Textural Complexity Model Foods Assessed with Instrumental and Sensory Measurements

Journal of Texture Studies

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 9-22

  Tang, Jingyuan ^a   Larsen, Danaé S ^a   Ferguson, Lynnette ^a   James, Bryony J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

Descriptive analysis; gel; heterogeneous model foods; oral behavior; temporal dominance of sensations; texture complexity

Indexed keywords

FOOD TECHNOLOGY; GELS;

DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS; HETEROGENEOUS MODELING; ORAL BEHAVIOR; TEMPORAL DOMINANCE OF SENSATIONS; TEXTURE COMPLEXITY;

SENSORY ANALYSIS;

EID: 84964804726     PISSN: 00224901     EISSN: 17454603     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/jtxs.12188     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Blundell, J., De Graaf, C., Hulshof, T., Jebb, S., Livingstone, B., Lluch, A., Mela, D., Salah, S., Schuring, E. and Van der Knaap, H. 2010. Appetite control: Methodological aspects of the evaluation of foods. Obes. Rev. 11, 251–270.
2. Bolhuis, D.P., Lakemond, C.M., De Wijk, R.A., Luning, P.A. and De Graaf, C. 2011. Both longer oral sensory exposure to and higher intensity of saltiness decrease ad libitum food intake in healthy normal-weight men. J. Nutr. 141, 2242–2248.
3. Dan, H., Okuhara, K. and Kohyama, K. 2003. Discrimination of cucumber cultivars using a multiple-point sheet sensor to measure biting force. J. Sci. Food Agric. 83, 1320–1326.
4. De Graaf, C. and Kok, F.J. 2010. Slow food, fast food and the control of food intake. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 6, 290–293.
5. Demars, L.L. and Ziegler, G.R. 2001. Texture and structure of gelatin/pectin-based gummy confections. Food Hydrocoll. 15, 643–653.
6. Devezeaux De Lavergne, M., Van Delft, M., Van de Velde, F., Van Boekel, M.A.J.S. and Stieger, M. 2015. Dynamic texture perception and oral processing of semi-solid food gels: Part 1: Comparison between QDA, progressive profiling and TDS. Food Hydrocoll. 43, 207–217.
7. De Wijk, R., Zijlstra, N., Mars, M., De Graaf, C. and Prinz, J. 2008. The effects of food viscosity on bite size, bite effort and food intake. Physiol. Behav. 95, 527–532.
8. Food Standards Australia and New Zealand. 2015. Nutrition panel calculator. Retrieved from http://www.foodstandards.govt.nz/industry/npc/Pages/Nutrition-Panel-Calculator-introduction.aspx.
9. Forde, C.G., Van Kuijk, N., Thaler, T., De Graaf, C. and Martin, N. 2013. Oral processing characteristics of solid savoury meal components, and relationship with food composition, sensory attributes and expected satiation. Appetite 60, 208–219.
10. Hogenkamp, P.S., Stafleu, A., Mars, M., Brunstrom, J.M. and De Graaf, C. 2011. Texture, not flavor, determines expected satiation of dairy products. Appetite 57, 635–641.
11. Holm, K., Wendin, K. and Hermansson, A.-M. 2009. Sweetness and texture perceptions in structured gelatin gels with embedded sugar rich domains. Food Hydrocoll. 23, 2388–2393.
12. Hutchings, S.C., Foster, K.D., Bronlund, J.E., Lentle, R.G., Jones, J.R. and Morgenstern, M.P. 2011. Mastication of heterogeneous foods: Peanuts inside two different food matrices. Food Qual. Prefer. 22, 332–339.
13. Hutchings, S.C., Foster, K.D., Bronlund, J.E., Lentle, R.G., Jones, J.R. and Morgenstern, M.P. 2012. Particle breakdown dynamics of heterogeneous foods during mastication: Peanuts embedded inside different food matrices. J. Food Eng. 109, 736–744.
14. Hutchings, S.C., Foster, K.D., Hedderley, D.I. and Morgenstern, M.P. 2014. Differences between age groups in the use of the temporal dominance of sensations technique across a range of food textures. J. Texture Studies 45, 206–219.
15. Kohyama, K., Hatakeyama, E., Dan, H. and Sasaki, T. 2005. Effects of sample thickness on bite force for raw carrots and fish gels. J. Texture Studies 36, 157–173.
16. Labbe, D., Schlich, P., Pineau, N., Gilbert, F. and Martin, N. 2009. Temporal dominance of sensations and sensory profiling: A comparative study. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 216–221.
17. Larsen, D.S., Tang, J., Ferguson, L., Morgenstern, M.P. and James, B. 2015. Textural complexity is a food property – shown using model foods. Int. J. Food Properties. DOI:10.1080/10942912.2015.1027402
18. Lawless, H.T. and Heymann, H. 2010. Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practices. Springer, Berlin, Germany.
19. Lenfant, F., Loret, C., Pineau, N., Hartmann, C. and Martin, N. 2009. Perception of oral food breakdown. The concept of sensory trajectory. Appetite 52, 659–667.
20. Mars, M., Hogenkamp, P., Gosses, A., Stafleu, A. and De Graaf, C. 2009. Effect of viscosity on learned satiation. Physiol. Behav. 98, 60–66.
21. Meillon, S., Urbano, C. and Schlich, P. 2009. Contribution of the Temporal Dominance of Sensations (TDS) method to the sensory description of subtle differences in partially dealcoholized red wines. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 490–499.
22. Meillon, S., Viala, D., Medel, M., Urbano, C., Guillot, G. and Schlich, P. 2010. Impact of partial alcohol reduction in Syrah wine on perceived complexity and temporality of sensations and link with preference. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 732–740.
23. Mosca, A.C., Velde, F.V.D., Bult, J.H.F., Van Boekel, M.A.J.S. and Stieger, M. 2010. Enhancement of sweetness intensity in gels by inhomogeneous distribution of sucrose. Food Qual. Prefer. 21, 837–842.
24. Mosca, A.C., Rocha, J.A., Sala, G., Van de Velde, F. and Stieger, M. 2012a. Inhomogeneous distribution of fat enhances the perception of fat-related sensory attributes in gelled foods. Food Hydrocoll. 27, 448–455.
25. Mosca, A.C., Van de Velde, F., Bult, J.H.F., Van Boekel, M.A.J.S. and Stieger, M. 2012b. Effect of gel texture and sucrose spatial distribution on sweetness perception. LWT – Food Sci. Technol. 46, 183–188.
26. Nakao, S., Ishihara, S., Nakauma, M. and Funami, T. 2013. Inhomogeneous spatial distribution of aroma compounds in food gels for enhancement of perceived aroma intensity and muscle activity during oral processing. J. Texture Studies 44, 289–300.
27. Oraguzie, N., Alspach, P., Volz, R., Whitworth, C., Ranatunga, C., Weskett, R. and Harker, R. 2009. Postharvest assessment of fruit quality parameters in apple using both instruments and an expert panel. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 52, 279–287.
28. Pineau, N., Schlich, P., Cordelle, S., Mathonnière, C., Issanchou, S., Imbert, A., Rogeaux, M., Etiévant, P. and Köster, E. 2009. Temporal dominance of sensations: Construction of the TDS curves and comparison with time–intensity. Food Qual. Prefer. 20, 450–455.
29. Pineau, N., de Bouillé, A.G.D., Lepage, M., LENFANT, F., Schlich, P., Martin, N. and Rytz, A. 2012. Temporal dominance of sensations: What is a good attribute list? Food Qual. Pref. 26(2), 159–165.
30. Weijzen, P.L., Smeets, P.A. and De Graaf, C. 2009. Sip size of orangeade: Effects on intake and sensory-specific satiation. Br. J. Nutr. 102, 1091.
31. Wilkinson, C., Dijksterhuis, G.B. and Minekus, M. 2000. From food structure to texture. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 11, 442–450.
32. Zdunek, A., Cybulska, J., Konopacka, D. and Rutkowski, K. 2010a. New contact acoustic emission detector for texture evaluation of apples. J. Food Eng. 99, 83–91.
33. Zdunek, A., Konopacka, D. and Jesionkowska, K. 2010b. Crispness and crunchiness judgment of apples based on contact acoustic emission. J. Texture Studies 41, 75–91.
34. Zijlstra, N., Mars, M., DE, De Wijk, R., Westerterp-Plantenga, M. and De Graaf, C. 2008. The effect of viscosity on ad libitum food intake. Int. J. Obes. 32, 676–683.
35. Zijlstra, N., De Wijk, R., Mars, M., Stafleu, A. and De Graaf, C. 2009. Effect of bite size and oral processing time of a semisolid food on satiation. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 90, 269–275.
36. Zijlstra, N., Mars, M., Stafleu, A. and De Graaf, C. 2010. The effect of texture differences on satiation in 3 pairs of solid foods. Appetite 55, 490–497.