MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409907495 · doi:10.1016/j.talanta.2025.128239

Development of non-targeted volatilomics with solid-phase microextraction for the authentication of plant-based milk alternatives

2025· article· en· W4409907495 on OpenAlexafffund
Tianqi Li, Huy Quang Lê, Renato Handoyo, Enea Pagliano, Yaxi Hu

Bibliographic record

VenueTalanta · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Industry and Aquatic Biology
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCarleton University
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCarleton University
KeywordsChemistrySolid-phase microextractionAuthentication (law)ChromatographyGas chromatography–mass spectrometryComputer securityMass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The demand for plant-based milk alternatives (PBMA) has increased substantially, especially among consumers allergic and/or intolerant to animal dairy products and consumers attentive to environmental sustainability. Concurrent with market expansion and higher production costs, fraudulent activities involving PBMA are of great concern. In order to validate authenticity of PBMA products, a headspace solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography mass spectrometry method (HS-SPME-GC-MS) was developed and optimized to differentiate 8 types of PBMA (i.e., almonds, cashews, hazelnuts, walnuts, oats, peanuts, pistachios, and macadamias) on the basis of their volatile metabolic profile (i.e., volatilome). A total of 80 samples (i.e., 10 replicates for each type of PBMA) were analyzed using HS-SPME-GC-MS and subjected to data preprocessing and classification model construction using machine learning algorithms. Approximately 143 volatile compounds were identified based on the MS-DIAL database (Version: 4.9.221218). Three machine learning algorithms were tested and among them, Support Vector Machine (SVM) achieved the best performance (100 % and 98.8 % accuracy for calibration and for cross-validation), followed by Random Forest (RF, 100 % and 94.3 %), and k-Nearest Neighbor (kNN, 98.8 % and 88.8 %). To further validate robustness, additional 32 samples (i.e., 4 biological replicates for each type of PBMA) were prepared, analyzed and identified with these models. SVM achieved an accuracy of 100 %, followed by RF (96.9 %) and kNN (90.6 %). RF yielded comparable accuracy with respect to SVM, but offered further information about features contributing substantially to classification. Hence, RF led to the identification of the top 30 most relevant volatile metabolites. A simplified RF model, constructed using only these 30 features, achieved a calibration accuracy of 100 %, cross-validation accuracy of 96.5 %, and validation accuracy of 96.9 %, indicating a great potential for these 30 metabolic features to be used as markers for (targeted) authentication. Harnessing the power of the non-targeted HS-SPME-GC-MS and machine learning, a highly accurate and reliable workflow for the authentication of PBMA was established. This method is reliable for the authentication of PBMA, ensures the integrity of the products, and can protect the health of consumers and the economy of this emerging area.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTalantaSame topicFood Industry and Aquatic BiologyFrench-language works237,207