4.7 Article

Evaluating taste-related attributes of black tea by micro-NIRS

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD ENGINEERING
卷 290, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110181

关键词

Micro-near-infrared spectrometer; Black tea; Taste attributes; Competitive adaptive reweighted sampling

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFD0400800]
  2. Major Scientific and Technological Projects of Anhui Province [18030701149, 18030701153]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated black tea taste attributes using a micro-NIR spectrometer, established prediction models, and analyzed characteristic wavelengths to predict taste attributes, demonstrating that micro-NIR spectrometers can be used to predict the taste attributes of black tea.
Tea taste assessments generally rely on panel sensory evaluation, which often yield inconsistent results. Therefore, the rapid and nondestructive assessment of the taste attributes of tea is important for its quality evaluation. This study assessed black tea taste attributes using a novel low-cost evaluation method that employed a smartphone-connected micro-near-infrared (micro-NIR) spectrometer. Bitterness and astringency intensity were evaluated by a trained panel, and caffeine and epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG) contents were analyzed using high-performance liquid chromatography. Partial least squares regression and multiple linear regression models were established on characteristic wavelengths selected using the successive projection algorithm and competitive adaptive reweighted sampling (CARS), respectively. The optimal prediction models obtained after conducting CARS selection yielded satisfactory results, with residual predictive deviation of 3.07, 2.28, 3.29, and 2.91 for bitterness score, astringency score, caffeine, and EGCG content, respectively. The results proved that micro-NIR spectrometers can be used to predict the taste attributes of black tea, providing a new method for the quality assessment black tea.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据