Juárez M, Polvillo O, Contò M, Ficco A, Ballico S, Failla S
MERAGEM Research Group, Department of Agroforestry Science, Agricultural Engineering College, University of Seville. Ctra. Utrera km 1, 41013 Seville, Spain.
J Chromatogr A. 2008 May 9;1190(1-2):327-32. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2008.03.004. Epub 2008 Mar 7.
Four different extraction-derivatization methods commonly used for fatty acid analysis in meat (in situ or one-step method, saponification method, classic method and a combination of classic extraction and saponification derivatization) were tested. The in situ method had low recovery and variation. The saponification method showed the best balance between recovery, precision, repeatability and reproducibility. The classic method had high recovery and acceptable variation values, except for the polyunsaturated fatty acids, showing higher variation than the former methods. The combination of extraction and methylation steps had great recovery values, but the precision, repeatability and reproducibility were not acceptable. Therefore the saponification method would be more convenient for polyunsaturated fatty acid analysis, whereas the in situ method would be an alternative for fast analysis. However the classic method would be the method of choice for the determination of the different lipid classes.
测试了四种常用于肉类脂肪酸分析的不同提取衍生方法(原位或一步法、皂化法、经典法以及经典提取与皂化衍生相结合的方法)。原位法回收率低且变化大。皂化法在回收率、精密度、重复性和再现性之间表现出最佳平衡。经典法除多不饱和脂肪酸外具有较高的回收率和可接受的变化值,其多不饱和脂肪酸的变化值高于前几种方法。提取和甲基化步骤相结合的方法具有很高的回收率,但精密度、重复性和再现性不可接受。因此,皂化法对于多不饱和脂肪酸分析更为方便,而原位法可作为快速分析的替代方法。然而,经典法将是测定不同脂质类别的首选方法。