Comparison of the results of the ELISA, histochemical, and immunohistochemical detection of soya proteins in meat products

Pospiech, Matěj; Tremlová, Bohuslava; Rencová, E; Randulová, Zdeňka; Lukášková, Zuzana Řezáčová; Pokorná, Jana

doi:10.17221/209/2010-cjfs

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Buffers were mixed according to the procedure by Brooks et al [ 20 ]. B-Calleja solution was used for background staining [ 25 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The results were statistically processed in Unistat 6.0 (Unistat Ltd., London, UK). McNemar’s test on a contingency table was used to compare lectin reactivity according to Pospiech et al [ 25 ]. Multiple comparisons with a t -distribution test were used to compare the marketed product results and the type of carrageenan used (E407 and E407a).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Detection of Carrageenan in Meat Products Using Lectin Histochemistry

Bartlová

Tremlová

Marcinčák

et al. 2021

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carrageenan is a polysaccharide that is widely used in the food industry. Due to its water holding capacity, there is a higher risk of adulteration for economic reasons related to it. A verifiable method for detecting carrageenan is still missing in the food inspection sector. The detection of carrageenan in meat products is not well described. Our study describes lectin histochemistry as a novel approach for carrageenan detection. Within this study, the detection of carrageenan in meat products by lectin histochemistry is validated. Lectins of Arachis hypogaea (PNA) and Bandeiraea simlicifolia (BSA), specific for galactose units of carrageenan, were used. The samples included model meat products (ground chicken-meat products) and meat products from retail markets (chicken and pork hams, sausages, salami, and dried sausages). The limit of determination (LoD) of this method was set at 0.01 g kg−1. The method sensitivity for lectin PNA reached 1, and, for lectin BSA, it reached 0.96. Method specificity for lectin PNA was 1, and, for lectin BSA, it was 1.33. Cross-reactivity with other hydrocolloids tested was not confirmed. The results confirm that lectin histochemistry is suitable for detecting carrageenan in meat products.

show abstract

“…Buffers were mixed according to the procedure by Brooks et al [ 20 ]. B-Calleja solution was used for background staining [ 25 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of Carrageenan in Meat Products Using Lectin Histochemistry

Bartlová

Tremlová

Marcinčák

et al. 2021

Foods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The procedures were performed according to Pospiech et al (2009). Histochemical examination was performed according to the procedure by Pospiech et al (2011).…”

Section: Immunofluorescence Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of new immunofluorescence method for detection of soy protein in meat products with immunohistochemical, histochemical, and ELISA methods

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soy proteins are commonly used in the food industry thanks to their technological properties. However, soy is, along with cow's milk, eggs, wheat, peanuts, tree nuts, fish, crustaceans, and molluscs, responsible for around 90% of food allergies, and is also one of the foodstuffs that can cause anaphylaxis. The aim of this work was to compare the immunofluorescence method for the detection of soy protein in meat products purchased from the retail market with other microscopic methods (immunohistochemical and histochemical), with the ELISA reference method and with the confirmatory results. Within the research, 127 meat products purchased in the retail network were examined using the immunofluorescence method used for the detection of soy protein. The method was compared to Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA), immunohistochemical, and histochemical methods. According to McNemar's test, noncompliance between the immunofluorescence method and immunohistochemical method was low. In addition, a significant difference between the fluorescence method and ELISA (P < 0.05) and a highly significant difference between the fluorescence method and histochemical examination (P < 0.01) was found. The immunofluorescence method was also compared with confirmatory results. According to McNemar's test, non-compliance between the immunofluorescence method and confirmatory results was low. The results showed the possibilities of this new method to detect the content of soy protein in meat products.

show abstract

“…Several methods can be used to detect soy in food, including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) (Scharf et al 2013) and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) (Stefanova et al 2013) with isolation using cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB), as well as microscopic, histological, and immunohistochemical methods (Pospiech et al 2011) and chromatographic methods (Leitner et al 2006). Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-based methods (like PCR techniques) are methods of choice due to their specificity and sensitivity and are suitable for the detection of very small amounts of DNA in processed food products (Mafra et al 2008;Jasbeer et al 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detection of soy in food from the Czech market using ELISA and PCR methods

Kružíková¹,

Popelková²,

Tšponová³

et al. 2022

Czech J. Food Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Soy is considered an allergen under Regulation No. 1169/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which mandates the labelling of soy allergen on food packaging. This study is focused on detecting soy in food products using two kinds of methods. The first method, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), was performed using two commercial kits (Veratox for Soy Allergen; Neogen, USA). The second method, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), was carried out with two different deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)-isolating kits and DNA isolation via the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) method. A total of 57 samples of food were tested, including 45 samples of animal origin and 12 samples of plant origin. The results were compared with information on the packaging. From the group of samples that contained soy according to the packaging (12 pieces), 9 samples were found to be positive by ELISA method, 10 samples by the CTAB method and 11 samples by GeneSpin. On the other hand, from the group of samples that should not contain soy according to the packaging (30 pieces), the presence of soy in 2 samples was detected by ELISA. No significant difference was found between the examined methods. Results show that the situation on the market is satisfactory and that only products declared as containing traces of soy appear to be problematic.

show abstract

Comparison of the results of the ELISA, histochemical, and immunohistochemical detection of soya proteins in meat products

Cited by 6 publications

References 15 publications

Detection of Carrageenan in Meat Products Using Lectin Histochemistry

Detection of Carrageenan in Meat Products Using Lectin Histochemistry

Comparison of new immunofluorescence method for detection of soy protein in meat products with immunohistochemical, histochemical, and ELISA methods

Detection of soy in food from the Czech market using ELISA and PCR methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About