基于免疫原理的7种磺胺类兽药残留快速检测试剂结果准确性评估

Accuracy evaluation of rapid detection kits for 7 kinds of sulfonamides veterinary drug residues based on immune principle

中文关键词:  磺胺类兽药残留  快速检测试剂盒  符合率  假阳性率  假阴性率

英文关键词:sulfonamides veterinary drug residues  rapid detection kit  coincidence rate  false positive rate  false negative rate

中文摘要:

      目的 评估市场上5种基于免疫原理的快速检测试剂盒检测7种磺胺类兽药残留的结果准确性。 方法 分别用5种快速检测试剂盒与GB/T 21316—2007《动物源性食品中磺胺类药物残留量的测定 液相色谱-质谱/质谱法》对样品中的7种磺胺类兽药残留进行测定, 验证快速检测试剂盒的检测准确性, 考察5种快速检测试剂盒在选择不同的样品基质、磺胺类基准时符合率、假阳性率、假阴性率, 并对其进行结果准确性评估。结果 选用猪肉、虾肉2种样品基质加标进行检测, 在80、100、150 μg/kg浓度点检测结果无显著性差异。B公司试剂盒以磺胺二甲嘧啶为基准, 检测符合率为96.6%, 且检测猪肉时假阴性率为0%, 准确性最高, 具有较好的实用性。A公司试剂盒以磺胺甲恶唑为基准, 检测符合率为72.8%, 检测磺胺嘧啶、磺胺甲嘧啶、磺胺二甲嘧啶时假阴性率高达100%, 不适合用于磺胺类兽药残留的检测。C、E和D公司的试剂盒检测磺胺甲恶唑时假阴性率高。由此可见, 对检测结果的准确性影响最大的是试剂盒基准物的选择, 其次是磺胺类兽药的结构。结论 5家公司中, 1家公司的产品能满足现场食品快速检测监管的需求, 4家公司的产品不适用于磺胺类兽药残留的检测, 建议进一步改进工艺提升准确性。

英文摘要:

      Objective To evaluate the accuracy of 5 kinds of rapid detection kits based on immune principle in the market for detecting 7 kinds of sulfonamide veterinary drug residues. Methods The 5 kinds of rapid detection kits and GB/T 21316—2007 Determination of sulfonamide residues in food of animal origin liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry were used to determine 7 kinds of sulfonamide veterinary drug residues in samples, respectively, the detection accuracy of the rapid detection kits was verified, and the coincidence rate, false positive rate and false negative rate of the 5 kinds of rapid detection kits when choosing different sample matrices and sulfonamides benchmarks were investigated and the result accuracy was evaluated. Results Two sample matrices, pork and shrimp, were spiked for detection, and there was no significant difference in the detection results at the concentration points of 80, 100 and 150 μg/kg. The kit of company B was based on sulfamethazine, with the detection coincidence rate of 96.6%, and the false negative rate of 0% when detecting pork, and the kit had the highest accuracy and good practicability. The kit of company A was based on sulfamethoxazole, with the detection coincidence rate of 72.8%, and the false negative rate was as high as 100% when detecting sulfadiazine, sulfamethazine and sulfamethazine. It was not suitable for the detection of sulfonamide veterinary drug residues. C, E, and D kits had high false negative rates for sulfamethoxazole. Therefore, the choice of kit reference substance was the most important factor affecting the accuracy of the test results, followed by the structure of sulfonamide veterinary drug. Conclusion Among the 5 companies, the products of one company can meet the needs of on-site food rapid detection and supervision, and the products of 4 companies are not suitable for the detection of sulfonamide veterinary drug residues. It is suggested that the process should be further improved to improve the accuracy.