Advertisement

Relationships Among Acid Milk Gel Sensory, Rheological, and Tribological Behaviors

  • Maryam Baniasadidehkordi
  • Helen S. JoynerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Food Engineering Series book series (FSES)

Abstract

Sensory evaluation is a useful technique to optimize the textural properties of semisolid foods. However, this method may not be time- and cost effective for all food products, particularly those needing rapid, low-cost development or troubleshooting. Rheometry can determine food mechanical behaviors that have been correlated to sensory attributes. Tribometry is a complementary measurement for rheometry since some textural attributes, e.g. smoothness and astringency, may be related to friction behaviors rather than viscosity or viscoelastic behaviors. Accordingly, the objective of this study was to determine the relationships among acid milk gel rheological, tribological, and sensory behaviors, as well as how addition of human whole saliva (HWS) during instrumental testing impacted these relationships. Textural attributes of 24 formulations of acid milk gels were evaluated using descriptive sensory analysis. Rheological and tribological behaviors of the acid milk gels were evaluated with and without the addition of HWS. Overall, several sensory attributes showed correlations with rheological and tribological behaviors, including critical strain, tanδ, complex modulus, zero shear viscosity, and flow behavior index, and friction coefficients at different sliding speeds. Viscosity parameters were correlated with mouthcoat, mouth viscosity, low-melting, smoothness, firmness, astringency, grittiness in mouth, and graininess. Friction coefficient at a sliding speed of 30 mm s−1 provided the best correlation to sensory attributes. However, chalkiness, graininess, and grittiness in mouth were correlated with friction coefficients at sliding speeds of 10–30 mm s−1. Changes in rheological and tribological behavior due to addition of HWS during instrumental testing impacted correlation strength and what parameters were correlated. The results of this study provide a better understanding of the relationships among acid milk gel rheological, tribological, and sensory relationships. This understanding can be helpful to develop textures of reduced- or non-fat semisolid foods that are similar to their full-fat counterparts.

Keywords

Sensory Tribology Rheology Semisolid foods Texture perception 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Funding for this project was provided by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture (grant #2015-67018-23069).

References

  1. Alakali, J., Okonkwo, T., & Iordye, E. (2008). Effect of stabilizers on the physico-chemical and sensory attributes of thermized yoghurt. African Journal of Biotechnology, 7, 2.Google Scholar
  2. Andrewes, P., Kelly, M., Vardhanabhuti, B., & Foegeding, E. (2011). Dynamic modelling of whey protein–saliva interactions in the mouth and relation to astringency in acidic beverages. International Dairy Journal, 21(8), 523–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beaulieu, M., Pouliot, Y., & Pouliot, M. (1999). Composition and microstructure of casein: Whey protein aggregates formed by heating model solutions at 95 C. International Dairy Journal, 9(3–6), 393–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bertrand, M.-E., & Turgeon, S. L. (2007). Improved gelling properties of whey protein isolate by addition of xanthan gum. Food Hydrocolloids, 21(2), 159–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bird, A. R., Brown, I. L., & Topping, D. L. (2000). Starches, resistant starches, the gut microflora and human health. Current Issues in Intestinal Microbiology, 1(1), 25–37.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Cassin, G., Heinrich, E., & Spikes, H. (2001). The influence of surface roughness on the lubrication properties of adsorbing and non-adsorbing biopolymers. Tribology Letters, 11(2), 95–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cayot, P., Schenker, F., Houzé, G., Sulmont-Rossé, C., & Colas, B. (2008). Creaminess in relation to consistency and particle size in stirred fat-free yogurt. International Dairy Journal, 18(3), 303–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chen, J. (2015). Food oral processing: Mechanisms and implications of food oral destruction. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 45(2), 222–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen, J., & Engelen, L. (2012). Food oral processing: Fundamentals of eating and sensory perception. John Wiley & Sons: Ames, IA. 320 p.Google Scholar
  10. Chen, J., & Stokes, J. R. (2012). Rheology and tribology: Two distinctive regimes of food texture sensation. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 25(1), 4–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chojnicka-Paszun, A., De Jongh, H. H. J., & De Kruif, C. G. (2012). Sensory perception and lubrication properties of milk: Influence of fat content. International Dairy Journal, 26(1), 15–22.Google Scholar
  12. de Wijk, R. A., & Prinz, J. F. (2005). The role of friction in perceived oral texture. Food Quality and Preference, 16(2), 121–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. De Wijk, R., Prinz, J., & Janssen, A. (2006a). Explaining perceived oral texture of starch-based custard desserts from standard and novel instrumental tests. Food Hydrocolloids, 20(1), 24–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Wijk, R., Terpstra, M., Janssen, A., & Prinz, J. (2006b). Perceived creaminess of semi-solid foods. Trends in Food Science & Technology, 17(8), 412–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Doublier, J.-L., Garnier, C., Renard, D., & Sanchez, C. (2000). Protein–polysaccharide interactions. Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science, 5(3–4), 202–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dresselhuis, D., De Hoog, E., Stuart, M. C., & Van Aken, G. (2008). Application of oral tissue in tribological measurements in an emulsion perception context. Food Hydrocolloids, 22(2), 323–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Engelen, L., de Wijk, R. A., Prinz, J. F., Janssen, A. M., van der Bilt, A., Weenen, H., & Bosman, F. (2003). A comparison of the effects of added saliva, α-amylase and water on texture perception in semisolids. Physiology & Behavior, 78(4), 805–811.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Engelen, L., de Wijk, R. A., van der Bilt, A., Prinz, J. F., Janssen, A. M., & Bosman, F. (2005). Relating particles and texture perception. Physiology & Behavior, 86(1), 111–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Engelen, L., van den Keybus, P. A., de Wijk, R. A., Veerman, E. C., Amerongen, A. V. N., Bosman, F., Prinz, J. F., & van der Bilt, A. (2007). The effect of saliva composition on texture perception of semi-solids. Archives of Oral Biology, 52(6), 518–525.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. Gibbins, H., & Carpenter, G. (2013). Alternative mechanisms of astringency–what is the role of saliva? Journal of Texture Studies, 44(5), 364–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Green, B. G. (1993). Oral astringency: A tactile component of flavor. Acta Psychologica, 84(1), 119–125.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Han, X., Yang, Z., Jing, X., Yu, P., Zhang, Y., Yi, H., & Zhang, L. (2016). Improvement of the texture of yogurt by use of exopolysaccharide producing lactic acid bacteria. BioMed Research International, 2016, 7945675.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. Harwalkar, V., Cholette, H., McKellar, R., & Emmons, D. (1993). Relation between proteolysis and astringent off-flavor in milk1. Journal of Dairy Science, 76(9), 2521–2527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ibrahim, N. H., Man, Y. B. C., Tan, C. P., & Idris, N. A. (2010). Mixture design experiment on flow behaviour of O/W emulsions as affected by polysaccharide interactions. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 67, 1000–1006.Google Scholar
  25. Isleten, M., & Karagul-Yuceer, Y. (2006). Effects of dried dairy ingredients on physical and sensory properties of nonfat yogurt. Journal of Dairy Science, 89(8), 2865–2872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Janiaski, D., Pimentel, T., Cruz, A., & Prudencio, S. (2016). Strawberry-flavored yogurts and whey beverages: What is the sensory profile of the ideal product? Journal of Dairy Science, 99(7), 5273–5283.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Janssen, A. M., Terpstra, M. E., De Wijk, R. A., & Prinz, J. F. (2007). Relations between rheological properties, saliva‐induced structure breakdown and sensory texture attributes of custards. Journal of Texture Studies, 38(1), 42–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jöbstl, E., O’Connell, J., Fairclough, J. P. A., & Williamson, M. P. (2004). Molecular model for astringency produced by polyphenol/protein interactions. Biomacromolecules, 5(3), 942–949.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Joyner, H. S., Pernell, C. W., & Daubert, C. R. (2014). Impact of formulation and saliva on acid milk gel friction behavior. Journal of food science, 79(5), E867–E880.Google Scholar
  30. Josephson, R., Thomas, E., Morr, C., & Coulter, S. (1967). Relation of heat-induced changes in protein-salt constituents to astringency in milk systems1. Journal of Dairy Science, 50(9), 1376–1383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Krzeminski, A., Tomaschunas, M., Köhn, E., Busch‐Stockfisch, M., Weiss, J., & Hinrichs, J. (2013). Relating creamy perception of whey protein enriched yogurt systems to instrumental data by means of multivariate data analysis. Journal of Food Science, 78(2), S314–S319.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lee, W., & Lucey, J. (2010). Formation and physical properties of yogurt. Asian-Australasian Journal of Animal Sciences, 23(9), 1127–1136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lemieux, L., & Simard, R. (1994). Astringency, a textural defect in dairy products. Le Lait, 74(3), 217–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Malone, M., Appelqvist, I., & Norton, I. (2003). Oral behaviour of food hydrocolloids and emulsions. Part 1. Lubrication and deposition considerations. Food Hydrocolloids, 17(6), 763–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Materials, A. S. f. T. a. (2004). ASTM E112–96 (2004) e2: Standard test methods for determining average grain size. ASTM.Google Scholar
  36. Morell, P., Hernando, I., Llorca, E., & Fiszman, S. (2015). Yogurts with an increased protein content and physically modified starch: Rheological, structural, oral digestion and sensory properties related to enhanced satiating capacity. Food Research International, 70, 64–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Morell, P., Chen, J., & Fiszman, S. (2016). The role of starch and saliva in tribology studies and the sensory perception of protein-added yogurts. Food & Function, 8, 545.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Ozcan, T. (2013). Determination of yogurt quality by using rheological and textural parameters. In Proc. 2nd international conference on nutrition and food sciences. IPCBEE.Google Scholar
  39. Pascua, Y., Koç, H., & Foegeding, E. A. (2013). Food structure: Roles of mechanical properties and oral processing in determining sensory texture of soft materials. Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science, 18(4), 324–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Peng, X., & Yao, Y. (2017). Carbohydrates as fat replacers. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology, 8, 331–351.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. Prinz, J., Huntjens, L., & de Wijk, R. (2006). Instrumental and sensory quantification of oral coatings retained after swallowing semi-solid foods. Archives of Oral Biology, 51(12), 1071–1079.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Puvanenthiran, A., Williams, R., & Augustin, M. (2002). Structure and visco-elastic properties of set yoghurt with altered casein to whey protein ratios. International Dairy Journal, 12(4), 383–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Roller, S. (1996). Starch-derived fat mimetics: Maltodextrins. In Handbook of fat replacers (p. 99). Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Saint-Eve, A., Kora, E. P., & Martin, N. (2004). Impact of the olfactory quality and chemical complexity of the flavouring agent on the texture of low fat stirred yogurts assessed by three different sensory methodologies. Food Quality and Preference, 15(7), 655–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sano, H., Egashira, T., Kinekawa, Y., & Kitabatake, N. (2005). Astringency of bovine milk whey protein. Journal of Dairy Science, 88(7), 2312–2317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sonne, A., Busch-Stockfisch, M., Weiss, J., & Hinrichs, J. (2014). Improved mapping of in-mouth creaminess of semi-solid dairy products by combining rheology, particle size, and tribology data. LWT- Food Science and Technology, 59(1), 342–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stokes, J. R., Boehm, M. W., & Baier, S. K. (2013). Oral processing, texture and mouthfeel: From rheology to tribology and beyond. Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science, 18(4), 349–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Thaiudom, S., & Goff, H. (2003). Effect of κ-carrageenan on milk protein polysaccharide mixtures. International Dairy Journal, 13(9), 763–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. van de Velde, F., de Hoog, E. H., Oosterveld, A., & Tromp, R. H. (2015). Protein-polysaccharide interactions to alter texture. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology, 6, 371–388.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Walstra, P. (1996). Dispersed systems: Basic considerations. In Food science and technology (pp. 95–156). New York: Marcel Dekker.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Food ScienceUniversity of IdahoMoscowUSA

Personalised recommendations