| Literature DB >> 31557876 |
Severino Segato1, Augusta Caligiani2, Barbara Contiero3, Gianni Galaverna4, Vittoria Bisutti5, Giulio Cozzi6.
Abstract
The study was carried out in an alpine area of North-Eastern Italy to assess the reliability of proton nuclear magnetic resonance 1H NMR to fingerprint and discriminate Asiago PDO cheeses processed in the same dairy plant from upland pasture-based milk or from upland hay-based milk. Six experimental types of Asiago cheese were made from raw milk considering 2 cows' feeding systems (pasture- vs. hay-based milk) and 3 ripening times (2 months, Pressato vs. 4 months, Allevo_4 vs. 6 months, Allevo_6). Samples (n = 55) were submitted to chemical analysis and to 1H NMR coupled with multivariate canonical discriminant analysis. Choline, 2,3-butanediol, lysine, tyrosine, and some signals of sugar-like compounds were suggested as the main water-soluble metabolites useful to discriminate cheese according to cows' feeding system. A wider pool of polar biomarkers explained the variation due to ripening time. The validation procedure based on a predictive set suggested that 1H NMR based metabolomics was an effective fingerprinting tool to identify pasture-based cheese samples with the shortest ripening period (Pressato). The classification to the actual feeding system of more aged cheese samples was less accurate likely due to their chemical and biochemical changes induced by a prolonged maturation process.Entities:
Keywords: Asiago cheese; NMR; alpine pasture; canonical discriminant analysis; ripening time
Year: 2019 PMID: 31557876 PMCID: PMC6827078 DOI: 10.3390/ani9100722
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Animals (Basel) ISSN: 2076-2615 Impact factor: 2.752
Figure 1Overlay of 1H NMR spectra (600 MHz) of the alpine Asiago Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) samples (D2O extracts).
Effect of the ripening time (RT), cows’ feeding system (FS) and their interaction (RT·FS) on proximate composition (g/100 g wet weight), ripening index (RI) and pH of alpine Asiago Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) cheese.
| Item |
| SEM | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pasture | Hay | Pasture | Hay | Pasture | Hay | RT | FS | RT·FS | ||
| Moisture | 39.3 a | 40.9 a | 33.7 b | 33.4 b | 30.2 c | 30.8 c | 0.40 | <0.001 | 0.143 | 0.133 |
| Fat | 29.1 c | 27.7 c | 32.0 b | 31.9 b | 34.7 a | 34.0 a | 0.38 | <0.001 | 0.159 | 0.328 |
| Protein | 23.1 c | 22.9 c | 26.0 b | 26.4 b | 27.3 a | 27.8 a | 0.26 | <0.001 | 0.384 | 0.563 |
| Ash | 3.4 c | 3.3 c | 3.9 b | 3.8 b | 4.6 a | 4.6 a | 0.08 | <0.001 | 0.599 | 0.964 |
| NaCl | 0.98 c | 0.95 c | 1.12 b | 1.15 b | 1.34 a | 1.35 a | 0.044 | <0.001 | 0.612 | 0.845 |
| RI | 20.4 c | 18.6 c | 23.6 b | 22.8 b | 26.9 a | 26.4 a | 0.81 | <0.001 | 0.248 | 0.569 |
| pH | 5.52 b | 5.54 b | 5.54 b | 5.56 b | 5.61 a | 5.64 a | 0.019 | <0.001 | 0.241 | 0.735 |
Pressato: 2-mo of ripening; Allevo_4: 4-mo of ripening; Allevo_6: 6-mo of ripening. RI: ripening index (water-soluble N over total N × 100). SEM: Standard error of the mean. a,b,c Means with different superscripts within a row differ (p < 0.05).
Figure 23D scatter plot of the canonical discriminant analysis of the six experimental groups (2 cows’ feeding systems per 3 ripening times) of alpine Asiago PDO samples. Pressato: 2-mo of ripening; Allevo_4: 4-mo of ripening; Allevo_6: 6-mo of ripening.
Statistical scores of 1H NMR predictors of the 6 experimental groups (2 cows’ feeding systems, FS per 3 ripening times, RT) of alpine Asiago PDO according to the stepwise procedure and the ANOVA (main fixed effects FS and RT and their interaction FS per RT).
| Step | 1H NMR Variables | Statistical Parameters of STEPWISE | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wilks’ λ | R2partial | FS | RT | FS·RT | ||||
| 1 | Sugar compound A | 0.303 | 21.7 | <0.001 | 0.87 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.146 |
| 2 | Sugar compound B | 0.282 | 24.6 | <0.001 | 0.75 | 0.565 | <0.001 | 0.107 |
| 3 | 2,3-butanediol | 0.208 | 12.6 | <0.001 | 0.57 | 0.031 | <0.001 | 0.110 |
| 4 | Sugar compound C | 0.182 | 7.9 | <0.001 | 0.48 | 0.956 | 0.001 | 0.474 |
| 5 | Lactic acid | 0.124 | 7.7 | <0.001 | 0.46 | 0.632 | 0.015 | 0.354 |
| 6 | Citric acid | 0.110 | 7.1 | <0.001 | 0.38 | 0.811 | <0.001 | 0.115 |
| 7 | Lysine | 0.086 | 4.8 | 0.002 | 0.32 | 0.031 | 0.001 | 0.231 |
| 8 | Unknown 1 | 0.075 | 5.8 | 0.001 | 0.29 | 0.021 | 0.003 | 0.956 |
| 9 | Aspartic acid | 0.054 | 4.7 | 0.002 | 0.24 | 0.320 | <0.001 | 0.950 |
| 10 | Choline | 0.033 | 4.8 | 0.002 | 0.20 | 0.027 | 0.002 | 0.747 |
| 11 | Unknown 2 | 0.012 | 4.2 | 0.008 | 0.11 | 0.156 | 0.008 | 0.634 |
| 12 | Phenylalanine | 0.008 | 3.2 | 0.021 | 0.12 | 0.608 | 0.002 | 0.974 |
| 13 | Tyrosine | 0.007 | 4.3 | 0.005 | 0.09 | 0.091 | <0.001 | 0.801 |
Figure 3Canonical discriminant analysis (CDA) scatter plot of alpine Asiago PDO samples according to the six experimental groups (2 cows’ feeding systems, FS per 3 ripening times, RT). Ninety-five per cent confidence ellipses (0.95-confidence interval) are drawn around each centroid of groupings. The red full circles represent the values of the correlation of the 13 1H NMR signals selected by the preliminary stepwise regression procedure. Green color/full symbols the pasture-based and brown color/empty symbols the hay-based samples. Circles and dotted-point line, Pressato (2-mo of ripening); squares and continuous line, Allevo_4 (4-mo of ripening); rhombus and dotted line, Allevo_6 (6-mo of ripening).
Descriptive statistics of the validation set based on stepwise feature selection of alpine Asiago PDO 1H NMR predictors.
| Descriptive Statistics |
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pasture | Hay | Pasture | Hay | Pasture | Hay | |
| Accuracy | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.89 | 1.00 | 0.83 | 0.94 |
| Precision | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.71 | 1.00 | 0.75 | 1.00 |
| Sensitivity | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.60 | 0.67 |
| Specificity | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.85 | 1.00 | 0.92 | 1.00 |
| MCC | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.78 | 1.00 | 0.56 | 0.79 |
Pressato: 2-mo of ripening; Allevo_4: 4-mo of ripening; Allevo_6: 6-mo of ripening. MCC: Matthews correlation coefficient. For the significance of the descriptive statistics, see Bisutti et al. 2019 [16].