Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  60 / 120 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 60 / 120 Next Page
Page Background

Reproducibility

41

The standard deviation or relative standard deviation calculated from among-laboratory data.

42

Expressed as the reproducibility standard deviation (SD

R

); or % reproducibility relative standard

43

deviation (% RSD

R

).

44

45

Recovery

46

The fraction or percentage of spiked analyte that is recovered when the test sample is analyzed

47

using the entire method.

48

49

Dried Plant Materials

50

Dried whole or milled flower plant material from

Cannabis sativa

and its hybrids.

51

52

5.

Method Performance Requirements

:

53

54

See table 2 and 3.

55

56

6.

System suitability tests and/or analytical quality control:

57

Suitable methods will include blank check samples, and check standards at the lowest point and

58

midrange point of the analytical range.

59

60

7.

Reference Material(s):

61

62

See tables 1A and 1B for sources of reference materials.

63

64

Refer to Annex F:

Development and Use of In-House Reference Materials

in Appendix F:

Guidelines

65

for Standard Method Performance Requirements

, 19

th

Edition of the AOAC INTERNATIONAL Official

66

Methods of Analysis (2012). Available at:

http://www.eoma.aoac.org/app_f.pdf

67

68

8.

Validation Guidance

:

69

70

Method performance should be demonstrated with homogeneous samples. Inherent variation in

71

the plant may preclude or limit homogeneity for the following reasons: (a) they are resinous,

72

cannabinoids are concentrated in the resin, which can clump during grinding; (b) between flower

73

variation can be high, grinding multiple flowers can impact the homogeneity; (c) grinding can

74

introduce heat, which will cause degradation of cannabidiolic acids into neutral forms, resulting in

75

less accurate results. Grinding would be the best option for homogeneous samples, but in some

76

cases there are issues with clumped resin, highly variable samples and additional grinding would

77

impact the results and lead to inaccurate data.

78

79

Appendix D

: Guidelines for Collaborative Study Procedures To Validate Characteristics of a Method

80

of Analysis;

19

th

Edition of the AOAC INTERNATIONAL Official Methods of Analysis (2012). Available

81

at:

http://www.eoma.aoac.org/app_d.pdf

82

83

Appendix F

: Guidelines for Standard Method Performance Requirements; 19

th

Edition of the AOAC

84

INTERNATIONAL Official Methods of Analysis (2012). Available at:

85

http://www.eoma.aoac.org/app_f.pdf

86

87

Appendix K

: Guidelines for Dietary Supplements and Botanicals; 19

th

Edition of the AOAC

88

INTERNATIONAL Official Methods of Analysis (2012). Available on line at:

89

http://www.eoma.aoac.org/app_k.pdf

90

91