For the calculated limit of detection (LOD), the ratio of standard deviation and the square root of the number of replicates was multiplied by three. These parameters were calculated separately for the solvent standards and the matrix-matched standards (urine). The used concentration level (Table ) varied depending on the analyte and the matrix. The lowest level at which the respective analyte was detected was used for the calculation of the LOD/LOQ level. This was standard level 0.3, 3, 30 or 300. A linear calibration (1/x weighted) was applied for quantitation (Table /S6). A single-point calibration was applied if the analyte was only detected in one calibrant. This was primarily the case for the HRMS measurements, as the same concentrations were used for the QQQ investigation. Some mycotoxins (deoxynivalenol, ochratoxin A, ochratoxin B), some endogenous estrogens (2-methoxyestradiol, 2methoxyestrone, 4-methoxyestradiol), tetrabromobisphenol A, and methiocarb were detected only at the highest concentration in HRMS. The mycotoxins citrinin and deoxynivalenol, and the glucuronide conjugates of zearalenone and metabolites thereof were only observed in the highest concentrated standard on the QQQ. An alternative approach to evaluate the LOQ is to estimate the concentration at which the signal to noise ratio (S/N) equals ten. However, this approach was not applied in this study. In the likelihood of background contamination in the urine "blank", the quantitation was achieved by standard addition. The contamination level in the process blank was subtracted from standards and samples. The suitability of a least square linear regression model for the calibration curves was assessed by the correlation coefficient (R 2 ), a lack-of-fit analysis (F test, α = 0.05) and a t-Student test to examine whether the slope is different from zero (α = 0.05). The signal suppression/enhancement was calculated as the slope of the urine-matched calibration divided by the slope of the solvent calibration curve multiplied by 100. Simplified assessment of the expected urinary concentration of analytes, when exposed to the acceptable/tolerable daily intake (ADI, TDI), was based on 70 kg body weight (EFSA 2012), 2 L urine volume ) and 100% urinary excretion rate. Bioavailability, biotransformation, and real urinary excretion rate were not considered as only a rough estimation was intended.