Relationship between Sensory and Instrumental Hardness of Commercial Cheeses

Abstract

The effect of deformation (10% to 90%) and deformation rate (0.2 to 10 mm/s) on both maximum compression force and correlation between sensory and instrumental measurements of hardness were investigated for 26 commercial cheeses. Log-linear regression models were used to model the relationship between deformation rate and maximum compression force and fitted well to the relationship, indicating that maximum compression force is a log linear function of deformation rate. Deformation had a large effect on the correlation between sensory and instrumental hardness, while deformation rate had a small effect. The optimal deformation and deformation rate for the maximum correlation were 70% to 90% and 1.0 mm/s, respectively. This implies that an optimal combination of deformation and deformation rate can be used for maximizing the correlation between sensory and instrumental hardness for cheese products.

Rheology and melt characterization of low-fat and full fat Mozzarella cheese made from microfluidized milk

“…Relating rheology of a cheese to the texture perceived by the consumer is not an easy task (Jack, Paterson, & Piggot, 1993;Peleg, 1983) although instrumental hardness and sensory firmness of cheeses are shown to be related (Drake, Boylston, & Swanson, 1996;Xiong, Meullenet, Hankins, & Chung, 2002). The exact relationship varies depending on the type and training of sensory panels and the specific tests selected to profile the rheology of the cheese.…”

“…Drake et al (1996) report that consumers could tell the difference between full and LF Cheddar cheeses (with and without fat replacers) and to a certain degree the differences among the LF cheeses; although instrumental values for firmness (cone penetrometer) did not rank the cheeses the same as firmness scores (trained descriptive analysis panel) or the texture scores (untrained consumer acceptance panel). Xiong et al (2002) evaluated 26 different types of commercial cheeses and reported that instrumental hardness (maximum compression force) had the highest correlation to sensory hardness (trained descriptive analysis panel) when instrument tests were conducted at 70-90% compression. Brown, Foegeding, Daubert, Drake, and Gumpertz (2003) reported, that for young Mozzarella and Monterey Jack cheeses, sensory scores (trained descriptive analysis panel) for hand firmness were related to phase angle, maximum compliance, and per cent creep recovery, while hand springiness was related to fracture modulus and first bite firmness was related to maximum compliance.…”

Textural profile analysis of paneer dried with low pressure superheated steam

“…Optimal combination of deformation and deformation rate can be used for maximizing the correlation between sensory and instrumental hardness for cheese products (Xiong et al 2002). Sensory and instrumental measurements were quantifi ed to assess hardness, cohesiveness and adhesiveness.…”

Developing a trained sensory panel for comparison of different brands of vanilla ice cream using descriptive sensory analysis

“…During the test sessions, each panellist quantitatively evaluated 3 local brands of vanilla ice cream (referred to as S1, S2 and S3 in the text) for 8 sensory attributes in comparison to the standard attribute intensities of the reference samples. The collected data were statistically analysed using two-way ANOVA and the results are given in Table 6 Table 4 for the names of the reference samples b Tolerance range = panel mean intensity ± 10 mm reported to be common even when using a highly trained panel (Xiong et al, 2002), as each member of the panel tend to use the given scale in different proportions to express the perceived intensity (Meilgaard et al, 2006). Increasing the number of practice sessions and advising the panellists to compare the perceived attribute intensity of the test sample against the intensities of both reference samples (instead of one) before rating the test sample are some of the measures that can be proposed to minimise the panellist effect.…”