Identification and Quantitation of Water-Soluble Synthetic Colors in Foods by Liquid Chromatography/Ultraviolet–Visible Method Development and Validation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A simple and sensitive liquid chromatography method of analysis has been developed and validated for the simultaneous quantitative determination of food colors in a broad range of foods. The method of analysis applies specific extraction solutions to obtain optimal color extraction. The extraction solutions are composed of different proportions of methanol and ammonium acetate, as the ion-pairing agent. Analysis was performed on reverse-phase C18 Poroshell column with ammonium acetate, methanol, acetonitrile, and acetone gradient elution as the mobile phases. Multiple-specific wavelengths were used to monitor color additives in the visible range to provide higher sensitivity and expanded scope needed for a large number of analytes. All 27 color compounds showed good linearity with regression coefficients predominantly above 0.990. The limit of detection and limit of quantitation values ranged from 0.10 to 0.43 and from 0.34 to 1.45 μg/g, respectively. The precision of the method ranged from 1.4 to 15.9%, while recoveries averaged 72% across all food commodities tested. The method of analysis offers convenience and adequate sensitivity for the analysis of a wide variety of food matrices containing a broad range of colors.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".