| Literature DB >> 31388576 |
Ives Yoplac1,2, Himer Avila-George3, Luis Vargas4, Paz Robert5, Wilson Castro6.
Abstract
This work evaluates near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy coupled with chemometric tools for determining the superficial content of citral ( S C C t ) on microparticles. To perform this evaluation, using spray drying, citral was encapsulated in a matrix of dextrin using twelve combinations of citral:dextrin ratios (CDR) and inlet air temperatures (IAT). From each treatment, six samples were extracted, and their S C C t and NIR absorption spectral profiles were measured. Then, the spectral profiles, pretreated and randomly divided into modeling and validation datasets, were used to build the following prediction models: principal component analysis-multilinear regression (PCA-MLR), principal component analysis-artificial neural network (PCA-ANN), partial least squares regression (PLSR) and an artificial neural network (ANN). During the validation stage, the models showed R 2 values from 0.73 to 0.96 and a root mean squared error (RMSE) range of [0.061-0.140]. Moreover, when the models were compared, the full and optimized ANN models showed the best fits. According to this study, NIR coupled with chemometric tools has the potential for application in determining S C C t on microparticles, particularly when using ANN models.Entities:
Keywords: ANN; Chemometrics; Food analysis; Food chemistry; Food composition; Food science; MLR; PCA; PLSR; Prediction; Spectroscopy
Year: 2019 PMID: 31388576 PMCID: PMC6675954 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02122
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Figure 1Chemical structures of citral: (a) geranial (citral a or cis-citral) and (b) neral (citral b or trans-citral). Adapted from [2] and [18].
Figure 2Experimental procedure.
Experimental treatments for microparticle preparation.
| IAT (°C) | CDR | Emulsion (g) | Dx (g) | Wt (g) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 200 | 1:20.0 | 32.0 | 20.0 | 48.0 |
| 2 | 200 | 1:12.5 | 32.0 | 12.5 | 55.5 |
| 3 | 120 | 1:20.0 | 32.0 | 20.0 | 48.0 |
| 4 | 160 | 1:20.0 | 32.0 | 20.0 | 48.0 |
| 5 | 160 | 1:12.5 | 32.0 | 12.5 | 55.5 |
| 6 | 160 | 1:12.5 | 32.0 | 12.5 | 55.5 |
| 7 | 120 | 1:5.0 | 32.0 | 5.0 | 63.0 |
| 8 | 120 | 1:12.5 | 32.0 | 12.5 | 55.5 |
| 9 | 160 | 1:5.0 | 32.0 | 5.0 | 63.0 |
| 10 | 200 | 1:5.0 | 32.0 | 5.0 | 63.0 |
| 11 | 160 | 1:12.5 | 32.0 | 12.5 | 55.5 |
| 12 | 160 | 1:12.5 | 32.0 | 12.5 | 55.5 |
IAT: Inlet air temperature to the spray dryer.
CDR: citral:dextrin ratio.
Emulsion = Soy lecithin (SL) + Water (Wt) + Citral (Ct).
Dx: Dextrin.
Wt: Water.
Figure 3Flowchart of dataset building.
Figure 4Multilayer neural network example.
Figure 5Evolution of mean absorbance according to SC.
Figure 6(a)PC vs Variance, (b) PCA-MLR, and (c) PCA-ANN.
Figure 7(a) Full PLSR, (b) and RMSE vs LVs.
Figure 8From top to bottom are the β coefficients and RW (dark points), the spectral profiles of the citral solutions, and the spectral profiles of microparticles.
Figure 9Optimized PLSR models.
Figure 10ANN models: (a) full and (b) optimized.
Statistical measures for SC determination models.
| Parameter | PCA | PLSR | ANN | |||
| MLR | ANN | Full | Optimized | Full | Optimized | |
| 0.767 | 0.715 | 1.000 | 0.964 | 0.970 | 0.980 | |
| 0.762 | 0.709 | 1.000 | 0.963 | 0.969 | 0.979 | |
| MSE | 0.016 | 0.014 | 0.000 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| RMSE | 0.126 | 0.120 | 0.000 | 0.055 | 0.052 | 0.043 |
| Parameter | PCA | PLSR | ANN | |||
| MLR | ANN | Full | Optimized | Full | Optimized | |
| 0.737 | 0.748 | 0.898 | 0.935 | 0.950 | 0.957 | |
| 0.725 | 0.737 | 0.893 | 0.932 | 0.948 | 0.955 | |
| MSE | 0.020 | 0.013 | 0.009 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| RMSE | 0.140 | 0.112 | 0.094 | 0.077 | 0.067 | 0.061 |
| RPD | 2.127 | 2.659 | 3.173 | 3.867 | 4.436 | 4.479 |
| RER | 7.948 | 9.936 | 11.857 | 14.451 | 16.579 | 18.235 |