Relative Sweetness of Sucralose in Beverage Systems and Sensory Properties of Low Calorie Beverages Containing Sucralose

음료 system에서 수크랄로스의 상대당도 및 수크랄로스를 함유한 저열량 음료의 관능적 특성

  • Kim, Mi-Young (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Cho, Hea-Young (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Park, Jae-Yeon (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, Soh-Min (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Suh, Dong-Soon (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Chung, Seo-Jin (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Kim, Hee-Sup (Department of Food & Nutrition, University of Suwon) ;
  • Kim, Kwang-Ok (Department of Food & Nutritional Sciences, Ewha Womans University)
  • 김미영 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 조해영 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 박재연 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 이소민 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 서동순 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 정서진 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 김희섭 (수원대학교 식품영양학과) ;
  • 김광옥 (이화여자대학교 식품영양학과)
  • Published : 2005.06.30

Abstract

Relative sweetness of sucralose, an intensive sweetener, to sucrose or fructose in binary model solution and beverage systems was examined. Sensory properties of sucralose solution, orange flavored beverage and sports drink containing sucralose were evaluated at the equi-sweetness to sucrose or fructose. Consumer acceptability tests were performed on orange flavored beverage. Relative sweetness of sucralose to sucrose was 350 and 500 in binary model solution and orange flavored beverage, respectively, while that of sucralose to fructose in sports drink was 550. All the sensory properties, except astringency, of sucralose solution examined were similar to those of sucrose solution. The sensory properties of orange flavored beverage, in which 50% sucrose was replaced with sucralose, were very close, and showed comparable or higher overall acceptability to that containing sucrose only. When fructose was replaced with sucralose in sports drink sour, salty and bitter tastes, metallic flavor, and astringency slightly increased.

본 연구는 수크랄로스를 이용한 저열량 음료의 관능적 특성을 평가하기 위하여 수행되었다. 이를 위해 수용액 및 음료 system에서 설탕이나 과당에 대한 수크랄로스 및 아스파탐의 상대당도를 조사하였고, 감미료를 함유한 수용액과 수크랄로스로 설탕이나 과당의 일부 또는 전부를 대체한 오렌지 향 음료 및 스포츠 음료의 관능적 특성을 평가하였다. 또한 대체율에 따른 오렌지 향 음료의 소비자 기호도를 조사하였다. 그 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 수용액 상태에서 설탕(10%)용액에 대한 수크랄로스의 상대당도는 350배였고, 아스파탐의 상대당도는 90배였다. 설탕 용액과 동일한 당도를 나타내는 수크랄로스 및 아스파탐 용액의 관능적 특성 평가 결과, 수렴성을 제외한 모든 특성에서 수크랄로스 용액과 설탕 용액 간에 유의적 차이를 나타내지 않았으나, 아스파탐 용액은 쓴맛, 금속성 향미 및 수렴성이 강하게 나타났다. 오렌지 향 음료(설탕 10%함유)에서 수크랄로스의 상대당도는 500배였으며, 설탕의 50%를 수크랄로스로 대체한 경우, 신맛을 제외한 모든 특성에서 설탕만을 첨가한 오렌지 향 음료와 유의적인 차이가 없었다. 설탕을 수크랄로스로 대체하여 제조한 오렌지향 음료에 대해 소비자 기호도 검사를 실시한 결과, 설탕의 50%를 수크랄로스로 대체한 음료는 설탕만 첨가한 음료와 동일한 기호도를 나타냈다.

Keywords

References

  1. Nelson AL. Special topices pp. 91-95. In: Sweetners: Alternative. Eagan Press, St. Paul, MN, USA (2000)
  2. Kim SY, Oh DK, Kim SS, Kim CJ. New sweeteners used in sucrose-free cookies: Sugar alcohols and new sugar sweeteners. Food Sci.Ind. 29: 53-61 (1996)
  3. Nabors OL, Gelardi RC. Introduction, pp. 1-14. In: Alternative Sweeeners. Nabors OL, Gelardi RC (ed). Marcel Dekker, Inc., NY, USA (1985)
  4. Walter GJ, Mitchell ML. Saccharin, pp. 15-41. In: Alternative Sweeteners. Nabors LO, Gelardi RC (ed). Marcel Dekker, Inc., NY, USA (1985)
  5. Homier BE. Properties and stability of aspartame. Food Technol. 38: 50-55 (1984)
  6. Nam SJ, Kim KO. Characteristics of sikhye (Korean traditional drink) made with different amount of cooked rice and malt and with different sweeteners. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 21: 197-202(1989)
  7. Wells AG. The use of intense sweeteners in soft drinks, pp. 169-214. In: Progress in Sweeteners. Grenby TH (ed). Elsevier Applied Science, NY, USA (1989)
  8. Pong L, Johnson JM, Barbeau WE, Stewart DL. Evaluation of alternative fat and sweetener systems in cupcakes. Cereal Chem. 68:552-555(1991)
  9. Park SM, Lee SR. Estimation of the total dietary intake of saccharin by Korean population. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 24: 563-567(1992)
  10. Nelson AL. Properties of high intensity sweeteners pp. 17-29. In: Sweeteners Alternative. Eagan Press, St. Paul, MN, USA (2000)
  11. Jenner MR. Sucralose: unveiling its properties application, pp. 121-142. In: Progress in Sweeteners. Grenby TH (ed). Elsevier Applied Science, NY, USA (1989)
  12. Ellis JW. Overview of sweeteners. J. Food Sci. 72: 671-675 (1995)
  13. Hood LL, Campbell A. Developing reduced calorie bakery products with sucralose. Cereal Foods World 35: 1171-1182 (1990)
  14. Kim YH, Ann JH, Baek SC, Yu JH. Studies on the characteristics of non fat plain liquid yoghurt with low calorie sweeteners. Korean J. Dairy Sci. 16: 376-384 (1994)
  15. Powers NL, Pangborn RM. Descriptive analysis of the sensory properties of beverages and gelatins contains containing sucrose of synthetic sweeteners. J. Food Sci. 43: 47-51 (1978) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1978.tb09733.x
  16. Hess DA, Setser CS. Alternative systems for sweetening layer cakes using aspartame with and without fructose. Cereal Chem. 60:337-400(1983)
  17. Redlinger PA, Setser CS. Sensory qualoty of selected sweeteners: Aqueous and lipid model systems. J. Food Sci. 52: 451-454 (1987) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1987.tb06637.x
  18. Hanger LY, Lotz A, Lepeniotis S. Descriptive profiles of selected high intensity sweeteners (HIS), HIS blends, and sucrose. J. Food Sci. 61: 456-464 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1996.tb14216.x
  19. Richard LB, Graham J. Stability of sucralose in baked goods. Food Technol. 44: 62-66 (1990)
  20. Burdach KJ, Kroeze JHA, Koster EP. Nasal, retronasal, and gustatory perception: an experimental comparison. Percep. Psychophys. 36:205-208(1984) https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206360
  21. Frank RA, Byram J. Taste-smell interactions are tastant and odor-ant dependent. Chem. Senses 13: 445-455 (1988) https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/13.3.445
  22. Dalton P, Doolittle N, Nagata H, Breslin PAS. The merging of the senses: integration of subthreshold taste and smell. Nature Neurosci. 3:431-432(2000) https://doi.org/10.1038/74797
  23. Prescott J, Johnstone V, Francis J. Odor-taste interactions: effects of attentional strategies during exposure. Chem. Senses 29: 331-340(2004) https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/bjh036
  24. Kim KO, O'Mahony MA. New approach to category scales of intensity I: traditional versus rank-rating. J. Sensory Studies 13: 241-249(1998) https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1998.tb00086.x
  25. Cardello HMAB, Dasilva MAPA, Damasio MH. Measurement of the relative sweetness of stevia extract, aspartame and cyclamate/ saccharin blend as compared to sucrose at different concentrations. Plant Foods Human Nutri. 54: 119-130 (1990)
  26. Prescott J. Flavours as a psychological construct: implications for perceiving and measuring the sensory qualities of foods. Food Qual. Pref. 10: 349-356 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(98)00048-2
  27. Klaauw NJ, Frank RA. Scaling component intensities of complex stimuli: The influence of response alternatives. Environ. Intl. 22: 21-31 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1016/0160-4120(95)00100-X