4.7 Review

Fourier Transform Infrared and Raman and Hyperspectral Imaging Techniques for Quality Determinations of Powdery Foods: A Review

期刊

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12314

关键词

chemometrics; infrared; powdery foods; Raman hyperspectral imaging

资金

  1. Univ. College Dublin (UCD)
  2. China Scholarship Council (CSC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) and Raman and hyperspectral imaging (HSI) techniques have emerged as reliable analytical methods for effectively characterizing and quantifying quality attributes of different categories of powdery food products (such as milk powder, tea powder, cocoa powder, coffee powder, soybean flour, wheat flour, and chili powder). In addition to the ability for gaining rapid information about food chemical components (such as moisture, protein, and starch), and classifying food quality into different grades, such techniques have also been implemented to determine trace impurities in pure foods and other properties of particulate foods and ingredients with avoidance of extensive sample preparation. Developments of corresponding quality evaluation systems based on FT-IR, Raman, and HSI data that measure food quality parameters and ensure product authentication, would bring about technical and economic benefits to the food industry by enhancing consumer confidence in the quality of its products. Accordingly, a comprehensive review of the mushrooming spectroscopy-based FT-IR, Raman, and HSI literature is carried out in this article. The spectral data collected, the chemometric methods used, and the main findings of recent research studies on quality assessments of powdered materials are discussed and summarized. Providing a review in such a flourishing research field is relevant as a signpost for future study. The conclusion details the promise of how such noninvasive and powerful analytical techniques can be used for rapid and accurate determinations of powder quality attributes in both academical and industrial settings.

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