Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Basic In-Mouth Attribute Evaluation: A Comparison of Two Panels.
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, Bioscience and Materials, Agrifood and Bioscience. Stellenbosch University, South Africa.
Stellenbosch University, South Africa.
Stellenbosch University, South Africa.
Stellenbosch University, South Africa.
2018 (English)In: Foods (Basel, Switzerland), ISSN 2304-8158, Vol. 8, no 1, article id E3Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

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.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2018. Vol. 8, no 1, article id E3
Keywords [en]
astringency, comparison, red wine, trained panel, winemakers
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-37508DOI: 10.3390/foods8010003PubMedID: 30577639OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-37508DiVA, id: diva2:1281448
Available from: 2019-01-22 Created: 2019-01-22 Last updated: 2019-01-22Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed
By organisation
Agrifood and Bioscience
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 3 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.35.8