Table 2. Recoveries from Anatoxin-a Fortified Water Samples Analyzed by the Two Developed cELISA (n = 3).
| direct |
indirect |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| sample | [A]a | Rb (%) | CV (%) | Rb (%) | CV (%) |
| tank | 0.5 | 117.4 | 9.9 | 103.8 | 7.8 |
| 1.0 | 103.3 | 5.1 | 92.9 | 5.9 | |
| 2.5 | 98.0 | 9.4 | 95.9 | 8.9 | |
| 5.0 | 94.8 | 8.9 | 96.5 | 14.1 | |
| 25.0 | 93.1 | 4.6 | 89.6 | 4.8 | |
| 50.0 | 94.2 | 8.1 | 89.2 | 8.9 | |
| 100.0 | 89.8 | 5.6 | 90.6 | 12.7 | |
| 250.0 | 90.9 | 14.6 | 97.3 | 14.7 | |
| 500.0 | 85.9 | 19.7 | 100.2 | 9.9 | |
| channel | 0.5 | 107.7 | 14.7 | 109.9 | 11.9 |
| 1.0 | 105.3 | 9.8 | 101.1 | 10.5 | |
| 2.5 | 98.5 | 10.1 | 98.5 | 7.9 | |
| 5.0 | 95.2 | 9.1 | 99.1 | 8.8 | |
| 25.0 | 91.2 | 11.0 | 88.7 | 7.8 | |
| 50.0 | 100.9 | 10.1 | 87.3 | 6.0 | |
| 100.0 | 96.6 | 10.3 | 85.9 | 4.1 | |
| 250.0 | 95.8 | 11.0 | 91.9 | 2.2 | |
| 500.0 | 90.9 | 14.9 | 88.8 | 5.4 | |
| lake | 0.5 | 106.4 | 15.7 | 101.2 | 9.9 |
| 1.0 | 92.1 | 11.2 | 94.8 | 8.9 | |
| 2.5 | 96.3 | 2.9 | 94.4 | 12.3 | |
| 5.0 | 94.8 | 4.7 | 98.8 | 11.8 | |
| 25.0 | 96.2 | 8.8 | 82.9 | 8.7 | |
| 50.0 | 102.4 | 3.3 | 86.6 | 10.0 | |
| 100.0 | 98.8 | 8.6 | 90.2 | 10.9 | |
| 250.0 | 102.1 | 10.4 | 95.7 | 9.8 | |
| 500.0 | 100.8 | 13.7 | 98.6 | 3.9 | |
| river | 0.5 | 112.3 | 15.4 | 105.9 | 7.4 |
| 1.0 | 86.3 | 13.8 | 94.1 | 5.3 | |
| 2.5 | 99.1 | 11.8 | 92.1 | 7.3 | |
| 5.0 | 100.1 | 8.0 | 93.5 | 8.2 | |
| 25.0 | 102.2 | 17.2 | 84.1 | 5.4 | |
| 50.0 | 104.7 | 11.5 | 86.3 | 8.9 | |
| 100.0 | 97.5 | 6.6 | 82.0 | 11.9 | |
| 250.0 | 96.4 | 3.1 | 85.2 | 7.8 | |
| 500.0 | 95.3 | 8.7 | 86.9 | 11.4 | |
a
Analyte concentration in ng/mL. Samples spiked at 0.5–5.0 ng/mL were diluted five times while samples spiked at 25.0–500.0 ng/mL were diluted 100 times.
b
Recovery values.