires acquisition and analysis conditions on a case-by-case basis. Routine analysis of multiple components can be accomplished using simple operations, but software operations can be very time-consuming if analytical conditions are frequently changed. Therefore, I would appreciate it if the software could be made a little easier to operate for preparing conditions or making slight adjustments to data analysis operations.
Considering you were already operating several LC-MS/MS systems when you purchased your first Shimadzu LC-MS/MS system, would you tell us the reasons behind selecting the LCMS-8050 model?
Also, the fact that we already had a history of using Shimadzu HPLC systems was a big factor. The delivery pump in the Shimadzu fluorescence detector and UV detector we currently use offers dramatically superior performance in comparison to other brands. Some of the other brands require replacing consumables frequently, but Shimadzu systems can be operated reliably without maintenance. When carryover was checked during the selection process, there was practically no carryover at all compared to competing products. The rinsing mechanism and injection system were also far superior.
Thank you. Now that it has been a half-year since the system was introduced, how do you like actually operating the system?
Thank you for sharing your valuable opinions.
Do you have any other requests for Shimadzu, not necessarily regarding the LCMS-8050?
We would also appreciate, by taking a different perspective, the ability to automate processes that currently cannot be automated. The current process flow, including standard solution preparation and pretreatment steps, still includes many manual steps.
Thank you for sharing your opinions.
We will strive to satisfy your expectations for supporting the LCMS-8050 system.
We will carefully consider your other comments as well.
Thank for providing your valuable time with us today.