Sens. & Instrumen. Food Qual.
(2009) 3:130–141
DOI 10.1007/s11694-009-9079-z
ORIGINAL PAPER
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy
in assessment of fruit quality: a review
Hongjian Lin Æ Yibin Ying
Received: 25 March 2008 / Accepted: 6 April 2009 / Published online: 25 April 2009
Ó Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009
Abstract Fruits provide nutrients for human body and are
able to prevent sorts of non-communicable diseases. The
fruit quality test is an area that both technology and market
section concern about. Near infrared spectroscopy (NIR) is
a rapid, precise, and non-destructive technique which can
be well utilized in determination of fruit quality. This
review paper summarizes the theory of NIR analysis, and
the fundamental structure of instruments based on NIR for
fruit quality assessment. Chemometrics for NIR spectros-
copy involving analysis methods of data pre-processing,
calibration, model transfer and evaluation, is also included.
In recent 11 years, significant progresses were achieved in
fruit quality assessment via NIR spectroscopy, which is the
main focus in this review. Furthermore, urgent problems in
this research field are discussed, expecting to be solved in
the near future.
Keywords Near infrared
NIR

Non-destructive measurement
Chemometrics
Analysis
Introduction
Fruits and vegetables have abundant nutritional compo-
nents which are necessary to human and significantly
protect for health. Increasing intake of fruits and vegetables
had been proposed as an effective way to considerably
improve public health in EU, and researchers thought a
great amount of deaths before the age of 65 would have
H. Lin
Y. Ying (&)
College of Biosystems Engineering and Food Science,
Zhejiang University, 268 Kaixuan St., Hangzhou 310029,
People’s Republic of China
e-mail: ybying@zju.edu.cn
123
been prevented if the consumption of fruit per capita
increased [1]. Some serious diseases, especially non-com-
municable ones like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, some
particular cancers, also can be prevented if people take
sufficient fruits and vegetables. A research carried out in
Denmark demonstrated that intake of appropriate fruits and
vegetables will lower the risk of lung cancer for some
group of people [2]. The amount of fruits and vegetables
consumption of the whole world is very big; however, it
differs greatly in terms of different countries and regions.
The World Health Organization, and the Food and Agri-
culture Organization (FAO) of United Nations recom-
mended people averagely to take much more these
products as a priority to enhance public health [3].
Consumers begin to pay more and more attention on
fruits and vegetables quality. They are looking for trust
marks and quality seals on these products, rejecting prod-
ucts with any adulteration or fraud, and expecting to buy
healthful and non-contaminated ones. At the same time, the
fruit and vegetable industries need more research about the
quality determination technology, for fruit internal quali-
ties are also important indicators for harvesting, transpor-
tation, storage and other handlings before the product
launches into the market. Certain measurements should be
taken to meet these demands. Governments of many
countries administrate to establish standards for technology
and enact the published regulations for fruit and vegetable
markets as to protect the rights of consumers and justice for
unfeigned competitors. United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA) released series of standards for variety
of agricultural products, such as standards for grading of
apples in 2002, and standards for apricots in 1994,
according to fruits’ appearance [4].
Indices for internal quality attributes (i.e., soluble solids
contents, total acids, sugar content, etc.) have been
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy in assessment of fruit quality
concerned about both in the field of nutrient research and
the regulatory commercial requirement these years. The
recent advances in technologies for determination of food
authenticity have been reviewed by Linda M. Reid et al.
through a comprehensive summary and comparison of
different technologies [5]. Some of these techniques can be
utilized in fruits and vegetable assessment, like near
infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). This review focuses on
application of NIR technology for fruit qualities.
At the time of writing, near infrared spectroscopy
technology has been extensively and effectively employed
in a variety of fields both for research and application
utilities, including areas of food, agricultural, chemical,
pharmaceuticals, textiles, polymers, cosmetics and medical
etc. [6], though inherent limiting factors it might have.
Compared to the silence of the one and a half century after
the discovery of NIR, increasing number of scientists and
engineers have been devoting themselves to exploiting this
old but ‘young’ technology. NIR, combined with chemo-
metrics, tends to be easy to collect spectral information and
to analyze the consequent data through computers. NIRS
contains more information of the internal quality of fruits;
while instead, other analysis methods like chemical anal-
ysis often get one quality attribute at one time. NIRS is a
non-invasive/destructive measurement and NIR instru-
ments are usually versatile for applying different type of
fruit samples. It is also rapid, free of reagents, as well as
low-cost, all contributing to its promising status.
Therefore, after the first application of near infrared
spectroscopy in agricultural products in 1950 s, lots of
researchers have involved in this endeavor and especially
the recent several years (Shown in Fig. 1). Theoretically,
organic components in fruits have their particular near
infrared spectra respectively; expecting more accurate
analysis, generally researchers need materials with the
mass concentration 0.1% at least. Other attributes such as
dry matter (DM), firmness, bruises, and brown-heart of
fruit can also be demonstrated by the distinction of near
infrared spectra indirectly. Most frequently analyzed
components and attributes in fruit are sugar content (in
degree Brix), total acidity, pH, soluble solids contents
(SSC), pectin, and firmness etc. [7–11]. As important
characteristics during grading, internal defects and surface
bruises also have been studied [12]. The most suitable
wavebands for quality determination of different species
and cultivars have been tried [13]. Fruits need to be stored
before trading and farmers need manage to predict the
harvest time, so their store status and ripe-stage are rele-
vantly concerned; for mango, indices of maturity were
evaluated using near infrared spectroscopy [14]. In many
circumstances, fruits need to be classified or graded by
species, producing areas, or even genes. Just as it is done in
EU market for the promotion and protection of food
131
120
100
80
Papers
60
40
20
0
88-92 93-97 98-02 03-07
Years
Fig. 1 This figure shows the approximate number of papers related
with fruits & NIR, in Elsevier (SDOL) and Web of Science (SCI-
Expanded)
products with recognized quality and origin (typical two:
the protected geographical indication and traditional spe-
cialty guaranteed), a set of methods are required [5].
Transgenetic tomatoes and common tomatoes were suc-
cessfully discriminated through NIR analysis, with an
excellent classification result: after the second derivative
pre-treatment, the percent correct classifications of the
calibration and the validation data set for both transgenic
and non-transgenic tomatoes are 100% [15]. On-line
application of NIR was tried early in 1993: the rate of three
fruits per second was achieved via near-infrared coupled
with optical fibers for detecting sugar content [16].
NIR spectroscopy was first used in various fruit products
like puree, grape wine, and fruit juice, as a method for
quality and process determination [17–19]. In recent
12 years (1998–2009), researchers turned this technology
to intact fruit object detection. This paper reviews the
recent progresses in the literature, discusses the funda-
mental theory and application of NIR in fruit quality
determination, and finally points out problems in this field
expected to be resolved in the near future to promote the
NIR’s application in practical area and industry.
Near infrared spectroscopy analysis
Introduction to near infrared spectroscopy
Near infrared spectroscopy is of overtone vibrational
spectroscopy behaving in the near infrared region of
12800–4000 cm-1 (or 780–2500 nm) where overtones or
combinations of fundamental stretching bands response
(shown in Fig. 2), often plotted as log(1/R) versus wave-
length. This type of absorption spectroscopy is compara-
tively weaker than mid-infrared, and contains molecular
123
132
Fig. 2 Short NIR (800–1100 nm) Spectra of nectarines, peaches and
plums (average of 20 fruit spectra for each fruit type) [22]. The
absorption peak around 970 nm is the second overtone of water
structure information seriously overlapped which resulted
in the silence of its research in the early days when sci-
entists found it of little use until the development of
computer science and data analysis technology. Spectra in
this region contain abundant information reflecting the
structure of molecules as well as attributes of objects such
as firmness, granularity, etc. For these bands are reflected
bonds of C–H, N–H, and O–H (bonds with hydrogen atoms
tend to vibrate independently from the rest part [20]),
analysis of organic molecules under the use of near infrared
absorption is feasible [21].
As the weakness of NIR intensity, its application in
quality evaluation for different fruit species needs to be
designed according to the fruit size, the thickness of its
skin, and the specific attributes to be test. Dispersive
reflectance and transmittance are considered as the two
main modes to employ [23], while the interactance mode is
the third one. More commonly, they are categorized as
three types of data acquisition configurations: reflectance,
transmittance and interactance modes (illustrated in
Fig. 3). Some groups use the term of diffuse reflectance
rather than the interactance mode.
The illumination and detector configurations differ from
each other in these three modes, resulting in different effect
on data acquisition even for the same object. Reflectance of
NIR is the beam reflected by the surface or low internal of
fruit and generates little information of internal quality, and
is easy to use without any contact with the fruit. Trans-
mittance mode can provide internal information as well as
internal disorders, while there is additional require on the
light intensity with respect to the penetration depth through
the fruit being limited. Transmitted beams are sometimes
partly blocked by fruit skin like orange’s and water-
melon’s, and the beam after it passes through the object
will be analyzed (similar but different in Beer–Lambert
123
H. Lin, Y. Ying
law). Lammertyn et al. have measured the distance that
light beam can penetrate into. It indicated a wavelength
dependent effect: around 4 mm in the 700–900 nm and
between 2 and 3 mm in the 900–1900 nm range in the
given intensity, which shows a more intensified illumina-
tion was required to obtain a penetration of greater depth if
the transmitant spectrum was needed [24]. Some internal
properties (soluble solids content is more accurately mea-
sured than total acid and pH) of oranges with extraordi-
narily thick seedcase, can be acceptably detected using
reflectance post-dispersive optical configuration [25]. The
interactance mode is the compromised one between the
former two. But it needs a seal to prevent the interference
from the environment which brings about disadvantages on
the high speed situation. A research on soluble solid con-
tent, density and flesh color of intact kiwifruit indicated the
best results with the interactance compared with the other
two [26].
After choosing a data acquisition mode, how to put the
object as well as the detect position will also need to be
considered. The fruit (i.e., the peach) is not strictly spher-
ical, and the chemical components would be heteroge-
neously distributed inside. Fu et al. investigated the effect
of measurement position on the white peach surface along
longitude and latitude [27]. The research indicated that
both diffuse reflectance spectrum and firmness of this fruit
were in relation to the detect position, according to the F
value of both dataset from analysis of variance. The
anisotropic differences resulted in a holistic model which
was proved the most robust one to predict the firmness of
preach fruit with higher value of r and rcv as well as lower
value of RMSEC, RMSECV and RMSEP.
Near infrared spectrometer
The typical processes to analyzing fruit’s samples and
setting up a model using NIR spectrometer can be sum-
marized as following: (1) select a NIR spectrometer and
accessories for measurement; (2) choose proper samples
which suitably represent the whole set; (3) obtain the NIR
data, the chemical or physical data, and preprocess the data
set; (4) set up a model; and (5) evaluate this model. Further,
if the practical applications are considered, engineers will
develop suitable model transfer methods, maintain the set
model periodically, build a sets of standards for extensive
recognition, and establish NIR spectrum database of vari-
ous of fruits species from a given band region.
The central part of spectroscopy is the ability to separate
inlet light as desired. The simplest case is a colorimeter
which uses glass filters to get lights of the required
wavelength. The band-pass in the spectrometer is similarly
determined, but more often the monochromator is made up
of prism or grating which is versatile to apply a variable
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy in assessment of fruit quality 133

Fig. 3 Sketches of Three

acquisition configurations: A.
Light source; B. Object; C. Fruit
holder; D. Optic fiber; E.
Detector. There is a light seal
contacting the fruit around the
end of fiber in the interactance
mode

ranges of wavelength [28]. Alternative types of NIR
spectrometers with corresponding diverse light splitter
technologies are the base for NIR research, and Fourier
transform spectrometer with interferometer is the one most
widely used in NIR application research field currently, due
to its wavelength precision, high ratio of signal to noise,
high scanning speed, and versatility.
An NIR spectrometer’s fundamental system is generally
consisted of light source, beam splitter system, sample
chamber, diffuse reflectance detector (or transmission
detector), control/data processing system, and record/dis-
play system (shown in Fig. 4).
When choosing work condition for spectrometer, mul-
tiple parameters of the instrument should be involved,
including the wavelength precision, resolving power,
scanning times, etc. [29]. A stable and accurate instrument
is the result of the optimized work conditions.
For fruit quality assessment, sample chamber is some-
times exclusively designed because it should vary with
fruits’ different size, shape or data acquisition mode. The
fiber optic cable detector is most common accessory, which
can be applied in interactance, reflectance and transmit-
tance (shown in Fig. 5). The fiber optic cable detector plays
a great role in the production process of fruit industry since
it is free of detecting environment variation. Authors find
that many research programs were underway via this
detector (for example, bifurcated optic fiber cable from
Ocean Optics Inc.).
Control and data processing system consists of hardware
(computer) and software (data process programs). Control
system coordinates each part of the NIR system work
together harmoniously, as a counterpart of brain in human
body, to control and modulate system parameters. Data
processing is usually implemented through kinds of soft-
ware to preprocess data set, to calibrate models, and to
evaluate the established models by prediction. A complete
NIRS system, typically used in fruit quality assessment, is
illustrated in Fig. 6.
Chemometrics
NIR spectra obtained by NIR spectrometers involve nearly
all types of organic molecules information, both overtones
and combinations, which can be got easily. However, these
spectral data unavoidably contain overlapped information
of many organic chemicals or other components at global
wavelength. The lack of efficient data processing methods
and computer equipments leads it difficult for earlier
researchers to use these data if they want to use the global

1 2 3 4

6 7

Fig. 4 Fundamental system of NIRS instrument. 1. Light source; 2.

beam splitter (or interferometer); 3. chamber; 4. transmission
detector; 5. diffuse reflectance detector; 6. control & data processing Fig. 5 Cone at the optical fiber end for measuring spectral reflectance
system; 7. record/display system [30]

123
134
Fig. 6 A typical NIRS acquisition device [31]
spectroscopy region instead of specific wave bands. A set
of strategies for analysis are of necessity, and chemomet-
rics meets this demands very well by robust modeling.
Generally speaking, the following steps are required to
establish a basic mathematical model: (1) to optimize the
samples’ spectral data set; (2) to choose suitable pattern
recognition or calibration methods to get proper models;
and (3) to evaluate the prediction effects and assess mod-
els’ precision or repetition.
When using NIR spectroscopy into the area of fruit
quality determination, researchers first tried to find the
optimal wavelength or spectroscopy regions for assessment
through mathematic equation analysis or comparing with
each other, just as experts of mid-infrared spectroscopy
did. That is to say, a more detailed examination is required
beyond the discrimination of short wave near infrared and
long wave near infrared spectroscopy during NIR’s
applying. As each type of organic molecule maps into
particular bands, feature bands of these molecules may
exist. However, researchers tend to exploit new algorithms
and chemometrics to balance the data redundancy and
complexity. The more natural and fundamental endeavor
direction is comparing light attributes after penetrating fruit
with methods of diffuse reflectance, and transmittance, etc.
Before getting the spectra for multipartite modeling, a set
of strategies to select the most suitable calibration samples
should be proposed [32], based on successive projection
algorithm, which must minimize redundancy but remain
representative. The protocol to identify and confirm
effective soluble solids absorption wavelengths was dis-
cussed and obtained [19]. The single-wavelength
(2270 nm) universal calibration equation with R2 = 0.982,
SEC = 0.518, SEP = 0.621, bias = -0.025 was devel-
oped for fresh fruit juices (orange, apple, grapefruit, grape,
123
H. Lin, Y. Ying
pear, pineapple, and sugarcane), after analyzing various
fruit juice in part of NIR region from 1000 nm to 2500 nm.
The applicability of this calibration equation to other fruit
juices was enhanced by cantaloupe, papaya, and peach
fresh juices, and confirmed the reliability of universality.
The sample, instrumental and environmental variables
should been taken into considerations [33, 34]. Generally,
modeling is divided into several sub-processes, with data
preprocessing as its first one.
Data preprocessing
For background of NIR spectrometer’s measurement is
complex, a relatively low ratio of signal to noise, spectrum
overlapping, and spectrum variation, after acquisition of
original data set, several pre-processing methods are uti-
lized to optimize the data set. These spectral pre-processing
methods summarily are served with purposes of sample set
compression, spectral data compression, system error
removing, and data smoothing. Methods often used which
benefit NIR spectra data set optimum are listed in this
paper. Smoothing is a kind of method for de-noising, with
moving smoothing and Savitzky–Golay polynomial
smoothing as main types. Derivative, mainly first or second
derivative, is employed to increase spectral resolution.
Fourier transform can abstract the principle information
from the data set and promote the ratio of signal to noise,
improving the signal quality. Wavelet transform is some-
what similar with Fourier transform, differentiated from the
later with window width varying with frequency. As a
result, the data decomposition is fast and represented by
sets of wavelet coefficients. Other methods, like multipli-
cative scatter correction (MSC), standard normal variate
(SNV), orthogonal signal correction (OSC), and net analyte
signal also has been developed for the spectral data pre-
processing.
Calibration
Model calibration plays a key role in NIR spectroscopy
determination, because models directly determine the
behavior of the whole system which would be exhibited by
both precision of property prediction and the correctness of
discrimination. For quantitative analysis, multiple linear
regression (MLR), step multiple linear regression (SMLR),
principle component regression (PCR), partial least square
regression (PLSR), artificial neural network (ANN), sup-
port vector machine regression (SVM) are most developed
methods in fruit quality evaluation. When classifying
varieties of certain samples, detailed as species, producing
area, and other discriminations, techniques differing from
quantitative analysis are required for pattern recognition.
These methods are mainly K-nearest neighbors (KNN),
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy in assessment of fruit quality
soft independent modeling of class analogy (SIMCA),
discriminating PLS, principle component analysis (PCA),
cluster analysis, artificial neural network (ANN), support
vector machine (SVM).
Qualitative analysis
When evaluating some quality attributes, we tend to use
pattern recognition methods to abstract and process the
important data, with results of classifying on the species or
geographical basis, or of ripeness stage, etc. A training set
of samples with known categories and properties is used to
set up a model, then this model is tested by validation set.
Besides methods mentioned above, there are some novel
ways. The effects of some commonly used sample prepa-
ration procedures, including overnight freezing, and the
type of homogenizer on the near-infrared (NIR) spectra of
red grape homogenates were investigated in a FOSS
NIRSystems 6500 instrument (400–2500 nm). Three
methods were used to analyze [35], namely Penalized
Discriminant Analysis (PDA), Multivariate Adaptive
Regression Splines discriminant analysis (MARS-DA) and
Random Forests (RF), yielding correct classification rates
(CCR) of 63.4%, 58.6% and 45.6%, respectively; great
improvements (CCRs of 99.93%, 99.2% and 76.4% for
PDA, MARS-DA and RF, respectively) was achieved after
an adaptive discrete wavelet transformation (DWT) maxi-
mizing the discrimination between the different combina-
tions of homogenizers, storage and grape varieties.
Quantitative analysis
Quantitative analysis is the other utility of chemometrics,
which focuses on properties greatly influencing fruit
quality. PLS, MLR, PCR and ANN are extensively used for
NIR quantitative analysis. PLS is recommended as the best
modeling method for most NIR spectra. [36] compared
PLSR, SMLR and PCR in the intact loquats’ full spectral
region from 800 to 2500 nm and in the combined region of
1400–1500 nm and 1900–2000 nm, drawing conclusion
that PLSR was the optimal one among three for SSC pre-
diction with correlation coefficients of calibration and
validation 0.96 and 0.95, respectively. The accuracy of DM
and SSC, based on 800–1000 nm near infrared, modeled by
PLS, are reported for ‘Royal Gala’ apples with very
accurate prediction (DM: R2 [ 0.95, RMSEP \0.32%;
SSC: R2 = 0.94, RMSEP = 0.32%) [37]. PLS algorithm
with different kernels (Covariance, Gaussian and polyno-
mial kernel) were implemented to estimate the sugar con-
tent of Golden Delicious apples in reflectance spectra
mode. The calibration results were insensitive to the actual
value of the tuning parameters of kernel function as well as
kernel types over a given spectral range. If wavelet
135
compression was implied, a compression ratio of up to 25
did not affect the accuracy of the kernel PLS calibration
models [38]. Also with apples as objectives, [33] selected a
large spectral data to analyze the effect of orchard, season
and cultivar to SSC of apples. They found that season and
cultivar were responsible for a major amount of the spectral
variability, while the orchard low (only appeared for cer-
tain cultivars during specific seasons). Including more
variability in the calibration set would increase the pre-
diction accuracy; on the other hand, more data would also
bring increased chance of adding atypical data, so it is
important to control amount of spectral variability. How-
ever, it is definitely appropriate that when the effect of a
certain factor is known a priori, it is reasonable to use
specific calibration models. Other methods instead of PLS
were also tested. Japanese pears were measured by fiber
optics in interactance mode to get the raw spectra and their
second derivative. By using MLR, precise calibration
equations were developed (For intact fruit spectra:
R = 0.93, SEP = 0.62 for alcohol insoluble solids in the
fresh weight, and R = 0.95, SEP = 8.48 for the oxalate
soluble pectin content in the alcohol insoluble solids). The
NIR models developed with the data collected in 1998
were not able to predict the 1997 data [10]. Least-Squared
Support Vector Machine (LS-SVM) regression as well as
NIR spectra was used to predict the acidity of three dif-
ferent grape varieties. LS-SVM regression produces more
accurate prediction compared to PLSR and MLR, but with
the model less robust if other pretreatment was not
employed [39]. Genetic algorithms (GAs) achieved good
results of pear internal quality measurement [40].
Model transfer
NIR models developed on one instrument might not per-
form well on another instrument, especially when on types
of instruments. While to recalibrate every sample’s spectra
for another spectrometer is a labored work, we need
develop model transfer methods to remove this obstacle.
Holland et al. acquired the mid-infrared spectra of rasp-
berry and strawberry purees on two Fourier-transform
spectrometers [17]. A pretreatment (baseline correction and
area normalization) made the spectra from the two spec-
trometers compatible for use in discriminant analyses.
Models using the first PC scores of the pretreated spectra
from one spectrometer were able to correctly assign the
fruit species of between 91.1 and 96.4% of the other. The
transfer of this data set was only wholly reliable using the
first PC scores. Various chemometrical techniques,
including slope and bias correction (SBC), direct stan-
dardization (DS), piecewise direct standardization (PDS),
double window PDS (DWPDS), orthogonal signal correc-
tion (OSC), finite impulse transform (FIR) and wavelet
123
136
transform (WT) were used to assess the transfer of pre-
dictive models for two populations of mandarin fruit,
among photodiode array based, SW-near infrared spec-
trometers using the same illumination/detection optical
geometry [41]. An interpolation and photometric response
correction method, a wavelength selection method and a
model updating method were additionally assessed.10
cases in 12 demonstrated that modified WT method per-
formed significantly better (e.g. RMSEP = 0.25% SSC)
than all other standardization methods. Also, a prior
experiment in the assessment of melon SSC showed
modified WT method performed significantly better [42]. A
calibration model transfer for soluble solids contents of
apple from a Fourier transform based spectrophotometer to
a diode array (DA) spectrophotometer was tested working
well, obtaining root mean squared error of prediction
(RMSEP) of 0.85° Brix on a data set of 477 Jonagored
apples. The necessity of calibration transfer procedures
between two DA spectrophotometers of the same type and
model had also been found [43].
Application of near infrared spectrometer combined
with chemometrics
Internal quality determination
NIR spectroscopy was earlier used to determinate quality
of fruit products such as fruit juice [17, 44–50], purees [51,
52] and others [53], than the intact fruit detecting [54]. In
food industry of fruit product, many quality indices are
studied, such as soluble solids content (SSC), sugar con-
tent, acidity; and so are some adulteration in fruit juice and
puree. Steps of construction were reviewed [55] and NIR
using for apple quality measure based on the assumption of
sugar content representing quality were discussed, with the
model established of R2 = 0.82 and remaining error
reduced by 5% when multilayer neural networks applied.
Bellon and other researchers [56] tested the fruit taste (i.e.,
sugar content), both near infrared and mid infrared. And
the former was considered totally non-destructive, with the
coefficient of correlation (R) 0.91 and the standard error of
calibration (SEC) is 1% of sugar. After these pioneering
experiments on intact fruits, food researchers then pour
unremitting efforts into this area, and lots of success was
achieved as scientific data are accumulated. Sugar content
is usually regarded as evaluation of fruit quality and
maturity. Researchers conducted sugar content assessment
on apple, watermelon, orange [7, 38, 57]. SSC is a com-
prehensive index of organic materials in fruit. Researchers
have also set up models for its assessments [9, 31, 58–60].
Turning to other attributes like firmness, etc., which seem
not to have direct relations with NIR spectroscopy,
123
H. Lin, Y. Ying
researchers also find the co-relationship, which may play
an important role in fruit quality measurement with
unknown causes [11, 61]. Basically, a wide range of NIR
wavelength may enhance the accuracy. The full NIR range
was divided into two windows (short NIR of 800–1100 nm
and long NIR of 1100–2500 nm); however, the full NIR
range (800–2500 nm) showed the best modeling results
both for SSC and acidity (pH) [62]. A research [63] was
carried out, aiming to develop practical applicable kinetic
models to describe and to predict the temperature depen-
dent firmness and moisture loss of tomatoes during storage.
Two types of models were developed, one based on fun-
damental laws of chemical kinetics and the other on PLSR.
The first model told that in the at low (\10 °C) tempera-
tures, its contribution to chilling injury increases at
decreasing temperatures; entire temperature range, its
contribution to the normally observed fruit softening and
moisture loss process increased at increasing temperature.
The second regression model described the actual firmness
of a homogeneous batch of tomatoes. NIR model’s per-
formance to evaluating oranges ripeness are influenced by
the storage condition and variation within fruits, because
the linear mesocarp relationship between the outer meso-
carp 10 mm and the subsequent middle 10 mm of tissue
varied with fruit maturity and with cultivars [64]. Some
other results are listed in Table 1, which illustrates the fruit
species, spectrum data acquisition mode, and attributes
tested in these researches.
Discrimination
In fruit classifying according to standards derived from
integral and comprehensive qualities, combined with pat-
tern recognition methods, NIR spectroscopy shows its
ability in discriminating fruits of different in production
areas, breeds or genotypes, growing stages, and so on.
Often, these differences cannot be established a direct
co-relationship with NIR spectroscopy, because they are
not the direct properties of a particular organic molecule;
moreover, properties like taste and maturity is somewhat a
description of human feeling other than common chemical
describing. The charm of NIR spectroscopy is the possi-
bility of setting up a model related to the human
experience.
Kusumiyati et al. [96] carried out experiments showing
the potential of portable NIR spectroscopy as a tool to
determine the harvest date of tomatoes when on-tree, and
grade levels after-harvesting, indicated by attributes of
firmness, color values and lycopene content. A calibration
model from PLSR was prior than PCR. The lycopene
content measurement with NIR spectroscopy was not
acceptable in this research. The researchers subjectively
attributed this unsatisfactory to the uncertainty during
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy in assessment of fruit quality 137

Table 1 Fruit internal quality

Species Acquisition mode Attributes/applications References
evaluation
Apple Interactance Dry-matter, SSC [37]
Reflectance SSC [34]
Reflectance SSC [33]
Reflectance SSC [58]
Interactance SSC [31]
Reflectance Sugar content [38]
Absorption Sugar content [65]
Reflectance Sugar content [66]
Reflectance Flavonols [67]
N/A Firmness, sugars, acid, dry matter [68]
Reflectance Sugar content [69]
Reflectance Storage quality [70]
Reflectance Maturity [71]
Reflectance Bruise [72]
Reflectance Bruise [73]
Reflectance Bruise [74]
Pear Reflectance Firmness, SSC [59]
Reflectance Firmness [61]
Interactance Pectin constituent [10]
Orange Reflectance SSC, total acidity [25]
Reflectance SSC, acidity, firmness [75]
N/A SSC [41]
Transmittance Sugar content [7]
Transmittance Sugar content, acid content [76]
Reflectance SSC, titratable acidity [77]
Interactance
Transmission
Transmittance Defect, ripeness [78]
Wikifruit Reflectance Dry matter, SSC [9]
Interactance Firmness, dry matter, SSC [79]
Interactance Dry matter, SSC [80]
Reflectance Maturity [81]
Reflectance Firmness [82]
Interactance Storage disorder [83]
Tomato Reflectance Firmness [63]
Transmittance (tomato mashed, samples Lycopene, beta-carotene [84]
rotated)
Reflectance Genotype [85]
Reflectance Rhizopus Stolonifer Spores [30]
N/A Fungicide (extracted [86]
from surface)
Peach Transmittance Grading [87]
Interactance Firmness [27]
Melon Transmittance SSC [88]
Reflectance Genotype (melon seeds) [89]
Watermelon Transmittance Total sugar [57]
Loquat Interactance SSC [36]
Interactance Producing area, variety [90]

123
138
Table 1 continued
Species Acquisition
mode
Mango Reflectance
Interactance
Grape N/A
Olive Reflectance
Chinese Reflectance
bayberry
Mangosteen Transmittance
N/A: Not available
chemical analysis (sample preparation, solvent extraction,
etc.).
Nowadays, fruits as well as other foodstuffs, recognized
quality or origin as protected designation of origin, pro-
tected geographical indication, and traditional specialty
guaranteed have their unique competition advantages, and
NIR spectroscopy is possible to provide measurements
against adulteration and fraud. A tool to measure fruit
quality by NIR was developed, which could detect fruits
taste and classify them into marketable or unmarketable
[56]. Ripeness often is evaluated through the fruit peel
color and some internal qualities [57, 78, 97]. Most of other
discriminations are according to varieties and genotypes
[98–101]. But even fruits of the same variety planted in
different place display distinguishable qualities [90].
Defect determination
Another niche application is defects inspecting, both facial
and internal. Compared with invasive detection of tradi-
tion, this technique can work well without disadvantages
such as spot check in invasive methods. Internal disorders
are mostly not externally recognized and only visible after
cutting, which make industrial production inconvenient.
NIR imaging and spectroscopy are both ways potential to
resolve it. NIR imaging (at 740 and 950 nm, respectively)
in machine vision systems for sorting apples for surface
defects (and bruise) have been implemented [102], using a
combination of three different threshold segmentation
routines and one routine based on artificial neural networks
and principal components. Apples were oriented with the
stem/calyx axis perpendicular to the imaging camera.
Grey-scale images in the visible wavebands were used to
verify orientation. Eight different apple varieties were used
to evaluate the routines. The ability of the routines to find
individual defects and measure the area ranged from 77 to
91% for the number of defects detected (with 1.1–3.6%
false positives).
NIR spectroscopy seems more appropriate for internal
defects detection like brown-heart, which is significant
123
H. Lin, Y. Ying
Attributes/applications References
Softening of the flesh, acidity, total soluble solids [91]
content
Eating quality [92]
Acidity [39]
Oil content, moisture, fatty acids [93]
Variety [94]
Translucent flesh disorder [95]
factors requiring consideration in the design of online NIR
spectroscopy detection systems [103]. They selected two
hundred and forty fruit using a clinical MRI system, later
checked by fruit dissecting, to have a uniform range of the
disorder from 0 to 100%. They found that pronounced
spectral changes were observed in the range 700–900 nm
as the percentage of browned tissue increased. Regression-
based Ratio, MLR and PLS calibration models applied to
independent prediction sets gave correlations of between
0.69 and 0.91 for the different geometries across the full
range of affected fruit. Corresponding root mean square
error of prediction (RMSEP) statistics of area affected is
between 7.9 and 15.4% which were elevated partly because
of the browning distribution asymmetry. PLS models were
the best one among the three models. The apple orientation
great influenced the model’s ability, and the best individual
model was obtained by spectra where the apple stem-calyx
axis was horizontal and the light source and detector were
located at right-angles to one another at the equator. This
result may lead a reduction in the incidence of brown-heart
in commercial lines containing affected fruit. Later, they
[104] devised two prototype on-line NIR transmission
systems to non-destructively measure the percentage of
internal tissue browning in ‘Braeburn’ apples (Malus
domestica Borkh.). One system was based on the principle
of time-delayed integration spectroscopy and the other
large aperture spectrometer. The systems were each opti-
mally configured to operate at 500 mm s-1 (or approxi-
mately five fruit per second) in the wavelength range 650–
950 nm. Regression models developed by PLS calibration
methods gave reasonable correlations and low prediction
errors (RMSECV 4–7%). The latter system was superior in
every case with the best results (with R2 = 0.9, and
RMSEP = 4.1%). Fu et al. [105] investigated the visible-
near infrared spectroscopy’s performance of diffuse
reflectance and transmission mode for detecting brown
heart of pear. The latter was found to be the better one: the
classifying correctness was 91.2% in fruit’s stem-calyx
axis horizontal. Three defective pears and one sound pear
(correctness 89.2%) were misclassified during calibration
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy in assessment of fruit quality
process and for validation, no defective pear was predicted
incorrectly and only one sound pear was predicted as defect
(correctness 95%). Discriminant analysis with Mahalanobis
Distance (MD) analysis can discriminate between brown
core and normal pears and grade the brown core pears to
three classes, based on NIR region of 651–1282 nm
wavelengths. The best modeling classification occurred for
precisely aligned pears using the difference at two wave-
lengths (713 and 743 nm), when the difference applied to a
test set, the classification model played a accuracy of
95.4% [106].
On-line applications
With development in internal quality determination and
classifying ability as well as defects inspecting, NIR
spectroscopy’s on-line application in fruit quality assess-
ment of industrial use have been invented one after
another. Bellon et al. combined the advantage of NIR for
quantitative analysis and MIR for qualitative analysis, to
develop two systems: the first to detect fructose and glu-
cose in fermentation processes; the second to detect sugar
in fruit at a rate of three fruits per second [16]. Three
simple near infrared (NIR) spectrometers with differing
dispersion elements (single equilateral prism, two equilat-
eral prisms in series, and a ruled diffraction grating) were
compared for suitability performance for in-line fruit
sorting. A practical application was investigated by com-
parison of spectra of transmitted radiation from whole
immature and mature limes (Citrus aurantifola) in part of
NIR range. All designs performed adequately (in terms of
resolution, spectral range, efficiency, and linearity across
the spectral range), while the dual-prism instrument dem-
onstrated a higher potential for more reliable, rapid sorting
than the other two [107]. The Vis/NIR spectra between 550
and 850 nm were used to determine the SSC in pears which
were in motion with speeds of 0.3, 0.5 and 0.7 m/s [108].
Multivariate analysis of variance indicated the spectra were
slightly affected by the moving speed. The acceptable
modeling results were achieved by applying the spectra
(after) at 0.5 m/s with a coeffecient of determination of
0.916. A longer Vis-NIR range (i.e., 550–1140 nm) would
provide more correlative information for SSC in terms of a
higher ratio of signal-noise for this range.
Conclusions
NIR spectroscopy analysis is widely utilized in fruit quality
assessment these years, because it is a simultaneous, pre-
cise and versatile method compared to canonical analysis.
Instruments based on NIR for quality determination have
139
been developed recent years. However, some problems
should be in-depth solved for ongoing/future research.
Different types of spectrometers are used to get the basic
knowledge of fruit quality, but the model transference is
still a problem between each other. Algorithms and
chemometrics are developed for this purpose; instead, basic
studies and discussion about the reasons for fruit spectra
varying lack, which may be another way to promote the
transferring robustness.
For on-line application, the potentials are limited by the
high price of NIR spectroscopy. Although there are some
measuring conveniences and low-cost analysis when run-
ning, the first investment is too high for a common fruit
producer or distributor. Traditionally, analyzers need some
sharing instrumentals and certain chemicals to fruit quality
test, which means less permanent assets investment. Sim-
ple and inexpensive instruments will promote their appli-
cations in fruit industrial.
Whether common consumers and markets accept the
extra price for using of NIR analysis is another type of
problem for NIR instrument and technology’s populariza-
tion. Public sectors and private sector appeal people con-
sume more fruits of high quality, but the acceptance of the
idea of ‘‘high-quality high-price’’ is still limited in many
countries, which needs a idea transformation through
intensively and effectively publicizing but not only the
technique progressing.
Acknowledgments The authors gratefully acknowledge the finan-
cial support provided by The National High Technology Research and
Development Program of China (No. 2006AA10Z257) and National
Key Technology R&D Program (No. 2006BAD11A12).
References
1. M. Joffe, A. Robertson, Public Health Nutr. 4(4), 893–901
(2001)
2. M. Sorensen, O. Raaschou-Nielsen, C. Brasch-Andersen,
A. Tjonneland, K. Overvad, H. Autrup, Lung Cancer 55(2),
137–144 (2007)
3. FAO, http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/fruitveg
1.htm (2003)
4. USDA, http://www.ams.usda.gov/fv/index.htm
5. L.M. Reid, C.P. O’Donnell, G. Downey, Trend Food Sci.
Technol. 17(7), 344–353 (2006)
6. W.F. McClure, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 11(6), 487–518
(2003)
7. K. Lee, G. Kim, S. Kang, J. Son, D. Choi, K. Choi, Measure-
ment of sugar contents in citrus using near infrared transmit-
tance. in Advances in Nondestructive Evaluation, Pt 1–3 (2004),
pp. 1014–1019
8. C. Ortiz, P. Barreiro, E. Correa, F. Riquelme, M. Ruiz-Altisent,
J. Agric. Eng. Res. 78(3), 281–289 (2001)
9. V.A. McGlone, R.B. Jordan, R. Seelye, P.J. Martinsen, Post-
harvest Biol. Technol. 26(2), 191–198 (2002)
10. P. Sirisomboon, M. Tanaka, S. Fujita, T. Kojima, J. Food Eng.
78(2), 701–707 (2007)
123
140
11. R.F. Lu, J. Texture Stud. 35(3), 263–276 (2004)
12. J. Xing, C. Bravo, D. Moshou, H. Ramon, J. De Baerdemaeker,
Comput. Electron. Agric. 52(1–2), 11–20 (2006)
13. X. Zou, J. Zhao, Y. Li, Vib. Spectrosc. 44(2), 220–227 (2007)
14. S. Saranwong, J. Sornsrivichai, S. Kawano, Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 31(2), 137–145 (2004)
15. L. Xie, Y. Ying, T. Ying, J. Food Eng. 82(3), 395–401 (2007)
16. V. Bellon, J.L. Vigneau, F. Sevila, Food Control 5(1), 21–27
(1994)
17. J.K. Holland, E.K. Kemsley, R.H. Wilson, J. Sci. Food Agric.
75(3), 391–400 (1997)
18. M. Ahro, M. Hakala, J. Kauppinen, H. Kallio, Fresenius J. Anal.
Chem. 371(4), 541–549 (2001)
19. W.H. Chang, S. Chen, C.C. Tsai, Trans. Asae 41(6), 1739–1745
(1998)
20. P. Williams, K. Norris, Near-Infrared Technology in the Agri-
cultural and Food Industries, 2nd edn. (American Association
of Cereal Chemists, Inc, St. Paul, 2001)
21. B. Stuart, Infrared Spectroscopy: Fundamentals and Applica-
tions (John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 2004)
22. M. Golic, K.B. Walsh, Anal. Chim. Acta 555(2), 286–291
(2006)
23. A. Peirs, N. Scheerlinck, K. Touchant, B.M. Nicolai, Biosyst.
Eng. 81(3), 305–311 (2002)
24. J. Lammertyn, A. Peirs, J. De Baerdemaeker, B. Nicolai, Post-
harvest Biol. Technol. 18(2), 121–132 (2000)
25. J.A. Cayuela, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 47(1), 75–80 (2008)
26. P.N. Schaare, D.G. Fraser, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 20, 175–
184 (2000)
27. X. Fu, Y. Ying, Y. Zhou, L. Xie, H. Xu, J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B
9(7), 552–557 (2008)
28. D.W. Ball, The basics of spectroscopy (SPIE Press, Bellingham,
Washington, 2001)
29. Y. Yan, Principle and application of Near Infrared Spectros-
copy Analysis, 1st edn. (China Light Industry Press, Beijing,
2005)
30. F. Hahn, I. Lopez, G. Hernandez, Biosyst. Eng. 89(1), 93–99
(2004)
31. Z. Xiaobo, Z. Jiewen, H. Xingyi, L. Yanxiao, Chemom. Intell.
Lab. Syst. 87(1), 43–51 (2007)
32. H.A.D. Filho, R.K.H. Galvao, M.C.U. Araujo, E.C. da Silva,
T.C.B. Saldanha, G.E. Jose, C. Pasquini, I. Milton Raimundo,
J.J.R. Rohwedder, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 72(1), 83–91
(2004)
33. A. Peirs, J. Tirry, B. Verlinden, P. Darius, B.M. Nicolai, Post-
harvest Biol. Technol. 28(2), 269–280 (2003)
34. A. Peirs, N. Scheerlinck, B.M. Nicolai, Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 30(3), 233–248 (2003)
35. D. Donald, D. Coomans, Y. Everingham, D. Cozzolino, M.
Gishen, T. Hancock, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 82(1–2), 122–
129 (2006)
36. J.P. Li, X.P. Fu, Y. Zhou, Y.B. Ying, L.J. Xie, X.Y. Niu, Z.K.
Yan, H.Y. Yu, Spectrosc. Spectr. Anal. 26(9), 1605–1609 (2006)
37. V.A. McGlone, R.B. Jordan, R. Seelye, C.J. Clark, Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 28(3), 431–435 (2003)
38. B.M. Nicolai, K.I. Theron, J. Lammertyn, Chemom. Intell. Lab.
Syst. 85(2), 243–252 (2007)
39. F. Chauchard, R. Cogdill, S. Roussel, J.M. Roger, V. Bellon-
Maurel, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst. 71(2), 141–150 (2004)
40. Y. Ying, Y. Liu, J. Food Eng. 84, 206–213 (2008)
41. C.V. Greensill, K.B. Walsh, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 10(1),
27–35 (2002)
42. C.V. Greensill, P.J. Wolfs, C.H. Spiegelman, K.B. Walsh, Appl.
Spectrosc. 55(5), 647–653 (2001)
43. M.C. Alamar, E. Bobelyn, J. Lammertyn, B.M. Nicolai,
E. Molto, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 45(1), 38–45 (2007)
123
H. Lin, Y. Ying
44. V.H. Segtnan, T. Isaksson, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 8(2),
109–116 (2000)
45. L.E. Rodriguez-Saona, F.S. Fry, M.A. McLaughlin, E.M. Cal-
vey, Carbohydr. Res. 336(1), 63–74 (2001)
46. A.M. Goula, K.G. Adamopoulos, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc.
11(2), 123–136 (2003)
47. J. Irudayaraj, J. Tewari, Appl. Spectrosc. 57(12), 1599–1604
(2003)
48. S.N. Jha, T. Matsuoka, Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 39(4), 425–430
(2004)
49. H.Y. Cen, Y. He, M. Huang, J. Agric. Food. Chem. 54(20),
7437–7443 (2006)
50. J.Y. Chen, H. Zhang, R. Matsunaga, J. Agric. Food. Chem.
54(26), 9652–9657 (2006)
51. L. Contal, V. Leon, G. Downey, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc.
10(4), 289–299 (2002)
52. G. Downey, J.D. Kelly, J. Agric. Food. Chem. 52(2), 204–209
(2004)
53. R.G. Dambergs, A. Kambouris, I.L. Francis, M. Gishen,
J. Agric. Food. Chem. 50(11), 3079–3084 (2002)
54. Y.D. Liu, Y. Ying, H.Y. Yu, X.P. Fu, J. Agric. Food. Chem.
54(8), 2810–2815 (2006)
55. L. Bochereau, P. Bourgine, B. Palagos, J. Agric. Eng. Res. 51,
207–216 (1992)
56. V. Bellon, G. Rabatel, C. Guizard, Food Control 3(1), 49–54
(1992)
57. A.T. Abebe, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 14(1), 67–70 (2006)
58. M. Ventura, A. de Jager, H. de Putter, F. Roelofs, Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 14(1), 21–27 (1998)
59. B.M. Nicolai, B.E. Verlinden, M. Desmet, S. Saevels, W. Saeys,
K. Theron, R. Cubeddu, A. Pifferi, A. Torricelli, Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 47(1), 68–74 (2008)
60. S. Bureau, D. Ruiz, M. Reich, B. Gouble, D. Bertrand, J.-M.
Audergon, C.M.G.C. Renard, Food Chem. 113, 1323–1328 (2009)
61. X.P. Fu, Y.B. Ying, H.S. Lu, H.Y. Yu, H.R. Xu, Spectrosc.
Spectr. Anal. 27(5), 911–915 (2007)
62. X. Fu, J. Li, Y. Zhou, Y. Ying, L. Xie, X. Niu, Z. Yan, H. Yu,
J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B 10(2), 120–125 (2009)
63. C. Van Dijk, C. Boeriu, F. Peter, T. Stolle-Smits, L.M.M.
Tijskens, J. Food Eng. 77(3), 575–584 (2006)
64. R.L. Long, K.B. Walsh, Aust. J. Agric. Res. 57(4), 403–410
(2006)
65. T. Temma, K. Hanamatsu, F. Shinoki, Opt. Rev. 9(2), 40–44
(2002)
66. Y.B. Ying, Y.D. Liu, X.P. Fu, Spectrosc. Spectr. Anal. 26(1),
63–66 (2006)
67. M.N. Merzlyak, A.E. Solovchenko, A.I. Smagin, A.A. Gitelson,
J. Plant. Physiol. 162(2), 151–160 (2005)
68. R. Quilitzsch, E. Hobert, J. Appl. Botany-Angewandte Botanik
77(5-6), 172–176 (2003)
69. J.-M. Roger, F. Chauchard, V. Bellon-Maurel, Chemom. Intell.
Lab. Syst. 66(2), 191–204 (2003)
70. V.A. McGlone, R.B. Jordan, P.J. Martinsen, Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 25(2), 135–144 (2002)
71. A. Peirs, A. Schenk, B.M. Nicolai, Postharvest Biol. Technol.
35(1), 1–13 (2005)
72. J. Xing, J. De Baerdemaeker, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 45(2),
176–183 (2007)
73. J. Xing, S. Landahl, J. Lammertyn, E. Vrindts, J.D. Baerde-
maeker, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 30(3), 249–258 (2003)
74. J. Xing, V. Van Linden, M. Vanzeebroeck, J. De Baerdemaeker,
Food Control 16(4), 357–361 (2005)
75. A.H. Gomez, Y. He, A.G. Pereira, J. Food Eng. 77(2), 313–319
(2006)
76. S. Tsuchikawa, E. Sakai, K. Inoue, K. Miyamoto, J. Am. Soc.
Hortic. Sci. 128(3), 391–396 (2003)
Theory and application of near infrared spectroscopy in assessment of fruit quality
77. V.A. McGlone, D.G. Fraser, R.B. Jordan, R. Kunnemeyer,
J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 11(5), 323–332 (2003)
78. G. Kim, K. Lee, K. Choi, J. Son, D. Choi, S. Kang, Defect and
ripeness inspection of citrus using NIR transmission spectrum.
in Advances in Nondestructive Evaluation, Pt 1–3 (2004), pp.
1008–1013
79. V.A. McGlone, S. Kawano, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 13(2),
131–141 (1998)
80. V.A. McGlone, C.J. Clark, R.B. Jordan, Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 46(1), 1–9 (2007)
81. J. Kim, A. Mowat, P. Poole, N. Kasabov, Chemom. Intell. Lab.
Syst. 51(2), 201–216 (2000)
82. X.P. Fu, Y.B. Ying, H.S. Lu, H.R. Xu, H.Y. Yu, Sens. Instru-
men. Food Qual. 1(1), 29–35 (2007)
83. C.J. Clark, V.A. McGlone, H.N. De Silva, M.A. Manning,
J. Burdon, A.D. Mowat, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 32(2), 147–
158 (2004)
84. M. Baranska, W. Schutz, H. Schulz, Anal. Chem. 78(24), 8456–
8461 (2006)
85. L. Xie, Y. Ying, T. Ying, H. Yu, X. Fu, Anal. Chim. Acta
584(2), 379–384 (2007)
86. S. Saranwong, S. Kawano, J. Near Infrared Spectrosc. 13(3),
169–175 (2005)
87. G. Carlomagno, L. Capozzo, G. Attolico, A. Distante, Infrared
Phys. Technol. 46(1-2), 23–29 (2004)
88. J.A. Guthrie, C.J. Liebenberg, K.B. Walsh, Aust. J. Agric. Res.
57(4), 411–418 (2006)
89. Z. Seregely, T. Deak, G.D. Bisztray, Chemom. Intell. Lab. Syst.
72(2), 195–203 (2004)
90. X. Fu, Y. Ying, Y. Zhou, H. Xu, Anal. Chim. Acta 598(1), 27–
33 (2007)
91. Z. Schmilovitch, A. Mizrach, A. Hoffman, H. Egozi, Y. Fuchs,
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 19(3), 245–252 (2000)
92. P.P. Subedi, K.B. Walsh, G. Owens, Postharvest Biol. Technol.
43(3), 326–334 (2007)
141
93. L. Leon, L. Rallo, A. Garrido, Grasas Y Aceites 54(1), 41–47
(2003)
94. X. Li, Y. He, H. Fang, J. Food Eng. 81(2), 357–363 (2007)
95. S. Teerachaichayut, K.Y. Kil, A. Terdwongworakul, W. Than-
apase, Y. Nakanishi, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 43(2), 202–206
(2007)
96. T.A. Kusumiyati, Munehiro. Tanaka, Sheishi. Kawasaki, J. Food
Agric. Environ. 6(2), 327–332 (2008)
97. A. Peirs, J. Lammertyn, K. Ooms, B.M. Nicolai, Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 21(2), 189–199 (2001)
98. Y. He, X.L. Li, Y.N. Shao, Quantitative analysis of the varieties
of apple using near infrared spectroscopy by principal compo-
nent analysis and BP model. in Ai 2005: Advances in Artificial
Intelligence (2005), pp. 1053–1056
99. Y. He, X.L. Li, Y.N. Shao, Intern. J. Food Prop. 10(1), 9–18
(2007)
100. L. Leon, A. Garrido-Varo, G. Downey, J. Agric. Food. Chem.
52(16), 4957–4962 (2004)
101. L.J. Xie, Y.B. Ying, T.J. Ying, J. Agric. Food. Chem. 55(12),
4645–4650 (2007)
102. B.S. Bennedsen, D.L. Peterson, Biosyst. Eng. 90(4), 419–431
(2005)
103. C.J. Clark, V.A. McGlone, R.B. Jordan, Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 28(1), 87–96 (2003)
104. V.A. McGlone, P.J. Martinsen, C.J. Clark, R.B. Jordan, Post-
harvest Biol. Technol. 37(2), 142–151 (2005)
105. X. Fu, Y. Ying, H. Lu, H. Xu, J. Food Eng. 83(3), 317–323
(2007)
106. D.H. Han, R.L. Tu, C. Lu, X.X. Liu, Z.H. Wen, Food Control
17(8), 604–608 (2006)
107. C.V. Greensill, D.S. Newman, Appl. Eng. Agric. 17(1), 69–76
(2001)
108. T. Sun, H. Lin, H. Xu, Y. Ying, Postharvest Biol. Technol. 51,
86–90 (2009)
123