| Literature DB >> 28300144 |
Jiyu Peng1, Kunlin Song1, Hongyan Zhu1, Wenwen Kong1,2, Fei Liu1, Tingting Shen1, Yong He1.
Abstract
Tobacco mosaic virus (TMV) is one of the most devastating viruses to crops, which can cause severe production loss and affect the quality of products. In this study, we have proposed a novel approach to discriminate TMV-infected tobacco based on laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS). Two different kinds of tobacco samples (fresh leaves and dried leaf pellets) were collected for spectral acquisition, and partial least squared discrimination analysis (PLS-DA) was used to establish classification models based on full spectrum and observed emission lines. The influences of moisture content on spectral profile, signal stability and plasma parameters (temperature and electron density) were also analysed. The results revealed that moisture content in fresh tobacco leaves would worsen the stability of analysis, and have a detrimental effect on the classification results. Good classification results were achieved based on the data from both full spectrum and observed emission lines of dried leaves, approaching 97.2% and 88.9% in the prediction set, respectively. In addition, support vector machine (SVM) could improve the classification results and eliminate influences of moisture content. The preliminary results indicate that LIBS coupled with chemometrics could provide a fast, efficient and low-cost approach for TMV-infected disease detection in tobacco leaves.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28300144 PMCID: PMC5353609 DOI: 10.1038/srep44551
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Averaged spectra for healthy and infected tobacco with varying degrees of symptoms.
The wavelength region is 230–880 nm. Spectra from both fresh and dried samples showed the similar profile, while the intensities of most emission lines were reduced, and some emission lines were disappeared. There were slight differences in peak intensity and peak position among varying degrees of symptoms.
Observed emission lines in fresh and dried samples based on NIST database.
| Elements | Wavelength (nm) |
|---|---|
| C (I) | 247.86 |
| Si (I) | 251.61, 288.16 |
| Fe (I) | 293.69*, 385.99* |
| Fe (II) | 253.54* |
| Mg (I) | 277.98*, 285.21, 382.94*, 383.23*, 383.83*, 389.19, 516.73*, 517.27*, 518.36* |
| Mg (II) | 279.08, 279.55, 279.80, 280.27 |
| Ca (I) | 422.67, 428.30, 428.94, 429.90, 430.25, 430.77, 431.87, 442.54, 443.57, 457.86*, 458.15*, 458.60*, 487.81, 504.16, 518.88*, 526.22*, 526.56*, 527.03*, 558.20, 558.87, 559.45, 559.85, 560.13*, 585.75*, 610.27, 612.22, 616.22, 616.64*, 643.91*, 644.98*, 646.26*, 647.17*, 649.38*, 671.77*, 714.82*, 720.22*, 854.21 |
| Ca (II) | 315.89, 317.93, 370.60, 373.69, 393.37, 396.85, 849.80, 866.21 |
| Mn (II) | 292.87* |
| Sc (II) | 364.38* |
| CN | 387.12, 388.29 |
| Al (I) | 394.40, 396.15 |
| K (I) | 404.41*, 404.72*, 693.88*, 766.49, 769.90 |
| Sr (I) | 460.73 |
| Sr (II) | 407.77*, 421.55* |
| Na (I) | 589.00, 589.59 |
| Ba (I) | 649.88* |
| Hα | 656.28 |
| Li (I) | 670.79* |
| N (I) | 742.36, 744.23, 746.83, 818.49, 821.63, 824.39, 862.92, 868.03 |
| O (I) | 777.42, 844.68 |
Note: the wavelengths that appeared in dried samples while not in fresh samples were marked with star.
Figure 2Relative standard deviation of main emission lines from fresh and dried samples (healthy tobacco leaves).
Main emission lines from dried samples had lower RSDs than those from fresh samples, which ranged from 5% to 15%.
Temperature and electron density of plasma of fresh and dried samples (healthy tobacco leaves).
| Fresh samples | Dried samples | |
|---|---|---|
| Temperature, K | 10807 ± 452 | 6217 ± 497 |
| Electron density, cm−3 | (2.74 ± 0.08) × 1017 | (2.52 ± 0.04) × 1017 |
Figure 3PC score plots for spectral datasets based on fresh samples (a) PC1 vs. PC2; (b) PC1 vs. PC3; (c) PC1, PC2 and PC3) and dried samples (d) PC1 vs. PC2; (e) PC1 vs. PC3; (f) PC1, PC2, and PC3). The first three PCs for fresh and dried samples contributed to 92.1% and 88.7% of the total explained variations, respectively. Better separations could be observed for dried samples.
Figure 4Y-predicted plot for PLS-DA classification of different symptoms of infected plants based on full spectrum of (a) fresh samples and (b) dried samples. Red squares, blue circles, magenta up triangles, violet stars indicate healthy, mild-infected, moderate-infected, severe-infected tobacco samples, respectively. Hollow markers indicate calibration set while solid markers indicate prediction set. The classification performance based on dried samples were higher than that based on fresh samples, with the accuracy of 97.2% in the prediction set.
Figure 5Regression coefficients for PLS models based on (a) fresh samples and (b) dried samples. A variable with large absolute value of regression coefficient plays an important role in PLS regression. The variables that actually worked in PLS models were main observed emission lines.
Classification results based on observed emission lines.
| Methods | Samples | Parameters | Accuracy | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calibration | Cross-validation | Prediction | |||
| PLS-DA | Fresh leaves | LVs = 7 | 67.1% | 62.2% | 63.2% |
| Dried leaf pellets | LVs = 6 | 91.7% | 82.1% | 88.9% | |
| SVM | Fresh leaves | C = 31.62; G = 0.001778 | 100% | 87.8% | 94.7% |
| Dried leaf pellets | C = 17.78; G = 0.0004642 | 100% | 97.6% | 94.4% | |
Abbreviations: LVs, latent variables; C, capacity factor; G, gamma.
Figure 6Schematic diagram of experimental LIBS setup.
The LIBS setup mainly consists of an Q-switch pulsed laser, optics (mirrors, lens, and fiber, etc.) for guiding the laser pulses onto the samples and transferring the light into a light disperse system, spectrograph for producing the spectra and detection for recoding the signal.