2019
DOI: 10.3390/s19030605
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Freshness Evaluation of Three Kinds of Meats Based on the Electronic Nose

Abstract: The aim of this study was to use an electronic nose set up in our lab to detect and predict the freshness of pork, beef and mutton. Three kinds of freshness, including fresh, sub-fresh and putrid, was established by human sensory evaluation and was used as a reference for the electronic nose’s discriminant factor analysis. The principal component analysis results showed the electronic nose could distinguish well pork, beef and mutton samples with different storage times. In the PCA figures, three kinds of meat… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
42
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 84 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
1
42
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It can be seen that, initially, the beef freshness was excellent and the scores decreased significantly ( p < 0.05) with the increase in storage time; in other words, longer storage time led to the poorer freshness of the ground beef. Similar trends were also reported in the literature working on pork [ 54 ], yellow chicken meat [ 55 ] and smoked bacon [ 56 ]. For the beef sample stored for 1 to 2 days, the freshness characteristics scored above four, which corresponded to the fresh group.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…It can be seen that, initially, the beef freshness was excellent and the scores decreased significantly ( p < 0.05) with the increase in storage time; in other words, longer storage time led to the poorer freshness of the ground beef. Similar trends were also reported in the literature working on pork [ 54 ], yellow chicken meat [ 55 ] and smoked bacon [ 56 ]. For the beef sample stored for 1 to 2 days, the freshness characteristics scored above four, which corresponded to the fresh group.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 88%
“…The e-nose instrument used was developed in-house, and is an updated version of the instrument mentioned in our previous work [42]. Similar to that work [42], this instrument had a gas sensor array, a gas filter and a data acquisition system ( Figure 1). In contrast to that work, where the e-nose instrument had 10 sensors in the gas sensor array, this instrument had 14 Figaro TGS series sensors.…”
Section: E-nose Instrument and Data Acquisitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Electronic olfactory systems, known as "E-nose", can be implemented to analyze various gas components based on a sensing method similar to the human olfactory system [18][19][20][21][22]. In the field of fire safety, Luo et al developed an E-nose that had successfully classified four industrial gas included CO 2 , CH 4 , NH 3 , VOCs [23].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%