Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37893749›Full record

ArticleFoods (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Possible Alternatives: Identifying and Quantifying Adulteration in Buffalo, Goat, and Camel Milk Using Mid-Infrared Spectroscopy Combined with Modern Statistical Machine Learning Methods.

Chu Chu, Haitong Wang, Xuelu Luo, Peipei Wen, Liangkang Nan, Chao Du, Yikai Fan, Dengying Gao, Dongwei Wang, Zhuo Yang and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Chu ChuFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Haitong WangFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Xuelu LuoFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Peipei WenFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Liangkang NanFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Chao DuFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Yikai FanFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.ORCID 0009-0007-0398-4702
Dengying GaoKey Laboratory of Animal Genetics, Breeding and Reproduction, Ministry of Education, College of Animal Science and Technology, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Dongwei WangFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Zhuo YangFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Guochang YangFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Li LiuFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Yongqing LiFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.
Bo HuQuality Standards Institue of Animal Husbandry, Xinjiang Academy of Animal Science, Urumqi 830012, China.
Zunongjiang AbulaQuality Standards Institue of Animal Husbandry, Xinjiang Academy of Animal Science, Urumqi 830012, China.
Shujun ZhangFrontiers Science Center for Animal Breeding and Sustainable Production, Ministry of Education, Huazhong Agricultural University, Wuhan 430070, China.

Funding

the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities 2662023DKPY001the Inter-Governmental International Science and Technology Cooperation Project of the State Key Research and Development Program 2021YFE0115500the International Science and Technology Cooperation Project of Hubei Province 2022EHB043
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adulteration of higher priced milks with cheaper ones to obtain extra profit can adversely affect consumer health and the market. In this study, pure buffalo milk (BM), goat milk (GM), camel milk (CM), and their mixtures with 5-50% (vol/vol) cow milk or water were used. Mid-infrared spectroscopy (MIRS) combined with modern statistical machine learning was used for the discrimination and quantification of cow milk or water adulteration in BM, GM, and CM. Compared to partial least squares (PLS), modern statistical machine learning-especially support vector machines (SVM), projection pursuit regression (PPR), and Bayesian regularized neural networks (BRNN)-exhibited superior performance for the detection of adulteration. The best prediction models for the different predictive traits are as follows: The binary classification models developed by SVM resulted in differentiation of CM-cow milk, and GM/CM-water mixtures. PLS resulted in differentiation of BM/GM-cow milk and BM-water mixtures. All of the above models have 100% classification accuracy. SVM was used to develop multi-classification models for identifying the high and low proportions of cow milk in BM, GM, and CM, as well as the high and low proportions of water adulteration in BM and GM, with correct classification rates of 94%, 100%, 100%, 99%, and 100%, respectively. In addition, a PLS-based model was developed for identifying the high and low proportions of water adulteration in CM, with correct classification rates of 100%. A regression model for quantifying cow milk in BM was developed using PCA + BRNN, with RMSEV = 5.42%, and R

Indexed as

machine learningmid-infrared spectroscopymilkmilk adulteration

Identifiers

PMID37893749
PMCPMC10606090

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.