Abstract

The purpose of this study was to understand why some canned orange juices are not perceived as orange juice. Sensory flavor profile data indicated that the primary odor (orthonasal) attributes were tropical fruit/grapefruit, cooked/caramel, musty, and medicine. By comparison fresh-squeezed juice lacked these odor attributes. GC-O analysis found 43 odor-active components in canned juices. Eight of these aroma volatiles were sulfur based. Four of the 12 most intense aroma peaks were sulfur compounds that included methanethiol, 1-p-menth-1-ene-8-thiol, 2-methyl-3-furanthiol, and dimethyl trisulfide. The other most intense odorants included 7-methyl-3-methylene-1,6-octadiene (myrcene), octanal, 2-methoxyphenol (guaiacol), 2-ethyl-4-hydroxy-5-methyl-3(2H)-furanone (homofuraneol), (E)-non-2-enal, (E,E)-deca-2,4-dienal, 4-hydroxy-3-methoxybenzaldehyde (vanillin), and alpha-sinensal. Odorants probably responsible for the undesirable sensory attributes included grapefruit (1-p-menth-1-ene-8-thiol), cooked [2-ethyl-4-hydroxy-5-methyl-3(2H)-furanone, 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethyl-3(2H)-furanone (Furaneol), and 3-(methylthio)propanal (methional)], musty [7-methyl-3-methylene-1,6-octadiene and (E)-non-2-enal], and medicine (2-methoxyphenol). The canned juices also lacked several aldehydes and esters normally found in fresh orange juice.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.