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
           

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:“棕色鼻子”专业苹果公司(Malus X Diversa)的机器收获已被证明提供了与手收获的产量和果汁品质特征。在这两年的研究中,由机器收获和手工收获的水果产生的胶片的感官感知(颜色,香气,味道,口感,味道和余日)(56摄氏度)0-4周采后使用训练有素的面板和电子舌(电子舌)进行比较。对于近乎所有的感官属性,培训的小组成员将从2014年手中的样品高于2014年的机器收获样本。一些关键的感官差异包括较深的颜色,更涩味和加热的口感,以及比手收获样品更酸的味道。训练有素的小组成员由于评估的任何感官属性的2015样本中的收获方法而感知差异。 E-Tangue展示了2014年样本的良好歧视(指数值= 95),但2015年样本的歧视(指数值= -0.5),镜像培训的小组成员所经历的年度变异。总的来说,电子舌显示对金属和酸的反应,与机器收获的样品更有关,以及对与手中样品更相关的甜味和蜜蜂的反应。这些结果表明,由机器收获的水果制成的苹果酒可以具有不同的感觉轮廓,而不是由手工收获的果实制成的苹果酒。应在接下来进行消费者品酒小组,以提供对不同感官概况的市场反应的指示,限定了收获方法的影响。结果还表明,长达4周的水果的环境储存(56摄氏度)可能不会影响苹果感官属性;然而,鉴于先前研究中表现出显着的产量损失,苹果苹果苹果种植者应该避免机器收获的水果。由于收获年份,苹果酒质量的变化很可能是2年之间的手工收获技术差异的结果,特别是2014年的果实比2015年的水果萎缩,展示了用标准方案收获完全成熟的果实的重要性至于为苹果酒生产商提供一致的原料。与训练有素的小组成员相比,E-Tumpue产生的可变结果和在载体纳入苹果酒感官评估协议之前需要开发。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 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