Determination of Sulfamethazine in Swine and Cattle Feed by Reversed-Phase Liquid Chromatography with Post-Column Derivatization: Collaborative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A liquid chromatographic (LC) method for the analysis of sulfamethazine (SMT) in complete swine and cattle feed was collaboratively studied. The method uses post-column derivatization with dimethylaminobenzaldehyde and detection at 450 nm. To 5g finely ground feed, extractant (0.2N HCl + 1.5% diethylamine in 25% methanol), and internal standard solutions are added, and the SMT is extracted by shaking for 1 h. Clarified extract (high-level sample extract diluted to a target concentration of ca 5.5 microg/mL) is chromatographed on a Cla reversed-phase LC column with acetonitrile-2% acetic acid (17 + 83) mobile phase. Sulfamerazine is used as an internal, or surrogate standard to correct for variable recovery of sulfamethazine from a variety of feed matrixes. Six Youden matched-pair samples were sent to 10 collaborators in Korea, Canada, and the United States. Label claims on the commercial feeds ranged from 0.0077 to 0.22% SMT. The SMT mean recovery as determined from the 5 samples with known analyte content was 99.8%. The within-laboratory relative standard deviation (repeatability) ranged from 0.28 to 4.72%. Among-laboratory (including within-laboratory) relative standard deviation (reproducibility) ranged from 1.26 to 4.87%. The authors recommend the method for AOAC INTERNATIONAL Official First Action status.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".