4.5 Review

Modern Analytical Techniques for Berry Authentication

期刊

CHEMOSENSORS
卷 11, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/chemosensors11090500

关键词

berries; authenticity; geographical origin; fingerprinting; chemometrics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review discusses the use of modern analytical techniques for berry authentication, indicating that chemical approaches have been the main focus of studies to date. However, other chemical, biomolecular, and isotopic methods have also shown promising results. Combinations of different approaches are increasingly used to complement each other. Continuous research in the field of food authentication is needed, especially for berries, given their importance and the evolving adulteration practices.
The health-related properties attributed to berries and the subsequent interest awakened within the market of functional foods mean that these small fruits may be potential targets for food fraud. In this review, studies on berry authentication through modern analytical techniques are discussed in detail. Most of the studies reported to date are related to chemical approaches, mainly chromatographic techniques. Other chemical (NMR, NIR, and Raman spectroscopy), biomolecular, and isotopic methods have also delivered promising results in the field of berry authentication, although there is still limited information available in this respect. Despite the potential of the methods described in the present review, to date, there is no universal one. Therefore, combinations of different approaches in order to complement each other are increasingly used (e.g., HPTLC and mass spectrometry; Raman and IR spectroscopies; biomolecular and analytical techniques horizontal ellipsis ). Considering that adulteration practices are increasingly evolving, continuous research in the field of food authentication is needed, especially in the case of berries, since there are still some berry species that have not yet been included in any authentication study.

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

4.5
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