4.7 Article

Feasibility study for the use of near infrared spectroscopy in the qualitative and quantitative analysis of green tea, Camellia sinensis (L.)

Journal

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
Volume 478, Issue 2, Pages 303-312

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0003-2670(02)01509-X

Keywords

NIR spectroscopy; green tea

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper indicates the possibility to use near infrared spectroscopy (NIR) combined with PLS as a rapid method to estimate the quality of green tea. NIR is used to build calibration models to predict the content of caffeine, epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) and epicatechin (EC and for the prediction of the total antioxidant capacity of green tea. For the determination of the total antioxidant capacity, the trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (TEAC) method is used. Until now, the prediction of the antioxidant capacity as such by use of NIR has not been reported. For caffeine and TEAC, models are build for the whole green tea leaves and also for the ground leaves. For the polyphenols (EGCG) and EC, only models for the whole leaves are investigated. A partial least squares (PLS) algorithm is used to perform the calibration. To decide upon the number of PLS factors included in the PLS model, the model with the lowest root mean square error of cross-validation (RMSECV) for the training set is chosen. The correlation coefficient (r) between the predicted and the reference results for the test set is used as an evaluation parameter for the models: for the TEAC results r = 0.90 for the model with the whole leaves, r = 0.86 for the model with the powdered leaves are obtained. The caffeine prediction model has a correlation coefficient r = 0.96 for the whole leaves and r = 0.93 for the ground leaves. The correlation coefficient for the EGCG and the EC content models are, respectively 0.83 and 0.44. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. 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