4.7 Article

Qualification and quantisation of processed strawberry juice based on electronic nose and tongue

Journal

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 60, Issue 1, Pages 115-123

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2014.08.041

Keywords

Electronic nose; Electronic tongue; Processes; Classification; Regression

Funding

  1. National Key Technology RD Program [2012BAD29B02-4]
  2. Chinese National Foundation of Nature and Science [31071548, 31370555]
  3. Ministry of Education [2010010110133]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An electronic nose (E-nose) and an electronic tongue (E-tongue) have been used to characterise strawberry juices based on different processes (i.e. Microwave Pasteurisation, Steam Blanching, High Temperature Short Time Pasteurisation, Frozen-Thawed, and Freshly Squeezed). Quality parameters (vitamin C, pH, total soluble solid, total acid and sugar/acid ratio) were detected by traditional measuring methods. For qualitative discrimination, E-tongue system reached higher accuracy than E-nose did, and lower than the simultaneous utilisation. For quantitative prediction, E-tongue system had better performance (R-2 ranged from 0.7294 to 0.8622 for the calibration, and R-2 ranged from 0.7362 to 0.9527 for the validation) than E-nose did (R-2 ranged from 0.5344 to 0.8741 for the calibration, and R-2 ranged from 0.4444 to 0.7258 for the validation), and worse than the simultaneous utilisation (R-2 ranged from 0.9627 to 0.9834 for the calibration, and R-2 ranged from 0.8553 to 0.8959 for the validation). Either E-nose or E-tongue was suited to classify strawberry juice, but was insufficient to predict the values of quality parameters (vitamin C, pH, total soluble solid, total acid, and sugar/acid ratio). This work indicates that the simultaneous utilisation of E-nose and E-tongue can discriminate processed juices and predict juice quality parameters successfully for the food industry. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available