Cargando…
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels
Astringency is often difficult to evaluate accurately in wine because of its complexity. This accuracy can improve through training sessions, but it can be time-consuming and expensive. A way to reduce these costs can be the use of wine experts, who are known to be reliable evaluators. Therefore, th...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352104/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30577639 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods8010003 |
_version_ | 1783390751073239040 |
---|---|
author | Mihnea, Mihaela Aleixandre-Tudó, José Luis Kidd, Martin du Toit, Wessel |
author_facet | Mihnea, Mihaela Aleixandre-Tudó, José Luis Kidd, Martin du Toit, Wessel |
author_sort | Mihnea, Mihaela |
collection | PubMed |
description | Astringency is often difficult to evaluate accurately in wine because of its complexity. This accuracy can improve through training sessions, but it can be time-consuming and expensive. A way to reduce these costs can be the use of wine experts, who are known to be reliable evaluators. Therefore, the aim of this work was to compare the sensory results and the panel performance obtained using trained panelists versus wine experts (winemakers). Judges evaluated twelve red wines for in-mouth basic perception (sweet, sour, bitter, astringent, and burning sensation) following the same tasting protocol and with the samples being presented in two different tasting modalities. Panels’ performance and relationship between the chemical composition and the sensory perception were investigated. Both panels showed similar consistency and repeatability, and they were able to accurately measure the astringency of the wines. However, the significant correlations between sensory scores and chemical composition varied with the panel and the tasting modality. From our results, we could see that winemakers tended to discriminate better between the samples when the differences were very small. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6352104 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-63521042019-02-01 Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels Mihnea, Mihaela Aleixandre-Tudó, José Luis Kidd, Martin du Toit, Wessel Foods Article Astringency is often difficult to evaluate accurately in wine because of its complexity. This accuracy can improve through training sessions, but it can be time-consuming and expensive. A way to reduce these costs can be the use of wine experts, who are known to be reliable evaluators. Therefore, the aim of this work was to compare the sensory results and the panel performance obtained using trained panelists versus wine experts (winemakers). Judges evaluated twelve red wines for in-mouth basic perception (sweet, sour, bitter, astringent, and burning sensation) following the same tasting protocol and with the samples being presented in two different tasting modalities. Panels’ performance and relationship between the chemical composition and the sensory perception were investigated. Both panels showed similar consistency and repeatability, and they were able to accurately measure the astringency of the wines. However, the significant correlations between sensory scores and chemical composition varied with the panel and the tasting modality. From our results, we could see that winemakers tended to discriminate better between the samples when the differences were very small. MDPI 2018-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6352104/ /pubmed/30577639 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods8010003 Text en © 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Mihnea, Mihaela Aleixandre-Tudó, José Luis Kidd, Martin du Toit, Wessel Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title | Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_full | Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_fullStr | Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_full_unstemmed | Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_short | Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_sort | basic in-mouth attribute evaluation: a comparison of two panels |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6352104/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30577639 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods8010003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mihneamihaela basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels AT aleixandretudojoseluis basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels AT kiddmartin basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels AT dutoitwessel basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels |