Pornchaloempong, Pimpen
Loading...
Preferred name
Pornchaloempong, Pimpen
Alternative Name
Pornchaloempong, P.
Main Affiliation
Email
pimpen.po@kmitl.ac.th
15 results
Now showing 1 - 10 of 15
- Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Analysis of the Pomelo Peel Essential Oils at Different Storage Durations Using a Visible and Near-Infrared Spectroscopic on Intact Fruit(2024-08-01); ;Duangchang, Jittra; ; Shrestha, Bim PrasadPomelo fruit pulp mainly is consumed fresh and with very little processing, and its peels are discarded as biological waste, which can cause the environmental problems. The peels contain several bioactive chemical compounds, especially essential oils (EOs). The content of a specific EO is important for the extraction process in industry and in research units such as breeding research. The explanation of the biosynthesis pathway for EO generation and change was included. The chemical bond vibration affected the prediction of EO constituents was comprehensively explained by regression coefficient plots and x-loading plots. Visible and near-infrared spectroscopy (VIS/NIRS) is a prominent rapid technique used for fruit quality assessment. This research work was focused on evaluating the use of VIS/NIRS to predict the composition of EOs found in the peel of the pomelo fruit (Citrus maxima (J. Burm.) Merr. cv Kao Nam Pueng) following storage. The composition of the peel oil was analyzed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS) at storage durations of 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, 75, 90, 105 and 120 days (at 10 °C and 70% relative humidity). The relationship between the NIR spectral data and the major EO components found in the peel, including nootkatone, geranial, β-phellandrene and limonene, were established using the raw spectral data in conjunction with partial least squares (PLS) regression. Preprocessing of the raw spectra was performed using multiplicative scatter correction (MSC) or second derivative preprocessing. The PLS model of nootkatone with full MSC had the highest correlation coefficient between the predicted and reference values (r = 0.82), with a standard error of prediction (SEP) of 0.11% and bias of 0.01%, while the models of geranial, β-phellandrene and limonene provided too low r values of 0.75, 0.75 and 0.67, respectively. The nootkatone model is only appropriate for use in screening and some other approximate calibrations, though this is the first report of the use of NIR spectroscopy on intact fruit measurement for its peel EO constituents during cold storage. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Revealing the Power of Deep Learning in Quality Assessment of Mango and Mangosteen Purée Using NIR Spectral Data(2025-09-01); ;Sharma, Sneha; ; The quality control of fruit purée products such as mango and mangosteen is crucial for maintaining consumer satisfaction and meeting industry standards. Traditional destructive techniques for assessing key quality parameters like the soluble solid content (SSC) and titratable acidity (TA) are labor-intensive and time-consuming; prompting the need for rapid, nondestructive alternatives. This study investigated the use of deep learning (DL) models including Simple-CNN, AlexNet, EfficientNetB0, MobileNetV2, and ResNeXt for predicting SSC and TA in mango and mangosteen purée and compared their performance with the conventional chemometric method partial least squares regression (PLSR). Spectral data were preprocessed and evaluated using 10-fold cross-validation. For mango purée, the Simple-CNN model achieved the highest predictive accuracy for both SSC (coefficient of determination of cross-validation ((Formula presented.)) = 0.914, root mean square error of cross-validation (RMSE<inf>CV</inf>) = 0.688, the ratio of prediction to deviation of cross-validation (RPD<inf>CV</inf>) = 3.367) and TA ((Formula presented.) = 0.762, RMSE<inf>CV</inf> = 0.037, RPD<inf>CV</inf> = 2.864), demonstrating a statistically significant improvement over PLSR. For the mangosteen purée, AlexNet exhibited the best SSC prediction performance ((Formula presented.) = 0.702, RMSE<inf>CV</inf> = 0.471, RPD<inf>CV</inf> = 1.666), though the RPD<inf>CV</inf> values (<2.0) indicated limited applicability for precise quantification. TA prediction in mangosteen purée showed low variance in the reference values (standard deviation (SD) = 0.048), which may have restricted model performance. These results highlight the potential of DL for improving NIR-based quality evaluation of fruit purée, while also pointing to the need for further refinement to ensure interpretability, robustness, and practical deployment in industrial quality control. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Moisture content prediction in durian husk biomass via near infrared spectroscopy coupled with aquaphotomics and explainable machine learning(2025-12-15) ;Shrestha, Zenisha ;Shrestha, Bijendra; ;Pun, Umed KumarBajracharya, Tri RatnaAccurate determination of moisture content is essential for energy efficiency and biomass management for fuel materials such as durian husk. Traditional methods of determining biomass moisture content are time-consuming and require specialized expertise, posing challenges for continuous monitoring. To address this limitation, this study applies Near Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS) combined with machine learning models to rapidly and accurately assess moisture content. Both linear Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) and non-linear approaches were used, including Support Vector Machines (SVM), Artificial Neural Networks (ANN), and Extreme Gradient Boosting (XGB). The application of preprocessing techniques, notably the Savitzky-Golay second derivative (SD) and Standard Normal Variate (SNV), significantly augmented the predictive performance, highlighting the importance of data preprocessing in spectral analysis. Synthetic spectral augmentation using Gaussian noise revealed that while SVM and ANN exhibited near-perfect performance, SVM demonstrated quantifiable reliability. This study also demonstrates SVM as the most sensitive and reliable method for detecting and quantifying moisture content in durian husk. This research contributes novel insights to biomass analysis, highlighting the benefits of integrating NIRS and feasibility of explainable machine learning techniques to identify water related spectral parameters to advance aquaphotomics, thereby advancing rapid and accurate biomass characterization. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Shelf-life extension of Thai green papaya salad dressing by hurdle technology(2024-09-01); ;Krusong, Warawut; ; Srisawat, KraisuwitGreen papaya salad or Som Tum is the most popular spicy mixed salads in Thailand due to its unique rich flavor. Green papaya salad dressing (GPSD) is made from various ingredients such as fresh chili pepper, fresh garlic, rind tamarind, fish sauce and lime oil, including the limitation in controlling the taste and flavor of salad dressing and its poor shelf-life. In this study, a convenient ready-to-eat GPSD was developed. Hurdle technology was applied to extend shelf-life of the GPSD based on monitoring of microbial contamination and food pathogens throughout the process. Hurdle technology able to decrease total plate count (TPC) from 5.6 ± 0.2 to 1 ± 0.3 log CFU/g and yeast and mold (Y&M) from 4.2 ± 0.3 to <1 log CFU/g. After 12 weeks of storage at 5 ± 2 °C, slightly increase of TPC was detected as 1.5 ± 0.2 log CFU/g and no changes were found for Y&M and other pathogens. At week 12, GPSD stored at 32 ± 2 °C was found to have higher TPC and Y&M (3.7 ± 0.3 and 2.4 ± 0.3 log CFU/g, respectively). Therefore, a combination of hurdles that combines low a<inf>w</inf>, low pH, heat treatment, low temperature after hot filling, and chilled storage could extend the shelf-life of GPSD with satisfy sensorial test result and be suitable for minimally processed salad dressing. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Predicting biomass global warming potential with FT-NIR spectroscopy(2025-12-01) ;Gyawali, Prakash ;Shrestha, Bijendra; ;Posom, JetsadaThis research is to predict the global warming potential (GWP) of biomass by using Fourier transform near-infrared (FT-NIR) spectroscopy. A partial least squares regression model of 197 biomass chip samples was developed for predicting GWP of fast-growing trees and agricultural residues. The reference value of GWP of biomass sample was calculated by the method provided by Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). After applying different spectral pretreatments and variable selection methods, the best model for predicting GWP was found using the 1st derivative spectrum pretreatment and covariance method (COVM) based variable selection. The results indicate GWP model exhibit good predictive capabilities, where the model can be usable with caution for any purpose including research, by achieving a coefficient of determination for prediction set (R<sup>2</sup><inf>P</inf>) of 0.86, and ratio of prediction to deviation (RPD) of 2.6. Additionally, the RMSEP of 0.00063 suggests a low prediction error. This pioneering approach presents a swift and efficient means to determine GWP, the complex functionality parameter, which reveals an optimal relationship model, showcasing its efficacy in a significant advancement in the assessment of biomass functionality related to climate change issue. Additionally, the further research is recommended to integrate FT-NIR data with thermogravimetric analyser to simulate of different thermal conversion of biomass type where different emission gases are generated and with gas chromatography–mass spectrometry for evaluation of concentration of the generated gases for further refine GWP predictions which providing more comprehensive insights and exact content of emission gases affect global warming to support the IPCC. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, NIR Spectroscopy as an Alternative to Thermogravimetric Analyzer for Biomass Proximate Analysis: Comparison of Chip and Ground Biomass Models(2024-02-01) ;Shrestha, Bijendra ;Posom, Jetsada; ;Shrestha, Bim PrasadThis study investigates the non-destructive analysis of proximate parameters (moisture content, MC; volatile matter, VM; fixed carbon, FC; ash content) in various chipped and ground biomass using a combination of destructive thermogravimetric analysis (TGA) and non-destructive near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) with partial least squares regression (PLSR). The thermogravimetric method determines proximate analysis data through TG and DTG curves, tracking biomass mass loss over time or temperature. NIRS scans chipped biomass in diffuse reflectance, and ground biomass in transflectance mode, covering the wavenumber range from 3595 to 12,489 cm<sup>−1</sup>. PLSR-based models (Full-PLSR, GA-PLSR, SPA-PLSR, MP PLSR 5-range method, and MP PLSR 3-range method) are developed and evaluated based on R<sup>2</sup>P, RMSEP, and RPD. MC and FC models for chip biomass exhibit satisfactory performance, making them cautiously applicable in various applications, including research. Optimal models for MC and FC in chip biomass, constructed using GA-PLSR with the second derivative and Full-PLSR with a constant offset, yield high R<sup>2</sup>P values (0.8654 and 0.8773), low RMSEP values (0.85% and 2.12%), and high RPD values (2.9 and 3.0), indicating applicative capabilities. Other parameters such as MC and FC in ground biomass, as well as VM and ash content in both chip and ground biomass, are found suitable for rough screening. Model sensitivity, assessed by calculating LOQ, indicates high sensitivity for VM in both chip and ground biomass and FC in chip biomass, as the calculated LOQ value is lower than the minimum reference values used during model development. However, for the remaining parameters, LOQ values surpass the established minimum reference value, suggesting limitations in predicting samples below the calibration range. Continuous model enhancement incorporating an ample number of representative biomass samples and consistent validation with unknown samples are imperative for ensuring accurate predictions. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Effect of Environment Temperature and Relative Humidity on Thermal Emissivity: Study Case of Mango Fruit(2024-01-01); ;Sripinyowanich Jongyingcharoen, Jiraporn ;Junto, Apiwat; Dachoupakan Sirisomboon, CheewanunThis research was to study the effect of the environment condition during image captured including temperature and relative humidity in the packaging house of the mango exporting factory and in the orchard on the emissivity of mango fruit. The result showed that in the controlled environment of the packaging house in factory, the emissivity was increased (the mango emitted more energy) when the surface temperature was lower and the emissivity of mango is 0.71-0.84 and in the uncontrolled environment of open-air packaging yard in the mango orchard, the different transpiration rates of mango effected mainly by ambient temperature and relative humidity make the morning condition emissivity of 0.44-0.66 and the afternoon condition of 0.72-0.98. There was the effect of the different measured positions on the fruits where the physiology was different and the fluctuated environment in the latter condition made the wide range of emissivity of mangoes. This indicated the shortcoming of thermal imaging of horticultural product if the correct emissivity varied and difficult to set in the thermal camera setting, hence the inaccurate thermogram to be obtained. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Primary assessment of macronutrients in durian (CV Monthong) leaves using near infrared spectroscopy with wavelength selection(2024-01-05); ;Jaisue, Natthapon ;Worphet, Akarawhat ;Tawinteung, NukoonFarmers would be able to regulate fertilization and produce quality durian if they knew the nutrient concentration in durian leaves. A long period of time for traditional nutritional content determination is needed. Therefore, near-infrared spectroscopy is a good method for nondestructive and quick nutrient content evaluation. The leaf sample matrices (fresh leaves, dried ground leaves, and dried ground leaf pellets) were scanned by Fourier transform near-infrared (FT-NIR) with a wavelength of 12,500–3,600 cm<sup>−1</sup>. Regression models were developed using partial least squares (PLS) with full wavelength, short wavelength, and selected wavelength by successive projections algorithm (SPA). In this study, the model for N and K concentration was acceptable and the prediction was considered good but for P content not had succeeded. As a result, the PLS-SPA model using fresh leaf samples for evaluating N content in durian leaves exhibited performance of r<sup>2</sup> = 0.852, SEP = 0.14%, RPD = 2.63 and bias = −0.020%. The PLS-SPA model using dried ground leaf samples for evaluating K content in durian leaves exhibited performance of r<sup>2</sup> = 0.820, SEP = 0.13%, RPD = 2.36 and bias = 0.006%. This research found that it is possible to apply NIR waves to predict N and K concentrations in durian leaves. It is not necessary to predict directly from the wavelengths associated with -N or -K bonds. Instead, NIR can measure them indirectly from the bonding of proteins, which are products formed by N and K. In addition, selecting the wavelength that is related to the value to be measured can produce results that are not significantly different from using full or short wavelengths. These models can assist farmers in rapidly predicting N and K content in durian leaves for immediate fertilizer adjustment. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Author Correction: Predicting biomass global warming potential with FT-NIR spectroscopy (Scientific Reports, (2025), 15, 1, (33725), 10.1038/s41598-025-10584-z)(2026-12-01) ;Gyawali, Prakash ;Shrestha, Bijendra; ;Posom, JetsadaCorrection to: Scientific Reportshttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-10584-z, published online 30 September 2025 The original version of this Article contained errors. In the original version of this article, the climate-carbon effect value was not included as introduced in AR6. As a result, in the Materials and methods section, under the subheading ‘Estimation of global warming potential and emission of greenhouse gas (GHG)’, where: “Step 1: (CO<inf>2</inf>, CH<inf>4</inf>, N<inf>2</inf>O) emissions (kg) = Mass of Fuel (kg) × Carbon emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) Step 2: Total GWP = (GWP of CO<inf>2</inf>×CO<inf>2</inf> emissions) +(GWP of CH<inf>4</inf>×CH<inf>4</inf> emissions) +(GWP of N<inf>2</inf>O×N<inf>2</inf>O emissions)” now reads: “Step 1: GHG (CO<inf>2</inf>, CH<inf>4</inf>, or N<inf>2</inf>O) emissions (kg) = Mass of Fuel (kg) × Specific GHG emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) Step 2: Total GWP (kg CO<inf>2</inf>e) = (GWP of CO<inf>2</inf>×CO<inf>2</inf> emissions) + (GWP of CH<inf>4</inf>×CH<inf>4</inf> emissions) + (GWP of N<inf>2</inf>O×N<inf>2</inf>O emissions)” In addition, under the subheading ‘Model development and validation’, where: “The model was optimized by selecting wavenumbers through various variable selection methods, including the Correlation Method (CM), Variance Method (VM), Co-Variance Method (COVM), and Variable Importance Projection (VIP). The spectral data were pretreated using raw spectra, standard normal variate (SNV), as well as first derivative and second derivative transformations. The following spectra pretreatment methods: Standard Normal Variate (SNV) is for corrects scatter effects and baseline variations<sup>35</sup>,” now reads: “The model was optimized by selecting wavenumbers through various variable selection methods, including the Correlation Method (CM), Variance Method (VM), Co-Variance Method (COVM), and Variable Importance Projection (VIP). The following spectra pretreatment methods: Standard Normal Variate (SNV) is for correcting scatter effects and baseline variations<sup>35</sup>,” In addition, Equations 3, 4 and 6 contained typesetting errors. As a result, Equation 3: (Formula presented.) now reads, (Formula presented.) Equation 4: (Formula presented.) now reads: (Formula presented.) And Equation 6 (Formula presented.) now reads: (Formula presented.) Furthermore, under the Results section, subheading ‘Predicting performance of biomass GWP using PLSR’, where: “The model developed with CM (reduction of 1150 wavenumber of full range to 325 wavenumber) of 1st derivative spectra, gave best performance with R<sup>2</sup><inf>P</inf> was 0.87 (Table 4).” now reads: “The model developed with COVM (reduction of 1150 wavenumber of full range to 325 wavenumber) of 1st derivative spectra, gave the best performance with R<sup>2</sup><inf>P</inf> was 0.85 (Table 4).” Under the subheading ‘Prediction result of HHV using PLSR’, where: “This approach reduced the number of variables from 1150 to 365 wavenumbers, significantly enhancing the model’s performance (R<sup>2</sup><inf>C</inf> of 0.98 and R<sup>2</sup><inf>P</inf> of 0.87)” now reads: “This approach reduced the number of variables from 1150 to 365 wavenumbers, significantly enhancing the model’s performance (R<sup>2</sup><inf>C</inf> of 0.98 and R<sup>2</sup><inf>P</inf> of 0.86)” Under the subheading ‘Regression coefficient and x-loading of GWP model’, where: “Prominent peaks were identified and the bond vibration interpretation is shown in Table 7 and the vibration indicated by Workman and Weyer<sup>38</sup> at the wavenumbers in bold were not found or not related to biomass.” now reads: “Prominent peaks were identified, and the bond vibration interpretation is shown in Table 7, which was indicated by Workman and Weyer<sup>38</sup>.” Equation 8: GWP for CO<inf>2</inf>, or CH<inf>4</inf>, or N<inf>2</inf>O Emissions = (1×CO<inf>2</inf> Emission) or (29.8×CH<inf>4</inf> Emission) or (273×N<inf>2</inf>O Emission) = (1×112 HHV) for CO<inf>2</inf> Emission or (29.8×30 HHV) for CH<inf>4</inf> Emission or (273×4 HHV) for N<inf>2</inf>O Emission = 112.0×HHV for CO<inf>2</inf> Emission or 894.0×HHV for CH<inf>4</inf> Emission or 1092.0×HHV for N<inf>2</inf>O Emission and GWP total = 2098.0 (HHV, TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) = 0.000002098 kJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 0.000002098 Jg<sup>-1</sup> now reads: GWP for CO<inf>2</inf>, or CH<inf>4</inf>, or N<inf>2</inf>O Emissions = (1×CO<inf>2</inf> Emission) or (27.2×CH<inf>4</inf> Emission) or (273×N<inf>2</inf>O Emission) = (1×112 HHV) for CO<inf>2</inf> Emission or (27.2×30 HHV) for CH<inf>4</inf> Emission or (273×4 HHV) for N<inf>2</inf>O Emission = 112.0×HHV for CO<inf>2</inf> Emission or 816.0×HHV for CH<inf>4</inf> Emission or 1092.0×HHV for N<inf>2</inf>O Emission and GWP total (kg CO<inf>2</inf>e) = 2020.0 (HHV, TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) = 0.000002020 kJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 0.000002020 J g<sup>-1</sup> Moreover, Tables 1 and 3 have been corrected. Incorrect Table 1: Remarks IPCC guideline Calculation of CO<inf>2</inf> emission Higher Heating Value = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor = 112 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>, we can follow these steps: Convert HHV to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: Since 1 TJ = 10<sup>12</sup> J, we need to convert the HHV from J kg<sup>-1</sup> to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: HHV in TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> / 10<sup>12</sup> = 1.7932×10<sup>-3</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> CO<inf>2</inf> emission (kg) = Mass of fuel (kg) × CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) CO<inf>2</inf> emission (kg) = 1 kg × 112 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> × 0.017932 TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> Therefore, the CO<inf>2</inf> emission from stationary fuel combustion with an HHV of 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> and using the default CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor of 112 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> would be approximately 2.0083×10<sup>-3</sup> kg of CO<inf>2</inf> per kg of fuel. CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor: 112 kg dry matter TJ<sup>-1</sup> (typical for wood combustion) Calculation of CH<inf>4</inf> emission Hight Heating Value = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> CH<inf>4</inf> emission factor = 30 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> Convert HHV unit to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> 1 TJ= 10<sup>12</sup> J HHV from J kg<sup>-1</sup> to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: HHV in TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> / 10<sup>12</sup> = 1,7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> CH<inf>4</inf> emission (kg) = Mass of Fuel (kg) × CH<inf>4</inf> emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) CH<inf>4</inf> emission (kg) = 1 kg × 30 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> × 1,7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> CH<inf>4</inf> emission (kg) = 5.3796×10<sup>-4</sup> kg of CH<inf>4</inf> per kg of fuel CH<inf>4</inf> emission factor: 30 kg dry matter TJ<sup>-1</sup> Calculation of N<inf>2</inf>O emission Hight Heating Value = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> N<inf>2</inf>O emission factor = 4 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> Convert HHV unit to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> 1 TJ = 10<sup>12</sup> J HHV from J kg<sup>-1</sup> to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: HHV in TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> / 10<sup>12</sup> = 1.7932 ×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> N<inf>2</inf>O emission (kg) = Mass of Fuel (kg) × N<inf>2</inf>O emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) N<inf>2</inf>O emission (kg) = 1 kg × 4 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> × 1.7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> N<inf>2</inf>O emission (kg) = 7.1728×10<sup>-5</sup> kg of N<inf>2</inf>O per kg of fuel N<inf>2</inf>O emission factor 4 kg dry matter /TJ The concept of global warming potential (GWP) was introduced in IPCC –AR1 (Shine et al. 1990) to compare the greenhouse effects of different greenhouse gases relative to a reference gas, normally taken as carbon dioxide, under this definition, CO<inf>2</inf> would have a GWP value of 1. Total GWP = (GWP of CO<inf>2</inf>×CO<inf>2</inf> emissions)+(GWP of CH<inf>4</inf>×CH<inf>4</inf> emissions)+(GWP of N<inf>2</inf>O×N<inf>2</inf>O emissions) Total GWP =1×2.0083×10<sup>-3</sup>+29.8× 5.379 ×10<sup>-4</sup>+273×7.1728×10<sup>-5</sup> Total GWP=0.0376 kg CO<inf>2</inf>e This calculation is by 100 years based GWP of emission gases followed AR6 <sup>7</sup> Correct Table 1: Remarks IPCC guideline Calculation of CO<inf>2</inf> emission Higher Heating Value = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor = 112 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>, we can follow these steps: Convert HHV to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: Since 1 TJ = 10<sup>12</sup> J, we need to convert the HHV from J kg<sup>-1</sup> to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: HHV in TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> / 10<sup>12</sup> = 1.7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> CO<inf>2</inf> emission (kg) = Mass of fuel (kg) × CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) CO<inf>2</inf> emission (kg) = 1 kg × 112 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> × 1.7932 × 10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> Therefore, the CO<inf>2</inf> emission from stationary fuel combustion with an HHV of 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> and using the default CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor of 112 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> would be approximately 2.0083 × 10<sup>-3</sup> kg of CO<inf>2</inf> per kg of fuel. CO<inf>2</inf> emission factor: 112 kg dry matter TJ<sup>-1</sup> (typical for wood combustion) Calculation of CH<inf>4</inf> emission Higher Heating Value = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> CH<inf>4</inf> emission factor = 30 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> Convert HHV unit to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> 1 TJ= 10<sup>12</sup> J HHV from J kg<sup>-1</sup> to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: HHV in TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> / 10<sup>12</sup> = 1,7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> CH<inf>4</inf> emission (kg) = Mass of Fuel (kg) × CH<inf>4</inf> emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) CH<inf>4</inf> emission (kg) = 1 kg × 30 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> × 1,7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> CH<inf>4</inf> emission (kg) = 5.3796×10<sup>-4</sup> kg of CH<inf>4</inf> per kg of fuel CH<inf>4</inf> emission factor: 30 kg dry matter TJ<sup>-1</sup> Calculation of N<inf>2</inf>O emission Higher Heating Value = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> N<inf>2</inf>O emission factor = 4 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> Convert HHV unit to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> 1 TJ = 10<sup>12</sup> J HHV from J kg<sup>-1</sup> to TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>: HHV in TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> = 17932000 J kg<sup>-1</sup> / 10<sup>12</sup> = 1.7932 × 10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> N<inf>2</inf>O emission (kg) = Mass of Fuel (kg) × N<inf>2</inf>O emission factor (kg TJ<sup>-1</sup>) × HHV (TJ kg<sup>-1</sup>) N<inf>2</inf>O emission (kg) = 1 kg × 4 kg TJ<sup>-1</sup> × 1.7932×10<sup>-5</sup> TJ kg<sup>-1</sup> N<inf>2</inf>O emission (kg) = 7.1728×10<sup>-5</sup> kg of N<inf>2</inf>O per kg of fuel N<inf>2</inf>O emission factor 4 kg dry matter /TJ<sup>-1</sup> The concept of global warming potential (GWP) was introduced in IPCC –AR1 (Shine et al. 1990) to compare the greenhouse effects of different greenhouse gases relative to a reference gas, normally taken as carbon dioxide, under this definition, CO<inf>2</inf> would have a GWP value of 1. Total GWP = (GWP of CO<inf>2</inf>×CO<inf>2</inf> emissions) + (GWP of CH<inf>4</inf>×CH<inf>4</inf> emissions) + (GWP of N<inf>2</inf>O×N<inf>2</inf>O emissions) Total GWP = 1×2.0083×10<sup>-3</sup>+ 27.2× 5.3796 × 10<sup>-4</sup>+ 273×7.1728×10<sup>-5</sup> Total GWP= 0.03622 kg CO<inf>2</inf>e This calculation is by 100 years based GWP of emission gases followed AR6 <sup>7</sup> Incorrect Table 3: Calibration set Prediction set Parameter Method NT NC Max Min Mean SD NP Max Min Mean SD GWP IPCC Guidelines 197 147 0.03905 0.03080 0.03564 0.00180 50 0.038943 0.033002 0.03577 0.00165 HHV (J g<sup>-1</sup>) Bomb Calorimeter 197 147 18616 16405 16976 910 50 17950 15268 17051 787 Correct Table 3: Parameter Method NT Calibration Set Prediction Set NC Max Min Mean SD NP Max Min Mean SD GWP (kg CO<inf>2</inf>e) IPCC Guidelines 197 147 0.03905 0.03080 0.03564 0.00180 50 0.038943 0.033002 0.03577 0.00165 HHV (J g<sup>-1</sup>) Bomb Calorimeter 197 147 18616 16405 15268 910 50 17950 16976 17051 787 Finally, the legends of Tables 4 and 7 have been updated: “Table 4: Prediction of GWP of biomass of fast-growing tree and agriculture residue by PLSR. N: Number of samples in calibration set, R<sup>2</sup><inf>c</inf>: coefficient of determination of calibration set, n: number of samples in prediction set, R<sup>2</sup><inf>p</inf>: coefficient of determination of prediction set, RPD: ratio of prediction to deviation, CM: correlation method, VM: variance method, COVM: co-variance method, VIP: variable. Significant values are in [bold].” now reads: “Table 4. Prediction of GWP of biomass of fast-growing tree and agriculture residue by PLSR. N: Number of samples in calibration set, R<sup>2</sup><inf>c</inf>: coefficient of determination of calibration set, n: number of samples in prediction set, R<sup>2</sup><inf>p</inf>: coefficient of determination of prediction set, RPD: ratio of prediction to deviation, CM: correlation method, VM: variance method, COVM: co-variance method, VIP: variable important projection, FstDev: 1<sup>st</sup> derivative, SecDev: 2<sup>nd</sup> derivative. Significant values are in [bold].” “Table 7. The function groups corresponding to the wavenumber shown in regression coefficient plot and x-loading plot of models for GWP and HHV. *1ν, fundamental stretching vibration; 2ν, 1st overtone of fundamental stretching vibration; 3ν, 2nd overtone of fundamental stretching vibration; 5ν, 4th overtone of fundamental stretching vibration; 1δ, fundamental bending (deformation) vibration; 3δ, 2nd overtone of fundamental bending (deformation) vibration; 1, symmetric stretching vibration; 2, bending vibration; 3, asymmetric stretching vibration; and + is combination. now reads: “Table 7. The function groups corresponding to the wavenumber shown in regression coefficient plot and x-loading plot of models for GWP and HHV. 1ν, fundamental stretching vibration; 2ν, 1st overtone of fundamental stretching vibration; 3ν, 2nd overtone of fundamental stretching vibration; 5ν, 4<sup>th</sup> overtone of fundamental stretching vibration; 1δ, fundamental bending (deformation) vibration; 3δ, 2nd overtone of fundamental bending (deformation) vibration; and + is combination.” The original version of this Article has been corrected. - Some of the metrics are blocked by yourconsent settings
Item type:Publication, Dataset of air cargo supply chain conditions and fruit quality evolution: Case study of mango shipment from Thailand to France(2025-08-01) ;Paviet-Salomon, Y. ;Laguerre, O. ;Duret, S. ;Denis, A.Mawilai, P.This study presents a detailed dataset collected during the international transport of mangoes (Mangifera indica L. cv. ‘Nam Dok Mai Si-Thong’) within a fully loaded Unit Load Device (ULD). The ULD contained 148 boxes (14 mangoes/box) and 31 boxes were instrumented by data loggers to monitor air and mango temperatures, as well as air humidity along the shipment. Measurements were recorded every 5 min throughout the 86.2 hour journey from Bangkok (Thailand) to Paris (France), it included cold storage, refrigerated transport, airport warehouse, air transport, and final delivery to the FRISE-INRAE laboratory in Paris suburban. At reception (Day 3), all boxes were stored at two temperatures (16 °C and 21 °C) over 15 days during which mango quality was assessed. Key quality attributes such as mass loss, peel color, pH, sugar content, and visual appearance were evaluated at Day 3, Day 6, Day 9, and Day 15 to highlight the impact of storage conditions on fruit quality. It is to be noticed that the same quality assessment was undertaken after harvest and before the cold storage in Thailand (Day 0). The dataset comprises raw and processed data files that include the temperature and humidity changes over time, as well as the quality evolution. These data are stored in series of txt files, with raw values and processed results i.e. min, max, average values, standard deviation and variance to facilitate future analysis. Additionally, the dataset includes series of jpeg files of mango images at different assessment days. This dataset is valuable for both practical and research purposes. For fruit exporters, it offers the insights into how different positions within a ULD can affect mango quality during a long-distance transport and implements certain measures to minimize quality degradation. For researchers, the dataset provides a base for numerical models validation, such as simplified thermal models and Computational Fluid Dynamics simulations. The international supply chain dataset is rare because of the complexity and the cost of implementation.
