| Literature DB >> 36010391 |
Tongzhao Wang1,2, Yixiao Zhang1,2, Yuanyuan Liu1,2, Zhijuan Zhang1,2, Tongbin Yan1,2.
Abstract
Stone cells are a distinctive characteristic of pears and their formation negatively affects the quality of the fruit. To evaluate the stone cell content (SCC) of Korla fragrant pears, we developed a Vis/NIR spectroscopy system that allowed for the adjustment of the illuminating angle. The successive projective algorithm (SPA) and the Monte Carlo uninformative variable elimination (MCUVE) based on the sampling algorithm were used to select characteristic wavelengths. The particle swarm optimization (PSO) algorithm was used to optimize the combination of penalty factor C and kernel function parameter g. Support vector regression (SVR) was used to construct the evaluation model of the SCC. The SCC of the calibration set ranged from 0.240% to 0.657% and that of the validation set ranged from 0.315% to 0.652%. The SPA and MCUVE were used to optimize 57 and 83 characteristic wavelengths, respectively. The combinations of C and g were (6.2561, 0.2643) and (2.5133, 0.1128), respectively, when different characteristic wavelengths were used as inputs of SVR, indicating that the first combination had good generalization ability. The correlation coefficients of the SPA-SVR model after pre-processing the standardized normal variate (SNV) for both sets were 0.966 and 0.951, respectively. These results show that the SNV-SPA-SVR model satisfied the requirements of intelligent evaluation of SCC in Korla fragrant pears.Entities:
Keywords: Korla fragrant pear; intelligent evaluation; stone cell content; successive projective algorithm; support vector regression; uninformative variable elimination
Year: 2022 PMID: 36010391 PMCID: PMC9407552 DOI: 10.3390/foods11162391
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Vis/NIR spectra acquisition system for Korla fragrant pears. A: spectrometer; B: optical fiber; C: halogen lamp; D: sample; E: rotating stage; F: optical fiber bracket; G: lamp mounting plate; H: system mounting rack.
Statistics of SCC in Cs and Vs.
| Sample Set | Numbers | Min (%) | Max (%) | Mean (%) | SD (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cs | 90 | 0.240 | 0.657 | 0.486 | 0.100 | 0.008 |
| Vs | 30 | 0.315 | 0.652 | 0.481 | 0.083 |
Max: the maximum value of the dataset; Min: the minimum value of the dataset; Cs: calibration sets; Vs: validation sets.
Figure 2Reflective spectral curves. (a) Raw spectrum; (b) spectrum after SNV pretreating.
Correlation coefficients of Cs and Vs with different S-G parameters.
| Frame Size | None | 3 | 5 | 7 | 9 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fitting Order | ||||||
| none | 0.8613 | |||||
| 0.8214 | ||||||
| 1 | 0.8276 | 0.7867 | 0.7403 | 0.7012 | ||
| 0.8007 | 0.7616 | 0.7150 | 0.6710 | |||
| 2 | 0.8306 | 0.7928 | 0.7789 | |||
| 0.8035 | 0.7710 | 0.7458 | ||||
| 3 | 0.8414 | 0.8227 | 0.8023 | |||
| 0.8137 | 0.8006 | 0.7853 | ||||
| 4 | 0.8527 | 0.8419 | ||||
| 0.8195 | 0.8059 | |||||
| 5 | 0.8926 | 0.8647 | ||||
| 0.8210 | 0.8100 | |||||
| 6 | 0.8589 | |||||
| 0.8128 | ||||||
| 7 | 0.8527 | |||||
| 0.8026 | ||||||
Correlation coefficients on the top and the bottom of different combinations of frame size and fitting order refer to correlation coefficients of validation set and calibration set, respectively.
Evaluation of PLSR based on different spectral preprocessing algorithms.
| Parameter | Preprocessing Algorithm | Factor Number | RC | RMSEC (%) | RV | RMSEV (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stone cell content (%) | None | 9 | 0.8613 | 0.0360 | 0.8214 | 0.0412 |
| MSC | 10 | 0.9191 | 0.0277 | 0.8879 | 0.0325 | |
| SNV | 10 | 0.9189 | 0.0277 | 0.8935 | 0.0315 | |
| S-G(7, 5) | 10 | 0.8926 | 0.0319 | 0.8210 | 0.0409 | |
| S-G(7, 5)& MSC | 10 | 0.9001 | 0.0308 | 0.8614 | 0.0361 | |
| S-G(7, 5)& SNV | 10 | 0.8999 | 0.0308 | 0.8641 | 0.0356 |
RC: the correlation coefficient of the calibration set; RMSEC: root mean square error of the calibration set; RV: the correlation coefficient of the validation set; RMSEV: root mean square error of the validation set; S-G(7,5): Savitzky–Golay filter with a frame size of 7 and fitting order of 5.
Figure 3Changing processes of RMSEV with different wavelengths. (a) SPA; (b) MCUVE.
Figure 4Distribution of characteristic wavelengths. (a) SPA; (b) MCUVE.
Figure 5Optimization of SVR parameters. (a) SPA; (b) MCUVE.
Figure 6Scatter plot of the calibration set (×) and verification set (o) of stone cell content. (a) SPA; (b) MCUVE.