婴幼儿配方乳粉中维生素A、E检测方法的比较研究

Comparison study of analytical methods on vitamin A and vitamin E in infant formula

中文关键词:  婴幼儿配方乳粉  维生素A  维生素E  方法比较

英文关键词:infant formula  vitamin A  vitamin E  method comparison

中文摘要:

      目的 比较GB 5009.82-2016《食品安全国家标准 食品中维生素A、D、E的测定》第一法(以下简称GB方法)和AOAC 2012.10/ISO20633: 2015《婴幼儿配方食品和成人营养品中维生素A、E的同时测定》 (以下简称AOAC/ISO方法)检测婴幼儿配方粉中维生素A和维生素E的差异。方法 通过标准方法文本比对, 分析2种方法的原理及技术步骤差异; 通过质控样检测, 分析2组结果的标准偏差、变异系数、95%重复性限、相对重复性限值、平均值、回收率等指标, 比对2种方法的精密度和准确度差异; 通过市售样品检测, 分析2种方法检测结果的系统偏差和比例偏差, 判别2种方法对婴幼儿配方乳粉的结果一致性。结果 2种方法原理不同, 步骤也存在差异。质控样检测比对结果表明, AOAC/ISO方法的重复性和重现性标准偏差、变异系数、95%重复性限、相对重复性限值结果, 均低于GB方法测得的同类指标; AOAC/ISO方法和GB方法均表现出较好的回收率指标(100%±5%)。样品对比检测结果表明, 维生素A 的检测结果不存在系统偏差和比例偏差, 结果一致; 维生素E 的检测结果既有系统偏差也有比例偏差, 结果不一致。结论 AOAC/ISO方法和GB方法原理及操作步骤存在明显不同, 可能导致2种方法在测定维生素E含量时, 结果差异达到统计学显著水平。

英文摘要:

      Objective To compare the differences of GB 5009.82-2016 National food safety standard- Determination of vitamin A, D, E in food method 1 and (hereinafter referred to as the GB method) AOAC 2012.10/ISO 20633:2015 Simultaneous determination of vitamins A and E in infant formula and adult nutritional (hereinafter referred to as AOAC/ISO method) in the detection of vitamin A and vitamin E in infant formula powder. Methods The differences of the principles and technical steps between these 2 methods were compared through the text file; the precision and trueness were compared by analyzing the key parameters e.g. standard deviation, coefficient of variation, 95% repeatability limit, relative repeatability limits, mean value and recovery of standard reference materials; the systematic and proportional bias of these 2 methods were analyzed by comparing the analytical results of infant formula samples purchased from China market. Results The method principle and the operation procedures of these 2 methods were different. The standard reference materials test results showed that, the key parameters of method repeatability and reproducibility (e.g. standard deviation, coefficient of variation, 95% repeatability limit, relative repeatability limits) were lower by performing AOAC/ISO method; and both AOAC/ISO method and GB method had good recovery (100%±5%). The comparison results of sample test showed that, there was no systematic deviation and proportion deviation between GB and AOAC/ISO method for vitamin A analysis, whereas there were both systematic deviation and proportion deviation between GB and AOAC/ISO method for vitamin E analysis. Conclusion The principle and operation procedure of AOAC/ISO method and GB method are different, which may lead to significant differences when performing these 2 methods to test vitamin E in infant formula samples.