Literature DB >> 25124655

Sensory differences between beet and cane sugar sources.

Brittany L Urbanus1, Ginnefer O Cox, Emily J Eklund, Chelsea M Ickes, Shelly J Schmidt, Soo-Yeun Lee.   

Abstract

Research concerning the sensory properties of beet and cane sugars is lacking in the scientific literature. Therefore, the objectives of this research were to determine whether a sensory difference was perceivable between beet and cane sugar sources in regard to their (1) aroma-only, (2) aroma and taste without nose clips, and (3) taste-only with nose clips, and to characterize the difference between the sugar sources using descriptive analysis. One hundred panelists evaluated sugar samples using a tetrad test. A significant difference (P < 0.05) was identified between beet and cane sugar sources when evaluated by aroma-only and taste and aroma without nose clips. However, there was no difference when tasted with nose clips. To characterize the observed differences, ten trained panelists identified and quantified key sensory attributes of beet and cane sugars using descriptive analysis. Analysis of variance indicated significant differences (P < 0.05) between sugar samples for 8 of the 10 attributes including: off-dairy, oxidized, earthy, and barnyard aroma, fruity and burnt sugar aroma-by-mouth, sweet aftertaste, and burnt sugar aftertaste. The sensory profile of beet sugar was characterized by off-dairy, oxidized, earthy, and barnyard aromas and by a burnt sugar aroma-by-mouth and aftertaste, whereas cane sugar was characterized by a fruity aroma-by-mouth and sweet aftertaste. This study shows that beet and cane sugar sources can be differentiated by their aroma and provides a sensory profile characterizing the differences. As sugar is used extensively as a food ingredient, sensory differences between beet and cane sugar sources once incorporated into different product matrices should be studied as a next step.
© 2014 Institute of Food Technologists®

Entities:  

Keywords:  beet; cane; descriptive analysis; sugar; tetrad

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25124655     DOI: 10.1111/1750-3841.12558

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Food Sci        ISSN: 0022-1147            Impact factor:   3.167


  1 in total

Review 1.  The Maillard reaction in traditional method sparkling wine.

Authors:  Hannah M Charnock; Gary J Pickering; Belinda S Kemp
Journal:  Front Microbiol       Date:  2022-08-26       Impact factor: 6.064

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.