4.7 Article

Discrimination of transgenic soybean seeds by terahertz spectroscopy

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 6, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep35799

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Key Research and Development Plan of China [2016YFD0401104]
  2. Key Science & Technology Specific Projects of Anhui Province [15czz03117]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31401544]
  4. Key Special Foundation for Young Scientists of Anhui Province [2013SQRL077ZD]
  5. Funds for Huangshan Professorship of Hefei University of Technology [407-037019]
  6. Talent Research Funds of Hefei University [15RC09]
  7. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [JZ2016HGTB0712]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Discrimination of genetically modified organisms is increasingly demanded by legislation and consumers worldwide. The feasibility of a non-destructive discrimination of glyphosate-resistant and conventional soybean seeds and their hybrid descendants was examined by terahertz time-domain spectroscopy system combined with chemometrics. Principal component analysis (PCA), least squares-support vector machines (LS-SVM) and PCA-back propagation neural network (PCA-BPNN) models with the first and second derivative and standard normal variate (SNV) transformation pre-treatments were applied to classify soybean seeds based on genotype. Results demonstrated clear differences among glyphosate-resistant, hybrid descendants and conventional non-transformed soybean seeds could easily be visualized with an excellent classification (accuracy was 88.33% in validation set) using the LS-SVM and the spectra with SNV pre-treatment. The results indicated that THz spectroscopy techniques together with chemometrics would be a promising technique to distinguish transgenic soybean seeds from non-transformed seeds with high efficiency and without any major sample preparation.

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