4.7 Article

Differentiation of cumin seeds using a metal-oxide based gas sensor array in tandem with chemometric tools

期刊

TALANTA
卷 176, 期 -, 页码 221-226

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2017.08.024

关键词

Cumin seeds; Electronic nose; Classification; 2D-LDA; U-PLS-DA

资金

  1. research deputy of Shahrekord University (Shahrekord, Iran)
  2. Brazilian agency (CNPq) [141/623]
  3. Brazilian agency (CAPES)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cumin is a plant of the Apiaceae family (umbelliferae) which has been used since ancient times as a medicinal plant and as a spice. The difference in the percentage of aromatic compounds in cumin obtained from different locations has led to differentiation of some species of cumin from other species. The quality and price of cumin vary according to the specie and may be an incentive for the adulteration of high value samples with low quality cultivars. An electronic nose simulates the human olfactory sense by using an array of sensors to distinguish complex smells. This makes it an alternative for the identification and classification of cumin species. The data, however, may have a complex structure, difficult to interpret. Given this, chemometric tools can be used to manipulate data with two-dimensional structure (sensor responses in time) obtained by using electronic nose sensors. In this study, an electronic nose based on eight metal oxide semiconductor sensors (MOS) and 2D-LDA (two-dimensional linear discriminant analysis), U-PLS-DA (Partial least square discriminant analysis applied to the unfolded data) and PARAFAC-LDA (Parallel factor analysis with linear discriminant analysis) algorithms were used in order to identify and classify different varieties of both cultivated and wild black caraway and cumin. The proposed methodology presented a correct classification rate of 87.1% for PARAFAC-LDA and 100% for 2D-LDA and U-PLS-DA, indicating a promising strategy for the classification different varieties of cumin, caraway and other seeds.

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