Postharvest assessment of fruit quality parameters in apple using both instruments and an expert panel

Postharvest Biology and Technology

Volumn 52, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 279-287

  Oraguzie, Nnadozie ^a   Alspach, Peter ^a   Volz, Richard ^a   Whitworth, Claire ^a   Ranatunga, Chandra ^a   Weskett, Rosemary ^a   Harker, Roger ^a  

^a THE NEW ZEALAND INSTITUTE FOR PLANT AND FOOD RESEARCH LIMITED   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Apple fruit quality phenotyping; Expert panel; Inter expert differences; Machine measurements; Sensory scores

Indexed keywords

ERYSIPHALES; MALUS X DOMESTICA;

EID: 63449111880     PISSN: 09255214     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.postharvbio.2009.01.004     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Alspach P.A., and Oraguzie N.C. Estimation of genetic parameters of apple (Malus domestica) fruit quality from open pollinated families. N.Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 30 (2002) 219-228
2. Alston, F.H., Evans, K.M., MacFie, H.J.H., King, G.J., Beyts, P.K., 1996. The potential for improving organoleptic quality in apples through marker assisted breeding related to consumer preference studies. In: Agri-food Quality: An Interdisciplinary Approach, Woodhead publishing Abington, Cambridge, England. pp. 35-38.
3. Daillant-Spinnler B., MacFie H.J.H., Beyts P.K., and Hedderley D. Relationships between perceived sensory properties and major preference directions of 12 varieties of apples from the southern hemisphere. Food Qual. Prefer. 7 (1996) 113-126
4. Durel C.E., Laurens F., Fouillet A., and Lespinasse Y. Utilization of pedigree information to estimate genetic parameters from large unbalanced data sets in apple. Theor. Appl. Gen. 96 (1998) 1077-1085
5. Fisher D.C. Mealiness and quality of delicious apples as affected by growing conditions, maturity and storage techniques. Sci. Agr. 23 (1943) 569-588
6. Gawel R. The use of language by trained and untrained experienced wine tasters. J. Sensory Stud. 12 (1997) 267-284
7. Hampson C.R., Quamme H.A., Hall J.W., MacDonald R.A., King M.C., and Cliff M.A. Sensory evaluation as a selection tool in apple breeding. Euphytica 111 (2000) 79-90
8. Harker F.R., Maindonald J., Murray S.H., Gunson F.A., Hallett I.C., and Walker S.B. Sensory interpretation of instrumental measurements. 1. Texture of apple fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24 (2002) 225-239
9. Harker F.R., Marsh K.B., Young H., Murray S.H., Gunson F.A., and Walker S.B. Sensory interpretation of instrumental measurements. 2. Sweet and acid taste of apple fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24 (2002) 241-250
10. King G.J., Maliepaard C., Lynn J.R., Alston F.H., Durel C.E., Evans K.M., Griffon B., Laurens F., Manganaris A.G., Schrevens E., Tartarini S., and Verhaegh J.J. Quantitative genetic analysis and comparison of physical and sensory descriptors relating to fruit flesh firmness in apple (Malus pumila Mill). Theor. Appl. Gen. 100 (2000) 1074-1084
11. Jaeger S.R., Andani Z., Wakeling I.N., and MacFie H.J.H. Consumer preferences for fresh and aged apples: a cross-cultural comparison. Food Qual. Pref. 9 (1998) 355-366
12. Lawless H.T., and Heymann H. Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practices (1999), Kluwer Academic Publishers, New York p. 827
13. Lyon D.H., Francombe M.A., Hasdell T.A., and Lawson K. Guidelines for Sensory Analysis in Food Product Development and Quality Control (1992), Chapman & Hall, London p. 131
14. MacFie H.J.H., and Beyts P. Consumer preference and sensory studies on southern and northern hemisphere dessert apples. Eur. Apple 3 (1995) 12-13
15. Mann H., Bedford D., Luby J., Vickers Z., and Tong C. Textural and microscopic analysis of softening related changes in apple fruit during storage. Hort. Science 40 (2005) 1815-1820
16. Meilgaard M., Civille G.V., and Carr B.T. Sensory Evaluation Techniques. fourth edition (2007), CRC Press, Boca Raton p. 448
17. Mitcham, E.J., 1997. In: Mitcham, E.J. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th International Controlled Atmosphere Research Conference, Apples and Pears. Postharvest Horticulture Series No. 16 (2):308. University of California, Davis.
18. Oraguzie N.C., Currie A.J., 2004. Apple breeding: exploitation of genetic variation via recurrent selection. In: Vollman, J., Grausgruber, H., Ruckenbauer, P. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 17th Eucarpia Convention on Genetic variation for Plant Breeding, pp. 439-445.
19. Oraguzie N.C., Hofstee M., Brewer L.R., and Howard C. Estimation of genetic parameters in a recurrent selection program in apple. Euphytica 118 (2001) 29-37
20. Perrin, L., Symoneaux, R., Maître, I., Asselin, C., Jourjon, F., Pagès, J., 2007. Comparison of conventional profiling by a trained tasting panel and free profiling by wine professionals. Amer. J. Enol. Vitic. 58, 508-517.
21. R Development Core Team, 2007. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0, http://www.R-project.org.
22. Smith, S.M., 1985. Measurement of the Quality of Apples: Recommendation of an EEC Working Group. Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.
23. Washington State Dept of Agriculture, May 15, 1999. Clarifying New 'Red Delicious' Inspections. Good Fruit Grower.
24. Wright, C., 2005. 'A taste of tea' Presented by Peta Mathias. Chris Wright Producer/Director, TV One. http://www.tvnz.co.nz.
25. Zamora M.C., and Guirao M. Performance comparison between trained assessors and wine experts using specific sensory attributes. J. Sensory Stud. 19 (2004) 530-545