Evaluation of Aroma Differences between Hand-Squeezed Juices from Valencia Late and Navel Oranges by Quantitation of Key Odorants and Flavor Reconstitution Experiments

Abstract

Twenty-five odor-active compounds were quantified in hand-squeezed juices of Valencia late and Navel oranges using stable isotope dilution assays. Odor activity values (OAVs, ratio of the concentration to odor thresholds) based on odor thresholds in water were calculated for the entire set of aroma compounds in both varieties. It was shown that due to their high OAVs, the fruity-smelling esters ethyl 2-methylpropanoate, ethyl butanoate, (S)-ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, and 3a,4,5,7a-tetrahydro-3,6-dimethyl-2(3H)-benzofuranone (wine lactone), the grassy smelling (Z)-hex-3-enal, and the citrus-like decanal were the most potent odorants in both juices. The weaker fruity note in the Navel oranges was clearly correlated with significantly lower OAVs of all fruity-smelling esters but a higher OAV of (Z)-3-hexenal compared to Valencia late. Model solutions simulating the odor of both orange varieties confirmed the findings of the quantitation studies.

Emission of oxygenated volatile organic compounds (OVOCs) during the aerobic decomposition of orange wastes

“…Although 2,4,6-trimethyl-1,3,5-trioxane and 1,1,-diethoxy-ethane, as products from the condensation of acetaldehyde, were previously observed in fruit such as capers (Ozcan and Chalchat, 2007) and fermentative food such as grape wine (Lee and Noble, 2003) and pomaces (Ruberto et al, 2008), they have never been reported in citrus fruits, and in our study they were merely trivial constituents detected in emitted OVOCs. This profile of emitted OVOCs was consistent with that of OVOCs in citrus fruit flesh (Umano et al, 2002) or juice (Buettner and Schieberle, 2001;Brat et al, 2003), with ethanol, acetaldehyde, and ethyl acetate being the predominant compounds extracted. Also, the results in the study were quite similar to previous studies, which revealed that ethanol, ethyl acetate, 2-butanone and acetaldehyde typically showed high levels in odor sources such as municipal solid wastes (Staley et al, 2006) and waste treatment facilities (Eitzer, 1995;Smet et al, 1999;Dorado et al, 2014;Lehtinen et al, 2013).…”

“…Alcohols dominated in released OVOCs and were followed by esters, ketones and aldehydes (Table 1, Fig. 2), just as those detected in citrus fruit flesh (Umano et al, 2002) and juice (Buettner and Schieberle, 2001;Brat et al, 2003) and in intermediates of aerobic metabolism of organic materials (Eitzer, 1995;Staley et al, 2006). Alcohols were also observed as major VOCs emitted from green wastes (lawn clippings, yard prunings, and food wastes, as well as green and woody wastes) (Kumar et al, 2011) and biowastes (70% garden waste, 20% kitchen waste and 10% nonrecyclable paper) (Smet et al, 1999) during the aerobic composting process.…”

“…Although OVOCs are major biogenic volatile organic compounds from living plant leaves (Seco et al, 2007;Laffineur et al, 2012) or fruit (Buettner and Schieberle, 2001;Umano et al, 2002;Brat et al, 2003), as metabolites formed largely from pectin (Laffineur et al, 2012), fatty or amino acid precursors (Peterson and Reineccius, 2002), they can be formed during the decomposition or decay of organic matters such as plant litters (Isidorov and Jdanova, 2002;Gray et al, 2010), green wastes (Kumar et al, 2011) and vegetable, fruit and garden wastes (Defoer et al, 2002). Thus, OVOCs are also major non-methane organic compounds in waste gases from various waste treatment processes including transferring (Dorado et al, 2014), landfilling (Davoli et al, 2003;Dincer et al, 2006;Tassi et al, 2009) and composting (Eitzer, 1995;Smet et al, 1999;Pierucci et al, 2005;Romain et al, 2005;Staley et al, 2006;He et al, 2010;Kumar et al, 2011;Lehtinen et al, 2013).…”

Sensory and Hedonic Evaluation in Response to Food-Cue Exposure: The Case of Juicing Demonstration of Fresh Oranges

“…The aroma of fresh squeezed orange juice has been perceived as one characteristic distinguishing it from processed orange juices (Buettner & Schieberle, 2001). The one-way ANOVA results (within the control group) indicated that consumers did not significantly distinguish the flavor (p=0.39) and aroma (p=0.08) of fresh squeezed orange juice but, they significantly distinguished the color (p<0.0001).…”

“…It should be noted that commercial brand orange juice, even of the same brand, comes in different varieties, depending on availability. While orange varieties can affect sensory properties (Buettner & Schieberle, 2001), Lotong, Chambers, & Chambers (2003) found that the flavor of most commercial orange juice brands is not differentiable based on sensory characteristics.…”