Sweetener

14,000,000 Leading Edge Experts on the ideXlab platform

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

Scan Science and Technology

Contact Leading Edge Experts & Companies

The Experts below are selected from a list of 28119 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Seo Jin Chung - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Effect of concentration range on the accuracy of measuring sweetness potencies of Sweeteners
    Food Quality and Preference, 2020
    Co-Authors: Seong Bo Kim, Seo Jin Chung
    Abstract:

    Abstract The main objective of the present study was to determine the effect of the concentration range of Sweetener on the accuracy of sweetness potency, defined as the ratio of target Sweetener and sucrose concentrations at equivalent sweetness intensity level (Wee, Tan, & Forde, 2018), measurement. Attempts were made to measure the sweetness potencies of two bulk Sweeteners (powder allulose and liquefied allulose) and three intense Sweeteners (sucralose, rebaudioside A, rebaudioside D) using a sucrose-Sweetener combined (SSC) method. Three sets of sample combination were evaluated in three independent descriptive analysis testing sessions. One set of Sweetener samples had a sucrose-equivalent concentration (SEC) range of 2–15%, wide range condition. The other two sample sets had narrower SEC ranges, of 1–9% for the narrow-range, low-concentration condition, and 8–16% for the narrow-range, high-concentration condition. All samples were evaluated by 10 trained panelists. Reference standards for sweetness intensities were provided during the testing sessions. Overall, the predicted sweetness potency measured over the wide concentration range was less accurate than that measured over the narrower range. Additionally, the results showed that the sweetness potencies were little affected by the concentration for bulk Sweeteners, while the sweetness potencies changed dramatically for intense Sweeteners. The SSC method was previously proposed for reducing the contextual bias caused by a range-frequency effect during sweetness intensity measurement. However, the present study has revealed that this method is not completely free from psychological biases and that the accuracy of measuring sweetness potency can be affected by the concentration range over which the panelist is evaluating. Thus, the concentration range of sample sets that are evaluated together should be determined carefully to ensure accurate measurement of sweetness.

  • Sweetness potency and sweetness synergism of Sweeteners in milk and coffee systems
    Food Research International, 2015
    Co-Authors: Ji Hye Choi, Seo Jin Chung
    Abstract:

    This study investigated the presence of sweetness synergism in milk and instant coffee systems. It consists of three parts: 1) modeling concentration-sweetness intensity curves of Sweeteners (stevia, sucralose, xylose, tagatose and erythritol); 2) measuring the sweetness potencies of Sweeteners compared to sucrose at wide concentration range; and 3) investigating the presence of sweetness synergisms in binary Sweetener mixtures. The panelists evaluated sweetness and other sensory characteristics of Sweeteners using descriptive analysis. Based on the modeled curve derived from step 1, the concentration of each Sweetener with sweetness intensity equal to 2.5% or 2.8% sucrose was calculated for milk and coffee systems, respectively. For the sweetness synergism study, one type of intense Sweetener was mixed with one type of bulk Sweetener, each eliciting 2.5% or 2.8% equi-sweetness to sucrose, and compared with 5% sucrose added to a milk system or 5.6% sucrose added to a coffee system. The sweetness potencies of bulk Sweeteners generally increased whereas the sweetness potencies of intense Sweeteners decreased as the concentration increased. The binary Sweetener mixtures mostly showed additivity in milk and suppression in coffee system rather than synergism when the concentration dependent nature of sweetness potency for each Sweetener was taken into account.

  • optimal sensory evaluation protocol to model concentration response curve of Sweeteners
    Food Research International, 2014
    Co-Authors: Ji Hye Choi, Seo Jin Chung
    Abstract:

    Abstract The objective of this study was to develop an optimal sensory evaluation protocol to model the concentration–response (C–R) curve of various Sweeteners in skimmed milk system. C–R curve was modeled for xylose, tagatose, erythritol, sucralose, and stevia. Five concentrations of each Sweetener corresponding to the sweetness of 1%, 2%, 3.5%, 5%, and 7% sucrose were calculated by the sweetness potency value obtained from a previous study. Three types of sensory evaluation method were compared for their accuracy in modeling the C–R curve. Traditional method measured the sweetness intensities of 5 concentration levels of a specific Sweetener in one test set (eg. xylose 1.6%, 3.2%, 5.6%, 7.9%, 11.1%). Hetero sample-equi concentration method measured the sweetness of 6 types of Sweeteners having similar sweetness intensity level in one test set (eg. set 1: sucrose 1%, xylose 1.6%, tagatose 1.2%, erythritol 1.7%, sucralose 0.002%, stevia 0.04%; set 2: sucrose 2%, xylose 3.2%, tagatose 2.4%, erythritol 3.3%, sucralose 0.004%, stevia 0.08%, etc.). Sucrose-Sweetener combined method measured the sweetness of 5 levels of specific Sweetener as well as the 5 levels of sucrose in one test set. All samples were evaluated by 10 trained panelists. Reference standards for sweetness intensities were provided in all methods. To identify the most accurate sensory evaluation protocol, the concentrations of each Sweetener corresponding to the sweetness levels of 1.5% and 4.5% sucrose were interpolated from the C–R curve modeled for each Sweetener measured by the 3 methods. The actual sweetness intensities of the interpolated concentrations of each Sweetener were validated with the sweetness intensities of 1.5% and 4.5% sucrose levels. The result showed that the sucrose-Sweetener combined method was the most accurate protocol. Traditional method tended to overestimate the sweetness potency value of Sweeteners in low concentration range whereas hetero sample-equi concentration method tended to underestimate the value. Another significant finding was that the sweetness potency value of each Sweetener changed as the concentration changed.

Helena Maria André Bolini - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • time intensity profile of pitanga nectar eugenia uniflora l with different Sweeteners sweetness and bitterness
    Food Science and Technology International, 2016
    Co-Authors: Mirian Luisa Faria Freitas, Mariana Borges De Lima Dutra, Helena Maria André Bolini
    Abstract:

    Pitanga has been used by the Brazilian food industry mainly for juice production. This fruit shows good economic potential due to its high concentration of vitamins and minerals. The aim of the present work was to characterize the time–intensity profile of pitanga nectar sweetened with different Sweeteners to verify differences on the perception of sweet and bitter tastes. The Sweeteners used to replace sucrose were sucralose, aspartame, stevia 40% rebaudioside A, stevia 95% rebaudioside A, neotame, and 2:1 cyclamate/saccharin blend. Fifteen assessors were selected according to their discriminating capability and trained to participate in the time–intensity analysis for sweetness and bitterness. The samples prepared with sucralose and 2:1 cyclamate/saccharin blend presented a similar sweetness profile to the sample prepared with sucrose, and the samples prepared with sucralose and aspartame presented a similar bitterness profile to the sample prepared with sucrose. Thus, sucralose would be the most suitable Sweetener to replace sucrose in pitanga nectar.

  • High‐intensity Sweeteners in espresso coffee: ideal and equivalent sweetness and time–intensity analysis
    International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2015
    Co-Authors: Bruna Marcacini Azevedo, Flávio Luis Schmidt, Helena Maria André Bolini
    Abstract:

    Summary The efficient substitution of sucrose by a Sweetener in beverages requires the application of some sensory techniques. First, one must determine the concentrations of the Sweeteners under study, equivalent in sweetness to the ideal sucrose concentration. In addition, it is fundamental to determine which is most similar to sucrose. The objectives of this study were to determine the ideal sweetness for espresso coffee and the equivalent concentrations in sweetness of different Sweeteners, as well as characterise the time–intensity profile of each Sweetener in relation to sweetness. The Sweeteners evaluated were sucralose, aspartame, neotame, a cyclamate/saccharin mixture (2:1) and stevia. The sucrose concentration considered ideal by consumers was 12.5% (w/v), and the equivalent concentrations of the Sweeteners were 0.0159% for sucralose, 0.0549% for aspartame, 0.0016% for neotame, 0.0359% for the cyclamate/saccharin mixture and 0.0998% for stevia. The time–intensity analysis indicated that possibly the Sweeteners neotame, aspartame and sucralose would be the best substitutes for sucrose.

  • Ideal and relative sweetness of high intensity Sweeteners in mango nectar
    International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2012
    Co-Authors: Rafael Silva Cadena, Helena Maria André Bolini
    Abstract:

    Summary The aim of this study was to analyse the ideal and relative sweetness of mango nectar with high intensity Sweeteners. The ideal sweetness of the samples sweetened with sucrose at 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5% and 15%, was analysed using an acceptance test with a just-about-right (JAR) scale and 100 consumers of mango nectar. The magnitude estimation method was then used to determine the relative sweetness of the high intensity Sweeteners. Six samples were prepared and one Sweetener added to each: sucrose, sucralose, 100:50:1 acesulfame-K/sucralose/neotame blend, 1:1 thaumatin/sucralose blend and stevia with 97% of rebaudioside. The ideal sweetness analysis revealed that 6.84% was the ideal concentration of sucrose. The relative sweetness analysis showed that neotame presented the highest sweetening power, being 6026 times sweeter than sucrose with respect to the mango nectar containing 7% of sucrose, followed by sucralose (627), thaumatin/sucralose blend 1:1 (549), acesulfame-K/sucralose/neotame blend 100:50:1 (259) and stevia (134).

  • sweetness equivalence of different Sweeteners in strawberry flavored yogurt
    Journal of Food Quality, 2011
    Co-Authors: R C Reis, Helena Maria André Bolini, Valeria Paula Rodrigues Minim, Beatriz Rodrigues Pimentel Dias, Luis Antonio Minim, Elaine Berger Ceresino
    Abstract:

    TosuccessfullysubstitutesucroseforSweeteners,furtherstudiesmustbecarriedout based on previous knowledge of Sweetener concentration to determine the equivalent sweetness of such compounds. In this work, sweetness equivalence of strawberry-flavored yogurt with different Sweeteners and/or their combinations (aspartame, acesulfame-K, cyclamate, saccharin, stevia and sucralose) and yogurt sweetenedwith11.5%w/wsucrosewasmeasuredusingthesensorymagnitudeestimation method. The sweetness concentrations equivalent to strawberry yogurt sweetened with 11.5% w/w sucrose in the tested Sweeteners were 0.072% w/w for aspartame, 0.042% w/w for aspartame/acesulfame-K (2:1), 0.064% w/w for cyclamate/saccharin, 0.043% w/w for cyclamate/saccharin (2:1)/stevia (1.8:1) and 0.30% w/w for sucralose. These results can promote the use of different Sweetener combinationsinstrawberry-flavoredyogurt,speciallyacesulfame-Kandstevia,once they produce more pleasing in this product.

  • different Sweeteners in beverages prepared with instant and roasted ground coffee ideal and equivalent sweetness
    Journal of Sensory Studies, 2010
    Co-Authors: Patricia Carla Barbosa Trevizam Moraes, Helena Maria André Bolini
    Abstract:

    Nowadays, people are increasingly concerned about their health and appearance, and have sought feeding alternatives to the main problems that affect world population, such as obesity and diabetes, that share a close relation with high sucrose consumption. This study determined the ideal sweetness in beverages prepared with instant coffee and roasted ground coffee, using a “just about right” scale, and the equivalent sweetness of samples sweetened with sucralose, stevia, aspartame, cyclamate/saccharin (2:1), acesulfame K, by using the Magnitude Estimation. Sucrose concentration considered ideal by consumers for instant coffee beverages was 9.5%, with Sweetener concentrations equivalent to 0.01494% for sucralose; 0.09448% for stevia; 0.05064% for aspartame; 0.04967% for acesulfame K; and 0.0339% for a cyclamate/saccharin (2:1) blend. Sucrose concentration considered ideal by consumers for roasted ground coffee beverages was 12.5%, with Sweetener concentrations equivalent to 0.0209% for sucralose; 0.0166% for stevia; 0.0724% for aspartame; 0.0640% for acesulfame K; 0.0582% for cyclamate/saccharin (2:1) blend. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS This study may serve as a guide for the food industry that aims at producing drinks or powders (instant coffee or roasted ground coffee) with the addition of Sweeteners to replace sucrose, or to educate consumers about the amount of Sweetener that can be added to these drinks for obtaining the ideal sweetness in relation to sucrose. This information is only possible to be obtained with the application of a sensory technique analysis, because Sweeteners behavior is specific for each product type.

Ashish Kumar Singh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Stability, Physico-Chemical, Microbial and Sensory Properties of Sweetener/Sweetener Blends in Lassi During Storage
    Food and Bioprocess Technology, 2012
    Co-Authors: V. George, Sumit Arora, Vivek Sharma, Balbir Kaur Wadhwa, Ashish Kumar Singh
    Abstract:

    Storage studies of artificially sweetened lassi samples revealed that the binary Sweetener aspartame × acesulfame-k blend (0.05% equivalence, 50:50, 0.05%*) was the best blend as it resembled control in all the sensory attributes up to 5 days of storage. Increase in acidity and viscosity and decrease in pH of artificially sweetened lassi samples was similar to control lassi during storage and was not influenced by the addition of Sweetener/Sweetener blends. The decrease in lactic and increase in yeast and mold counts obtained during storage of lassi were highly influenced by sucrose. Analysis of aspartame, acesulfame-k, saccharin, and sucralose added, either singly or in blends in lassi , showed their stability throughout the storage period as analyzed over high performance liquid chromatography/high pressure thin layer chromatography plates.

  • Assessment of stability of binary Sweetener blend (aspartame x acesulfame-K) during storage in whey lemon beverage
    Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2011
    Co-Authors: Sumit Arora, Ashish M. Shendurse, Vivek Sharma, Balbir Kaur Wadhwa, Ashish Kumar Singh
    Abstract:

    In the present study, artificial Sweeteners—aspartame, acesulfame-K and binary Sweetener blend of aspartame x acesulfame-K were assessed for stability during storage in whey lemon beverage. A solid phase extraction method using C18 cartridges was standardized for the isolation of aspartame, acesulfame-K and their degradation products in whey lemon beverage. HPLC analytical conditions were standardized over C18 column for simultaneous separation of multiple Sweeteners and their degradation products in sample isolates. Storage studies revealed that increase in acidity and viscosity and decrease in pH and ascorbic acid content of artificially sweetened whey lemon beverage samples were similar to the changes occurring in control samples during storage. Analysis using HPLC showed that aspartame (added either singly or in a blend) and acesulfame-K (added in a blend) were stable in whey lemon beverage under refrigerated condition for 15 days.

Gaston Ares - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • application of survival analysis to estimate equivalent sweet concentration of low calorie Sweeteners in orange juice
    Journal of Sensory Studies, 2014
    Co-Authors: Florencia Alcaire, Rafael Silva Cadena, Shari Zorn, Lucia Antunez, Leticia Vidal, Ana Gimenez, Gaston Ares
    Abstract:

    The aim of the present work was to apply survival analysis to estimate equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners in orange juice. Five low-calorie Sweeteners were considered: sucralose and four samples of stevia. For each Sweetener, a series of six orange juice samples with different Sweetener concentration were prepared. Groups of 34 consumers evaluated the series of six pairs of samples, each composed of one reference sample (sweetened with 10% sucrose) and one sample with low-calorie Sweetener. Consumers were asked to complete a paired-comparison test and to indicate which of the samples was sweeter. The elicited data were analyzed using survival analysis. For each Sweetener, the percentage of assessors perceiving the sample with the low-calorie Sweetener as sweeter than the sample with sucrose as a function of Sweetener concentration was determined. Equivalent sweet concentrations were determined for each Sweetener and compared with estimations obtained using logistic regression and published data. Practical Applications Equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners can be estimated by applying survival analysis to the data obtained from paired-comparison tests. This approach is based on a simple sensory methodology. Its main advantage is the consideration of individual differences among assessors, which may lead to more accurate estimations than those obtained with other methodologies.

  • Application of Survival Analysis to Estimate Equivalent Sweet Concentration of Low‐Calorie Sweeteners in Orange Juice
    Journal of Sensory Studies, 2014
    Co-Authors: Florencia Alcaire, Rafael Silva Cadena, Shari Zorn, Lucia Antunez, Leticia Vidal, Ana Gimenez, Gaston Ares
    Abstract:

    The aim of the present work was to apply survival analysis to estimate equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners in orange juice. Five low-calorie Sweeteners were considered: sucralose and four samples of stevia. For each Sweetener, a series of six orange juice samples with different Sweetener concentration were prepared. Groups of 34 consumers evaluated the series of six pairs of samples, each composed of one reference sample (sweetened with 10% sucrose) and one sample with low-calorie Sweetener. Consumers were asked to complete a paired-comparison test and to indicate which of the samples was sweeter. The elicited data were analyzed using survival analysis. For each Sweetener, the percentage of assessors perceiving the sample with the low-calorie Sweetener as sweeter than the sample with sucrose as a function of Sweetener concentration was determined. Equivalent sweet concentrations were determined for each Sweetener and compared with estimations obtained using logistic regression and published data. Practical Applications Equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners can be estimated by applying survival analysis to the data obtained from paired-comparison tests. This approach is based on a simple sensory methodology. Its main advantage is the consideration of individual differences among assessors, which may lead to more accurate estimations than those obtained with other methodologies.

Rafael Silva Cadena - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • application of survival analysis to estimate equivalent sweet concentration of low calorie Sweeteners in orange juice
    Journal of Sensory Studies, 2014
    Co-Authors: Florencia Alcaire, Rafael Silva Cadena, Shari Zorn, Lucia Antunez, Leticia Vidal, Ana Gimenez, Gaston Ares
    Abstract:

    The aim of the present work was to apply survival analysis to estimate equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners in orange juice. Five low-calorie Sweeteners were considered: sucralose and four samples of stevia. For each Sweetener, a series of six orange juice samples with different Sweetener concentration were prepared. Groups of 34 consumers evaluated the series of six pairs of samples, each composed of one reference sample (sweetened with 10% sucrose) and one sample with low-calorie Sweetener. Consumers were asked to complete a paired-comparison test and to indicate which of the samples was sweeter. The elicited data were analyzed using survival analysis. For each Sweetener, the percentage of assessors perceiving the sample with the low-calorie Sweetener as sweeter than the sample with sucrose as a function of Sweetener concentration was determined. Equivalent sweet concentrations were determined for each Sweetener and compared with estimations obtained using logistic regression and published data. Practical Applications Equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners can be estimated by applying survival analysis to the data obtained from paired-comparison tests. This approach is based on a simple sensory methodology. Its main advantage is the consideration of individual differences among assessors, which may lead to more accurate estimations than those obtained with other methodologies.

  • Application of Survival Analysis to Estimate Equivalent Sweet Concentration of Low‐Calorie Sweeteners in Orange Juice
    Journal of Sensory Studies, 2014
    Co-Authors: Florencia Alcaire, Rafael Silva Cadena, Shari Zorn, Lucia Antunez, Leticia Vidal, Ana Gimenez, Gaston Ares
    Abstract:

    The aim of the present work was to apply survival analysis to estimate equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners in orange juice. Five low-calorie Sweeteners were considered: sucralose and four samples of stevia. For each Sweetener, a series of six orange juice samples with different Sweetener concentration were prepared. Groups of 34 consumers evaluated the series of six pairs of samples, each composed of one reference sample (sweetened with 10% sucrose) and one sample with low-calorie Sweetener. Consumers were asked to complete a paired-comparison test and to indicate which of the samples was sweeter. The elicited data were analyzed using survival analysis. For each Sweetener, the percentage of assessors perceiving the sample with the low-calorie Sweetener as sweeter than the sample with sucrose as a function of Sweetener concentration was determined. Equivalent sweet concentrations were determined for each Sweetener and compared with estimations obtained using logistic regression and published data. Practical Applications Equivalent sweet concentration of low-calorie Sweeteners can be estimated by applying survival analysis to the data obtained from paired-comparison tests. This approach is based on a simple sensory methodology. Its main advantage is the consideration of individual differences among assessors, which may lead to more accurate estimations than those obtained with other methodologies.

  • Ideal and relative sweetness of high intensity Sweeteners in mango nectar
    International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2012
    Co-Authors: Rafael Silva Cadena, Helena Maria André Bolini
    Abstract:

    Summary The aim of this study was to analyse the ideal and relative sweetness of mango nectar with high intensity Sweeteners. The ideal sweetness of the samples sweetened with sucrose at 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5% and 15%, was analysed using an acceptance test with a just-about-right (JAR) scale and 100 consumers of mango nectar. The magnitude estimation method was then used to determine the relative sweetness of the high intensity Sweeteners. Six samples were prepared and one Sweetener added to each: sucrose, sucralose, 100:50:1 acesulfame-K/sucralose/neotame blend, 1:1 thaumatin/sucralose blend and stevia with 97% of rebaudioside. The ideal sweetness analysis revealed that 6.84% was the ideal concentration of sucrose. The relative sweetness analysis showed that neotame presented the highest sweetening power, being 6026 times sweeter than sucrose with respect to the mango nectar containing 7% of sucrose, followed by sucralose (627), thaumatin/sucralose blend 1:1 (549), acesulfame-K/sucralose/neotame blend 100:50:1 (259) and stevia (134).