4.7 Article

Evaluation of an artificial olfactory system for grain quality discrimination

Journal

LWT-FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 40, Issue 10, Pages 1815-1825

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.lwt.2006.12.016

Keywords

food safety; ergosterol; barley; grain storage; electronic nose; intelligent sensors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A commercially available Cyranose-320 (TM) conducting polymer-based electronic nose system was used to analyze the headspace from stored barley samples. Three types of barley samples were analyzed, namely, clean barley, naturally Fusarium infected barley and Fusarium inoculated clean barley. The barley samples were stored at moisture contents of 13, 18, 20 and 25 g of water/100 g sample. The raw signals obtained from the electronic nose system were pre-processed by various signal-processing techniques to extract area-based features. Principal component analysis was subsequently performed on the processed signals to further reduce the dimensionalities. Classification models using linear (LDA) and quadratic discriminant analyses (QDA) were developed using the extracted features. The performance of the developed models was validated using leave-1-out cross validation and bootstrapping method. The models classified the barley samples stored into two groups based on the ergosterol content, i.e., acceptable (ergosterol content < 3.mu g/g) and unacceptable (ergosterol content < 3.0 mu g/g). Overall, the total maximum classification accuracy obtained was 86.8% by both LDA and QDA when leave-l-out cross-validation was used. By bootstrapping validation the maximum total classification accuracy obtained was 86.4% and 86.1% respectively, by QDA and LDA. The study proves that there is potential in using an electronic nose system for indicating mold spoilage in stored grains, and necessitates future studies in this direction. (c) 2007 Swiss Society of Food Science and Technology. Published by 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