B0 = intercept coefficient; B1 = slope
coefficient; Err[Bi] = standard error of coefficient
‘Bi’; p -value = probability Bi ≠
0 (< 0.05). See Tables 1 and 2 for
abbreviations.
The linear correlations obtained from application of Model B to
IPR-T−1 demonstrated in the high R²
coefficients, low σy (≤ 0.2) and high F-ratios (≥ 368),
all indicators that the model equations had relatively high goodness of
fit for each FAME. Similar to the results from applying Model
A , the Model B results for MeC18:2 in Figure 4exhibited some curvature in the data. The residual plot for MeC18:2 (seeFigure S2 in the supporting information) revealed a non-random
pattern and fitting the data to a second-order polynomial (data not
shown) resulted in slight improvements for R² (0.997), F-ratio (848) and
σy (0.06). However, the three regression coefficients
had p -value ≥ 0.09, indicating they were not significant to the
correlation of the data. Given these results, the linear model described
by Model B was determined to be sufficient for correlating
IPR-T−1 data for MeC18:2. Therefore,
the linear correlation results in Table 4 were employed to
calculate shelf-life results at 25 °C for all FAME studied in the
present work.
A conformation graph showing IPB data calculated from
application of the Model B equations versus experimental
IPR data is presented Figure 5 . Analogous to
the results in Figure 2 , all data points are in close proximity
to the dashed line representing IPB =
IPR. This suggested