book of abstracts - aracne · arnaldo d'amico (univ. roma tor vergata and cnr-imm) corrado di...

9th International Symposium on Olfaction and Electronic NoseRome, 30 Sep – 2 Oct 2002

1

9th International Symposium on Olfaction and Electronic NoseISOEN ’02

Rome30 Sep – 2 Jul, 2002

Centro Congressi Frentani

Bookof

Abstracts


2


3

Foreword

Since the half of the eighties the technological mimic of the main functions of human olfaction becamepossible. Since that, an increasing number of researchers have dedicated their efforts to improve the originalidea pursuing the fabrication of electronic noses. Practical applications, in a wide number of cases, appearedin the literature, and in the nineties some companies have introduced the electronic nose technology to themarket.

ISOEN series of conferences was started by Alpha-Mos Company in 1993 as a vehicle to collect scientists,manufacturers and end-users in a unique forum where expertises, products, and solutions might be illustratedand discussed. The main character of the conference has remained the same during the past editions givingrise to a need of a common place for scientisists, manufacturers, and end-user interested to electronic noseand chemical sensor arrays.

Jan Bruegel des Velours (of thevelvets) was the last member ofa famous family of painters. Inthe XVII century he painted aseries of large canvases eachdedicated to the representationof one of the five human senses.To represent olfaction thepainter chosen the moststraightforward sources ofpleasant odours such as flowers,woods, foods, and a gorgeousfeminine body.This series of paintings isexhibited in Madrid at the Pradomuseum.

ISOEN’02 is supported by:

EC Thematic NetworkNOSE II

National Research CouncilFinalised Project MADESS II

Institute for Microelectronicsand Microsensors

IEEE Sensors Council

Italian Association Sensorsand Microsystems

University of Rome “TorVergata”

Technobiochip Scarl


4

9th ISOEN Committees

Symposium ChairArnaldo D'Amico (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata and

CNR-IMM)Corrado Di Natale (Univ Roma Tor Vergata and

CNR-IMM)

ISOEN Steering CommitteeArnaldo D'Amico (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata)Julian Gardner (Univ. Warwick)Patrick Mielle (INRA, Dijon)Krishna Persaud (Univ. Manchester)Joe Stetter (Univ. Illinois, Chicago)Udo Weimar (Univ. Tübingen)

Organizing CommiteeChairman:Antonio Paoletti (Univ Roma Tor Vergata)

Antonella Macagnano (CNR-IMM, Roma)Eugenio Martinelli (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata)Roberto Paolesse (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata and

CNR-IMM)Giorgio Pennazza (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata)Pietro Siciliano (CNR-IMM, Lecce)Romeo Becherelli (CNR-IMM, Roma)Marco Valdoni (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata)

FinancialLuigi Maita (CNR-IMM, Roma) Luigi Aronica (Univ. Roma Tor Vergata)

International Symposium CommitteeHenry Baltes (ETH, Zürich)Carlo Cannella (Univ. Roma La Sapienza, Roma)Fabrizio Davide (Telecom Italia, Roma)Michael Frank (Henkel)Martin Holmberg (Univ. Linköping)Alberto Lamagna (CNEA, Buenos Aires)Andrei Legin (Univ. St. Petersburg)Ingemar Lundstrom (Univ. Linkoeping)CarloAndrea Malvicino (CR FIAT, Torino)Santiago Marco (Univ. Barcelona)Jan Mitrovics (Applied Sensors, Linkoeping)Jean C. Mifsud (AlphaMos, Toulouse)Juan Morante (Univ. Barcelona)Gudrun Olafsdottir (IFK, Reykjavik)William Penrose (Univ. Illinois, Chicago)Margarita Ruiz-Altisent (Univ. Politecnica Madrid)Douglas Rutledge (INA, Paris)Yoav Sarig (Ist. Agric. Eng. Bet Dagan)Giorgio Sberveglieri (Univ. Brescia)Giovanni Soncini (Univ. Trento)Stefan Strathmann (Univ. Tübingen)H. Troy Nagle (N. Carolina State Univ., Raileigh)Piero Visani (Nestle, Orbe)


5

MONDAY SEP. 30INVITED OPENING TALK

9.30 – 10.00

1. K. Persaud:University of Manchester, UKTwenty years of electronic nose evolution .............................................................................. 17

SESSION 110.30 – 12.30

SENSORS AND MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY

1. D. Filippini, I. Lundstrom:University of Linköping, SwedenDistinctive chemical image generation by a compact scanning lightpulse technique ..................................................................................................................... 23

2. J.R Stetter, W.R. Penrose, K. LonerganIllinois Institute of Technology, USAA capacitance based sensor array ........................................................................................... 25

3. K.S. Suslick1, M.A. Kosal2, W.B. McNamara III2, A. Sen2

1-University of Illinois, USA; 2-Chemsensing Inc., USASmellseeing: a colorimetric electronic nose............................................................................. 27

4. M. Rapp1, A. Skrypnick1, F. Bender1, A. Voigt1, J. Marcoll2

1- Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, Germany, 2- Drägerwerk GmbH, GermanyHigh sensitive organic gas detection using a SAW sensor based microarraywith a preconcentration unit................................................................................................... 29

5. G. Sehra, M. Cole, J.A. Covington, J.W. GardnerUniversity of Warwick, UKCombined electronic nose/tongue system for liquid analysis .................................................... 31

6. S.S Schiffman1, B.G. Graham1, H. Troy Nagle2:1- Duke University, USA; 2- NC State University, USAMeasuring odor intensity with photoionization detector (PID).................................................. 33

7. B. Forood, T. Kotseroglu, B. Kermani, M. LeblIllumina Inc., USAChemical detection using the Optical Nose system.................................................................. 35

8. F. Di Francesco1, L. Marano2, M. Falcitelli2, G. Pioggia2

1- CNR-IFC, Italy; 2- University of Pisa, ItalyMeasurement chambers for electronic noses ........................................................................... 37

SESSION 214.00 – 15.30

ELECTRONIC TONGUE

1. F. Winquist, C. Krantz-Rulcker, I. LundstromUniversity of Linköping, SwedenA miniaturized voltammetric electronic tongue ....................................................................... 43

2. L. Mattoso1, A. Riul1, F. Fonseca2

1- Embrapa, Brasil; 2- USP, BrasilAn electronic tongue based on nanostructured conducting polymer films.................................. 44


6

3. R. Paolesse1-2, C. Di Natale1-2, M. Burgio1, E. Mazzone1, G. Palleschi1, A. D’Amico1-2

1- University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy; 2- CNR-IMM, ItalyArray of electropolymerised porphyrin electrode for qualitative andquantitative analysis of liquid samples.................................................................................... 45

4. T. Tan, J. Poling, S. Isz:Alpha MOS, FranceDevelopment of bitterness masking formulations in the pharmaceuticalindustry with an electronic tongue.......................................................................................... 47

5. K. Esbansen1, D. Kirsanov2, A. Legin2, S. Makarychev-Mikhailov2, J. Mortensen3, J. Pedersen4, A.Rudnitskaya2, Y. Vlasov2

1- Alborg University, Denmark; 2- St. Petersburg University, Russia; 3- Rosklide University, Denmark,Kolding Biotech. Institute, DenmarkMonitoring of fermentation by the electronic tongue ............................................................... 49

6. T. Artursson, M. HolmbergUniversity of Linköping, SwedenCompression of data from electronic tongue based on voltammetryusing wavelet transform......................................................................................................... 51

SESSION 316.00 – 18.00

DATA ANALYSIS I

1. A. Perera, T. Sundic, A. Pardo, S. MarcoUniversity of Barcelona, SpainFeature extraction by sensor-class waveform variance analysis ................................................ 55

2. R. Gutierrez-Osuna1, P. Sun2

1- Texas A&M University, USA; 2- Wright State University, USAA biologically plausible computational architecture for sensor basedmachine olfaction.................................................................................................................. 57

3. T. Nakamoto, T. Yamanaka, R. MatsumotoTokyo Institute of Technology, JapanRecipe-exploration algorithms of odor recorder for multi-component odor................................ 60

4. Z. Boger1, R.E. Cavicchi2, S. Semancik2

1- IAEC, Israel; 2- NIST, USAAnalysis of conductometric micro-sensor responses in a 36-sensor array byartificial neural networks modelling ....................................................................................... 62

5. L. Carmel, Y. Koren, D. HarelWeizmann Institute, IsraelVisualizing and classifying odors using a similarity matrix ...................................................... 64

6. M. Pardo, G. SberveglieriINFM and University of Brescia, ItalyClassiifcation of electronic nose data with Support Vector Machines........................................ 66

7. T. Nakamoto, E. SumitomoTokyo Institute of Technology, JapanStudy of robust odor sensing system with auto-sensitivity control ............................................ 68


7

8. J. Brezmes, P. Margalef, E. Llobet, X. Vilanova, X. CorreigUniversitat Rovira i Virgili, SpainEvaluation of three modified Fuzzy Artmap akgorithms to be used byan electronic nose.................................................................................................................. 70

TUESDAY OCT. 1SESSION 4

9.00 – 10.15FOOD AND AGRICULTURE

1. P. Mielle, P. Landy, J.L. Ray:INRA Dijon, FranceElectronic noses: some tools for fitting sample throughput to sample delivery........................... 75

2. W. Bourgeois, R.M. StuetzCranfield University, UKA sensory upset early warning device for process stream monitoring........................................ 77

3. A.Z. Berna, S. Saevels, J. Lammertyn, B.M. NicolaiK.U. Leuven, BekgiumStudy of stem effect on the aroma profile of intact tomatoes(lycopersicum esculentum Mill.) by means of an electronic nose.............................................. 79

4. S. Capone1, A. Taurino2, M. Epifani1, C. Distante1, P. Siciliano1, R. Rella1

1- CNR-IMM, Italy; 2- University of Lecce, ItalyMeasurement of peach quality indicators by two non-destructive techniques:the electronic nose and the near infrared spectroscopy............................................................. 81

5. D. Rodrigues1, A. Lamagna1-2, S. Reich2, A. Boselli1, N. Scoccola1, M. Cerdan2

1- CNEA, Argentina; 2- Universidad de San Martin, ArgentinaComparison of the performance of two different eNoses in hops classification.......................... 84

6. C. Pinheiro, T. Schafer, J.G. CrespoUniversidade Nova de Lisboa, PortugalDirect integration of pervaporation with the electronic nose for improved discrimination in thepresence of interfering compounds......................................................................................... 86

SESSION 510.45 – 12.30

INDUSTRIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATIONS

1. N. Papamichail, U. WeimarUniversity of Tübingen, GermanyThe discrimination of constitutional isomers with different types ofchemical gas sensors ............................................................................................................ 91

2. B.R. Linnell1, R.C. Young1, W.J. Buttner1, R. Ramesham2

1- NASA, USA, 2- Jet Propulsion Lab., USAElectronic Nose Vapor Identification for Space Program Applications...................................... 93

3. L. Giolitti1, C. Malvicino2, D. Marzorati2, F. Bonino2

1- FIAT Auto spa, Italy; 2- Centro Ricerche Fiat, ItalyWill the electronic nose win the automitive challenge?............................................................ 96


8

4. S. Strathmann, B. Raffael, C. Simeanau, E. AnklamEC JRC, ItalyComparative investigation of recycled PET packaging material................................................ 97

5. D. WardWhirlpool Italia srl, ItalyPotential applications of electronic olfaction machines in domestic foodprocessing appliances............................................................................................................ 99

6. U. KruegerYSON Diagnostic AG, GermanySchematic classificaton of e-nose applications to support theintroduction of common standards........................................................................................ 100

7. W. Jambers, D. SimoensCentexbel, BelgiumEvaluation of odours of carpets using electronic noses........................................................... 101

SESSION 616.15 – 18.15

MEDICAL AND MICROBIOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS

1. I. Koronczi1, U. Krüger2, I. Kiseley1, D. Häringer1, R. Körber1, J. Goschnick1

1- Forschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, Germany; 2- YSON Diagnostic AG, GermanyElectronic nose breath analysis for the detection of health problems ....................................... 105

2. U. Binding1, W. Katzung2, H. Mauch3, J. Leonhardt2, G. Müller1-4

1- Laser und Medizin Technologie GmbH, Germany; 2- Institut für Umwelttechnologie, Germany;3- Krankenhaus Zehlendorf, Germany; 4- Freie Univeristät Berlin, GermanyDiagnostic of tubercolosis using Ion Mobility Spectrometry .................................................. 106

3. M.E. Kosal1, W.B. McNamara III1, A. Sen1, K.S. Suslick2

1- Chemsensing Inc., USA; 2- University of Illinois, USARapid colorimetric evaluation of bacterial metabolites........................................................... 108

4. S. Nachnani1, U. Krüger2, A. Rastogi1

1- University Health Resources Group Inc., UK; 2- YSON Diagnostic AG, GermanyDiscrimination of novel anaerobes isolated from the dorsum of the tongueusing conventional cultural methods and the Karlsruher micronase “Kamina”......................... 110

5. B. Dubreuil1, A. Cicani1, A. Molinie1-2, A. Pfohl-Leszkowicz1, A. Talou1

1- INPT, France; 2- La Toulosaine de cerèaels, FranceStudy of volatile metabolites generated by mycotoxins in wheat usingelectronic nose and GC-MS ................................................................................................. 112

6. J. Trihaas1, T. Van den Tempel2, P. Vaeggemose Nielsen1

1- Technical University, Denmark; 2- Cheese Culture Technology, DenmarkElectronic nose: smelling the microbiological quality of cheese ............................................. 114

7. T. Tan, S. IszAlpha MOS, FranceAnalytical and sensory specifications of flavour and other eccipientsfor drug formulation............................................................................................................ 115


9

WEDNESDAY OCT. 2SESSION 7

9.00 – 10.30DATA ANALYSIS II

1. N-Y Kim1, H-G Byun1, K. Persaud2

1- Samchok National University, Korea; 2- University of Manchester, UKAn identification technique applied to an odour sensing system with drift............................... 119

2. J.E Haugen1, C. Ketecioglu2

1- MATFORSK, Norway; 2- University of Aachen, GermanyComputational methods for handling the humidity issue of solid-state basedgas sensors ......................................................................................................................... 120

3. A. Walte, W. Münchmeyer, B. UngethümWMA Airsense Analysentechnik GmbH, GermanyNew methods for drift compensation for a metal oxide gas sensor arrayusing the autoenrichment technique and multivariate software approach................................. 122

4. C. Di Natale1-2, M. Careche3, R. Schubring4, A. Macagnano1-2, A. D’Amico1-2

1- University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy; 2- CNR-IMM, Italy; 3- CSIC-Istituto del Frio, Spain;4- Institute for Fishery Technology and Fish Quality, GermanyOdour, firmness, and colorimetric data fusion towards the definition ofan artificial quality index for fishes ...................................................................................... 124

5. M.L. Rodriguez-Mendez1, A. Arrieta1, V. Parra1, A. Vegas1, S. Villanueva1,R. Gutierrez-Osuna2, J.A. de Saja1

1- Universidad de Valladolid, Spain; 2- Texas A&M University, USASensor system for the complete organoleptic characterisation(smell, taste, and colour) of wines ........................................................................................ 126

6. M. Wandel, A. Lilienthal, A. Zell, U. WeimarUniversity of Tübingen, GermanyMobile robot using different senses ...................................................................................... 128

SESSION 811.00 – 12.30

FOOD PROCESSING

1. R. Bleibaum1, H. Stone1, S. Isz2, S. Labreche2, S. Saint Martin2, T. Tan2

1- Tragon Co., USA; 2- Alpha MOS, FranceComparison of sensory and consumer testing with e-nose and e-tonguefor fruit juices..................................................................................................................... 133

2. J. Lammertyn, S. Saevels, E.A Veraverbeke, A.Z. Berna, B.M. NicolaiK.U. Leuven, BelgiumApple aroma profiling during shelf-life: a comparison between E-Noseand mass spectrometer based E-Nose ................................................................................... 134

3. M. Riva1, S. Benedetti1, D. Ward2

1- Università di Milano; Italy; 2- Whirlpool Italia srl; ItalyMonitoring and controlling cooking processes using an electronicolfaction device .................................................................................................................. 136

4. J.P. Santos, M. Aleixandre, M.C. Horrillo, I. Sayago, M. Garcia, M.J. Fernandez, L. Ares, J.GutierrezCSIC-IFA, SpainA comparative analyis of sensor arrays for the implementation of anelectronic nose: application to Madrid wines characterization ................................................ 139


10

5. R. Körber, M. Harms, M. Kochbeck, J. GoschnickForschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbH, GermanyOn-site soil screening with an electronic nose in manual operation andmounted on an airship ......................................................................................................... 141

6. C. Di Nucci1, A. Fort1, S. Rocchi1, L. Tondi1, V. Vignoli1, M.B. Serrano-Santos1, F. Di Francesco2

1- Università di Siena, Italy; 2- CNR-IFC, PisaUse of the dynamic response of QCM sensors for detecting winearoma components .............................................................................................................. 142

TUESDAY OCT. 1POSTER SESSION

14.00 – 16.15

SENSORS AND MEASUREMENT TECHNOLOGY

1. J. Nicolais, A.C. RomainFondation Universitaire Luxembourgeoise, BelgiumAssessment of detection threshold of metal oxide sensors based e-noseto the pollution emitted by odorous sources .......................................................................... 147

2. E. Galeazzo, H.E.M. Peres, G. Santos, F.J. Ramirez-Fernandez, N. PeixotoEPUSP, BrasilResponses of porous silicon to organic vapors....................................................................... 149

3. J.M. Bolarin, J. Gomez, L.M. Tomas, A. RequenaUniversidad de Murcia, SpainMetal oxide gas sensors and neural network processing basedelectronic nose prototype..................................................................................................... 151

4. A. Tibuzzi1, C. Di Natale2-3, R. Paolesse2-3, A. Macagnano3, M. Zen4, G. Soncini1, A. D’Amico2-3

1- University of Trento, Italy; 2- University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, Italy; 3- CNR-IMM, Italy,4 ITC-IRST, ItalyA novel prototype of electro-optical nose.............................................................................. 152

5. Sakpal, A. Sonawane, D. GharpureUniversity of Pune, IndiaDevelopment of an analog nose for mixture analysis ............................................................. 154

6. M. Ivanovskaya1, D. Kotsikau1, D. Orlik1, G. Faglia2, P. Nelli2, M. Falasconi2

1- Belarus State University, Belarus; 2- INFM – Università di Brescia, ItalyThin film ceramic metal oxide based sensors for toxic gas controlling .................................... 156

7. C.J. Constantino1, A. Riul1, E. Venancio1, N. Consolin1, A. Antunes2, F. Fonseca3, O. Oliveira3,R. Aoca2, L. Mattoso1

1- EMBRAPA, Brasil; 2- University of Windsor, Canada; 3- Universidade de Sao Paulo, BrasilDetection limit for artificial sensors based on ultra-thin films of peryleneDerivatives ......................................................................................................................... 158

8. T. Sundic, A. Perera, A. Pardo, S. MarcoUniversity of Barcelona, SpainIdentification of essential oils aromas by means of iP-Nose electronic nose ............................ 159

9. J. Kleperis1, L. Grimberga1, A. Lusis1, P. Misans2

1- University of Latvia, Latvia 2- Riga Technical University, LatviaQuick autenticity testing of food and goods is it real with E/Z nose?....................................... 161

10. J-D Kim, H-G ByunSamchock National University, KoreaMobile robot with artificial olfactory function to recognize odours and to trackodour source location .......................................................................................................... 163


11

11. W. Andlauer, R. Koerber, U. Stahl, J. GoschnickForschungszentrum Karlsruhe, GermanyMobile odor tester for localisation and recognition of gas sources .......................................... 165

12. B.A. SnopokNational Academy of Sciences, UkraineCan nose be optoelectronic?................................................................................................. 167

13. Z.I. Kazantseva, I.A. Koshets, Yu.M. ShirshovNational Academy of Sciences, UkraineSelective and sensitive features of polymer coated QCM sensors towardsvolatile organic molecules ................................................................................................... 169

DATA ANALYSIS

1. R. Gutierrez-Osuna, A. Gutierrez-GalvezTexas A&M University, USAHabituation in the KIII olfactory model using gas sensor arrays ............................................. 171

2. C. Sawant, D. GharpureUniversity of Pune, IndiaImplementation of a tree network for multiple odor identification .......................................... 174

3. M. Zuppa1, C. Distante1, P. Siciliano1, K. Persaud2

1- CNR-IMM, Italy; 2- University of Manchester, UKImproving multiple self-organizing maps to compensate drift ................................................ 175

4. J. Trihaas, H. Ohm, U. Rasmussen, R. Monkevicius, P.V. Nielsen, H.H. BotheUniversity of Technology, DenmarkSupport vector machines. An application on e-nose data........................................................ 177

5. E. Martinelli1,C. Di Natale1,2, M. Romano3, A. Scarpa3, S. Sinopoli3, F. Vernazza4, P. Manghi4

1 – University of Roma “Tor Vergata”; 2- CNR-IMM, Italy; 3- Technobiochip, Italy; 4- Parmalat, ItalyDiscrimination of Commercial Milk Products based on Independent Component Analysis ofElectronic Nose Data........................................................................................................... 178

FOOD APPLICATIONS

1. R.K. Saleeb, L.M. Press, M. ParikhKraft Foods, USAAn E-Nose technique for determining roast and ground coffee aging...................................... 180

2. I. Dirinck1, A.C. Heiden2, C. Gil2, I. Van Leuven1, P. Dirinck1

1- Catholic University, Belgium; 2- Gerstel GmbH, GermanyCoffee aroma analysis using a mass spectrometry-based electronic nose ................................ 182

3. G. Cristofanilli, E. Dalcanale, M. BoradonnaUniversità di Parma; ItalyDetection of defected olive oil using an artificial olfactory system.......................................... 184

4. J. Martinez1, G. Pioggia2, M.L.Rodriguez-Mendez1, J.A. De Saja1

1- Universidad de Valladolid, Spain; 2- Università di Pisa, ItalyElectronic nose for the quality control of the olive oil aroma.Discrimination of quality, variety of olive and geographical origin......................................... 186

5. J. Brezmes1, P. Cabre2, S. Rojo1, E. Llobet1, X. Vilanova1, X. Correig1

1- Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Spain; 2-Freelance food quality consulter, SpainDiscrimination between different samples of olive oil using variableselection techniques and modified Fuzzy ARTmap neural networks ...................................... 188

6. H. Nanto, Y. Seikawa, T. Miyatake, K. Nobuyama, M. Komura, Y. TakeiKanazawa Institute of Technology, JapanDiscrimination of quality of Japanese Sake using SPR taste sensor andQCM odor sensor................................................................................................................ 191


12

7. A.L. Kukla, A.S Pavluchenko, Yu.M. Shirshov, N.V. Konoschunk, O. Yu. Posudievsky, V.DPokhodenkoNational Academy of Sciences, UkraineApplication of conducting polymer sensor array for the discriminationof cognac aroma.................................................................................................................. 193

8. M. Falasconi1, C. Garzella1, M. Pardo1, G. Sberveglieri1, F. Battistutta2, R. Zironi2, F. Nardini3

1- INFM and Università di Brescia, Italy; 2- Università di Udine, Italy; 3- Sacmi srl, ItalyDiscrimination of grape distillate aromas with the pico-electronic nose .................................. 194

9. R. Igreja, C.J. DiasUniversidade Nova de Lisboa, PortugalDevelopment of capacitive interdigital sensors for wine-must monitoring .............................. 196

10. C. Pinheiro1, B. Serrano2, T. Schafer1, J.G. Crespo1, M. Gregorkiewitz2, A. Fort2, V. Vignoli2, S.Rocchi2

1- Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal; 2- Università di Siena, ItalyComparison of two electronic nose systems for wine discriminationafter selective enrichment with pervaporation ....................................................................... 198

11. B. Kolahgar, C. Gil, A.C. HeidenGerstel GmbH, GermanyDiscrimination of different beer sorts and monitoring of the effect of agingby determination of flavour constituents using SPME and a chemical sensor .......................... 200

12. V. Schmitt, T. TanAlpha MOS, FranceEffect of the packaging on sensory properties of pulped and non pulpedfruit juices .......................................................................................................................... 201

13. S. Saevels, A.Z. Berna, J. Lammertyn, B.M. NicolaiK.U. Leuven, BelgiumPredicting optimal harvest date of apples based on aroma measurementswith the electronic nose ...................................................................................................... 202

14. M. Zude, M. Linke, B. HeroldATB Potsdam, GermanyApple fruit quality monitoring at varying produce temperatures ............................................. 204

15. C. Di Natale1-2, A. Macagnano2, E. Martinelli1, G. Pennazza1, R. Paolesse1-2, F. Mencarelli3,D. De Santis3, A. D’Amico1-2

1- Università di Roma “Tor Vergata”, Italy; 2- CNR-IMM, Italy; 3- Università della Tuscia, ItalyApplication of an electronic nose to the investigation of the effects of 1-MCPand propylene treatments of peaches .................................................................................... 206

16. C. Furlong1, L.J. Farmer1-2, T.D.J. Hagan2, C. Cheung1, A. Bailleul3, D.M. Rea2, J.R. Stewart1

1- Queen University of Belfast, UK; 2- DARD Food science division, UK; 3- ENSBANA, FranceDetermination of nectarine quality using an electronic nose andpreconcentration system to complement sensory panel, GC-MS, andGC-Odour analysis.............................................................................................................. 208

17. J. Martinez1, G. Pioggia2, M.L.Rodriguez-Mendez1, J.A. De Saja1

1- Universidad de Valladolid, Spain; 2- Università di Pisa, ItalyA dedicated saffron (crocus sativus L.) odour quality measurement system ............................ 210

18. J. ChmielewskiPoznan University of Economics, PolandElectronic nose: a useful tool for monitoring of aroma changes in cake................................... 212

19. J.F. Schneider1, L.F. Systma1, K. Brubaker1, J.R. Stetter2, W. Penrose2, L. Kwong2

1- Argonne National Laboratory, USA; 2- Illinois Institute of Technology, USAEvaluation of electronic nose technology in detecting contrabandmeat product....................................................................................................................... 214

20. E. Edirisinghe1, A. Graffham2, S. Taylor2, J. Jayasinghe1

1- NARA, Sri Lanka; 2- University of Greenwich, UKQuality evaluation of yellowfin tuna (thunnus albacers) using gas sensortechnology and PC analysis ................................................................................................ 215


13

21. J. Trihaas1, T. Van den Tempel2, P. Vaeggemose Nielsen1

1- University of Technology, Denmark; 2- Cheese Culture Technology, DenmarkQuality control of danish blue cheese with an electronic nose................................................. 216

22. S. Capone1, A. Taurino2, D. Dello Monaco2, C. Distante1, P. Siciliano1, R. Rella1

1- CNR-IMM, Italy; 2- Università di Lecce; ItalyQuantitative analysis of local diary products by an electronic nose and GC-MS ...................... 217

23. M. Romano, A. Scarpa, S. SinopoliTechnobiochip scarl, ItalyLibraNose application for Coffee quality control................................................................... 220

24. M. Romano1, A. Scarpa1, S. Sinopoli1, A. Mauro2, E. Martinelli3

1- Technobiochip scarl, Italy; 2- Carli srl, Italy; 3- University of Rome “Tor Vergata”, ItalyApplication of LibraNose to olive oil quality control ............................................................. 221

25. A. Sabuneti, M. Benzo, G. Massolini, C. Gandini, G. CaccialanzaUniversità di Pavia; ItalyGC/O, GC/MS and the Electronic Nose in the objective characterisation and identification ofbouquet and maderisation VOCs and semi-VOCs in Oltrepò Pavese white wines .................... 223

INDUSTRIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL APPLICATIONS

1. S.S Schiffman1, B.G. Graham1, R. Gutierrez-Osuna2, J. Zervakis1, H. Troy Nagle3

1- Duke University, USA; 2- Texas A&M University, USA; 3- NC State University, USAAssessment of animal odors: comparison of electronic nose and human panel......................... 224

2. C. Furlong, J.R. StewartQueen University of Belfast, UKDetection of agricultural odours using a portable electronic noseand preconcentration system................................................................................................ 226

3. C. Arnold, J. Goschnik, D. Häringer, I. KiselevForschungszentrum Karlsruhe, GermanyElectronic nose data processing for indoor air monitoring ..................................................... 228

4. V. Schmitt1, J. Braggins2, J. Chauvet1

1- Alpha MOS, France; 2- Agresearch, New ZealandInnovative and rapid air quality monitoring using electronic nose .......................................... 230

5. S. Reich1, D. Rodriguez2, L. Murruni1, C. Arrieta3, R. Marabini3, J. Gimenez3, A. Boselli2, A.Lamagna2

1- Universidad de San Martin, Argentina; 2- CNEA, Argentina; 3- CITEFA, ArgentinaEnvironmental oxidants sensed with an electronic nose ......................................................... 231

6. Q. Lucas, V.O. Schmitt, T. TanAlpha MOS, FranceStatistical quality control of petrochemical and oleochemical products usingthe new factory compatible electronic nose........................................................................... 232

7. O. Canhoto, N. MaganCranfield University, UKPotential detection of heavy metals and micro-organisms in waterusing electronic nose technology.......................................................................................... 233

8. J.L. Ray, P. Mielle, J.L. Puech, G. Albagnac, M. MoutounetInstitute National de la Recherche Agronomique, FranceEvaluation of oak wood toasting level by headspace comparison............................................ 235

9. M. Romano, A. Scarpa, S. SinopoliTechnobiochip scarl, ItalyIdentification of explosive materials by LibraNose................................................................ 237


14

MEDICAL AND MICROBIOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS

1. A.K. Pavlou1, N. Magan1, C. McNulty2, J. M. Jones2, D. Sharp2, J. Brown2, P. Klatser2, A.P.F.Turner1

1- Cranfield University, UK; 2- Gloucestershire Royal Hospital, UKDetection of the TB in vitro using electronic nose detection................................................... 238

2. R. Needham, N. MaganCranfield University, UKDetection and differentiation of microbial spoilage organisms of bakeryproducts in-vitro and in-situ................................................................................................. 240

3. M. Romano1, A. Scarpa1, S. Sinopoli1, S. Amarri2, A. Macagnano3

1- Technobiochip scarl, Italy; 2- Policlinico di Modena, Italy; 3- CNR-IMM, ItalyIn-vivo Helicobacter Pylori Identification by the Analysis of Breath by meansof an electronic nose............................................................................................................ 242

4. A. Setkus, A. Galdikas, Z. Kancleris, D. SenulieneSemiconductor Physics Institute, LithuaniaResponse kinetics based graphical visualization of smell: application ofrecognition of bacteria infected substances ........................................................................... 244

5. E. Castro1, N. Walsoe de Reca2, R. Filip3, R. Baby2, M. Cabezas2

1- Dr. Madaus & Co, Argentina; 2- CITEFA, Argentina; 3- Universidad de Buenos Aires, ArgentinaQuality control of medicinal plants with an electronic nose.................................................... 246

6. D. Clapham, W. MatthewsGlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, UKAnalysis of monomeric impurities and degradation products inapoly methyl metacrylate polymer of pharmaceutical relevance............................................... 248

7. A. Legin1, A. Rudnitskaya1, B. Seleznev1, D. Clapham2, K. Lord2, Y. Vlasov1

1- University of St. Petersburg, Russia; 2- GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, UKElectronic tongue for pharmaceutical applications: quantification oftastes and masking effects.................................................................................................... 249

8. J.E. Haugen1, A. Eriksson2, K. Persson Walker3, K. Svennerstein-Sjaunja2, F. Lundby1, O. Lind4

1- MATFORSK, Norway; 2- Kungsägens Research Centre, Sweden; 3- National VeterinaryInstitute, Sxeden; 4- DeLaval, SwedenDetection of mastitic milk using a commercial gas-sensor array system:................................. 251

9. I.V. Kruglenko1, B.A. Snopok1, Yu.M. Shirshov1, F.J. Rowell2

1- National Academy of Sciences, Ukraine; 2- University of Sunderland, UKCan electronic nose be used to detect pharmaceutical contaminants? ...................................... 253


15

Invited Opening Talk


16


17

Twenty years of Electronic Nose Evolution

Krishna C. Persaud

Department of Instrumentation and Analytical ScienceUMIST, Manchester, UK

The BackgroundEvidence from chemistry [1], olfactory psychophysics and structure-activity relationships of odorants, [2]together with the examination of ‘specific anosmias’ in the human population, all support the definition ofselectivity and specificity of putative biological olfactory receptors initiated by Amoore [3,4] and confirmedby recent developments in olfactory neurobiology and molecular genetics [5,6]. The ideas that severalclasses of olfactory receptors exist, selective to chemical species on the basis of molecular size, shape andcharge, pointed to individual olfactory receptors being rather broad in their selectivity to molecules withincertain classes. The important molecular parameters of an odorant determining the olfactory response would include theadsorption and desorption energies of the molecule from air to a receptor interface, partition coefficients,electron donor/acceptor interactions depending on the polarisability of the molecule, and its molecular sizeand shape.The rapid advances in neurobiology, electrophysiology and biochemistry that were occurring concurrently inthe 1960’s, leading to an understanding of the convergent nature of the olfactory system, allowed visionarymodels of the sensory systems for the instinctive recognition of patterns, including olfaction and taste, to beconstructed as exemplified by Deutsch [7] based on an idealised organisation of the cortex of the brain. Thesystem is inherently flexible and has room for excitatory and inhibitory control at each stage, making it anattractive proposition for olfactory cybernetic development. This understanding that receptors with partialspecificity could in principle be used to achieve reliable discrimination, was later exploited by Persaud andDodd [8] to achieve a functional device using just three broad specificity sensors.This paper emphasises key research in the field that pioneered the developments that we see today.

The Implementation

Array Based Odour SensorsThe discriminatory power of a small sensor array lies in the utilisation of cross-sensitivities between sensorelements. The responses of the individual sensors, each possessing a slightly different response towards thesample odours, when combined by suitable mathematical methods, can provide enough information todiscriminate between sample odours. These systems have been given the terminology ‘electronic nose’ andconsist of an array of chemical sensors possessing broad specificity, coupled to electronics and software thatallow feature extraction - extraction of salient data for further analysis, together with pattern recognition -identification of sample odour. Software techniques and material science are important aspects of thedevelopment of the system. Advancement in software signal processing techniques, coupled with patternrecognition, enable optimum usage of sensor responses. The specificity and sensitivity of existing chemicalsensors are constantly being developed, as well as new materials.Typically an electronic nose consists of three elements: a sensor array which is exposed to the volatiles,conversion of the sensor signals to a readable format, and software analysis of the data to producecharacteristic outputs related to the odour encountered. The output from the sensor array may be interpretedvia a variety of methods such as pattern recognition algorithms, principal component analysis, discriminantfunction analysis, cluster analysis and artificial neural networks to discriminate between samples.

Early ResearchEarly research in the field was hampered by the lack of suitable sensor materials capable of emulating thefunctional characteristics of the olfactory system, and also that the transduction and information processingsystems in biological systems were poorly understood. Tanyolaç and co-workers (1950) [9] explored thesurface tension changes of a liquid when volatile molecules were adsorbed, while the advent of the transistorstimulated interest in utilising germanium as a chemically sensitive transducer material. Pioneering work byDravnieks and Trotter (1965) [10] who measured contact surface potentials of various materials in thepresence of adsorbed volatiles, and the work of Wilkens and Hartmann (1964) [11] on the redox-potentials


18

measurable when various chemicals adsorbed onto electrodes, together with that of Buck et al (1965) [12]who investigated conductivity changes in solids due to interaction between adsorbed odorant molecules andcharge carriers in the solid, were some of the first steps trying to emulate some of the functional properties ofthe biological olfactory system, i.e. ‘broadly tuned receptors’. It was not until the commercial availability ofgas sensors based on metal oxides in the 1970’s (Figaro Inc., Japan) that the practicality of testing some ofthe conceptual ideas became possible, leading to the work of Persaud and Dodd (1982) [8]. This was basedon a small array of only three sensors, where the general architecture, although based on a limitedunderstanding of olfactory processes at the time, forms the basis for most of the instrumentation used today.A large number of sensor technologies are now available that are applicable to construction of sensor arraysfor “Electronic Nose” applications. These include sensor types such as - quartz crystal microbalances,surface acoustic wave devices, metal oxides, conducting polymer, optical sensors, and others. Thetechnology is rapidly evolving to meet key design parameters for the system. These include sensitivity,speed of operation, cost, size, manufacturability, the ability to operate in diverse environments, andimmunity to poisoning.

CommercialisationThe first commercial devices were marketed in the early 1990’s by Alpha MOS, France, based on metaloxide semiconductors, and Aromascan plc, UK (now Osmetech plc), based on conducting polymer sensors.These devices stimulated world-wide interest in the field both commercially and in academia as a bona-fideresearch field. Many other companies were formed world-wide to exploit a new, previously unexploitedmarket, the number totalling at least 40. While the early devices sold as generic devices that could ‘doanything and everything’, it was soon apparent that they were oversold, and had mixed reception in terms ofapplicability. They were also high cost items. They allowed the companies involved to identify the potentialfor the use of these instruments in specific areas, and in fact those companies that still exist have becomehighly focussed in their market strategies. The worldwide market potential is huge, but yet poorly exploited.

ResearchThe pioneering insight into the potential for multidisciplinary research in the field by Prof. WolfgangGoepel, that led to the formation of the European NOSE Network, in 1999, and its new incarnation NOSE IIin 2001, has brought together leading teams of researchers that attack the fundamental problems associatedwith sensor technology - stability, sensitivity, drift, ageing, poisoning, together with the electronics, andpattern recognition software that are inherent to a system. This continuing and growing network ofresearchers has created a new community that is just reaching critical mass. Many fundamental problems stillexist, sampling of low concentrations of volatiles being one of them. More emphasis is being placed onminiaturisation, ‘neuromorphic’ systems and design of software paradigms that mimic biological sensoryinformation processing.

ConclusionWhile we have ‘Electronic Nose’ technology, we do not yet have ‘Artificial Noses’ – instruments that can bemapped to human perception of odour.

1. Boelens, H. (1974). "Relationship between the chemical structure of compounds and their olfactive properties",Cosmetics and Perfumery, 89:1-7.

2. Beets, M. J. G. (1978). Structure-Activity Relationships in Human Chemoreception Applied Science PublishersLtd., London.

3. Amoore, J. E. (1962a). "The stereochemical theory of olfaction. 1. Identification of the seven primary odours.",Proc.Sci.sec.Toilet Goods Assoc., 37:1-12.

4. Amoore, J. E. (1962b). "The stereochemical theory of olfaction. 2. elucidation of the stereochemical properties ofthe olfactory receptor sites.", Proc.Sci.sec.Toilet Goods Assoc., 37:13-23.

5. Buck, L. B. (1997a). "Information coding in the olfactory system", Journal of Neurochemistry, 69:S210.6. Mombaerts, P., Wang, F., Dulac, C., Vassar, R., Chao, S. K., Nemes, A., Mendelsohn, M., Edmondson, J., and

Axel, R. (1996). "The molecular biology of olfactory perception", Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on QuantitativeBiology, 61:135-145.

7. Deutsch, S. (1967). Models of the nervous system John Wiley & Sons, New York, London, Sydney.8. Persaud, K. and Dodd, G. (1982). "Analysis of discrimination mechanisms in the mammalian olfactory system

using a model nose", Nature, 299:352-355.


19

9. Tanyolaç, N. N. and Eaton, J. R. (1950). "Study of odors", J.Am.Pharm.Assoc., 39:10.10. Dravnieks, A. and Trotter, P.J. (1965) “Polar vapour detection based on thermal modulation of contact potential”.

J. Sci. Instruments 42:62411. Wilkens, W.F., Hartman, J.D. (1964) An electronic analog for the olfactory processes. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci.

116:33812. Buck, T.M., Allen, F.G., Dalton, M. (1965) Setection of chemical species by surface effects on metals and

semiconductors. In: “Surface effects in detection”, Bregman and Dravnieks (Eds), Spartan Books Inc. WashingtonDC.


20

book of abstracts - aracne · arnaldo d'amico (univ. roma tor vergata and cnr-imm) corrado di...

Documents