Part II: Limitations. J. Planar Chromatogr. 5, 246-250 (1992). Optimization of a HPTLC method (K. Burger et al., J. Planar Chromatogr. 3, 504-510 (1990); in G. Angletti, A.A. Bjoseth, (Eds.), Organic Micropullutants in the Aquatic Environment; Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht-Boston-London (1991). Recommendations: Prewash the HPTLC plates by immersing in 2-propanol for at least 30 min; use of a thin (100 µm) HPTLC layer in order to increase the sensitivity of the UV detection by a factor of 2 to 3. Solvents of at least „chromatographic quality“. Reproducibility of migration distances ± 1 mm (both on the same plate and on different plates).

Jap. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health 40, 101-110 (1994). TLC of 46 common pesticides in serum and gastric lavage solutions on silica with 4 developing systems and 3 detection methods. Detection of 24 pesticides at < 500 ng by viewing under UV radiation, of 12 ones by spraying with Dragendorff's reagent. Study of the recoveries by using spiked serum samples.

J. Planar Chromatogr. 10, 80-89 (1997). Review for the period of 1994-1996 of advances in the applications of TLC and HPTLC for the separation, detection, and qualitative and quantitative determination of pesticides, other agrochemicals, and related compounds. Analyses are covered for a variety of samples, such as food and environmental, and for residues of pesticides of various types, including insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides, belonging to different chemical classes. A limited number of references on formulation analysis and the use of radio-TLC for studies of pesticide metabolism are also included. A collection of representative chromatographic systems for practical separations and analyses of a variety of pesticides are presented at the end of the review: 1. Introduction; 2. Materials and techniques (Sample preparation; thin layer plates, mobile phase selection, and plate development; detection and identification of zones), 3. Applications of TLC (General analytical studies and multiclass, multiresidue procedures; organochlorine (OC) and pyrethroid insecticides; organophosphorus (OP) pesticides; carbamate insecticides; herbicides and plant growth regulators; fungicides; miscellaneous pesticides, metabolites, and other compounds of agrochemical and environmental interest), 4. Hydrophobicity, metabolism, and data transfer studies, 5. Books and earlier reviews on pesticide TLC, 6. Selected chromatographic systems for the analysis of pesticides of various classes (70 references).

Chinese J. Chromatogr. (Sepu) 17, 93-94 (1999). TLC on silica gel with benzene - chloroform - ethyl acetate 5:5:1. Detection by spraying with 5% N-(1-naphthyl)ethylenediamine dihydrochloride. Evaluation by comparison with the standard. Detection limit, 10 ng. Comparison of the results with those obtained by GC, showing good agreement.

J. Agric. Food Chem. 49, 3728-3735 (2001). TLC and preparative TLC of anilofos and impurities (e.g. isopropyl aniline, isopropyl acetanilide, isopropyl chloroacetanilide, dithiodimer, monothiodimer, mercaptoacetanilide) on silica gel with benzene - acetone 17:3. Visualization by exposure to iodine vapor.

(Decontamination of insecticides in natural drugs with supercritical carbon dioxide.) Planta Med. 50, 171-173 (1984). TLC of insecticides, i.a. DDT and HCH on silica with hexane. Detection by UV 254 and 366 nm. New "fluid extraction TLC" technique.

J. AOAC Int. 72, 735-738 (1989). TLC of monensin on silica with chloroform – methanol – acetone – glycerol 98:60:40:2. Detection by placing the TLC plate facedown on a bioassay dish containing bacillus subtilis spore suspension in a specially prepared plating medium. After incubation and spraying with triphenyltetrazolinum chloride solution measurement of the inhibition zone.

J. Planar Chromatogr. 31, 243-249 (2018). HPTLC of diazinon (1) and chlorpyrifos (2) in the leave extracts of lavender and rosemary on silica gel with petroleum ether – ethanol – glacial acetic acid 95:5:1 for (1) and 90:10:1 for (2). Quantitative determination by absorbance measurement at 254 nm. The hRf values for (1) and (2) were 54 and 50, respectively. Linearity was in the range of 10-1600 ng/zone for (1) and 40-2000 ng/zone for (2). The intermediate precision was below 2 % (n=3). The LOD and LOQ were 3 and 10 ng/zone for (1) and 12 and 40 ng/zone for (2), respectively. Average recovery was 100.8 % for (1) and 99.9 % for (2).