Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of sensory attributes of coffee brews from robusta coffee roasted under different conditions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Food Research and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Robusta coffee beans with a different initial moisture of 5, 7.5 and 10% were convectively roasted at 230 °C, microwaved at 700 W, and roasted by the coupled convective-microwave method. Sensory attributes of brews prepared from these coffee samples were evaluated. Final temperature of microwaved coffee beans was lower than that of the beans processed by the two other methods, which resulted in a higher content of volatile aroma compounds and a lesser degree of charring of their surface. Lower initial humidity of coffee beans shortened the time of roasting. However, the aroma developed upon roasting of the moistest beans was the most intense and pleasant. Modification of roasting conditions increased shifting of the overall acceptability of coffee infusions by 2 points in a 10-point hedonic scale, which implies that, if roasting conditions are adequate to the type of coffee, its sensory characteristics can be improved. Thus, optimization of roasting parameters can increase the share of robusta in well-accepted commercial coffee blends, a convenient fact because of the significant difference in price between the latter and arabica coffee.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+
from $39.99 /Month
  • Starting from 10 chapters or articles per month
  • Access and download chapters and articles from more than 300k books and 2,500 journals
  • Cancel anytime
View plans

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Feria-Morales AM (2002) Food Qual Prefer 13:355–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mendes LC, de Menezes HC, Aparecida M, Silva AP (2001) Food Qual Prefer 12:153–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bicchi CP, Binello AE, Pellegrino GM, Vanni AC (1995) J Agric Food Chem 43:1549–1555

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. McEwan JA (1998) Food Technol 52:52–56

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gutwein RW, Kirkpatrick SJ, (1998) US Patent, 5,721,005

  6. Schenker S, Handschin S, Frey B, Perren R, Escher F (1999) In: Proceedings of the 18th ASIC Colloquium, Helsinki, Finland, pp 127–135

  7. Maki Y, Harujama T (1995) Patent WO 95/20325

  8. Jensen MR, Kirkpatrick SJ, Leppla JK (1995) US Patent, 5,322,703

  9. Nijhuis HH, Torringa HM, Muresan S, Yuksel D, Leguijt C, Kloek W (1998) Trends Food Sci Tech 9:13–20

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Overton SV, Manura JJ (1999) http://www.sisweb.com/referenc/applnote/ap11-a.htm

  11. Sanz C, Czerny M, Cid C (2002) Eur Food Res Technol 214:299–302

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. de Jong S, Heidema J, van der Knaap HCM (1998) Food Qual Prefer 3:111–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. ISO 6668:2000. Green coffee. Preparation of samples for use in sensory analysis. Technical Corrigendum 1

  14. Cristovam E, Russell C, Peterson A, Reid E (2000) Food Qual Prefer 11:437–444

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. ISO 8586-1:1993. Sensory analysis—General guidance for the selection, training and monitoring of assessors. Selected assessors

  16. ISO 5496:1992. Sensory analysis. Methodology. Initiation and training of assessors in the detection and recognition of odours

  17. Stampanoni Koeferli, CR (1998) Przem Spoż 4:36–39

    Google Scholar 

  18. Narain C, Peterson A, Reid E (2004) Food Qual Prefer 15:31–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. ISO 8589:1994. Sensory analysis. General guidance for the design of test rooms

  20. Nebesny E, Budryn G (2003) Eur Food Res Technol 217:157–163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Gerling JF (1984) US Patent, 4,326,114

  22. Radgwell RJ, Trovato V, Curti D, Fischer M (2002) Carbohyd Res 337:421–431

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Mayer F, Grosch W (2001) Flavour Fragrance J 16:180–190

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Lewandowicz G, Jankowski T, Fornal J. (2000) Carbohyd Polym 2:193–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hashim L, Chaveron H (1996) Food Res Int 6:619–623

    Google Scholar 

  26. Feria-Morales AM (1991) In: Proceedings of the 14th ASIC Colloquium, San Francisco, pp 622–630

  27. Belitz HD, Grosch W (1999) Food chemistry. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Hilderberg, pp 874–886

    Google Scholar 

  28. Dutra ER, Oliveira LS, Franca AS, Ferraz VP, Afonso RJCF (2000) J Food Eng 47:241–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mayer F, Czerny M, Grosch W (2000) Eur Food Res Technol 211:272–276

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Ohiokpehai O, Brumen G, Clifford MN (1982) In: Proceedings of the 10th ASIC Colloquium, Salvador, Brazil, p 177

  31. Navarini L, Cappuccio R, Suggi-Liverani F, Illy A (2004) J Texture Stud 35:525–541

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Bicchi CP, Panero OM, Pellegrino GM, Vanni AC (1997) J Agric Food Chem 45:4680–4686

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The studies were supported by grant number 3 P06 T 032 23 from the State Committee for Scientific Researches.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grażyna Budryn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nebesny, E., Budryn, G. Evaluation of sensory attributes of coffee brews from robusta coffee roasted under different conditions. Eur Food Res Technol 224, 159–165 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-006-0308-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-006-0308-y

Keywords