The monitoring of the counterfeit situation of a pesticide widely used in Egypt (abamectin) was done through the present study as seven samples of Abamectin formulations were collected from the Egyptian market. Packaging and labels were checked and analyzed by HPLC to determine the active ingredient content present in these samples. GC-MS and FTIR were used for additional analysis and detection of other active ingredients in the formulation.Counterfeit pesticides were studied in Egypt by doing questionnaires for all workers in the pesticide system (farmer - trader - researchers in the pesticide field) and the results of these forms were analyzed to show the most dominant pesticides in Egypt, in addition to random purchase of pesticides from the Egyptian market and the most number of samples Is from (abamectin pesticide) (7 samples).To obtain this number of abamectin formulations, 58 different pesticide formulations (16 different active ingredients) were collected from the Egyptian markets, and the share of abamectin was 7 samples (one active substance), representing 12.1% of the total tested samples. The obtained results showed that Examination of Packaging and indicated that three samples were not registered through Egyptian Agricultural Pesticides Committee thus representing 42.86% of the total tested samples. The non-registered products are Komaktin Gold Plus, Super Vertimic and Abamectine Strela. Three samples have registration number as other formulations already registered in Ministry of Agriculture which are Abamectin Super, Farmactine and Abamectin power. The last product (Tinam) has the correct registration number (no.1391) and it is the same number used to register it in Ministry of agriculture. The percentage of the active ingredient in 5 samples was less than the acceptable limits, The samples were (Abamectin super, Komaktin Gold Plus, Abamectin Power, Super vertimic and Abamectine strela) active ingredient content was 1.416, 0.64, 1.01, 0.2 and 0.12% respectively. One sample (Farmactine) didn’t contain Abamectin, and the sample (Tinam) was within the acceptable limits (1.53%). GC-MS used to determine the presence of any other materials or active ingredients within the samples. The result showed that Abamectin Super sample contains (Lambda cyhalothrin at R.t. 29.512 min), Farmactine sample contains (Fenpropathrin at R.t. 28.634 min), Abamectin Power sample contains (Diazinon at R.t. 16.088 min and Cypermethrin at R.t. 26.554 min) and Super Vertimic sample contains (Fenpropathrin at R.t. 23.916 min and Lambda cyhalothrin at R.t. 34.85 min). Three products Komaktin Gold Plus, Tinam and Abamectine Strela didn’t contain other active ingredients.The physical properties of the studied samples before and after storage were determined through emulsion characteristic test and four samples (Abamectin super, Farmactine, Abamectin Power and Tinam) showed good emulsion characteristics before and after storage. Super vertimic and Abamectine strela samples showed poor emulsification characteristics before and after storage. Komaktin Gold Plus showed good emulsification before storage but poor emulsion characteristics after storage.

Solid-phase extraction (SPE), gas chromatography electron capture detector (GC-ECD) and gas chromatography nitrogen-phosphorous detector (GC-NPD) and gas chromatography–mass spectroscopy (GC-MS) were applied for trace-level de-termination of 20 pesticides in river nile water. Samples were collected from March to October 2003 from different sites located in Greater Cairo, Egypt. First, extrac-tion by on-site solid-phase extraction of 1 liter from field and laboratory spiked and unspiked (raw river water) samples using poly-divinyl benzene-N-vinyl pyrolidine cartridge based sorbent. Next, water extracts were subject of analysis by GC-ECD and GC-NPD. Next, selected samples that were positive to GC-ECD or GC-NPD were analyzed by GC-MS in order to improve the determination of detected pesti-cides. Recoveries from laboratoy spiked samples were > 85% for 16 of the 20 com-pounds with % relative standard deviation (% RSD) in the 5 to 10 % range. The lowest recoveries were for aldrin, 52 % and prothiofos, 48 %. A similar trend was observed with p,p-DDE and p,p-DDT values. Field spike results also indicated high % recovery for most of the target compounds. Values were > 85% for 12 of the 20 analytes, as was the case in laboratory spikes, Aldrin, 54 % and prothiofos, 55 % yielded the lowest values. Overall field spike recovery reproducibility was lower since % RSDs were higher, 15-40 %. Overall results indicated a relatively high de-gree of accuracy and precision could be achieved for most of the target compounds by methods applied in present study.