Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  319 / 350 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 319 / 350 Next Page
Page Background

Table 16.

Method Comparison Results for Sliced Apples at 48 Hours.

1

SD

SD

(S

r

)

(S

r

)

1 4.0 x10

1

1.6021

4.0x10

1

1.6021

2 1.0 x10

1

1.0000

1.0 x10

1

1.0000

3

1.0x10

1

1.0000

1.0 x10

1

1.0000

4

2.0x10

1

1.301

<10

<0

5

2.0x10

1

1.301

<10

<0

1 4.4 x10

2

2.6435

4.6x10

2

2.6628

2 1.2 x10

2

2.0792

1.1x10

2

2.0414

3 1.4 x10

2

2.1461

1.1 x10

2

2.0414

4 1.2 x10

2

2.0792

4.0 x10

1

1.6021

5 1.6 x10

2

2.2041

1.5 x10

2

2.1761

1 1.8 x 10

4

4.2553

3.0 x 10

4

4.4771

2 1.6 x 10

4

4.2041

1.9 x 10

4

4.2788

3 2.5 x 10

4

4.3979

3.6 x 10

4

4.5563

4 2.6 x 10

4

4.415

4.1x 10

4

4.6128

5 1.4 x 10

4

4.1461

1.9 x 10

4

4.2788

p-value

Ct/g

LOG MEAN

Ct/g

LOG MEAN

Low

1.2408 0.2519

1.2007

Level

Sample

3MRYMPetrifilm

ISO/FDA BAM

0.3476 0.8546

Medium

2.2304 0.2367

2.4414 0.3799 0.5476

High

4.2837 0.1187

4.4407 0.1555 0.1104

2

3

Sliced Apples 60 hours

4

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

5

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

6

0.8546, 0.3675, and 0.1104, respectively. The t-test indicated no significant differences between the 3M

7

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

8

than the ISO and FDA BAM methods for the all levels, with S

r

values, respectively, of 0.2519 and 0.3476

9

for the low level, 0.2133 and 0.3799 for the medium level, and 0.1187 and 0.1555 for the high level.

10

Detailed results are presented in Table 17.

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

23

AOAC Research Institute

Expert Review Panel Use Only

OMAMAN-16D/ PTM Report

ERP Use Only - December 2014