27.09.2013 Views

Identification of the major drivers of 'phenolic' taste in ... - GWRDC

Identification of the major drivers of 'phenolic' taste in ... - GWRDC

Identification of the major drivers of 'phenolic' taste in ... - GWRDC

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

AWRI: <strong>Identification</strong> Of The Major Drivers Of ‘Phenolic’ Taste In White W<strong>in</strong>es<br />

produce irritation exist. Oleocanthal is one such compound. It is responsible for <strong>the</strong> peppery, back <strong>of</strong><br />

<strong>the</strong> throat burn<strong>in</strong>g sensation that typifies extra virg<strong>in</strong> olive oil. Recently, oleocanthal receptors located<br />

<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> human pharynx have been identifed (Peyrot des Gachons et al. 2011).<br />

The ‘burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong>’ perceived by <strong>the</strong> assessors was negatively associated with both <strong>in</strong>-mouth<br />

hotness (r= -0.331) and hot after<strong>taste</strong> (r= -0.395), suggest<strong>in</strong>g that ‘burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong>’ represents a<br />

sensory character that is not totally related to alcohol content. However, <strong>the</strong> model w<strong>in</strong>e (that<br />

conta<strong>in</strong>ed alcohol but not phenolics) was rated as hav<strong>in</strong>g a burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong>, suggest<strong>in</strong>g that alcohol<br />

<strong>in</strong>duced hot after<strong>taste</strong> and a similarly perceived phenolic <strong>in</strong>duced character were not totally<br />

differentiated by <strong>the</strong> <strong>taste</strong>rs.<br />

Add<strong>in</strong>g caftaric acid to <strong>the</strong> model w<strong>in</strong>e suppressed <strong>the</strong> perception <strong>of</strong> burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong>, while add<strong>in</strong>g<br />

GRP tended to <strong>in</strong>crease burn<strong>in</strong>g sensation. This suggests that GRP produces a burn<strong>in</strong>g sensation <strong>in</strong> its<br />

own right, while <strong>the</strong> presence <strong>of</strong> caftaric acid <strong>in</strong>terferes with <strong>the</strong> burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong> <strong>in</strong>duced by alcohol.<br />

Therefore two mechanisms are likely to be <strong>in</strong> play.<br />

GRP was found to have an enhanc<strong>in</strong>g effect on ‘oily mouth-feel’ (Figure 7-7, p=0.096). The<br />

relationship between perceived viscosity and oil<strong>in</strong>ess is less clear as <strong>the</strong>y were moderately correlated<br />

(r= 0.53, p=0.141). However, by keep<strong>in</strong>g both ‘oily mouth-feel’ and ‘viscosity’ <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir list <strong>of</strong> relevant<br />

attributes, <strong>the</strong>y were seen as dist<strong>in</strong>ct characters worthy <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>clusion by <strong>the</strong> tast<strong>in</strong>g panel.<br />

What is new here is <strong>the</strong> notion that small molecular weight phenolics from white w<strong>in</strong>es may suppress<br />

astr<strong>in</strong>gent and ‘burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong>’ sensations aris<strong>in</strong>g from acidity or alcohol ra<strong>the</strong>r than caus<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong>m<br />

as has previously been presumed. The mechanisms underly<strong>in</strong>g this are unclear but warrant fur<strong>the</strong>r<br />

<strong>in</strong>vestigation. While <strong>the</strong>re is evidence that GRP contributes to a burn<strong>in</strong>g after<strong>taste</strong>, <strong>in</strong> general, GRP<br />

and caftaric acid when <strong>taste</strong>d at w<strong>in</strong>e like concentrations have ei<strong>the</strong>r no effect or a suppressive effect<br />

on ‘phenolic <strong>taste</strong>s’ <strong>in</strong> white w<strong>in</strong>e.<br />

61<br />

Astr<strong>in</strong>gency<br />

3.0<br />

2.5<br />

2.0<br />

1.5<br />

1.0<br />

0.5<br />

0.0<br />

b<br />

a<br />

b<br />

Caftaric Acid GRP<br />

b<br />

a a<br />

60 mg/L<br />

30 mg/L<br />

0 mg/L<br />

Figure 7-3: Mean ‘astr<strong>in</strong>gency’ <strong>in</strong>tensity. Means with different subscripts are significantly<br />

different (p

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!