Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 11;59(3):846–858. doi: 10.1007/s13197-021-05057-w

Table 1.

Applications of e-nose for monitoring adulteration in food

Category Product Adulteration with Type of e-nose configuration for adulteration monitoring Detection result to recommend best technique References
Edible oils Camellia seed oil and sesame oil Maize oil Commercial type, Airsense PEN2 (Germany) e-nose system with 10 MOS sensors LDA: 83.6% for camellia seed oil while 94.5% for sesame oil Hai and Wang (2006a)
sesame oil Maize oil Commercial type, PEN2 (Airsense corporation, Germany) e-nose with 10 MOS sensors LDA: only one sample is incorrectly classified out of one hundred sixty five samples Hai and Wang (2006b)
Virgin olive oil Sunflower oil and olive–pomace oil Commercial type, two array chambers of Alpha MOS e-nose (FOX 3000) with 12 (6 + 6) MOS based sensors LDA: classification accuracy > 96% and in some cases almost 100% Cerrato Oliveros et al. (2002)
Olive oil Rapseed oil and sunflower oil Commercial type, Fox 4000 Alpha MOS e-nose (Toulouse, France) with 3 sensor chamber each containing 6 gas sensors PLS: correlation coefficient of 0.989 for rapseed adulteration of olive oil while, 0.990 for sunflower adulteration of olive oil Mildner-Szkudlarz and Jeleń 2010
Olive oil Hazelnut oil Commercial type, Alpha MOS e-nose (Fox 4000) system with 3 chambers each containing six MOS sensors

PCA: 96% separation of samples

PLS: correlation coefficient 0.997

Mildner-Szkudlarz and Jeleń (2008)
Argan oil Sunflower oil Experimental type, e-nose system with 5 MOS gas sensors PCA: 98.81% in comestible argan oil adulteration and 98.09% in cosmetic argan oil adulteration Bougrini et al. (2014)
Soybean oil Old frying oil Experimental type, 8 MOS gas sensor based e-nose system PLS: correlation coefficient of 0.843 for old frying oil adulteration of soybean oil Men et al. (2014)
Virgin coconut oil Palm kernel olein oil Commercial type, zNose™ (Model 7100 Electronic Sensor Technology, Newbury Park, CA, USA) e-nose with SAW sensor PLS: correlation coefficient of 0.91 for palm olein oil adulteration of virgin coconut oil Marina et al. (2010)
Palm olein oil palm stearin oil Commercial type, MS-E-nose (SMart Nose300; SMart Nose, MarinEpagnier, Switzerland) DFA: coefficient of determination for DF1 is 0.997 and DF2 is 0.966. DFA could able to discriminate below 10% adulteration level Hong et al. (2011)
Palm olein Lard Commercial type, zNose™ (Newbury Park, USA) based on SAW detector ANOVA: coefficient of determination is 0.906 and Pearson’s correlation coefficient > 0.90 Man et al. (2005)
Peony seed oil Soybean oil, corn oil, sunflower oil, rapeseed oil Commercial type, PEN3 e-nose (Airsense analytics, Germany) with 10 MOS chemical gas sensors LDA: soybean oil and sunflower oil can be successfully discriminated from peony seed oil Wei et al. (2018)
Milk and dairy products Milk Water and reconstituted milk powder Commercial type, PEN2 e-nose (WMA Airsense Analysentechnik, Germany) with 10 MOS sensors LDA: adulterated samples can be discriminated from milk stored for 1–4 days Yu et al. (2007)
Milk Aqueous CH2O, H2O2, NaClO Experimental type, e-nose device based on 10 MOS gas sensors SVM: 94.64%, 92.85%, 87.75% for aqueous CH2O, H2O2, NaClO adulteration in milk, respectively Tohidi et al. (2018a)
Milk Detergent powder Experimental type, e-nose system with 8 MOS sensors SVM: 92.42% classification accuracy Tohidi et al. (2018b)
Cheese Oscypek-like cheeses produced from ewe’s milk and cow’s milk Commercial type, SPME-MS based e-nose SVM: 97.9% classification accuracy Majcher et al. (2015)
Ghee Sunflower oil and cow body fat Experimental type, e-nose system with 8 different MOS gas sensors PCA: 96% and 97% accuracy for sunflower oil and cow body fat adulteration of ghee, respectively Ayari et al. (2018a)
Ghee Margarine Experimental type, e-nose system with 8 different MOS gas sensors PCA: 98% classification accuracy Ayari et al. (2018b)
Honey Honey Corn syrup and rice syrup Commercial type, GC-Heracles e-nose (Alpha MOS, Toulouse, France) PCA and PLS: Both the classifiers couldn’t well classified the syrup adulterations in honey Gan et al. (2016)
Honey Beetroot sugar and cane sugar Commercial type, Cyranose 320 (Pasadena, CA, USA) e-nose system with 32 polymer sensors LDA: 76.5% and 74.9% accuracy for stepwise LDA and direct LDA, respectively Subari et al. (2012)
Honey Beetroot sugar and cane sugar Commercial type, Cyranose 320 (Pasadena, CA, USA) e-nose system with 32 polymer sensors ANN: mean absolute error of 6.9% for fusion data while 15% for e-nose separately Subari et al. (2014)
Honey 2 different brands of sugar syrup Commercial type, Cyranose 320 e-nose system with 32 polymer matrix sensors blended with carbon black PNN: 92.59% classification accuracy Zakaria et al. (2011)
Alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks Liquor Different geographical spirits Commercial type, Alpha MOS based SA-Flash GC e-nose (HERACLES II, France) DFA: 100% classification accuracy Peng et al. (2015)
Italian wine Ethanol, methanol, and other brands of wine Experimental type, e-nose based on 4 MOS for headspace analysis ANN: 93% of correct classification Penza and Cassano (2004)
Fruit juice Alcohol Commercial type, Cyranose 320 e-nose system with 32 carbon/polymer matrix sensors

ANN, SVM: apple juice–Raki mixture, 98.33%

LDA: lemon juice–alcohol mixture, 95%

ANN: orange juice–vodka mixture, 96.67%

KNN: sour cherry juice–alcohol mixture, 91.67%

Ordukaya and Karlik (2016)
Cherry tomato juices Overripe tomato juices Commercial type, PEN2 e-nose (Airsense Analytics, Schwerin, Germany) chamber with 10 MOS sensors PCR: R2 > 0.99 for both training and prediction set of data Hong et al. (2014)
Fresh cherry tomato juice Overripe tomato juices upto 30 per cent Commercial type, PEN2 e-nose (Airsense Analytics, Schwerin, Germany) with 10 MOS positioned in a small chamber SVM: 100% classification accuracy Hong and Wang (2014)
Freshly squeezed orange juice 100% concentrated orange juice Commercial type, FOX 3000 e-nose (Alpha MOS, Toulouse, France) equipped with 12 MOS sensors LDA: 91.7% classification accuracy Shen et al. 2016
Meat Minced mutton Pork Commercial type, PEN2 e-nose (Airsense Corporation, Germany) with 10 different MOS sensors positioned in a small chamber BPNN: correlation coefficient > 0.97 for both calibration and validation Tian et al. (2019)
Mutton Duck meat Commercial type, PEN3 e-nose (Airsense Corporation, Germany) with 10 MOS sensors in sensor array LDA: 98.2% classification accuracy Wang et al. (2019)
Lard Chicken fat Commercial type, zNoseTM e-nose (7100 Vapour Analysis System, Electronic Sensor Technology, Newbury Park, CA) with SAW sensor PCA: 90% classification accuracy Nurjuliana et al. (2011)
Spices Spice mixtures Curry and garlic Commercial type, e-nose (KAMINA-type, Yson GmbH) contains a chip array of 38 sensor segments based on gas sensitive doped tin oxide PCA: 93.8% classification accuracy Banach et al. (2012)
Saffron Aroma fingerprints of saffron with yellow styles, safflower and dyed corn stigma Experimental type, e-nose system with 6 MOS sensors (HANWEI Electronics Co., Ltd., Henan, China) ANN: 86.87% and 100% accuracy for saffron adulteration with yellow styles-dyed corn stigma and safflower, respectively Heidarbeigi et al. (2015)
Cumin Coriander Experimental type, e-nose system with 6 MOS sensors PCA: 91.68% classification accuracy Tahri et al. (2017)
Saffron Artificially colored safflower and artificially colored yellow styles of saffron Experimental type, e-nose system with 7 MOS sensors

ANN: correlation coefficient of 0.95 and 0.97 for color and aroma based adulteration, respectively

SVM: 100% success rate only on aroma datasets

Kiani et al. (2017)