Chemosensory Perception

, Volume 2, Issue 1, pp 32–39 | Cite as

Efficacy of Various Palate Cleansers with Representative Foods

Article

Abstract

Palate cleansers are used to remove residuals and prevent adaptation that may otherwise alter intensity ratings. Foods were categorized into seven types (sweet, bitter, fatty, astringent, hot/spicy, cooling, and non-lingering) and a representative food was selected from each (jelly beans, coffee, smoked sausage, tea, spicy tortilla chip, mint, and applesauce, for each food type, respectively). A variety of documented palate cleansers typically used with each food type were identified (i.e., table water crackers, spring water, pectin solution, whole milk, chocolate, and warm water). Subsequently, all representative foods were assessed with all palate cleansers by 24 panelists. Only table water crackers were effective at preventing significant differences across replicates for all tested foods.

Keywords

Palate Cleanser Adaptation Intensity Assessment Interstimulus Interval Taste Flavor 

References

  1. Adhikari K, Heymann H, Huff HE (2003) Textural characteristics of low fat, full fat and smoked cheeses: sensory and instrumental approaches. Food Qual Prefer 14(3):211–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allison A-M, Work T (2004) Fiery and frosty foods pose challenges in sensory evaluation. Food Technology 58:32–37, MayGoogle Scholar
  3. Allison A-M, Chambers E, Milliken GA, Chambers DH (1999) Effects of interstimulus rinsing and time on measurements of capsaicin heat in tomato salsa. J Sens Stud 14:401–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Azanza MPV, Basman ICV, Magsuci CD, Mauricio RA (2004) Development of quick-cooking meat congees using multi-level sensory evaluation. Food Qual Prefer 15(4):331–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ball RD, Murray SH, Young H, Gilbert JM (1998) Statistical analysis relating analytical and consumer panel assessments of kiwifruit flavour compounds in a model juice base. Food Qual Prefer 9(4):255–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brannan GD, Setser CS, Kemp KE (2001) Effectiveness of rinses in alleviating bitterness and astringency residuals in model solutions. J Sens Stud 16(3):261–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Butler G, Poste LM, Mackie DA, Jones A (1996) Time-intensity as a tool for the measurement of meat tenderness. Food Qual Prefer 7(3–4):193–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carbonell L, Izquierdo L, Carbonell I (2007) Sensory analysis of Spanish mandarin juices. Selection of attributes and panel performance. Food Qual Prefer 18(2):329–341CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colonna AE, Adams DO, Noble A (2004) Comparison of procedures for reducing astringency carry-over effects in evaluation of red wines. Aust J Grape Wine Res 10:26–31Google Scholar
  10. Daillant-Spinnler B, MacFie HJH, Beyts PK, Hedderley D (1996) Relationships between perceived sensory properties and major preference directions of 12 varieties of apples from the Southern Hemisphere. Food Qual Prefer 7(2):113–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Delwiche J, O’Mahony M (1996) Changes in secreted salivary sodium are sufficient to alter salt taste sensitivity: use of signal detection measures with continuous monitoring of the oral environment. Physiol Behav 59(4–5):605–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dowell KJ, Chambers E, Milliken GA, Chambers DH (2005) Predicting interstimulus intervals between samples for capsaicin-containing salsa with a range of heat levels. J Sens Stud 20(3):187–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Duizer LM, Bloom K, Findlay CJ (1995) The effect of line orientation on the recording of time-intensity perception of sweetener solutions. Food Qual Prefer 6(2):121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Esaiassen M, Østli J, Elvevoll EO, Joensen S, Prytz K, Richardsen R (2004) Brining of cod fillets: influence on sensory properties and consumers liking. Food Qual Prefer 15(5):421–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Findlay CJ, Castura JS, Lesschaeve I (2007) Feedback calibration: a training method for descriptive panels. Food Qual Prefer 18(2):321–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Forde CG, Delahunty CM (2004) Understanding the role cross-modal sensory interactions play in food acceptability in younger and older consumers. Food Qual Prefer 15(7–8):715–727CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Graebe K (2001) Mint toothpaste. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sensory/message/1529. Accessed 10 January 2007
  18. Green C (2002) Mint mouthwash. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sensory/message/3323. Accessed 10 January 2007
  19. Gwartney E, Heymann H (1995) The temporal perception of menthol. J Sens Stud 10:393–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hutchinson SE, Trontow LA, Vickers ZM (1990) The effectiveness of common foods for reduction of capsaicin burn. J Sens Stud 4(3):157–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ishii R, Chang H-K, O’Mahony M (2007a) A comparison of serial monadic and attribute-by-attribute protocols for simple descriptive analysis with untrained judges. Food Qual Prefer 18(2):440–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ishii R, Kawaguchi H, O’Mahony M, Rousseau B (2007b) Relating consumer and trained panels’ discriminative sensitivities using vanilla flavored ice cream as a medium. Food Qual Prefer 18(1):89–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jacobsson A, Nielsen T, Sjöholm I, Wendin K (2004) Influence of packaging material and storage condition on the sensory quality of broccoli. Food Qual Prefer 15(4):301–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Johnson EA, Vickers Z (2004) The effectiveness of palate cleansing strategies for evaluating the bitterness of caffeine in cream cheese. Food Qual Prefer 15(4):311–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kremer S, Mojet J, Kroeze JHA (2007) Differences in perception of sweet and savoury waffles between elderly and young subjects. Food Qual Prefer 18(1):106–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Larsen H, Lea P, Rødbotten M (2005) Sensory changes in extruded oat stored under different packaging, light and temperature conditions. Food Qual Prefer 16(7):573–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lavin JG, Lawless HT (1998) Effects of color and odor on judgments of sweetness among children and adults. Food Qual Prefer 9(4):283–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lawless HT, Sheng N, Knoops SSCP (1995) Multidimensional scaling of sorting data applied to cheese perception. Food Qual Prefer 6(2):91–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mehinagic E, Royer G, Bertrand D, Symoneaux R, Laurens F, Jourjon F (2003) Relationship between sensory analysis, penetrometry and visible–NIR spectroscopy of apples belonging to different cultivars. Food Qual Prefer 14(5–6):473–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mialon VS, Clark MR, Leppard PI, Cox DN (2002) The effect of dietary fibre information on consumer responses to breads and “English” muffins: a cross-cultural study. Food Qual Prefer 13(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nasrawi CW, Pangborn RM (1989) The influence of tastants on oral irritation by capsaicin. J Sens Stud 3:287–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nindjin C, Otokoré D, Hauser S, Tschannen A, Farah Z, Girardin O (2007) Determination of relevant sensory properties of pounded yams (Dioscorea spp.) using a locally based descriptive analysis methodology. Food Qual Prefer 18(2):450–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Noble A (2007) Capsaicin. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sensory/message/2473. Accessed 10 January 2007
  34. Nurgel C, Pickering GJ (2006) Modeling of sweet, bitter and irritant sensations and their interactions elicited by model ice wines. J Sens Stud 21(5):505–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Mahony M (1972a) The interstimulus interval for taste: 1. Efficiency of expectoration and mouth rinsing in clearing the mouth of salt residuals. Perception 1:209–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. O’Mahony M (1972b) The interstimulus interval for taste: 2. Salt taste sensitivity drifts and the effects on intensity scaling and threshold measurement. Perception 1:217–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. O’Mahony M, Godman L (1974) The effect of interstimulus procedures on salt taste thresholds. Percept Psychophys 16(3):456–465Google Scholar
  38. Olarte C, Gonzalez-Fandos E, Sanz S (2001) A proposed methodology to determine the sensory quality of a fresh goat's cheese (Cameros cheese): application to cheeses packaged under modified atmospheres. Food Qual Prefer 12(3):163–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ovejero-Lopez I, Bro R, Bredie WIP (2005) Univariate and multivariate modelling of flavour release in chewing gum using time intensity: a comparison of data analytical methods. Food Qual Prefer 16:327–343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Park J-Y, O’Mahony M, Kim K-O (2007) Different-stimulus’ scaling errors; effects of scale length. Food Qual Prefer 18(2):362–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pickering GJ, Robert G (2006) Perception of mouth feel sensations elicited by red wine are associated with sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracil. J Sens Stud 21(3):249–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Piper D (2005) Mint gum. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sensory/message/5059. Accessed 10 January 2007
  43. Ross CF, Hinken C, Weller K (2007) Efficacy of palate cleansers for reductions of astringency carryover during repeated ingestions of red wine. J Sens Stud 22:293–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Schiffman S, Sattely-Miller E, Bishay I (2007) Time to maximum sweetness intensity of binary and ternary blends of sweeteners. Food Qual Prefer 18(2):405–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Stampanoni Koeferli CR, Piccinali P, Sigrist S (1996) The influence of fat, sugar and non-fat milk solids on selected taste, flavor and texture parameters of a vanilla ice-cream. Food Qual Prefer 7(2):9–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stevens DA, Lawless HT (1986) Putting out the fire: effects of tastants on oral chemical irritation. Percept Psychophys 39(5):46–350Google Scholar
  47. Summers T. (2005). Menthol/mints. http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/sensory/message/4866. Accessed 10 January 2007
  48. Wolf Frandsen L, Dijksterhuis G, Brockoff P, Nielsen J, Martens M (2007) Feelings as a basis for discrimination: comparison of a modified authenticity test with the same–different test for slightly different types of milk. Food Qual Prefer 18(1):97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhao L, Tepper BJ (2007) Perception and acceptance of selected high-intensity sweeteners and blends in model soft drinks by propylthiouracil (PROP) non-tasters and super-tasters. Food Qual Prefer 18(3):31–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Food Science and TechnologyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA
  2. 2.Solae, LLCSt. LouisUSA
  3. 3.Firmenich, Inc.PrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations