Assessing error upon sampling bagged animal feed

The University of Kentucky Division of Regulatory Services explored the adequacy of the AOAC Official Method 965.16 for sampling bagged animal feed and assessed the acceptability of the sample error introduced through the sampling process.  Eight feedstuffs were selected to represent a variety of feed forms, and their inherent differences in component size, with the objective of estimating the acceptability of the error introduced in the sampling process for each analyte. The findings suggest that the AOAC Official Method 965.16 is suitable for use in the collection of samples for regulatory purposes, particularly concerning mineral and drug components. The study's analysis and methodology provide valuable insights into the adequacy of the sampling method for regulatory purposes., This dataset was generated from protein, mineral(s), and drug analysis on 40 cores from each of 8 feedstuffs (320 individual cores)., , # Assessing Error upon Sampling Bagged Animal Feed

[https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.zcrjdfnn1](https://doi.org/10.5061/dryad.zcrjdfnn1)

## Description of the data and file structure

Assessing Error upon Sampling Bagged Animal Feed

Principle Investigator: Jennifer C. Combs, University of Kentucky, [[e-mail]](mailto:[e-mail])

Date of data collection: 2020-09-14 to 2020-09-21

Data collected from samples collected at Kentucky feed manufacturing facilities by inspectors trained and audited in the AOAC Official Method 965.16

Keywords: agriculture, animal feed, analytical variability, measurement uncertainty, sampling error, Association of American Feed Control Officials, AAFCO, Horwitz

Further, and more detailed, information about data collection, handling, and analysis is contained in the manuscript in which the data is published in the Journal of Regulatory Sciences DOI: [https://doi.org/10.21423/JRS.REGSCI.121293](https://doi.org/10.21423/JRS.REGSCI.121293...