Van Egmond H P, Wagstaffe P J
National Institute of Public Health and Environmental Protection, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Food Addit Contam. 1989 Jul-Sep;6(3):307-19. doi: 10.1080/02652038909373785.
The Community Bureau of Reference (BCR) is preparing a series of animal feed reference materials to provide a basis for analytical quality assurance for aflatoxin B1 analysis, a problem of particular importance in view of Community legislation. Before reference values can be assigned to the reference materials the major errors in the underlying measurements must be identified and reduced. This paper presents the results of two intercomparison exercises involving some 20 European laboratories who applied a wide variety of analytical methods. It is shown that the major source of error and discrepancy is connected with incomplete extraction and/or losses during clean-up and that, provided correction for recovery/background interference is made, many methods can achieve acceptable accuracy. Sources of error and their control are discussed, and essential details of the methods used are presented. It is concluded that analytical QA is more important than the use of standardized methods when a high degree of accuracy and comparability are required.
欧盟参考物质与测量研究所(BCR)正在制备一系列动物饲料参考物质,为黄曲霉毒素B1分析的分析质量保证提供依据,鉴于欧盟法规,这一问题尤为重要。在为参考物质指定参考值之前,必须识别并减少基础测量中的主要误差。本文介绍了两项比对试验的结果,约20个欧洲实验室参与了这些试验,他们采用了各种各样的分析方法。结果表明,主要误差和差异来源与提取不完全和/或净化过程中的损失有关,并且,如果对回收率/背景干扰进行校正,许多方法可以达到可接受的准确度。文中讨论了误差来源及其控制方法,并介绍了所使用方法的基本细节。得出的结论是,当需要高度的准确性和可比性时,分析质量保证比使用标准化方法更为重要。