Abstract
AbstractIn an effort to formulate healthier food products, sugar is often reduced or replaced with artificial or natural non‐nutritive sweeteners. However, the removal of sucrose often changes food texture, and non‐nutritive sweeteners inherently exhibit differences in sweetness quality, onset, and overall intensity. Therefore, the objectives of this study were to evaluate the effects of texture on sweetness dose‐response profiles of whey protein solutions sweetened with sucrose, sucralose, stevia, or monk fruit extracts, and to assess temporal progression of dominant attributes. Whey protein‐based model foods with different textural properties were generated without modifying composition by varying heating time. Dose‐response power functions and iso‐sweet equivalencies were determined using magnitude estimation scaling. Temporal profiles of dominant texture, taste, and flavor attributes were evaluated using temporal dominance of sensations (TDS). A significant texture‐sweetener interaction effect was observed (p < .05), where more viscous or semisolid textures required greater amounts of sweetener for iso‐sweetness. Moreover, the dose‐response slope decreased with increasing thickness for sucralose, stevia, and monk fruit‐sweetened textures. Results of TDS indicated that increased thickness prolonged the dominance of several attributes. This study shows that sugar reduction strategies are not universal; food matrix, sweetener type, and usage level need to be considered when attempting to modify texture or reduce sucrose.Practical applicationsSucrose reduction, use of nonnutritive sweeteners, and texture modification are all ways in which food manufacturers can increase the healthful quality of the food supply. However, these types of modifications can alter the overall sensory properties of a food. Texture‐taste interactions are not currently well understood, and knowledge in this area is important for designing ways to modify texture or reduce sucrose for health and enjoyment. The results of this study provide insight into texture‐taste interactions, indicating that sugar reduction or replacement strategies are not one size fits all and are likely product and sweetener‐specific.
Full Text
Topics from this Paper
Sugar Reduction Strategies
Temporal Dominance Of Sensations
Use Of Nonnutritive Sweeteners
Monk Fruit Extracts
Magnitude Estimation Scaling
+ Show 5 more
Create a personalized feed of these topics
Get StartedTalk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
Current Opinion in Food Science
Aug 1, 2021
Food Quality and Preference
Jan 1, 2019
Foods
Oct 2, 2020
Journal of Texture Studies
Apr 15, 2014
Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism
Feb 21, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Aug 1, 2019
Foods (Basel, Switzerland)
Jul 26, 2021
Food Research International
Dec 1, 2022
Physiology & Behavior
Oct 1, 2016
Journal of Chemometrics
Nov 4, 2022
British Food Journal
Mar 7, 2016
Food Quality and Preference
Sep 1, 2012
Foods (Basel, Switzerland)
Jul 26, 2021
International Dairy Journal
Mar 1, 2021
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Sep 1, 2021
Journal of Sensory Studies
Journal of Sensory Studies
Nov 20, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Nov 12, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Oct 24, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Oct 1, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Sep 28, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Sep 25, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Sep 19, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Sep 19, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Sep 19, 2023
Journal of Sensory Studies
Sep 11, 2023