| Literature DB >> 36204380 |
Vandana Chaudhary1, Priyanka Kajla2, Aastha Dewan2, R Pandiselvam3, Claudia Terezia Socol4, Cristina Maria Maerescu4.
Abstract
Milk and milk products, meat, fish and poultry as well as other animal derived foods occupy a pronounced position in human nutrition. Unfortunately, fraud in the food industry is common, resulting in negative economic consequences for customers as well as significant threats to human health and the external environment. As a result, it is critical to develop analytical tools that can quickly detect fraud and validate the authenticity of such products. Authentication of a food product is the process of ensuring that the product matches the assertions on the label and complies with rules. Conventionally, various comprehensive and targeted approaches like molecular, chemical, protein based, and chromatographic techniques are being utilized for identifying the species, origin, peculiar ingredients and the kind of processing method used to produce the particular product. Despite being very accurate and unimpeachable, these techniques ruin the structure of food, are labor intensive, complicated, and can be employed on laboratory scale. Hence the need of hour is to identify alternative, modern instrumentation techniques which can help in overcoming the majority of the limitations offered by traditional methods. Spectroscopy is a quick, low cost, rapid, non-destructive, and emerging approach for verifying authenticity of animal origin foods. In this review authors will envisage the latest spectroscopic techniques being used for detection of fraud or adulteration in meat, fish, poultry, egg, and dairy products. Latest literature pertaining to emerging techniques including their advantages and limitations in comparison to different other commonly used analytical tools will be comprehensively reviewed. Challenges and future prospects of evolving advanced spectroscopic techniques will also be descanted.Entities:
Keywords: animal based products; authentication; chemometrics; dairy products; pre-processing; spectroscopic techniques
Year: 2022 PMID: 36204380 PMCID: PMC9531581 DOI: 10.3389/fnut.2022.979205
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Nutr ISSN: 2296-861X
Various spectroscopic techniques applied for animal origin food authentication and adulteration with their strength and pitfalls.
| Spectroscopic technique | Working principle | Based on the phenomenon | Outcomes | Application | Strength | Pitfalls | References |
| Terahertz Spectroscopy | Employs magnetic field depicting frequency ranging from hundred gigahertz to many terahertz | Vibrational transitions | Helps in depicting the qualitative and quantitative information pertaining to food constituents | - Detection of extraneous matter (stone, nail, plastic, hair etc.) in food products | - Non-destructive | - Due to substantial suppression of THz signals in the presence of water, THz imaging is confined to dry food matrices. | ( |
| Laser-Induced Breakdown Spectroscopy | Food sample is exposed to intensified and highly concentrated laser pulse, which generates a tiny stream of plasma composed of excited atoms and ions. When these atoms/ions descend back to their ground state, they emit specific wavelengths of light, further collected by a spectrometer. The spectrum produced is examined for emission lines and the material can be identified and quantified. | Optical/Atomic emission | - helpful in characterization as well as identification of food materials | - To detect adulteration | - Provides concurrent multi-elemental concentration of an analyte in all forms of matter | - Lower reproducibility rate of results | ( |
| Hyperspectral imaging | Spectral image acquisition at few discrete and narrow wavebands in spatial direction | Absorption, transmission or scattering of electromagnetic radiations of specific wavelength characteristic of compounds and acquisition single or multiple images | Detect individual traits or features directly connected with quality | - Authenticate origin | -Single or multiple images | - Expensive | ( |
| NMR | Phenomenon of absorption and emission of energy in the radiofrequency range of the electromagnetic spectrum | Numbers of resonating nuclei are measured as signals that are directly used for quantitative purpose. | Detect different classes of chemical compounds simultaneously | -Unveil erudite frauds | - Powerful tool for food | - Not suitable for analysis of non-homogenous samples like milk | ( |
| Raman spectroscopy | Optical measurement of energy transfer of light particle from the molecules present in the sample material | Spectrum is obtained by the molecular vibrations while bond extension and bending caused due to the variation in polarizability | Characterize molecular structure of chemical substances | - Adulteration detection in milk and dairy products, beverages, honey and grain | -Non-destructive technique | -Sensitive | ( |
| Near Infrared spectroscopy | Measure the absorption of electromagnetic waves ranging between 780–2500 nm when subjected on sample | Variation in absorption at a particular wavelength depends on the composition of food, geographical origin, variety or genotype | - Peculiar spectrum of each food allows its identification and differentiation | -Freshness, shelf-life, authenticity, mislabeling of seafood | -Low cost | - Low efficiency in certain food analysis | ( |
| Vibrational spectroscopy | Measure the amount of incident light on the sample that can be absorbed, scattered, transmitted or reflected during interaction | Interaction of electromagnetic radiations and vibrational or excited states of atomic nuclei | -Identification/authentication | -Authentication of food commodities | - Non-destructive technique | - Hardly selective | ( |
| UV-Vis spectroscopy | Measures the amount of light absorbed by the sample at the particular wavelength of UV-Vis range | Beer’s Law where concentration of solute is directly proportional to the amount of light absorbed | - Absorbed spectra provide fingerprints of compounds | -Authenticate the food compounds based on their native absorption spectrum | - Applicable for wide range of compounds | -Low sensitivity and selectivity | ( |
FIGURE 1(A) Terahertz spectroscopy. (B) Laser induced breakdown spectroscopy. (C) Hyperspectral imaging. (D) NMR spectroscopy. (E) Raman spectroscopy.
Spectroscopic techniques for authentication/adulteration of meat, poultry and seafood.
| Type of animal origin food | Issues related to authentication | Spectroscopic technique analysis | Data Analysis/Chemometrics | Experiment conditions | Outcomes | References |
|
| ||||||
| Fish filet samples | Classification of deep-frozen fish filets | Raman Spectroscopy (wavelength of 532 nm) | Sensitive non-linear iterative peak-clipping algorithm (SNIP) | Twelve samples of fishes, spectra recorded in range from 300–3400cm–1 | Efficient classification. Proven to be a potential screening tool in fish filet identification | ( |
| Salmon filets | Detect variation in fish muscle in terms of total variable counts, specific spoilage organism, or any other changes in composition during storage for different combinations of storage time, temperature, and packaging atmosphere | Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) | Principal component analysis (PCA) and partial least square regression (PLS-R) | Salmon filets (3*4*1cm) weighing 20 g were stored under three conditions: air packaging, modified packaging 50% N2/40% CO2/10% O2 with lemon juice, 50% N2/40% CO2/10% O2 without lemon juice. | FTIR spectra with PLS-R allowed bacterial load estimation. Lemon juice with modified atmosphere packaging pronouncedly reduced | ( |
| Bighead carp ( | To determine the freshness | Near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy (NIRS) | Partial least-squares regression (PLSR) in combination with Competitive adaptive reweighted sampling (CARS) | 150 samples, Spectral range:1000–1799 nm in reflectance mode | Freshness prediction models were successfully developed with satisfactory high coefficients of prediction for different freshness indicators like pH, total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N), thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), and ATP-related compounds ( | ( |
| Shelled shrimp ( | To distinguish between fresh, frozen samples of shelled shrimp, to check adulteration and mislabeling | VIS-NIR (400–1000 nm) in paired with a hyperspectral imaging system | Discrimination Random forest and soft independent modeling of class analogy | Fresh ( | Satisfying results were derived with accurate classification rates of 91.11 and 88.89% for both models | ( |
| Green Lipped mussel ( | To assess the microplastics in seafood models | Raman Spectroscopy | Automated Raman Mapping approach | Mussel shell was thawed for soft tissue extraction, mackerel was cut into pieces with bones prior to digestion. The both samples were digested at 40C for 48husing KOH, KOH with H2O2, KOH, EDTA and H2O2, | Polypropylene, polyethylene, poly (ethylene terephthalate), and polystyrene were identified as microplastics in fragmented and fibers | ( |
| Fish | To identify fish species and their substitution | Ultraviolet-visible (UV-Vis) spectroscopy | Principal Component Analysis (PCA) | Sixty fish samples from 12 commonly consumed fishes species. Scan range from 200–400 nm | Successful identification and genetic evaluation of fish species | ( |
| Salmon | To identify the wild and farmed salmon | Direct Analysis in Real-Time (DART) coupled with High-Resolution Mass Spectroscopy (HRMS) | Principle Component Analysis (PCA) | 26 wild salmon from Canada and a total of 74 farmed salmon, arising from aquaculture plants of Canada (25), Norway (25) and Chile (24), all of | PCA showed a clear distinction between wild and farmed salmon, which accounted for the explanation of 99.38% of variance | ( |
| European sea bass ( | Authentication of proper labeling issues for European sea bass as per International labeling regulation | Inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometer for macro-, micro-and toxic elements detection | Principal component analysis (PCA) and Sample classification through discriminant analysis | Samples were collected from 18 different Italian and foreign sources out of which 45 were wild, 85 were intensively reared, 20 were semi-intensively farmed, 10 extensively farmed | Elemental composition and toxic elemental detection helped in checking regulations limits. | ( |
| Fish and shrimps | Detection of brevetoxin B (BTX) | Spectroscopic ellipsometry (SE) and attenuated internal reflection spectroscopic ellipsometry (TIRE) | two anti BTX aptamers using predictive modeling tools and an exclusion method | Sensors capable of detecting BTX ranging from 0.05–1600 nm in TIRE and 0.5–2000 nm in SE configuration | Successful detection of BTX toxins with detection limits of 1.32 ng/ml for SE and 0.72 ng/ml for TIRE configurations | ( |
| Caviar | To distinguish between Aquitaine caviar and other caviars sample. | 1H-NMR spectroscopy | Multivariate models-Soft Independent Modeling by Class Analogy (SIMCA) and orthogonal partial least square discriminant Analysis | 91 aqueous extracts of caviar samples, NIR parameters: a 500-ms acquisition time, an 80-ms mixing time, an 8090-Hz spectral width, and a 1.5-s relaxation delay. | NMR metabolic profile provided the freshness estimation as well as the shelf life of caviar cans along with the characterization of different metabolites | ( |
| Atlantic salmon | For quick identification of rainbow trout adulteration in Atlantic salmon | Combination of Raman Spectroscopy with a machine learning approach | Pre-processing methods-first and second derivative, multiple scattering correction. Recursive feature elimination, genetic algorithm, and simulated annealing and supervised K-means clustering algorithm. | Adulterated samples contained different concentrations (0–100% w/w at 10% intervals) of rainbow trout mixed into | The developed model of GA-KM-cubist machine learning with Raman spectroscopy was effective in the adulteration detection of Atlantic salmon | ( |
| King Salmon Atlantic salmon and Rainbow trout | To study lipidomics properties for better distinction among these three salmonids | Hydrophilic interaction chromatography-mass spectroscopy | LIPID MAPS prediction tool, One-way analysis of variance, principal component analysis | 15 samples (05 for each King Salmon Atlantic salmon and Rainbow trout), MS parameters: ion spray voltage-4500V, ion spray temperature-500°C, ion drying gas pressure 24 psi, nebulizer gas pressure- 30 psi, curtain gas pressure-25 psi declustering potential-75V, collision energy-40V | Phospholipids of m/z 802.8 and m/z 834.8 were reported to be potential markers for species identification | ( |
| Different Fish and seafood Samples | To develop a protocol for rapid authentication of seafood | MALDI TOF Mass Spectrophotometer | R studio 1.1.419 software, Flex analysis 3.4 software | Distinguish different seafood species on the analysis of muscle tissue processed by the acid method. | ( | |
|
| ||||||
| Minced Beef | Adulteration with pork and duck meat | Near-infrared spectroscopy (12,500–5400cm–1) | Discriminant analysis and Partial least squares | For pork adulteration in beef samples- 10–80% (w/w) with 10% increment were blended with beef to get 72 (3 × 3 × 8) blended samples along with 3 pure beef meat and 3 pure pork meat samples. | Discriminant analysis provided best results with classification rate of 100% for binary system and 91.5% for ternary systems within selected wavelength. Optimal PLS models predicted adulterant levels with correlation coefficient of 95.80 and 95.69%. | ( |
| Mutton and beef | Adulteration with pork meat or mutton | Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (4000–450 cm–1 at resolution of 0.4 cm–1) | Partial least square discriminant analysis and support vector machine | 180 samples | In PLS-DA model, coefficient of determination for calibration and testing sets was 0.99 with RMSEC 0.06, and RMSCV and RMSEP with value 0.08, predicting 100% model accuracy. | ( |
| Fish meal, poultry, porcine, bovine and ovine samples | To distinguish different sources of animal originated feed samples based on specific lipid characteristics | FT- Raman Spectroscopy (3600–400 cm–1 at resolution of 4 cm–1 | Principal component analysis and partial least squares-discriminant analysis | 105 processed animal-derived feedstuff samples [29 fishmeal and 76 meat and bone meal (25 from poultry, 23 from porcine, 14 from bovine and 14 from ovine sources)] | Special peak ratios of 1645/1748 and 1645/1445 with high correlation | ( |
| Beef and Pork | Detection of minced beef | Multispectral imaging spectroscopy | Partial least square discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) | 220 meat samples | 98.48% overall correct classification was achieved to distinguish between pure and adulterated samples for PLS-DA and LDA. While for independent testing of pure and adulterated samples, PLS-DA was more accurate than LDA | ( |
| Scallop, shrimp, pig liver, chicken, beef and mixed sample | Identification of different meat species | Laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy | Multiplicative scatter correction (MSC) and K-nearest neighbor (KNN) model | 6 samples were prepared into pellet form with diameter-40 mm under pressure of 20MPa. | Recognition rate enhanced from 94.17 to 100%, while decline in prediction coefficient of variance from 5.16 to 0.56% was revealed proving MSC and LIBS to be accurate and stable in meat species authentication. | ( |
| Poultry –processed products | Adulteration detection | Liquid chromatography-mass spectroscopy | LC-QQQ multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) method | 12 different processed poultry based products samples | Resolves the purpose of product quality monitoring, check on food composition, compliance with declared labeling and detection of fraudulent practices. | ( |
| Fresh meat | Adulterated with different types of beef and pork offals | Vibrational spectroscopy (wavelength range- 1800–1000 cm–1) and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy wavelength range- 4000–550 cm–1 | SIMCA, LDA | Samples comprise of three categories | SIMCA model proved to be best for beef offals identification while LDA for pork offals using non-scaled spectra | ( |
| Eggs shells | To determine egg freshness through external scanning of egg shell | Raman spectroscopy | Partial least square regression model of 100–3000 cm–1 | 125 samples, Raman spectroscopy parameters, the acquisition band −100–3000 cm–1; resolution- 12 cm–1; integration time −5 s; number of scans—3 times; and detection distance between the probe and the egg shell surface—6 mm | More than 0.9 value of correlation coefficients was observed with Haugh unit, albumen pH and air chamber diameter, while 0.8 value for air chamber height, indicating strong relation of Raman spectrum of egg shell with freshness. | ( |
| Eggs | identify fake and poor quality eggs | Raman spectroscopy (1800–600 cm–1) and Raman hyperspectral imaging (1500–390 cm–1) | Principal component analysis, Partial least squares discriminant analysis, multiplicative scatter correction | Samples were divided into two groups: one group-real chicken eggs and other group of fake eggs. Raman hyperspectral imaging revealed that fake eggs exhibit more-intense chemical images at an optimal waveband centered around 1295 cm–1 | Raman techniques identify the fake eggs as the chemicals used in manufacturing of fake eggs and provide 100% accuracy. | ( |
| Eggs | To verify the authenticity of native eggs | Near infrared spectroscopy | Data driven-based class modeling DDCM | 122 egg samples of three types one-native ( | NIR spectroscopy on combination with class-modeling is efficient tool for authentication of a specific type of native eggs | ( |
| Eggs | Screening and sorting of organic eggs | 1H NMR spectroscopy | Principal component analysis followed by linear discrimination analysis (PCA-LDA) and Monte-Carlo cross validation | 344 samples of chicken eggs, out of that 214 were barn/free-range eggs while 130 eggs were from organic farms. Separated egg white and yolk from different were freeze dried for further analyses. NMR spectra were acquired at 290 K with relaxation delay for 3 s, and acquisition time of 11 s. | 93% accurate recognition/identification of the organic eggs was evaluated on employing NMR spectroscopy with chemometrics | ( |
| Beef muscles | To distinguish three beef muscles ( | Classical front face (FFFS) and Synchronous (SFS) Fluorescence spectroscopy | Partial Least Square Discriminant Analysis (PLSDA), Support Vector Machine associated with PLS (PLS-SVM) and Principal Components Analysis (PCA-SVM) | 261 samples of three beef muscles- | For the FFFS, the PLS-SVM with the 382 nm excitation wavelength gave the best identification results. For SFS, when performing discrimination of the three muscles, the 120 nm gave best results | ( |
| Minced beef and horse meat | Detection of minced beef adulteration with horsemeat | Multispectral imaging spectroscopy | Partial least square discriminant analysis, random forest and support vector machines | 110 samples, four levels of adulteration, 20–80, 40–60, 60–40, and 80–20% (w/w) containing each meat samples, multispectral images were acquired in 18 wavelengths | SVM model gave 95.31% overall correct classification for independent batch validation and correct classification of fresh and pure ground meat samples | ( |
| Beef Steak | To differentiate between grass-fed and grain-fed beef | Near infrared reflectance (NIR) and Raman spectroscopy | Partial least squares discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) and linear discriminant analysis (LDA) | Total 108 beef steak samples classified as grass-fed ( | The NIR spectra accurately discriminated between grass- and grain-fed beef on both fat (91.7%, | ( |
Spectroscopic techniques for authentication/adulteration of milk and milk products.
| Milk and milk products | Issue related to authentication | Spectroscopic technique employed | Data analysis/Chemometric analysis | Experiment conditions | Outcomes | References |
| Goat milk | Adulteration with cow milk | Near-infrared (NIR) spectroscopy | PLS algorithm | 7 lots with 18 samples of goat milk and bovine milk separately | Successfully detected the adulteration of goat milk with cow milk even at a minimum concentration of 1.0154 per 100 grams | ( |
| Camel milk | Adulteration with goat milk | NIR spectroscopy (wavelength ranging from 700 to 2500 nm, resolution at 2 cm–1) | Multivariate analysis | 03 samples of camel milk adulterated with goat milk at different concentrations | Could detect the goat milk up to 0.5% whereas the limit of quantification of adulteration was 2.0% having | ( |
| Cow Milk | Adulteration | NIR spectroscopy (64 scans at 8 cm–1 resolution) | Standard variance spectrum of precision tests | Approximately 800 milk samples from different regions of China. Out of 800, 287 samples were of raw cow milk and remaining 526 of adulterated milk with thickeners and pseudo proteins (melamine, ammonia and urea) | Water signal in NIR spectra of milk was found to be crucial component determining contaminated milk discrimination. | ( |
| Milk | Diagnosis of mastitis and the disease-causing microorganisms | NIR spectroscopy (spectra ranged from 400 to 2500 nm; 2 nm interval) | PLSR | 200 numbers of foremilk samples taken from morning as well as afternoon milking | Could be employed for | ( |
| Liquid milk | Melamine adulteration | NIR spectroscopy | One-class partial least squares | No. of samples 102 | The results depicted that melamine adulteration could be depicted up to an accuracy of 89%, sensitivity 90% with 88% specificity | ( |
| Cheese | Presence of goat, cow, ewe milk | NIR spectroscopy | PCA, MPLS | No. of samples 112 | Was able to identify the fatty acid composition, thereby predicting the variability in the type of milk used for its production | ( |
| Cow milk market samples | Adulterants including hydrogen peroxide, urea, whey, synthetic milk | Attenuated total reflectance Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) (wavelength between 4000 to 500 cm–1) | SIMCA and PLSR | No. of samples 370 | With the help of Soft Independent Modeling of Class Analogy (SIMCA) the limits up to which adulterants like hydrogen peroxide (>0.019 g/L), urea (>0.78 g/L), whey (>7.5 g/L), and synthetic milk (>0.1 g/L) are added could be identified. | ( |
| Liquid milk | Sucrose adulteration | Attenuated total reflectance Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy | Multivariate analysis (PCA and SIMCA) | No of scans 32/sample; Resolution 4 cm–1 | Coefficient of determination value obtained was 0.996 | ( |
| Liquid Milk | Authentication of cow feeding and geographical origin | NIR spectroscopy | Cluster Analysis and PLS discriminate | No. of samples 486 | Could easily distinguish the milk obtained from pasture fed and preserved forage fed animals which was reflected by low error rate of 5.4% even for the diet having lower proportion of pasture (30%) whereas error was stable (2.5%) when pasture proportion was more than 70% | ( |
| Ghee | To detect lard in pure ghee | Attenuated total reflectance Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy | Chemometrics | Wavelength between 4000 to 500 cm–1 | Percentage accuracy was more than 99% | ( |
| Milk powder | Exogenous proteins adulteration | LIBS | Convolutional neural network (CNN) | − | CNN helped in achieving a high accuracy rate of 97.7% and prediction rate of 97.8% | ( |
| Butter | Margarine adulteration | LIBS | PLS and PCA | 12 and 5 samples of butter and margarine | Exhibited very little error rate of prediction to be 3.37 while the error rate for calibration was 2.02 | ( |
| Infant milk | Melamine | LIBS | PCA, univariate and NN | 10,04, 04, and 02 pure semi-skimmed milk, branded cow milk, goat and sheep milk sample, respectively | Generated finer results in comparison to the traditional techniques | ( |
| Butter | Margarine adulteration | Raman spectroscopy | PLS, PCA, principal component regression (PCR), artificial neural networks (ANNs) | No. of samples 01-homemade, 07- commercial, 02- regular margarine and 04- light margarine | R2 values for PLS, PCR and ANN were 0.987, 0.968, and 0.978, respectively | ( |
| Milk powder | Melamine adulteration | Hyperspectral near-infrared imaging | Spectral angle measure (SAM), spectral correlation measure (SCM), and Euclidian distance measure (EDM) | No. of samples 36 (replicated); | Less than 1% adulteration could be detected in milk powders | ( |
| Cheese | Starch adulteration | Hyperspectral near-infrared imaging | PLSR | Spectra range 200–1000 nm | Reported | ( |
| Buffalo milk | Cow milk adulteration | Synchronous fluorescence (SF) spectroscopy | PCA, PLS | − | DL-6% | ( |