宠物饲料中尿素的测定:利用能力验证数据评估不同分析技术的适用性。

IF 2.3 3区 农林科学 Q2 CHEMISTRY, APPLIED
Carlos Gonçalves, Katrien Bouten, Pieter Dehouck, Håkan Emteborg, Joerg Stroka, Ursula Vincent, Christoph von Holst
{"title":"宠物饲料中尿素的测定:利用能力验证数据评估不同分析技术的适用性。","authors":"Carlos Gonçalves, Katrien Bouten, Pieter Dehouck, Håkan Emteborg, Joerg Stroka, Ursula Vincent, Christoph von Holst","doi":"10.1080/19440049.2023.2300741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The determination of urea in pet feed at contaminant levels using the spectrophotometric method described in Commission Regulation (EC) No 152/2009 has been reported by several EU laboratories to lack the required selectivity. Whilst urea is not authorised as an additive in pet feed, the control of urea in pet feed is of economic importance, because the addition of urea may unlawfully increase the apparent protein content. To investigate the capabilities of different analytical techniques, a proficiency test was organised where the participants (EU official control laboratories, laboratories from the academia and private laboratories) were free to use their method of choice for analysing three dog feed test materials, two samples of which were spiked with urea. Twenty-one laboratories submitted results using the following techniques: spectrophotometry (Implementing Regulation (EC) No 152/2009), LC-MS/MS, HPLC-UV, enzymatic-colorimetry, gravimetry and an 'in-house photometric' method. Only two laboratories that used LC-MS/MS were able to quantify urea accurately in the test material containing a mass fraction of 18.9 mg kg<sup>-1</sup> whereas satisfactory results at the level of 258.9 mg kg<sup>-1</sup> were obtained by one participant that used an 'in-house photometric method' and one that used the enzymatic method, in addition to the five participants using LC-MS/MS. The technique that provided the highest success rate across the three test materials was LC-MS/MS, whereas spectrophotometry, the enzymatic-based and HPLC-UV methods led to overestimated results in addition to a dispersion of results not suitable for compliance analysis. To address the determination of urea in pet feed at low levels, a better performing method than the one described in the legislation is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":12295,"journal":{"name":"Food Additives and Contaminants Part A-chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determination of urea in pet feed: assessing the suitability of different analytical techniques using proficiency test data.\",\"authors\":\"Carlos Gonçalves, Katrien Bouten, Pieter Dehouck, Håkan Emteborg, Joerg Stroka, Ursula Vincent, Christoph von Holst\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/19440049.2023.2300741\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The determination of urea in pet feed at contaminant levels using the spectrophotometric method described in Commission Regulation (EC) No 152/2009 has been reported by several EU laboratories to lack the required selectivity. Whilst urea is not authorised as an additive in pet feed, the control of urea in pet feed is of economic importance, because the addition of urea may unlawfully increase the apparent protein content. To investigate the capabilities of different analytical techniques, a proficiency test was organised where the participants (EU official control laboratories, laboratories from the academia and private laboratories) were free to use their method of choice for analysing three dog feed test materials, two samples of which were spiked with urea. Twenty-one laboratories submitted results using the following techniques: spectrophotometry (Implementing Regulation (EC) No 152/2009), LC-MS/MS, HPLC-UV, enzymatic-colorimetry, gravimetry and an 'in-house photometric' method. Only two laboratories that used LC-MS/MS were able to quantify urea accurately in the test material containing a mass fraction of 18.9 mg kg<sup>-1</sup> whereas satisfactory results at the level of 258.9 mg kg<sup>-1</sup> were obtained by one participant that used an 'in-house photometric method' and one that used the enzymatic method, in addition to the five participants using LC-MS/MS. The technique that provided the highest success rate across the three test materials was LC-MS/MS, whereas spectrophotometry, the enzymatic-based and HPLC-UV methods led to overestimated results in addition to a dispersion of results not suitable for compliance analysis. To address the determination of urea in pet feed at low levels, a better performing method than the one described in the legislation is required.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12295,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Food Additives and Contaminants Part A-chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Food Additives and Contaminants Part A-chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2023.2300741\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Food Additives and Contaminants Part A-chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19440049.2023.2300741","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

据一些欧盟实验室报告,使用欧盟委员会法规 (EC) No 152/2009 中描述的分光光度法测定宠物饲料中的尿素污染物水平缺乏所需的选择性。虽然尿素未被授权作为宠物饲料的添加剂,但控制宠物饲料中的尿素具有重要的经济意义,因为添加尿素可能会非法增加表观蛋白质含量。为了考察不同分析技术的能力,我们组织了一次能力测试,让参与者(欧盟官方控制实验室、学术界实验室和私人实验室)自由选择分析方法,对三种狗饲料测试材料进行分析,其中两种样品添加了尿素。21 家实验室使用以下技术提交了结果:分光光度法(实施条例 (EC) No 152/2009)、LC-MS/MS、HPLC-UV、酶联比色法、重量比色法和 "内部光度法"。只有两家使用 LC-MS/MS 的实验室能够对质量分数为 18.9 mg kg-1 的测试材料中的尿素进行准确定量,而除了五家使用 LC-MS/MS 的实验室外,还有一家使用 "内部光度法 "的实验室和一家使用酶法的实验室获得了 258.9 mg kg-1 的满意结果。三种测试材料中成功率最高的技术是 LC-MS/MS,而分光光度法、酶解法和 HPLC-UV 法除了结果分散不适合进行符合性分析外,还导致结果估计过高。为解决宠物饲料中低水平尿素的测定问题,需要一种比法规中描述的方法性能更好的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determination of urea in pet feed: assessing the suitability of different analytical techniques using proficiency test data.

The determination of urea in pet feed at contaminant levels using the spectrophotometric method described in Commission Regulation (EC) No 152/2009 has been reported by several EU laboratories to lack the required selectivity. Whilst urea is not authorised as an additive in pet feed, the control of urea in pet feed is of economic importance, because the addition of urea may unlawfully increase the apparent protein content. To investigate the capabilities of different analytical techniques, a proficiency test was organised where the participants (EU official control laboratories, laboratories from the academia and private laboratories) were free to use their method of choice for analysing three dog feed test materials, two samples of which were spiked with urea. Twenty-one laboratories submitted results using the following techniques: spectrophotometry (Implementing Regulation (EC) No 152/2009), LC-MS/MS, HPLC-UV, enzymatic-colorimetry, gravimetry and an 'in-house photometric' method. Only two laboratories that used LC-MS/MS were able to quantify urea accurately in the test material containing a mass fraction of 18.9 mg kg-1 whereas satisfactory results at the level of 258.9 mg kg-1 were obtained by one participant that used an 'in-house photometric method' and one that used the enzymatic method, in addition to the five participants using LC-MS/MS. The technique that provided the highest success rate across the three test materials was LC-MS/MS, whereas spectrophotometry, the enzymatic-based and HPLC-UV methods led to overestimated results in addition to a dispersion of results not suitable for compliance analysis. To address the determination of urea in pet feed at low levels, a better performing method than the one described in the legislation is required.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
6.90%
发文量
136
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Food Additives & Contaminants: Part A publishes original research papers and critical reviews covering analytical methodology, occurrence, persistence, safety evaluation, detoxification and regulatory control of natural and man-made additives and contaminants in the food and animal feed chain. Papers are published in the areas of food additives including flavourings, pesticide and veterinary drug residues, environmental contaminants, plant toxins, mycotoxins, marine biotoxins, trace elements, migration from food packaging, food process contaminants, adulteration, authenticity and allergenicity of foods. Papers are published on animal feed where residues and contaminants can give rise to food safety concerns. Contributions cover chemistry, biochemistry and bioavailability of these substances, factors affecting levels during production, processing, packaging and storage; the development of novel foods and processes; exposure and risk assessment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信