Investigating physicochemical, volatile and sensory parameters playing a positive or a negative role on tomato liking

Food Research International

Volumn 50, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 409-419

  Piombino, Paola ^a   Sinesio, Fiorella ^b   Moneta, Elisabetta ^b   Cammareri, Maria ^c   Genovese, Alessandro ^a   Lisanti, Maria Tiziana ^a   Mogno, Maria Rita ^d   Peparaio, Marina ^b   Termolino, Pasquale ^c   Moio, Luigi ^a   Grandillo, Silvana ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES FEDERICO II   (Italy)

^b ISTITUTO NAZIONALE DELLA NUTRIZIONE   (Italy)

^c CNR   (Italy)

^d Monsanto Agricoltura Italia SPA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Consumer overall liking; Physicochemical parameters; Sensory evaluation; Tomato; Volatiles

Indexed keywords

CONSUMER OVERALL LIKING; PHYSICOCHEMICAL PARAMETERS; SENSORY EVALUATION; TOMATO; VOLATILES;

ODORS;

FRUITS;

LYCOPERSICON ESCULENTUM;

EID: 84870516916     PISSN: 09639969     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2012.10.033     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aubert C., Baumann S., Arguel H. Optimization of the analysis of flavor volatile compounds by liquid-liquid microextraction (LLME). Application to the aroma analysis of melons, peaches, grapes, strawberries, and tomatoes. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 2005, 53(23):8881-8895.
2. Baldwin E.A., Goodner K., Plotto A. Interaction of volatiles, sugars, and acids on perception of tomato aroma and flavor descriptors. Journal of Food Science 2008, 73(6):S294-S307.
3. Baldwin E.A., Goodner K.L., Plotto A., Pritchett K., Einstein M. Effect of volatiles and their concentration on perception of tomato descriptors. Journal of Food Science 2004, 69(8):S310-S318.
4. Baldwin E.A., Scott J.W., Shewmakert C.K., Schuch W. Flavor trivia and tomato aroma: Biochemistry and possible mechanisms for control of important aroma components. Hortscience 2000, 35(6):1013-1022.
5. Berna A.Z., Lammertyn J., Buysens S., Di Natale C., Nicolai B.M. Mapping consumer liking of tomatoes with fast aroma profiling techniques. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2005, 38:115-127.
6. Boukobza F., Dunphy P.J., Taylor A.J. Measurement of lipid oxidation-derived volatiles in fresh tomatoes. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2001, 23:117-131.
7. Carli P., Arima S., Fogliano V., Tardella L., Frusciante L., Ercolano M.R. Use of network analysis to capture key traits affecting tomato organoleptic quality. Journal of Experimental Botany 2009, 60(12):3379-3386.
8. Carli P., Barone A., Fogliano V., Frusciante L., Ercolano M.R. Dissection of genetic and environmental factors involved in tomato organoleptic quality. BMC Plant Biology 2011, 11:58.
9. Causse M., Buret M., Robini K., Verschave P. Inheritance of nutritional and sensory quality traits in fresh market tomato and relation to consumer preferences. Journal of Food Science 2003, 68:2342-2350.
10. Causse M., Friguet C., Coiret C., Lépicier M., Navez B., Lee M., et al. Consumer preferences for fresh tomato at the European scale: A common segmentation on taste and firmness. Journal of Food Science 2010, 75(9):S531-S541.
11. Clarke R.J., Bakker J. Volatile components. Wine flavour chemistry 2004, 120-188. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford (UK). R.J. Clarke, J. Bakker (Eds.).
12. Eriksson L., Johansson E., Kettaneh-Wold N., Wold S. Multi- and megavariate data analysis. Principles and applications 2001, Umetrics Academy, Umeå (Sweden).
13. Hongsoongnern P., Chambers E. A lexicon for green odor or flavor and characteristics of chemicals associated with green. Journal of Sensory Studies 2008, 23(2):205-221.
14. Hough G., Wakeling I., Mucci A., Chambers E., Méndez Gallardo I., Rangel Alves L. Number of consumers necessary for sensory acceptability tests. Food Quality and Preference 2006, 17(6):522-526.
15. Jackson S.L. Research methods and statistics: A critical thinking approach 2012, Wadsworth Cengage Learning, Belmont, CA. 4th ed.
16. Kazeniac S.J., Hall R.M. Flavor chemistry of tomato volatiles. Journal of Food Science 1970, 35:519-530.
17. Krumbein A., Peters P., Bruckner B. Flavour compounds and a quantitative descriptive analysis of tomatoes (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) of different cultivars in short-term storage. Postharvest Biology and Technology 2004, 32(1):15-28.
18. Lisanti M.T., Piombino P., Genovese A., Pessina R., Moio L. Traditional Italian tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) cultivars and their commercial homologues: differences in volatile composition. Italian Journal of Food Science 2008, 20(3):333-350.
19. MacFie H.J.H., Bratchell N., Greenhoff K., Vallis L.V. Designs to balance the effect of order of presentation and first-order carry-over effects in hall tests. Journal of Sensory Studies 1989, 4:129-148.
20. Malundo T.M.M., Shewfelt R.L., Scott J.W. Flavor quality of fresh tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) as affected by sugar and acid levels. Postharvest Biology and Technology 1995, 6:103-110.
21. Petro-Turza M. Flavor of tomato and tomato products. Food Reviews International 1987, 2:309-351.
22. Pyne A.W., Wick E.L. Volatile components of tomatoes. Journal of Food Science 1965, 30:192-200.
23. Shidfar F., Froghifar N., Vafa M., Rajab A., Hosseini S., Shidfar S., et al. The effects of tomato consumption on serum glucose, apolipoprotein B, apolipoprotein A-I, homocysteine and blood pressure in type 2 diabetic patients. International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 2011, 6(3):289-294.
24. Sinesio F., Cammareri M., Moneta E., Navez B., Peparaio M., Silvertand B., et al. Sensory quality of fresh French and Dutch market tomatoes: a preference mapping study with Italian consumers. Journal of Food Science 2010, 75(1):S55-S67.
25. Sinesio F., Di Natale C., Quaglia G.B., Bucarelli F.M., Moneta E., Macagnano A., et al. Use of electronic nose and trained sensory panel in the evaluation of tomato quality. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 2000, 80(1):63-71.
26. Sinesio F., Moneta E., Peparaio M. Sensory characteristics of traditional field grown in southern Italy tomato genotypes. Journal of Food Quality 2007, 30(6):878-895.
27. Tandon K.S., Baldwin E.A., Scott J.W., Shewfelt R.L. Linking sensory descriptors to volatile and nonvolatile components of fresh tomato flavor. Journal of Food Science 2003, 68(7):2366-2371.
28. Tieman D., Bliss P., McIntyre L.M., Blandon-Ubeda A., Bies D., Odabasi A.Z., et al. The chemical interactions underlying tomato flavor preferences. Current Biology 2012, 22(11):1035-1039.
29. Tikunov Y., Lommen A., de Vos C.H., Verhoeven H.A., Bino R.J., Hall R.D., et al. A novel approach for nontargeted data analysis for metabolomics. Large-scale profiling of tomato fruit volatiles. Plant Physiology 2005, 139(3):1125-1137.
30. Ursem R., Tikunov Y., Bovy A., van Berloo R., van Euwijk F. A correlation network approach to metabolic data analyisis for tomato fruits. Euphytica 2008, 161:181-193.
31. Varela P., Ares G. Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization. Food Research International 2012, 48(2):893-908.
32. Zanor M.I., Rambla J.L., Chaïb J., Steppa A., Medina A., Granell A., et al. Metabolic characterization of loci affecting sensory attributes in tomato allows an assessment of the influence of the levels of primary metabolites and volatile organic contents. Journal of Experimental Botany 2009, 60(7):2139-2154.