IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnlcjf/v43y2025i1id113-2024-cjfs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of three different methods for the determination of sulphur dioxide in fruit and vegetable products

Author

Listed:
  • Novel Kishor Bhujel

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Eugene Okraku Asare

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Tereza Podskalská

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Kshitiz Pokhrel

    (Department of Microbiology, Nutrition and Dietetics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Filip Beňo

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Vojtěch Kružík

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Aleš Rajchl

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

  • Helena Čížková

    (Department of Food Preservation, Faculty of Food and Biochemical Technology, University of Chemistry and Technology, Prague, Czech Republic)

Abstract

Sulphite is a food additive used worldwide. Globally, for concentrations above 10 mg.kg-1, sulphite compounds must be labelled as sulphur dioxide (SO2) on the packaging due to their potential health risks. This study compares spectrophotometric (S), titration (T) (modified optimised Monier-Williams, OMW), and reflectoquant (R) methods for measuring sulphur dioxide in twenty fruit and vegetable products. The samples comprise sulphited, unsulphited, and naturally sulphur-containing products (Allium genus such as garlic and onion). The article discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the method used. Allium genus samples yielded false-positive results, especially in fresh garlic samples with average SO2 concentrations of 46, 1 152, and 40 mg.kg-1 obtained by titration, spectrophotometric, and reflectoquant methods, respectively, therefore, none of the methods is suitable for testing this type of vegetables or products containing a low proportion of them. For other types of samples, the methods showed acceptable working characteristics. Recovery tests showed 89.5, 82.0, and 75.2% recovery with 2.8, 3.9, and 13.2% repeatability and the limit of quantification of 1, 10, and 25 mg.kg-1 in the spectrophotometric, titration, and reflectoquant methods. The result highlights the importance of method selection based on sample characteristics and regulatory compliance.

Suggested Citation

  • Novel Kishor Bhujel & Eugene Okraku Asare & Tereza Podskalská & Kshitiz Pokhrel & Filip Beňo & Vojtěch Kružík & Aleš Rajchl & Helena Čížková, 2025. "Comparison of three different methods for the determination of sulphur dioxide in fruit and vegetable products," Czech Journal of Food Sciences, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 43(1), pages 1-7.
  • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjf:v:43:y:2025:i:1:id:113-2024-cjfs
    DOI: 10.17221/113/2024-CJFS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://cjfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/113/2024-CJFS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: http://cjfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/113/2024-CJFS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/113/2024-CJFS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnlcjf:v:43:y:2025:i:1:id:113-2024-cjfs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.