WO2007110115A1 - A sweet food composition with low sugar contents - Google Patents

A sweet food composition with low sugar contents Download PDF

Info

Publication number
WO2007110115A1
WO2007110115A1 PCT/EP2007/000510 EP2007000510W WO2007110115A1 WO 2007110115 A1 WO2007110115 A1 WO 2007110115A1 EP 2007000510 W EP2007000510 W EP 2007000510W WO 2007110115 A1 WO2007110115 A1 WO 2007110115A1
Authority
WO
WIPO (PCT)
Prior art keywords
concentration
food composition
sweetness
sweet
odorant
Prior art date
Application number
PCT/EP2007/000510
Other languages
French (fr)
Inventor
David Philippe Labbe
Nathalie Marguerite Claire MARTIN
Original Assignee
Nestec S.A.
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Nestec S.A. filed Critical Nestec S.A.
Priority to AU2007229766A priority Critical patent/AU2007229766A1/en
Priority to EP07722761A priority patent/EP2012594A1/en
Priority to US12/297,679 priority patent/US20090162519A1/en
Publication of WO2007110115A1 publication Critical patent/WO2007110115A1/en

Links

Classifications

    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23L—FOODS, FOODSTUFFS, OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASSES A21D OR A23B-A23J; THEIR PREPARATION OR TREATMENT, e.g. COOKING, MODIFICATION OF NUTRITIVE QUALITIES, PHYSICAL TREATMENT; PRESERVATION OF FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS, IN GENERAL
    • A23L2/00—Non-alcoholic beverages; Dry compositions or concentrates therefor; Their preparation
    • A23L2/52—Adding ingredients
    • A23L2/60—Sweeteners
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23C—DAIRY PRODUCTS, e.g. MILK, BUTTER OR CHEESE; MILK OR CHEESE SUBSTITUTES; MAKING THEREOF
    • A23C9/00—Milk preparations; Milk powder or milk powder preparations
    • A23C9/12—Fermented milk preparations; Treatment using microorganisms or enzymes
    • A23C9/13—Fermented milk preparations; Treatment using microorganisms or enzymes using additives
    • A23C9/1307—Milk products or derivatives; Fruit or vegetable juices; Sugars, sugar alcohols, sweeteners; Oligosaccharides; Organic acids or salts thereof or acidifying agents; Flavours, dyes or pigments; Inert or aerosol gases; Carbonation methods
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23L—FOODS, FOODSTUFFS, OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASSES A21D OR A23B-A23J; THEIR PREPARATION OR TREATMENT, e.g. COOKING, MODIFICATION OF NUTRITIVE QUALITIES, PHYSICAL TREATMENT; PRESERVATION OF FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS, IN GENERAL
    • A23L27/00—Spices; Flavouring agents or condiments; Artificial sweetening agents; Table salts; Dietetic salt substitutes; Preparation or treatment thereof
    • A23L27/30—Artificial sweetening agents
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23L—FOODS, FOODSTUFFS, OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASSES A21D OR A23B-A23J; THEIR PREPARATION OR TREATMENT, e.g. COOKING, MODIFICATION OF NUTRITIVE QUALITIES, PHYSICAL TREATMENT; PRESERVATION OF FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS, IN GENERAL
    • A23L29/00—Foods or foodstuffs containing additives; Preparation or treatment thereof
    • A23L29/30—Foods or foodstuffs containing additives; Preparation or treatment thereof containing carbohydrate syrups; containing sugars; containing sugar alcohols, e.g. xylitol; containing starch hydrolysates, e.g. dextrin
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23L—FOODS, FOODSTUFFS, OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASSES A21D OR A23B-A23J; THEIR PREPARATION OR TREATMENT, e.g. COOKING, MODIFICATION OF NUTRITIVE QUALITIES, PHYSICAL TREATMENT; PRESERVATION OF FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS, IN GENERAL
    • A23L33/00—Modifying nutritive qualities of foods; Dietetic products; Preparation or treatment thereof
    • A23L33/10—Modifying nutritive qualities of foods; Dietetic products; Preparation or treatment thereof using additives
    • A23L33/125—Modifying nutritive qualities of foods; Dietetic products; Preparation or treatment thereof using additives containing carbohydrate syrups; containing sugars; containing sugar alcohols; containing starch hydrolysates
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23L—FOODS, FOODSTUFFS, OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, NOT COVERED BY SUBCLASSES A21D OR A23B-A23J; THEIR PREPARATION OR TREATMENT, e.g. COOKING, MODIFICATION OF NUTRITIVE QUALITIES, PHYSICAL TREATMENT; PRESERVATION OF FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS, IN GENERAL
    • A23L5/00—Preparation or treatment of foods or foodstuffs, in general; Food or foodstuffs obtained thereby; Materials therefor
    • A—HUMAN NECESSITIES
    • A23—FOODS OR FOODSTUFFS; TREATMENT THEREOF, NOT COVERED BY OTHER CLASSES
    • A23V—INDEXING SCHEME RELATING TO FOODS, FOODSTUFFS OR NON-ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND LACTIC OR PROPIONIC ACID BACTERIA USED IN FOODSTUFFS OR FOOD PREPARATION
    • A23V2002/00—Food compositions, function of food ingredients or processes for food or foodstuffs

Definitions

  • the present invention relates to a food composition
  • a food composition comprising at least one sugar at suprathreshold but very low concentration, that further comprises one ingredient to enhance the perception of sweetness.
  • the present invention addresses the problems set out above with a food composition comprising at least one natural and/or artificial sugar that is present in said composition at a suprathreshold concentration.
  • said food composition is characterized in that it further comprises at least one sweet-enhancing ingredient chosen from the list comprising: benzaldehyde, ethylbutyrate, furaneol, vanillin, isoamylacetate, or a combination thereof, said ingredient being present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 2,5.10-5 mg/l.
  • said sugar is chosen in the list comprising: simple sugars, hydrogentated sugars, chlorodeoxy sugars, terpenoids or their glycosides, dihydrochalcones, peptides, proteins, nitroanilines, sulphamates oximes, isocoumarins, saccharins, acesulphames, tryptophanes, ureas, or a combination thereof.
  • said sweet-enhancing ingredient is present in said composition at a concentration of between 1 ,5.10-6 mg/l and 2,5.10-5 mg/l.
  • said sweet-enhancing ingredient is ethyl butyrate.
  • said sugar is present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 50 g/l, but such that said sugar can be tasted consciously by a consumer.
  • the food composition according to the present invention can either be aromatised water, or a chilled dairy plain yogurt.
  • FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the liquid flow composition evaluated overtime in sweetness intensity.
  • LTP Local Threshold of the Panel
  • S is the sweetness of a sucrose solution without odorant.
  • SO is the sweetness of sucrose solution with odorant.
  • Figure 2 is a schematic representation of the impact of subthreshold ethyl butyrate concentrations (X-axis) on sweetness (Y-axis) of the 15g/l sucrose solutions.
  • Figure 3 is a schematic representation of the impact of a subthreshold ethyl butyrate on sweetness of a sweet commercial flavoured mineral water beverage reduced in sucrose by 10%.
  • sodium hypothreshold concentration it is meant a concentration perceptible by subjects because said concentration is above the detection threshold concentration, i.e. conscious perception.
  • threshold concentration it is meant for a concentration not perceptible by subjects because it is below the detection threshold concentration, i.e. unconscious perception.
  • panel detection threshold it is meant that the concentration was defined as the lowest individual detection threshold concentration perceived among the panel.
  • Perceptual similarity between an odorant and a tastant in mixture seemed to be a good predictor of taste intensity change.
  • an odour can acquire a taste quality when the odour-taste pair is congruent, meaning present in food commonly experienced by consumers. Congruency is defined as "the extent to which two stimuli are appropriate for combination in a food product".
  • pineapple flavouring can enhance perceived sweetness of a model solution.
  • strawberry odour enhances whipped cream sweetness whereas peanut butter does not affect sweetness rating.
  • vanilla flavouring enhances perceived sweetness when added in milk among children and adults.
  • an odour can also decrease taste intensity when the odour-taste pair is not congruent in food.
  • odorants were selected because of their reported enhancing properties on sweetness at a suprathreshold level: benzaldehyde ; ethyl butyrate ; furaneol ; vanillin and isoamyl acetate. As will be understood in the following, it was found that also all of those ingredients have a positive effect, one of them is more particularly interesting - ethyl butyrate -.
  • Experiment 1 Quantification of the impact at a subthreshold level of ethylbutyrate on sweetness in mineral water (Vittel, France) containg 15% sucrose.
  • Experiment 2 Validation of the boosting impact on sweetness of subthreshold concentration of ethylbutyrate in a commercial mineral water beverage containing 44% sucrose and a strawberry flavouring
  • Experiment 1 Quantification of the impact at a subthreshold level of ethylbutyrate on sweetness in mineral water (Vittel, France) containg 15% sucrose.
  • the concentration above which all AFC tests are correct is considered as the individual detection threshold concentration.
  • the Lowest individual Threshold concentration within the Panel [LTP] was chosen as a basis to determine the subthreshold concentrations used in the next steps of the experiment.
  • This system allowed to deliver a continuous flow of liquid in mouth with a constant rate and sucrose content but varying in odorant concentration.
  • sucrose concentration was increased to 15g/L in order to clearly perceive sweetness when the solution was delivered continuously with the liquid delivery system.
  • the odorant concentration of the flow delivered in the subject's mouth was programmable by step with two parameters: the 3-channel contributions to the liquid flow composition in percentage and the step duration in seconds. By mixing the three solutions, the device was able to deliver on-line a solution with a wide range of different odorant concentrations.
  • a computerized FIZZ session was coupled to the HPLC pump and allowed to synchronize the apparition on screen of the sweetness scale 10 seconds after the beginning of each step. This time period took into account the three seconds needed for the pump to make the mixing and deliver the required concentration. Then the subjects could score the sweetness intensity during the seven remaining seconds. During evaluation, subjects were also asked to report on a sheet of paper any other perception than sweetness (olfactory or gustatory). Moreover a debriefing session was carried out at the end of the second experiment to collect general comments of subjects. After exploring the impact of the two odorants, an additional session was conducted to validate that the sweet enhancement was not due to the device or the procedure. The evaluation of sweetness intensity over time at ten different points was assessed using the 15g/L sucrose solution but without odorant addition.
  • Figure 2 represents the change in perceived sweetness (SC) between the unfavoured (S) and the flavoured (SO) sweetened solutions for each ethyl butyrate concentration. All subthreshold concentrations of ethyl butyrate significantly increased the perceived sweetness of the sucrose solution. In addition, the sweetness due to ethyl butyrate subthreshold addition was constant whatever the odorant concentration.
  • sweetness enhancement was induced by ethyl butyrate at a suprathreshold concentration because of an increase of the odorant release in headspace due to physical-chemical interaction with sucrose.
  • the second hypothesis was improbable as it had been shown that release of ethyl butyrate present in orange aroma was not enhanced by sucrose (at concentration similar to those used in the present study) compared to the aqueous control.
  • subjects did not report any other perceived olfactory or gustatory notes different from sweetness during evaluation with the liquid delivery system.
  • Experiment 2 Validation of the boosting impact on sweetness of subthreshold concentration of ethylbutyrate in a commercial mineral water beverage containing 44% sucrose and a strawberry flavouring
  • the impact of a subthreshold concentration of ethyl butyrate was evaluated in a commercial beverage (Strawberry Vittel, France) comprising Vittel mineral water with 44% sucrose and a strawberry flavouring (called "ref" in Figure 3) by a na ⁇ ve panel of 1 1 subjects different from the first experiment.
  • This reference was compared to two trials which were a reference with 10% less sucrose and a reference with 10% less sucrose and 2.5 10 "5 mg/l of ethyl butyrate. The two trials were compared to the reference on a -5 to 5 point scale, the reference was arbitrarily at 0 for odour and sweet attribute.
  • the figure 3 represents the panel mean score with the confident interval at 95%. Results showed that the trial with 10% less sucrose was evaluated less sweet than the reference whereas the trial with the same sucrose reduction but containing ethyl butyrate was not significantly different from the reference in terms of sweetness.

Landscapes

  • Life Sciences & Earth Sciences (AREA)
  • Health & Medical Sciences (AREA)
  • Polymers & Plastics (AREA)
  • Chemical & Material Sciences (AREA)
  • Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
  • Food Science & Technology (AREA)
  • Nutrition Science (AREA)
  • Molecular Biology (AREA)
  • Microbiology (AREA)
  • Proteomics, Peptides & Aminoacids (AREA)
  • Mycology (AREA)
  • Seasonings (AREA)
  • Non-Alcoholic Beverages (AREA)

Abstract

The present invention relates to a food composition comprising at least one natural and/or artificial sugar that is present in said composition at a suprathreshold concentration, characterized in that said food composition further comprises at least one sweet-enhancing ingredient chosen from the list comprising: benzaldehyde, ethylbutyrate, furaneol, vanillin, isoamylacetate, or a combination thereof, said ingredient being present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 2,5.10-5 mg/l.

Description

A SWEET FOOD COMPOSITION WITH LOW SUGAR CONTENTS
David, Philippe LABBE
The present invention relates to a food composition comprising at least one sugar at suprathreshold but very low concentration, that further comprises one ingredient to enhance the perception of sweetness.
In the recent years, it was found that food products containing added sugar, like for example soda and sugar-sweetened beverage has an impact on consumer's body weight, especially children's body weight. These findings show that for each additional daily serving of a sugar-sweetened soft drink, the incidence of obesity was significantly increased.
The studies that have been conducted show that soft drinks are currently the leading source of added sugars in the daily diet of consumers in developed - and sometimes developing - countries. These drinks may be easy to over-consume, because calories in liquid form seem to be less satiating, or less filling, than calories in solid form.
It is therefore crucial to find a way to keep the sweet taste in some products, while reducing their real contents in sugar (added sugar).
The present invention addresses the problems set out above with a food composition comprising at least one natural and/or artificial sugar that is present in said composition at a suprathreshold concentration.
According to the invention, said food composition is characterized in that it further comprises at least one sweet-enhancing ingredient chosen from the list comprising: benzaldehyde, ethylbutyrate, furaneol, vanillin, isoamylacetate, or a combination thereof, said ingredient being present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 2,5.10-5 mg/l.
i Surprisingly, it was found that the combination of a sugar at suprathreshold concentration, with one predetermined compound chosen in the list cited above, that is present in the food at subthreshold concentration, enhances the overall perception of the sweetness in the food, although the contents of added sugar is dramatically decreased compared to a food composition that does not contain the sweet-enhancing component.
Preferably, said sugar is chosen in the list comprising: simple sugars, hydrogentated sugars, chlorodeoxy sugars, terpenoids or their glycosides, dihydrochalcones, peptides, proteins, nitroanilines, sulphamates oximes, isocoumarins, saccharins, acesulphames, tryptophanes, ureas, or a combination thereof.
Also preferably, said sweet-enhancing ingredient is present in said composition at a concentration of between 1 ,5.10-6 mg/l and 2,5.10-5 mg/l.
Advantageously, said sweet-enhancing ingredient is ethyl butyrate.
In another preferred ambodiment of the invention, said sugar is present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 50 g/l, but such that said sugar can be tasted consciously by a consumer.
The food composition according to the present invention can either be aromatised water, or a chilled dairy plain yogurt.
The invention will now be described in further details, by describing three specific experiments wherein food compositions according to the invention were prepared and tested. This detailed description of specific examples and experiments of the invention are made with reference to the accompanying figures which are as follows. Figure 1 is a schematic diagram of the liquid flow composition evaluated overtime in sweetness intensity. LTP (Lowest Threshold of the Panel) is a composition comprising 3.90"04 ppm for ethyl butyrate. S is the sweetness of a sucrose solution without odorant. SO is the sweetness of sucrose solution with odorant.
Figure 2 is a schematic representation of the impact of subthreshold ethyl butyrate concentrations (X-axis) on sweetness (Y-axis) of the 15g/l sucrose solutions.
Figure 3 is a schematic representation of the impact of a subthreshold ethyl butyrate on sweetness of a sweet commercial flavoured mineral water beverage reduced in sucrose by 10%. First of all, for the sake of clarity in the body of the following description, a few definitions are now proposed.
By "suprathreshold concentration", it is meant a concentration perceptible by subjects because said concentration is above the detection threshold concentration, i.e. conscious perception.
By "subthreshold concentration", it is meant for a concentration not perceptible by subjects because it is below the detection threshold concentration, i.e. unconscious perception.
By "panel detection threshold", it is meant that the concentration was defined as the lowest individual detection threshold concentration perceived among the panel.
Pioneer studies on interaction at a suprathreshold level between odour and taste perception showed that subjects attribute a taste to aqueous solution flavoured with an odorant, by using static sensory measurement or Time-Intensity evaluation. Conversely, retronasal olfactory perception can also be modulated by taste perception.
Perceptual similarity between an odorant and a tastant in mixture seemed to be a good predictor of taste intensity change. Indeed an odour can acquire a taste quality when the odour-taste pair is congruent, meaning present in food commonly experienced by consumers. Congruency is defined as "the extent to which two stimuli are appropriate for combination in a food product". For instance pineapple flavouring can enhance perceived sweetness of a model solution. In real food context, strawberry odour enhances whipped cream sweetness whereas peanut butter does not affect sweetness rating. Another study showed that vanilla flavouring enhances perceived sweetness when added in milk among children and adults. Besides, it has also been shown that an odour can also decrease taste intensity when the odour-taste pair is not congruent in food. In this experiment, caramel odour, related to sweet taste, decreased sour taste intensity. Functional Resonance Magnetic Imagery (FMRI) results also provided evidence for the convergence of taste and olfactory stimuli in the lateral anterior part of the orbitofrontal cortex to produce flavour in humans. More recently, it was uncovered that the effect of stimuli at a subthreshold concentration has also an impact on perception. Integration at a subthreshold level of congruent taste and olfactory stimuli presented orthonasally was demonstrated using a variant of the two-alternative forced choice method. Indeed threshold of benzaldehyde presented orthonasally significantly decreases with the presence of a saccharin solution in mouth at a subthreshold concentration. The same experiment repeated with sodium monoglutamate does not lead to change of benzaldehyde sensitivity. As for olfactory/taste interaction at a suprathreshold level, interaction at a subthreshold level occurs only with familiar odorant/tastant pair.
These results about the impact of familiarity were confirmed by repeating the same experiment with another panel. However in this case, a lack of integration for the benzaldehyde/saccharine pair was observed for four subjects and may be explain by their low familiarity with this taste/aroma pair. These two studies demonstrate that integration of a subthreshold olfactory stimulus delivered orthonasally with a subthreshold taste was dependent of the subject food experience.
It was also demonstrated an integration of odour and taste at a subthreshold level. This experiment showed that odour/taste integration is not dependent on familiarity. The impact of tastant and odorant are additive, regardless of the harmony of the taste/odour pair. However in this experiment, the odorant is delivered orally in mixture with tastant. To explain difference of results between different studies, one assume that stimulus delivery (orthonasal or retronasal) may play a key role in odorant/tastant interaction. According to the present invention, it is highlighted whether the impact of an odorant at a subthreshold level could enhance sweetness of a sucrose solution at a suprathreshold level. In our experiments, the odorant was presented orally in sucrose mixture clearly perceived as sweet. The aim of this protocol was to mimic everyday consumption of sweet food. Indeed there is a need for the food industry to enlarge understanding about the impact of olfactory/taste interaction on consumer perception.
The following odorants were selected because of their reported enhancing properties on sweetness at a suprathreshold level: benzaldehyde ; ethyl butyrate ; furaneol ; vanillin and isoamyl acetate. As will be understood in the following, it was found that also all of those ingredients have a positive effect, one of them is more particularly interesting - ethyl butyrate -.
The two following experiments were designed to fulfill our objectives:
Experiment 1 : Quantification of the impact at a subthreshold level of ethylbutyrate on sweetness in mineral water (Vittel, France) containg 15% sucrose. Experiment 2: Validation of the boosting impact on sweetness of subthreshold concentration of ethylbutyrate in a commercial mineral water beverage containing 44% sucrose and a strawberry flavouring
Experiment 1 : Quantification of the impact at a subthreshold level of ethylbutyrate on sweetness in mineral water (Vittel, France) containg 15% sucrose.
A/ Individual threshold measurement and lowest threshold of the panel [LTP] determination for the two odorants selected further to the first experiment:
Fifteen one-liter ethyl butyrate solutions were prepared at room temperature with mineral water (Vittel Bonne Source, France) with odorant concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 5.94E-06 ppm (=0.1 to 5.94E-06 mg/l) for ethyl butyrate. Each solution was done one hour prior to the tasting.
A new panel with twelve naϊve subjects participated to this experiment. The individual detection threshold was determined by using the Force-Choice Ascending Concentration Series Method of Limit (ASTM, 1991 ). For each odorant, a series of fifteen 3-alternative forced choice was assessed by the subjects. An ascending concentration range was defined with a dilution factor of 2. The appropriate concentration range was determined further to benchscale preliminary trials. The fifteen 3-AFC were evaluated in an ascending concentration order. Solutions were presented in plastic cup coded with 3-digit random numbers and served at room temperature in a 50-ml cup. Evaluation was conducted in the same conditions as previously described for experiment 1.
For each subject, the concentration above which all AFC tests are correct is considered as the individual detection threshold concentration. The Lowest individual Threshold concentration within the Panel [LTP] was chosen as a basis to determine the subthreshold concentrations used in the next steps of the experiment.
B/ Investigation of the impact of odorant at a subthreshold level on sweetness intensity To explore the impact of odorant at a subthreshold level on sweet perception, a liquid delivery system was developed. The device was based on a programmable four-channel preparative HPLC pump (Merck-Hitachi, L 7150) and four 1 -liter reservoirs. Teflon tubing did the link from the four reservoirs to the HPLC mixing chamber and from the mixing chamber to the subject's mouth. One reservoir (A) contained a sucrose aqueous solution and the two other reservoirs (B and C) contained the same sucrose aqueous solution than inside the reservoir A with two different odorant concentrations. This system allowed to deliver a continuous flow of liquid in mouth with a constant rate and sucrose content but varying in odorant concentration. Compared to experiment 1 , sucrose concentration was increased to 15g/L in order to clearly perceive sweetness when the solution was delivered continuously with the liquid delivery system. In this study, the odorant concentration of the flow delivered in the subject's mouth was programmable by step with two parameters: the 3-channel contributions to the liquid flow composition in percentage and the step duration in seconds. By mixing the three solutions, the device was able to deliver on-line a solution with a wide range of different odorant concentrations.
For each odorant, five concentrations were defined based on [LTP], ([LTP]/16, [LTP]/32, [LTP]/64, [LTP]/128, [LTP]/256) and delivered by mixing the two flavoured solutions with the pure sucrose solution (Figure 1 ). The sucrose solution delivered in-mouth at 25ml/mn was alternatively flavoured and non-flavoured with three increasing odorant concentrations during the first sequence and with two decreasing concentrations during the second sequence. The first sequence was therefore divided into six steps (three flavoured and three unfavoured) and the second sequence was divided into four steps (two flavoured and two unfavoured stimuli) with a total of ten steps for the two sequences (Figure 1 ). This flavoured and unfavoured liquid alternation ensured the tubing rinsing between each odorant concentration delivery and limited sensory adaptation. Each of the 10 step was delivered during 18 seconds. The total duration of the two sequences therefore lasted 180 seconds.
The twelve subjects evaluated individually the sequences 1 and 2 during one session with a 180-second break between each sequence. The total amount of liquid swallowed during a session based on the 25ml/mn flow rate was 75 ml. Each session was duplicated. A total of four sessions per judge was therefore conducted. To standardize among the eleven subjects the liquid delivery in mouth and swallowing, subjects were trained to pinch the Teflon tube extremity between the top and bottom incisives with 1 cm tube into the mouth. The subjects were invited to swallow regularly and normally. They scored overtime the sweet taste intensity at sixteen time points corresponding to the sixteen steps on a 11 -box scale anchored at the extremities from "Not sweet at all" to "Very sweet". A computerized FIZZ session was coupled to the HPLC pump and allowed to synchronize the apparition on screen of the sweetness scale 10 seconds after the beginning of each step. This time period took into account the three seconds needed for the pump to make the mixing and deliver the required concentration. Then the subjects could score the sweetness intensity during the seven remaining seconds. During evaluation, subjects were also asked to report on a sheet of paper any other perception than sweetness (olfactory or gustatory). Moreover a debriefing session was carried out at the end of the second experiment to collect general comments of subjects. After exploring the impact of the two odorants, an additional session was conducted to validate that the sweet enhancement was not due to the device or the procedure. The evaluation of sweetness intensity over time at ten different points was assessed using the 15g/L sucrose solution but without odorant addition.
Before evaluation sessions, a training consisted in two sessions of habituation were carried out with the device and protocol where subjects got used to receive a constant liquid in mouth combined with a scoring task in a limited time. This training was carried out with unfavoured sucrose solution only.
Sensory data were transformed according to the formula SCn=SOn - Sn where SC is the Sweetness Change, SO the Sweetness of sucrose solution with Odorant and S the Sweetness of sucrose solution without odorant evaluated before
SO. Five odorant concentrations (n) were investigated overtime. A confidence interval at 5% was calculated for the five SC panel mean scores.
Threshold concentration ranges within the twelve subjects were for ethyl butyrate from 3.90E-04 to 3.2 ppm (panel mean: 4.09E-01 ppm). The lowest individual detection threshold value [LTP] was selected and used for the investigation at subthreshold level i.e. 3.90E-04 ppm. Figure 2 represents the change in perceived sweetness (SC) between the unfavoured (S) and the flavoured (SO) sweetened solutions for each ethyl butyrate concentration. All subthreshold concentrations of ethyl butyrate significantly increased the perceived sweetness of the sucrose solution. In addition, the sweetness due to ethyl butyrate subthreshold addition was constant whatever the odorant concentration.
Two explanatory hypotheses can be proposed to explain enhancing impact on sweetness of subthreshold concentrations of ethyl butyrate:
First, ethyl butyrate at subthreshold level enhanced sweetness by perceptual interaction as showed by former experiments.
Second, sweetness enhancement was induced by ethyl butyrate at a suprathreshold concentration because of an increase of the odorant release in headspace due to physical-chemical interaction with sucrose. The second hypothesis was improbable as it had been shown that release of ethyl butyrate present in orange aroma was not enhanced by sucrose (at concentration similar to those used in the present study) compared to the aqueous control. In addition, subjects did not report any other perceived olfactory or gustatory notes different from sweetness during evaluation with the liquid delivery system.
Our first hypothesis is in agreement with recent studies. Indeed odour/taste interaction was reported to result from associations experienced and memorized through food exposure without any explicit attention or learning. Besides, previous studies had highlighted the impact of congruency on olfactory/taste central integration with an orthonasal presentation of the odorant. The role of food experience on sensory interaction at suprathreshold level was also evidenced at a central level. The main outcome of this invention was that sweet taste of a sucrose solution was enhanced by retronasal olfactory perception with odorant even if this odorant was at a subthreshold level. If validated in real drink or food, this finding may be key in the current food industry context of sucrose content reduction.
Experiment 2: Validation of the boosting impact on sweetness of subthreshold concentration of ethylbutyrate in a commercial mineral water beverage containing 44% sucrose and a strawberry flavouring The impact of a subthreshold concentration of ethyl butyrate was evaluated in a commercial beverage (Strawberry Vittel, France) comprising Vittel mineral water with 44% sucrose and a strawberry flavouring (called "ref" in Figure 3) by a naϊve panel of 1 1 subjects different from the first experiment. This reference was compared to two trials which were a reference with 10% less sucrose and a reference with 10% less sucrose and 2.5 10"5 mg/l of ethyl butyrate. The two trials were compared to the reference on a -5 to 5 point scale, the reference was arbitrarily at 0 for odour and sweet attribute.
The figure 3 represents the panel mean score with the confident interval at 95%. Results showed that the trial with 10% less sucrose was evaluated less sweet than the reference whereas the trial with the same sucrose reduction but containing ethyl butyrate was not significantly different from the reference in terms of sweetness.
This result highlighted that the enhancing impact of the subthreshold concentration of ethyl butyrate on sweetness allow a 10% sucrose reduction while keeping the same sweetness.
It should be understood that various changes and modifications to the presently preferred embodiments described herein will be apparent to those skilled in the art. Such changes and modifications can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention and without diminishing its attendant advantages. It is therefore intended that such changes and modifications be covered by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A food composition comprising at least one natural and/or artificial sugar that is present in said composition at a suprathreshold concentration, characterized in that said food composition further comprises at least one sweet- enhancing ingredient chosen from the list comprising: benzaldehyde, ethylbutyrate, furaneol, vanillin, isoamylacetate, or a combination thereof, said ingredient being present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 2,5.105 mg/l.
2. A food composition according to claim 1 , wherein said sugar is chosen in the list comprising: simple sugars, hydrogentated sugars, chlorodeoxy sugars, terpenoids or their glycosides, dihydrochalcones, peptides, proteins, nitroanilines, sulphamates oximes, isocoumarins, saccharins, acesulphames, tryptophanes, ureas, or a combination thereof.
3. A food composition according to claim 1 , wherein said sweet- enhancing ingredient is present in said composition at a concentration of between 1 ,5.1 CT6 mg/l and 2,5.10"5 mg/l.
4. A food composition according to any of claims 1 to 3, wherein said sweet-enhancing ingredient is ethyl butyrate.
5. A food composition according to claims 1 to 4, wherein said sugar is present in said composition at a concentration not exceeding 50 g/l.
6. A food composition according to claims 1 or 5, wherein said food composition is aromatised water.
7. A food composition according to claims 1 to 5, which is a chilled dairy plain yogurt.
PCT/EP2007/000510 2006-03-29 2007-01-22 A sweet food composition with low sugar contents WO2007110115A1 (en)

Priority Applications (3)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
AU2007229766A AU2007229766A1 (en) 2006-03-29 2007-01-22 A sweet food composition with low sugar contents
EP07722761A EP2012594A1 (en) 2006-03-29 2007-01-22 A sweet food composition with low sugar contents
US12/297,679 US20090162519A1 (en) 2006-03-29 2007-01-22 Sweet food composition with low sugar contents

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
EP06111913 2006-03-29
EP06111913.7 2006-03-29

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
WO2007110115A1 true WO2007110115A1 (en) 2007-10-04

Family

ID=36808332

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
PCT/EP2007/000510 WO2007110115A1 (en) 2006-03-29 2007-01-22 A sweet food composition with low sugar contents

Country Status (6)

Country Link
US (1) US20090162519A1 (en)
EP (1) EP2012594A1 (en)
CN (1) CN101453905A (en)
AU (1) AU2007229766A1 (en)
RU (1) RU2008142745A (en)
WO (1) WO2007110115A1 (en)

Cited By (2)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2010003997A1 (en) 2008-07-11 2010-01-14 Nestec S.A. Isoamyl acetate for weight management
WO2012107201A3 (en) * 2011-02-08 2012-10-18 Nutrinova Nutrition Specialties & Food Ingredients Gmbh Sweetness enhancers, sweetener compositions, methods of making the same and consumables containing the same

Families Citing this family (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US20180020709A1 (en) * 2014-04-16 2018-01-25 Purecircle Usa Inc. Rebaudioside m biosynthetic production and recovery methods

Citations (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US3851073A (en) * 1972-08-03 1974-11-26 Macandrews & Forbes Co Sweetening agent
US3851069A (en) * 1971-10-05 1974-11-26 S Hachtman Tobacco flavored candy
GB1468127A (en) * 1974-04-09 1977-03-23 Firmenich & Cie Sweetness enhancer for reduced sugar containing products
EP0167214A2 (en) * 1984-07-02 1986-01-08 Pfw (Nederland) B.V. Sugar simulating compounds
EP0438913A1 (en) * 1990-01-23 1991-07-31 Warner-Lambert Company Enhanced sweetness of acesulfame-K in edible compositions
US20040022895A1 (en) * 2002-07-23 2004-02-05 Wm Wrigley Jr. Company Encapsulated flavors and chewing gum using same

Family Cites Families (3)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
EP0574586B1 (en) * 1991-11-12 1997-01-22 Kyowa Hakko Kogyo Co., Ltd. Process for producing food and drink
US6703056B2 (en) * 2000-09-29 2004-03-09 The Procter + Gamble Co. Beverage compositions comprising arabinogalactan and defined minerals
US20050276839A1 (en) * 2004-06-10 2005-12-15 Rifkin Calman H Appetite satiation and hydration beverage

Patent Citations (6)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
US3851069A (en) * 1971-10-05 1974-11-26 S Hachtman Tobacco flavored candy
US3851073A (en) * 1972-08-03 1974-11-26 Macandrews & Forbes Co Sweetening agent
GB1468127A (en) * 1974-04-09 1977-03-23 Firmenich & Cie Sweetness enhancer for reduced sugar containing products
EP0167214A2 (en) * 1984-07-02 1986-01-08 Pfw (Nederland) B.V. Sugar simulating compounds
EP0438913A1 (en) * 1990-01-23 1991-07-31 Warner-Lambert Company Enhanced sweetness of acesulfame-K in edible compositions
US20040022895A1 (en) * 2002-07-23 2004-02-05 Wm Wrigley Jr. Company Encapsulated flavors and chewing gum using same

Cited By (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
WO2010003997A1 (en) 2008-07-11 2010-01-14 Nestec S.A. Isoamyl acetate for weight management
JP2011527189A (en) * 2008-07-11 2011-10-27 ネステク ソシエテ アノニム Isoamyl acetate for weight management
US8647687B2 (en) 2008-07-11 2014-02-11 Nestec S.A. Isoamyl acetate for weight management
WO2012107201A3 (en) * 2011-02-08 2012-10-18 Nutrinova Nutrition Specialties & Food Ingredients Gmbh Sweetness enhancers, sweetener compositions, methods of making the same and consumables containing the same

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU2007229766A1 (en) 2007-10-04
CN101453905A (en) 2009-06-10
EP2012594A1 (en) 2009-01-14
RU2008142745A (en) 2010-05-10
US20090162519A1 (en) 2009-06-25

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
US5902628A (en) Beverage with reduction of lingering sweet aftertaste of sucralose
US20050013915A1 (en) Mixtures with a sweetness and taste profile of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) 55 comprising HFCS 42 and acesulfame K
WO2010057024A1 (en) Improving perceptional characteristics of beverages
KR20010074679A (en) Method of improving sweetness delivery of sucralose
Hewson et al. Taste–aroma interactions in a citrus flavoured model beverage system: Similarities and differences between acid and sugar type
EP1894475A2 (en) Sweetener compositions with a sweetness and taste profile comparable to HFCS 55
AU2018249143A1 (en) Method for reducing lingering sweet aftertaste
JPWO2019059391A1 (en) A colorless transparent beverage containing potassium
TWI801723B (en) Lemon-flavored sugar-free carbonated beverage and method for enhancing palatability
US20090162519A1 (en) Sweet food composition with low sugar contents
Wiet et al. Fat concentration affects sweetness and sensory profiles of sucrose, sucralose, and aspartame
JP2019024364A (en) Tiliroside-containing carbonated beverage
Weel et al. A protocol for measurement of in vivo aroma release from beverages
de Graaf et al. The chemical senses and nutrition: The role of taste and smell in the regulation of food intake
EP2605668A1 (en) Sweetener composition
JP2019170194A (en) Carbonated beverage
JP7033409B2 (en) Acidic milk drink, acid milk drink base, acid milk drink manufacturing method, acid milk drink based manufacturing method, and acid milk drink flavor improving method
JP2005087052A (en) Sweetener-containing alcoholic drink
JP7445804B1 (en) Carbonated drinks containing citrus juice
JP7368546B2 (en) Carbonated drink
JP2018121662A (en) Low carbohydrate carbonic acid alcoholic drink
Boelrijk et al. Flavour release from liquid food products
WO2017159847A1 (en) Beverage, method for producing beverage, and method for improving beverage flavor
US20150056348A1 (en) Nutritional products having a modulated off-taste intensity and methods for making and using same
Suresh Kumar Using odors to enhance sweetness of artificial sweeteners

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 200780019538.5

Country of ref document: CN

121 Ep: the epo has been informed by wipo that ep was designated in this application

Ref document number: 07722761

Country of ref document: EP

Kind code of ref document: A1

NENP Non-entry into the national phase

Ref country code: DE

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 2007722761

Country of ref document: EP

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 2007229766

Country of ref document: AU

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 8617/DELNP/2008

Country of ref document: IN

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 2008142745

Country of ref document: RU

Kind code of ref document: A

ENP Entry into the national phase

Ref document number: 2007229766

Country of ref document: AU

Date of ref document: 20070122

Kind code of ref document: A

WWE Wipo information: entry into national phase

Ref document number: 12297679

Country of ref document: US