
doi: 10.1007/bf03192233
pmid: 23606068
Direct and indirect competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays were optimized for the determination of aflatoxin B1 in groundnut utilizing a specific monoclonal antibody developed at the University of Strathclyde, UK. The monoclonal antibody was conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (HRP) for direct competitive assay, while a commercially available goat-antimouse IgG-HRP conjugate was employed for indirect competitive ELISA. Both ELISAs detected aflatoxin B1 as low as 20 pg/well. Methanol-water-KCl (70 + 30 v/v, 0.5 %) extracts of groundnut were assayed by ELISA after diluting 1: 10 with PBS-Tween buffer or subjected to simple cleanup for 5:1 concentration prior to assay. The mean recoveries from groundnut spiked with 10 to 200/ig/kg of pure aflatoxin B1 were >90% in either ELISA, but the toxin recoveries at concentrations of 1-5μg/kg were only 65-67 % when subjected to cleanup and concentration before assay. The mean within-assay, inter-assay, and sub-sample coefficients of variation by ELISA of aflatoxin B1 in naturally contaminated groundnuts were, respectively, 8.9%, 11.1%, and 7.9% for direct competitive assay and 4.6%, 11.2%, and 8% for indirect competitive assay. Both ELISA methods are useful for routine analysis of aflatoxin B1 in groundnuts.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
