ArticleJournal of agricultural and food chemistry2026
Comparative Evaluation of Total Ergot Alkaloids Determination by ELISA and UHPLC-MS/MS in Wheat: Implications of Cross-Reactivity and Matrix Effects.
Article in Journal of agricultural and food chemistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Development of a high-specificity nanobody-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the rapid detection of mebendazole residues.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ergot alkaloids (EAs) are toxic secondary metabolites found in cereal grains that require effective monitoring strategies. This study evaluated a commercially available enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for total ergot alkaloids against a validated ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS) reference method using naturally contaminated wheat and durum samples. Beyond method comparison, the study examined cross-reactivity and matrix effects to explain differences between immunoassay and chromatographic measurements. The ELISA demonstrated good repeatability and calibration stability across kits and days, but systematic bias relative to UHPLC-MS/MS was observed, with ELISA results generally underestimating chromatographic totals. ELISA accuracy assessment using certified reference and proficiency test materials revealed inconsistent bias, including occasional overestimation. ELISA cross-reactivity, based on half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC
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.