Comparison of species classification models of mass spectrometry data: Kernel Discriminant Analysis vs Random Forest; A case study of Afrormosia (Pericopsis elata (Harms) Meeuwen)

Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry

Volumn 31, Issue 19, 2017, Pages 1582-1588

  Deklerck, V ^a,d   Finch, K ^b   Gasson, P ^c   Van den Bulcke, J ^a   Van Acker, J ^a   Beeckman, H ^d   Espinoza, E ^e  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^b OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS   (United Kingdom)

^d ROYAL MUSEUM FOR CENTRAL AFRICA   (Belgium)

^e US Fish and Wildlife National Forensics Laboratory   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMERCE; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FORESTRY; MASS SPECTROMETRY; TIMBER;

CLASSIFICATION METHODS; CLASSIFICATION MODELS; DIRECT ANALYSIS IN REAL-TIME; KERNEL DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; MASS SPECTROMETRY DATA; MILICIA EXCELSA; RANDOM FOREST CLASSIFICATION; RANDOM FORESTS; SPECIES CLASSIFICATION; SPECTRA'S;

IONIZATION;

CHEMISTRY; CLASSIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FABACEAE; MASS SPECTROMETRY; METABOLISM; METABOLOME; METABOLOMICS; PROCEDURES; TREE;

DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; FABACEAE; MASS SPECTROMETRY; METABOLOME; METABOLOMICS; TREES;

EID: 85029102426     PISSN: 09514198     EISSN: 10970231     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/rcm.7939     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. Appendices I, II and III. Available: https://cites.org/sites/default/files/notif/E-Notif-2016-068-A.pdf (accessed December 12, 2016).
2. Prota 7(1): Timbers. In: Louppe D, Oteng-Amoaki AA, Brink M, eds. Plant Resources of Tropical Africa. Wageningen: Backhuys Publishers; 2008.
3. PROSEA 5(1): Plant resources of South-East Asia 5. Pericopsis mooniana. In: Soerianegra I, Lemmens RHMJ, eds. Timber Trees: Major Commercial Timbers. Wageningen: Pudoc Scientific Publishers; 1993:342-345.
4. InsideWood (2004 – onwards). Available: http://insidewood.lib.ncsu.edu/search (accessed November 25, 2016).
5. Wheeler EA, Baas P, Gasson E. IAWA list of microscopic features for hardwood identification. IAWA Bull. 1989;10:219-332.
6. Cody RB, Laramee JA, Durst HD. Versatile new ion source for the analysis of materials in open air under ambient conditions. Anal Chem. 2005;77:2297-2302.
7. Cody RB, Dane AJ, Dawson-Andoh B, Adepipe EO, Nkansah K. Rapid classification of white oak (Quercus alba) and northern red oak (Quercus rubra) by using pyrolysis direct analysis in real time (DART™) and time-of-flight mass spectrometry. J Anal Appl Pyrol. 2012;95:134-137.
8. Lancaster C, Espinoza E. Evaluating agarwood products for 2-(2-phenylethyl) chromones using direct analysis in real time time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2012;26:2649-2656.
9. Espinoza EO, Lancaster CA, Kreitals NM, Hata M, Cody RB, Blanchette RA. Distinguishing wild from cultivated agarwood (Aquilaria spp.) using direct analysis in real time (DART™) and time-of-flight mass spectrometry. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2014;28:281-289.
10. McClure PJ, Chavarria GD, Espinoza E. Metabolic chemotypes of CITES protected Dalbergia timbers from Africa, Madagascar, and Asia. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2015;29(9):783-788.
11. Lesiak AD, Musah RA. Rapid high-throughput species identification of botanical material using Direct Analysis in Real Time high resolution mass spectrometry. J Vis Exp. 2016;116:1-11. e54197.
12. Evans PD, Mundo IA, Wiemann MC, et al. Identification of selected CITES-protected Araucariaceae using DART TOFMS. IAWA J. 2017;38(2):266-281. https://doi.org/10.1163/22941932-20170171.
13. Finch K, Espinoza E, Jones FA, Cronn R. Source identification of western Oregon Douglas-fir wood cores using mass spectrometry and random forest classification. Appl Plant Sci. 2017;5(5):1-12. https://doi.org/10.3732/apps.1600158.
14. Baudat G, Anouar F. Generalized discriminant analysis using a kernel approach. Neural Comput. 2000;12:2385-2404.
15. Lever J, Krzywinski M, Althman N. Model selection and overfitting. Nat Methods. 2016;13(9):703-704.
16. Liaw A, Wiener M. Classification and regression by randomForest. R News. 2002;2(3):18-22.
17. Breiman L, Friedman J, Stone CJ, Olshen RA. Classification and regression trees. Chapman & Hall; 1984.
18. Strobl C, Malley J, Tutz G. An introduction to recursive paritioning: rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging and random forests. Psychol Methods. 2009;14(4):323-348.
19. Breiman L. Random Forests. Machine Learning. 2001;45(1):5-32.
20. Perrier A. Feature Importance Random Forest; 2015. Available: http://alexperrier.github.io/jekyll/update/2015/08/27/feature-importance-random-forests-gini-accuracy.html.
21. Chen C, Liaw A, Breiman L. Using random forest to learn imbalanced data. Berkeley: University of California; 2004:1-12 Available: http://statistics.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/tech-reports/666.pdf.