Food Measure
DOI 10.1007/s11694-017-9663-6
ORIGINAL PAPER
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree
fruits: a review
Satyam Srivastava1 · Shashikant Sadistap2 
Received: 9 July 2017 / Accepted: 5 October 2017
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017
Abstract  Optimum maturity at harvest is a very important
determinant to ensure the final quality of the fruits. Har-
vesting fruits at appropriate time maintains different quality
parameters such as taste, size, shape, nutritional parameters
and also have longer shelf life. While as fruits picked too
early or too late in season are more susceptible towards dif-
ferent physiological disorders as well as have very shorter
shelf life. So optimal harvesting time judgement is one of
the most important information for various fruit growers
to optimize the yield and to decrease the on-field losses.
In recent years, various rapid and reliable non-destructive
sensing techniques along with different multivariate, data
fusion, and chemometric algorithms have been evolved to
measure the quality parameters of different fruit samples
at the time of harvesting. This paper presents an extensive
review on different on-field issues during harvesting of vari-
ous fruits and also how these issues significantly contributes
to fruit spoilage all over the world. Presented paper also
consist review on different non-destructive sensing tech-
niques (electronic nose, spectroscopy, ultrasonic, imaging
etc) along with various data processing algorithms (data
treatment, feature extraction, data fusion etc) used for qual-
ity assessment of different fruit cultivars. Scope of multiple
non-destructive sensing techniques fusion, challenges and
bottlenecks also have been explored in the context of fruit
quality assessment. Various products available in global
market are also reviewed based on their sensing technique,
* Satyam Srivastava
satyamsrivastava@ceeri.res.in
1
Academy Scientific & Innovative Research (AcSiR),
CSIR-CEERI, Pilani, India
2
CSIR-CEERI, Pilani, India
application, prediction capabilities, cost, accessibility and
reliability.
Keywords  Non-destructive · Harvesting time · Fruits ·
Shelf life · And data fusion
Introduction
India is one of the largest producer of fruits and vegetables
as well as one of the biggest wasters in the world. Money
involved in Indian wastage due to different fruits and veg-
etables worth Rs 13,300 crores annually. There are various
reasons behind this problem but more than 20% of fruits and
vegetables spoilage occurs due to wrong on-field judgements
(Fig. 1) as well as different handling and storage issues [1].
One of the most common and important on-field judgement
that affects the fruits and vegetables quality is optimal har-
vesting time judgement. Fruits picked at optimal harvest-
ing time have better quality parameters compared to fruits
picked too early or too late. Various fruit cultivars can be
classified in two different classes such as climacteric fruits
and non-climacteric fruits [2]. Non-climacteric fruits cannot
continue their ripening cycle after picking from the tree and
also not responds towards ethylene force ripening method.
Climacteric fruit have the capability to continue their ripen-
ing cycle after harvesting and also towards ethylene force
ripening method. Force ripening practices are not good for
human health as well as it damages different fruit quality
parameters such as taste, nutritional parameters etc [3].
So, in the case of non-climacteric fruit samples, optimal
harvesting time is one of the most important parameter at the
time of harvesting. One of the other pressing issue related
to on-field problems is early warning of different disease
attacks and suggestion for right remedial action. Earlier,
13
Vol.:(0123456789)

Fig. 1  Various on-field issues during harvesting of fruits
fruit grower was dependent on his own intelligence based
on the change in color, size, shape and weight. Chemical and
mechanical methods are also used in different fruit prod-
ucts industries to accesses the fruit quality [4]. Recently,
there is a growing interest in different electronic methods
to accesses the fruit quality parameters. Various electronic
destructive type methods (impedance measurement, pressure
based measurement) [5] have been explored for fruit quality
assessment but most of these methods are time consuming,
damages fruit sample while measurement and best suited
for lab level applications. With the rapid development in
science, technology and computation algorithms, new elec-
tronic non-destructive sensing methods have been explored
to extract different quality parameters of on-tree fruits and
also to overcome all existing challenges and bottlenecks
with destructive methods. Few of these methods such as
hyperspectral imaging [6], electronic nose (e-nose) [7],
ultrasonic based stiffness measurement [8] etc are also used
in non-contact sensing mode to avoid any kind of damage
to the on-tree fruit crop. Widely explored non-destructive
methods includes UV–Vis–NIR/MIR type spectroscopy
sensing, sonic vibration, e-nose, and machine vision and
so on. Sensing methods used for fruit quality measurement
and authentication over the time period are presented in the
form of timeline (Fig. 2). Various researchers contributed
their investigation regarding non-destructive methods for
fruit quality inspection and authentication but most of them
were focused on lab level solutions and haven’t discussed the
on field problems and their solutions. Presented investigation
13
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
covers all non-destructive sensing methods in brief along
with the scope of multi-sensing techniques fusion to extract
better information from various fruit samples. Presented
review also discuss about the different on-field problems and
their solution available globally and compares them based
on their features, availability and cost.
Non‑destructive methods for fruit quality
assessment and authentication
Various non-destructive sensing methods have been explored
by different researchers to judge quality parameters of fruits
samples. Few of them have been used for on-tree fruit qual-
ity inspection process, while as others are best suited for lab
level applications. This paper covers six major sensing tech-
niques used over the time period along with their advantages
and disadvantages in the area of fruit identification, quality
inspection and control.
Fruit quality inspection using electronic nose
Sensing technology of artificial olfaction had its beginnings
with the invention of first multi-gas sensor array in 1982
[15]. Advancements in aroma sensors technology, electron-
ics and instrumentation, chemical engineering and artificial
intelligence made it possible to develop variety of instru-
ments to detect, measure and characterize different vola-
tile organic compounds in various applications. Electronic
noses have been specially designed and developed for the
automatic acquisition, detection, identification and classi-
fication of complex mixtures of odours, vapours and gases.
Electronic nose instrument works based on the principle of
human nose (Fig. 3) and it consist of selective and non-
selective chemical sensor array for aroma sensing, dynamic
or static gas sampling scheme for aroma flow control, front
end readout interface along with the combination of intel-
ligent pattern recognition algorithms for data acquisition,
processing and quantification.
Various prototypes of artificial e-nose have been
designed and developed to discriminate complex odor
mixture consist of different volatile organic compounds.
Most of presented work in the area of e-nose design and
development uses different kind of sensors such as metal
oxide (MOS), semi conductive polymer, optical, elec-
trochemical and surface acoustic wave sensors [16]. In
most of the applications, cross selective gas or VOC sen-
sor array has been used to sense wide range of chemical
odor mixture and further to discriminate various diverse
mixtures of possible analytes. Response of individual sen-
sors are collectively integrated to produce a unique digital
response pattern and further converted in to the form of
unique aroma signature. Collected signatures represents
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review

Fig. 2  Sensing methods used for fruit quality assessment and authentication [9–14]

Table 1  Different volatile organic compounds found in different fruit

cultivars

Fruit cultivar Chemical family Major compound Ref.

Apple Aliphatic esters Ethyl butanoate [18]

Banana Aliphatic esters Isoamyl acetate [19]
Peach Lactones γ-Decalactone [20]
Kiwifruit Aliphatic aldehydes Hexanal [21]
Pineapple Organic acids Hexanoic acid [22]
Raspberry Aliphatic ketones Raspberry ketone [23]
Fig.  3  a Functional diagram of human odor sensing scheme, b Strawberry Furanone lactones Furaneol [24]
mimic diagram of electronic nose Tomato Apocarotenoids β-ionone [25]

as the identity of a simple or complex mixture, which

could be further utilized for training, testing and clas-
sification. Fruit aroma consist of a complex mixture of
different VOCs whose composition corresponds to spe-
cific plant and fruit cultivar. Few of the fruits share many
aromatic characteristics while as each fruit also have a
distinctive aroma that depends upon the combination of
volatile organic compounds [17]. Most common aroma
compounds found in different fruit cultivars (Table 1) are
phenols, esters, ketones, aldehydes etc.
Kiani et  al. presented a new portable e-nose system
(Fig. 4) for identification of different types of saffron, stigma
of Crocus sativus L. (Iridaceae), based on their volatile
organic compounds (VOC’s). Presented e-nose uses metal
oxide based gas sensor array consist of ten gas sensors, tem-
perature, humidity sensor along with direct head space sam-
pling integrated with microcontroller based real time data
acquisition unit. Eleven saffron samples have been collected
from different regions for analysis and testing. Authors used

13
 S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap

Fig.  4  a The portable e-nose expert system developed for saffron aroma quality evaluation. b The sensor array and the test chamber. Repro-
duced with permission from Kiani et al. [26]. Copyright Elsevier 2016

principal component analysis (PCA) (Fig. 5) and hierarchi-
cal clustering analysis (HCA) as unsupervised models and
multilayer perception (MLP) neural networks and partial
least squares (PLS) as supervised models were utilized to
develop the e-nose classification capability. Based on the
results, PCA of volatile compounds fingerprints revealed
11 distinct groups corresponding to 11 different saffron
samples. This was further confirmed by HCA which classi-
fied the groups into five distinct quality classes (excellent,
very good, good, medium and poor quality) which were used
as the MLP and PLS classification goals. Results of analysis
showed that performance of the MLP model for prediction
of saffron samples quality class was better than PLS model,
with 100% success rate and high correlation coefficients of

Fig. 5  PCA score plot of the

characterization of 11 different
saffron samples with various
aromas [26]. Reproduced with
permission from Zhang et al.
[27]. Copyright Taylor and
Francis 2016

13
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
cross validation (­ R2 = 0.989 and relatively low RMSE value
of 0.141) [26]. Zhang et al. presented a case study to analyse
the soluble solid content in persimmon fruits using com-
mercial available e-nose system (PEN3). Presented system
consist of sampling apparatus, a detector unit containing an
array of ten different metal oxide sensors and pattern recog-
nition software (Win Muster v. 1.6) for data acquisition and
analysis. PCA has been used to discriminate different pick-
ing dates for persimmon samples corresponding to different
maturity level (Fig. 5). While as authors also used support
vector machine (SVM), multiple linear regression and back
propagation neural network and it has been observed that
SVM shows better prediction accuracy [27].
Zhang et al. presented a study to predict optimal harvest-
ing time for peach samples based on the responses of the
metal oxide based gas sensor array. Authors implemented
PCR and PLS model on collected gas sensor array data and
it has been observed that PLS model represents a good abil-
ity in predicting quality index, with high correlation coef-
ficient ­(R2 = 0.86) for penetrating force, sugar content and
acidity (Fig. 6) [28].
Saevels presented a study to understand the potential
of the e-nose along with mass spectrometer based e-nose
(MSE-Nose) to monitor the changes in apple fruit volatiles
during shelf life. Collected apples were stored for 8 months
Fig. 6  Scatter plot of the first two main axes illustrating the e-nose sensor response data categorized into the three groups: a PCA and b LDA.
Reproduced with permission from Zhang et al. [28]. Copyright Springer 2012
at three different storage conditions and the volatile pro-
file changes were followed subsequently over a period of
15 days. PCA has been implemented on collected e-nose
data and score plot of PCA showed no storage history effect
and only very little shelf life effect. While as MSE-Nose and
GC/MS score plots clearly indicated the presence of both
shelf life and storage history trend. Moreover, the volatile
profile changes during shelf life depended on the storage
history. Partial least mean square model has been imple-
mented to correlate the firmness with days of shelf life with
the volatile production of apples [29].
Brezmes developed based e-nose to measure the shelf
life of pink lady apples based on the change in the ripe-
ness stage. In this study, a personal computer e-nose sys-
tem has been developed to accesses the ripeness state of
apples throughout their shelf life. Authors used PCA and
fuzzy ART technique for classification between mature and
immature apple samples. PCA analysis doesn’t shows any
clustering behaviour that might be attributed to ripening
while as fuzzy ART shows a tendency to classify measure-
ments regarding to their ripeness stage (Fig. 7) [30].
Llobet et al. developed an e-nose using an array inex-
pensive commercial tin oxide odor sensors and used them
to analyse the ripeness states of banana samples. Authors
used PCA along with investigatory techniques to classify
13
 S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap

Fig. 7  PCA scores using col-

lected e-nose signal a PCA are
computed using fruit and cali-
bration measurement togther, b
PCA are computed using fruit
measurement alone then both
calibration and measurement
projected. Reproduced with
permission from Brezmes [30].
Copyright Elsevier 2004

banana ripeness stages based on the change in sample skin
color. Three other supervised classification techniques
such as fuzzy ARTMAP, LVQ and MLP also have been
used to classify the samples into the observed seven states
of ripeness and it has been observed that fuzzy ARTMAP
and LVQ classifiers outperformed the MLP classifier with
the accuracies of 90.3 and 92% compared with 83.4%
respectively [31]. Gomez et al. used e-nose technology
to predict storage life based on the change in volatile pro-
duction of mandarin samples. Authors used commercial
e-nose (PEN-2) technology for measurement and testing
purpose. PCA and LDA have been used to classify man-
darin samples having different shelf life, LDA shows good
classification results and well classified mandarin samples
having same storage time [32]. Lebrun et al. used e-nose

13
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
along gas chromatography technology to predict matu-
rity stages of mango samples. Harvested mango samples
have been evaluated using GC and E-Nose (Alpha FOX
3000) for aroma and other volatiles as well as for soluble
solid and acids. Volatile data from the different harvest
maturities and ripening stages were discriminated using
multivariate statistics (DFA). Both the e-nose and GC
results were able to separate fruits having different har-
vest maturity index [33]. Yu et al. investigated about long
Jing green tea quality parameters using electronic nose
technology. Commercially developed PEN-2 electronic
nose instrument to measure the quality parameters of long
Jing green tea samples. Four different groups based on dif-
ferent quality grade (A120, A280, A380 and A600) have
been used for measurement, training and testing proce-
dure [34]. Xiaobo et al. presented an e-nose based method
to classify apples based on their maturity and freshness.
50 fresh and 50 rotten apples have been collected and
used commercial e-nose setup. PCA and GA-RBF neu-
ral network based algorithms have been used for feature
extraction process from measured dataset. Satisfactory
classification has been shown between fresh and rotten
apples and it has been observed that GA-RBF has been
shown 96.4% recognition probability for fresh and rotten
apples [35]. Wilson et al. reviewed various advancements
in the area of e-nose development along with their applica-
tions in different area such as food, medical etc. Authors
explained different types of aroma along with its role in
human society and commerce. Concept of different types
of e-nose instrumentation along with various data treat-
ment and analysis techniques also have been explained in
detailed [36]. Falasconi et al. reviewed e-nose technology
for microbiological screening of various food products.
Authors presented a detailed review of four case studies
for microbial contamination detection using e-nose: (1)
Alicyclobacillus spp. spoilage of fruit juices, (2) early
detection of microbial contamination in processed toma-
toes, (3) screening of fungal and fumonisin contamination
of maize grains, and (4) fungal contamination on green
coffee beans. Baietto et al. reviewed the chemical nature
of different fruit volatiles during different ripeness stages
of the agro-fruit production process and describe some of
the important applications for fruit identifications, cultivar
discriminations, ripeness assessments and fruit grading for
assuring fruit quality in commercial markets [37]. Ampu-
ero investigated the efforts have been taken in the direction
e-nose application for dairy products quality inspection
such as milk, cheese etc. Authors explained different types
of sensors technology (nose metal oxide, conductive poly-
mer etc) used in electronic along with different data treat-
ment methods (PCA, LDA, PLS, DFA etc) [38]. Few of
the other major efforts taken in the direction of e-nose for
fruit quality inspection have been summarized in tabular
form as following (Table 2).
Fruit quality inspection using UV–Vis–NIR
spectroscopy
Fruits have different absorption and reflection properties
in the light of different wavelength band change in their
internal attributes such as sugar, acidity, SCC etc. Electro-
magnetic spectrum covers a large range of photon energies
which could be divide in to different bands such radio wave,
microwave, infrared, near infrared, visible, ultraviolet, X-ray
etc. Optical properties indicate the response of the fruits to
visible light band (400–700 nm) and near infrared (NIR)
band (700–2500 nm). When a light beam falls on an object,
part of the incident beam gets reflected by the surface of the
object, which is called as regular reflectance. Other remain-
ing radiation is transmitted through the surface into cellular
structure of the object where it gets scattered by small inter-
faces with in the tissues or absorbed by cellular constituents.
Absorbed portion of radiation could be transformed to dif-
ferent parts of energy such as heat, luminescence, chemical
changes etc. So, overall part of the transmitted energy gets
absorbed (absorption) and some part is reflected back to
the surface and remaining part transmitted through object
(Fig. 8) [56].
Visible and NIR spectrum majorly explored for fruit
internal quality inspection while as ultraviolet (UV) band
used for disinfection of fruits and beverages from differ-
ent bacteria’s, virus etc. Visible and NIR spectroscopy have
been utilized for fruit quality measurement for many years.
NIR spectroscopy has several advantages over the visible
spectroscopy such as NIR radiation is highly penetrative and
thus it can be applied directly to the sample without any
sample preparation. Other advantages are that they could
provide quantitative information on the major organic com-
ponents of food products. Various modes have been explored
for different category of fruits like transmission mode is con-
sidered to access sugar, SSC and acidity of thick skinned
fruits [57]. Few of the other explored modes are reflectance
and interactance (Fig. 9). In reflectance method, source and
detector lactated in the same direction and when fruit get
illuminated by source, scattered reflected radiation recorded
by the detector. Generally different lamps are used as a
source and diode array as detector while as few of efforts
also have been taken in the direction of LED array as source.
Cen et al. reviewed the potential of NIR reflectance spec-
troscopy to determine the quality of various food samples.
Authors explained the concept and features associated with
NIR reflectance spectroscopy along with different issues
and challenges related to spectroscopy system design. Pre-
processing and chemometric techniques used for qualitative
and quantitative used for calibration model development
13


Table 2  Major contributions in the area of electronic nose for fruit quality assessment and authentication
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation Parameters Preprocess Data processing Validation Model accuracy Ref.
details details

13
Apple (Royal Gala) Electronic nose + GC FOX 4000 (Alpha Maturity, Harvest Residual maximum PCA, DFA Cross-validation by – [39]
MOS System) date likelihood (REML), GC data
Descriptive Profil- least significant dif-
ing by 18 trained ference (LSD)
experts about
aroma, flavor,
texture
Apples (Pinklady) Electronic nose Customized experi- Shelf life, firmness, Normalization PCA, Fuzzy ART – Firmness: 0.93 [30]
mental setup [21 starch, pH Starch: 0.68
sensors (FIS(SB/SP pH: 0.84
Series), TGS)]
Banana Electronic nose PC based electronic Ripeness stage Normalization PCA, LDA, SIMCA, – Classification: [40]
nose experimental SVM 98.66%
setup consist of 6
gas sensors along
with dynamic
sampling scheme,
NI-USB6009
Mango (Harumanis) Electronic nose Developed electronic Ripeness stage Normalization PCA, ANN (MLP) – Classification: 95% [41]
nose experimental
setup with 8 metal
oxide gas sen-
sors, software on
Labview
Strawberry Electronic E-nose (PEN 3, Win Pathogenic fungal Normalization PCA, ANOVA, MLP Cross-validation by Classification: 96.6% [42]
nose + GCMS Muster Air-sense disease detection GCMS
Analytics Inc., (Botrytis, Penicil-
Germany) lium and Rhizopus)
Peach Electronic nose + GC Electronic nose (PEN Ripeness stage Normalization PCA, LDA, CART Cross-validation by Recognition rate: [43]
2, Win Muster Air GC 100%
sense)
Apples (Malus Electronic nose Libra Nose (Tech- Soluble solids, Normalization, drift PCA, PLS – SCC: 0.77 Firmness: [44]
domestica Borkh.) nobiochip, Elba acidity, starch and compensation 0.80 Acidity: 0.69
Island, Italy) firmness
Apples (Romanian) Electronic nose Alpha FOX 3000 Acidity, soluble Normalization PCA, DFA – Recognition Per: [45]
solid, sweetness, 100%
astringency
Peaches and Nectar- Electronic nose Libra nose (Tech- Sweetness, flesh Relative normaliza- PCA, LVQ – Identification: 86% [46]
ines nobiochip, Elba color tion and average
Island, Italy)
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
 Table 2  (continued)
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation Parameters Preprocess Data processing Validation Model accuracy Ref.
details details

Mandarin Electronic nose Electronic nose (PEN Picking dates (ripe- Normalization PCA, LDA – Classification rate: [47]
2, Win Muster Air ness stage) 92%
sense)
Peaches, nectarines, Electronic nose Customized experi- Firmness, saturation, Normalization PCA, PLS – Firmness: 0.94, satu- [48]
apples, and pears mental setup of PC hue, firmness, SCC ration: 0.79, hue:
based electronic 0.99, SCC: 0.92
nose (dynamic sam-
pling scheme with
24 MOS Sensors)
Peach Electronic nose Customized experi- Penetrating force, Normalization MLR, QPST and – Penetrating force: [49]
mental electronic acidity, sugar BPANN 0.87
nose with MOS content Acidity: 0.81
sensors Sugar content: 0.79
Peach and pears Electronic nose Customized experi- Fruit ripeness Relative normaliza- PLA, MLP – Success rate: 92% [50]
mental PC based tion
electronic nose with
MOS sensors
Apple (Fuzi) Electronic Nose Customized experi- Storage time Normalization, sto- PCA – Success rate: 84.62% [51]
mental PC based chastic resonance
electronic nose with signal-to-noise ratio
MOS sensors
Peaches Electronic Nose e-nose EOS 835 Sweetness, juiciness, ANOVA, Student– PCA Sweetness: 0.92 Juci- [52]
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review

(SACMI, Imola, texture Newman–Keuls ness: 0.92, Texture:

Italy) separation 0.93
Banana Electronic nose Customized experi- Ripeness stage Normalization Fuzzy ARTMAP, – Success rate: 92% [31]
mental PC based LVQ and MLP
electronic nose with
MOS sensors
Apple Electronic nose Cyranose 320 (Model Firmness, TSS, starch Normalization PCA, MANOVA, – Success rate: 83% [53]
320, Cyrano Sci- DA, CCA
ences)
Pear Electronic nose Customized Electron- Acidity, SCC, firm- Normalization PCA, PCR, LDA, – Acidity: 0.56 [54]
ics with six MOS ness MLR, PLS SCC: 0.94
sensors along with Firmness: 0.92
USB-6009 card
Oranges and Apples Electronic nose Libra nose (Tech- Mealiness, skin Normalization PCA, PLS, PLS-DA Cross-validation Success rate: 99% [55]
nobiochip, Elba damage
Island, Italy)

13
 S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap

Ref.

[27]
Model accuracy

SCC: 91.36%
Cross-validation

Fig. 8  Light distribution scheme on fruit sample

Validation

PCA, MLR, SVM

Data processing

and BPANN
Normalization
Preprocess

Picking dates (SCC)

Parameters

E-nose (PEN 3, Win

Muster Air-sense
Analytics Inc.,
Instrumentation

Germany)
details
Sensing technique

Electronic nose

Fig. 9  Different geometrical configurations a reflectance mode, b

transmittance mode
details

are also reviewed and explained in detail [58]. Jha et al.

reviewed different non-destructive techniques contributed
Table 2  (continued)

by various researchers for quality evaluation of intact fruits

and vegetables. Nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), X-ray,
Fruit cultivar

Persimmon

computerized tomography and spectroscopy techniques

have been reviewed and explained in detail. Scope of dif-
ferent miscellaneous techniques such as acoustic based

13
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
firmness detection, color detection using machine vision etc
also has been explored [59]. Magwaza et al. talked about the
application of NIR spectroscopy for internal and external
quality analysis of citrus fruits. Authors explained the con-
cept of NIR spectroscopy, wavelength band selection, data
acquisition positions, spectral preprocessing and chemo-
metric models specially used for various citrus cultivars.
Challenges with model accuracy and robustness also have
been discussed in detail [60]. Choi et al. reviewed various
efforts taken in the direction of NIR spectroscopy for fruit
quality evaluation along with different measurement modes
such as half and full transmission and reflectance mode.
Multiple linear regression model (MLR) has been devel-
oped using 16 wavelength data for sugar content estimation
of peach samples with determination coefficient of 0.71 and
standard error of calibration of 0.42 Brix. Model. Overall
developed system (Fig. 10) could classify peach samples
Fig.  10  a Peach quality grading system, b calibration model using
PLSR. Reproduced with permission from Choi et al. [61]. Copyright
ISEECAF, 2006
in to two different classes based on sugar content and the
overall accuracy of classification is around 91% [61].
Huang et al. reviewed application of NIR spectroscopy
for online monitoring of quality in food and beverage sam-
ples such as such as meat, fruit, grain, dairy products etc.
Presented review emphasize the methods designed for on/in-
line measurement of data, chemometric treatment, as well as
interpretation of the experimental observations [62]. Lam-
mertyn et al. investigated about the light penetration proper-
ties of NIR radiation for apples. Authors explored bifurcated
and optical configuration for spectroscopy data acquisition
over the wavelength band of 500–1900 nm. Partial least
mean square (PLS) model has been used on collected spec-
troscopy data for calibration model development. Results
shown that bifurcated configuration (­ R2 = 0.91) performed
better compared to optical configuration (­ R2 = 0.81) for SSC
prediction of apple samples [63] (Fig. 11).
Peirs et al. used visible and NIR spectroscopy for opti-
mal harvesting date’s prediction of different apple cul-
tivars. Authors used commercial spectrometer (Optical
Spectrum Analyzer (OSA) 6602, Rees Instruments Ltd.,
Goldalming, UK) having range of 380–2000 nm with the
resolution of 0.5 nm. Authors used multiplicative scatter
Fig.  11  a The bifurcated optical configuration, b The 0°:45° optical
configuration. Reproduced with permission from Huang et  al. [63].
Copyright Elsevier 2000
13
 S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap

correction along with PCA for feature extraction and
PLS for calibration model development. Presented study
predicted SSC, acidity, firmness and maturity of apple
samples with good correlation coefficient [64]. Das et al.
recently presented a smartphone based spectrometer for
instantons ripeness detection of apple samples. Devel-
oped system measures apples properties over the wave-
length band of 340–780 nm with the resolution of 15 nm.
Authors basically tried to measure the chlorophyll con-
tent in apple samples and further converted in to ripeness
stage. Authors developed 5th order calibration model to
predict chlorophyll content of apples. Overall presented
system is very portable and have satisfactory accuracy of
61–74% [65] (Fig. 12).
Few of the other major efforts taken in the direction of
spectroscopy technique used for fruit quality inspection have
been summarized as following (Table 3).
Fruit quality inspection using ultrasound sensing
technique
Ultrasonic sensing technology is popularly used various food
quality monitoring and control applications such as emulsifica-
tion, freezing, thermosonication, cavitation and disinfection.
Recently, there is a growing interest for ultrasound technique
application for non-destructive food quality measurement.
Ultrasound technique could be used directly on field or in
industries for food quality inspection due to its non-destructive

Fig.  12  a Close-up of the nozzle depicting illumination and collection geometry, b interface for spectral acquisition with integration times and
modes of operation, c typical ChlF for Golden Delicious apple sample. Reproduced with permission from Das et al. [65]. Copyright Nature 2016

13
 Table 3  Major contribution in the area of UV–Vis–NIR spectroscopy for fruit quality assessment and authentication
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model accuracy Error analysis Ref.
details details

kiwifruit (Actinidia Visible–NIR spec- Commercial SCC, density, internal Scaling, smooth- PLS and PCR cali- SCC: 0.93, density: SEP SSC: 0.80 [66]
chinensis) troscopy spectrom- flesh color ing, absorbance bration models 0.74, internal flesh brix, Density:
eter wavelengths: transformation, color: 0.82 3.6 kg m−3, Internal
300–1100 nm with MSC, SNV, NSD, Flesh Color: 1.6
3.3 nm res ABSD1-2
Apples NIR diffuse reflec- Commercial spec- Firmness, sugar Relative reflectance, PCA for features Firmness 0.38 0.58, SSC: 0.37–0.42 brix, [67]
tance spectroscopy trometer wave- content absorbance calcula- extraction and PCR SCC: 0.93–0.97 Firmness: 6.6-
lengths 300 to tion, smoothing, 10.1N
1100 nm with 2 nm MSC
res
Mango NIR reflectance PC based experimen- Firmness, total solu- First and second MLR, PCA and PLS Firmness: 0.9276 Firmness 1.223 [68]
spectroscopy tal setup with com- ble content, acidity, derivative of reflec- TSS: 0.6085 TSS: 0.161
mercial spectrom- storage period tance spectrum Acidity: 0.8226 Acidity: 0.8226
eter Wavelength: Storage period: Storage period:
1200–2400 nm with 0.9380 0.9380
1 nm res
Blueberries MIR and NIR spec- Instrument: FT–NIR Ripening Parameters Mean, SD, and mul- Partial least squares TSS: 0.96 TSS: 0.65 [69]
troscopy spectrometer (MPA, (TSS), nutraceuti- tiplicative scatter (PLS) regression Phenols: 0.87–0.97 Phenols: 0.18
Bruker Optics, cal compounds correction algorithms Flavonoids: 0.97 Flavonoids: 0.25
Ettlingen, Ger- (phenols, total Ascorbic acid: 0.91 Ascorbic: 0.22
many) Wavelength: flavonoids and Anthocyanins: 0.92 Anthocyanins: 0.80
833–2777 nm total anthocyanins,
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review

ascorbate)
Golden Delicious Hyperspectral imag- A hyperspectral Flesh color, firmness, Normalization, SD, PCA for feature Acidity: 0.57 Acidity: 0.8 [70]
Apple ing fluorescence imag- soluble solids con- mean and max extraction and SCC: 0.66 SSC: 1.19
ing system has been tent, and titratable ANN for training Flesh color: 0.93 Flesh color: 0.03
developed Wave- acid Firmness: 0.75 Firmness: 8.57
length: 408–430 nm
Apple parenchyma, Visible–NIR spec- Bifurcated and opti- Soluble solids content Normalization, SD, PLS model has been Bifurcated: 0.91 bifurcated_ [63]
Jonagold troscopy cal config. has been (SCC) mean and max used to develop Optical conf.: 0.87 RMSEP:0.73 Opti-
used to study the calibration model cal_RMSEP: 0.87
penetration depth of
Vis/NIR spec-
trum, Wavelength:
500–1900 nm
Apricot (Kioto and Visible–NIR spec- Portable spectrometer Soluble solids content SNV, second deriva- FDA and PLS SSC: 0.88–.96 SSC: 0.67–1.1 TA: [71]
Harostar) troscopy has been devel- (SSC), total acidity tive after SNV TA: 0.73–0.97 24
oped using off (TA) and firmness Firmness (Fi): 0.92 Firmness (Fi): 6.2–13
the shelf source, (Fi)
detector, grating,
filters Wavelength:
650–1200 nm

13


Table 3  (continued)
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model accuracy Error analysis Ref.
details details

13
Satsuma mandarin Vis–NIR spectros- Commercial spec- Firmness soluble sol- Averaging, Smooth- PCA, PCAR and PLS Firmness: 0.83 Firmness: 8.53 [72]
copy trometer system has ids content (SSC) ing, MSC SCC: 0.94 SSC: 0.33
been used having acidity Acidity: 0.8 Acidity: 0.18
wavelength range of
35–2500 nm
Mango fruit NIR spectroscopy Commercial spec- SCC, DM, Starch MSC MLR, PLS DM : 0.86 DM: 0.73 [73]
trometer Wave- Starch: 0.82 Starch: 0.77
length: 700–
1100 nm
Apple Vis–NIR spectros- Commercial spec- Soluble solids, Streif Normalization, PCR, PLS Maturity: 0.90 Maturity: 7.4 [64]
copy trometer Wave- index, acidity and second derivative, Streif index: 0.84 Streif index: 0.18
length: 380– firmness, maturity MSC SCC: 0.84 SCC: 0.73
2000 nm Acidity: 0.80 Firmness: 1.13
Firmness: 0.78
Apricot FT-near-infrared Commercial spec- Soluble solids and Normalization, SNV PCA, PLS Soluble solids: 0.92 Soluble solids: 0.98 [74]
spectroscopy trometer Wave- titratable acidity Titratable acidity: Titratable acidity:
length: 800– 0.89 3.62
2500 nm
Mandarin NIR spectroscopy Experiment setup Light distribution Monte Carlo simula- – – – [75]
developed (laser study tion of the light
diode: 808 nm) levels inside a
mandarin
Apple (Malus domes- UV–Vis spectroscopy Developed smart Ripeness stage chlo- Averaged, noise 5th order calibration Firmness: 0.61–0.74 – [65]
tica) phone based spec- rophyll maturity removal model
trometer wave-
length: 340–780 nm
with 15 nm
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
nature. Other advantages of ultrasound sensing technique over
other non-destructive techniques are that it is highly sensitive,
has fast response, is robust and is able to perform high velocity
measurement. Ultrasound technique is performed by accessing
the echo wave propagated through different mediums. Ampli-
tude and time of flight of the propagated echo signal changes
with change in the properties of the material (refractive index,
weight, mass etc). Furthermore, recorded amplitude and time
of flight of echo ultrasound signal could be converted in to
attenuation and propagation delay introduced due to test sam-
ple [76]. General architecture of a ultrasound measurement
experimental setup consist of a pulse triggering circuit having
frequency of ultrasound transmitter centre frequency, band
pass filter having, zero threshold detector unit, time to digital
converter unit and processor unit to calculate attenuation and
propagation delay in echo signal (Fig. 13).
Tpd = Tstop − Tstart
Attenuation = Atransmitted − Arecieved
Attenuation = 20log10 Attenuation
Fig.  13  a General architecture of ultrasonic measurement experi-
mental setup. b Yellow: triggering TX pulse train. Violet: echo ultra-
sound signal. Cyan: ultrasound echo signal converted in to pulse form
Generally, ultrasound based measurement can be cat-
egorized into two types such as contact and non-contact
type mode. Contact type ultrasound measurement method
has been explored by several researchers for different food
and beverage materials while as non-contact measurement
method still have its own challenges and limitations. Three
types of ultrasonic sensing modes have been explored by
different researchers such as pulse echo, pitch catch and
transmission to measure the thickness, velocity, density
and defects of the test sample. In transmission mode, test
sample is located between the transmitter and receiver and
evaluation of the test sample is based on transmission wave.
Besides pitch catch mode is based on the reflection wave
where transmitter and receiver installed at the same side.
Transmitter and receiver transducer can be couple on the
single chip and work as a transceiver. Pulse echo model used
the transceiver where the test sample was evaluated based on
change in reflection wave (Fig. 14a, b, c). Selection of ultra-
sonic sensing mode depends on the nature of application as
well as frequency range of transmitter and receiver like for
potato stiffness assessment pitch catch or pulse echo mode
will be better compared to transmission mode because ultra-
sonic transmitted signal cannot propagate through potato
flesh [78].
Frequency level for producing acoustic signal depends
on the nature of application such as safety, quality assur-
ance, product modification or others. Low frequency acous-
tic signal (20–100 kHz) consist higher power and could be
used for quality inspection of fruits having thick peel while
as other low frequency applications in food industries are
fermentation, drying, emulsification and crystallization.
High frequency ultrasonic signal (2–19 MHz) consist low
power could be useful for food quality assessment [77]. A
very first effort in the direction of ultrasonic based quality
assessment has been taken by Ha et al. for potato quality
inspection. Authors used longitudinal ultrasonic transducer
with the frequency range of 50 kHz–1 MHz and change in
the time of flight and amplitude has been measured for rotten
and healthy potato samples. It has been observed that change
in ultrasound signal amplitude and time of flight propa-
gated through potato flesh can be easily classified between
healthy and rotten potatoes [78]. Mizrach et al. presented
a similar kind of ultrasound sensing experimental setup
for ripening detection of autumn and winter grown ‘galia’
Fig. 14  Ultrasonic sensing mode a transmission; b pitch catch; c
pulse-echo (T transmitter, R receiver, TR transceiver)
13

melons. Firmness, dry weight and total soluble solid have
been measured using commercial mechanical ultrasound
sensing experimental setup (Chatillon durometer) and good
correlation model ­(R2 = 0.80) has been found [79]. Mizrach
presented a non-destructive ultrasonic method to monitor the
firmness and sugar content of greenhouse tomatoes during
shelf life. Author measured the acoustic wave attenuation
by using contact type method and a second order non-linear
model with good correlation index ­(R2 = 0.9648) has been
found between attenuation of the reflected ultrasound signal
and the firmness of the tomato samples while as unable to
correlate the firmness results with sugar index [80]. Saggin
et al. measured the density of sucrose (0–60 wt%), glyc-
erol (0–50 wt%), sodium chloride (0–27 wt%) solutions and
tomato ketchup (0–100 wt%) using a modified ultrasound
experimental setup. Authors used pulse echo technique
with the ultrasound transducer having a centre frequency
of 2.25 MHz. Linear model with high correlation index
­(R2 = 0.999 for sodium chloride, tomato ketchup, glycerol
and ­R2 = 0.994 for sucrose) has been obtained between the
density variations and the amplitude of the echo signal [81].
Gaete-Garretón contributed a novel non-invasive ultrasonic
based method for avocado ripening prediction. Results
were validated with the standard penetrometer results and a
high correlation index ­(R2 = 0.9762) linear model has been
obtained between acoustic absorption coefficient of propa-
gated ultrasound signal and firmness of the avocado sam-
ples [82]. Dolatowski et al. reviewed various applications of
ultrasound for inactivation process of different bacteria and
meat quality assessment [83]. Mizrach reviewed ultrasonic
technology applications for fruits and vegetable assessment
during pre and post harvesting process. Author explained
fundamentals of ultrasound technology and associated qual-
ity parameters for fruits and vegetables [84]. Few of the
other major efforts taken in this area have been summarized
as following (Table 4).
Fruit quality inspection using machine vision sensing
technique
The application of machine vision in the area of food indus-
try has increased considerably in recent years. The quality of
a processed or fresh fruits or vegetable could be defined by
a series of physicochemical parameters such as weight, size,
shape, colour ripeness etc. Most of these factors have tradi-
tionally been accessed by visual inspection by trained opera-
tors but this is time consuming, required more man power
and always there is a high risk involved due to human error.
Automated computer vision has been taken in to account to
decrease the human intervention involved and at the same
time to increase the accuracy. Automated computer vision
can simplify different tedious monitoring processes that take
a long time and required complex apparatus to performed
13
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
General computer vision experimental setup consist of a
camera to capture the image of the sample, light source with
directional waveguide for proper illumination, color filters
and connectivity with a personal computer or an embedded
system for image acquisition, storage and processing. Accu-
racy of an application for fruit quality is highly dependent on
various factors such as quality of the input image, illumina-
tion conditions, and orientation of camera, shape and size
of the object to be inspected [98]. To develop an automated
machine vision sensing system for fruit quality inspection,
image process techniques are often combined with mechani-
cal and instrumental devices to minimize the human inter-
vention involved. Machine vision based system has been uti-
lized at various places such as shorting and grading based
on size, shape, color and defects on the outer surface of the
fruits, counting the number of ripen fruits on tree, disease
detection and recognition etc [99]. Aleixos et al. presented
a multispectral based real time inspection for different citrus
cultivars using machine vision and digital signal processors.
Presented work includes the development of a multispectral
camera, which is able to visible and NIR images from same
scene. Authors also designed application specific algorithms
and their implementation on a specific board having two
parallel DSPs to divide the inspection task and to reduce
the overall processing time. Developed system is able to
inspect different cultivars of citrus based on size, color and
presence of defects at a minimum rate of 5 fruits/s [100]. Du
et al. reviewed various learning techniques used in computer
vision for food quality inspection in recent years such as sta-
tistical learning, fuzzy logic, genetic algorithms and decision
tree [101]. Brosnan et al. reviewed various advancement in
the area of computer vision for quality inspection of food
products. Authors explained the fundamentals of computer
vision with their various food quality applications such as
bakery products, meat, fish, fruits and vegetables [102]. Few
of the other major efforts taken in this area have been sum-
marized as following (Table 5).
Scope of multiple non‑destructive sensing
techniques fusion
Recently, there is a growing interest towards multiple sens-
ing techniques fusion for improving the quality assessment
and authentication of various food samples. Fusion of data
from complementary sensing techniques can provide bet-
ter insight about any food sample than a single sensing
technique. The concept of multiple sensing techniques
fusion is inspired by humans, just like human mind relies
on multiple sensing techniques in order to achieve more
accurate inferences about food suitability and improve
the chance of survival. Data fusion approaches have been
combined in different ways to improve the classification
 Table 4  Major contribution in the area of ultrasound based measurement for fruit quality assessment and authentication
Fruit Cultivar Sensing technique details Instrumentation details
Plum Nondestructive ultra- High-power, low-
sound method was used frequency ultrasonic
as sensing technique pulser-receiver (Kraut-
kramer, Model USL33),
a pair of 50-kHz ultra-
sonic transducers
Apple Ultrasonic energy absorb- Chatillon LRX testing
ance machine and cylindrical
probs
Avocado fruits Ultrasonic technique Krautkramer USL 33
high- power low-
frequency ultrasonic
pulser/receiver, a pair
of 50-kHz narrow-band
ultrasonic transducers
Apple, Pear, and Peach Ultrasonic measurement High power ultrasonic
techniques pulser (Ritec Model
SP-801) and a broadband
receiver (Ritec Model
BR-640). Panametrics,
peak frequency: 0.5
[MHz]
Korean Apple Ultrasonic measurement UTM (Universal testing
techniques machine)
Avocado fruits Ultrasonic effect Acoustic generator (pie-
zoelectric pre-stressed
sandwich transducer
coupled to a stepped
horn made of titanium
alloy)
Orange Ultrasonic eco pulse Panametrics PI20-2 20;
method 0.25 F = 2.00 0690004,,
Pulser-Receiver model
5052PR Sofranel,,
oscilloscope, GBIP
connector
Avocado fruits Ultrasonic Method Krautkramer USL 33
13
Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model Accuracy Reference
The acoustic pulse ampli- Acoustic wave attenua- Firmness linear model- R2 = 0.8996 [85]
tude were recorded tion, analyzed ling attenuation
until full ripening was
detected. Firmness,
attenuation
Mealiness in apples Energy absorbance cal- Energy profile R2 = 0.69 [86]
culation
Transit time of the acous- Acoustical parameters Correlation, curve fitting R2 = 0.9946 [87]
tical wave and the pulse analysis
amplitude, Firmness,
refractive index in oil
content, dry weight
Attenuation, velocity and Elastic modulus, bio Multi-linear regression Apple: 0.706 [88]
peak frequency yield strength, force– analyses, statistical Pear: 0.861
deformation curves, regression analysis Peach: 0.675
Multi-linear regression
models
Apparent elastic modulus, Ultrasonic velocity Linear regression model R2 = 0.833 [89]
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
ultrasonic velocity, measurement, firmness
apparent attenuation measurement
Surface acoustic absorp- Theoretical calculations, Normalization of ripen- – [82]
tion coefficient, equato- absorption, firmness ing state
rial diameter, weight, and error analysis at dif-
and firmness ferent interval of time
Velocity measurement Signals backscattered Longitudinal speed com- – [90]
Minimization pression, peel thickness
compression
Wave velocity, attenua- Pre cooling and sizing Data normalization, non- R2 = 0.9946 [91]
tion coefficient, firm- of sample, ultrasonic linear regression
ness, dry weight, oil and penetration test,
content DW and oil content
determination


Table 4  (continued)
Fruit Cultivar Sensing technique details Instrumentation details Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model Accuracy Reference

13
Apple Pressure and Ultrasonic Ultrasonic pulse receiver Sugar content, firmness Scaling, Calibration, FE modeling – [92]
method (UPR) finite element, analysis
Tomato Ultrasonic method Low frequency system, Color, firmness, attenua- Stiffness factor calcula- Statistical modelling R2 = 0.95 [93]
USD10NF tion, time of flight tion, mean observation
Avocado and Mango Ultrasonic High-power, low- Firmness, attenuation, Correlation model Nonlinear regression R2 = 0.95 [94]
frequency ultrasonic velocity analysis
pulser-receiver (Kraut-
kramer Model USL33)
Apple Ultrasound Spectrometer Module Absorbance, stiffness, Non-destructive SSC prediction model R2 = 0.93 [95]
(MMS1 NIR-enhanced), firmness R2 = 0.91
Photo diode array detec-
tor (S4874-250Q)
Orange Ultrasound Harmonic wave func- Ultrasound velocity, Statistical analysis Correlation R2 = 0.874 [96]
tion generator (Sony dehydration R2 = 0.961
AFG320), power ampli-
fier (ENI 240L)
Mango Ultrasound LT374M Lecroy oscil- Ultrasound velocity, PCA, correlation Linear SSC and PLS R2 = 0.98 [97]
loscope, MM4005 attenuation model R2 = 0.81
Microcontroller based
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
 Table 5  Major contribution in the area of machine vision based measurement for fruit quality assessment and authentication
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation details Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model accuracy Reference
details

Citrus Multispectral computer Customized experi- Identification of differ- RGB, HSI color extrac- LDA Success rate: 65–94% [103]
vision mental setup (CCD ent defects tion
(coupled charge
device) camera (Sony
XC-003P), UV and
NIR light source)
Apples (Jonagold) Machine vision (normal Customized conveyer Identification of infected Background segmenta- K-Mean clustering, Success rate: 73% [104]
image processing) belt based grading sampels tion, Color, shape and QDA
machine (Four lighting texture Extraction
tubes (690, 600 nm)
(18 W, type 33 from
Philips, The Nether-
lands), two cameras
(colour 3CCD CX003-
P from Sony, Japan)
Strawberry Hyperspectral imaging A laboratory hyperspec- Moisture, TSS, pH Corrected with a white MLR and PLS Moisture: 0.90, TSS: [105]
tral imaging system and a dark reference 0.80, pH: 0.87
was constructed (an
illumination unit
which consists of two
50 W halogen lamps
and CCD camera
(PCO-1600, Pco.
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review

Imaging, Germany))
Watermelon Machine vision (visible Image processing Volume Evaluation Grayscale, binary image, Ellipsoid approxima- Success rate: 95% [106]
image processing) system consisted of a outline detection tion, Bland–Altman
CMOS camera with approach
USB connection, a
fluorescent ring light
source (32 W), laptop
computer equipped
with ImageJ 1.36b,
Labview 6.1
Citrus Multispectral machine Customized experi- Color, size and shape Segmentation, edge Size and shape estima- Success rate: 93–94% [100]
vision mental setup along finding, color extrac- tion, surface inspec-
with conveyor belt tion, singularization tion, defect detection
with CCD camera
and illumination light
(classification between
mandarin and lemon
based on parameters)

13


Table 5  (continued)
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation details Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model accuracy Reference
details

13
Apple Multispectral machine Multispectral imaging Defect detection Corrected using dark 10-fold cross validation Success rate: 86–95% [107]
vision system was assembled images and reference technique with neural
(black and white CCD images (reflectance network
camera, UV-A fluores- (R), visible light
cent lamp, a tungsten induced fluorescence
halogen light source, (FVIS), and UV
seven band pass filters) induced fluorescence
(FUV))
Apple NIR imaging Charge-coupled device Defect Identification Color extraction, image PCA, ANN (Fletcher– Success rate: 77–93% [108]
(CCD) camera (Sony enhancement Reeves update
DFW-X700, Sony conjugate gradient
Corporation, Tokyo, algorithm)
Japan) mounted over
the conveyor
oranges, peaches, apples Machine vision (normal Machine vision system Length of damage, dam- Segmentation, color Fruit size, centroid loca- Success rate: 86–93% [109]
image processing) was composed of a aged area, overall fruit extraction (RGB, HIS, tion using morpho-
three charge cou- size and shape Lab), Bayesian discri- logical features
pled device (CCD) minant analysis
colour camera (Sony
XC003P) and a frame
grabber (Matrox
Meteor), connected to
a compatible personal
computer [Pentium
200 MHz, 48 Mb ran-
dom access memory
(RAM)]
Citrus Machine vision (visible CCD (charge-coupled Peel defect detection in Smoothing (peer group GLA (Generalized Success rate: 95% [110]
image processing) device) camera (Sony citrus filtering), histogram Lloyd Algorithm),
XC-003P), placed correction JSEG, Region-
400 mm above the growing iteration and
scene, provided the merging
video in the RGB (red,
green, blue) coordi-
nates
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
 Table 5  (continued)
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation details Parameters Preprocess Data processing Model accuracy Reference
details

Apple Hyperspectral imaging Hyperspectral imaging Chilling Injury Detec- Global thresholding Color measurement, Success rate: 93% [111]
(400–1000 nm) system charge-coupled tion, firmness used for background BPANN
device (CCD) camera extraction
(PCO-1600, PCO
Imaging, Germany),
spectrograph (ImSpec-
tor V10E, Optikon
Co., Canada) coupled
with a standard
C-mount zoom lens
pomegranate Machine vision (visible Customized conveyer Detection of unwanted Pixel-oriented segmen- R/G ratio, Bayesian Success rate: 90% [112]
image processing) belt based grading part of pomegranate tation algorithm, color linear discriminant
machine system has fruit extraction analysis (LDA)
been developed
Mango (B74) Machine vision (visible Experimental setup con- Ripeness stage Lab and RGB color Statistical modelling Success rate: 55–69% [113]
image processing) sist (Two fluorescence extraction
lamps (TL-D Delux,
18W/965, Philips),
colour digital camera
(Olympus SP-500
UZ))
Strawberry Machine vision (visible Image processing part Shape, size and color Color extraction K-Mean clustering Classification: 90% [114]
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review

image processing) consists of camera

(WV-CP470, Pana-
sonic), image collect-
ing card (DH-CG300,
Daheng company)
Peach Multispectral imaging Frame grabber, National Firmness, SCC ANOVA Ward method Success rate: 82–87% [115]
Instruments, and a
three CCD custom
camera, MS-3100 with
three bandpass filters
centered at 800 nm
Infrared (IR), 675 nm
Red (R) and 450 nm
Blue (B), with a band-
width of 20 nm
Citrus Machine vision (visible 3-CCD camera (Sony Skin defect detection Color extraction, image PCA, T2 histogram and [116]
image processing) XC-003P), eight fluo- enhancement threshold analysis,
rescent tubes (daylight MIA method
type, 25W)

13

of food products and the prediction of their properties.
Data fusion approaches could be classified in three dif-
ferent levels such as low, mid and high level data fusion
(Fig. 15). Other than data fusion, single and multilevel
prediction modelling have been explored in past research
contributions. Borras et al. recently reviewed various data
Fig.  15  a Functional block diagram of different data fusion approach, b data processing methods used for fruit assessment and authentication
over the time period
13
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
fusion approaches used for food and beverage quality
assessment and authentication. Authors explained funda-
mental of data fusion methods with their bottlenecks and
challenges. Few of the major efforts taken in the direction
of multiple sensing technique fusion are summarized as
following (Table 6) [117].
 Table 6  Major contribution in the area of non-destructive sensing techniques fusion for fruit quality assessment and authentication
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation Parameters Data fusion treat- Data processing Model accuracy Error Reference
fusion details ment

Apple Vis/NIR Spectros- A customized PC Firmness and SSC Simple concatena- PLS, PLS-DA Firmness: 0.93 Firmness: 7.73 [95]
copy and Acoustic based acoustic (on tree and shelf tion SCC: 0.20 SCC: 1.29
Sensing sensing system life)
and commercial
spectrometer
(400–1100 nm)
Grapes UV/NIR spectros- LCA 1000 E-Nose Fermentation time PCA, Genetic Algo- PLSR, PLS-DA Success rate: 90.4% Error: 9.6% [118]
copy and E-Nose and UV and FTIR rithm
Spectrometer
(Commercial)
Peaches Mechanical (impact Magness–Taylor Firmness, SSC and Simple concatena- PCA, MLR Success rate: 78.0% Error: 22.0% [119]
response) and opti- penetration force acidity (maturity, tion
cal sensing using impactor, harvest assess-
portable spec- ment)
trophotometer
Minolta CM-50I
(450–700 nm)
Wine Electronic Nose and PC based custom- Wine Quality and Identity declaration Fuzzy C-means, Success rate: Error: 5.6–16.7% [120]
electronic Tongue ized experimental Brand base clas- concatenation POFNN 83.3–94.4%
setup for E-tongue, sification
E-Nose
Apple Electronic Nose and Cyranose 320 (Con- Apple defect detec- Covariance matrix PCA, PNN, Bayes- Success rate: 89% Error: 11.0% [121]
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review

Acoustic Sensing ductive polymer tion adaptation evolu- ian network

Sensor) and Z-nose tionary strategy
(Surface acoustic (CMAES)
sensor)
Peaches Electronic nose and Commercial Firmness, SSC, Outer product PLS, PLS-DA Success rate: 93% Error: 7.0% [122]
visible spectros- Spectrometer Chlorophyll and analysis Feature
copy (300–1100 nm) acidity, Carotenoid extraction e PCA
and Libra Nose scores
Apple Electronic Nose, Commercial FTIR SSC, Sugar content (a) Variable selec- (a) NNs, MCR, PLS Success rate: 94% Error: 6.0% [123]
Machine Vision spectrometer, CCD and classification tion stepwise and PCR (b) Deci-
and NIR Spectros- color camera, cus- based on quality (b) Decision tree sion tree
copy tomized gas sensor
setup
Tomato Acoustic, weight Minolta CR 300 Ripening Stage Identity declaration Bayesian classifier Success rate: 95% Error: 5.0% [124]
and Colorimetric colorimeter, weigh- concatenation
Sensing ing instrument cus-
tomized acoustic
experimental setup

13


Table 6  (continued)
Fruit cultivar Sensing technique Instrumentation Parameters Data fusion treat- Data processing Model accuracy Error Reference
fusion details ment

13
Tomato Impact acoustic Minolta CR 300 Ripening Stage Identity declaration Bayesian classifier Success rate: 89% Error: 11.0% [125]
sensing and colori- colorimeter, Cus- concatenation (Bhattacharyya
metric sensing tomized Acoustic distance)
Experimental setup
Soybean flour NIR and MIR spec- MB160 FT-NIR Quality par. correla- Preprocessed data PLS Success rate: 95% Error: 5.0% [126]
troscopy spectrom- tion (crude protein
eter (ABB), FTLA and moisture)
2000 FTIR spec-
trometer
Wine Electronic nose and Electronic nose Classify four types Simple concatena- PCA, LDA and Success rate: 98.1% Error: 1.9% [127]
tongue (PEN2), custom- of Barbera wines tion CART
ized E-tongue
Experimental setup
Cherry tomato Electronic nose and PEN2 e-nose (Air SSC, Acidity Variable selection e PCA and CVA LVQ, SSC: 0.9970 Acid- SSC: 0.0056 Acid- [128]
juices tongue sense analytics), stepwise, factor F Lib-SVM and PCR ity: 0.9985 ity: 0.0553
alpha-Astree
e-tongue (Alpha
MOS company)
Apple Acoustic sensor, Vis- Vis-SWNIR spec- SSC, Firmness Variable selection e PLS SSC: 94.2% Firm- SSC: 5.8% Firm- [129]
SWNIR, HSI and trometer (S4000, specific for ness: 92.7% ness: 7.3%
bioyield tester Ocean Optics, each technique
Dunedin, FL),
portable firmness
tester, online hyper
spectral scattering
system (OHSS)
White grapes E-Nose, UV and LCA 1000, FTIR White grapes clas- Identity declaration PLS-DA, Bayesian Success rate: Error: 4.7% − 5.6% [130]
FTIR spectroscopy spectrometer sification concatenation inference 94.4–95.3%
(Bruker)
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
Globally available solutions
Various research efforts have been reported in the area of
food quality assessment and authentication but very few of
the efforts have been translated in to the handheld proto-
type, which could be used to solve various on-field issues
as mentioned above. Most of the reported research efforts
are time consuming, bulky, need expert manpower for
operation and best suited for lab level applications. NIR
spectroscopy is one the common and mostly used method
in commercial available handheld system to predict on-tree
fruits quality parameters such as firmness, sugar content,
ripeness stage and acidity. Most of the developed handy
spectroscopy systems are costly due to usage of expensive
NIR source, detectors, filters and other interface circuitry
but results consists higher repeatability and reliability.
Chemometric is majorly used for data processing and
prediction model development in almost all spectroscopy
instruments. Other than spectroscopy, ultrasound based
stiffness and firmness measurement is one of the widely
used and cost effective method to predict on-tree fruit
quality parameters as mentioned above. Measured firm-
ness and stiffness of the on-tree fruits further converted
in the form of various other quality parameters using sim-
ple linear or non-linear statistical modelling. In most of
the reported ultrasound sensing methods for fruit quality
assessment, contact type mode has been used for hard-
ness measurement because non-contact ultrasound method
for fruit quality assessment have various limitations and
challenges such as distance-weight modelling, depth of
penetration, frequency range and size of transducers and
other interface electronics. Electronic nose using metal
oxide based gas sensors is also widely reported for on-tree
fruit quality parameters. Limitations and bottlenecks with
metal oxide based e-nose are cross selectivity and sensitiv-
ity of the sensors due dynamic environmental conditions
and baseline variation. Most of the solutions available
in global market for on-tree fruit quality inspection are
based on contact type methods and uses single sensing
technique followed by single level prediction modelling.
Most of the existing solution addresses harvesting time
judgement issue while as other important issues such as
shelf life prediction and early warning for disease attack
still need a cost effective, accurate and fast solution. There
is no single effort has been identified in global market
related to multiple non-contact sensing techniques fusion
followed by predictive algorithmic intelligence to solve
various on-field issues such as early warning for disease
attack and related remedial action, harvesting time judge-
ment and many more. Fe of the efforts (Table 7) have been
identified in the direction to solve the problem of harvest-
ing time judgement but most of them are very costly as
well as have very limited features.
Discussion and conclusion
Different on-field issues during fruit harvesting time have
been raised and reported solutions in literature have been
reviewed. Various non-destructive sensing methods used
over the time period for fruit quality assessment and authen-
tication have been discussed and compared with other sens-
ing methods based on their advantaged and disadvantages.
Fundamental concepts of different non-destructive sens-
ing methods such as e-nose, UV–Vis–NIR spectroscopy,
machine vision and ultrasonic based sensing contributions
have been explained in detail along with contribution of
various researchers. Other non-destructive sensing meth-
ods NMR, computer tomography etc are not considered for
this review because those are time consuming, bulky and
not suitable for field applications. Different non-destructive
sensing techniques fusion approaches used for fruit quality
assessment and authentication have been reviewed along
with their positive and negative points. Various portable
instruments available for on-tree fruits quality inspection
have been compared and reviewed based on their features
such as sensing technique, prediction variables, portability
and cost. So many researchers have contributed in the area
of non-destructive sensing methods for on-tree fruit quality
inspection still very few global market products are avail-
able to address few of the on-field issues. Even, most of the
systems available to address on field issues are very costly
and address very limited issues.
Implications and future work
Various fruit growers are facing different issues at different
stages of the supply chain such as harvesting from field,
storage and precooling, drying, disinfection, grading, pack-
aging and transport. As all later stages are highly dependent
on first stage related to quality, cost and losses. There is
an essential requirement to solve on-field issues for mini-
mizing the losses as well as to harvest high quality fruits.
Even different vendors and fruit growers uses various artifi-
cial ripening methods using different chemicals and gases,
which leads towards serious social implications related to
human health. Such kind of practices could be minimized
using the various electronic intervention to judge optimal
harvesting time for different fruits. Several efforts have been
identified in the direction of fruit quality assessment and
authentication but most of them are bulky, time consum-
ing, lab basis and requires skilled manpower to operate. Few
of the efforts have been also recognized in the direction to
develop a handy instrument for fruit quality assessment and
authentication but most of them are either destructive type
or predicts very limited parameters. Future of fruit quality
assessment and authentication should be based on multiple
13

13
Table 7  Globally available handheld non-destructive sensing based fruit inspection systems
Instrument name and company
F-750 Handheld Brix and Dry
Matter Meter (Felix Ins.,
USA)
Nondestructive Fruit Tester
(H-100C) (Sunforest, Korea)
DA-Meter (Turoni, Italy)
QS300, Portable instrument
for fruit assessment (Unitech, troscopy
Italy)
HFH80 Series Fruit and
Vegetable Ripeness Tester
(Omega, USA)
Food Sniffer, Portable E-Nose
(PRESS, USA)
6003-E Fruit Firmness Tester
(Vaiseshika Instruments,
India)
6007-A Refractometer
Sensing technique details
Near-infrared (NIR) spectros-
copy
Near-infrared (NIR) spectros-
copy
Vis–Near-infrared (NIR) spec-
troscopy
Vis-Near-infrared (NIR) spec-
Ultrasonic Sensing
Electronic Nose
Pressure based firmness tester
Visible Spectroscopy (destruc-
tive type)
Instrumentation details Parameters Fruit cultivars Cost (INR) Reference
(approxi-
mate)
Handy instrument with graph- Total Soluble Solids (TSS or Cherry, apple, chico 5 Lakhs [131]
ics lcd and keys for human brix), titratable acidity, and
interface, offers off tree color
testing
Handy Instrument with Graph- Total Soluble Solids (TSS or Citrus, apple, peer 20 Lakhs [132]
ics LCD and Keys for Human brix), titratable acidity, and
Interface, offers on tree color
testing
Handy Instrument with graph- Measures amount of chloro- Apple 8 Lakhs [133]
ics LCD and keys for human phyll in fruit samples
interface, offers on tree testing
Handy Instrument with graph- Sugar content expressed in Brix Peaches, nectarines, apples, 5 Lakhs [134]
ics LCD and keys for human degrees, acidity pears, kiwis
interface, offers off tree
testing
Handy Instrument with Seven Measures stiffness and firmness Peaches, cherry, citrus 3.2 Lakhs [135]
segment LCD and keys for
human interface, offers off
tree testing
Pocket Size Module connectiv- Measures VOC, Temperature, Meat 10K [136]
ity with smart phone Humidity, Ammonia Meas-
ures freshness
Bench type system, best suited Firmness, stiffness Peaches, nectarines, apples, 25K [137]
for lab applications pears, kiwis
Handy module with keys and Sugar content Peaches, cherry, citrus 5K [138]
LCD for human interface
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
non-contact sensing techniques fusion to extract better infor-
mation from different fruits along with smartphone based
IoT devices for easy operation and data collection. Different
data processing algorithms will play key role to crate the
future of agro advisory services to predict climate change,
magnitude of extreme events, overall yield and many more
[139].
References
1. Food Loss and Food Waste (2015). http://www.fao.org/food-loss-
and-food-waste/en/. Accessed 2 May 2017
2. India wastes Rs 440 billion on fruits and vegetables. http://www.
thestatesman.com/mobi/news/27363-india-wastes-rs-440-billion-
on-fruits-and-vegetables.html. Accessed 29 Nov 2013
3. Global food security index 2014 SPECIAL REPORT: Food loss
and its intersection with food security by The Economist
4. J. Gustavsson, C. Cederberg, U. Sonesson, R. van Otterdijk, A.
Meybeck, Global Food Losses and Food Waste: Extent Causes
and Prevention.” (Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of
the United Nations, Rome, 2011)
5. World Food Logistics Organization. Identification of Appropri-
ate Postharvest Technologies for improving Market Access and
Incomes for Small Horticultural Farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa
and South Asia. (World Food Logistics Organization Alexandria,
2010)
6. A.A. Gowen et al., Hyperspectral imaging–an emerging process
analytical tool for food quality and safety control. Trends Food
Sci. Technol. 18(12), 590–598 (2007)
7. A. Loutfi et al., Electronic noses for food quality: a review. J.
Food Eng. 144, 103–111 (2015)
8. T.S. Awad et al., Applications of ultrasound in analysis, process-
ing and quality control of food: A review. Food Res. Int. 48(2),
410–427 (2012)
9. S. Khalifa, M. Komarizadeh, B. Tousi, Usage of fruit response to
both force and forced vibration applied to assess fruit firmness-a
review. Aust. J. Crop Sci. 5.5, 516 (2011)
10. Mohr, Test & Measurement Solution for Industry, home page.
http://www.mohr-engineering.com/mdt-fruit-tester-texture-ana-
lyzer.php. Accessed 2 May 2017
11. RJL Systems, home page. https://www.rjlsystems.com/applica-
tions-of-bia/real-time-bioelectrical-impedance-analysis-experi-
ment-4-0/. Accessed 6 May 2017
12. M. Soltani, R. Alimardani, M. Omid, Prediction of banana qual-
ity during ripening stage using capacitance sensing system. Aust.
J. Crop Sci. 4(6), 443 (2010)
13. M. Aboonajmi, H. Faridi, Nondestructive quality assessment of
Agro-food products. in Proceedings of the 3rd Iranian Interna-
tional NDT Conference, Tehran, 2016. Accessed 6 May 2017
14. Y-net news.com, Israeli mini-scanner tells what’s in food, drink or
pills. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4700181,00.
html. Accessed 8 May 2017
15. K. Persaud, G. Dodd, Analysis of discrimination mechanisms in
the mammalian olfactory system using a model nose. Nature 299
(5881), 352–355 (1982)
16. M. Peris, L. Escuder-Gilabert, A 21st century technique for food
control: electronic noses. Anal. Chim. Acta 638(1), 1–15 (2009)
17. M.A.M. El Hadi et al., Advances in fruit aroma volatile research.
Molecules 18(7), 8200–8229 (2013)
18. D. Holland, O. Larkov, I. Bar-Yaákov, E. Bar, A. Zax, E.
Brandeis, Developmental and varietal differences in volatile ester
formation and acetyl-CoA: Alcohol acetyl transferase activities
in apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) fruit. J. Agric. Food Chem.
53, 7198–7203 (2005)
19. S.K. Wendakoon, Y. Ueda, Y. Imahori, M. Ishimaru, Effect of
short-term anaerobic conditions on the production of volatiles,
activity of alcohol acetyltransferase and other quality traits of
ripened bananas. J. Sci. Food Agric. 86, 1475–1480 (2006)
20. I. Eduardo, G. Chietera, D. Bassi, L. Rossini, A. Vecchietti, Iden-
tification of key odor volatile compounds in the essential oil of
nine peach accessions. J. Sci. Food Agric. 90, 1146–1154 (2010)
21. C.V. Carcia, R.J. Stevenson, R.G. Atkinson, R.A. Winz, S.Y.
Quik, Changes in the bound aroma profiles of “Hayward” and
“Hort16A” kiwifruit (Actinidia spp.) during ripening and GC-
olfactometry analysis. Food Chem. 137, 45–54 (2013)
22. Y. Tokitomo, M. Steinhaus, A. Buttner, P. Schieberle, Odor-
active constituents in fresh pineapple (Ananas comosus [L.]
Merr.) by quantitative and sensory evaluation. Biosci. Biotech-
nol. Biochem. 69, 1323–1330 (2005)
23. S.M. Malowicki, R. Martin, M.C. Qian, Volatile composition in
raspberry cultivars grown in the Pacific Northwest determined
by stir bar sorptive extraction-gas chromatography-mass spec-
trometry. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 4128–4133 (2008)
24. R.R. Jetti, E. Yang, A. Kurnianta, C. Finn, M.C. Qian, Quanti-
fication of selected aroma-active compounds in strawberries by
headspace solid-phase microextraction gas chromatography and
correlation with sensory descriptive analysis. J. Food Sci. 72,
S487–S496 (2007)
25. M.E. Auldridge, D.R. McCarty, H.J. Klee, Plant carotenoid
cleavage oxygenases and their apocarotenoid products. Curr.
Opin. Plant Biol. 9, 315–321 (2006)
26. S. Kiani, S. Minaei, M. Ghasemi-Varnamkhasti, A portable elec-
tronic nose as an expert system for aroma-based classification of
saffron. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 156, 148–156 (2016)
27. W. Zhang et al., A study on soluble solids content assessment
using electronic nose: persimmon fruit picked on different dates.
Int. J. Food Prop. 19(1), 53–62 (2016)
28. H. Zhang et al., Application of electronic nose and statistical
analysis to predict quality indices of peach. Food Bioprocess
Technol. 5(1), 65–72 (2012)
29. S. Saevels et al., An electronic nose and a mass spectrometry-
based electronic nose for assessing apple quality during shelf life.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 31(1), 9–19 (2004)
30. J. Brezmes et al., Correlation between electronic nose signals and
fruit quality indicators on shelf-life measurements with pinklady
apples. Sens. Actuators B 80(1), 41–50 (2001)
31. E. Llobet et al., Non-destructive banana ripeness determination
using a neural network-based electronic nose. Meas. Sci. Tech-
nol. 10(6), 538 (1999)
32. A.H. Gomez, et al., Discrimination of storage shelf-life for man-
darin by electronic nose technique. LWT-Food Sci. Technol.
40(4), 681–689 (2007)
33. M. Lebrun et al., Discrimination of mango fruit maturity by vola-
tiles using the electronic nose and gas chromatography. Posthar-
vest Biol. Technol. 48(1), 122–131 (2008)
34. H. Yu et  al., Quality grade identification of green tea using
E-nose by CA and ANN. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 41(7), 1268–
1273 (2008)
35. Z. Xiaobo, Z. Jiewen, “Comparative analyses of apple aroma
by a tin-oxide gas sensor array device and GC/MS. Food Chem.
107(1), 120–128 (2008)
36. A.D. Wilson, M. Baietto, Applications and advances in elec-
tronic-nose technologies. Sensors 9(7), 5099–5148 (2009)
37. M. Falasconi et al., Electronic nose for microbiological qual-
ity control of food products. Int. J. Electrochem. (2012).
doi:10.1155/2012/715763
38. S. Ampuero, J.O. Bosset, The electronic nose applied to dairy
products: a review. Sens. Actuators B 94(1), 1–12 (2003)
13

39. H. Young et al., Characterization of Royal Gala apple aroma
using electronic nose technology potential maturity indicator. J.
Agric. Food Chem. 47(12), 5173–5177 (1999)
40. A. Sanaeifar et al., Development and application of a new low
cost electronic nose for the ripeness monitoring of banana using
computational techniques (PCA, LDA, SIMCA, and SVM).
Czech J. Food Sci. 32, 538–548 (2014)
41. S. Nordiyana et al., Development of electronic nose for fruits
ripeness determination. in 1st International Conference on Sens-
ing Technology, Palmerston North, 2005
42. L. Pan et al., Early detection and classification of pathogenic
fungal disease in post-harvest strawberry fruit by electronic nose
and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry. Food Res. Int. 62,
162–168 (2014)
43. S. Benedetti et al., Electronic nose as a non-destructive tool to
characterise peach cultivars and to monitor their ripening stage
during shelf-life. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 47(2), 181–188
(2008)
44. S. Saevels et al., Electronic nose as a non-destructive tool to
evaluate the optimal harvest date of apples. Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 30(1), 3–14 (2003)
45. E.M. Pruteanu et al., Electronic nose for discrimination of Roma-
nian apples. Lucr. Stiintifice 398–404 (2009)
46. C. Di Natale et al., Electronic nose based investigation of the
sensorial properties of peaches and nectarines. Sens. Actuators
B 77(1), 561–566 (2001)
47. A.H. Gómez et al., Electronic nose technique potential moni-
toring mandarin maturity. Sens. Actuators B 113(1), 347–353
(2006)
48. J. Brezmes et al., Evaluation of an electronic nose to assess fruit
ripeness. IEEE Sens. J. 5(1), 97–108 (2005)
49. H. Zhang et al., Evaluation of peach quality indices using an
electronic nose by MLR, QPST and BP network. Sens. Actuators
B 134(1), 332–338 (2008)
50. J. Brezmes et al., Fruit ripeness monitoring using an electronic
nose. Sens. Actuators B 69(3), 223–229 (2000)
51. H. Guohua et al., Fuji apple storage time predictive method using
electronic nose. Food Anal. Methods 6(1), 82–88 (2013)
52. R. Infante, M. Farcuh, C. Meneses, Monitoring the sensorial
quality and aroma through an electronic nose in peaches during
cold storage. J. Sci. Food Agric. 88(12), 2073–2078 (2008)
53. L.P. Pathange et al., Non-destructive evaluation of apple maturity
using an electronic nose system. J. Food Eng. 77(4), 1018–1023
(2006)
54. H. Zhang, J. Wang, S. Ye, Predictions of acidity, soluble solids
and firmness of pear using electronic nose technique. J. Food
Eng. 86(3), 370–378 (2008)
55. C. Di Natale et al., The evaluation of quality of post-harvest
oranges and apples by means of an electronic nose. Sens. Actua-
tors B 78(1), 26–31 (2001)
56. H. Gao, F. Zhu, J. Cai, A review of non-destructive detection
for fruit quality. in International Conference on Computer and
Computing Technologies in Agriculture. (Springer, Berlin, 2009)
57. B.M. Nicolai et al., Nondestructive measurement of fruit and
vegetable quality by means of NIR spectroscopy: a review. Post-
harvest Biol. Technol. 46(2), 99–118 (2007)
58. H. Cen, Y. He, Theory and application of near infrared reflec-
tance spectroscopy in determination of food quality. Trends Food
Sci. Technol. 18(2), 72–83 (2007)
59. S.N. JHA, T. MATSUOKA, Non-destructive techniques for qual-
ity evaluation of intact fruits and vegetables. Food Sci. Technol.
Res. 6(4), 248–251 (2000)
60. L.S. Magwaza et al., NIR spectroscopy applications for internal
and external quality analysis of citrus fruit—a review. Food Bio-
process Technol. 5(2), 425–444 (2012)
13
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
61. K.-H. Choi, K.-J. Lee, G. Kim. Nondestructive quality evalu-
ation technology for fruits and vegetables using near-infrared
spectroscopy. in Proceedings of the International Seminar on
Enhancing Export Competitiveness of Asian Fruits, Bangkok,
Thailand, 2006
62. H. Huang et al., Near infrared spectroscopy for on/in-line moni-
toring of quality in foods and beverages: a review. J. Food Eng.
87(3), 303–313 (2008)
63. J. Lammertyn et al., Light penetration properties of NIR radia-
tion in fruit with respect to non-destructive quality assessment.
Postharvest Biol. Tecnol. 18(2), 121–132 (2000)
64. A. Peirs et al., Prediction of the optimal picking date of different
apple cultivars by means of VIS/NIR-spectroscopy. Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 21(2), 189–199 (2001)
65. A.J. Das et al., Ultra-portable, wireless smartphone spectrometer
for rapid, non-destructive testing of fruit ripeness. Sci. Rep. 6,
32504 (2016)
66. P.N. Schaare, D.G. Fraser, Comparison of reflectance, interact-
ance and transmission modes of visible-near infrared spectros-
copy for measuring internal properties of kiwifruit (Actinidia
chinensis). Postharvest Biol. Technol. 20(2), 175–184 (2000)
67. R. Lu, D.E. Guyer, R.M. Beaudry, Determination of firmness and
sugar content of apples using near-infrared diffuse reflectance. J.
Texture Studies 31(6), 615–630 (2000)
68. Z. Schmilovitch et al., Determination of mango physiological
indices by near-infrared spectrometry. Postharvest Biol. Technol.
19(3), 245–252 (2000)
69. N. Sinelli et al., Evaluation of quality and nutraceutical content
of blueberries (Vaccinium corymbosum L.) by near and mid-
infrared spectroscopy. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 50(1), 31–36
(2008)
70. H.K. Noh, R. Lu, Hyperspectral laser-induced fluorescence imag-
ing for assessing apple fruit quality. Postharvest Biol. Technol.
43(2), 193–201 (2007)
71. C. Camps, D. Christen, Non-destructive assessment of apricot
fruit quality by portable visible-near infrared spectroscopy.
LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 42, 1125–1131 (2009). 6)
72. A.H. Gomez, Y. He, A.G. Pereira, Non-destructive measurement
of acidity, soluble solids and firmness of Satsuma mandarin using
Vis/NIR-spectroscopy techniques. J. Food Eng. 77(2), 313–319
(2006)
73. S. Saranwong, J. Sornsrivichai, S. Kawano, Prediction of ripe-
stage eating quality of mango fruit from its harvest quality meas-
ured nondestructively by near infrared spectroscopy. Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 31(2), 137–145 (2004)
74. S. Bureau et al., Rapid and non-destructive analysis of apricot
fruit quality using FT-near-infrared spectroscopy. Food. Chem.
113(4), 1323–1328 (2009)
75. D.G. Fraser et al., Light distribution inside mandarin fruit dur-
ing internal quality assessment by NIR spectroscopy. Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 27(2), 185–196 (2003)
76. J. Chandrapala et al., Ultrasonics in food processing. Ultrason.
Sonochem. 19(5), 975–983 (2012)
77. M.T. Khairi et al., Contact and non-contact ultrasonic measure-
ment in the food industry: a review. Meas. Sci. Technol. 27(1),
012001 (2015)
78. K.-l. Ha et al., A basic study on nondestructive evaluation of
potatoes using ultrasound. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. Part 1 30, 80–82
(1991)
79. A. Mizrach et al., Ultrasonic evaluation of some ripening param-
eters of autumn and winter-grown ‘Galia’melons. Sci. Hortic.
56(4), 291–297 (1994)
80. A. Mizrach, Nondestructive ultrasonic monitoring of tomato
quality during shelf-life storage. Postharvest Biol. Technol.
46(3), 271–274 (2007)
Non-destructive sensing methods for quality assessment of on-tree fruits: a review
81. R. Saggin, J.N. Coupland, Concentration measurement by acous-
tic reflectance. J Food Sci. (Chicago) 66(5), 681–685 (2001)
82. L. Gaete-Garretón et al., A novel noninvasive ultrasonic method
to assess avocado ripening. J. Food Sci. 70(3), E187–E191
(2005)
83. Z.J. Dolatowski, J. Stadnik, D. Stasiak, Applications of ultra-
sound in food technology. Acta Scientiarum Polonorum Tech-
nologia Alimentaria 6(3), 88–99 (2007)
84. A. Mizrach, Ultrasonic technology for quality evaluation of fresh
fruit and vegetables in pre-and postharvest processes. Postharvest
Biol. Technol. 48(3), 315–330 (2008)
85. A. Mizrach, Assessing plum fruit quality attributes with an ultra-
sonic method. Food Res. Int. 37(6), 627–631 (2004)
86. A. Bechar et al., Determination of mealiness in apples using
ultrasonic measurements. Biosyst. Eng. 91(3), 329–334 (2005)
87. A. Mizrach, U. Flitsanov, Predicting avocado shelf life by an
ultrasonic nondestructive method. Acta Hortic 421, 111–119
(1995)
88. K.K. Bok et al., Evaluation of fruit firmness by ultrasonic meas-
urement. Key Eng. Mater. 270, 1049–1054 (2004)
89. K.-B. Kim et al., Determination of apple firmness by nondestruc-
tive ultrasonic measurement. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 52(1),
44–48 (2009)
90. I. Aboudaoud et al., The maturity characterization of orange fruit
by using high frequency ultrasonic echo pulse method. IOP Conf.
Ser. 42(1), 012038 (2012)
91. M. Mizrach, U. Flitsanov, Nondestructive ultrasonic determina-
tion of avocado softening process. J. Food Eng. 40(3), 139–144
(1999)
92. R. Lewis et al., Characterising pressure and bruising in apple
fruit. Wear 264(1), 37–46 (2008)
93. B.E. Verlinden, V. De Smedt, B.M. Nicolaı̈, Evaluation of ultra-
sonic wave propagation to measure chilling injury in tomatoes.
Postharvest Biol. Technol. 32(1), 109–113 (2004)
94. A. Mizrach, Determination of avocado and mango fruit proper-
ties by ultrasonic technique. Ultrasonics 38(1), 717–722 (2000)
95. M. Zude et al., Non-destructive tests on the prediction of apple
fruit flesh firmness and soluble solids content on tree and in shelf
life. J. Food Eng. 77(2), 254–260 (2006)
96. F. Camarena, J.A. Martinez-Mora, Potential of ultrasound to
evaluate turgidity and hydration of the orange peel. J. Food Eng.
75(4), 503–507 (2006)
97. M. Valente et al., Multivariate calibration of mango firmness
using vis/NIR spectroscopy and acoustic impulse method. J.
Food Eng. 94(1), 7–13 (2009)
98. S. Cubero et al., Advances in machine vision applications for
automatic inspection and quality evaluation of fruits and veg-
etables. Food Bioprocess Technol. 4(4), 487–504 (2011)
99. T. Brosnan, D.-W. Sun, Improving quality inspection of food
products by computer vision—a review. J. Food Eng. 61(1), 3–16
(2004)
100. N. Aleixos et al., Multispectral inspection of citrus in real-time
using machine vision and digital signal processors. Comput.
Electron. Agric. 33(2), 121–137 (2002)
101. C.-J. Du, D.-W. Sun, Learning techniques used in computer
vision for food quality evaluation: a review. J. Food Eng. 72(1),
39–55 (2006)
102. T. Brosnan, D.-W. Sun, Inspection and grading of agricultural
and food products by computer vision systems—a review. Com-
put. Electron. Agric. 36(2), 193–213 (2002)
103. J. Blasco et al., Citrus sorting by identification of the most com-
mon defects using multispectral computer vision. J. Food Eng.
83(3), 384–393 (2007)
104. V. Leemans, M.F. Destain, A real-time grading method of apples
based on features extracted from defects. J. Food Eng. 61(1),
83–89 (2004)
105. G. ElMasry et al., Hyperspectral imaging for nondestructive
determination of some quality attributes for strawberry. J. Food
Eng. 81(1), 98–107 (2007)
106. A.B. Koc, Determination of watermelon volume using ellip-
soid approximation and image processing. Postharvest Biol.
Technol. 45(3), 366–371 (2007)
107. D. Ariana, D.E. Guyer, B. Shrestha, Integrating multispectral
reflectance and fluorescence imaging for defect detection on
apples. Comput. Electron. Agric. 50(2), 148–161 (2006)
108. B.S. Bennedsen, D.L. Peterson, Performance of a system for
apple surface defect identification in near-infrared images. Bio-
syst. Eng. 90(4), 419–431 (2005)
109. J. Blasco, N. Aleixos, E. Moltó, Machine vision system for
automatic quality grading of fruit. Biosyst. Eng. 85(4), 415–
423 (2003)
110. J. Blasco, N. Aleixos, E. Molto, Computer vision detection of
peel defects in citrus by means of a region oriented segmenta-
tion algorithm. J. Food Eng. 81(3), 535–543 (2007)
111. G. ElMasry, N. Wang, C. Vigneault, Detecting chilling injury
in Red Delicious apple using hyperspectral imaging and neural
networks. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 52(1), 1–8 (2009)
112. J. Blasco et al., Development of a machine for the automatic
sorting of pomegranate (Punica granatum) arils based on com-
puter vision. J. Food Eng. 90(1), 27–34 (2009)
113. S.P. Kang, A.R. East, F.J. Trujillo, Colour vision system evalu-
ation of bicolour fruit: A case study with ‘B74’mango. \Post-
harvest Biol. Technol. 49(1), 77–85 (2008)
114. X. Liming, Z. Yanchao, Automated strawberry grading system
based on image processing. Comput. Electron. Agric. 71, S32–
S39 (2010)
115. L. Lleó et al., Multispectral images of peach related to firmness
and maturity at harvest. J. Food Eng. 93(2), 229–235 (2009)
116. F. López-García et al., Automatic detection of skin defects
in citrus fruits using a multivariate image analysis approach.
Comput. Electron. Agric. 71(2), 189–197 (2010)
117. E. Borràs et al., Data fusion methodologies for food and bev-
erage authentication and quality assessment—a review. Anal.
Chim. Acta 891, 1–14 (2015)
118. S. Roussel et al., Authenticating white grape must variety with
classification models based on aroma sensors, FT-IR and UV
spectrometry. J. Food Eng. 60(4), 407–419 (2003)
119. M. Ruiz-Altisent, L. Lleó, F. Riquelme, Instrumental qual-
ity assessment of peaches: fusion of optical and mechanical
parameters. J. Food Eng. 74(4), 490–499 (2006)
120. L. Rong, H. Ping, H. Wenlei, A novel method for wine analysis
based on sensor fusion technique. Sens. Actuators B 66(1),
246–250 (2000)
121. C. Li, P. Heinemann, R. Sherry, Neural network and Bayes-
ian network fusion models to fuse electronic nose and surface
acoustic wave sensor data for apple defect detection. Sens.
Actuators B 125(1), 301–310 (2007)
122. C. Di Natale et al., Outer product analysis of electronic nose
and visible spectra: application to the measurement of peach
fruit characteristics. Anal. Chim. Acta 459(1), 107–117 (2002)
123. Z. Xiaobo, Z. Jiewen, Apple quality assessment by fusion three
sensors. in Sensors, 2005 IEEE. IEEE, 2005
124. J.I. Aranda-Sanchez, A. Baltazar, G. González-Aguilar,
Implementation of a Bayesian classifier using repeated meas-
urements for discrimination of tomato fruit ripening stages.
Biosyst. Eng. 102(3), 274–284 (2009)
125. A. Baltazar, J.I. Aranda, G. González-Aguilar, Bayesian classi-
fication of ripening stages of tomato fruit using acoustic impact
and colorimeter sensor data. Comput. Electron. Agric. 60(2),
113–121 (2008)
13

126. L.P. Brás et al., Multiblock PLS as an approach to compare and
combine NIR and MIR spectra in calibrations of soybean flour.
Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 75(1), 91–99 (2005)
127. S. Buratti et al., Characterization and classification of Italian
Barbera wines by using an electronic nose and an amperometric
electronic tongue. Anal. Chim. Acta 525(1), 133–139 (2004)
128. X. Hong, J. Wang, Detection of adulteration in cherry tomato
juices based on electronic nose and tongue: Comparison of dif-
ferent data fusion approaches. J. Food Eng. 126, 89–97 (2014)
129. F. Mendoza, R. Lu, H. Cen, Comparison and fusion of four non-
destructive sensors for predicting apple fruit firmness and soluble
solids content. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 73, 89–98 (2012)
130. S. Roussel et al., Fusion of aroma, FT-IR and UV sensor data
based on the Bayesian inference. Application to the discrimina-
tion of white grape varieties. Chemometr. Intell. Lab. Syst. 65(2),
209–219 (2003)
131. Felix, instruments, home page. https://felixinstruments.com/
food-science instruments/portable-nir-analyzers/f-750-produce-
quality-meter/. Accessed 10 May 2017
132. Sunforest, home page. http://sunforest.en.ec21.com/. Accessed
10 May 2017
13
S. Srivastava, S. Sadistap
133. Trturoni, home page, retrieved from http://www.trturoni.com/en/
content/8-da-meter. Accessed 10 May 2017
134. Unitech, home page. http://www.postharvest.biz/en/company/
unitecspa/_id:29711,seccion:productcatalog,producto:10531/.
Accessed 10 May 2017
135. Omega, home page. http://in.omega.com/pptst/HFH80.html.
Accessed 10 May 2017
136. Food, sniffer, home page. http://www.myfoodsniffer.com/.
Accessed 10 May 2017
137. Sunshine, instruments, home page. http://www.digitalinstrument-
sindia.com/digital-measuring-instruments.html#fruit-hardness-
tester-20-kg-fr-5120-lutron-instruments. Accessed 10 May 2017
138. Vaiseshika electronic devices, home page. https://www.indi-
amart.com/vaiseshika. Accessed 10 May 2017
139. M. Valipour, M.A.G. Sefidkouhi, M. Raeini, Selecting the best
model to estimate potential evapotranspiration with respect to
climate change and magnitudes of extreme events. Agric. Water
Manage. 180, 50–60 (2017). Accessed 10 May 2017