Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Joyner 2018 - Explaining Food Texture Through Rheology - Review
Joyner 2018 - Explaining Food Texture Through Rheology - Review
com
ScienceDirect
Building food rheology–sensory relationships allows food or have anisotropic structures (e.g. meats, Mozzarella)
scientists to predict textural attributes from instrumental are difficult to analyze accurately.
measurements. However, these relationships can be difficult to 2. Rheological tests can at best measure a few properties
determine due to the complex composition, structure of the food, of a food at a time; descriptive analysis panelists can
as well as the difficulties in accounting for the changes to the food measure half a dozen or more textural attributes in a
during oral processing. Novel rheological and sensorial analyses single food simultaneously. Thus, multiple rheological
are working toward a better understanding of food structural analyses are needed to collect sufficient information to
breakdown, bolus development, and the associated properties predict sensory texture.
and attributes of the food as it undergoes these changes. These 3. With a few exceptions, rheological tests cannot mea-
analyses are uncovering some of the key unknown information sure temporal changes in sensory textures, including
about food behaviors during oral processing, allowing progression saliva-induced changes.
toward a universal set of rheological–sensory relationships. 4. Fundamental rheological tests cannot completely rep-
licate oral conditions and changes to food during
Address mastication. Thus, rheological behaviors relate well
School of Food Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, ID 83844, United to first-bite texture attributes but are often poorly
States
related to chewdown and residual sensory textures.
Corresponding author: Joyner (Melito), Helen S (hjoyner@uidaho.edu)
Figure 1
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
(a)
Force
A1 A2 A4 A5
Time
L1 A3 L2
(b)
Frequency
Strain
(c)
Friction Coefficient
Sliding Speed
Current Opinion in Food Science
Sample results from (a) two cycle compression testing, (b) LAOS testing, (c) tribological testing.
maintaining a calibrated panel is not only time-consum- used to determine the impact of a potentially confound-
ing and expensive but requires significant amounts of ing variable on a response, as it can be performed on more
product and proper reference standards for calibration. than two variables simultaneously [25]. PCA is used for
Thus, more rapid sensory methods that require less large sets of potentially correlated variables to collapse
training have become increasingly popular [18]. them into two linearly uncorrelated variables—the prin-
cipal components [1]. At least six different samples are
General consumer panels are mainly used to determining needed for a valid PCA. All of these analyses require
preference or liking of foods. Texture liking data from quantitative data and continuous (not discrete) variables.
these panels can be related to both descriptive analysis
and rheological data to determine what attributes or It can be difficult to determine quantitative relationships
properties of a food are liked. Although consumer texture between rheological and sensory data if one of the data
preferences can vary widely, it is still possible to deter- sets cannot be collapsed into a single value or a small set of
mine sensory–rheology relationships in these cases by values. Collapsing data into a single value may also result
analyzing a subset of the data in which consumer pre- in loss of valuable information, potentially leading to
ferences align. incorrect conclusions. For example, viscosity at 50 s 1,
the shear rate historically correlated to perception of
Novel analyses multiple sensory attributes [26], is often used when com-
Sensory methods that use untrained panelists (consumers) paring instrumental to sensory viscosity. However, select-
are becoming increasingly popular because they can be ing a single viscosity for comparison omits information on
performed rapidly and require little to no panelist training flow behavior profiles, which may be critical for develop-
[18]. Novel analyses used in consumer panels include flash ing rheology–sensory relationships. If possible, a model
profiling, check all that apply (CATA) questions, and should be fit to the data set and the model parameters used
napping [18]. Studies comparing descriptive analysis data for developing relationships. For example, instrumental
to novel untrained panel data have shown good agreement viscosity data can be fit to a flow behavior model. If fitting
[19–22]. Given this agreement, it is likely that the use of data to a model is not possible and selecting a single point
these novel consumer analyses for food texture evaluation from the data set is not desired, then the trends of the
will continue to increase in the future. entire data set can be used to make qualitative compar-
isons. While this approach does not allow quantitative
Temporal testing, which determines the changes in per- analysis, it can be an important first step in understanding
ceived sensory attributes of foods during and after oral relationships between rheological and sensory behaviors.
processing, has become increasingly popular, as it can be For example, comparing friction behaviors at different
performed with untrained panelists and used to evaluate sliding speeds to temporal data on food texture may yield
multiple attributes simultaneously [23]. One popular insight into how the food is manipulated orally during
temporal method is temporal dominance of sensations, consumption, how thin-layer behavior of the food devel-
in which panelists identify and rate dominant product ops over time, and why different textural sensations
attributes; the dominant attribute is selected from a list dominate as the food is chewed and swallowed.
and may change over time [23]. Time intensity is a second
temporal method in which trained panelists rate the Currently, there is no universal method for developing
intensity of selected attributes over time [23]. If temporal rheology–sensory relationships and a wide variety of
testing is performed using a general consumer panel, rheological and sensory analyses have been used to deter-
temporal CATA (TCATA) questions can be used; mine these relationships in different food products.
TCATA questions can also be used with trained panelists Table 1 summarizes the analyses used in recent studies,
[24]. These methods can be used on solid, semisolid, along with the methods used to develop the relationships.
and fluid foods, and provide valuable information about In general, descriptive analysis and standard rheometry
the changes in texture perception during consumption. are most commonly used, although novel sensory and
However, it can be challenging to relate temporal data to rheological analyses are gaining traction.
rheological data because the changes in food structure
and composition during consumption are generally not Looking forward
replicated in fundamental rheological testing. While there have been significant strides in building
rheology–sensory relationships, there are still large gaps
Building rheology–sensory relationships in understanding how instrumental and human data con-
Statistical tools are typically used to build rheology– nect. To fill in some of these gaps, the following strategies
sensory relationships; common statistical analyses include are recommended:
regression, correlation, and principal component analyses
(Table 1). In general, both regression and correlation 1. Increased collaboration is needed between groups
analyses determine the strength of the relationship focusing on sensory science and groups focusing on
between variables [25]. Regression analysis can also be rheology and functional behaviors.
Table 1
Rheological, sensorial, and statistical analyses used recent food science studies that include development of rheological–sensory relationships.
GPA: generalized procrustes analysis; HCA: hierarchical cluster analysis; HSD: honestly significant difference; LSD: least significant difference; LSM: least square means; MFA: multiple factor
Reference
[49]
and rheological data use a simple ANOVA or linear
[44]
[45]
[46]
[47]
[48]
[22]
correlation. Statisticians should be included on the
research team to ensure that the analyses are appro-
priate for the data and encourage food scientists to
ANOVA
PCA
PCA
PCA
Descriptive analysis
analysis; PCA: principal component analysis; PLS: partial least squares: SNK: Student Newman Keuls.
TDS
TDS
Compressive testing
Temperature profile
Viscosity profile
Nothing declared.
Yield stress
Acknowledgements
TPA
TPA
The author would like to thank Carolyn Ross for her advice and feedback
on the content of this paper.
This study was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and
Agriculture, Hatch project 1005029.
High-protein nutrition bars
Semi-solid gels
of special interest
of outstanding interest
Sausages
Sausages
2. Melito HS, Daubert CR, Foegeding EA: Relationships between apply (CATA), projective mapping, sorting and intensity scale.
nonlinear viscoelastic behavior and rheological, sensory and Food Res Int 2013, 54:601-610.
oral processing behavior of commercial cheese. J Texture Stud
2013, 44:253-288. 20. Bruzzone F, Ares G, Giménez A: Temporal aspects of yoghurt
texture perception. Int Dairy J 2013, 29:124-134.
3. Pascua Y, Koç H, Foegeding EA: Food structure: roles of
mechanical properties and oral processing in determining 21. Cadena RS, Caimi D, Jaunarena I, Lorenzo I, Vidal L, Ares G,
sensory texture of soft materials. Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci Deliza R, Giménez A: Comparison of rapid sensory
2013, 18:324-333. characterization methodologies for the development of
functional yogurts. Food Res Int 2014, 64:446-455.
4. Chen J, Stokes JR: Rheology and tribology: two distinctive
regimes of food texture sensation. Trends Food Sci Technol 22. Devezeaux de Lavergne M, van Delft M, van de Velde F, van
2012, 25:4-12. Boekel MA, Stieger M: Dynamic texture perception and oral
processing of semi-solid food gels: part 1: comparison
5. Richardson RK, Morris ER, Ross-Murphy SB, Taylor LJ, Dea ICM: between QDA, progressive profiling and TDS. Food
Characterization of the perceived texture of thickened Hydrocolloids 2015, 43:207-217.
systems by dynamic viscosity measurements. Food
Hydrocolloids 1989, 3:175-191. 23. Di Monaco R, Su C, Masi P, Cavella S: Temporal dominance of
sensations: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 2014, 38:104-112.
6. Kokini JL: The physical basis of liquid food texture and texture–
taste interactions. J Food Eng 1987, 6:51-81. 24. Castura JC, Antúnez L, Giménez A, Ares G: Temporal Check-All-
That-Apply (TCATA): a novel dynamic method for
7. Wendin K, Ekman S, Bülow M, Ekberg O, Johansson D, characterizing products. Food Qual Prefer 2016, 47:79-90.
Rothenberg E, Stading M: Objective and quantitative definitions This manuscript introduces Temporal Check All That Apply (TCATA)
of modified food textures based on sensory and rheological questions as a method of evaluating food sensory attributes over time.
methodology. Food Nutr Res 2010, 54:5134. The results laid the groundwork for refinement of the TCATA method,
including its use with untrained panelists.
8. Sharma M, Kristo E, Corredig M, Duizer L: Effect of hydrocolloid
type on texture of pureed carrots: rheological and sensory 25. Granato D, de Araújo Calado VM, Jarvis B: Observations on the
measures. Food Hydrocolloids 2017, 63:478-487. use of statistical methods in Food Science and Technology.
Food Res Int 2014, 55:137-149.
9. Paine FA, Paine HY: A Handbook of Food Packaging. Springer
Science & Business Media; 2012. 26. Stokes JR, Boehm MW, Baier SK: Oral processing, texture and
mouthfeel: from rheology to tribology and beyond. Curr Opin
10. Duvarci OC, Yazar G, Kokini JL: The SAOS, MAOS and LAOS Colloid Interface Sci 2013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
behavior of a concentrated suspension of tomato paste and its cocis.2013.04.010.
prediction using the Bird-Carreau (SAOS) and Giesekus
models (MAOS-LAOS). J Food Eng 2017, 208:77-88. 27. Scheuer PM, Luccio MD, Zibetti AW, Miranda MZ, Francisco A:
Tomato paste rheological behaviors over a large range of strains were fit Relationship between instrumental and sensory texture
to constitutive models; this paper is one of the first to fit nonlinear profile of bread loaves made with whole-wheat flour and fat
rheological behaviors of food to a model. Modeling nonlinear rheological replacer. J Texture Stud 2016, 47:14-23.
data in this manner allows for better simulation of food rheological
behaviors during processing conditions. 28. Panouille M, Saint-Eve A, Deleris I, Le Bleis F, Souchon I: Oral
processing and bolus properties drive the dynamics of salty
11. Yazar G, Duvarci OC, Tavman S, Kokini JL: Effect of mixing on and texture perceptions of bread. Food Res Int 2014, 62:238-
LAOS properties of hard wheat flour dough. J Food Eng 2016, 246.
190:195-204.
29. Wolter A, Hager A-S, Zannini E, Czerny M, Arendt EK: Influence of
12. Prakash S, Tan DDY, Chen J: Applications of tribology in dextran-producing Weissella cibaria on baking properties and
studying food oral processing and texture perception. Food sensory profile of gluten-free and wheat breads. Int J Food
Res Int 2013, 54:1627-1635. Microbiol 2014, 172:83-91.
13. Pradal C, Stokes JR: Oral tribology: bridging the gap between 30. Bize M, Smith BM, Aramouni FM, Bean SR: The effects of egg
physical measurements and sensory experience. Curr Opin and diacetyl tartaric acid esters of monoglycerides addition on
Food Sci 2016, 9:34-41. storage stability, texture, and sensory properties of gluten-
This review article provides an excellent summary of the current under- free sorghum bread. J Food Sci 2017, 82:194-201.
standing of food tribology. The discussion includes tribological testing
setups, surface selection, saliva addition, and relationships of friction 31. Laguna L, Primo-Martı́n C, Varela P, Salvador A, Sanz T: HPMC
behaviors to rheological, sensory, and oral processing behaviors. and inulin as fat replacers in biscuits: sensory and
instrumental evaluation. LWT Food Sci Technol 2014, 56:494-
14. Loret C, Walter M, Pineau N, Peyron MA, Hartmann C, Martin N: 501.
Physical and related sensory properties of a swallowable
bolus. Physiol Behav 2011, 104:855-864. 32. Herranz B, Canet W, Jiménez MJ, Fuentes R, Alvarez MD:
Characterisation of chickpea flour-based gluten-free batters
15. Drago SR, Panouillé M, Saint-Eve A, Neyraud E, Feron G, and muffins with added biopolymers: rheological, physical
Souchon I: Relationships between saliva and food bolus and sensory properties. Int J Food Sci Technol 2016, 51:1087-
properties from model dairy products. Food Hydrocolloids 1098.
2011, 25:659-667.
33. Carvalho NB, Minim VPR, Silva RdCdS, Della Lucia SM, Minim LA:
16. Yven C, Patarin J, Magnin A, Labouré H, Repoux M, Guichard E, Artificial neural networks (ANN): prediction of sensory
Feron G: Consequences of individual chewing strategies on measurements from instrumental data. Food Sci Technol Camp
bolus rheological properties at the swallowing threshold. J 2013, 33:722-729.
Texture Stud 2012, 43:309-318.
34. Pereira EPR, Cavalcanti RN, Esmerino EA, Silva R, Guerreiro LRM,
17. Fukatsu H, Nohara K, Kotani Y, Tanaka N, Matsuno K, Sakai T: Cunha RL, Bolini HMA, Meireles MA, Faria JAF, Cruz AG: Effect of
Endoscopic evaluation of food bolus formation and its incorporation of antioxidants on the chemical, rheological,
relationship with the number of chewing cycles. J Oral Rehabil and sensory properties of probiotic petit suisse cheese. J Dairy
2015, 42:580-587. Sci 2016, 99:1762-1772.
18. Varela P, Ares G: Sensory profiling, the blurred line between 35. Saint-Eve A, Panouille M, Capitaine C, Deleris I, Souchon I:
sensory and consumer science. A review of novel methods for Dynamic aspects of texture perception during cheese
product characterization. Food Res Int 2012, 48:893-908. consumption and relationship with bolus properties. Food
Hydrocolloids 2015, 46:144-152.
19. Cruz AG, Cadena RS, Castro WF, Esmerino EA, Rodrigues JB,
Gaze L, Faria JAF, Freitas MQ, Deliza R, Bolini HMA: Consumer 36. Arancibia C, Castro C, Jublot L, Costell E, Bayarri S: Colour,
perception of probiotic yogurt: performance of check all that rheology, flavour release and sensory perception of dairy
desserts. influence of thickener and fat content. LWT Food Sci 43. Contador L, Dı́az M, Hernández E, Shinya P, Infante R: The
Technol 2015, 62:408-416. relationship between instrumental tests and sensory
determinations of peach and nectarine texture. Eur J Hoticult
37. Varela P, Pintor A, Fiszman S: How hydrocolloids affect the Sci 2017, 81:189-196.
temporal oral perception of ice cream. Food Hydrocolloids
2014, 36:220-228. M, Mastilovic
44. Torbica A, Belovic J, Kevrean , Pestoric
M, krobot D,
Hadnapev TD: Nutritional, rheological, and sensory evaluation
38. Li Y, Joyner HS, Lee AP, Drake MA: Impact of pasteurization of tomato ketchup with increased content of natural fibres
method and fat on milk: relationships among rheological, made from fresh tomato pomace. Food Bioprod Process 2016,
tribological, and astringency behaviors. Int Dairy J 2018, 78:28- 98:299-309.
35.
This study provides a comprehensive picture of milk structure, viscosity, 45. Devezeaux de Lavergne M, Derks JA, Ketel EC, de Wijk RA,
friction behavior, and sensory texture over an 8-week storage time. While Stieger M: Eating behaviour explains differences between
fiction behaviors did correlate with milk astringency, friction behaviors individuals in dynamic texture perception of sausages. Food
alone were not able to predict milk astringency. These results suggest a Qual Prefer 2015, 41:189-200.
complex astringency mechanism that is more than simple changes in
friction behaviors. 46. da Conceição Jorge É, Mendes ACG, Auriema BE, Cazedey HP,
Fontes PR, Ramos A, de LS, Ramos EM: Application of a check-
39. Morell P, Hernando I, Llorca E, Fiszman S: Yogurts with an all-that-apply question for evaluating and characterizing meat
increased protein content and physically modified starch: products. Meat Sci 2015, 100:124-133.
rheological, structural, oral digestion and sensory properties
related to enhanced satiating capacity. Food Res Int 2015, 47. Rezende NV, Benassi MT, Vissotto FZ, Augusto PP,
70:64-73. Grossmann MV: Mixture design applied for the partial
replacement of fat with fibre in sucrose-free chocolates. LWT
40. Morell P, Chen J, Fiszman S: The role of starch and saliva in Food Sci Technol 2015, 62:598-604.
tribology studies and the sensory perception of protein-added
yogurts. Food Funct 2017, 8:545-553. 48. Banach JC, Clark S, Lamsal BP: Instrumental and sensory
This study showed that addition of both starch and saliva has significant texture attributes of high-protein nutrition bars formulated
impact on yogurt tribological behaviors, regardless of formulation. Similar with extruded milk protein concentrate. J Food Sci 2016, 81.
to Ref. [38], this study shows that astringency of yogurt is complex and
49. Devezeaux de Lavergne M, Tournier C, Bertrand D, Salles C, Van
cannot be predicted by friction behavior alone.
de Velde F, Stieger M: Dynamic texture perception, oral
41. Juvonen R, Honkapää K, Maina NH, Shi Q, Viljanen K, processing behaviour and bolus properties of emulsion-filled
Maaheimo H, Virkki L, Tenkanen M, Lantto R: The impact of gels with and without contrasting mechanical properties. Food
fermentation with exopolysaccharide producing lactic acid Hydrocolloids 2016, 52:648-660.
bacteria on rheological, chemical and sensory properties of This study examines oral processing and temporal sensory texture of
pureed carrots (Daucus carota L.). Int J Food Microbiol 2015, filled gels, as well as the rheological behaviors of the gels and gel boli.
207:109-118. These data provide a comprehensive picture of how the gels are broken
down and texture perception changes during oral processing. In parti-
42. Basu S, Shivhare US: Rheological, textural, microstructural, cular, texture changes bilayer gels were able to be tracked; the authors
and sensory properties of sorbitol-substituted mango jam. pointed out that the methods used for determining textural changes could
Food Bioprocess Technol 2013, 6:1401-1413. be used on complex layered foods, such as sandwich cookies.