Assessment of the fitness for purpose utilisation of 5-hydroxymethyl-2-fufural quantification analysis in FAPAS proficiency tests

Abstract

The international utilisation of 5-hydroxymethyl-2-fufural (HMF) as an indicator of honey quality necessitates its appropriate laboratory analysis. FAPAS supplies associated proficiency tests to externally assess the analytical performance. Currently, HMF results submitted are separated and analysed according to whether HPLC or spectrophotometric methods were used. This study aimed to establish whether data from the two methods could be analysed in combination for PTs at HMF concentrations of honey quality concern and remain fit for purpose. 15 years' worth of FAPAS honey proficiency test data was analysed. 25 PTs' result distributions, assigned values and RSD R s were compared. Alterations to zscore outcomes when HPLC and spectrophotometric results are combined and the Horwitz function used alternatively to Apidologie collaborative trial data were considered. The majority of PTs showed submitted spectrophotometric results did not significantly differ to those using HPLC. Assigned values generated by spectrophotometric and HPLC results displayed were correlated (linear functional relationship estimate, y ¼ 0.16715 + 1.052x). 5.22% of z-scores revised to a 'questionable' value as a result of combining both method datasets, with spectrophotometric results being the most affected.HorRat values illustrated RSD R values calculated using Horwitz instead of collaborative trial data are within acceptable parameters. Consequently, combining the two methods' results for assessment of HMF analysis proficiency tests at levels of interest to honey quality remains fit for purpose.

Detecting food authenticity and integrity

“…Of course, many other approaches in addition to spectroscopy are as expected very much in evidence within the collection, such as mass spectrometry and/or chromatographic techniques; [11][12][13] genomics, [14][15][16][17] with at least one of these articles concerning the detection of horse DNA in meats, 16 ELISA, [18][19][20] as well as molecular imprinted polymer-based chemiluminescence. 21 As this collection is dedicated to showcasing detection methods for food authenticity and integrity, it covers a broad range of equally important areas in addition to those dedicated to food fraud/adulteration, such as the measurement of compounds as food quality indicators, as in the case of a cyclic aldehyde for honey for example, 22 whereas others focus on contamination by unwanted compounds, whether this contamination is intentional or inadvertent, and this is exemplied via an especially relevant, timely, and important Critical Review on supply chain risk and the urgent analytical needs required for food allergens 23 Other articles concerned with chemical contaminants include, perhaps not surprisingly, those on the detection of the now infamous plasticizer melamine, 9 pesticides, 13 hazardous dyes, 11 fungicides, 19 drug and preservative residues, 18,21 multiple adulterants of milk, including chloride, starch and sucrose, 24 as well as heterocyclic aromatic amines formed when heating protein-rich foods, 12 the latter having received considerable attention and debate of late due to the mutagenic and carcinogenic potential of the compounds concerned. Of course foods can be subject to bacterial contamination (as well as spoilage) and the detection of perhaps two of the most well-known foodborne pathogens, Salmonella species 20 and Campylobacter spp.…”