Simulation of Mouth Conditions for Flavor Analysis

Abstract

This unit discusses the use and design of the two mouth simulators, the retronasal aroma simulator (RAS) and the model mouth, that have successfully been verified to produce an effluent with volatile ratios similar to that found in human exhaled breath during eating. Though at a glance the apparatuses seem very different, they produce relatively similar effluents. Of obvious notability is the difference in the size of the reservoir; the RAS reservoir is 1 liter and the model mouth reservoir is 70 ml. When determining which apparatus to use, carefully consider concentration needs, absorption characteristics of compounds, and shear resistance of the food. Figure G1.7.1 is a comparison of chromatograms from a solid-phase microextraction (SPME) from a beverage in a sealed container and from the same beverage in a mouth simulator. This comparison demonstrates that a very different volatile ratio is produced from the same food under different sampling conditions. Due to these differences, it is important to use a sampling method that simulates mouth conditions when studying flavor compositions that produce a human perception. Most methods intended to increase headspace volatile concentration, such as adding salt for salting out, do not uniformly affect volatility. For some compounds,

Real Time Detection of Aroma Compounds in Meat and Meat Products by SIFT-MS and Comparison to Conventional Techniques (SPME-GC-MS)

“…Saliva influences the volatility of some compounds when a food is chewed, because it dilutes the sample (food), affects the pH and may affect the binding aroma compounds through the action of the enzymes present [9]. In the present study, it was observed that the composition of the HS with the sausage alone (orthonasal aroma) differed when artificial saliva was added (simulation of retronasal aroma).…”

“…However, saliva is only one of the factors that affect the release of volatile compounds when eating food. Also involved are mouth temperature, mastication rate and breath flow [9]. The present experiments are a preliminary study of aroma perception during eating and further research by exploiting SIFT-MS for real-time studies of flavour release (direct nosespace analysis) would surely be very productive.…”

“…Artificial saliva was prepared according to Deibler and van Ruth [9] and was added together with the sausage sample in the vial (sample/saliva ratio 1:1). The GC-MS and SIFT-MS analytical procedures were the same as described previously for the sausage alone …”

“…However, it is known that the composition of volatiles released from food is different when it is sniffed than when it is eaten (orthonasal and retronasal aroma, respectively) [9]. Retronasal aroma perception is a dynamic process in which many factors such as mastication, mouth temperature, breath flow and salivation are involved.…”

“…Retronasal aroma perception is a dynamic process in which many factors such as mastication, mouth temperature, breath flow and salivation are involved. Saliva has an important impact on the release of volatile compounds because it dilutes the food, affects the pH and may cause compositional changes through the action of the enzymes present [9]. For this reason, aroma release during food consumption should best be studied by systems that simulate the retronasal process.…”