PDF《不同前处理方法对食品中总砷含量测定 结果的影响》

第10 卷第5期食品安全质量检测学报Vol.

10 No.

5 2019 年3月Journal of Food Safety and Quality Mar. ,

2019 *通讯作者: 雷宁生, 副主任技师, 主要研究方向为食品安全检测.E-mail: [email protected] *Corresponding author: Lei Ning-Sheng, Associate Chief Technician, Guangxi Center for Disease Prevention and Control,

18 Jinzhou Road, Nanning 530028, China. E-mail: [email protected] 不同前处理方法对食品中总砷含量测定 结果的影响 黎少豪, 雷宁生* , 吴训(广西壮族自治区疾病预防控制中心, 南宁 530028) 摘要: 目的 探究适合于测定不同食品中总砷的前处理方法.方法 分别采用干法消解、湿法消解、微波 消解分别对不同类型样品进行前处理, 食品中总砷含量依据 GB/T 5009.11―2014《食品中总砷及无机砷的测 定》氢化物原子荧光法进行, 通过计算回收率、精密度以及质控样品的准确性对测定结果进行分析和比较. 结果 对于大米这类成分简单的食品, 干法消解、 湿法消解、 微波消解

3 种方式进行前处理结果相差不大, 但 微波消解法处理后结果准确度更好.对于有机砷的形态主要为砷糖和砷脂类的海产品, 干灰化法消解后测得 结果最接近于真值, 微波和湿法消化存在消化不完全的问题. 对于油炸食品, 微波消解法准确度更好;

湿法消 解耗费试剂多, 时间长;

干法消化法操作容易起泡、飞溅, 从而造成样品砷损失.结论 不同消解方法在食品 中总砷的测定过程中各有优缺点, 要根据不同样品中砷形态来选择, 对于砷形态比较复杂的食品, 也可以利 用不同的消解方式的优点相互结合的方式-混合消解法对样品进行前处理. 关键词: 干法消解法;

湿法消解法;

微波消解法;

氢化物原子荧光法;

总砷 Effect of different pretreatment methods on determination results of total arsenic content in foods LI Shao-Hao* , LEI Ning-Sheng, WU Xun (The Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Nanning 530028, China) ABSTRACT: Objective To explore the pretreatment methods suitable for the determination of total arsenic in different foods. Methods Different types of samples were pretreated by dry digestion, wet digestion and microwave digestion, respectively. The total arsenic content in food was analyzed according to GB/T 5009.11―2014 Determination of total arsenic and inorganic arsenic in food by hydride atomic fluorescence spectrometry. The determination results were analyzed and compared by calculating the recovery, precision and the accuracy of quality control samples. Results For food with simple ingredients such as rice, the results of pretreatment by dry digestion, wet digestion and microwave digestion had little difference, but the accuracy of microwave digestion was better. For the marine products whose organic arsenic mainly consisted of arsenic sugars and arsenic lipids, the results obtained after digestion by dry ashing method were the closest to the truth value, and the digestion by microwave and wet method was incomplete. For fried foods, the microwave digestion method was more accurate, the wet digestion method consumed more reagents and took a long time;

the dry digestion method was easy to foam and splash, thus causing arsenic loss in the sample. Conclusion Different digestion methods have advantages and disadvantages in

1306 食品安全质量检测学报第10 卷the determination of total arsenic in food, which should be selected according to the morphology of arsenic in different samples. For food with complex arsenic morphology, mixed digestion method can also be used to pretreat samples by combining the advantages of different digestion methods. KEY WORDS: dry digestion;