ArticleToxins2026
Variation Among Grain Elevator Testing Sites and Analytical Cross-Reactivity of Commercial Immunoassay Kits for Deoxynivalenol Detection in Maize.
Article in Toxins, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Commercial immunoassay-based test kits are widely used for rapid screening of deoxynivalenol (DON) in maize; however, inconsistent results are frequently observed under commercial testing conditions. This study evaluated two distinct contributors to such variability: analytical cross-reactivity of commercial DON immunoassays and between-site variability arising from routine grain elevator testing practices. Under controlled laboratory conditions, all kits accurately measured DON but responded differently to co-occurring DON derivatives. In naturally contaminated maize, immunoassay results reflected the combined presence of DON and co-occurring derivatives, consistent with differences in antibody specificity. An interlaboratory comparison involving multiple grain elevators analyzing identical blinded samples demonstrated substantial between-site variability in reported DON concentrations, with about 16% of results deviating by more than ±20% from the LC-MS/MS reference value. Collectively, these findings show that inconsistent DON test outcomes arise from the combined effects of antibody cross-reactivity and site-specific testing variability, rather than from any unreliability of the analytical methods themselves. This finding highlights the importance of interpreting rapid DON measurements considering these factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.