The impact of wood ice cream sticks' origin on the aroma of exposed ice cream mixes

Journal of Dairy Science

Volumn 85, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 355-359

  Jiamyangyuen, S ^a   Delwiche, J F ^a   Harper, W J ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Aroma; Ice cream; Sensory evaluation; Wood

Indexed keywords

BETULA PENDULA;

ARTICLE; FOOD HANDLING; ICE CREAM; ODOR; STANDARD; TIME; WOOD;

FOOD TECHNOLOGY; ICE CREAM; ODORS; TIME FACTORS; WOOD;

EID: 0036481449     PISSN: 00220302     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(02)74081-2     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Aiken, J. W., and A. C. Noble. 1984a. Comparison of the aromas of oak- and glass-aged wines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 35:196-199.
2. Aiken, J. W., and A. C. Noble. 1984b. Composition and sensory properties of Cabernet Sauvignon wine aged in French versus American oak barrels. Vitis 23:27-36.
3. Baldwin, G. 1995. Oak barrels - revisiting old issues. Aust. Grapegrow. 379:25-27.
4. Barbary, O., R. Nonaka, J. Delwiche, J. Chan, and M. O'Mahony. 1993. Focused difference testing for the assessment of differences between orange juices made from orange concentrate. J. Sens. Stud. 8:43-67.
5. Fusaro, D. 2000. Candy bars and small packages. Dairy Foods 101:57.
6. Jindra, J. A., and J. F. Gallander. 1987. Effect of American and French oak barrels on the phenolic composition and sensory quality of Seyval bland wines. Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 28:133-138.
7. Leske, P. 1998. The sensory evaluation of barrels coopered from Russian oak: Results from Australia. Aust. N.Z. Wine Ind. J. 13:170-171, 173-174.
8. Marshall, R. T., and W. S. Arbuckle. 1996. Flavoring and coloring materials. Page 81 in Ice Cream. 5th ed. Chapman and Hall. New York, NY.
9. O'Mahony, M. 1986. The binomial test: Applications in sensory difference and preference testing. Page 57 in Sensory Evaluation of Food: Statistical Methods and Procedures. Marcel Dekker, Inc. New York.
10. O'Mahony, M. 1990. Cognitive aspects of difference testing and descriptive analysis: Criterion variation and concept formation. Pages 117-139 in Psychological Basis of Sensory Evaluation. R. L. McBride and H. J. H. MacFie, eds. Elsevier Applied Science, London.
11. O'Mahony, M. 1992. Understanding discrimination tests: A user-friendly treatment of response bias, rating and ranking R-index tests and their relationship to signal detection. J. Sens. Stud. 7:1-47.
12. O'Mahony, M. 1995. Sensory measurement in food science: Fitting methods to goals. Food Technol. 49:72-82.
13. O'Mahony, M., and L. R. Goldstein. 1987. Sensory techniques for measuring differences in California navel oranges treated with doses of Gamma-radiation below 0.6 Kgray. J. Food Sci. 52:348-352.
14. O'Mahony, M., U. Thieme, and L. R. Goldstein. 1988. The warm-up effect as a means of increasing the discriminability of sensory difference tests. J. Food Sci. 53:1848-1850.
15. Pomar, M., and L. A. Gonzalez-Mendoza. 2001. Changes in composition and sensory quality of red wine aged in American and French oak barrels. J. Int. Sci. Vigne Vin. 35:41-48.
16. Rousseau, B., and M. O'Mahony. 1997. Sensory difference tests: Thurstonian and SSA predictions for vanilla flavored yogurts. J. Sens. Stud. 12:127-146.
17. Thieme, U., and M. O'Mahony. 1990. Modifications to sensory difference test protocols: The warmed-up paired comparison, the single standard duo-trio and A-not A test modified for response bias. J. Sens. Stud. 5:159-176.
18. Waterhouse, A. L., and J. P. Towey. 1994. Oak lactone isomer ratio distinguishes between wines fermented in American and French oak barrels. J. Agric. Food Chem. 42:1971-1974.