 Application Data Sheet 1
Title
Comparison of Distell Fatmeter and Fosslet methods of lipid analysis.
Product
Raw minced (ground) beef from shops and supermarkets in the Aberdeen area.
Data Source
Torry Research Station.
Sampling Method
Eight measurements made on 500g hand compressed samples
Statistics
Number of mince samples : 14
Maximum lipid content (Fosslet) : 33.8%
Minimum lipid content (Fosslet) : 4.6%
Regression equation, y = a + bx a = 1.14; b = 0.977 (y is Fatmeter result, x is Fosslet)
Correlation coefficient r : 0.979
Standard error : ± 1.46
 |
| Comparison of Fosslet and Distell methods for Lipid Measurement |
Comments
These measurements were taken using the recommended procedure.
Conclusion
The standard error could be diminished by taking more readings.
Application Data Sheet 2
Title
Comparison of Distell Fatmeter and Fosslet methods of lipid analysis.
Product
Raw minced (ground) beef from shops and supermarkets in the Aberdeen area. Minced beef samples taken from production at Midland Meat Packers (MMP).
Data Source
Torry Research Station (TRS) and Foss Electric.
Sampling Method
Eight measurements made on 500g hand compressed samples.
Statistics
Number of mince samples : 33
Maximum lipid content (Fosslet) : 33.8%
Minimum lipid content (Fosslet) : 4.6%
Regression equation, y = a + bx a = 0.607; b = 1.004 (y is Fatmeter result, x is Fosslet)
Correlation coefficient r : 0.981
Standard error : ± 1.14
 |
| Comparison of Fosslet and Distell methods for Lipid Measurement |
Comments
These measurements include those shown in Data Sheet 1. Because the MMP data cover only a narrow range of fat contents this allows them to be seen as actually equivalent to the previous data.
Conclusion
Their inclusion does not significantly change any of the regression parameters.
Application Data Sheet 3
Title
Comparison of Distell Fatmeter and Fosslet methods of lipid analysis.
Product
Raw Minced pork from retailer in Elgin.
Data Source
Distell Industries Ltd.
Sampling Method
Eight measurements made on 500 g, hand compressed samples.
Statistics
Number of mince samples : 11
Maximum lipid content (Fosslet): 59.1%
Minimum lipid content (Fosslet): 8.95%
Regression equation, y = a + bx: a =0.994; b=0.962 (y is Fatmeter result, x is Fosslet)
Correlation coefficient (r) : 0.986
Standard error : ±2.5
 |
| Comparison of Fosslet and Distell methods for Lipid Measurement |
Comments
There is high correlation between these methods although the number of data is small.
Conclusion
The standard error is large due to both this small number of samples, and the large range of fat contents. More samples would reduce this considerably.
|
