Improving freshness prediction in frozen fish burgers: A comparative study of propolis additives using ANN and RSM models

Fatemeh Koushki , Mohsen Mokhtarian , Mohsen Dalvi-Isfahan , Hongwei Xiao , Weipeng Zhang
{"title":"Improving freshness prediction in frozen fish burgers: A comparative study of propolis additives using ANN and RSM models","authors":"Fatemeh Koushki ,&nbsp;Mohsen Mokhtarian ,&nbsp;Mohsen Dalvi-Isfahan ,&nbsp;Hongwei Xiao ,&nbsp;Weipeng Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.agrcom.2025.100078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The freshness of fish burgers (FBs) declines during frozen storage. Here, we assessed FB freshness using quality control indicators (QCIs), including peroxide value (PV), total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N), and total viable count (TVC). Two predictive models were compared, one based on response surface methodology (RSM) and the other on an artificial neural network (ANN). Their accuracy was evaluated using frozen FBs that incorporated different concentrations of freeze-dried propolis (FDP; 0%–0.4%) and stored for various durations (0, 30, 60, and 90 days). Both FDP and storage time (ST) had significant effects (<em>p</em> ​&lt; ​0.01) on the quality control indicators (QCIs) of frozen FBs, with ST having a more significant effect than FDP on the QCI changes. A numerical optimization process determined that the optimal values of ST and FDP were approximately 27 days and 0.30 ​g/[100 ​g of fish paste], respectively. The coefficient of determination (R<sup>2</sup>) values for the QCIs of frozen FBs in the ANN model were 0.9657 for PV, 0.9753 for TVB-N, and 0.9872 for TVC. These values were slightly lower in the RSM model, 0.9717 for PV, 0.9603 for TVB-N, and 0.9861 for TVC. Overall, the ANN model with a 2-13-3 topology (13 neurons in the first hidden layer) showed greater potential for prediction of FB quality during frozen storage and was found to be the more efficient method.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100065,"journal":{"name":"Agriculture Communications","volume":"3 1","pages":"Article 100078"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Agriculture Communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2949798125000080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The freshness of fish burgers (FBs) declines during frozen storage. Here, we assessed FB freshness using quality control indicators (QCIs), including peroxide value (PV), total volatile basic nitrogen (TVB-N), and total viable count (TVC). Two predictive models were compared, one based on response surface methodology (RSM) and the other on an artificial neural network (ANN). Their accuracy was evaluated using frozen FBs that incorporated different concentrations of freeze-dried propolis (FDP; 0%–0.4%) and stored for various durations (0, 30, 60, and 90 days). Both FDP and storage time (ST) had significant effects (p ​< ​0.01) on the quality control indicators (QCIs) of frozen FBs, with ST having a more significant effect than FDP on the QCI changes. A numerical optimization process determined that the optimal values of ST and FDP were approximately 27 days and 0.30 ​g/[100 ​g of fish paste], respectively. The coefficient of determination (R2) values for the QCIs of frozen FBs in the ANN model were 0.9657 for PV, 0.9753 for TVB-N, and 0.9872 for TVC. These values were slightly lower in the RSM model, 0.9717 for PV, 0.9603 for TVB-N, and 0.9861 for TVC. Overall, the ANN model with a 2-13-3 topology (13 neurons in the first hidden layer) showed greater potential for prediction of FB quality during frozen storage and was found to be the more efficient method.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信