| Literature DB >> 29049369 |
Byeong-Ju Lee1, Hye-Youn Kim1, Sa Rang Lim1, Linfang Huang2, Hyung-Kyoon Choi1.
Abstract
Panax ginseng C.A. Meyer is a herb used for medicinal purposes, and its discrimination according to cultivation age has been an important and practical issue. This study employed Fourier-transform infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy with multivariate statistical analysis to obtain a prediction model for discriminating cultivation ages (5 and 6 years) and three different parts (rhizome, tap root, and lateral root) of P. ginseng. The optimal partial-least-squares regression (PLSR) models for discriminating ginseng samples were determined by selecting normalization methods, number of partial-least-squares (PLS) components, and variable influence on projection (VIP) cutoff values. The best prediction model for discriminating 5- and 6-year-old ginseng was developed using tap root, vector normalization applied after the second differentiation, one PLS component, and a VIP cutoff of 1.0 (based on the lowest root-mean-square error of prediction value). In addition, for discriminating among the three parts of P. ginseng, optimized PLSR models were established using data sets obtained from vector normalization, two PLS components, and VIP cutoff values of 1.5 (for 5-year-old ginseng) and 1.3 (for 6-year-old ginseng). To our knowledge, this is the first study to provide a novel strategy for rapidly discriminating the cultivation ages and parts of P. ginseng using FT-IR by selected normalization methods, number of PLS components, and VIP cutoff values.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29049369 PMCID: PMC5648215 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0186664
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Representative FT-IR spectral data obtained after area normalization.
Assignment of major bands in a representative Fourier-transform infrared (FT-IR) spectrum of Panax ginseng samples.
| Wavenumber (cm–1) | Vibration | Suggested biomolecular assignment | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4000–3500 | O-H stretching | H2O | [ |
| 3335 | O-H stretching | Hydroxyl group of ginsenosides | [ |
| N-H stretching | Amide A of proteins | [ | |
| 2923 | C-H stretching | C-H bond of ginsenosides | [ |
| C-H stretching (asymmetric) | CH2 in fatty acids, lipids, and proteins | [ | |
| Methylene group of membrane phospholipids | [ | ||
| 2442–2208 | O-C-O stretching | CO2 | [ |
| 1733 | C = O stretching | Carbonyl group and lipids | [ |
| 1621 | OC = O stretching (asymmetric) | Calcium oxalate | [ |
| C-O and C-N stretching | Amide I of proteins | [ | |
| 1417 | CH3 stretching (asymmetric) | Lipids and aromatics | [ |
| 1373 | COO−stretching (symmetric) and CH3 bending | Lipids and proteins | [ |
| 1253 | N-H bending in plane and C-N stretching | Amide III of proteins | [ |
| 1018 | C-O-C and CO stretching | Polysaccharides | [ |
| -C-O- stretching | Carbohydrates | [ | |
| 914–600 | O-C-O bending | CO2 | [ |
Selection of partial-least-squares–discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) models according to various normalization and scaling methods and numbers of PLS components for discriminating cultivation ages and parts of P. ginseng samples.
| Normalization method | Scaling | R2Y | Q2Y | R2Y intercept | Q2Y Intercept | Number of components |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Area | UV | 0.904 | 0.719 | 0.343 | –0.373 | 2 |
| Min–max | UV | 0.870 | 0.832 | 0.265 | –0.389 | 2 |
| Vector (first) | UV | 0.961 | 0.855 | 0.390 | –0.275 | 1 |
| Vector (second) | Par | 0.973 | 0.907 | 0.119 | –0.325 | 1 |
| Area | UV | 0.880 | 0.816 | 0.384 | –0.290 | 2 |
| Min–max | Par | 0.841 | 0.722 | 0.313 | –0.231 | 2 |
| Vector (first) | Par | 0.725 | 0.478 | 0.360 | –0.141 | 1 |
| Vector (second) | Par | 0.887 | 0.586 | 0.209 | –0.164 | 1 |
| Area | Par | 0.923 | 0.798 | 0.391 | –0.280 | 2 |
| Min–max | Par | 0.939 | 0.723 | 0.391 | –0.209 | 2 |
| Vector (first) | Par | 0.774 | 0.672 | 0.285 | –0.233 | 1 |
| Vector (second) | Par | 0.677 | 0.417 | 0.533 | –0.109 | 1 |
| Area | Par | 0.866 | 0.771 | 0.270 | –0.312 | 3 |
| Min–max | Par | 0.826 | 0.544 | 0.264 | –0.243 | 3 |
| Vector (first) | Par | 0.908 | 0.754 | 0.328 | –0.370 | 3 |
| Vector (second) | Par | 0.915 | 0.862 | 0.363 | –0.349 | 3 |
| Area | Par | 0.889 | 0.758 | 0.256 | –0.370 | 3 |
| Min–max | Par | 0.849 | 0.681 | 0.288 | –0.327 | 3 |
| Vector (first) | UV | 0.889 | 0.800 | 0.362 | –0.340 | 2 |
| Vector (second) | Par | 0.678 | 0.501 | 0.265 | –0.317 | 2 |
TR, tap root; RH, rhizome; LR, lateral root; Min–max, minimum–maximum; Vector (first), vector normalization applied after the first differentiation; Vector (second), vector normalization applied after the second differentiation; UV, unit variance; Par, Pareto.
Selected normalization and variable influence on projection (VIP) cutoff values for model construction for discriminating 5- and 6-year-old ginseng samples and permutation parameters derived from the partial-least-squares regression (PLSR) prediction models.
| Normalization method | VIP cutoff | Total wavenumbers | RMSEE (months) | RMSEP (months) | R2Y | Q2Y | R2Y intercept | Q2Y intercept | Number of components |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | 552 | 0.077 (0.924) | 0.044 (0.528) | 0.981 | 0.970 | –0.064 | –0.369 | 1 | |
| 1.3 | 112 | 0.198 (2.376) | 0.036 (0.432) | 0.890 | 0.788 | 0.201 | –0.389 | 2 | |
| 1.3 | 262 | 0.171 (2.052) | 0.096 (1.152) | 0.918 | 0.806 | 0.231 | –0.296 | 2 | |
TR, tap root; RH, rhizome; LR, lateral root; RMSEE, root-mean-square error of estimation; RMSEP, root-mean-square error of prediction; UV, unit variance.
Fig 2Flow chart to discriminate cultivation ages and parts of ginseng.
VIP, variable influence on projection.
Selected normalization and variable influence on projection (VIP) cutoff values for model construction for discriminating various parts of ginseng samples, and the permutation parameters derived from the PLSR prediction models.
| Normalization method | VIP cutoff | Total wavenumbers | RMSEE | RMSEP | R2Y | Q2Y | R2Y intercept | Q2Y intercept | Number of components |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.5 | 23 | 0.204 | 0.161 | 0.950 | 0.913 | 0.352 | –0.223 | 2 | |
| 1.3 | 258 | 0.337 | 0.185 | 0.864 | 0.764 | 0.363 | –0.321 | 2 | |
TR, tap root; RH, rhizome; LR, lateral root; RMSEE, root-mean-square error of estimation; RMSEP, root-mean-square error of prediction; UV, unit variance; Par, Pareto.