Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/98010
標題: 消費者評估克菲爾菌在不同基質所製成飲品之感官特性及接受性
Sensory characteristics and consumer acceptance of Kefir beverages manufactured with different ingredients using consumer panel
作者: 陳一瑋
Yi-Wei Chen
關鍵字: 克菲爾
消費者測試
感官品評
Kefir
consumer test
sensory evaluation
引用: 周建家。2000。益生細菌之篩選及選擇性培養基之建立。中興大學食品科 學所碩士論文。 張志翔與劉伯康。2012。不同糖含量手搖茶飲消費者喜好程度。2012 生 活應用科學學術研討會。台北。台灣。 朱光裕。2006。台灣消費者茶類消費與飲茶習慣調查。中興大學食品暨應 用生物科技學系所學位論文。 陳智強。2004。培養條件對乳酸菌胞外多醣生產及抗氧化性之影響。台灣 大學食品科技所碩士論文。 廖啟成。1998。乳酸菌之分類及應用。食品工業。30(2): 1-10。 蔡英傑。1998。乳酸菌與益生菌。生物產業。9(2): 5-15。 林杰、王文丹、莊振鈺、劉伯康。2016。添加甜菊糖之鳳梨酥感官品質特 性。國立高雄餐旅大學第四屆全國餐旅創新研發應用研討會。高雄。台 灣。 邱雅琪、張瀞予、呂哲維、莊朝琪、劉伯康。2016。傳統定量描述分析與 以消費型品評員進行之選擇適合分析評估市售咖哩感官品質之比較。台 灣食品科學技術學會第46 次會員大會。台中。台灣。 邱雅琪。2015。市售咖哩感官特性分析:整合分析型與消費者型之品評數 據。中台科技大學食品科技系碩士論文。 程玫雪、蔡碩文、陳一瑋、莊朝琪、劉伯康。2016。9 分法與選擇適合分 析法評估6 種市售無糖包裝烏龍茶感官品質。2016 亞太暨兩岸茶產業研 討會。台北。 程玫雪、蔡碩文、劉伯康。2016。聯合分析評估台灣消費者對於市售罐裝 茶飲料的消費者行為。中華生物資源應用協會第四屆技術創作大賞。台 北。 劉伯康、莊朝琪。2016。「食品感官品評-理論與實務(第二版)」。新文京開 發出版股份有限公司:新北市。 3 – 187 Adams, J., Williams, A., Lancaster, B.,& Foley, M. (2007).Advantages and uses of check-all-that-apply response compared to traditional scaling of attributes for salty snacks. Paper presented at the 7th Pangborn sensory science symposium. Minneapolis, USA. Adams, M. R. 1999. Safety of industrial lactic acid bacteria. J. Biotechnol. 68: 171-178. Ares, G., & Jaeger, S.R. (2013). Check-all-that-apply questions: Influence of attribute order on sensory product characterization. Food Quality and Preference, 28, 141– 153. Ares, G., and Varela, P. (2014) Comparison of Novel Methodologies for Sensory Characterization. In P. Varela & G. Ares (Eds.), Novel Techniques in Sensory Characterization and Consumer Profiling (pp 365-389). Boca Raton: CRC Press. Ares, G., Antunez, L., Bruzzone, F., Vidal, L., Gimenez, A., Pineau, B., Beresford, M. K., Jin, D., Paisley, A.G., Chheang, S.L., Roigard, C. M. (2015). Comparison of sensory product profiles generated by trained assessors and consumers using CATA questions: Four case studies with complex and/or similar samples. Food Quality and Preference, 45,75-86. Ares, G., Barreiro, C., Deliza, R., GimÉNez, A. N. A., & GÁMbaro, A. (2010a). Application of a check-all-that-apply question to the development of chocolate milk desserts. Journal of Sensory Studies, no-no. Ares, G., Barreiro, C., Deliza, R., GimÉNez, A. N. A., & GÁMbaro, A. (2010b). Consumer expectations and perception of chocolate milk desserts enriched with antioxidants. Journal of Sensory Studies, no-no. Ares, G., Jaeger, S. R., Antunez, L., Vidal, L., Gimenez, A., Coste, B., Picallo, A., & Castura, J.C.(2015). Comparison of TCATA and TDS for dynamic sensory characterization of food products . Food Research International, 78, 148-158 Beshkova, D.M., Simova, E.D., Simov Z.I., Frengova, G.I. & Spasov,Z.N.(2002).Pure culture for making kefir . food microbiology, 19 ,537-544. Brown, W. V., and Collins, E. B. 1977. End products and fermentation balances for lactic streptococci grown aerobically on low concentrations of glucose. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 33: 38-42. Charteris, W. P., Kelly, P. M., Morelli, L., and Collins, J. K. 1998. Development and application of an in vitro methodology to determine the transit tolerance of potentially probiotic Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species in the upper human gastrointestinal tract. J. Appl. Microbiol. 84: 759-768. Clark, P. A., and Martin, J. H. 1994. Selection of Bifidobacteria for use as dietary adjuncts in cultured dairy foods: III. Tolerance to simulated bile concentrations of human small intestines. Cult. Dairy Prod. J. 29(8): 18-21. Cliff, M., & Heymann, H. (1993). Development and use of time-intensity methodology for sensory evaluation – A review. Food Research International, 26, 375–385. Collins, E. B. 1972. Biosynthesis of flavor compounds by microorganisms. J. Dairy Sci. 55: 1022-1028. Dooley, L., Lee, Y.S., Meullenet, J.F. (2009). The application of check-all-that-apply (CATA) consumer profiling to preference mapping of vanilla ice cream and its comparison to classical external preference mapping. Food Quality and Preference,21, 394-401. Duboc, P., and Mollet, B. 2001. Applications of expolysaccharides in the dairy industry. Int. Dairy J. 11: 759-768. Epler, S., Chambers IV, E., & Kemp, K. E. (1988). Hedonic scales are a better predictor than just-about-right scales of optimal sweetness in lemonade. Journal Sensory Studies, 13, 191–197. Gilbert, J. M., Young, H., Ball, R. D., & Murray, S. H. (1996). Volatile flavor compounds affecting consumer acceptability of kiwifruit. Journal of Sensory Studies, 11(3), 247-259. Harker, F. R., Amos, R. L., White, A., Petley, M. B., & Wohlers, M. (2008). Flavor differences in heterogeneous foods can be detected using repeated measures of consumer preferences. Journal of Sensory Studies, 23(1), 52–64. Jaeger, S.R., Ares G. (2014). Lack of evidence that concurrent sensory product characterisation using CATA questions bias hedonic scores.Food Quality and Preference, 35, 1–5. Jaeger, S.R., Chheang, S.L., Yin, J.,Bava, C.M., Gimenez, A.,Vidal, L., & Ares, G. (2013). Check-all-that-apply (CATA) responses elicited by consumers: Within-assessor reproducibility and stability of sensory product characterizations. Food Quality and Preference, 30, 56–67. JR, M. G., Rutenbeck, S., Pollack, L., Resurreccion, A. V. A., & Moskowitz, H. R.(2006). The just-about-right intensity scale : functional analyses and relation to hedonics. Journal of Sensory Studies, 22, 194-211 Lawless, H. T., & Heymann, H. (2010). Sensory evaluation of food: Principles and practices (2nd ed.). New York: Springer. Le Révérend , F.M., Hidrio, C., Fernandes, A., & Aubry, V. (2008). Comparison between temporal dominance of sensations and time intensity results. Food Quality and Preference,19(2),174-178 Li, B., Hayes, J. E., Ziegler, G. R. (2014) Just-about-right and ideal scaling provide similar insights into the influence of sensory attributes on liking. Food Quality and Preference,3771-78 McMahon, K. M., Culver, C., Castura, J. C., & Ross, C. F. (2017). Perception of carbonation in sparkling wines using descriptive analysis(DA) and temporal check-all-that-apply (TCATA). Food Quality and Preference, 59, 14-26. Meilgaard, M., Civille, G. V., & Carr, B. T. (1999). Sensory evaluation techniques. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Micheli, L., Uccelletti D., Palleschi, C. & Crescenzi, V. (1999). Isolation and characterisation of a ropy Lactobacillus strain producing the exopolysaccharide kefiran. Appliced Microbiology and biotechnology, 53, 69-74 Murry,J.M.,Delahunty,C.M.,&Baxter,I.A(2001).Descriptive sensory analysis: past, present and future . Food Research International,34,461-471 Otles, S. & Cagindi, O. (2003). Kefir: A Probiotic Dairy-Composition, Nutritional and Therapeutic Aspects . pakistan Jouranl of Nutrition, 2, 54-59 Parente, M. E., Ares, G., & Manzoni, A. V. (2010). Application of two consumer profiling techniques to cosmetic emulsions. Journal of Sensory Studies, 25(5), 685-705. Parente, M. E., Manzoni, A. V., & Ares, G. (2011). External preference mapping of commercial antiaging creams based on consumers' responses to a check-all-that-apply question. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26(2), 158-166. Piqueras-Fiszman, B., & Spence, C. (2011). Do the material properties of cutlery affect the perception of the food you eat? An exploratory study. Journal of Sensory Studies, 26(5), 358-362. Plaehn, D. (2012).CATA penalty/reward. Food Quality and Preference, 24(1), 141– 152. Punter, P. H. (2008). Bridging the gap between R&D and marketing: The ideal profile method. In Third European conference on sensory and consumer research, Hamburg, Germany. Reinbach, H.C., Giacalone, D., Ribeiro, L.M., Bredie, W. L.P., Frost, M.B. (2014) Comparison of three sensory profiling methods based on consumer perception: CATA, CATA with intensity and napping. Food Quality and Preference. 32, 160-166. Reiss, J.(1990). Metabolic activity of Tibi grains. Zeitschrift für Lebensmittel-Unter suchung und Forschung , 191, 462–465. Rothman, L., & Parker, M. J. (2009). Just-About-Right (JAR) Scales: Design,Usage, Benefits, and Risks: American Society for Testing & Materials. Schoevers, a. & Jbritz.(2003). Influence of different culturing conditions on kefir grain increase . International Journal of Dairy Technology, 56,18 Shepherd, R., Smith, K., & Farleigh, C. A. (1989). The relationship between intensity, hedonic and relative-to-ideal ratings. Food Quality and Preference, 1(2), 75-80. Stone, H., Sidel, J., Oliver, S., Woolsey, A., & Singleton, R. C. (1974). Sensory evaluation by quantitative descriptive analysis. Food Technology, November, 24– 34. Sudre, J., Pineau, N., Loret, C., & Martin, N. (2012). Comparison of methods to monitor liking of food during consumption. Food Quality and Preference, 24, 179– 189. Varela, P., & Ares, G. (2012). Sensory profiling, the blurred line between sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for product characterization. Food Research International, 48, 893–908. Villegas-ruiz, X., Angulo O., & O'Mahony, M. (2008). Hidden and fales 'preferences' on the structured 9-point hedonic scale. Journal Sensory Studies, 23(6),780-790 Worch, T., Dooley, L., Meullenet, J. F., & Punter, P. H. (2010). Comparison of PLS dummy variables and Fishbone method to determine optimal product characteristics from ideal profiles. Food Quality and Preference, 21(8), 1077-1087.
摘要: 近年來,國人對身體健康的注重及食品無添加劑的嚮往,對於天然加工之食品的需求度逐漸升高,而克菲爾菌具有促進腸道內的益菌生長、促進腸蠕動等多項促進生理效能之功效,使得克菲爾飲品受到市場關注。克菲爾,是一種原發於高加索的發酵牛奶飲品,克菲爾菌是由乳酸菌及酵母菌組成的複合菌,在室溫的條件下,產生具酸味的,有碳酸氣的,輕微的酒精飲料。本研究以市面上販賣之克菲爾菌為主題,分別以兩種商業克菲爾菌(紅布朗公司及四方牧場之克菲爾菌),植入不同基質(全脂牛奶、低脂牛奶及豆漿)進行消費者接受性風味品評研究。 本研究使用的商業菲爾菌,分別依照標示所建議的配方,植入不同基質以25℃下培養48小時並以透過110位消費者以九分法及選擇適合項目法,評估消費者對於兩組克菲爾菌在不同基質時所產出的樣品之感官特性及接受性。 透過感官品評與統計分析結果顯示,克菲爾飲品整體喜好程度介於「非常不喜歡」到「稍微喜歡」之間,其中紅布朗牛奶克菲爾飲品整體喜歡程度最高,顯著性高於四方牧場牛奶克菲爾飲品;紅布朗豆漿克菲爾喜歡程度極低達到消費者難以接受。消費者評估克菲爾感官特性感受結果顯示紅布朗牛奶克菲爾飲品具有甜香氣、乳清香氣、奶香氣、甜味適中、牛奶味、乳酸味、清爽感、滑順感、平滑感、甜餘味與乳香餘味;四方牧場牛奶克菲爾飲品具有布丁狀、亮澤感、酒香氣、酒釀味、啤酒味、強酸味、醋酸味、氣泡感、刺激感及酒餘味等特性,而豆漿基質的克菲爾具有乳黃色、暗色感、不均勻感、豆臭香氣味道及其餘味、黃豆香氣味道及其餘味。 消費者整體上喜歡克菲爾中具有乳白色、亮澤感、流動固體狀、弱或剛好之香氣、奶香、乳清香氣、甜香氣、弱或剛剛好之甜味及酸味、乳酸味、牛奶味、滑順感、平滑感、順口感、乳脂感、清爽感、甜餘味、酸餘味、乳香餘味等特性,不喜歡具有乳黃色、暗色感、不均勻感、黃豆與豆臭之香氣味道及其餘味、強酸味、不良味、刺激感等。消費者感受到紅布朗牛奶克菲爾具有愉悅的、健康的、輕盈的、天然感、無添加感之感受;四方牧場牛奶克菲爾消費者感受具有酸澀感及微醺感而用豆奶為基質的克菲爾消費者感受到噁心感及不舒服感。 紅布朗牛奶克菲爾飲品可能酵母菌比例低,所以消費者感受不出菲爾菌具應有的感官特性而四方牧場的克菲爾飲品有明顯的酒香氣、啤酒味、釀酒味與酒餘味等克菲爾菌具應有的特性但整體上消費者對於這些感官特性偏向負面的喜好感受而統計上標準差極大,表示消費者喜好呈現兩極化之趨勢。 本研究之實驗結果顯示,以豆漿為基質的克菲爾產品,台灣消費者完全無法接受而以兩種商業菌且牛奶為基質的克菲爾飲品接受度高,可以值得推廣。
In recent years, consumers have gradually increased the demand for natural processed foods depending on giving attention to physical health and desiring the food without additives. Kefir fermented products have vomited the market attention because traditionally Kefir bacteria have a lot of physiological functions including promoting the growth of beneficial bacteria in the intestines and assisting intestinal peristalsis. Kefir, one of fermented milk drinks, originating from the Caucasus, is a bacteria compound composed of lactic acid bacteria and yeast. Sensory characteristics of Kefir drinks, usually incubated at room temperature, traditionally have sourness, carbonated and slightly alcohol. The objectives of this study are tantamount to explore consumer acceptance and understanding the liking driver of sensory characteristics for Kefir drinks manufactured with commercial Kefir bacteria with full-fat and low-fat milk or soymilk base. Commercial Kefir bacteria from Red Brown and Professional Ranch were cultured in different matrices for 48 hours at 25 degrees according to the recommended formulation of the label. 110 consumers were asked to evaluate the sensory characteristics of Kefir drink and their acceptance using check-all-that-apply method and 9-point hedonic test. The results of sensory evaluation and statistical analysis showed consumer acceptance of Kefir beverages varied between ' dislike very much' and 'like slightly'. The product fermented Red Brwon with milk base had the highest degree and is much higher than that of Professional Ranch. Soymilk base Kefir drink is not acceptable for consumers. Sensory characteristics of Red Brown Kefir products had sweet aroma, dairy aroma, milky aroma, sweetness, milky flavor, lactic acid flavor, freshness, smoothness, sweetness aftertaste and milky flavor aftertaste. Professional Ranch Kefir products had significant sensory characteristics with pudding shape, brightness, wine aroma, brewing flavor, beer flavor, strong sourness, acetic acid flavor, bubble sense, stimulate feeling and alcohol aftertaste. Unacceptable soymilk Kefir had the sensory characteristics of creamy yellow, dark color, non-uniformity, soy and bean smell and its aftertaste. Consumers generally liked Kefir products with creamy white color, brightness, fluid shape, suitable aroma, milky aroma, dairy aroma, sweet aroma, sweetness, sourness, lactic acid flavor, milky flavor, smoothness, creaminess, freshness, sweet aftertaste, sour aftertaste and dairy aftertaste. Consumers disliked the sensory characteristics such as a creamy yellow color, dark color, non-uniformity, soybean smell and aftertaste, high sourness, off-flavor and simulate feeling. Consumers feel Red Brown products are pleasant, healthy, natural, and light and Professional Ranch product has sourness and astringency and tipsy. Soymilk products feel disgusting and uncomfortable. Consumers don't feel the traditional sensory characteristics of alcohol aroma, beer flavor, brewing flavor for Red Brwon Kefir because of the possibility of low yeast content. However, these traditional Kefir's sensory characteristics would be a negative trend for preference and the standard deviation of the evaluation of these sensory attributes is very high. It means consumer preference is not consistent. Summary, Kefir product with soymilk base is not acceptable for Taiwan's consumers but it is a valuable promotion that Kefir product with milk base has a high acceptability.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/98010
文章公開時間: 2020-08-30
Appears in Collections:食品暨應用生物科技學系

文件中的檔案:

取得全文請前往華藝線上圖書館



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.