Semi-Automated Air-Cell Image Measurement and Weight-Loss Monitoring for Non-Destructive Assessment of Egg Freshness During Storage

Mookarin Nookong; Juthamat Wattanacharosroj; Jettanat Changdee; Pemsini Buaphae; Chawakorn Sri-ngernyuang

doi:10.55003/ETH.430306

Authors

Mookarin Nookong Faculty of Engineering and Agro-Industry, Maejo University, Thailand
Juthamat Wattanacharosroj Faculty of Engineering and Agro-Industry, Maejo University, Thailand
Jettanat Changdee Faculty of Engineering and Agro-Industry, Maejo University, Thailand
Pemsini Buaphae Faculty of Engineering and Agro-Industry, Maejo University, Thailand
Chawakorn Sri-ngernyuang Faculty of Engineering and Agro-Industry, Maejo University, Thailand

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55003/ETH.430306

Keywords:

Egg freshness, Semi-automated measurement, Air-cell area, Weight loss, Non-destructive assessment

Abstract

Conventional methods for evaluating egg freshness rely heavily on candling, visual inspection, or destructive laboratory tests. These approaches are often subjective, operator-dependent, and difficult to apply consistently in large-scale food production. To address these limitations, this study developed a non-destructive approach for monitoring egg freshness-related changes during storage by combining cumulative weight-loss measurement with image-based air-cell area measurement. A total of 100 eggs were stored under ambient conditions and repeatedly measured at five time points: Day 1, Day 6, Day 11, Day 16, and Day 21. Repeated-measures ANOVA confirmed significant effects of storage duration on egg weight and air-cell area (p < 0.001). Cumulative weight loss reached 4.22% by Day 21, while the mean air-cell area increased from 90.6 mm² on Day 1 to 274.7 mm² on Day 21 after skipped air-cell annotations were treated as missing data. Cumulative weight loss showed a significant positive association with air-cell area ratio when individual egg-level observations were analyzed. However, the moderate regression strength indicated that air-cell enlargement was not explained by weight loss alone and may also be influenced by egg-specific factors such as shell structure, shell porosity, and initial egg size. These findings indicate that combining weight-loss monitoring with GUI-based air-cell image measurement can support non-destructive assessment of freshness-related changes in eggs during storage.

References

Z. Gao, J. Zheng, and G. Xu, “Research Progress and Technological Application Prospects of Comprehensive Evaluation Methods for Egg Freshness,” Foods, vol. 14, no. 9, 2025, Art. no. 1507, doi: 10.3390/foods14091507.

K. Drabik, T. Próchniak, K. Kasperek, and J. Batkowska, “The Use of the Dynamics of Changes in Table Eggs during Storage to Predict the Age of Eggs Based on Selected Quality Traits,” Animals, vol. 11, no. 11, 2021, Art. no. 3192, doi: 10.3390/ani11113192.

H. E. Samli, A. Agma, and N. Senkoylu, “Effects of Storage Time and Temperature on Egg Quality in Old Laying Hens,” Journal of Applied Poultry Research, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 548–553, 2005, doi: 10.1093/japr/14.3.548.

S. Harnsoongnoen and N. Jaroensuk, “The grades and freshness assessment of eggs based on density detection using machine vision and weighing sensor,” Scientific Reports, vol. 11, no. 1, 2021, Art. no. 16640, doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-96140-x.

K. Yao, J. Sun, L. Zhang, X. Zhou, Y. Tian, N. Tang, and X. Wu, “Nondestructive detection for egg freshness based on hyperspectral imaging technology combined with harris hawks optimization support vector regression,” Journal of Food Safety, vol. 41, no. 3, 2021, Art. no. e12888, doi: 10.1111/jfs.12888.

P. Ong, S. -Y. Chiu, I. -L. Tsai, Y. -C. Kuan, Y. -J. Wang, and Y. -K. Chuang, “Nondestructive egg freshness assessment using hyperspectral imaging and deep learning with distance correlation wavelength selection,” Current Research in Food Science, vol. 11, 2025, Art. no. 101133, doi: 10.1016/j.crfs.2025.101133.

E. Loffredi, S. Grassi, and C. Alamprese, “Spectroscopic approaches for non-destructive shell egg quality and freshness evaluation: Opportunities and challenges,” Food Control, vol. 129, 2021, Art. no. 108255, doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2021.108255.

V. M. Nakaguchi and T. Ahamed, “Fast and Non-Destructive Quail Egg Freshness Assessment Using a Thermal Camera and Deep Learning-Based Air Cell Detection Algorithms for the Revalidation of the Expiration Date of Eggs,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 20, 2022, Art. no. 7703, doi: 10.3390/s22207703.

Q. Wang, X. Deng, Y. Ren, Y. Ding, L. Xiong, Z. Ping, Y. Wen, and S. Wang, “Egg freshness detection based on digital image technology,” Scientific Research and Essay, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 1073–1079, 2009.

T. H. Kim, J. H. Kim, J. Y. Kim, and S. E. Oh, “Egg Freshness Prediction Model Using Real-Time Cold Chain Storage Condition Based on Transfer Learning,” Foods, vol. 11, no. 19, 2022, Art. no. 3082, doi: 10.3390/foods11193082.

J. Hansot, W. Wongsaroj, T. Sangsuwan, and N. Thong-un, “A low-cost autonomous portable poultry egg freshness machine using majority voting-based ensemble machine learning classifiers,” Smart Agricultural Technology, vol. 10, 2025, Art. no. 100768, doi: 10.1016/j.atech.2025.100768.

X. Yang, R. B. Bist, S. Subedi, and L. Chai, “A Computer Vision-Based Automatic System for Egg Grading and Defect Detection,” Animals, vol. 13, no. 14, 2023, Art. no. 2354, doi: 10.3390/ani13142354.

J. Pardede, M. F. Z. A. Rawosi, A. P. Setyaningrum, R. M. Milenio, and C. Chazar, “Egg Weight Estimation Based on Image Processing using Mask R-CNN and XGBoost,” Journal of Applied Data Sciences, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 3005–3016, 2025, doi: 10.47738/jads.v6i4.1004.

C. Quan, Q. Xi, X. Shi, R. Han, Q. Du, F. Forghani, C. Xue, J. Zhang, and J. Wang, “Development of predictive models for egg freshness and shelf-life under different storage temperatures,” Food Quality and Safety, vol. 5, 2021, Art. no. fyab021, doi: 10.1093/fqsafe/fyab021.

J. S. Garcia, R. K. Gast, Q. D. Read, and D. R. Jones, “The impact of egg handling and storage temperature on shell eggs stored for 27 weeks: Egg quality,” Poultry Science, vol. 105, no. 2, 2025, Art. no. 106264, doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2025.106264.