2018 Sugar ERP - Method Review Book

AOAC SMPR ERPs - 2018 METHOD REVIEW FORM

Submission ID

4097479995606925554

Submission Date

2018-08-10 17:06:39

Name

Philip Haselberger

E-mail

philip.haselberger@abbott.com

Organization

Abbott Nutrition

Title of Method

Sugar Profile by High Performance Anion Exchange Chromatography with Pulsed Amperometric Detection

AOAC Candidate Method Number (e.g. ALN-01)

SUG-003

Applicable SMPR

2018.001

I. Summary of the Method

Analytical test method for the determination of galactose, glucose, fructose, sucrose, lactose, and maltose in animal feed, pet food, and human food. Samples are extracted in 50:50 water EtOH and optionally further clarified with Carrez. Extracts are then filtered, dried, and reconstituted in water. This sample is then analyzed by HPAEC-PAD instrumentation (equipped with post column reagent delivery pump) against a 5-level linear internal standard corrected curve (with 1/x weighting). No. The potential impact of self hydrolysis by samples that have a low or high pH did not appear to be addressed. As far as I could tell pH was only explicitly mentioned in regard to impact on Carrez clean up. Also while the mitigation of enzymatic degradation was addressed in the previous publication it introduces an apparent low bias (50% EtOH relative to pure water extracts) in total sugar content (likely due to solubility issues).

II. Review of the Method Only 1. Does the applicability of the method support the applicability of the SMPR? If not, please explain what is missing. 2. Does the analytical technique(s) used in the method meet the SMPR? If not, please specify how it differs from what is stated in the SMPR. 3. Are the definitions specified in the SMPR used and applied appropriately in the method? If no, please indicate how the terms are used.

Mostly. Especially for isomaltulose there were some widely aberrant results (212.5% spike in lemon juice, & 144.2% in dog food for example).

Yes.