Firmness Evaluation of Sweet Cherries by a Trained and Consumer Sensory Panel

Abstract

The objective of this study was to examine cherry firmness and the ability of a trained and consumer panel to differentiate between cherries of different firmness values. For the trained panel (n = 12) and consumer panel (n = 100) evaluations, two late-maturing, commercially important cherry cultivars were evaluated, "Selah" and "Skeena. " For trained panel evaluations, the analytical firmness value of each cherry was determined, although for the consumer panel, cherries were characterized into different firmness categories (low, intermediate and high), after which, a series of paired comparisons were made. "Selah" was the less-firm cultivar by approximately 20 g/mm and consumers could distinguish the more-firm cherry in all comparisons (P < 0.05). For "Skeena, " consumers could only distinguish soft versus firm. Trained panelists were able to distinguish between cherries of a minimum analytical firmness value of~40 g/mm. A model was developed to predict sensory firmness from analytical determinations of firmness (r = 0.63). PRACTICAL APPLICATIONSDeveloping prediction models to estimate sensory response from analytical data will benefit the fruit industry by potentially allowing the use of analytical measurements as a proxy for sensory evaluation. In addition, understanding the importance of firmness on cherry acceptance and knowing the 3 Corresponding

Correlation between sensory and instrumental measurements of standard and crisp‐texture southern highbush blueberries ( Vaccinium corymbosum L. interspecific hybrids)

“…The significant compression and bioyield force differences found between replicated genotypes within a season may result from changes in management and environmental conditions that can occur rapidly within a growing season. A similar increase in precision over sensory analysis was documented in sweet cherry, where a difference of 0.39 N mm −1 was required before a trained sensory panel could perceive a significant difference in cherry firmness . With this potential incongruence between trained panel evaluations and instrumental measures, we used a correlative approach to align trained panel results with common instrumental measurements.…”

Evaluation of induced pitting damage of late season cherries ‘Regina’ and ‘Sweetheart’ using an impact energy method

“…A controlled single impact applied on the fruit was not enough to affect fruit physicochemical parameters, in contrast to reports where bruising leads to changes in sugar-acid balance (Alique et al, 2005). Texture is one of the most important quality attributes in cherries that affects consumer acceptance (Ross et al, 2009;Hampson et al, 2014). Fruit firmness decreased during storage of both cultivars as indicated by a higher deformation capacity of the tissue with time, attributed to a loss in cell turgidity (Wang and Vestrheim, 2002).…”

Consumer perception of d'Anjou pear classified by dry matter at harvest using near‐infrared spectroscopy

“…This would seem to indicate that sensory outcomes between high and moderate dry matter fruit, whether that be due to limitations of sensory ability or instrumental error in classification, were subtle enough to not impact liking in this instance. This observation appears similar to untrained consumers’ inability to detect finer differences among firmness classifications in cherry (Ross et al ., ). Regardless, instrumental discrimination and rejection of low dry matter fruits at harvest may benefit consumer experiences by removing poor tasting fruits from the market.…”