2015
DOI: 10.1080/19393210.2014.991355
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monosodium glutamate in chicken and beef stock cubes using high-performance liquid chromatography

Abstract: In this survey monosodium glutamate (MSG) levels in chicken and beef stock cube samples were determined. A total number of 122 stock cube samples (from brands A, B, C, D) were collected from local markets in Ankara, Turkey. High-performance liquid chromatography with diode array detection (HPLC-DAD) was used for quantitative MSG determination. Mean MSG levels (±SE) in samples of A, B, C and D brands were 14.6 ± 0.2 g kg⁻¹, 11.9 ± 0.3 g kg⁻¹, 9.7 ± 0.1 g kg⁻¹ and 7.2 ± 0.1 g kg⁻¹, respectively. Differences betw… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Certain substances such as L-cysteine, dopamine, cholesterol, creatinine, and L-cystine at a 100-fold concentration of GLU affected the RTP intensity of the system less than ± 5%. To check the accuracy of the developed method, the same chicken and beef cubes have been analyzed with the HPLC-UV method 12 before the RTP technique and the obtained results were consistent with the RTP method. Moreover, in order to understand the accuracy of the extraction procedure and the proposed method, and to check the possible interferences of other substances coming from the samples, recovery studies were performed 38 by spiking preanalyzed samples with appropriate amounts of the stock solution of GLU.…”
Section: Interferencesmentioning
confidence: 83%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Certain substances such as L-cysteine, dopamine, cholesterol, creatinine, and L-cystine at a 100-fold concentration of GLU affected the RTP intensity of the system less than ± 5%. To check the accuracy of the developed method, the same chicken and beef cubes have been analyzed with the HPLC-UV method 12 before the RTP technique and the obtained results were consistent with the RTP method. Moreover, in order to understand the accuracy of the extraction procedure and the proposed method, and to check the possible interferences of other substances coming from the samples, recovery studies were performed 38 by spiking preanalyzed samples with appropriate amounts of the stock solution of GLU.…”
Section: Interferencesmentioning
confidence: 83%
“…10 GLU is generally determined by spectrophotometric, luminescence, and chromatographic techniques after a derivatization step, which is necessary to enhance the detection signals. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) required derivatization of GLU, which made possible its UV-Vis 11,12 and fluorimetric 13,14 detection in biological samples. Underivatized glutamic acid was analyzed with the use of mass spectrometric (MS) detection.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a remarkable result, MSG was detected in two instant soup samples although their labels indicated that they had no MSG contents. Demirhan et al (2015) examined the amount of L‐GLU of food samples via HPLC, and they found the MSG content between 5.70 and 18.3 g kg −1 in bouillons samples. Cebi et al (2018) determined the MSG content of foodstuffs using HPLC, and they detected the content as 130.5–153.9 g kg −1 in bouillons.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…So, the OPA-RTU derivatisation reagent was preferred as the derivatising agent instead of the OPA solution in the further experiments for the sake of time saving and simplicity for each analysis. (Demirhan et al, 2015). For this reason, the OPA-RTU contains 1 mg o-phthaldialdehyde per mL solution with 2-mercaptoethanol as the sulphhydryl moiety.…”
Section: Derivatisation Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, developing sensitive and rapid methods is highly demanded and plays an important role in food industry and clinical analysis. Various methods are available for determination of glutamate like chromatography (Acuna and Trias 2009, Buck et al 2009, Demirhan et al 2015, spectrophotometry (Acebal et al 2008) and fluorimetry (Tsukatani and Matsumoto 2005), electrophoresis (Tucci et al 1998) and potentiometry (G€ und€ uz et al 1988). However, most of these methods are cumbersome, time consuming, and require expensive apparatus and skilled person to operate.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%