Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy

One hundred wheat samples, with moisture ranging from 14.42 %to 7.66 %, were used to test the moisture loss from grinding, the accuracy of moisture content from two different electric moisture meters, and the accuracy and precision of Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy whole wheat moisture deter...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Chang, Weider
Format: Others
Published: DigitalCommons@USU 1987
Subjects:
Online Access:https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4068
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5084&context=etd
id ndltd-UTAHS-oai-digitalcommons.usu.edu-etd-5084
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-UTAHS-oai-digitalcommons.usu.edu-etd-50842019-10-13T05:54:24Z Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy Chang, Weider One hundred wheat samples, with moisture ranging from 14.42 %to 7.66 %, were used to test the moisture loss from grinding, the accuracy of moisture content from two different electric moisture meters, and the accuracy and precision of Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy whole wheat moisture determination. Fifty samples were ground through three grinders, Wiley, Cemotec , and UDY Cyclone grinder. Moisture content was determined from these ground samples, and compared with whole wheat moisture. The Cemotec grinder caused the least amount of moisture loss, followed by Wiley and then UDY Cyclone. Fifty whole wheat samples were used to calibrate the Tecator GP6010 moisture meter. Another 50 whole wheat samples with known moisture values, were used to test the accuracy of the Tecator GP6010 moisture meter. Moisture and compared to moisture readings from a Motomco meter. Tecator moisture value had a better correlation coefficient to whole wheat moisture than Motomco moisture values (0.935 and 0.917, respectively). Three sample sets from different grinding preparation methods were scanned by NIRS . Eight moisture values were entered into the computer, and separate multiple regression equations developed. Sixteen wheat samples with known moisture content were used to test the equations. For .whole wheat moisture equation, SEA and r 2 were 0.159 and 0.991, 0.223 and 0.972, 0 .223 and 0 .973, 0.322 and 0.888, 0.218 and 0.968, 0.248 and 0.969 , 0.208 and 0.978 , 0.249 and 0.970 for whole wheat, Cemotec, Wiley, UDY, C3 , C5, C6, and Motomco moisture, respectively. For Cemotec moisture equation, SEA and r2 were 0.226 and 0.944, 0.208 and 0.927, 2.267 and 0.071, 0.208 and 0.853, 0.272 and 0.876, 2.296 and 0.088, 0.291 and 0.896, 0.248 and 0.927, for whole wheat, Cemotec, Wiley, Udy, C3, CS , C6, and Motomco moisture, respectively. For UDY moisture equation, SEA and r2 were 0 .402 and 0.909, 0.364 and 0.900, 0.353 and 0.907, 0.119 and 0 .973, 0.407 and 0.858, 0.484 and 0.856, 0.514 and 0.835, 0.403 and 0.897, for whole wheat, Cemotec, Wiley, UDY, Tecator C3, CS, C6, and Motomco moisture, respectively. Many desirable features make the whole wheat method a good direction for Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy. 1987-05-01T07:00:00Z text application/pdf https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4068 https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5084&context=etd Copyright for this work is held by the author. Transmission or reproduction of materials protected by copyright beyond that allowed by fair use requires the written permission of the copyright owners. Works not in the public domain cannot be commercially exploited without permission of the copyright owner. Responsibility for any use rests exclusively with the user. For more information contact Andrew Wesolek (andrew.wesolek@usu.edu). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations DigitalCommons@USU Animal Sciences
collection NDLTD
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Animal Sciences
spellingShingle Animal Sciences
Chang, Weider
Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy
description One hundred wheat samples, with moisture ranging from 14.42 %to 7.66 %, were used to test the moisture loss from grinding, the accuracy of moisture content from two different electric moisture meters, and the accuracy and precision of Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy whole wheat moisture determination. Fifty samples were ground through three grinders, Wiley, Cemotec , and UDY Cyclone grinder. Moisture content was determined from these ground samples, and compared with whole wheat moisture. The Cemotec grinder caused the least amount of moisture loss, followed by Wiley and then UDY Cyclone. Fifty whole wheat samples were used to calibrate the Tecator GP6010 moisture meter. Another 50 whole wheat samples with known moisture values, were used to test the accuracy of the Tecator GP6010 moisture meter. Moisture and compared to moisture readings from a Motomco meter. Tecator moisture value had a better correlation coefficient to whole wheat moisture than Motomco moisture values (0.935 and 0.917, respectively). Three sample sets from different grinding preparation methods were scanned by NIRS . Eight moisture values were entered into the computer, and separate multiple regression equations developed. Sixteen wheat samples with known moisture content were used to test the equations. For .whole wheat moisture equation, SEA and r 2 were 0.159 and 0.991, 0.223 and 0.972, 0 .223 and 0 .973, 0.322 and 0.888, 0.218 and 0.968, 0.248 and 0.969 , 0.208 and 0.978 , 0.249 and 0.970 for whole wheat, Cemotec, Wiley, UDY, C3 , C5, C6, and Motomco moisture, respectively. For Cemotec moisture equation, SEA and r2 were 0.226 and 0.944, 0.208 and 0.927, 2.267 and 0.071, 0.208 and 0.853, 0.272 and 0.876, 2.296 and 0.088, 0.291 and 0.896, 0.248 and 0.927, for whole wheat, Cemotec, Wiley, Udy, C3, CS , C6, and Motomco moisture, respectively. For UDY moisture equation, SEA and r2 were 0 .402 and 0.909, 0.364 and 0.900, 0.353 and 0.907, 0.119 and 0 .973, 0.407 and 0.858, 0.484 and 0.856, 0.514 and 0.835, 0.403 and 0.897, for whole wheat, Cemotec, Wiley, UDY, Tecator C3, CS, C6, and Motomco moisture, respectively. Many desirable features make the whole wheat method a good direction for Near Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy.
author Chang, Weider
author_facet Chang, Weider
author_sort Chang, Weider
title Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy
title_short Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy
title_full Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy
title_fullStr Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy
title_full_unstemmed Comparing Different Methods for Determining Moisture in Wheat Using NESR Infrared Reflectance Spectroscopy
title_sort comparing different methods for determining moisture in wheat using nesr infrared reflectance spectroscopy
publisher DigitalCommons@USU
publishDate 1987
url https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/4068
https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5084&context=etd
work_keys_str_mv AT changweider comparingdifferentmethodsfordeterminingmoistureinwheatusingnesrinfraredreflectancespectroscopy
_version_ 1719266856760508416