| Literature DB >> 35318372 |
Dragana Bartolić1, Dragosav Mutavdžić1, Jens Michael Carstensen2, Slavica Stanković3, Milica Nikolić3, Saša Krstović4, Ksenija Radotić5.
Abstract
Cereal seeds safety may be compromised by the presence of toxic contaminants, such as aflatoxins. Besides being carcinogenic, they have other adverse health effects on humans and animals. In this preliminary study, we used two non-invasive optical techniques, optical fiber fluorescence spectroscopy and multispectral imaging (MSI), for discrimination of maize seeds naturally contaminated with aflatoxin B1 (AFB1) from the uncontaminated seeds. The AFB1-contaminated seeds exhibited a red shift of the emission maximum position compared to the control samples. Using linear discrimination analysis to analyse fluorescence data, classification accuracy of 100% was obtained to discriminate uncontaminated and AFB1-contaminated seeds. The MSI analysis combined with a normalized canonical discriminant analysis, provided spectral and spatial patterns of the analysed seeds. The AFB1-contaminated seeds showed a 7.9 to 9.6-fold increase in the seed reflectance in the VIS region, and 10.4 and 12.2-fold increase in the NIR spectral region, compared with the uncontaminated seeds. Thus the MSI method classified successfully contaminated from uncontaminated seeds with high accuracy. The results may have an impact on development of spectroscopic non-invasive methods for detection of AFs presence in seeds, providing valuable information for the assessment of seed adulteration in the field of food forensics and food safety.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35318372 PMCID: PMC8940939 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-08352-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1The normalized fluorescence emission spectra shown in solid and dashed lines correspond to control and aflatoxin B1-contaminanted Zea mays seeds, respectively. Excitation was set at 340 nm.
Figure 2Diagram of scattering of scores corresponding to contaminated and uncontaminated seeds in the space of the first two Principal components. Each score corresponds to one seed. The left side shows the histograms of the scores of the second main component of these two groups.
Training and test sample confusion matrix for 2-class, AFB1-contaminated (C) and control (UN) seeds, classification results.
| Predicted group membership | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | UN | C | Total | |||
| Training seta | Original | Count | UN | 35 | 0 | 35 |
| C | 0 | 11 | 11 | |||
| % | UN | 100 | 0 | 100 | ||
| C | 0 | 100 | 100 | |||
| Test setb | Original | Count | UN | 10 | 0 | 10 |
| C | 0 | 5 | 5 | |||
| % | UN | 100 | 0 | 100 | ||
| C | 0 | 100 | 100 | |||
a100% of selected training cases correctly classified.
b100% of test original grouped cases correctly classified.
Figure 3(A) sRGB images (a, b) and corresponding nCDA images (c, d) of Zea mays L. seedslot for control (uncontaminated) and AFB1-contaminated seeds. (B) The average reflectance spectra from the multispectral images (A) of control and aflatoxin contaminated seeds.
Figure 4Difference in reflectance intensity between control and contaminated seed samples in the range 350–970 nm.
Figure 5VideometerLab4 instrument (left) and its scheme of the setup for capturing multispectral images (right).