Determination of Mycotoxin Contamination Levels in Rice and Dietary Exposure Assessment

Table 1

Results for validation, sensitivity (limit of detection (LD) and quantification(LQ)), linearity (determination coefficients: R², x: concentration, y: signal), and interday precision (n = 9, RSD: relative standard deviation) studied at three concentration levels.

Analyzed	Polished rice
	LD (μg/Kg)	LQ (μg/Kg)	Equation	R^2	Rec ± RSD (%)
					n1	n2	n3
AFB1	0.20	0.50	y = 0.8733x + 0.1618	0.9993	103.2 ± 14.2	97.9 ± 6.7	100.6 ± 3.1
AFB2	0.10	0.25	y = 2.7519x + 0.1752	0.9933	94.5 ± 13.3	97.1 ± 5.3	87.8 ± 1.2
AFG1	0.20	0.50	y = 0.8819x + 0.0706	0.9988	96.7 ± 2.6	101.2 ± 3.1	89.6 ± 4.4
AFG2	0.10	0.25	y = 1.3682x + 0.1805	0.9998	84.7 ± 13.3	89.7 ± 12.2	89.55 ± 9.1
OTA	0.25	0.50	y = 0.1761x + 0.1741	0.9991	78.4 ± 12.1	89.3 ± 9.8	85.9 ± 12.0
ZEA	9.35	18.75	y = 0.1238x − 0.1962	0.9997	97.06 ± 6.8	94.75 ± 1.7	95.61 ± 1.6
Paddy rice
AFB1	0.20	0.50	y = 0.9529x − 0.0574	0.9998	104.1 ± 2.4	95.4 ± 1.0	93.88 ± 1.0
AFB2	0.10	0.25	y = 2.7299x − 0.2048	0.9998	115.4 ± 2.4	97.7 ± 0.5	91.3 ± 0.6
AFG1	0.20	0.50	y = 0.6033x + 0.1797	0.9979	102.3 ± 3.2	100.9 ± 1.5	110.3 ± 3.1
AFG2	0.10	0.25	y = 0.7925x + 0.4338	0.9982	111.9 ± 4.6	106.4 ± 5.6	94.4 ± 1.0
OTA	0.25	0.50	y = 0.1730x + 0.1526	0.9996	100.3 ± 13.4	96.92 ± 6.6	98.8 ± 2.0
ZEA	9.35	18.75	y = 0.1303x − 0.6474	0.9986	101.7 ± 4.4	103.3 ± 1.6	98.5 ± 3.3