• Title/Summary/Keyword: MassARRAY

Search Result 292, Processing Time 0.019 seconds

Analytical Method for Determination of Laccaic Acids in Foods with HPLC-PDA and Monitoring (식품 중 락카인산 성분 분리정제를 통한 분석법 확립 및 실태조사)

  • Jae Wook Shin;Hyun Ju Lee;Eunjoo Lim;Jung Bok Kim
    • Journal of Food Hygiene and Safety
    • /
    • v.38 no.5
    • /
    • pp.390-401
    • /
    • 2023
  • Major components of lac coloring include laccaic acids A, B, C, and E. The Korean Food Additive Code regulates the use of lac coloring and prohibits its use in ten types of food products including natural food products. Since no commercial standards are available for laccaic acids A, B, C, and E, a standard for lac pigment itself was used to separate laccaic acids from the lac pigment molecule. A standard for each laccaic acid was then obtained by fractionation. To obtain pure lac pigment for use in food by High performance Liquid Chromatography Photo Diode Array (PDA), a C8 column yielded the best resolution among various tested columns and mobile phases. A qualitative analytical method using High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) Tandem Mass(LC-MS/MS) was developed. The conditions for fast and precise sample preparation begin with extraction using methanol and 0.3% ammonium phosphate, followed by concentration. The degree of precision observed for the analyses of ham, tomato juice and Red pepper paste was 0.3-13.1% (Relative Standard Deviation (RSD%)), degree of accuracy was 90.3-122.2% with r2=0.999 or above, and recovery rate was 91.6-114.9%. The limit of detection was 0.01-0.15 ㎍/mL, and the limits of quantitation ranged from 0.02 to 0.47 ㎍/mL. Lac pigment was not detected in 117 food products in the 10 food categories for which the use of lac pigment is banned. Multiple laccaic acids were detected in 105 food products in 6 food categories that are allowed to use lac color. Lac pigment concentrations range from 0.08 to 16.67 ㎍/mL.

Spatial effect on the diffusion of discount stores (대형할인점 확산에 대한 공간적 영향)

  • Joo, Young-Jin;Kim, Mi-Ae
    • Journal of Distribution Research
    • /
    • v.15 no.4
    • /
    • pp.61-85
    • /
    • 2010
  • Introduction: Diffusion is process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channel overtime among the members of a social system(Rogers 1983). Bass(1969) suggested the Bass model describing diffusion process. The Bass model assumes potential adopters of innovation are influenced by mass-media and word-of-mouth from communication with previous adopters. Various expansions of the Bass model have been conducted. Some of them proposed a third factor affecting diffusion. Others proposed multinational diffusion model and it stressed interactive effect on diffusion among several countries. We add a spatial factor in the Bass model as a third communication factor. Because of situation where we can not control the interaction between markets, we need to consider that diffusion within certain market can be influenced by diffusion in contiguous market. The process that certain type of retail extends is a result that particular market can be described by the retail life cycle. Diffusion of retail has pattern following three phases of spatial diffusion: adoption of innovation happens in near the diffusion center first, spreads to the vicinity of the diffusing center and then adoption of innovation is completed in peripheral areas in saturation stage. So we expect spatial effect to be important to describe diffusion of domestic discount store. We define a spatial diffusion model using multinational diffusion model and apply it to the diffusion of discount store. Modeling: In this paper, we define a spatial diffusion model and apply it to the diffusion of discount store. To define a spatial diffusion model, we expand learning model(Kumar and Krishnan 2002) and separate diffusion process in diffusion center(market A) from diffusion process in the vicinity of the diffusing center(market B). The proposed spatial diffusion model is shown in equation (1a) and (1b). Equation (1a) is the diffusion process in diffusion center and equation (1b) is one in the vicinity of the diffusing center. $$\array{{S_{i,t}=(p_i+q_i{\frac{Y_{i,t-1}}{m_i}})(m_i-Y_{i,t-1})\;i{\in}\{1,{\cdots},I\}\;(1a)}\\{S_{j,t}=(p_j+q_j{\frac{Y_{j,t-1}}{m_i}}+{\sum\limits_{i=1}^I}{\gamma}_{ij}{\frac{Y_{i,t-1}}{m_i}})(m_j-Y_{j,t-1})\;i{\in}\{1,{\cdots},I\},\;j{\in}\{I+1,{\cdots},I+J\}\;(1b)}}$$ We rise two research questions. (1) The proposed spatial diffusion model is more effective than the Bass model to describe the diffusion of discount stores. (2) The more similar retail environment of diffusing center with that of the vicinity of the contiguous market is, the larger spatial effect of diffusing center on diffusion of the vicinity of the contiguous market is. To examine above two questions, we adopt the Bass model to estimate diffusion of discount store first. Next spatial diffusion model where spatial factor is added to the Bass model is used to estimate it. Finally by comparing Bass model with spatial diffusion model, we try to find out which model describes diffusion of discount store better. In addition, we investigate the relationship between similarity of retail environment(conceptual distance) and spatial factor impact with correlation analysis. Result and Implication: We suggest spatial diffusion model to describe diffusion of discount stores. To examine the proposed spatial diffusion model, 347 domestic discount stores are used and we divide nation into 5 districts, Seoul-Gyeongin(SG), Busan-Gyeongnam(BG), Daegu-Gyeongbuk(DG), Gwan- gju-Jeonla(GJ), Daejeon-Chungcheong(DC), and the result is shown

    . In a result of the Bass model(I), the estimates of innovation coefficient(p) and imitation coefficient(q) are 0.017 and 0.323 respectively. While the estimate of market potential is 384. A result of the Bass model(II) for each district shows the estimates of innovation coefficient(p) in SG is 0.019 and the lowest among 5 areas. This is because SG is the diffusion center. The estimates of imitation coefficient(q) in BG is 0.353 and the highest. The imitation coefficient in the vicinity of the diffusing center such as BG is higher than that in the diffusing center because much information flows through various paths more as diffusion is progressing. A result of the Bass model(II) shows the estimates of innovation coefficient(p) in SG is 0.019 and the lowest among 5 areas. This is because SG is the diffusion center. The estimates of imitation coefficient(q) in BG is 0.353 and the highest. The imitation coefficient in the vicinity of the diffusing center such as BG is higher than that in the diffusing center because much information flows through various paths more as diffusion is progressing. In a result of spatial diffusion model(IV), we can notice the changes between coefficients of the bass model and those of the spatial diffusion model. Except for GJ, the estimates of innovation and imitation coefficients in Model IV are lower than those in Model II. The changes of innovation and imitation coefficients are reflected to spatial coefficient(${\gamma}$). From spatial coefficient(${\gamma}$) we can infer that when the diffusion in the vicinity of the diffusing center occurs, the diffusion is influenced by one in the diffusing center. The difference between the Bass model(II) and the spatial diffusion model(IV) is statistically significant with the ${\chi}^2$-distributed likelihood ratio statistic is 16.598(p=0.0023). Which implies that the spatial diffusion model is more effective than the Bass model to describe diffusion of discount stores. So the research question (1) is supported. In addition, we found that there are statistically significant relationship between similarity of retail environment and spatial effect by using correlation analysis. So the research question (2) is also supported.

  • PDF

  • (34141) Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, 245, Daehak-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon
    Copyright (C) KISTI. All Rights Reserved.