This fact is often called induction of the decrease of the response by the matrix (Garrido Frenich,
Martínez Vidal, Fernández Moreno, see more & Romero-González, 2009). In order to try to minimise or even eliminate the matrix effect, several studies have been conducted, for example, the pre-cleaning of the extracts (Picó et al., 2004). This step consists of removing endogenous components to reduce the contamination of the chromatographic system. However, thorough cleaning of the extracts also reduces the percentage of extraction of analytes, thus making the methodology impracticable (Schenck & Lehotay, 2000) . The construction of the analytical curve in the same sample extract, free of pesticide residues, is also an alternative for assessing the matrix effect (Dömötörová et al., 2006, Erney et al., 1993, Menkissoglu-Spiroudi and Fotopoulou, 2004 and Pinho et al., 2009). In this case, the active sites are occupied in the same way in both analysis of standards and analysis of samples reducing the matrix effect. In the literature, several authors have been studying the matrix effect in chromatographic analysis. Menkissoglu-Spiroudi and Fotopoulou
(2004) studied the effect of different plant components in the chromatographic response of a group of pesticides and observed recovery TGF-beta inhibitor percentages greater than 200% for some pesticides. Erney et al. (1993) approached the study of the matrix effect on the analysis of organophosphates in milk and cream and high percentages of recovery were also observed (Erney et al., 1993). Jimenez, Bernal, del Nozal, Toribio, and Martín (1998) analysed the difference in chromatographic response for different pesticides in honey, finding for the pesticide captan recovery percentages greater Clomifene than 1000% (Jimenez et al., 1998). However, more comprehensive studies, which consider different types of matrices, different compounds and evaluate data from a multivariate way, are still needed, since the chromatographic analysis has become commonplace
in many areas of knowledge. In this sense, the aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of co-extractives of seven different matrices in the analysis of eleven pesticides by gas chromatography with electron capture detector and analyse the matrix effects obtained by principal component analysis (PCA). Standard stock solutions of chlorothalonil (99.3% w/w), procymidone (99.9% w/w), iprodione (99.3% w/w), deltamethrin (99.7% w/w), azoxystrobin (99.9% w/w) purchased from Sigma Aldrich (Seelze, Germany), methyl parathion (99.0% w/w), chlorpyrifos (99.0% w/w), endosulfan (73.2% w/w), cypermethrin (92.4% w/w) purchased from Chem Service (West Chester, PA, USA), λ-cyhalothrin (86.5% w/w) and permethrin (92.