Sampling guidelines for building and curating food authenticity databases
Open accessAbstract
Background Food fraud is a global issue often detected through the use of analytical testing. Analysis of suspect foodstuffs and comparison of their results to those contained within a food authenticity database is a typical approach. This scientific opinion was commissioned as part of the FoodIntegrity EU project to provide guidance for the creation of these food authenticity databases. This opinion paper provides what the authors believe are the most important considerations which must be addressed, when creating a food authenticity database. Specifically, the areas of database scope, analytical methodology, sampling, collection and storage of data, validation and curation are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Current published databases of authentic and non-authentic spectra do not appear to be large enough.
“However, access to appropriate chemometric techniques is required and current published databases of authentic and non-authentic spectra do not appear to be large enough and unlikely to have had due regard to the latest recommended composition guidelines (62).”
From Authenticity and the Potability of Coconut Water - a Critical Review (2020) · cites this paper as [62]
Current published databases of authentic and non-authentic spectra are unlikely to have had due regard to the latest recommended composition guidelines.
“However, access to appropriate chemometric techniques is required and current published databases of authentic and non-authentic spectra do not appear to be large enough and unlikely to have had due regard to the latest recommended composition guidelines (62).”
From Authenticity and the Potability of Coconut Water - a Critical Review (2020) · cites this paper as [62]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Authenticity and the Potability of Coconut Water - a Critical Review
Burns, D. T., Johnston, E. L., & Walker, M. J. (2020) · Journal of AOAC International · doi:10.1093/jaocint/qsz008 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
- Authors
- Donarski, J., Camin, F., Fauhl-Hassek, C., Posey, R., & Sudnik, M.
- Affiliations
- Fera Science (United Kingdom) (GB)
- Fondazione Edmund Mach (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Donarski, James
- Venue
- Trends in Food Science & Technology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-08
- Volume
- 90
- Pages
- 187-193
- ISSN
- 0924-2244 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2913894448
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 1.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Trends in Food Science & Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Trento) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- CINECA IRIS Institutional Research Information System (Fondazione Edmund Mach) (submittedVersion)
- OpenAgrar (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity) (cc-by)
- Funders
- European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (613688)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Identification and Quantification in Food
- Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Analytical Chemistry › Spectroscopy and Chemometric Analyses
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Supply Chain Traceability
- Keywords
- food fraud, sampling guidelines, database curation, database validation, analytical methods, data collection and storage
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
