2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2016.11.049
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Novel method for the producing area identification of Zhongning Goji berries by electronic nose

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
29
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
29
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in Figure a, a score scatter plot was drawn to show the grouping, similarities and differences among PDM samples cooked by different methods. The first two principal components accounted for 93.23% of the variation (greater than 85%), which appears to provide sufficient information about the samples (Li, Yu, Xu, & Gao, ). Of the total variation, PC1 and PC2 represented 87.43 and 5.80%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown in Figure a, a score scatter plot was drawn to show the grouping, similarities and differences among PDM samples cooked by different methods. The first two principal components accounted for 93.23% of the variation (greater than 85%), which appears to provide sufficient information about the samples (Li, Yu, Xu, & Gao, ). Of the total variation, PC1 and PC2 represented 87.43 and 5.80%, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The center distance of the four kinds of bayberry wine group is far from each other. Owing to the high variance contribution rate, sufficient representativeness can be observed (Li et al, ). The results show that the volatile flavor compounds of the four kinds of bayberry wines had obvious differences.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The electronic nose (Germany Airsense PEN 3.5) was used to tentatively estimate the aroma profile similarity after fermentation. The E‐nose analysis was based on previous reports (Hong, Wang, & Qi, ; Li et al, ) and with modifications. The procedures were as follows: 5 ml of each bayberry wine sample was added in a 20‐ml glass vial and capped with a Teflon rubber cap.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure S1, Supporting Information, shows the mean response values generated by the ten sensors to six samples at 0–60 s. The variation trends of signals in all VROs showed similar changes that increased sharply and then stabilized after 40 s. However, the response values of 10 sensors were significantly different. The response values of S7 (i.e., mainly sensitive to S‐containing compounds) exhibited significant distinctions in samples, followed by S2 (broad‐range of chemicals), S9 (mainly sensitive to organic sulfides), and S6 (sensitive to methane) . For the remaining sensors, especially S1, S3, and S5, a minimal change in resistance occurred over detection time.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…E‐nose analysis was based on the procedure described by Xu et al . and Li et al . Prior to detection, 5 ± 0.01 g of each sample was placed into a 50 mL glass vial with a Teflon/silicone septum in the screw cap.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%