Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  316 / 350 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 316 / 350 Next Page
Page Background

Table 13.

Method Comparison Results for Yogurt at 60 Hours.

1

SD

SD

(S

r

)

(S

r

)

1

<10

<0

<10

<0

2

<10

<0

<10

<0

3

<10

<0

<10

<0

4

<10

<0

<10

<0

5

<10

<0

<10

<0

1 2.8 x10

2

2.4472

2.6 x10

2

2.415

2 2.0 x10

2

2.301

3.2 x 10

2

2.5051

3 2.8 x10

2

2.4472

3.0 x1 0

2

2.4771

4 3.0 x 10

2

2.4771

3.2 x 10

2

2.5051

5 3.6 x 10

2

2.5563

3.4 x 10

2

2.5315

1 2.8 x10

3

3.4472

2.4 x10

3

3.3802

2 2.4 x10

3

3.3802

3.6 x10

3

3.5563

3 2.8 x10

3

3.4472

2.6 x10

3

3.415

4 2.6 x10

3

3.415

3.4 x10

3

3.5315

5 2.6 x10

3

3.415

2.4 x10

3

3.3802

1 2.0 x 10

4

4.301

2.2 x 10

4

4.3424

2 1.6 x 10

4

4.2041

1.6 x 10

4

4.2041

3 2.0 x 10

4

4.301

2.2 x 10

4

4.3424

4 1.6 x 10

4

4.2041

1.4 x 10

4

4.1461

5 1.3 x 10

4

4.1139

1.6 x 10

4

4.2041

High

4.2248 0.0787

4.2478 0.0895 0.6776

Medium

3.4209 0.0279

3.4526 0.085 0.4633

NA

Low

2.4458 0.0942

2.4868 0.0445 0.3973

Uninoculated

-

-

-

Level

Sample

3M RYM Petrifilm

ISO / FDA BAM

-

p-value

Ct/g LOG MEAN

Ct/g LOG MEAN

2

3

Sour Cream 48 and 60 hours

4

No statistically significant difference was observed between 2 of the 3 levels analyzed between the two

5

methods. The p-values calculated at a 95% confidence level for the low and medium levels were 0.8528

6

and 0.3007. The 3M RYM method had a higher repeatability value than the ISO and FDA BAM methods

7

for the low and medium levels, with S

r

values, respectively, of 0.0681 and 0.0733 for the low level and

8

0.3970 and 0.4310 for the medium level. The t-test indicated a significant difference between the 3M

9

RYM method and the ISO and FDA BAM methods on the high level with a p-value of 0.0457. The means

10

were 2.9943 for the 3M RYM method and 3.1259 for the ISO and FDA BAM methods. For the high level

11

the ISO and FDA BAM had higher repeatability values compared to the RYM method, with S

r

values,

12

respectively, of 0.0367 and 0.1050. Detailed results are presented in Table 14.

13

14

15

20

AOAC Research Institute

Expert Review Panel Use Only

OMAMAN-16D/ PTM Report

ERP Use Only - December 2014