...
首页> 外文期刊>HortTechnology >Sensory Comparison of Ciders Produced from Machine- and Hand-harvested 'Brown Snout' Specialty Cider Apples Stored at Ambient Conditions in Northwest Washington
【24h】

Sensory Comparison of Ciders Produced from Machine- and Hand-harvested 'Brown Snout' Specialty Cider Apples Stored at Ambient Conditions in Northwest Washington

机译:由机器和手动收获的“棕色鼻子”特种苹果苹果苹果苹果苹果苹果苹果苹果制作的感觉比较,储存在华盛顿西北部的环境条件下

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Machine harvest of 'Brown Snout' specialty cider apple (Malus x domestica) has been shown to provide yield and juice quality characteristics similar to that of hand harvest. In this 2-year study, the sensory perception (color, aroma, flavor, mouthfeel, taste, and aftertaste) of ciders produced from machine-harvested and hand-harvested fruit that were ambient stored (56 degrees F) 0-4 weeks postharvest were compared using a trained panel and electronic tongue (e-tongue). For nearly all sensory attributes evaluated, the trained panelists scored the 2014 machine-harvested samples higher than the 2014 hand-harvested samples. Some of the key sensory differences included a darker color, a more astringent and heated mouthfeel, and a more sour taste of the machine-harvested samples than the hand-harvested samples. Trained panelists perceived no differences due to the harvest method among the 2015 samples for any of the sensory attributes evaluated. The e-tongue demonstrated good discrimination (index value = 95) of 2014 samples, but poor discrimination (index value = -0.5) of 2015 samples, mirroring the year-to-year variation experienced by the trained panelists. Overall, the e-tongue demonstrated a response to metallic and sour that was more associated with the machine-harvested samples and a response to sweet and umami that was more associated with the hand-harvested samples. These results demonstrate that cider made from machine-harvested fruit can have a different sensory profile than cider made from hand-harvested fruit. A consumer tasting panel should be conducted next to provide an indication of market response to the differing sensory profiles, qualifying the impact of harvest method. Results also indicate that ambient storage (56 degrees F) of fruit up to 4 weeks may not impact cider sensory attributes; however, cider apple growers should avoid ambient storage of machine-harvested fruit given the significant yield losses demonstrated in previous studies. Variation in cider quality due to year of harvest was most likely a result of differences in the hand-harvest technique between the 2 years, specifically more fruit bruising in 2014 than in 2015, demonstrating the importance of harvesting fully mature fruit with a standard protocol so as to supply a consistent raw material to cider producers. The e-tongue produced variable results compared with trained panelists and more development is needed before it can be incorporated into cider sensory evaluation protocol.
机译:机器收获“棕鼻”特色苹果酒(Malus x domestica)的产量和果汁质量特征与手工收获相似。在这项为期2年的研究中,使用经过培训的面板和电子舌(e-Telegue)对机器收获和手工收获的苹果汁进行了感官感知(颜色、香气、风味、口感、味道和余味)比较,这些苹果汁在采后0-4周(56华氏度)环境储存。对于评估的几乎所有感官属性,经过培训的小组成员对2014年机器采集的样本的评分高于2014年手工采集的样本。与手工采集的样品相比,机器采集的样品的一些关键感官差异包括颜色更深、口感更涩、更热,以及味道更酸。经过培训的专家组成员认为,2015年样本中任何感官属性的采集方法都没有差异。电子舌在2014年样本中表现出良好的辨别力(指数值=95),但在2015年样本中表现出较差的辨别力(指数值=-0.5),反映了受过培训的专家组成员所经历的逐年变化。总的来说,电子舌对金属和酸的反应与机器采集的样本更相关,而对甜味和鲜味的反应与手工采集的样本更相关。这些结果表明,用机器收获的水果制成的苹果酒与用手工收获的水果制成的苹果酒具有不同的感官特征。消费者品尝小组应在旁边进行,以提供市场对不同感官特征的反应指示,从而确定收获方法的影响。结果还表明,水果的环境储存(56华氏度)长达4周可能不会影响苹果酒的感官属性;然而,鉴于之前的研究表明苹果产量损失巨大,苹果酒种植者应该避免机器收获水果的环境储存。苹果酒质量因采收年份的不同而发生变化,很可能是由于两年之间手工采收技术的差异,尤其是2014年的水果碰伤比2015年更多,这表明了按照标准方案采收完全成熟的水果的重要性,以便为苹果酒生产商提供一致的原材料。与训练有素的专家组成员相比,电子舌产生的结果各不相同,在将其纳入苹果酒感官评估方案之前,还需要进一步发展。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号