Table 1.

Common analytical techniques used for detection of gluten in foods.

Common gluten detection techniques	Strengths	Limitations
Sandwich ELISA	- Commercially available - Specific - Sensitive - Robust - Quantitative analysis of intact gluten is possible	- Not suitable for quantitation of fermented-hydrolyzed gluten - Lack of certified reference materials limit the accuracy of the results
Competitive ELISA	- Commercially available - Appropriate for fermented-hydrolyzed gluten	- Usually less sensitive and robust compared to sandwich ELISA - Appropriate calibrant is needed for accurate analysis results
Immunosensors/ Dipsticks/Lateral flow devices (LFDs)	- User friendly - Rapid analysis - Useful for on-site analysis - Commercially available	- Usually qualitative or semi-quantitative
Western blots	- Separates and detects gluten proteins according to their size - Can be used as a confirmatory technique for ELISA	- Less sensitive compared to ELISAs - Not commercially available - Requires expertise - Usually qualitative/semi-quantitative
Mass spectrometry	- Highly sensitive - Can directly detect proteins/peptides that are not detected by immunological techniques - Quantitative analysis is possible	- Expensive equipments - Requires expertise - Similar to the ELISAs need certified reference materials for accurate quantitation - Depends on publicly available databases of wheat and barley proteins, which in most cases are incomplete or are poorly curated
DNA-based methods	- Stable analyte - DNA is more efficiently extracted compared to proteins - Can be used as a highly sensitive screening method for the presence of gluten containing cereals - Quantitative analysis is possible using quantitative real-time PCR (Q-PCR)	- Unsuitable for highly processed or fermented-hydrolyzed foods
Aptamer-based assays	- New generation methods - Highly sensitive	- Extensive validation studies are lacking in different food matrices