1 / 13

36th ICAR Session – 16 June 2006 Niagara Falls, New York, USA

The way to reference systems and centralised calibration for milk recording testing – present status in Germany. 36th ICAR Session – 16 June 2006 Niagara Falls, New York, USA. Joint Meeting of ICAR Reference Laboratory Network and NALMA. Agenda. remarks on „reference systems“

erik
Download Presentation

36th ICAR Session – 16 June 2006 Niagara Falls, New York, USA

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The way to reference systemsand centralised calibrationfor milk recording testing –present status in Germany 36th ICAR Session – 16 June 2006 Niagara Falls, New York, USA Joint Meeting of ICAR Reference Laboratory Network and NALMA

  2. Agenda • remarks on „reference systems“ • centralised calibration? • present status in Germany • outlook

  3. remarks on reference systems • global trade needs global validity of analytical results! • validity means equivalence • worldwide at any place • at any point in time • despite what method is used anywhere – anytime – anyhow

  4. sources of „errors“ in equivalence • reference method • reference lab • SRM or CRM • characterization • „quality“ (shelf life, shipment, …) • calibration procedure • routine method • information failures (missing, comparability)

  5. source of „error“ calibration – the traditional way of life ?  SCC calibration 124.000 relating something variable to a certified source ref.met „linear calibration model“ ref.met = reference method reference lab routine analyzer secundary reference material

  6. ? result the analytical problem what about interpretation? differences?  who is right? the „real“ world claim  there is only one truth! analytics

  7. do we need centralised calibration? • we need calibration, because we have to use routine methods • high throughput • high performance (precision characteristics) • data availability and handling • low labour, low costs • traditional linear calibration schemes have to be interlinked to reduce equivalence failures

  8. situation in Germany

  9. situation in Germany (12.2007) • 65.850 farms under DHI (of 95.870) • 3.514.000 cows under DHI (of 4.730.000) • ~35 mio. DHI samples • 19 labs, ~330 staff • ~50 kombi-analyzers

  10. lab QA sources of „errors“ in equivalence interlaboratory reference system • reference method • reference lab • SRM or CRM • characterization • „quality“ (shelf life, shipment, …) • calibration procedure • routine method • information failures (missing, comparability) QSE – deep frozen RM (8 ref.labs – very long shelf life)

  11. AFEMA ring trials situation in Germany

  12. outlook • Analytical people are more and more aware that equivalency means cooperation on all levels – locally – nationally – internationally! • International structures for implementation of reference systems are missing so far. What can ICAR do? • Joint new work item with IDF on reference systems! Centralised calibration is one issue…

More Related