Review Article
Recent Research Advancements of Coffee Quality Detection: Targeted Analyses vs. Nontargeted Fingerprinting and Related Issues
Table 1
Advantages and limitations of different detection methods in coffee quality.
| Detection methods | Advantages | Limitations | References |
| Microscope | Simpleness, convenience, and without pretreatment | Low accuracy, destructiveness, limited detection, and subjectivity (samples and adulterants need to be compared visually) | [25] | Chromatography | Quantitative detection and accuracy | Costly operation, time-consuming, and requires specific markers | [32, 50ā52] | Spectroscopy | Fast and nondestructive analysis | Poor accuracy and complex metrological analysis | [53, 54] | Mass spectrometry | Precision and sensitivity | High cost and require pretreatment | [55] | Array sensors | Convenience and simpleness | Poor accuracy and sensitivity and limited measurement range | [56] | Sequencing methods | Accuracy and sensitivity | Need to consider the DNA pattern and endogenous genes of a specific substance and complicated operation | [57] | Thermal, digital image and other new detection techniques | Modernization, sensitivity, and other unique merits | Newly developed, not widely available, and needs further study | [58, 59] |
|
|