4.7 Article

Application of ATR-FTIR Incorporated with Multivariate Data Analysis for Discrimination and Quantification of Urea as an Adulterant in UHT Milk

期刊

FOODS
卷 12, 期 15, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/foods12152855

关键词

milk fraud; adulterants; urea; Fourier transform-infrared spectroscopy; discriminant; regression analysis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study successfully identified and quantified urea in UHT milk using infrared spectroscopy and statistical analysis. The results showed that specific wavenumbers in the infrared spectrum can be used to detect the concentration of urea in UHT milk.
Urea is naturally present in milk, yet urea is added intentionally to increase milk's nitrogen content and shelf life. In this study, a total of 50 Ultra heat treatment (UHT) milk samples were spiked with known urea concentrations (0-5 w/v%). Attenuated total reflectance-Fourier transform infrared (ATR-FTIR) spectroscopy with principal component analysis (PCA), discriminant analysis (DA), and multiple linear regression (MLR) were used for the discrimination and quantification of urea. The PCA was built using 387 variables with higher FL > 0.75 from the first PCA with cumulative variability (90.036%). Subsequently, the DA model was built using the same variables from PCA and demonstrated the good distinction between unadulterated and adulterated milk, with a correct classification rate of 98% for cross-validation. The MLR model used 48 variables with p-value < 0.05 from the DA model and gave R-2 values greater than 0.90, with RMSE and MSE below 1 for cross-validation and prediction. The DA and MLR models were then validated externally using a test dataset, which shows 100% correct classification, and the t-test result (p > 0.05) indicated that the MLR could determine the percentage of urea in UHT milk within the permission limit (70 mg/mL). In short, the wavenumbers 1626.63, 1601.98, and 1585.5534 cm(-1) are suitable as fingerprint regions for detecting urea in UHT milk.

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