↓ Skip to main content

Inter-laboratory validation of an inexpensive streamlined method to measure inorganic arsenic in rice grain

Overview of attention for article published in Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
18 Mendeley
Title
Inter-laboratory validation of an inexpensive streamlined method to measure inorganic arsenic in rice grain
Published in
Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry, May 2018
DOI 10.1007/s00216-018-1075-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rufus L. Chaney, Carrie E. Green, Steven J. Lehotay

Abstract

With the establishment by CODEX of a 200 ng/g limit of inorganic arsenic (iAs) in polished rice grain, more analyses of iAs will be necessary to ensure compliance in regulatory and trade applications, to assess quality control in commercial rice production, and to conduct research involving iAs in rice crops. Although analytical methods using high-performance liquid chromatography-inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry (HPLC-ICP-MS) have been demonstrated for full speciation of As, this expensive and time-consuming approach is excessive when regulations are based only on iAs. We report a streamlined sample preparation and analysis of iAs in powdered rice based on heated extraction with 0.28 M HNO3 followed by hydride generation (HG) under control of acidity and other simple conditions. Analysis of iAs is then conducted using flow-injection HG and inexpensive ICP-atomic emission spectroscopy (AES) or other detection means. A key innovation compared with previous methods was to increase the acidity of the reagent solution with 4 M HCl (prior to reduction of As5+ to As3+), which minimized interferences from dimethylarsinic acid. An inter-laboratory method validation was conducted among 12 laboratories worldwide in the analysis of six shared blind duplicates and a NIST Standard Reference Material involving different types of rice and iAs levels. Also, four laboratories used the standard HPLC-ICP-MS method to analyze the samples. The results between the methods were not significantly different, and the Horwitz ratio averaged 0.52 for the new method, which meets official method validation criteria. Thus, the simpler, more versatile, and less expensive method may be used by laboratories for several purposes to accurately determine iAs in rice grain. Graphical abstract Comparison of iAs results from new and FDA methods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 18 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 22%
Student > Master 2 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 11%
Researcher 2 11%
Professor 1 6%
Other 3 17%
Unknown 4 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Environmental Science 3 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 17%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Chemistry 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 8 44%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,688,303
of 25,411,814 outputs
Outputs from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#6,621
of 9,635 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#265,482
of 339,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Analytical & Bioanalytical Chemistry
#105
of 164 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,411,814 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,635 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.1. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,826 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 164 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.