These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of four methods for forage nitrate analysis.
    Author: Bedwell CL, Hamar DW, Hoesterey ML, Sonderman JP, Odde KG.
    Journal: J Vet Diagn Invest; 1995 Oct; 7(4):527-30. PubMed ID: 8580177.
    Abstract:
    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 < 0.05) than the other methods. The results from this study suggest that the nitrate-selective electrode method is more accurate and precise than the other methods of analysis tested.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]