Literature DB >> 7712215

Bitterness of sweeteners as a function of concentration.

S S Schiffman1, B J Booth, M L Losee, S D Pecore, Z S Warwick.   

Abstract

Sixteen trained tasters provided sweetness and bitterness intensity ratings for 19 compounds including: acesulfame-K, alitame, aspartame, fructose, glucose, glycine, lactitol, maltitol, monoammonium glycyrrhizinate, neohesperidin dihydrochalcone, neosugar (fructo-oligosaccharide), palatinit (isomalt), rebaudioside-A, sodium cyclamate, sodium saccharin, stevioside, sucralose, sucrose, and thaumatin. With increasing concentration, high-potency sweeteners including acesulfame-K, neohesperidin dihydrochalcone, sodium saccharin, rebaudioside-A, and stevioside tended to become more bitter. Low-potency sweeteners including fructose, sucrose, and lactitol tended to become less bitter with increasing concentration.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7712215     DOI: 10.1016/0361-9230(94)00225-p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Res Bull        ISSN: 0361-9230            Impact factor:   4.077


  41 in total

1.  Gut T1R3 sweet taste receptors do not mediate sucrose-conditioned flavor preferences in mice.

Authors:  Anthony Sclafani; Damien S Glass; Robert F Margolskee; John I Glendinning
Journal:  Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 3.619

2.  Modulation of bitter taste perception by a small molecule hTAS2R antagonist.

Authors:  Jay P Slack; Anne Brockhoff; Claudia Batram; Susann Menzel; Caroline Sonnabend; Stephan Born; Maria Mercedes Galindo; Susann Kohl; Sophie Thalmann; Liliana Ostopovici-Halip; Christopher T Simons; Ioana Ungureanu; Kees Duineveld; Cristian G Bologa; Maik Behrens; Stefan Furrer; Tudor I Oprea; Wolfgang Meyerhof
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2010-05-27       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Preference for sucralose predicts behavioral responses to sweet and bittersweet tastants.

Authors:  Gregory C Loney; Ann-Marie Torregrossa; Chris Carballo; Lisa A Eckel
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 3.160

4.  Male rats show an indifference-avoidance response for increasing concentrations of the artificial sweetener sucralose.

Authors:  Nicholas T Bello; Andras Hajnal
Journal:  Nutr Res       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.315

5.  Interpreting consumer preferences: physicohedonic and psychohedonic models yield different information in a coffee-flavored dairy beverage.

Authors:  Bangde Li; John E Hayes; Gregory R Ziegler
Journal:  Food Qual Prefer       Date:  2014-09-01       Impact factor: 5.565

6.  Molecular mechanism of the sweet taste enhancers.

Authors:  Feng Zhang; Boris Klebansky; Richard M Fine; Haitian Liu; Hong Xu; Guy Servant; Mark Zoller; Catherine Tachdjian; Xiaodong Li
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-02-19       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 7.  The functional role of the T1R family of receptors in sweet taste and feeding.

Authors:  Yada Treesukosol; Kimberly R Smith; Alan C Spector
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2011-03-02

8.  Relative sweetness and sweetness quality of phyllodulcin [(3R)-8-Hydroxy-3-(3-hydroxy-4-methoxyphenyl)-3,4-dihydro-1H-isochromen-1-one].

Authors:  Min-Ji Kim; Sang-Ho Yoo; Yang Kim; Jae-Hee Hong
Journal:  Food Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2016-08-31       Impact factor: 2.391

9.  Relative sweetness and sweetness quality of Xylobiose.

Authors:  Hye-Won Park; Min-Ji Kim; Sheungwoo Seo; Sangho Yoo; Jae-Hee Hong
Journal:  Food Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2017-05-29       Impact factor: 2.391

10.  Examination of the perception of sweet- and bitter-like taste qualities in sucralose preferring and avoiding rats.

Authors:  A-M Torregrossa; G C Loney; J C Smith; L A Eckel
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2014-12-10
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.