Protein fortified products are regularly recommended to older adults to improve nutritional status and limit sarcopenia. However protein fortification can elicit negative sensory attributes such as mouthdrying. Sensitivity to mouthdrying can increase with age, yet the influence of saliva flow and mucoadhesion remain uncertain. Here, two studies tested different whey protein beverages (WPB); 22 healthy younger volunteers completed a pilot and 84 healthy volunteers from two age groups (18–30; 65+) completed the main study. In both studies salivary flow rates (mL/min) were measured and saliva samples were collected at time intervals post beverage consumption to measure mucoadhesion to the oral cavity, where protein concentration was analysed by Bradford Assay. Volunteers rated perception and acceptability of WPBs in the main study. WPB consumption resulted in significantly increased protein concentration (p < 0.0001) in saliva samples compared with a control whey permeate beverage. Older adults had significantly lower unstimulated saliva flow (p = 0.003) and significantly increased protein concentration (p = 0.02) in saliva samples, compared with younger adults. Heating of WPB significantly (p < 0.05) increased mouthdrying and thickness perception and reduced sweetness compared with unheated WPB. Mucoadhesion is concluded to be a true phenomenon in WPBs and increases with age.

Although there are numerous high protein products on the market, they are typically not designed with, or for, older consumers. This is surprising considering that dietary guidelines recognise the need for higher protein intake in later life. Protein fortified products are, however, associated with negative sensory attributes and poor consumer acceptance. This paper investigates the extent of mouthdrying sensations within a high protein solid food matrix, along with the effect of age and saliva flow. Solid models using cakes and biscuits, with or without protein fortification, were investigated. The sensory profile and physical properties were analysed and two volunteer studies (n = 84; n = 70) were carried out using two age groups (18–30; 65+). Volunteers rated individual perception and liking of products, and salivary flow rates (mL/min) were measured. Unstimulated salivary flow rates were significantly lower (p < 0.05) in older adults, although this was not found to influence product perception. Protein fortification of cakes and biscuits significantly increased (p < 0.05) perceived mouthdrying, hardness and “off” flavours, and significantly reduced (p < 0.05) melting rate, moistness and liking compared with the control versions. There is a clear need to address negative sensory attributes associated with protein fortification of cakes and biscuits to ensure product suitability for older adults.

Protein needs are considered to increase with age, with protein consumption being associated with many positive outcomes. Protein-fortified products are often used to improve nutritional status and prevent age-related muscle mass loss in older adults. Accordingly, older adults are commonly provided with products fortified with whey protein; however, such products can cause mouthdrying, limiting consumption and product enjoyment. Currently, the extent to which age and individual differences (e.g., saliva, oral health, food oral processing) influence the perception of whey protein-derived mouthdrying is relatively unclear. Previous research in this area has mainly focused on investigating mouthdrying, without taking into account individual differences that could influence this perception within the target population. Therefore, the main focus of this review is to provide an overview of the relevant individual differences likely to influence mouthfeel perception (specifically mouthdrying) from whey protein-fortified products, thereby enabling the future design of such products to incorporate better the needs of older adults and improve their nutritional status. This review concludes that age and individual differences are likely to influence mouthdrying sensations from whey protein-fortified products. Future research should focus more on the target population and individual differences to maximise the benefits from whey protein fortification.

Whey protein is fortified into beverages to provide functional benefits, however, these beverages are considered mouthdrying. To date whey protein derived mouthdrying has not been quantified using a ‘physical measure’ in parallel with rated perception. Saliva flow could also relate to whey protein derived mouthdrying, however this has not been previously tested as an intervention. Accordingly, volunteers (n = 40) tested mouthdrying in different whey beverages and the sensory profile was evaluated by a trained sensory panel (n = 10). Volunteers also rated mouthdrying combined with collection of saliva samples post beverage consumption to measure retention to the oral cavity. To modulate saliva flow rate, volunteers both chewed on parafilm (to increase saliva flow) and used cotton wool (to remove saliva) before tasting beverages and rating mouthdrying. Both the volunteers and sensory panel rated whey protein beverages (WPB) as significantly more mouthdrying than the control beverage (whey permeate). The significantly higher rating of mouthdrying from the volunteers coincided with significantly higher protein concentration in saliva samples post WPB consumption, supporting mucoadhesion as the mechanism. Modulating saliva flow did not lead to any difference in rated mouthdrying and future work would be beneficial to evaluate further the influence of natural variation in salivary flow rate.

Synthetic angiotensins I and II (AI and AII) and natural eel angiotensin were injected with angiotensin antagonists into freshwater-adapted, unanesthetized American eels, Anguilla rostrata, in an attempt to characterize the vasopressor properties of angiotensins in a primitive vertebrate. A converting enzyme inhibitor, SQ 20,881, inhibited vasopressor responses to eel angiotensin (presumably AI) and [Val5,Ser9]AI, but not those to [Asn1,Val5]AII, suggesting that a converting enzyme-like substance may exist in eels. [Sar1,Thr8]AII (10 microgram/kg per min) and [Sar1,Ile8]AII (1 microgram/kg per min), which antagonize angiotensin's action in mammals, showed neither agonistic vasopressor nor antagonistic effects in eels against [Asn1,Val5]AII or eel angiotensin. [Tal8]AII ([8-thienylalanine]AII) and a higher dose of [Sar1,Ile8]AII increased eel aortic pressure themselves and reduced vasopressor responses to [Asn1,Val5]AII. This is presumably a nonspecific decrease in response during the agonistic phase of the analogs. Angiotensin receptors in the blood vessels of eels may differ from those in mammals. Alpha-adrenergic blocking drugs and reserpine partially inhibited the pressor effect of [Asn1,Val5]AII in eels.