Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis
Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins 80523, USA. Twenty forage samples were collected and selected for variation in nitrate content. Each forage samples was analyzed 4 times by 4 different methods: diphenylamine spot pl...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation 1995-10, Vol.7 (4), p.527-530 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 530 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 527 |
| container_title | Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation |
| container_volume | 7 |
| creator | Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.) Hamar, D.W Hoesterey, M.L Sonderman, J.P Odde, K.G |
| description | Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins 80523, USA.
Twenty forage samples were collected and selected for variation in nitrate content. Each forage samples was analyzed 4 times by 4 different methods: diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic. Five feed extracts were spiked with 2 different amounts of nitrate and analyzed by each method. The spectrophotometric and nitrate-selective electrode had similar percent recoveries, which were close to 100%. The nitrate-selective electrode method had the least variation of the 4 methods. The diphenylamine spot plate method had the poorest average recovery, greatest variation, and was the least accurate. The average coefficients of variation for all samples within a method were 15%, 12%, 6.4%, and 16 for the diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic methods, respectively. The variation in the nitrate-selective electrode method was lower (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1177/104063879500700418 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_77836666</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_104063879500700418</sage_id><sourcerecordid>77836666</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3468-439a00f57e89edb8a76a54d94e261b3646ba3188e6958d5c32fb61f64cea42523</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kFtLwzAYhoMoU6d_YCD0Ru_qcj5cyvAEAy901yFt0y2jbWayKvv3pnR4IxgISfje94E8AMwQvEdIiDmCFHIihWIQCggpkifgAilKcqoIP033FMiHxDm4jHELIcNMoAmYSCZhIlwAvvDtzgQXfZf5Oqt9H7LW7je-iukRhm3WNuvcPpi9zUxnmkN08Qqc1aaJ9vp4TsHq6fFj8ZIv355fFw_LvCSUy5wSZSCsmbBS2aqQRnDDaKWoxRwVhFNeGIKktFwxWbGS4LrgqOa0tIZihskU3I3cXfCfvY173bpY2qYxnfV91EJIwtNKQTwGy-BjDLbWu-BaEw4aQT3I0n9lpdLNkd4Xra1-K0c7aT4f5zE50NvkJn0__k-8HRsbt958u2B1bE3TJD7W26_KCU01wwN5NuZq47VZJ_969a4Yl5Ii8gNS9oWS</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>77836666</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.) ; Hamar, D.W ; Hoesterey, M.L ; Sonderman, J.P ; Odde, K.G</creator><creatorcontrib>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.) ; Hamar, D.W ; Hoesterey, M.L ; Sonderman, J.P ; Odde, K.G</creatorcontrib><description>Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins 80523, USA.
Twenty forage samples were collected and selected for variation in nitrate content. Each forage samples was analyzed 4 times by 4 different methods: diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic. Five feed extracts were spiked with 2 different amounts of nitrate and analyzed by each method. The spectrophotometric and nitrate-selective electrode had similar percent recoveries, which were close to 100%. The nitrate-selective electrode method had the least variation of the 4 methods. The diphenylamine spot plate method had the poorest average recovery, greatest variation, and was the least accurate. The average coefficients of variation for all samples within a method were 15%, 12%, 6.4%, and 16 for the diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic methods, respectively. The variation in the nitrate-selective electrode method was lower (P</description><identifier>ISSN: 1040-6387</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1943-4936</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/104063879500700418</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8580177</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Los Angeles, CA: J Vet Diagn Invest</publisher><subject>ACCURACY ; ALIMENT POUR ANIMAUX ; ANALYTICAL METHODS ; Animal Feed - analysis ; Animals ; Cattle ; CHEMICAL COMPOSITION ; CHROMATOGRAPHIE LIQUIDE HAUTE PRESS ; Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods ; Colorimetry - methods ; COMPOSICION QUIMICA ; COMPOSITION CHIMIQUE ; CROMATOGRAFIA LIQUIDA ALTA PRESION ; Diphenylamine ; DIPHENYLAMINE SPOT PLATE ; Electrochemistry - methods ; ESPECTROMETRIA ; FEEDS ; HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY ; HPLC ; NITRATE ; NITRATE-SELECTIVE ELECTRODE ; NITRATES ; Nitrates - analysis ; NITRATOS ; PIENSOS ; Poaceae ; SPECTROMETRIE ; SPECTROMETRY ; SPECTROPHOTOMETRY ; Spectrophotometry - methods ; TECHNIQUE ANALYTIQUE ; TECNICAS ANALITICAS ; VARIATION</subject><ispartof>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation, 1995-10, Vol.7 (4), p.527-530</ispartof><rights>1995 American Association of Veterinary Laboratory Diagnosticians</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3468-439a00f57e89edb8a76a54d94e261b3646ba3188e6958d5c32fb61f64cea42523</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3468-439a00f57e89edb8a76a54d94e261b3646ba3188e6958d5c32fb61f64cea42523</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8580177$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamar, D.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoesterey, M.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sonderman, J.P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Odde, K.G</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis</title><title>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation</title><addtitle>J Vet Diagn Invest</addtitle><description>Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins 80523, USA.
Twenty forage samples were collected and selected for variation in nitrate content. Each forage samples was analyzed 4 times by 4 different methods: diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic. Five feed extracts were spiked with 2 different amounts of nitrate and analyzed by each method. The spectrophotometric and nitrate-selective electrode had similar percent recoveries, which were close to 100%. The nitrate-selective electrode method had the least variation of the 4 methods. The diphenylamine spot plate method had the poorest average recovery, greatest variation, and was the least accurate. The average coefficients of variation for all samples within a method were 15%, 12%, 6.4%, and 16 for the diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic methods, respectively. The variation in the nitrate-selective electrode method was lower (P</description><subject>ACCURACY</subject><subject>ALIMENT POUR ANIMAUX</subject><subject>ANALYTICAL METHODS</subject><subject>Animal Feed - analysis</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Cattle</subject><subject>CHEMICAL COMPOSITION</subject><subject>CHROMATOGRAPHIE LIQUIDE HAUTE PRESS</subject><subject>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods</subject><subject>Colorimetry - methods</subject><subject>COMPOSICION QUIMICA</subject><subject>COMPOSITION CHIMIQUE</subject><subject>CROMATOGRAFIA LIQUIDA ALTA PRESION</subject><subject>Diphenylamine</subject><subject>DIPHENYLAMINE SPOT PLATE</subject><subject>Electrochemistry - methods</subject><subject>ESPECTROMETRIA</subject><subject>FEEDS</subject><subject>HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY</subject><subject>HPLC</subject><subject>NITRATE</subject><subject>NITRATE-SELECTIVE ELECTRODE</subject><subject>NITRATES</subject><subject>Nitrates - analysis</subject><subject>NITRATOS</subject><subject>PIENSOS</subject><subject>Poaceae</subject><subject>SPECTROMETRIE</subject><subject>SPECTROMETRY</subject><subject>SPECTROPHOTOMETRY</subject><subject>Spectrophotometry - methods</subject><subject>TECHNIQUE ANALYTIQUE</subject><subject>TECNICAS ANALITICAS</subject><subject>VARIATION</subject><issn>1040-6387</issn><issn>1943-4936</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1995</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kFtLwzAYhoMoU6d_YCD0Ru_qcj5cyvAEAy901yFt0y2jbWayKvv3pnR4IxgISfje94E8AMwQvEdIiDmCFHIihWIQCggpkifgAilKcqoIP033FMiHxDm4jHELIcNMoAmYSCZhIlwAvvDtzgQXfZf5Oqt9H7LW7je-iukRhm3WNuvcPpi9zUxnmkN08Qqc1aaJ9vp4TsHq6fFj8ZIv355fFw_LvCSUy5wSZSCsmbBS2aqQRnDDaKWoxRwVhFNeGIKktFwxWbGS4LrgqOa0tIZihskU3I3cXfCfvY173bpY2qYxnfV91EJIwtNKQTwGy-BjDLbWu-BaEw4aQT3I0n9lpdLNkd4Xra1-K0c7aT4f5zE50NvkJn0__k-8HRsbt958u2B1bE3TJD7W26_KCU01wwN5NuZq47VZJ_969a4Yl5Ii8gNS9oWS</recordid><startdate>199510</startdate><enddate>199510</enddate><creator>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.)</creator><creator>Hamar, D.W</creator><creator>Hoesterey, M.L</creator><creator>Sonderman, J.P</creator><creator>Odde, K.G</creator><general>J Vet Diagn Invest</general><general>SAGE Publications</general><scope>FBQ</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199510</creationdate><title>Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis</title><author>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.) ; Hamar, D.W ; Hoesterey, M.L ; Sonderman, J.P ; Odde, K.G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3468-439a00f57e89edb8a76a54d94e261b3646ba3188e6958d5c32fb61f64cea42523</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1995</creationdate><topic>ACCURACY</topic><topic>ALIMENT POUR ANIMAUX</topic><topic>ANALYTICAL METHODS</topic><topic>Animal Feed - analysis</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Cattle</topic><topic>CHEMICAL COMPOSITION</topic><topic>CHROMATOGRAPHIE LIQUIDE HAUTE PRESS</topic><topic>Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods</topic><topic>Colorimetry - methods</topic><topic>COMPOSICION QUIMICA</topic><topic>COMPOSITION CHIMIQUE</topic><topic>CROMATOGRAFIA LIQUIDA ALTA PRESION</topic><topic>Diphenylamine</topic><topic>DIPHENYLAMINE SPOT PLATE</topic><topic>Electrochemistry - methods</topic><topic>ESPECTROMETRIA</topic><topic>FEEDS</topic><topic>HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY</topic><topic>HPLC</topic><topic>NITRATE</topic><topic>NITRATE-SELECTIVE ELECTRODE</topic><topic>NITRATES</topic><topic>Nitrates - analysis</topic><topic>NITRATOS</topic><topic>PIENSOS</topic><topic>Poaceae</topic><topic>SPECTROMETRIE</topic><topic>SPECTROMETRY</topic><topic>SPECTROPHOTOMETRY</topic><topic>Spectrophotometry - methods</topic><topic>TECHNIQUE ANALYTIQUE</topic><topic>TECNICAS ANALITICAS</topic><topic>VARIATION</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.)</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hamar, D.W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hoesterey, M.L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sonderman, J.P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Odde, K.G</creatorcontrib><collection>AGRIS</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bedwell, C.L. (Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.)</au><au>Hamar, D.W</au><au>Hoesterey, M.L</au><au>Sonderman, J.P</au><au>Odde, K.G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation</jtitle><addtitle>J Vet Diagn Invest</addtitle><date>1995-10</date><risdate>1995</risdate><volume>7</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>527</spage><epage>530</epage><pages>527-530</pages><issn>1040-6387</issn><eissn>1943-4936</eissn><abstract>Diagnostic Laboratory, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins 80523, USA.
Twenty forage samples were collected and selected for variation in nitrate content. Each forage samples was analyzed 4 times by 4 different methods: diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic. Five feed extracts were spiked with 2 different amounts of nitrate and analyzed by each method. The spectrophotometric and nitrate-selective electrode had similar percent recoveries, which were close to 100%. The nitrate-selective electrode method had the least variation of the 4 methods. The diphenylamine spot plate method had the poorest average recovery, greatest variation, and was the least accurate. The average coefficients of variation for all samples within a method were 15%, 12%, 6.4%, and 16 for the diphenylamine spot plate, spectrophotometric, nitrate-selective electrode, and high-performance liquid chromatographic methods, respectively. The variation in the nitrate-selective electrode method was lower (P</abstract><cop>Los Angeles, CA</cop><pub>J Vet Diagn Invest</pub><pmid>8580177</pmid><doi>10.1177/104063879500700418</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1040-6387 |
| ispartof | Journal of veterinary diagnostic investigation, 1995-10, Vol.7 (4), p.527-530 |
| issn | 1040-6387 1943-4936 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_77836666 |
| source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | ACCURACY ALIMENT POUR ANIMAUX ANALYTICAL METHODS Animal Feed - analysis Animals Cattle CHEMICAL COMPOSITION CHROMATOGRAPHIE LIQUIDE HAUTE PRESS Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid - methods Colorimetry - methods COMPOSICION QUIMICA COMPOSITION CHIMIQUE CROMATOGRAFIA LIQUIDA ALTA PRESION Diphenylamine DIPHENYLAMINE SPOT PLATE Electrochemistry - methods ESPECTROMETRIA FEEDS HIGH PRESSURE LIQUID CHROMATOGRAPHY HPLC NITRATE NITRATE-SELECTIVE ELECTRODE NITRATES Nitrates - analysis NITRATOS PIENSOS Poaceae SPECTROMETRIE SPECTROMETRY SPECTROPHOTOMETRY Spectrophotometry - methods TECHNIQUE ANALYTIQUE TECNICAS ANALITICAS VARIATION |
| title | Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-09T00%3A15%3A01IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20four%20methods%20for%20forage%20nitrate%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20veterinary%20diagnostic%20investigation&rft.au=Bedwell,%20C.L.%20(Colorado%20State%20University,%20Fort%20Collins,%20CO.)&rft.date=1995-10&rft.volume=7&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=527&rft.epage=530&rft.pages=527-530&rft.issn=1040-6387&rft.eissn=1943-4936&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/104063879500700418&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E77836666%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=77836666&rft_id=info:pmid/8580177&rft_sage_id=10.1177_104063879500700418&rfr_iscdi=true |