The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Trends in Chemometrics: Food Authentication, Microbiology, and Effects of Processing
Abstract
In the last decade, the use of multivariate statistical techniques developed for analytical chemistry has been adopted widely in food science and technology. Usually, chemometrics is applied when there is a large and complex dataset, in terms of sample numbers, types, and responses. The results are used for authentication of geographical origin, farming systems, or even to trace adulteration of high value‐added commodities. In this article, we provide an extensive practical and pragmatic overview on the use of the main chemometrics tools in food science studies, focusing on the effects of process variables on chemical composition and on the authentication of foods based on chemical markers. Pattern recognition methods, such as principal component analysis and cluster analysis, have been used to associate the level of bioactive components with in vitro functional properties, although supervised multivariate statistical methods have been used for authentication purposes. Overall, chemometrics is a useful aid when extensive, multiple, and complex real‐life problems need to be addressed in a multifactorial and holistic context. Undoubtedly, chemometrics should be used by governmental bodies and industries that need to monitor the quality of foods, raw materials, and processes when high‐dimensional data are available. We have focused on practical examples and listed the pros and cons of the most used chemometric tools to help the user choose the most appropriate statistical approach for analysis of complex and multivariate data.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Richardson, P. I. C., Muhamadali, H., Ellis, D. I., & Goodacre, R. (2019) · Food Chemistry · doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.08.038 · Cited by 64
Marti‐Quijal, F. J., Zamuz, S., Tomašević, I., Rocchetti, G., Lucini, L., Marszałek, K., Barba, F. J., & Lorenzo, J. M. (2019) · Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture · doi:10.1002/jsfa.9595 · Cited by 42
Sampling guidelines for building and curating food authenticity databases
Donarski, J., Camin, F., Fauhl-Hassek, C., Posey, R., & Sudnik, M. (2019) · Trends in Food Science & Technology · doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2019.02.019 · Cited by 42
Khan, S., Rai, A. K., Singh, A., Singh, S., Dubey, B. K., Lal, R. K., Negi, A. S., Birse, N., Trivedi, P. K., Elliott, C. T., et al. (2023) · Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis · doi:10.1016/j.jpha.2023.04.018 · Cited by 34
Rai, A. K., Khan, S., Kumar, A., Dubey, B. K., Lal, R. K., Tiwari, A., Trivedi, P. K., Elliott, C. T., & Ch, R. (2023) · Metabolites · doi:10.3390/metabo13010122 · Cited by 33
“1 was used for performing K-nearest neighbour classification [39,40].”
Method
Metadata
- Authors
- Granato, D., Putnik, P., Kovačević, D. B., Santos, J. S., Calado, V., Rocha, R. S., Cruz, A. G. D., Jarvis, B., Rodionova, O. Y., & Pomerantsev, A.
- Venue
- Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-03-30
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 663-677
- ISSN
- 1541-4337 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2794629511
- Cited by
- 440
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 35.54
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Trends in Chemometrics: Food Authentication, Microbiology, and Effects of Processing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1541-4337.12341
- The paper
- Granato, D., Putnik, P., Kovačević, D. B., Santos, J. S., Calado, V., Rocha, R. S., Cruz, A. G. D., Jarvis, B., Rodionova, O. Y., & Pomerantsev, A. (2018). Trends in Chemometrics: Food Authentication, Microbiology, and Effects of Processing. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12341
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.