Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels
Astringency is often difficult to evaluate accurately in wine because of its complexity. This accuracy can improve through training sessions, but it can be time-consuming and expensive. A way to reduce these costs can be the use of wine experts, who are known to be reliable evaluators. Therefore, th...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
MDPI AG
2018-12-01
|
Series: | Foods |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/8/1/3 |
id |
doaj-f917611d56d74023aa633b454b756d0d |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-f917611d56d74023aa633b454b756d0d2020-11-25T00:21:26ZengMDPI AGFoods2304-81582018-12-0181310.3390/foods8010003foods8010003Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two PanelsMihaela Mihnea0José Luis Aleixandre-Tudó1Martin Kidd2Wessel du Toit3Department of Viticulture and Oenology, Stellenbosch University, ZA-7600 Stellenbosch, South AfricaDepartment of Viticulture and Oenology, Stellenbosch University, ZA-7600 Stellenbosch, South AfricaDepartment of Statistics and Actuarial Sciences, Stellenbosch University, ZA-7600 Stellenbosch, South AfricaDepartment of Viticulture and Oenology, Stellenbosch University, ZA-7600 Stellenbosch, South AfricaAstringency is often difficult to evaluate accurately in wine because of its complexity. This accuracy can improve through training sessions, but it can be time-consuming and expensive. A way to reduce these costs can be the use of wine experts, who are known to be reliable evaluators. Therefore, the aim of this work was to compare the sensory results and the panel performance obtained using trained panelists versus wine experts (winemakers). Judges evaluated twelve red wines for in-mouth basic perception (sweet, sour, bitter, astringent, and burning sensation) following the same tasting protocol and with the samples being presented in two different tasting modalities. Panels’ performance and relationship between the chemical composition and the sensory perception were investigated. Both panels showed similar consistency and repeatability, and they were able to accurately measure the astringency of the wines. However, the significant correlations between sensory scores and chemical composition varied with the panel and the tasting modality. From our results, we could see that winemakers tended to discriminate better between the samples when the differences were very small.http://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/8/1/3astringencycomparisonred winetrained panelwinemakers |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Mihaela Mihnea José Luis Aleixandre-Tudó Martin Kidd Wessel du Toit |
spellingShingle |
Mihaela Mihnea José Luis Aleixandre-Tudó Martin Kidd Wessel du Toit Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels Foods astringency comparison red wine trained panel winemakers |
author_facet |
Mihaela Mihnea José Luis Aleixandre-Tudó Martin Kidd Wessel du Toit |
author_sort |
Mihaela Mihnea |
title |
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_short |
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_full |
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_fullStr |
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_full_unstemmed |
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels |
title_sort |
basic in-mouth attribute evaluation: a comparison of two panels |
publisher |
MDPI AG |
series |
Foods |
issn |
2304-8158 |
publishDate |
2018-12-01 |
description |
Astringency is often difficult to evaluate accurately in wine because of its complexity. This accuracy can improve through training sessions, but it can be time-consuming and expensive. A way to reduce these costs can be the use of wine experts, who are known to be reliable evaluators. Therefore, the aim of this work was to compare the sensory results and the panel performance obtained using trained panelists versus wine experts (winemakers). Judges evaluated twelve red wines for in-mouth basic perception (sweet, sour, bitter, astringent, and burning sensation) following the same tasting protocol and with the samples being presented in two different tasting modalities. Panels’ performance and relationship between the chemical composition and the sensory perception were investigated. Both panels showed similar consistency and repeatability, and they were able to accurately measure the astringency of the wines. However, the significant correlations between sensory scores and chemical composition varied with the panel and the tasting modality. From our results, we could see that winemakers tended to discriminate better between the samples when the differences were very small. |
topic |
astringency comparison red wine trained panel winemakers |
url |
http://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/8/1/3 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT mihaelamihnea basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels AT joseluisaleixandretudo basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels AT martinkidd basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels AT wesseldutoit basicinmouthattributeevaluationacomparisonoftwopanels |
_version_ |
1725362744744476672 |