Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identifying the sensory profile and fatty acid composition for quality valorization of Marrone chestnut cultivars

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

Abstract

Consumers are increasingly interested in chestnuts for their health benefits and also for their organoleptic qualities. It is therefore very important to enhance the chestnut from a sensorial point of view. The sensorial characteristics of commercial chestnuts from three Italian Marrone cultivars (M1 ‘Marrone di Antrodoco’; M2 ‘Marrone dei Monti Cimini’; M3 ‘Marrone del Mugello’ PGI) were investigated with the aim of identifying their sensory profiles. The sensory evaluation was conducted according to (ISO 8589 in Sensory analysis. General guidance for the design of test rooms, 2007; UNI EN ISO 13299 in Sensory analysis. Methodology. General guidance for establishing a sensory profile, 2016). Each descriptor was scored on a range with intervals ranging from 0 (absence of the descriptor) to 10 (maximum intensity of the descriptor). The M1 cultivar is characterized by greater crunchiness (8.0, on a scale from 0 to 10), sweetness (7.5), aromatic intensity (7.9) and caramel aroma (3.3). The M2 cultivar is distinguished by its buttery (3.2) and floral aroma (3.0) with a wood/musk note (1.9) that is missing from the other two cultivars. The M3 cultivar has an almond aroma (5.2) and is distinguished by walnut (3.0) and citrus (2.8) aromas, which are absent in cultivars M1 and M2. The results of this study are important as they experimentally demonstrate that the identification of characteristic sensory profile makes the qualitative differences between cultivars evident. The results showed that linoleic, oleic and palmitic acids were the main components of the lipid fraction of chestnut nuts. In all samples the unsaturated fraction predominated over the saturated one. It is also important to note that there were significant quantitative differences between cultivars. The valorization of Marrone chestnut cultivars contributes to promoting consumer use of these products with their high nutritional value and therefore contributes to the promotion of public health.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data presented in this study are available on request from the co-author, Maria Teresa Frangipane.

References

  1. Barreiraa JCM, Casal S, Ferreira ICFR, Peresa AM, Pereira JA, Oliveira MBPP (2012) Chemical characterization of chestnut cultivars from three consecutive years: chemometrics and contribution for authentication. Food Chem Toxicol 50:2311–2317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2012.04.008

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Beccaro GL, Donno D, Lione GG, de Biaggi M, Gamba G, Rapalino S, Riondato I, Gonthier P, Mellano MG (2020) Castanea spp. agrobiodiversity conservation: genotype influence on chemical and sensorial traits of cultivars grown on the same clonal rootstock. Foods 9:2–25. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9081062

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bertoni C, Abodi M, D’Oria V, Milani GP, Agostoni C, Mazzocchi A (2023) Alpha-linolenic acid and cardiovascular events: a narrative review. Int J Mol Sci 24:14319. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms241814319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Bini L, Gori M, Nin S, Natale R, Meacci E, Giordani E, Biricolti S (2023) Assessing the genetic variability of sweet chestnut varieties from the Tuscan Apennine Mountains (Italy). Agronomy 13:1947. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy13071947

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Breisch H (1995) Châtaignes et Marrons. Centre technique interprofessionnel des fruits et légumes, Paris, France

  6. Carneiro-Carvalho A, Vilela A, Ferreira-Cardoso J, Marques T, Anjos R, Gomes-Laranjo J, Pinto T (2019) Productivity, chemical composition and sensory quality of “Martaínha” chestnut variety treated with Silicon. CYTA J Food 17:316–323. https://doi.org/10.1080/19476337.2019.1579757

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cavallini M, Lombardo G, Binelli G, Cantini C (2022) Assessing the genetic identity of tuscan sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.). Forests 13:967. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13070967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cerulli A, Napolitano A, Hošek J, Masullo M, Pizza C, Piacente S (2021) Antioxidant and in vitro preliminary anti-inflammatory activity of Castanea sativa (Italian Cultivar “Marrone di Roccadaspide” PGI) burs, leaves, and chestnuts extracts and their metabolite profiles by LC-ESI/LTQOrbitrap/MS/MS. Antioxidants 10:278. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox10020278

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Chang X, Liu F, Lin Z, Qiu J, Peng C, Lu Y, Guo X (2020) Phytochemical profiles and cellular antioxidant activities in chestnut (Castanea mollissima BL.) kernels of five different cultivars. Molecules 25:178. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25010178

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Choupina A (2019) Nutritional and health potential of European chestnut. Rev Ciênc Agrár 42(3):801–807. https://doi.org/10.19084/rca.17701

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cirlini M, Dall’Asta C, Silvanini A (2012) Volatile finger printing of chestnut flours from traditional Emilia Romagna (Italy) cultivars. Food Chem 134:662–668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.02.151

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ciucure CT, Geana E-I, Sandru C, Tita O, Botu M (2022) Phytochemical and nutritional profile composition in fruits of different sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.) cultivars grown in Romania. Separations 9:66. https://doi.org/10.3390/separations9030066

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Contador L, Robles B, Shinya P, Medel M, Pinto C, Reginato G, Infante R (2015) Characterization of texture attributes of raw almond using a trained sensory panel. Fruits 70:231–237. https://doi.org/10.1051/fruits/2015018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Corona P, Cutini A, Chiavetta U, Paoletti E (2016) Forest-food nexus: a topical opportunity for human well-being and silviculture. Ann Silvic Res 40:1–10. https://doi.org/10.12899/ASR-1181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Corona P, Frangipane MT, Moscetti R, Lo Feudo G, Castellotti T, Massantini R (2021) Chestnut cultivar identification through the data fusion of sensory quality and FT-NIR spectral data. Foods 2021(10):2575. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112575

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Delgado T, Pereira JA, Casal S, Ramalhosa E (2016) Chapter 6: bioactive compounds of chestnuts as health promoters. In: Natural bioactive compounds from fruits and vegetables as health promoters part II, vol 6. Bentham Science Publishers, Sharjah, pp. 132–154 (ISBN 978-1-68108-244-8)

  17. España MSA, Galdón BR, Romero CD, Rodríguez ER (2011) Fatty acid profile in varieties of chestnut fruits from Tenerife (Spain). CyTA J Food 9:77–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/19476331003686858

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. FAO (2023) Food and Agriculture Organization of United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org/en/#data/QC. Accessed 24 Mar 2023

  19. Frangipane MT, Massantini R, Corona P (2024) Better selection of chestnut cultivars: experimenting the sensory characterization of the Marrone chestnuts compared to the “Chataigne” chestnuts. Eur Food Res Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-023-04438-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Frangipane MT, Costantini L, Garzoli S, Merendino N, Massantini R (2024) Characterizing the antioxidant activity and sensory profile of chestnuts (Castanea sativa Mill.) grown in the Cimini Mountains of central Italy. J Agric Food Res 16:101113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.101113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. ISO 8589 (2007) Sensory analysis. General guidance for the design of test rooms

  22. Lo Piccolo E, Landi M, Ceccanti C, Mininni AN, Marchetti L, Massai R, Guidi L, Remorini D (2020) Nutritional and nutraceutical properties of raw and traditionally obtained four from chestnut fruit grown in Tuscany. Eur Food Res Technol 246:1867–1876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-020-03541-9

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Li R, Sharma AK, Zhu J, Zheng B, Xiao G, Chen L (2022) Nutritional biology of chestnuts: a perspective review. Food Chem 395:133575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.133575

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Marques C, Correia E, Dinis L-T, Vilela A (2022) An overview of sensory characterization techniques: from classical descriptive analysis to the emergence of novel profiling methods. Foods 11:255. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11030255

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Massantini R, Moscetti R, Frangipane MT (2021) Progress in evaluating chestnuts quality: a review of recent developments. Trends Food Sci Technol 113:245–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.04.036

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Mellano MG, Beccaro GL, Bounous B, Trasino C, Barrel A (2009) Morpho-biological and sensorial quality evaluation of chestnut cultivars in Aosta Valley (Italy). Acta Hortic 815(ISHS):125–132. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2009.815.16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Mellano MG, Rapalino S, Donno D (2017) Sensory profiles of Castanea sativa cultivars and eurojapanese hybrids. Castanea 2:8–9

    Google Scholar 

  28. Mohsenin NN (1980) Physical properties of plant and animal material. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mota M, Pinto T, Vilela A et al (2018) Irrigation positively affects the chestnut’s quality: the chemical composition, fruit size and sensory attributes. Sci Hortic 238:177–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2018.04.047

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Mustafa AM, Abouelenein D, Acquaticci L, Alessandroni L, Abd-Allah RH, Borsetta G, Sagratini G, Maggi F, Vittori S, Caprioli G (2021) Effect of roasting, boiling, and frying processing on 29 polyphenolics and antioxidant activity in seeds and shells of sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.). Plants 10:2192. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10102192

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Neri L, Dimitri G, Sacchetti G (2010) Chemical composition and antioxidant activity of cured chestnuts from three sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.) ecotypes from Italy. J Food Compos Anal 23:23–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2009.03.002

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Pereira-Lorenzo S, Ramos-Cabrer AM, Barreneche T, Mattioni C, Villani F, Díaz-Hernández B, Martín LM, Robles-Loma A, Cáceres Y, Martín A (2019) Instant domestication process of European chestnut cultivars. Ann Appl Biol 174:74–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/aab.12474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Poljak I, Vahcic N, Gacic M, Idžojtic M (2016) Morphology and chemical composition of fruits of the traditional Croatian chestnut variety ‘Lovran Marron.’ Food Technol Biotechnol 54:189–199. https://doi.org/10.17113/ftb.54.02.16.4319

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Poljak I, Vahcic N, Vidaković A, Tumpa K, Žarkovic I, Idžojtic M (2021) Traditional sweet chestnut and hybrid varieties: chemical composition, morphometric and qualitative nut characteristics. Agronomy 11(516):2–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11030516

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Santos MJ, Pinto T, Vilela A (2022) Sweet chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.) nutritional and phenolic composition interactions with chestnut flavor physiology. Foods 11:4052. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11244052

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Santos MJ, Pinto T, Mota J, Correia E, Vilela A (2023) Influence of the cooking system, chemical composition, and α-amylase activity on the sensory profile of chestnut cultivars—longal and judia—and their consequence on consumer’s acceptability. Int J Gastron Food Sci 34:100799. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2023.100799

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Serdar U, Bounous G, Ertürk U, Akyuz B, Fulbright DW (2018) Evaluation of the descriptive characteristics of chestnut. Acta Hortic 1220:35–44. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic2018.1220.6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Tonelli N, Gallouin F (2013) Des Fruits et des Graines Comestibles du Monde Entire. Lavoisier, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  39. UNECE (2010) UNECE standard FFV-39 concerning the marketing and commercial quality control of sweet chestnuts (Castanea spp.). UNECE, New York, pp 1–7

    Google Scholar 

  40. UNI EN ISO 13299 (2016) Sensory analysis. Methodology. General guidance for establishing a sensory profile

  41. UPOV (2017) Guidelines for the conduct of tests for distinctness, uniformity and stability. Chestnut (Castanea sativa Mill.). TG/124/4 (ed.). (Geneve: International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants)

  42. Van den Dool H, Kratz PD (1963) A generalization of the retention index system including linear temperature programmed gas—liquid partition chromatography. J Chromatogr A 11:463–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Warmund MR, Elmore JR, Adhikari K, McGraw S (2011) Descriptive sensory analysis and free sugar contents of chestnut cultivars grown in North America. J Sci Food Agr 91:1940–1945. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.4417

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Yang F, Liu Q, Pan SY, Xu C, Xiong YLL (2015) Chemical composition and quality traits of Chinese chestnuts (Castanea mollissima) produced in different ecological regions. Food Biosci 11:33–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2015.04.004

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Yurtlu YB, Serdar U, Yesiloglu E (2014) Physical properties of some chestnut cultivars produced in black Sea Region of Turkey. Acta Hortic 1019:249–255. https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2014.1019.38

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Publication funded under the activities by the Rete Rurale Nazionale (the Italian National Rural Network)- WP 22.2 "Forests".

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department for Innovation in Biological, Agro-Food and Forest Systems (DIBAF), University of Tuscia, Via San Camillo de Lellis, 01100, Viterbo, Italy

    Maria Teresa Frangipane, Riccardo Massantini & Piermaria Corona

  2. Department of Chemistry and Technology of Drugs, Sapienza University of Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185, Rome, Italy

    Stefania Garzoli

  3. Department of Environmental Biology, Sapienza University-Rome, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185, Rome, Italy

    Daniela de Vita

  4. Study Alpine Centre, University of Tuscia, Via Rovigo, 7, 38050, Pieve Tesino, Italy

    Riccardo Massantini

  5. CREA Research Centre for Forestry and Wood, Arezzo, Italy

    Piermaria Corona

Authors
  1. Maria Teresa Frangipane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stefania Garzoli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniela de Vita
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Riccardo Massantini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Piermaria Corona
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Maria Teresa Frangipane: Conceptualization, Data curation, Sensory analysis, Methodology, Writing. Stefania Garzoli: Formal analysis, Supervision, Writing. Daniela de Vita: Formal analysis. Riccardo Massantini: Supervision– review & editing. Piermaria Corona: Supervision, Validation, review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Teresa Frangipane.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Compliance with ethics requirements

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants followed the International Olive oil Council (IOC) STANDARDS, METHODS AND GUIDES for the organoleptic analysis.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Frangipane, M.T., Garzoli, S., de Vita, D. et al. Identifying the sensory profile and fatty acid composition for quality valorization of Marrone chestnut cultivars. Eur Food Res Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-024-04579-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-024-04579-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation