Foods · 6 authors, 1 centre
This summary was generated by AI from a single paper. It has not been reviewed by a clinician and is not clinical advice. Verify against the source before acting on it.
This study compared XRF and ICP-OES methods for determining zinc concentration in rice grains, finding a strong positive correlation (R²=0.83, p=0.000). The main limitation is that XRF has higher detection limits and may be affected by sample inhomogeneity, but it offers a cost-effective and rapid alternative for large-scale screening.
Rice is a major staple crop, and zinc deficiency affects billions globally, making accurate mineral analysis crucial for biofortification programs. ICP-OES is a standard method but is costly and time-consuming, while XRF is a potential low-cost alternative. Methods: The study analyzed 200 dehusked rice samples and 4 known high-Zn samples using both XRF and ICP-OES. XRF used 3-5 g samples with minimal preparation, while ICP-OES involved acid digestion. Statistical analysis included linear regression and Pearson correlation. Key Results: There was a high positive correlation between XRF and ICP-OES results, with R²=0.83, p=0.000, and Pearson correlation of 0.91. XRF had a limit of detection (LOD) of 3 ppm and limit of quantification (LOQ) of 10 ppm, compared to ICP-OES with LOD 0.5 ppm and LOQ 1.2 ppm. Zn concentrations ranged from 12-30 ppm (XRF) and 9.7-26.2 ppm (ICP-OES). Limitations: XRF has higher detection limits, sample inhomogeneity may cause errors, and it cannot analyze elements lighter than sodium. The study only focused on zinc in rice. Implications: XRF is a reliable, cost-effective, and rapid method for screening zinc in rice, suitable for large-scale breeding programs to improve micronutrient content.
