Sugar reduction without compromising sensory perception. An impossible dream?

Sugar reduction in food and beverage products involves several challenges. Non-nutritive sweeteners may give unwanted off-flavors, while sugar-reduced products often lack mouthfeel. To overcome this, the addition of aroma to increase sweetness through cross-modal interactions, and the addition of hydrocolloids such as pectin to increase viscosity, have been suggested as strategies to aid sugar reduction. However, viscosity has been shown to decrease both taste and aroma intensities. An increase in viscosity may thereby affect the use of aromas as sweetness enhancers. Additionally, the effects of aromas and hydrocolloids on sweetness intensity and mouthfeel depend on the food matrix involved. The present study investigated cross-modal aroma–sweetness–viscosity interactions in two beverage matrices: water and apple nectar. The perceptual effects of vanilla aroma (0–1 mL/kg), sucrose (2.5%–7.5% w/w) and pectin (0%–0.3% w/w) were studied in both matrices. For each matrix, cross-modal interactions were analyzed with descriptive analysis using a trained sensory panel. The effect of vanilla aroma on sweetness intensity was found to be higher in apple nectar compared to in water. Furthermore, pectin affected neither taste, aroma, nor the cross-modal effects of aroma on taste in either of the matrices. These results indicate that pectin, in the studied range of concentrations, may be used to improve mouthfeel in sugar-reduced beverages, without compromising taste or aroma perception.

Section: The Effects Of Matrix On Sweetness-aroma-pectin Interactionssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…This may negatively affect consumers' acceptability of the products [3,4]. Instead of using non-nutritive sweeteners, it has been suggested to use cross-modal interactions as an alternative strategy to reduce the sugar content in many food and beverages [5][6][7][8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ternary Cross-Modal Interactions between Sweetness, Aroma, and Viscosity in Different Beverage Matrices

Bertelsen

Mielby

Byrne

et al. 2020

“…However, many non-nutritive sweeteners have a negative effect on consumers' acceptability of the products, as they can have off-flavors and a slow onset or a lingering of the sweet taste [3,4]. As eating and drinking are multisensory experiences, cross-modal interactions have been suggested as an alternative strategy in the reformulation of products with the aim of reducing the sugar content [5][6][7][8]. The addition of aroma has, for example, been shown to increase sweetness intensity in many studies [5,[9][10][11][12][13][14][15] and has therefore been suggested as a tool to aid sugar reduction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual Differences in Sweetness Ratings and Cross-Modal Aroma-Taste Interactions

Bertelsen

Mielby

Alexi

et al. 2020

Aroma-taste interactions, which are believed to occur due to previous coexposure (concurrent presence of aroma and taste), have been suggested as a strategy to aid sugar reduction in food and beverages. However, coexposures might be influenced by individual differences. We therefore hypothesized that aroma-taste interactions vary across individuals. The present study investigated how individual differences (gender, age, and sweet liker status) influenced the effect of aroma on sweetness intensity among young adults. An initial screening of five aromas, all congruent with sweet taste, for their sweetness enhancing effect was carried out using descriptive analysis. Among the aromas tested, vanilla was found most promising for its sweet enhancing effects and was therefore tested across three sucrose concentrations by 129 young adults. Among the subjects tested, females were found to be more susceptible to the sweetness enhancing effect of vanilla aroma than males. For males, the addition of vanilla aroma increased the sweet taste ratings significantly for the 22–25-year-olds, but not the 19–21-year-olds. Consumers were clustered according to their sweet liker status based on their liking for the samples. Although sweet taste ratings were found to vary with the sweet liker status, aroma enhanced the sweetness ratings similarly across clusters. These results call for more targeted product development in order to aid sugar reduction.

“…Considering the well-established importance of healthy nutrition for the prevention of noncommunicable diseases [44], the reformulation of foods still presents a significant challenge, particularly when addressing food ingredients which are directly effecting the sensory properties of foods (sugar, fat, salt, etc.) [45]. To guide consumers' food preference towards healthier choices, a complementary approach should also support the early development of healthy eating habits [46] and health literacy.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facilitating Consumers Choice of Healthier Foods: A Comparison of Different Front-of-Package Labelling Schemes Using Slovenian Food Supply Database

Kupirovič

Hristov

Hribar

et al. 2020

Summary indicator front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes are gaining momentum. In Europe, an example of such a scheme is Nutri-Score, which was first introduced in France. Supported by additional research, the scheme has the potential to expand into other countries. Such a scenario opens a series of questions related to the use of Nutri-Score in the territories with pre-existing food labelling schemes. A key question is whether different nutrition labelling schemes would provide conflicting information for consumers when applied to same foods. The goal of our study was, therefore, to evaluate the alignment of different front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes. The study was conducted using cross-sectional data on the composition of selected categories of prepacked foods with high penetration nutrition/health claims and symbols in the Slovenian food supply. We evaluated a variety of existing front-of-package nutrition labelling schemes: three interpretive nutrition rating systems (Nutri-Score, Health Star Rating (HSR), Traffic light system), four health symbols (Protective Food symbol, Choices, Finnish heart, and Keyhole symbol), and also three nutrient profile models developed for other purposes (Office of Communications (United Kingdom, Ofcom), World Health Organization Regional office for Europe (WHOE) and Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ)). Overall, our results indicate that interpretive nutrition rating systems (i.e., Nutri-Score) are mostly less strict than the nutrient profiles of tested health symbols. A risk of conflicting information would happen in a scenario where food is eligible to carry a health symbol, but is at the same time rated to have lower nutritional quality by an accompanying interpretive nutrition rating system. When Protective Food symbol and Nutri-Score are used together, this would occur for 5% of foods in our sample. To avoid such risks, schemes for health symbols could be adapted to be stricter than interpretive nutrition rating systems used in the same territory/market, but such adaptations are challenging and should be well planned. While our study showed that, in most cases, Nutri-Score is a less strict model than tested health symbols, the rating-system approach might offer useful support and incentive for food producers towards gradual food reformulation.