ARTICLES

Variability Associated with Chemically Testing Screened Farmers Stock Peanuts For Aflatoxin¹

Authors: , , ,

Abstract

Forty farmers stock lots of runner peanuts suspected of containing aflatoxin were identified by the Federal State Inspection Service using the visual Aspergillus flavus method. A 227-kg portion was removed from each of the 40 lots. Each 227-kg portion was screened over a belt screening device with 0.953-cm (24/64 inch) spacing to remove loose shelled kernels, foreign material, and small pods. Each screened portion was divided into ten 9.5-kg samples. Each sample was shelled, all kernels in the sample were comminuted in the Federal State subsampling mill, and the aflatoxin in duplicate 356-g subsamples per sample was extracted and quantified using HPLC methods. The total variability among the 10 aflatoxin test results was determined for each lot. The total variability was partitioned into sampling, subsampling, and analytical variability components for each lot. All variance components were shown to be functions of the aflatoxin concentration. Using regression techniques the functional relationship for each variance components and aflatoxin concentration was developed. The total variance associated with a 9.5-kg sample, 356-g subsample, and HPLC quantification when testing a screened farmers stock lot at 20 ppb is 295.2 and the CV is 89.5%.

Full Article Available as PDF only - Use Download Feature

Keywords: aflatoxin, peanuts, Sampling, variability

How to Cite: Whitaker, T. , Dorner, J. , Dowell, F. & Giesbrecht, F. (1992) “Variability Associated with Chemically Testing Screened Farmers Stock Peanuts For Aflatoxin¹”, Peanut Science. 19(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.3146/i0095-3679-19-2-6

Author Notes

1Paper No. BAE 9114 of the Journal Series of the Department of Biological and Agricultural Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 276957625. The use of trade names in this publication does not imply endorsement by the United States Department of Agriculture or the North Carolina Agricultural Research Service of the products named nor criticism of similar ones not mentioned.