Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Sampling foods for mycotoxins.

T B Whitaker1

  • 1US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, North Carolina State University, Box 7625, Raleigh, NC 27695-7625, USA. Tom_Whitaker@ncsu.edu

Food Additives and Contaminants
|January 6, 2006
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

A Risk Assessment Model for Importation of United States Milling Wheat Containing Tilletia contraversa.

Plant disease·2019
Same author

Determination of aflatoxin risk components for in-shell Brazil nuts.

Food additives & contaminants. Part A, Chemistry, analysis, control, exposure & risk assessment·2011
Same author

Design of a sampling plan to detect ochratoxin A in green coffee.

Food additives and contaminants·2006
Same author

Sampling grain shipments to detect genetically modified seed.

Journal of AOAC International·2002
Same author

Distribution among sample test results when testing shelled corn lots for fumonisin.

Journal of AOAC International·2001
Same author

Sampling techniques.

Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)·2000
Same journal

Update on the progress in acrylamide and furan research. Proceedings of the DG Sanco/CIAA sponsored workshop "Acrylamide" and joint DG Sanco/EFSA/DG JRC workshop "Furan in food." March 16-17, 20006 and May 19, 2006, respectively. Brussels, Belgium.

Food additives and contaminants·2008
Same journal

Food additives and contaminants.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

Index of authors---volume 24.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

High-performance liquid chromatographic method for the simultaneous detection of the adulteration of cereal flours with melamine and related triazine by-products ammeline, ammelide, and cyanuric acid.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

Mycotoxin occurrence and Aspergillus flavus soil propagules in a corn and cotton glyphosate-resistant cropping systems.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
Same journal

Occurrence and fate of Fusarium mycotoxins during commercial processing of oats in the UK.

Food additives and contaminants·2007
See all related articles

Estimating mycotoxin concentration in bulk lots is challenging due to sampling variability. This study discusses methods to reduce uncertainty in mycotoxin testing for accurate risk assessment.

Area of Science:

  • Agricultural Science
  • Food Safety
  • Analytical Chemistry

Background:

  • Accurate mycotoxin concentration assessment in bulk commodities is crucial for food safety and risk management.
  • Traditional mycotoxin sampling plans involve multiple steps, each introducing potential variability and uncertainty.
  • Variability in mycotoxin testing increases with higher contamination levels, complicating accurate estimations.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To highlight the inherent difficulties in obtaining precise mycotoxin concentration estimates from bulk lots.
  • To identify and discuss sources of variability within mycotoxin test procedures.
  • To explore methods for reducing uncertainty in sampling, sample preparation, and analytical steps.

Main Methods:

  • Review of a standard mycotoxin test procedure, including sample collection, comminution, subsampling, extraction, and quantification.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of uncertainty associated with each step of the mycotoxin testing process.
  • Examination of the relationship between mycotoxin concentration and the variance of test results.

    • Main Results:

    • Sampling is identified as the primary source of variability in mycotoxin testing.
    • Sampling variability is exacerbated by the heterogeneous distribution of mycotoxins, with a small percentage of kernels showing high contamination.
    • Variability in each testing step, including sample preparation and analysis, increases with mycotoxin concentration.

    Conclusions:

    • Precise and accurate estimation of true mycotoxin concentration in bulk lots is inherently limited by sampling and testing variability.
    • Understanding and mitigating variability at each stage of the mycotoxin testing procedure is essential for reliable risk assessment.
    • Further research into methods for reducing sampling, sample preparation, and analytical variability is warranted.