Differences in the levels of sulphites and pesticide residues in soils and wines and under organic and conventional production methods

The surface and output of organic agriculture is growing steadily in recent years, being generally seen as a healthier, safer and more sustainable alternative to conventional agriculture. Comparisons between organic and conventional products are nonetheless scarce in the literature, especially in the case of wine. The aim of this study was to compare sulphite content and pesticide residues in both soils and wines under organic and conventional production. Fourteen samples of organic and conventional wines and vineyard soils were collected in pairs for each of the seven wine-producing islands of the Canary Islands. A QuEChERS-based method was employed to detect 218 pesticides and 49 POPs. Sulphites were measured by potentiometric titration with a double electrode. On average, higher levels of sulphites were found in conventional wines. Similarly, conventional wines presented higher numbers and concentrations of pesticide residues both in soils and wines than their organic counterparts. The overall pesticide concentrations in our sample was 4.2 µg/kg. Conventional wines presented a considerably higher average concentration than organic wines (8.2 against 0.25 µg/kg). In turn, concentrations in conventional soils averaged 8.7 against 2.8 µg/kg in organic soils, a 68.19 % lower residue concentration. The analytes most commonly found were PCB 28, p,p′-DDE, tebuconazole and the metabolite 4,4′-dichlorobenzophenone in soils and mefenoxam, tebuconazole, fluopyram and boscalid in wines. No single wine exceeded the 10 % of the MRLs established by the European Union for wine grapes. However, the presence of low levels of pesticides in organic wines should be monitored.

This paper was supported by the Spanish Plan of Innovation, Technical and Scientific Research 2017–2020 – Ramón and Cajal Ref. RYC2018-024025-I. The text was edited by Guido Jones, currently funded by the Cabildo de Tenerife, under the TFinnova Programme supported by MEDI and FDCAN funds.

Peer reviewed