MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402541667 · doi:10.1093/jas/skae234.774

PSVII-23 Discriminating meat from different Canadian cattle feeding systems by visible and near-infrared spectroscopy

2024· article· en· W4402541667 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara León-Ecay, Ó. López-Campos, Ainara López-Maestresalas, K. Insausti, Bryden Schmidt, N. Prieto

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicSpectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpectroscopyInfraredInfrared spectroscopyAnimal scienceBiologyChemistryOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Labeling of meat products is key to guarantee quality and origin. Rising production costs and an increase in world trade are leading to an on-going growth of meat fraud. Hence, the objective of this study was to evaluate the potential of visible and near-infrared (Vis-NIR) spectroscopy to discriminate meat from different Canadian cattle feeding systems. Steers (n = 45) were randomly assigned to three feeding systems: barley (n = 15), corn (n = 15) or grass-fed (n = 15). At 72 h postmortem, Vis-NIR spectra were collected on a) the longissimus thoracis (LT) muscle between the 12th and 13th ribs after 20 min of blooming (intact lean), and b) the adjacent subcutaneous fat from each in-bone ribeye. Afterwards, a steak from the anterior side of the striploin was collected and frozen at -20°C until analysis. After thawing at 4°C overnight, the striploin steak was ground and spectra were collected (ground meat). Four spectral replicates were acquired from each tissue sample with a portable LabSpec4 Standard-Res spectrometer (380–2,500 nm; 1 nm-bandwidth). The absorbances of the visible (Vis), near-infrared (NIR), and both regions combined (Vis-NIR) were later imported into the software PLS_Toolbox 9.3. under MATLAB R2023b. After the application of several mathematical pre-processing treatments, Partial Least Square-Discriminant Analysis (PLS-DA) and Support Vector Machine (SVM) discriminant approaches were performed. For the intact tissue, the best results were obtained using the Vis-NIR region with a combination of 2ndderivative+smoothing+mean center, and a PLS-DA with 6 latent variables (LV). This approach correctly classified 100% of the meat samples from each feeding group, with an area under the curve of a receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) of 1 in cross-validation (CV). Likewise, 100% of the fat samples from each feeding system were correctly classified in CV, using only the Vis region and 2ndderivative+smoothing+mean center by PLS-DA (5 LV and AUROCCV = 1). For ground meat, both PLS-DA (Vis, smoothing + mean center, 6 LV, AUROCCV = 1 or Vis-NIR, mean scatter correction, 6 LV, AUROCCV = 1) and SVM (Vis-NIR, smoothing + standard normal variate) correctly classified 100% of the samples from barley, corn and grass-fed in CV. The classification was successful only considering the Vis region due to the high homogenization of these samples. For fat, the significant variable importance in projection (VIP) scores were found at 423 to 612 nm, where carotenoids absorb energy. This would explain the accuracy of the Vis region for the classification of the fat samples. For intact and ground meat, significant VIP scores were found in both the Vis region, due to the myoglobin absorption, and NIR region (1,796 to 1,900 nm), due to the vibration of the hydrocarbon bonds from fatty acids. Hence, these results showed the potential of Vis-NIR spectroscopy to authenticate either fat, intact lean or ground meat from cattle fed different diets.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.754
Threshold uncertainty score0.489

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal ScienceSame topicSpectroscopy and Chemometric AnalysesFrench-language works237,207