Advertisement

European Food Research and Technology

, Volume 244, Issue 12, pp 2117–2125 | Cite as

Use of verjuice as an acidic salad seasoning ingredient: evaluation by consumers’ liking and Check-All-That-Apply

  • Amanda Dupas de Matos
  • Massimiliano Magli
  • Matteo Marangon
  • Andrea Curioni
  • Gabriella Pasini
  • Simone Vincenzi
Original Paper

Abstract

Verjuice is an unfermented juice produced by pressing unripe grapes used as acidifying in food preparations. In this study, the drivers of consumers’ liking of three acidic salad seasonings (verjuice, lemon juice, and white wine vinegar) were compared by Check-All-That-Apply test. Results showed that overall liking scores were not different for salads seasoned with verjuice and lemon juice, whereas they were significantly higher for those seasoned with vinegar. The liking was associated with moderate sweetness and vinegar aroma typical of vinegar, while it was opposed to lemon aroma, astringent, bitter, high acidity, aqueous viscosity, yellowish color of seasoning, herbaceous, and vegetable aroma typical of lemon juice and verjuice. The approach used resulted appropriate to identify the drivers of liking. Results showed that verjuice can be a valid alternative to common acidic salad seasoning, and indicated the directions for future improvements of this product.

Keywords

Verjuice Salad seasoning Sensory evaluation Consumer test Unripe grape juice Check-All-That-Apply 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was support by Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) (Grant number: 204483/2014-0) and University of Padova. This study was undertaken as part of the PhD program Land, Environment, Resources, and Health of Amanda Dupas de Matos. The authors wish to thank Marco Lucchetta for donating the grapes.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Compliance with ethics requirements

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

All subjects involved in the sensory study were preliminary informed about the aim of the research and the nature of the samples and a signed consent form was collected from each panellist. No personal data were collected or used in any forms.

References

  1. 1.
    De Melo ANF, De Souza EL, Da Silva Araujo VB, Magnani M (2015) Stability, nutritional and sensory characteristics of French salad dressing made with mannoprotein from spent brewer’s yeast. LWT Food Sci Technol 62:771–774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sirò I, Kápolna E, Kápolna B, Lugasi A (2008) Functional food. Product development, marketing and consumer acceptance—a review. Appetite 51:456–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sikora M, Badrie N, Deisingh AK, Kowalski S (2008) Sauces and dressings: a review of properties and applications. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 48:50–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tesfaye W, Morales ML, GarcÍa-Parrilla MC, Troncoso AM (2002) Wine vinegar: technology, authenticity and quality evaluation. Trends Food Sci Technol 13:12–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mas A, Torija MJ, García-Parrilla MC, Troncoso AM (2014) Acetic acid bacteria and the production and quality of wine vinegar. Sci World J 2014:394671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ho CW, Lazim AM, Fazry S, Zaki UKHH, Lim SJ (2017) Varieties, production, composition and health benefits of vinegars: a review. Food Chem 221:1621–1630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nikfardjam MSP (2008) General and polyphenolic composition of unripe grape juice (verjus/verjuice) from various producers. Mitt Klosterneubg 58:28–31Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hayoglu I, Kola O, Kaya C, Özer S, Turkoglu H (2009) Chemical and sensory properties of verjuice, a traditional Turkish non-fermented beverage from kabarcik and yediveren grapes. J Food Process Preserv 33:252–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Karapinar M, Sengun IY (2007) Antimicrobial effect of koruk (unripe grape—Vitis vinifera) juice against Salmonella typhimuriumon salad vegetables. Food Control 18:702–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Karabiyikli S, Öncül N (2016) Inhibitory effect of unripe grape products on foodborne pathogens. J Food Process Preserv 40:1459–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dupas de Matos A, Curioni A, Bakalinsky AT, Marangon M, Pasini G, Vincenzi S (2017) Chemical and sensory analysis of verjuice: an acidic food ingredient obtained from unripe grape berries. Innov Food Sci Emerg Technol 44:9–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    ZibaeeNezhad MJ, Mohammadi E, Beigi MAB, Mirzamohammadi F, Salehi O (2012) The effects of unripe grape juice on lipid profile improvement. Cholesterol 2012:890262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alipour M, Davoudi P, Davoudi Z (2012) Effects of unripe grape juice (verjuice) on plasma lipid profile, blood pressure, malondialdehyde and total antioxidant capacity in normal, hyperlipidemic and hyperlipidemic with hypertensive human volunteers. J Med Plants Res 6:5677–5683Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Adams J, Williams A, Lancaster B, Foley M (2007) Advantages and uses of check-all-that-apply response compared to traditional scaling of attributes for salty snacks. In: 7th pangborn sensory science symposium Minneapolis, USA, 12–16 August, 2007Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Varela P, Ares G (2012) Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization. Food Res Int 48:893–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bruzzone F, Vidal L, Antúnez L, Giménez A, Deliza R, Ares G (2015) Comparison of intensity scales and CATA questions in new product development: sensory characterisation and directions for product reformulation of milk desserts. Food Qual Prefer 44:183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Coombe B (1995) Adoption of a system for identifying grapevine growth stages. Aust J Grape Wine Res 1:100–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ares G, Jaeger SR (2015) Check-all-that-apply (CATA) questions with consumers in practice: experimental considerations and impact on outcome. In: Delarue J, Lawlor B, Rogeaux M (eds) Rapid sensory profiling techniques. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, pp 227–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alcaire F, Antúnez L, Vidal L, Giménez A, Ares G (2017) Aroma-related cross-modal interactions for sugar reduction in milk desserts: influence on consumer perception. Food Res Int 97:45–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Van Trijp HC, Punter PH, Mickartz F, Kruithof L (2007) The quest for the ideal product: comparing different methods and approaches. Food Qual Prefer 18:729–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ares G, Dauber C, Fernández E, Giménez A, Varela P (2014) Penalty analysis based on CATA questions to identify drivers of liking and directions for product reformulation. Food Qual Prefer 32:65–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ares G, Etchemendy E, Antúnez L, Vidal L, Giménez A, Jaeger SR (2014) Visual attention by consumers to check-all-that-apply questions: Insights to support methodological development. Food Qual Prefer 32:210–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Parente ME, Manzoni AV, Ares G (2011) External preference mapping of commercial antiaging creams based on consumers’ responses to a check-all-that-apply question. J Sens Stud 26:158–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Meyners M, Castura JC, Carr T (2013) Existing and new approaches for the analysis of CATA data. Food Qual Prefer 30:309–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Laureati M, Cattaneo C, Lavelli V, Bergamaschi V, Riso P, Pagliarini E (2017) Application of the check-all-that-apply method (CATA) to get insights on children’s drivers of liking of fiber-enriched apple purees. J Sens Stud 32:e12253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Xiong R, Meullenet JF (2006) A PLS dummy variable approach to assess the impact of jar attributes on liking. Food Qual Prefer 17:188–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Plaehn D (2012) CATA penalty/reward. Food Qual Prefer 24:141–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Varela P, Ares G (2014) Novel techniques in sensory characterization and consumer profiling. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Martens H, Martens M (2000) Modified Jack-knife estimation of parameter uncertainty in bilinear modelling by partial least squares regression (PLSR). Food Qual Prefer 11:5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cadot Y, Caillé S, Samsonc A, Barbeaua G, Cheynier V (2010) Sensory dimension of wine typicality related to a terroir by quantitative descriptive analysis, just about right analysis and typicality assessment. Anal Chim Acta 660:53–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Marcano J, Varela P, Cunha LM, Fiszman S S (2015) Relating dynamic perception of reformulated cheese pies to consumers’ expectations of satiating ability. Food Res Int 78:369–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Byrne B (2016) Interactions in chemesthesis: everything affects everything else. In: McDonald ST, Bolliet DA, Hayes JE (eds) Chemesthesis: chemical touch in food and eating. Wiley Blackwell, New Jersey, pp 154–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Duffy VB, Rawal S, Park J, Brand MH, Sharafi M, Bolling BW (2016) Characterizing and improving the sensory and hedonic responses to polyphenol-rich aronia berry juice. Appetite 107:116–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Iland PG, Dry PR, Proffit T, Tyerman S (2011) The grapevine: from the science to the practice of growing vines for wine. Patrick Iland Wine Promotions, AdelaideGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ares G, Barreiro C, Deliza R, Giménez ANA, Gambaro A (2010) Application of a check-all-that-apply question to the development of chocolate milk desserts. J Sens Stud 25:67–86Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dooley L, Lee Y-S, Meullenet J-F (2010) The application of check-all-that-apply (CATA) consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping. Food Qual Prefer 21:394–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE)University of PadovaLegnaro (PD)Italy
  2. 2.Centre for Research in Viticulture and Enology (CIRVE)Conegliano (TV)Italy
  3. 3.IBIMET-BIOAGRIFOOD Department CNRBolognaItaly

Personalised recommendations