Cargando…

Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration

The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential of taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid determination of beef adulteration. A total of 228 minced meat samples were prepared and analyzed via raw ground beef mixed separately with chicken, duck, and pork in the range of 0 ~ 50%...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lu, Biao, Han, Fangkai, Aheto, Joshua H., Rashed, Marwan M. A., Pan, Zhenggao
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34532030
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2494
_version_ 1783752880050667520
author Lu, Biao
Han, Fangkai
Aheto, Joshua H.
Rashed, Marwan M. A.
Pan, Zhenggao
author_facet Lu, Biao
Han, Fangkai
Aheto, Joshua H.
Rashed, Marwan M. A.
Pan, Zhenggao
author_sort Lu, Biao
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential of taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid determination of beef adulteration. A total of 228 minced meat samples were prepared and analyzed via raw ground beef mixed separately with chicken, duck, and pork in the range of 0 ~ 50% by weight at 10% intervals. Total sugars, protein, fat, and ash contents were also measured to validate the differences between raw meats. For sensing the water‐soluble chemicals in the meats, an electronic tongue based on multifrequency large‐amplitude pulses and six metal electrodes (platinum, gold, palladium, tungsten, titanium, and silver) was employed. Fisher linear discriminant analysis (Fisher LDA) and extreme learning machine (ELM) were used to model the identification of raw and the adulterated meats. While an adulterant was detected, the level of adulteration was predicted using partial least squares (PLS) and ELM and the results compared. The results showed that superior recognition models derived from ELM were obtained, as the recognition rates for the independent samples in different meat groups were all over 90%; ELM models were more precisely than PLS models for prediction of the adulteration levels of beef mixed with chicken, duck, and pork, with root mean squares error for the independent samples of 0.33, 0.18, and 0.38% and coefficients of variance of 0.914, 0.956, and 0.928, respectively. The results suggested that taste sensors combined with ELM could be useful in the rapid detection of beef adulterated with other meats.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8441491
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84414912021-09-15 Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration Lu, Biao Han, Fangkai Aheto, Joshua H. Rashed, Marwan M. A. Pan, Zhenggao Food Sci Nutr Original Research The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential of taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid determination of beef adulteration. A total of 228 minced meat samples were prepared and analyzed via raw ground beef mixed separately with chicken, duck, and pork in the range of 0 ~ 50% by weight at 10% intervals. Total sugars, protein, fat, and ash contents were also measured to validate the differences between raw meats. For sensing the water‐soluble chemicals in the meats, an electronic tongue based on multifrequency large‐amplitude pulses and six metal electrodes (platinum, gold, palladium, tungsten, titanium, and silver) was employed. Fisher linear discriminant analysis (Fisher LDA) and extreme learning machine (ELM) were used to model the identification of raw and the adulterated meats. While an adulterant was detected, the level of adulteration was predicted using partial least squares (PLS) and ELM and the results compared. The results showed that superior recognition models derived from ELM were obtained, as the recognition rates for the independent samples in different meat groups were all over 90%; ELM models were more precisely than PLS models for prediction of the adulteration levels of beef mixed with chicken, duck, and pork, with root mean squares error for the independent samples of 0.33, 0.18, and 0.38% and coefficients of variance of 0.914, 0.956, and 0.928, respectively. The results suggested that taste sensors combined with ELM could be useful in the rapid detection of beef adulterated with other meats. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-07-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8441491/ /pubmed/34532030 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2494 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Food Science & Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals LLC https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Lu, Biao
Han, Fangkai
Aheto, Joshua H.
Rashed, Marwan M. A.
Pan, Zhenggao
Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
title Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
title_full Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
title_fullStr Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
title_full_unstemmed Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
title_short Artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
title_sort artificial bionic taste sensors coupled with chemometrics for rapid detection of beef adulteration
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8441491/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34532030
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2494
work_keys_str_mv AT lubiao artificialbionictastesensorscoupledwithchemometricsforrapiddetectionofbeefadulteration
AT hanfangkai artificialbionictastesensorscoupledwithchemometricsforrapiddetectionofbeefadulteration
AT ahetojoshuah artificialbionictastesensorscoupledwithchemometricsforrapiddetectionofbeefadulteration
AT rashedmarwanma artificialbionictastesensorscoupledwithchemometricsforrapiddetectionofbeefadulteration
AT panzhenggao artificialbionictastesensorscoupledwithchemometricsforrapiddetectionofbeefadulteration