Barley for Food and Health: Science, Technology, and Products

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SENSORY EVALUATION 141 as Stone and Sidel (1993) should be consulted for the theory and organization of a program. Guidelines for specific tests can be obtained from the American Society for Testing and Materials (Conshohocken, Pennsylvania). Sensory testing can be done in two general ways: groups of untrained consumers ascertain general acceptance of a product, or a trained laboratory taste panel can be used. The latter is much more involved but provides much more specific information. The consumer panel should have a large number of members, representing a cross section of a population, who are given a sample and asked to complete a very simple evaluation such as “like” or “don’t like.” This type of testing provides only a general idea of product acceptability; however, the results can indicate the advisability of further, more precise evaluation. The physical area for trained taste panels should be a quiet, neutral environment with privacy booths or spaces for panelists and an arrangement for presentation of samples for testing. Training of panelists involves various aspects of taste recognition and knowledge of quality factors of the specific type of food to be tested. Standardized testing procedures should be used and results should be analyzed statistically, which requires an adequate number of panelists to assure reliable results. Three categories of tests are used in sensory evaluation: discriminative, descriptive analysis, and affective (Stone and Sidel 1993). Discriminative testing may use such simple tests as the paired comparison test, in which two samples are presented and the panelists are asked if they can discern a difference. Another is the triangle test, where three samples are presented, two of which are identical and the panelists are asked to identify the off sample. In descriptive analysis tests, a quantitative total sensory description of a product is provided, necessitating thorough screening and training of panelists. They may be asked to identify various aspects of flavor, aroma, presence of aftertaste, chewiness, crunchiness or stickiness, or any other impressions of a product. The third category, affective testing, indicates acceptance or preference of a product by making a choice between two samples presented. Another form of affective testing is the hedonic scale, in which panelists rate a product on nine points, ranging from “like extremely” to “dislike extremely.” Facial image scales are also used, where panelists (sometimes children) choose a facial expression close to their reaction to a product. Additionally, the visual analogue scale (VAS) is used to measure the satiety of a food by assessing degree of hunger, fullness, nausea, desire to eat, and amount of food that can be eaten at a meal (Flint et al. 2000). Preparation of food samples to be tested must be carried out carefully so that the appearances are identical. All samples must be equally fresh, of equal temperature, in sizes only large enough for two bites. The order of presentation is randomized and panelists should not be overwhelmed by the number of samples at a sitting. Room-temperature water should be provided for mouth rinsing between samples. Panelists are required to complete score forms to be used for analysis of results. Documentation and record keeping are essential for credibility of a sensory evaluation program. Decisions about research directions, product development, and marketing may be dependent on the results.
142 EVALUATION OF FOOD PRODUCT QUALITY SUMMARY Substitution of barley into standard wheat formulas will produce product variations due to the presence of β-glucan, polyphenols, and other unique compounds. To achieve acceptable and reproducible results, it is important to conduct and document quality evaluations of the products. A great deal of barley research has been done on yeast bread, a commonly eaten food that can provide an enhanced health benefit by inclusion of barley. Other baked goods and pasta have their own specialized objective evaluation techniques. Sensory testing is essential for consumer acceptance of new products, and requires standard procedures. Results of objective and subjective tests of a food should correspond with each other, for assurance of quality. REFERENCES AACC (American Association of Cereal Chemists International). 2000. Approved Methods AACC , 10th ed. St. Paul, MN. Published online at http://www.aaccnet.org. Ames, N., Rhymer, C., Rossnagel, B., Therrien, M., Ryland, D., Dua, S., and Ross, K. 2006. Utilization of diverse hulless barley properties to maximize food product quality. Cereal Foods World 51:23–28. Baker, A. E., Dibbon, R. A., and Ponte, J. G., 1987. Comparison of bread firmness measurement by four instruments. Cereal Foods World 32:486–489. CGC (Canadian Grain Commission). 2003. Quality of Western Wheat. CGC, Winnipeg, MB, Canada. Crosbie, G. B. 1991. The relationship between starch swelling properties, paste viscosity and boiled noodle quality in wheat flours. J. Cereal Sci. 13:145–150. Cubadda, R. 1988. Evaluation of durum wheat, semolina and pasta in Europe. Pages 217–228 in: Durum Wheat Chemistry and Technology. G. Fabriani and C. Lintas, eds. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul, MN. Dexter, J. E., Izydorczyk, M. S., Marchylo, B. A., and Schlichting, I. M. 2005. Texture and colour of pasta containing mill fractions from hull-less barley genotypes with variable content of amylose and fibre. Pages 488–493 in: Using Cereal Science and Technology for the Benefit of Consumers: Proc. 12th International ICC Cereal and Bread Congress. S. P. Cauvain, S. S. Salmon, and L. S. Young, eds. Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK/CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Dick, J. W., and Youngs, V. L. 1988. Evaluation of durum wheat, semolina and pasta in the United States, Pages 237–261 in: Durum Wheat Chemistry and Technology. G. Fabriani and C. Lintas, eds. American Association of Cereal Chemists, St. Paul, MN. Ereifej, K. I., Al-Mahasneh, M. A., and Rababah, T. M. 2006. Effect of barley flour on quality of balady bread. Int. J. Food Prop. 9:39–49. Flint, A., Raben, A., Blundell, J. E., and Astrup, A. 2000. Reproducibility power and validity of visual analogue scales in assessment of appetite sensations in single test-meal studies. Int. J. Obes. Relat. Metab. Disord. 24:38–48.
Page 2:
BARLEY FOR FOOD AND HEALTH Science,
Page 5 and 6:
On a Seed “This was the goal of t
Page 7 and 8:
Cover design by Jean Rose Johnston.
Page 10 and 11:
CONTENTS Preface xiii 1 Barley Hist
Page 12 and 13:
CONTENTS ix Infrared Processing, 12
Page 14:
CONTENTS xi Asia, 221 Barley Mixed-
Page 17 and 18:
xiv PREFACE In the concluding two c
Page 19 and 20:
2 RELATIONSHIP OF HUMANS AND BARLEY
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
10 RELATIONSHIP OF HUMANS AND BARLE
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
2 Barley: Taxonomy, Morphology, and
Page 37 and 38:
20 BARLEY: TAXONOMY, MORPHOLOGY, AN
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
3 Barley Biotechnology: Breeding an
Page 51 and 52:
34 BARLEY BIOTECHNOLOGY: BREEDING A
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
4 Barley: Genetics and Nutrient Com
Page 75 and 76:
58 BARLEY: GENETICS AND NUTRIENT CO
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108: 90 BARLEY: GENETICS AND NUTRIENT CO
Page 113 and 114: 96 BARLEY PROCESSING: METHODS AND P
Page 115 and 116: 98 BARLEY PROCESSING: METHODS AND P
Page 117 and 118: 100 BARLEY PROCESSING: METHODS AND
Page 151 and 152: 134 EVALUATION OF FOOD PRODUCT QUAL
Page 157: 140 EVALUATION OF FOOD PRODUCT QUAL
Page 161 and 162: 7 Barley Food Product Research and
Page 163 and 164: 146 BARLEY FOOD PRODUCT RESEARCH AN
Page 195 and 196: 8 Health Benefits of Barley Foods I
Page 197 and 198: 180 HEALTH BENEFITS OF BARLEY FOODS
Page 209 and 210:
192 HEALTH BENEFITS OF BARLEY FOODS
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
9 Current Status of Global Barley P
Page 223 and 224:
206 CURRENT STATUS OF GLOBAL BARLEY
Page 225 and 226:
208 CURRENT STATUS OF GLOBAL BARLEY
Page 227 and 228:
10 Barley Foods: Selected Tradition
Page 229 and 230:
212 BARLEY FOODS: SELECTED TRADITIO
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 242 and 243:
APPENDIX 1 Glossary: Botany and Pla
Page 244 and 245:
APPENDIX 2 Glossary: Food and Nutri
Page 246 and 247:
APPENDIX 3 Glossary: Barley Terms T
Page 248 and 249:
APPENDIX 4 Equivalent Weights and M
Page 250 and 251:
SOURCES OF BARLEY AND BARLEY PRODUC
Page 252 and 253:
Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Ph: 888-
Page 254 and 255:
SOURCES OF BARLEY AND BARLEY PRODUC
Page 256 and 257:
E-mail:Tony.Steeper@csiro.au Web: h
Page 258 and 259:
BARLEY RESOURCE ORGANIZATIONS 241 P
Page 260 and 261:
INDEX Air classification, 102, 122-
Page 262:
INDEX 245 Meat and barley casserole
show all

Barley for Food and Health: Science, Technology, and Products

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?