## 3 Results
fitted method (3.61 \(\upmu\)g/kg) showed a statistically significant difference compared to the others. Finally, the results of the kits did not show significant differences (Table 5). Since differences were observed between all cultivars and methods, deeper attention was paid only to the cultivars present in the shipments for 2020 and 2021 (Bella di Cerignola and Nocellara del Belice). Specifically for aflat, the ANOVA did not reveal any statistically significant differences between the two years observed and between the two cultivars. In contrast, for ochratoxin A, statistical differences (\(p\)-value \(<\) 0.001) between the averages were identified in the two years, but not between the two cultivars (Figure 2). Taken individually, the cultivars showed a different trend and distribution for both aflat and ochratoxin A. Specifically, the Bella di Cerignola cultivar had a higher concentration of aflat, ranging from a minimum value of 2.29 \(\upmu\)g/kg to a maximum value of 4 \(\upmu\)g/kg, while the Nocellara del Belice cultivar had a more homogeneous concentration for the year 2020 and a more uneven situation for the year 2021. Regarding the concentration of \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Cultivar** & **1** & **Shipment** & **II** & **Shipment** & **IV Shipment** & **LC-MS/MS** \\ \hline  & Veratox® & Agraquant® & Veratox® & Agraquant® & Veratox® & Agraquant® & Veratox® & Agraquant® \\ \hline Nocellara del Belice & \(<\)LOQ & 2.78 \(\pm\) 0.23 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(2.88\) \(\pm\) 0.63 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\ Castelvetano method & \(<\)LOQ & 2.74 \(\pm\) 0.31 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\ Nocellara Enea & \(<\)LOQ & 2.49 \(\pm\) 0.28 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - & - \\ Natural method & 3.74 \(\pm\) 0.05 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & 2.29 \(\pm\) 0.08 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & 2.29 \(\pm\) 0.08 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & 3.42 \(\pm\) 0.32 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & 3.00 \(\pm\) 0.56 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\ Irana Banca & \(<\)LOQ & 3.86 \(\pm\) 0.41 & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - & - \\ Natural method & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & - & - & - \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\  & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ & \(<\)LOQ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Result of the ELISA method: Average aflatoxin content in the batch processing of the olive paste samples belonging to the four shipping groups (\(\upmu\)g/kg), \(\pm\)SD (standard deviation), \(n=4\).