4.7 Article

Prediction of Egg Freshness and Albumen Quality Using Visible/Near Infrared Spectroscopy

期刊

FOOD AND BIOPROCESS TECHNOLOGY
卷 4, 期 5, 页码 731-736

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11947-009-0265-0

关键词

Egg freshness; Egg quality; VIS/NIR spectroscopy; Partial least squares

资金

  1. Poultry Industry of Canada

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Important changes occur in egg during storage leading to loss of quality. Prediction of these changes is critical in order to monitor egg quality and freshness. The aim of this research was to evaluate application of visible (VIS) and near infrared (NIR) spectroscopy as a rapid and non-destructive technique for egg quality assessment. Three hundred and sixty intact white-shelled eggs freshly laid by the same flock of hens fed with a standard feed were obtained. They were put under controlled conditions of temperature and humidity (T = 18 A degrees C and RH = 55%) for 16 days of storage. Forty eggs were analyzed at day 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16. Transmission spectral data was obtained in the range from 350 to 2,500 nm. The non-destructive spectral data was compared to egg sample's Haugh unit (HU) and albumen pH in terms of quality and to the number of storage days in terms of freshness. A partial least squares predictive model was developed and used to link the destructive assessment methods and the number of storage days with the spectral data. The correlation coefficient between the measured and predicted values of HU, albumen pH, and number of storage days were up to 0.94, R (2) was up to 0.90 and the root mean square error values for the validation were 5.05, 0.06, and 1.65, respectively. These results showed that VIS/NIR transmission spectroscopy is a good tool for assessment of egg freshness and albumen pH and can be used as a non-destructive method for the prediction of HU, albumen pH, and number of storage days. In addition, the relevant information about these parameters was in the VIS and NIR ranging from 411 to 1,729 nm.

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