| Literature DB >> 35010239 |
Francesca Calò1, Chiara Roberta Girelli1, Selina C Wang2, Francesco Paolo Fanizzi1.
Abstract
Geographical origin assessment of extra virgin olive oil (EVOO) is recognised worldwide as raising consumers' awareness of product authenticity and the need to protect top-quality products. The need for geographical origin assessment is also related to mandatory legislation and/or the obligations of true labelling in some countries. Nevertheless, official methods for such specific authentication of EVOOs are still missing. Among the analytical techniques useful for certification of geographical origin, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and mass spectroscopy (MS), combined with chemometrics, have been widely used. This review considers published works describing the use of these analytical methods, supported by statistical protocols such as multivariate analysis (MVA), for EVOO origin assessment. The research has shown that some specific countries, generally corresponding to the main worldwide producers, are more interested than others in origin assessment and certification. Some specific producers such as Italian EVOO producers may have been focused on this area because of consumers' interest and/or intrinsic economical value, as testified also by the national concern on the topic. Both NMR- and MS-based approaches represent a mature field where a general validation method for EVOOs geographic origin assessment could be established as a reference recognised procedure.Entities:
Keywords: chemometrics; elemental profiling; extra virgin olive oil; geographical origin; isotope ratio; mass spectrometry; metabolomics; molecular fingerprinting; nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy
Year: 2022 PMID: 35010239 PMCID: PMC8750049 DOI: 10.3390/foods11010113
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Comprehensive mechanism-based scheme summarizing the application of NMR and MS techniques associated with chemometric tools in the specific subject of EVOOs’ geographical origin analysis.
Summary of the most important advantages and shortcomings of NMR and MS techniques [42,43].
| Analytical Technique | Advantages | Shortcomings |
|---|---|---|
| NMR |
High reproducibility. Profitably use for nonselective analysis (fingerprinting). Fast measurement. Minimal sample preparation. Non-destructive. Sample storage for a long time. Inherently quantitative. Correlation between the NMR signal intensity and metabolite concentrations. Suitable for untargeted and targeted analyses. |
Intrinsically low sensitivity (improvable with multiple scans, higher magnet field strength, cryo-cooled microprobes, and hyperpolarization methods). Peak overlapping from multiple detected metabolites. Spectral resolution (usually less than 200 metabolites can be unambiguously detected and identified in one measurement). |
| MS |
High sensitivity. Profitable use for selective analysis (in combination with chromatography). Very fast measurement. High number of detected and identified metabolites. |
Low reproducibility (compared to NMR spectroscopy). Requirement of a prior sample separation with chromatography. Different ionization methods in sample measurement. Destructive. Sample cannot be recovered. Usually no correlation between the MS line intensity and metabolite concentrations. |
Geographical classification studies of EVOOs by NMR spectroscopy, according to the chronological order of appearance.
| Frequency | Nucleus | Geographical Area | Chemometric Treatment | Outcomes * | Year | References | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | ||||||
| 75.5 MHz | 13C | 12 Italian Regions | PCA, PLS, PCR, LMR | √ | √ | √ | 1997 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | 4 Italian Regions | PCA, HCA | √ | - | √ | 1998 | [ |
| 75.5 MHz | 13C | 3 Italian Regions | PCA, PLS, PCR | √ | √ | - | 1999 | [ |
| 400, 500 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | PCA, HCA, DA | √ | - | √ | 2000 | [ |
| 75.5 MHz | 13C | 13 Italian Regions PDO | PCA | - | - | √ | 2001 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Tuscany Region (Italy) PDO | HCA, K-means, DA | √ | - | - | 2001 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | 5 Italian Regions | ANOVA, TCA, LDA | √ | - | - | 2001 | [ |
| 600, 150.9 MHz | 1H, 13C | Italy and Argentina | TCA, LDA | √ | - | √ | 2001 | [ |
| 150.9 MHz | 13C | Sicily Region (Italy) | MANOVA, PCA, | √ | - | √ | 2003 | [ |
| 125.7 MHz | 13C | Apulia Region (Italy) PDO | MANOVA, LDA | √ | √ | √ | 2003 | [ |
| 125.7 MHz | 13C | Apulia Region (Italy) | ANOVA, PCA, HCA, DA | √ | √ | √ | 2003 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Veneto Region (Italy) PDO | ANOVA, PCA | √ | - | √ | 2005 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 1H | Greece, Italy, Spain, Tunisia, Turkey | LDA, PLS-DA, ANN | √ | √ | - | 2005 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Veneto and Lombardia Regions (Italy) | PCA | - | - | √ | 2006 | [ |
| 600, 62.9 MHz | 1H, 13C | Lazio Region (Italy) PDO | ANOVA, PCA, LDA | √ | - | √ | 2007 | [ |
| 500, 202 MHz | 1H, 31P | 2 Greek Regions | SCDA, CBT | √ | √ | √ | 2008 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Liguria Region (Italy) PDO and other: Italy, Spain, France, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey | PLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2010 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | ANOVA, HCA, PCA, | √ | - | √ | 2011 | [ |
| 500, 202 MHz | 1H, 31P | 4 Greek Regions | SCDA, CBT | √ | - | √ | 2012 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) PDO, Greece | PCA, CA, MANOVA, MC | √ | √ | - | 2012 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) PDO, Greece, Spain, Tunisia | PCA | - | - | √ | 2012 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Piedmont Region (Italy) | PCA | - | - | √ | 2012 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | PCA, OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2013 | [ |
| 400, 500 MHz | 1H | Turkey, Jordan, Palestine, Libia | ANOVA | - | - | √ | 2013 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Salento area; Italy) | PCA, OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2014 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia and Calabria Regions (Italy) PDO, Greece, Spain | PCA | - | - | √ | 2014 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2015 | [ |
| 700 MHz | 1H, 13C | Sicily Region (Italy) PDO | PCA | - | - | √ | 2015 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | 15 Italian Regions PDO and Tunisia | PCA | - | - | √ | 2016 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) PDO | PCA, PLS-DA, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2016 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia & Calabria Regions (Italy) | PCA, PLS-DA, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2016 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | PCA, PLS-DA, OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2016 | [ |
| 400, 500 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | PCA, PLS-DA, OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2016 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Apulia Region (Italy) | PCA, ANN | √ | √ | √ | 2017 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 1H | Italy (Tuscany, Sicily and Apulia Regions), EU (Spain and Portugal) and non-EU (Tunisia, Turkey, Chile and Australia) | PCA, OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2017 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Sardinia Region (Italy) | PCA, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2017 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Tunisia and Italy | PCA, PLS-DA, OPLS-DA, PLSR | √ | √ | √ | 2017 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Tuscany Region (Italy) PGI | PCA, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2018 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Turkey and Slovenia | ANOVA, PCA, PLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2018 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Italy | LDA | √ | √ | √ | 2019 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Italy, Greece, Spain | PCA, CA, KNN | √ | √ | - | 2019 | [ |
| 600 MHz | 1H | Turkey | ANOVA, PLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2019 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 13C | 8 Italian Regions | ANOVA, PCA | - | - | - | 2019 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Italy | PCA, PLS-DA, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2020 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H, 13C | Tuscany Region (Italy) | ANOVA, PCA | - | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| 500 MHz | 1H, 13C | Malta | PCA, PLS-DA, ANN | √ | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | Italy (also PDO) | ANOVA, PCA, PLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| 400 MHz | 1H | International Blends (Italy, Tunisia, Portugal, Spain, Greece) | PCA, PLSR, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2021 | [ |
* Summarized outcomes for the listed NMR studies: A Classification model realization; B Prediction test execution; C Molecular markers identification.
Figure 2Graphical representation of the partition of selected nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR)-based studies on extra virgin olive oils (EVOOs)’ geographical origin assessment.
Key molecular markers identified in NMR studies of Table 2.
| Molecular Markers * | References | Molecular Markers * | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aldehydes | [ | n-Alkanals | [ |
| Carotenoids | [ | Oleacein and Oleocanthal | [ |
| cis-Vaccenis acid | [ | Oleic Acid | [ |
| Coumaric acid | [ | Peroxides | [ |
| Cycloartenol | [ | Phenolic Compounds | [ |
| Eicosenoic acid | [ | Pigments | [ |
| Elenolic acid | [ | Pinoresinol | [ |
| Flavonoids (including Apigenin and Luteolin) | [ | Satured Fatty Acids | [ |
| Formaldehyde | [ | Secoiridoids | [ |
| Hexanal | [ | Squalene | [ |
| Homovanillic acid | [ | Sterols (including β Sitosterol) | [ |
| Hydroxityrosol | [ | Syringaresinol | [ |
| Linoleic Acid | [ | Terpenes | [ |
| Linolenic Acid | [ | Trans-2-Alkenals | [ |
| Methyl cyclohexanol | [ | Trans-2-Hexenal | [ |
| Mono/Di/Tri-acylglycerols | [ | Tyrosol | [ |
| MUFA | [ | Volatile Compounds | [ |
* as defined in the specific referenced papers.
Geographical classification studies of EVOOs by MS, according to the chronological order of appearance.
| Combined Approach | Geographical Area | Chemometric Treatment | Outcomes * | Year | References | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | |||||
| MS MOLECULAR FINGERPRINT | |||||||
| Pyrolysis MS | Italy | ANN, PCA, CVA | √ | √ | - | 1997 | [ |
| HS-MS | Italy, Greece, Spain, Tunisia, commercial EVOOs | PCA, LDA | √ | √ | √ | 2005 | [ |
| GC-CI-ITD MS | Calabria Region (Italy) and Tunisia | LDA, ANOVA | √ | - | √ | 2007 | [ |
| PTR-MS | Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Spain, France PDO | ANOVA, LSD, PLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2008 | [ |
| HS-MS | Spain and Italy PDO | KNN, CA, PCA | √ | √ | - | 2008 | [ |
| HS-MS, UV–vis, NIR | Liguria Region (Italy) | PCA, UNEQ-QDA | √ | - | - | 2010 | [ |
| RRLC-ESI-TOF-MS | Central and Southern Tunisia | ANOVA, PCA, HCA | - | - | √ | 2011 | [ |
| HS-SPME-GC/MS | Western Greece | ANOVA, LDA, PCA | √ | - | √ | 2011 | [ |
| HS-SPME-GC/MS | Spain PDO | LDA, PCA, SLDA | √ | √ | √ | 2011 | [ |
| SPME-GC/MS | Crete and Tunisia | ANOVA, PCA | - | - | √ | 2011 | [ |
| HPLC-ESI-TOF-MS | Tunisia | ANOVA, CDA | √ | √ | √ | 2012 | [ |
| HPLC-ESI-TOF-MS | Southern Catalonia (Spain) | DA | √ | √ | √ | 2013 | [ |
| HS-SPME–GC–MS | Italy | Linear regressions, Pearson’s correlations (r), standard deviations. | - | - | √ | 2013 | [ |
| FGC E-nose, SPME/GC-MS | Italy PGI and PDO and non-Italy | PCA, HCA, LDA, PLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2016 | [ |
| UHPLC-QTOF-MS | Spain | PLS-DA, OPLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2016 | [ |
| MALDI-TOF MS | Croatia | PCA | - | - | √ | 2017 | [ |
| MALDI-TOF MS | Northwest Istria, Dalmatia, Italy and Bosnia and Herzegovina | PCA | - | - | √ | 2017 | [ |
| SPME/GC-MS | Greece | MANOVA, LDA | √ | - | √ | 2017 | [ |
| LC-ESI-QTOF-MS | Greece | PCA, RF | √ | - | √ | 2018 | [ |
| UHPLC-ESI-MS/MS | Spain PDO | PCA, LDA | √ | - | √ | 2018 | [ |
| UHPLC-ESI-MS/QTOF MS | Tunisia and Italy | OPLS-DA, KCA | √ | - | √ | 2018 | [ |
| GC-MS, MALDI-TOF/MS, NIR | Croatia | PCA, PLS-DA, PLS | √ | √ | √ | 2018 | [ |
| SPME-GC-MS | Garda (Italy) PDO | PCA, KNN | √ | - | √ | 2019 | [ |
| UHPLC-QTOF-MS | Italy | OPLS-DA, HCA | √ | √ | √ | 2019 | [ |
| GC-IT-MS and UPLC-DAD | Croatia | ANOVA, LSD, SLDA, PLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2019 | [ |
| LC-ESI-QTOF-MS and | 6 Mediterranean GIs PDO (from Spain, Greece, Italy and Morocco) | PCA, PLS-DA | √ | √ | √ | 2019 | [ |
| GC-MS, UHPLC-QTOF MS | Southern Brazil | PCA, ANOVA, LSD test | - | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| HPLC-PDA/MS, HPLC-FLD | Italy, Portugal, Spain and Croatia | PCA, LDA | √ | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| LC-ESI-MS/MS, | Italy PDO and commercial blends | ANOVA, LSD, PCA, PLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| FIA-MRMS, UPLC-HRMS, HRMS/MS | Greece | PCA, OPLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| HS-SPME-GC-MS | Croatia, Slovenia, Spain, Italy, Greece, Morocco, Turkey | ANOVA, PCA, PLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2020 | [ |
| MHS-SPME, GC-MS, GC-FID | Sicily, Tuscany, and Garda lake Regions (Italy) | PLS-DA | √ | - | √ | 2021 | [ |
| UHPLC-QTOF-MS | Greece (North Aegean Region) | ANOVA | - | - | √ | 2021 | [ |
| HPLC–PDA-ESI–MS | Morocco | PCA, HCPC, Pearson’s correlations, ANOVA, Tukey test (HSD) | √ | - | √ | 2021 | [ |
| ISOTOPE RATIO IRMS | |||||||
| IRMS, GC-MS | Spain, Italy, Greece, France | PCA | - | - | - | 1998 | [ |
| GC-C-IRMS | Portugal and Turkey | PCA, LDA, ANOVA, HCA | √ | - | - | 2010 | [ |
| IRMS, ICP-MS | Italy PDO and PGI | Kruskall–Wallis and multiple bilateral comparison | - | - | - | 2010 | [ |
| IRMS, HPLC-APCI-MS | Italy and Croatia | ANOVA, LDA | √ | - | - | 2011 | [ |
| EA/IRMS, GC/FID | Italy PDO/PGI | PCA, PLS-DA | √ | - | - | 2014 | [ |
| IRMS | 9 Italian Regions | Regression-geostatics combined approach (OLS, MR, SKlm) | - | √ | - | 2016 | [ |
| IRMS and RRS | Italian coasts | PCA, LDA | √ | √ | - | 2017 | [ |
| GC-C/Py-IRMS | EU and non-EU | PCA, ROCs, RF | √ | - | - | 2019 | [ |
| IRMS | Portugal | PCA, LMR | - | - | - | 2020 | [ |
| IRMS | Central Greece and Peloponnese | OPLS-DA | √ | √ | - | 2021 | [ |
| ELEMENTAL PROFILE ICP-MS | |||||||
| ICP-MS/OES | Spain | PCA, LDA, PLS-DA, SVM, RF | √ | - | - | 2018 | [ |
| ICP-MS | Croatia | ANOVA | - | - | - | 2019 | [ |
| ICP-MS | Liguria Region (Italy) | PCA, LDA | √ | - | - | 2019 | [ |
| ICP-MS | Tunisia | PCA, WHCA | - | - | - | 2021 | [ |
* Summarized outcomes for the listed MS studies: A Classification model realization; B Prediction test execution; C Molecular markers identification.
Figure 3Graphical representation of the partition of selected mass spectrometry (MS)-based studies on extra virgin olive oils (EVOOs)’ geographical origin assessment.
Key molecular markers identified in MS studies of Table 4.
| Molecular Markers * | References | Molecular Markers * | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Alcohols | [ | Ketones | [ |
| Aldehydes | [ | Lignans (including pinoresinol and syringaresinol) | [ |
| Benzenoids | [ | Ligstroside Aglycone | [ |
| Carbonyl Compounds | [ | Oleacein | [ |
| Carboxylic Acids | [ | Oleocanthal | [ |
| Chlorophylls | [ | Organic acid | [ |
| Cholesterol Derivatives | [ | Other Secoiridoids | [ |
| Diglycerides | [ | Tyrosol | [ |
| Elenolic Acid | [ | Vanillic Acid | [ |
| Esters | [ | Terpenes (including sesquiterpene) | [ |
| Fatty Acids | [ | Vitamin D3 derivates | [ |
| Flavonoids (including Apigenin and Luteolin) | [ | Vitamin E Isomers and derivates | [ |
| Furanoids | [ | Phenolic Compounds | [ |
| Hydrocarbons | [ | Triterpenoids | [ |
| Hydroxybenzoic Acids | [ | Triacylglycerols | [ |
| Hydroxycinnamics | [ | Oleuropein and derivatives | [ |
| Hydroxytyrosol | [ | Volatile Compounds (including limonene, pentadiene, hexane) | [ |
* as defined in the specific referenced papers.
Figure 4Chemometric analyses associated with NMR and MS techniques in selected published papers reported according to the frequency of their specific use (a) and their first appearance in the literature reviewed here (b).
Summary of the most important advantages and shortcomings of chemometric methods [160,161] related to the works considered in the present review.
| Chemometrics | Methods | Advantages | Shortcomings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Unsupervised | PCA |
Quick evaluation and data overview. |
No class information. The non-linear combination of the variables is not taken into consideration. Requirement of a scaling method. Risk of misleading (principal components explained lower variance). |
| HCA |
Quick sample cluster overview. Easy interpretation of results. |
No class information. Sensitivity to outliers. No easy derivation of variable importance. Time-consuming. | |
| Supervised | LDA |
Easy, simple, and fast data overview. Suitable for linear and low-dimensional data. |
Lost of sensitivity in multi-classification task. Not suitable for higher-dimensional data. Non-linear information between the classes and the variables is not taken into consideration. |
| PLS-DA |
Quick derivation of important variables in peaks list. Suitable for linear data. Usefulness to handle the collinearity among the variables. |
Non-linear information of the peaks list is not taken into consideration. Requirement of a scaling method. | |
| OPLS-DA |
Easy interpretation of the models. Usefulness for biomarker discovery. |
Non-linear information between the peaks list and classes of the samples are not taken into consideration. Requirement of a scaling method. | |
| RF |
Easy interpretation of results. Usefulness for multi-classification task. No requirement of a scaling method. |
Vulnerable decision trees. Requirement of a large sample size. | |
| ANN |
Easy interpretation of results. |
Time consuming. Complex training and validation procedure. Requirement of a scaling method. Difficult interpretation of models. |
Figure 5Temporal distribution from 1997 to 2021 (to date) of selected NMR- and MS-based studies for geographical origin assessment of EVOOs. Data from systematic research on https://www.scopus.com/ and https://scholar.google.com/ (accessed on 1 December 2021).
Figure 6Evolution over five-year period of main 1H NMR frequencies (400, 500, and 600 MHz) reported in here selected studies.
Figure 7Evolution over five-year period of molecular-fingerprint and chromatography MS techniques reported in here selected studies.
Figure 8Countries of origins for EVOOs subject to geographical origin assessment in selected NMR and MS-based studies. Data from systematic research on https://www.scopus.com/ and https://scholar.google.com/ (accessed on 1 December 2021).