4.7 Review

The accessibility, necessity, and significance of certified reference materials for total selenium content and its species to improve food laboratories' performance

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 425, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.136460

关键词

Certified reference materials (CRMs); Food safety; Quality control; Quality assurance; Selenium; Selenium speciation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Micronutrients are vital nutrients that the body needs in small quantities daily to prevent deficiencies. Selenium (Se) is a natural mineral found in foods and is essential for the functioning of selenoproteins, which are crucial for maintaining human health. Monitoring dietary selenium levels and using certified reference materials (CRMs) are important for quality assurance. This review highlights the need for more certified CRMs for selenium species in food analysis laboratories to meet validation requirements and bridge the gap between available food matrix materials.
Micronutrients are one of the most important groups of nutrients that our body needs daily in trace amounts to tackle deficiencies. Selenium (Se) is a mineral that occurs naturally in foods and is an essential component of selenoproteins that support the healthy functioning of the human body. Therefore, monitoring dietary Se concentrations must be a higher priority to meet daily intakes. Fulfillment can be addressed through applying various analytical techniques, and the certified reference materials (CRMs) tool plays a crucial role in quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). The availability of certified CRMs for total Se content with addition to their species is presented. The review emphasizes the necessity of incorporating more food matrix CRMs certifying Se species, apart from total Se content, to meet method validation requirements for food analysis laboratories. This would help CRM producers bridge the gap between available food matrix materials that are not certified for Se species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据