Firmness evaluation of sweet cherries by a trained and consumer sensory panel

Journal of Texture Studies

Volumn 40, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 554-570

  Ross, Carolyn F ^a   Chauvin, Maite A ^a   Whiting, Matthew ^b  

^a WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Firmness; Model; Sensory; Sweet cherry

Indexed keywords

PRUNUS AVIUM;

EID: 70349547238     PISSN: 00224901     EISSN: 17454603     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-4603.2009.00197.x     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. ABBOTT, J.A., WATADA, A.E. MASSIE, D.R. 1984. Sensory and instrument measurement of apple texture. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 109, 221 228.
2. BADDELEY, A. 1990. Human Memory: Theory and Practice, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
3. BATISSE, C., BURET, M. COULOMB, P.J. 1996. Biochemical differences in cell wall of cherry fruit between soft and crisp fruit. J. Agric. Food Chem. 44, 453 457.
4. BRENNAN, J.G., JOWITT, R. MUGHSI, O.A. 1970. Some experiences with the general foods texturometer. J. Texture Studies 1 (1 167 184.
5. BROWN, S.K.S. BOURNE, M.C. 1988. Assessment of components of fruit firmness in selected sweet cherry genotypes. HortScience 23, 902 904.
6. CHAUVIN, M., ROSS, C.F., PITTS, M., KUPFERMAN, E. SWANSON, B. 2009. Relationship between instrumental and sensory determination of apple and pear texture. J. Food Qual in press).
7. CIVILLE, G.V. SZCZESNIAK, A.S. 1973. Guidelines to training a texture profile panel. J. Texture Studies 4, 204 223.
8. CLIFF, M.A., DEVER, M.C., HALL, J.W. GIRARD, B. 1996. Development and evaluation of multiple regression models for prediction of sweet cherry liking. Food Res. Int. 28 (6 583 589.
9. CRISOSTO, C.H., CRISOSTO, G.M. RITENOU, M.A. 2002. Testing the reliability of skin color as an indicator of quality for early season "Brooks" (Prunus a6ium L.) cherry. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24, 147 154.
10. DE BELIE, N., HALLETT, I.C., MARKER, F.R. BAERDEMAEKER, J. 2000. Influence of ripening and turgor on the tensile properties of pears: A microscopic study of cellular and tissue changes. J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 125 (3 350 356.
11. DEVER, M.C., MACDONALD, R.A., CLIFF, M.A. LANE, W.D. 1996. Sensory evaluation of sweet cherry cultivars. HortScience 31, 150 153.
12. DIEHL, K.C., HAMANN, D.D. WHITFIELD, J.K. 1979. Structural failure in selected raw fruits and vegetables. J. Texture Studies 10, 371 400.
13. FACTEAU, T.J., ROWE, K.E. CHESTNUT, N.E. 1985. Firmness of sweet cherry fruit following multiple applications of gibberellic acid. J. Am. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 110 (6 775 777.
14. GUYER, D.E., SINHA, N., CHANG, T.S. CASH, J.N. 1993. Phytochemical and sensory characteristics of selected Michigan sweet cherry cultivars. J. Food Qual. 16 (5 355 370.
15. HARD, M.M., ZAEBRINGERR, M.V., BOWMAN, F. MACKEY, A.C. 1977. Predicting texture of fresh fruit and vegetables by chemical and physical methods. Coll. Agric., Wash. State Univ. Bul. 836, 1 10.
16. HARKER, F.R. HALLETT, I.C. 1992. Physiological changes associated with development of mealiness of apple fruit during cool storage. HortScience 27, 1291 1294.
17. HARKER, F.R., REDGWELL, R.J., HALLETT, I.C., MURRAY, S.H. CARTER, G. 1997. Texture of fresh fruit. Hortic. Rev. 20, 121 224.
18. HARKER, F.R., HALLETT, I.C., MURRAY, S.H. CARTER, G. 1998. Food-mouth interactions: Toward a better understanding of fruit texture. Acta Hortic. 464, 461 466.
19. HARKER, F.R., MAINDONALD, J., MURRAY, S.H., GUNSON, F.A., HALLET, I.C. WALKER, S.B. 2002a. Sensory interpretation of instrumental measurements 1: Texture of apple fruit. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 24, 225 239.
20. HARKER, F.R., GUNSON, F.A., BROOKFIELD, P.L. WHITE, A. 2002b. An apple a day: The influence of memory on consumer judgment of quality. Food Qual. Pref. 13, 173 179.
21. HARKER, F.R., LAU, K. GUNSON, F.A. 2003a. Juiciness of fresh fruit: A time-intensity study. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 29, 55 60.
22. HARKER, F.R., GUNSON, F.A. JAEGER, S.R. 2003b. The case for fruit quality: An interpretive review of consumer attributes and preferences for apples. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 28, 333 347.
23. HARKER, F.R., GUNSON, F.A. TRIGGS, C.M. 2006a. Apple firmness: Creating a tool for product evaluation based on a sensory-instrumental relationship. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 39, 327 330.
24. HARKER, F.R., AMOS, R.L., ECHEVERRIA, G. GUNSON, F.A. 2006b. Influence of texture on taste: Insights gained during studies of hardness, juiciness, and sweetness of apple fruit. J. Food Sci. 71 (2 S77 S82.
25. HOLT, J.E. SCHOORL, D. 1985. Mechanical properties and texture of stored apples. J. Texture Studies 15, 377 394.
26. KAPPEL, F. MACDONALD, R.A. 2002. Gibberellic acid increases fruit firmness, fruit size, and delays the maturity of "Sweetheart" sweet cherry. J. Am. Pomol. Soc. 56, 219 222.
27. KAPPEL, F., FISHER-FLEMING, B. HOGUE, E. 1996. Fruit characteristics and sensory attributes of an ideal sweet cherry. HortScience 31, 443 446.
28. LILL, R.E. 1985. Alleviation of internal breakdown of nectarines during cold storage by intermittent warming. Sci. Hortic. 25, 241 246.
29. MEHINAGIC, E., ROYER, G., SYMONEAUX, R., BERTRAND, D. JOURJON, R. 2004. Prediction of the sensory quality of apples by physical measurements. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 34, 257 269.
30. MITCHAM, E.J., CLAYTON, M. BIASI, W.V. 1998. Comparison of devises for measuring cherry fruit firmness. Hortic. Sci. 33, 723 727.
31. MUSKOVICS, G., FELFOLDI, J., KOVACS, E., PERLAKI, R. KALLAY, T. 2006. Changes in physical properties during fruit ripening of Hungarian sweet cherry (Prunus avium L.) cultivars. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 40, 56 63.
32. NEVEN, L. DRAKE, S. 2000. Comparison of alternative postharvest quarantine treatments for sweet cherries. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 20, 107 114.
33. PAOLETTI, F., MONETA, E., BERTONE, A. SINESIO, F. 1993. Mechanical properties and sensory evaluation of selected apple cultivars. Lebensm.-Wiss. Technol. 26, 721 726.
34. PELEG, M. 1980. Theoretical analysis of the relationship between mechanical hardness and its sensory assessment. J. Food Sci. 45, 1156 1160.
35. RICHARDSON, A. 1986. The effects of herbicide soil management systems and nitrogen fertilizer on the eating quality of Cox's Orange Pippin apples. J. Hortic. Sci. 61, 447 456.
36. ROESSLER, E.B., PANGBORN, R.M., SIDEL, J.L. STONE, H. 1976. Expanded statistical tables for estimating significance in paired-preference, paired difference, duo-trio and triangle tests. J. Food Sci. 43, 940 947.
37. SLOULIN, W. 1990. Cherry quality survey - status report. Proc. Wash. State Hortic. Assoc. 86, 226 227.
38. STONE, H. SIDEL, J. 2004. Sensory Evaluation Practices, 3rd Ed., Elsevier Academic Press, New York, NY.
39. SZCZESNIAK, A.S. 1987. Correlating sensory with instrumental texture measurements - an overview of recent developments. J. Texture Studies 18, 1 15.
40. SZCZESNIAK, A.S. ILKER, R. 1988. The meaning of textural characteristics - juiciness in plant food stuffs. J. Texture Studies 19, 61 78.
41. WHITING, M.D. 2006. Quality of new sweet cherry varieties. Compact Fruit Tree 39 (1 23 24.
42. WHITING, M.D., LANG, G.A. OPHARDT, D. 2005. Rootstock and training system affect sweet cherry growth, yield and fruit quality. HortScience 40, 582 586.