| Literature DB >> 35744924 |
Arkadiusz Matwijczuk1, Iwona Budziak-Wieczorek2, Grzegorz Czernel1, Dariusz Karcz3, Alicja Barańska4, Aleksandra Jedlińska4, Katarzyna Samborska4.
Abstract
Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) in connection with chemometric analysis were used as a fast and direct approach to classify spray dried honey powder compositions in terms of honey content, the type of diluent (water or skim milk), and carrier (maltodextrin or skim milk powder) used for the preparation of feed solutions before spray drying. Eleven variants of honey powders containing different amounts of honey, the type of carrier, and the diluent were investigated and compared to pure honey and carrier materials. Chemometric discrimination of samples was achieved by principal component analysis (PCA), hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA), linear discriminant analysis (LDA), and partial least squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) modelling procedures performed on the FTIR preprocessed spectral data for the fingerprint region (1800-750 cm-1) and the extended region (3600-750 cm-1). As a result, it was noticed that the type of carrier is a significant factor during the classification of different samples of powdered multifloral honey. PCA divided the samples based on the type of carrier, and additionally among maltodextrin-honey powders it was possible to distinguish the type of diluent. The result obtained by PCA-LDA and PLS-DA scores yielded a clear separation between four classes of samples and showed a very good discrimination between the different honey powder with a 100.0% correct overall classification rate of the samples.Entities:
Keywords: FTIR spectroscopy; carrier; chemometric analysis; honey powder; spray drying
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35744924 PMCID: PMC9229643 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27123800
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Composition of honey powders obtained with different carriers (MD—maltodextrin, —milk powder) and diluents (w—water, m—skim milk).
| Variant | Group | Honey Solids to Carrier Solids Ratio ( |
|---|---|---|
| 40MDw | II | 40:60 |
| 50MDw | 50:50 | |
| 60MDw | 60:40 * | |
| 50MPw | III | 50:50 |
| 60MPw | 60:40 | |
| 70MPw | 70:30 | |
| 40MDm | IV | 40:60 |
| 50MDm | 50:50 | |
| 60MDm | 60:40 | |
| 50MPm | V | 50:50 |
| 60MPm | 60:40 | |
| 70MPm | 70:30 |
* drying not possible due to high stickiness.
Figure 1FTIR spectra for different samples of honey and basic materials. All spectra were normalized at the 3290 cm−1.
The location of the maxima of absorption bands FTIR with arrangement of appropriate vibrations selected for maltodextrin (MD), skim milk powder (MP), and multifloral honey (H) made in terms of spectral 3900–700 cm−1.
| Type and Origin of Vibrations | FTIR Position of Bands (cm−1) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| MD | MP | H | |
| ν(O–H) in H2O | 3291 | 3285 | 3281 |
| ν(C–H) or/and ν(NH3) of free amino acids | 2927 | 2927 | 2937 |
| ν(C–O) from carbohydrate | 1742 | 1739 | 1740 |
| δ (O–H) from H2O | 1645 | 1643 | 1642 |
| δ (N–H) from amid II | 1546 | ||
| δ (O–CH) and δ (C–C–H) | 1453 | 1449 | 1450 |
| δ (O–H) in C–OH group + δ (C–H) in the alkenes | 1417 | 1419 | 1420 |
| δ (–OH) in C–OH group | 1363 | 1366 | 1366 |
| ν(C–H) in carbohydrates or/and ν(C–O) in carbohydrates | 1257 | 1254 | 1257 |
| ν(C–H) in carbohydrates or/and ν(C–O) in carbohydrates | 1148 | 1148 | 1148 |
| ν(C–O) in C–O–C group | 1104 | 1114 | 1101 |
| ν(C–O) in C–OH group or ν (C–C) in the carbohydrate structure | 1013 | 1020 | 1027 |
| δ (C–H) | 925 | 915 | 916 |
| Anomeric region of carbohydrates or δ (C–H) | 896 | 883 | 895 |
Figure 2Hierarchical clustering analysis (HCA) tree diagram. (A)—analysis performed on all 14 samples in the range between 1800–750 cm−1, (B)—analysis performed on 11 samples from II–V group in the range between 1800–750 cm−1, and (C)—analysis performed on all 14 samples in the range between 3600–750 cm−1.
Eigenvalues, percentage of variance, and cumulative percentage in the data used for the PCA calculations obtained for the multifloral honey, maltodextrin, and skim milk powder.
| Principal Component Number | Eigenvalue | Percentage of Variance (%) | Cumulative (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 750–1800 cm−1 (14 samples) | |||
| 1 | 1004.849 | 68.310 | 68.310 |
| 2 | 184.067 | 12.513 | 80.823 |
| 3 | 133.050 | 9.044 | 89.868 |
| 4 | 92.275 | 6.272 | 96.141 |
| 5 | 32.647 | 2.219 | 98.360 |
| 750–1800 cm−1 (11 samples) | |||
| 1 | 1058.583 | 71.963 | 71.963 |
| 2 | 223.148 | 15.169 | 87.133 |
| 3 | 147.245 | 10.009 | 97.143 |
| 4 | 18.230 | 1.239 | 98.382 |
| 5 | 1058.583 | 71.963 | 71.963 |
| 750–3600 cm−1 (14 samples) | |||
| 1 | 1643.594 | 41.182 | 41.182 |
| 2 | 1311.975 | 32.873 | 74.055 |
| 3 | 396.217 | 9.927 | 83.983 |
| 4 | 205.171 | 5.140 | 89.124 |
| 5 | 141.846 | 3.554 | 92.678 |
Figure 3Principal component analysis (PCA) two-dimensional (2D) score plot (PC1 versus PC2) calculated for the data acquired from the FTIR spectra in the range between 1800—750 cm−1. (A)—analysis conducted for 14 samples (I-V group) and (B)—analysis conducted for 11 samples (II-V group). Linear Discriminant Analysis (LDA) score plot of multifloral honeys of different carrier and diluent by using first three PCs as variables. (C)—analysis conducted for 14 samples (I-V group) and (D)—analysis conducted for 11 samples (II-V group). Range between 1800–750 cm−1.
Figure 4The loading plot of PC1 (on the top) and PC2 (on the bottom) for the region 750–1800 cm−1. (A)—analysis conducted for 14 samples (I-V group) and (B)—analysis conducted for 11 samples (II–V group).
Classification results of the classes computed by LDA.
| LDA prediction matrix for 14 samples | ||||||
| True class | Assigned to class | % Correct classification | ||||
| I | II | III | IV | V | ||
| I | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 33.3 |
| II | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100.0 |
| III | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 33.3 |
| IV | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 66.7 |
| V | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 66.7 |
| Total | 5 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3 | 57.1 |
| LDA prediction matrix for 11 samples | ||||||
| True class | Assigned to class | % Correct classification | ||||
| II | III | IV | V | |||
| II | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100.0 | |
| III | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 100.0 | |
| IV | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 100.0 | |
| V | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 100.0 | |
| Total | 2 | 3 | 3 | 3 | 100.0 | |
Figure 5Partial least-squares-discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) scores plot t(1)/t(2) of FTIR spectra on the range 1800–750 cm−1.
Classification results of the classes computed by PLS-DA for training sample and validation sample.
| Confusion matrix for the training sample (variable group): | ||||||
| from\to | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | % correct |
| 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 100.00% |
| 3 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 100.00% |
| 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 100.00% |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 100.00% |
| Total | 2 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 9 | 100.00% |
| Confusion matrix for the validation sample (variable group): | ||||||
| from\to | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Total | % correct |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00% |
| 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.00% |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 100.00% |
| Total | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 50.00% |