4.7 Article

Highly efficient authentication of edible oils by FTIR spectroscopy coupled with chemometrics

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 385, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.132661

关键词

Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR); Discrimination analysis (DA); Camellia oil; Adulteration; Backward interval partial least squares regression (BiPLS)

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [32001739, 31772001, 31972109]
  2. Zhejiang Province Key RD Project [2021C02013, 2020C2018]
  3. Zhejiang Province Public Welfare Technology Application Research Project [LGN21C200005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel improved method for authenticating edible oil samples based on FTIR spectroscopy coupled with chemometrics has been developed. Discrimination and quantitative models were established and achieved high accuracy in detecting and quantifying adulterant oils in edible oil blends.
A novel improved method for the authentication of edible oil samples based on Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy coupled with chemometrics has been developed. A discrimination analysis model has been developed. On this basis, 100% correct classification of 135 samples from eleven species has been achieved. Recognition rates with respect to external validation for 91 pure oil samples and 231 blend samples were 100% and 92.6%, respectively. A general quantitative model for detecting edible oil adulteration (taking Camellia oil as an example) has also been built. An optimal backward interval partial least-squares model, based on the spectral regions nu = 3100-2900, 1800-1700, 1500-1400, and 1200-1100 cm(-1), has been determined, giving good performances. A specific sub-model using a single adulterant oil has also been constructed, which showed higher prediction accuracy. Based on the developed qualitative and quantitative FTIR methods, adulterant oils in Camellia blends could be rapidly detected, effectively differentiated, and accurately quantified.

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