ReviewFrontiers in plant science2025
Pesticide residue detection techniques for increasing productivity and yield: recent progress and future outlooks.
Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microchemical Techniques for Multiclass Fungicide Residue Analysis in Complex Food Matrices.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- High-Throughput Determination of 210 Pesticide Residues in Gherkins by QuEChERS Coupled with LC-MS/MS and GC-MS/MS.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The intensive use of pesticides in modern agriculture has significantly improved crop yield and food security but introduced serious health concerns due to the accumulation of pesticide residues in fruits and vegetables and the environment, posing serious health risks. This review comprehensively explores the various residue detection techniques and plant metabolomics as an emerging tool to unravel the biochemical and physiological consequences of pesticide exposure. The article critically evaluates current methodologies for pesticide residue analysis, encompassing sampling strategies, storage considerations, and a wide range of extraction techniques, including QuEChERS, solid-phase extraction (SPE), and emerging green alternatives such as supercritical fluid extraction and ultrasound-assisted extraction. A detailed comparison of analytical techniques particularly gas chromatography (GC), liquid chromatography (LC), mass spectrometry (MS), and novel non-separative methods such as biosensors and spectroscopy is presented, emphasizing sensitivity, specificity, and adaptability to complex matrices. Furthermore, the integration of metabolomics with advanced platforms such as machine learning, green chemistry principles, and microfluidic innovations is discussed as a transformative direction for future pesticide residue monitoring. The review is a novel compilation of conventional residue detection methods and emerging omics-driven, artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted approaches and identifies current limitations, including matrix interferences and regulatory disparities, and advocates for the harmonization of residue standards, alongside the development of cost-effective, high-throughput analytical platforms to ensure food safety, improve risk assessment, and enhance understanding of plant metabolic responses under pesticide stress. Moreover, multi-omics approaches can be more reliable in evaluating the quality of claimed organic farming products.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.