| Literature DB >> 36010536 |
Yilin Mao1, He Li1, Yu Wang1, Kai Fan1, Yujie Song1, Xiao Han1, Jie Zhang1, Shibo Ding2, Dapeng Song2, Hui Wang2, Zhaotang Ding1,3.
Abstract
The withering and fermentation degrees are the key parameters to measure the processing technology of black tea. The traditional methods to judge the degree of withering and fermentation are time-consuming and inefficient. Here, a monitoring model of the biochemical components of tea leaves based on hyperspectral imaging technology was established to quantitatively judge the withering and fermentation degrees of fresh tea leaves. Hyperspectral imaging technology was used to obtain the spectral data during the withering and fermentation of the raw materials. The successive projections algorithm (SPA), competitive adaptive reweighted sampling (CARS), and uninformative variable elimination (UVE) are used to select the characteristic bands. Combined with the support vector machine (SVM), random forest (RF), and partial least square (PLS) methods, the monitoring models of the tea polyphenols (TPs), free amino acids (FAA) and caffeine (CAF) contents were established. The results show that: (1) CARS performs the best among the three feature band selection methods, and PLS performs the best among the three machine learning models; (2) the optimal models for predicting the content of the TPs, FAA, and CAF are CARS-PLS, SPA-PLS, and CARS-PLS, respectively, and the coefficient of determination of the prediction set is 0.91, 0.88, and 0.81, respectively; and (3) the best models for quantitatively judging the withering and fermentation degrees are FAA-SPA-PLS and TPs-CARS-PLS, respectively. The model proposed in this study can improve the monitoring efficiency of the biochemical components of tea leaves and provide a basis for the intelligent judgment of the withering and fermentation degrees in the process of black tea processing.Entities:
Keywords: fermentation degree; hyperspectral imaging; machine learning; quality composition; tea plant; withering degree
Year: 2022 PMID: 36010536 PMCID: PMC9407140 DOI: 10.3390/foods11162537
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Acquisition and analysis of hyperspectral data.
Standard curve of FAA and CAF.
| Standard Sample | Linear Equation | R2 |
|---|---|---|
| FAA | 0.9983 | |
| CAF | 0.9903 |
Figure 2Changes of TPs, FAA, and CAF contents during withering and fermentation of fresh tea leaves. (a) Changes of quality components during tea withering; (b) changes of quality components during tea fermentation.
The quality component content of the sample.
| Maximum/% | Minimum/% | Average/% | Standard Deviation/% | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training Set | Testing Set | Training Set | Testing Set | Training Set | Testing Set | Training Set | Testing Set | |
| TPs | 12.79 | 13.28 | 6.00 | 6.31 | 10.43 | 10.93 | 2.11 | 2.05 |
| FAA | 6.13 | 6.10 | 4.11 | 4.23 | 5.05 | 4.98 | 0.54 | 0.57 |
| CAF | 5.52 | 5.40 | 4.21 | 4.35 | 4.83 | 4.91 | 0.31 | 0.31 |
Figure 3Raw data and spectra after pretreatment. (a) Original spectra of tea samples; (b) spectra after preprocessing by MSC + 1D + S-G algorithm schemes follow another format.
Figure 4Distribution of characteristic bands.
Bands screening results.
| Index | Screening Method | Number of Bands | Characteristic Bands (nm) |
|---|---|---|---|
| TPs | SPA | 13 | 512, 569, 609, 672, 714, 764, 848, 864, 898, 913, 955, 971, 992 |
| CARS | 16 | 519–522, 653, 733, 764–768, 794–796, 862, 880–882, 911, 966, 1010 | |
| UVE | 159 | 473–475, 488–532, 554–594, 606–667, 686–703, 719–738, 750–785, 814–840, 979–986, 997 | |
| FAA | SPA | 16 | 409, 450, 512, 701, 724, 738, 778, 807, 823, 844, 869, 896, 911, 931, 946, 992 |
| CARS | 30 | 405–407, 425, 437–450, 522–529, 580–584, 715, 748, 784, 823–826, 896, 970, 984–986 | |
| UVE | 174 | 391–470, 488–527, 542–559, 594–623, 679–724, 734–759, 933–960, 973–1010 | |
| CAF | SPA | 14 | 665, 679, 703, 726, 778, 807, 823, 851, 884, 929, 944, 957, 971, 1007 |
| CARS | 13 | 494–498, 542, 545, 695, 710, 748, 812, 909, 922, 1007–1008 | |
| UVE | 90 | 483–531, 544–582, 535–655, 676–700, 715–727 |
Modeling results.
| Index | Model Valuation Index | SPA | CARS | UVE | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SVM | PLS | RF | SVM | PLS | RF | SVM | PLS | RF | ||
| TPs | RC2 | 0.911 | 0.923 | 0.924 | 0.926 | 0.926 | 0.920 | 0.919 | 0.931 | 0.924 |
| RMSEC | 0.006 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.00 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.005 | |
| RMSECV | 0.005 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.005 | 0.005 | 0.003 | 0.004 | |
| RP2 | 0.886 | 0.900 | 0.890 | 0.898 | 0.911 | 0.887 | 0.899 | 0.895 | 0.895 | |
| RMSEP | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | |
| RPD | 3.497 | 5.178 | 2.718 | 4.797 | 5.223 | 3.587 | 4.886 | 4.285 | 4.438 | |
| FAA | RC2 | 0.857 | 0.850 | 0.880 | 0.870 | 0.854 | 0.852 | 0.860 | 0.847 | 0.877 |
| RMSEC | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.003 | |
| RMSECV | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | |
| RP2 | 0.802 | 0.882 | 0.830 | 0.846 | 0.866 | 0.788 | 0.800 | 0.778 | 0.743 | |
| RMSEP | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.003 | 0.002 | 0.002 | 0.003 | |
| RPD | 2.547 | 2.974 | 1.857 | 2.864 | 2.522 | 1.609 | 2.368 | 1.798 | 1.579 | |
| CAF | RC2 | 0.769 | 0.765 | 0.790 | 0.771 | 0.787 | 0.752 | 0.786 | 0.767 | 0.783 |
| RMSEC | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.004 | |
| RMSECV | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.004 | |
| RP2 | 0.756 | 0.757 | 0.748 | 0.763 | 0.814 | 0.742 | 0.721 | 0.741 | 0.752 | |
| RMSEP | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.003 | 0.004 | 0.004 | 0.003 | 0.003 | |
| RPD | 2.052 | 2.045 | 1.540 | 1.754 | 2.426 | 1.488 | 1.403 | 2.015 | 1.700 | |
Figure 5Scatter diagram of prediction of TPs, FAA, and CAF content. (a–c) TPs content prediction results obtained by CARS-SVM, CARS-PLS, and CARS-RF models; (d–f) FAA content prediction results obtained by CARS-SVM, CARS-PLS, and CARS-RF models; (g–i) CAF content prediction results obtained by CARS-SVM, CARS-PLS, and CARS-RF models.