Correlation between Sensory and Instrumental Measurement of Tofu Texture

Zhihong QIAO; Ronghua XU; Heng WANG; Li ZHU

doi:10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020070243

Volume 42 Issue 8

Apr. 2021

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Abstract

References

Science and Technology of Food Industry > 2021 > 42(8): 271-276. > DOI: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020070243

QIAO Zhihong, XU Ronghua, WANG Heng, et al. Correlation between Sensory and Instrumental Measurement of Tofu Texture[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2021, 42(8): 271−276. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2020070243.

Citation:

PDF (812 KB)

Correlation between Sensory and Instrumental Measurement of Tofu Texture

Tourism College, Beijing Union University, Beijing 100101, China

More Information

Received Date: July 21, 2020
Available Online: January 31, 2021

Graphical Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

To explore the best instrumental measurement of the tofu texture, the four types of commercially available fresh tofu as the research object, two instrumental evaluation methods (two compression and insert test) and sensory evaluation methods of the tofu texture were carried out at the same time, and the correlation analyses between two evaluation methods was studied. The results showed that except for the cohesiveness, the other four instrumental indexes (hardness, elasticity, chewability and adhesiveness) in the compression test were well correlated with the sensory evaluation indexes of the tofu texture. The hardness was significantly correlated with the sensory texture hardness (r=0.952, P<0.05). The three instrumental indexes (apparent rupture strainε, apparent rupture stress σ, and apparent elasticity E) in the insertion experiment were also well correlated with the sensory evaluation indexes of the tofu texture. The correlation between apparent rupture stressσ and sensory hardness and fineness was significant (r=0.989, −0.978, P<0.05). Comprehensive consideration suggests that the hardness and apparent rupture stress of the instrumental index can replace the sensory evaluation indexes to objectively and accurately evaluate the texture of tofu, and only these two indexes can be used in the actual production of tofu and the scientific research of the texture of tofu.
- tofu,
- texture,
- sensory,
- mechanical measurement,
- correlation

FullText(HTML)

References (25)

References

[1]	Tsai S J, Lan C Y, Kao C S, et al. Studies on the yield and quality characteristic of tofu[J]. Journal of Food Science,1981,46:1734−1740. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1981.tb04474.x
[2]	Tim Keal Y. Application of liquid and solid rheological technologies to the textural characterisation of semi-solid foods[J]. Food Research International,2006,39:265−276. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2005.07.016
[3]	Szczesniak A S, Brandt M A, Friedman H. Development of standard rating scales for mechanical parameters of texture and correlation between the objective and sensory methods of texture evaluation[J]. Journal of Food Science,1963,28:397−403. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1963.tb00217.x
[4]	Mudgil D, Barak S, Khatkar B S. Optimization of textural properties of noodles with soluble fiber, dough mixing time and different water levels[J]. Journal of Cereal Science,2016,69:104−110. doi: 10.1016/j.jcs.2016.02.015
[5]	赵清霞, 郑环宇, 丁阳月, 等. 湿豆渣面包仪器质构与感官质构相关性分析[J]. 食品工业科技,2016,37(6):94−99.
[6]	梁曹雯, 李清明, 邓洁红, 等. 泡萝卜感官评价及质构相关性分析[J]. 湖南农业科学,2016(8):99−102.
[7]	沈颖越, 宋婷婷, 蔡为明, 等. 基于质构仪质地多面分析法对香菇质地评价[J]. 菌物学报,2021,40(2):1−9.
[8]	何全光, 黄梅华, 张娥珍, 等. 芒果TPA质构测定优化及不同成熟度芒果质构特性分析[J]. 食品工业科技,2016,37(18):122−126.
[9]	程晓燕, 葛向珍, 薛华丽, 等. 枸杞鲜果贮藏期间质量损失率与时间的拟合及与质构参数的关系[J]. 食品科学,2020,41(17):261−266. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20200410-138
[10]	Aguirre M E, Owens C M, Miller R K, et al. Descriptive sensory and instrumental texture profile analysis of woody breast in marinated chicken[J]. Poultry Science,2018,97:1456−1461. doi: 10.3382/ps/pex428
[11]	汪经邦, 谢晶, 刘大勇, 等. 暗纹东方鲀低温贮藏期间水分、质地和蛋白质的变化规律[J]. 食品科学,2020,41(21):213−221. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-20191008-036
[12]	Sun N, Breene W M. Calcium sulfate concentration influence on yield and quality of tofu from five soybean varieties[J]. Journal of Food Science,1991,56(6):1604−1610. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1991.tb08651.x
[13]	Lu J Y, Carter E, Chung R A. Use of Calcium salts for soybean curd preparation[J]. Journal of Food Science,1980,45:32−34. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.1980.tb03864.x
[14]	李升, 崔峻, 魏富彬, 等. 豆浆加工工艺对全子叶豆腐品质影响的研究[J]. 食品工业科技,2016,37(2):239−243.
[15]	Peng X Y, Guo S T. Texture characteristics of soymilk gels formed by lactic fermentation: A comparison of soymilk prepared by blanching soybeans under different temperatures[J]. Food Hydrocolloids,2015,43:58−65. doi: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2014.04.034
[16]	陈杰, 谭琳, 彭钰淇, 等. 响应面法优化全豆豆腐凝固剂配方的研究[J]. 中国粮油学报,2018,33(5):16−23. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0174.2018.05.003
[17]	Rekha C R, Vijayalakshmi G. Influence of processing parameters on the quality of soycurd (tofu)[J]. Journal of Food Science and Technology,2013,50(1):176−180. doi: 10.1007/s13197-011-0245-z
[18]	Jun J Y, Jung M J, Jeong I H. Effects of crab shell extract as a coagulant on the textural and sensorial properties of tofu (soybean curd)[J]. Food Science & Nutrition,2019,7(2):547−553.
[19]	李加双, 张良, 王晶, 等. 热处理方式对豆腐品质特性的影响[J]. 食品与发酵工业,2019,45(23):142−148.
[20]	赵秋艳, 宋一丹, 宋莲军, 等. 市售嫩豆腐品质特性指标的差异性分析及其品质评定[J]. 江苏农业科学,2019,47(23):217−221.
[21]	刘丽莎, 金杨, 张小飞, 等. 盐卤豆腐与内酯豆腐质构与分子间作用力比较研究[J]. 食品科技,2020,45(10):60−64.
[22]	于寒松, 陈今朝, 张伟, 等. 两种工艺生产豆腐的营养成分与品质特性的关系[J]. 食品科学,2015,36(19):49−54. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201519009
[23]	李小雅, 许慧, 江杨娟, 等. 加工工艺对北方豆腐品质特性的影响[J]. 食品科学,2017,38(6):261−266. doi: 10.7506/spkx1002-6630-201706041
[24]	李美丽, 胡文艺, 雷郅轩, 等. 不同大豆品种理化成分与全豆豆腐加工特性分析[J]. 食品工业科技,2019,40(24):305−310.
[25]	江振桂, 王秋普, 张一震, 等. 不同凝固剂对豆腐品质的影响[J]. 食品与发酵工业,2019,45(7):229−234.

Supplements (0)

Cited By

Cited by

Periodical cited type(26)

1.	周新雨，王子欢，杨小平，王志新，贾利蓉，段飞霞. 天然着色剂与抗氧化剂对~(60)Co-γ射线辐照辣椒红油的协同护色作用研究. 中国调味品. 2025(01): 68-77 .
2.	陈宇佳，邓朝军，张婷婷，王秀平，陈秀萍，赵加宁，马翠兰，蒋际谋. 基于图像识别的枇杷资源果肉褐变鉴定方法研究与应用. 果树学报. 2025(02): 288-299 .
3.	张康逸，温青玉，刘燕，耿宁宁，张嫚，何梦影. 一种植物蛋白复合肽盐的工艺研究. 中国调味品. 2024(03): 137-144 .
4.	张洪交，张存喜，王瑞，王可，乔倩. 基于图像处理和改进DenseNet网络的小黄鱼新鲜度识别. 南方水产科学. 2024(03): 133-142 .
5.	唐一诺，章肖肖，宋文文，宋盈萱，高露，陈晓乐，郑振佳. 胭脂虫红色素口红制备工艺优化及品质分析. 中国食品添加剂. 2024(08): 139-147 .
6.	刘恒言，陈秀金，臧鹏，董海胜，孙京超，赵伟，白玉冰，徐楠，张龙振，王雪晴，杜秉健，王耀，李兆周. 面包的品质变化及改良的研究进展. 食品与发酵工业. 2024(17): 394-404 .
7.	骆冬莹，孙蕾，孙金威，梁文星，王苏宁，赵广生. 纳滤与闪蒸技术对新鲜牛乳浓缩效果的影响. 中国乳品工业. 2024(09): 75-80 .
8.	杨芳，王逊城，贾洪锋，许程剑，袁海彬. 基于GC-IMS结合多元统计方法对不同品种植物油制备的辣椒油风味品质的比较. 现代食品科技. 2024(10): 338-350 .
9.	鲍雨婷，陈琪，王灼琛. 低温油炸黄茶风味小麦脆片加工工艺优化及品质分析. 中国食品学报. 2024(11): 254-268 .
10.	张莉，季国志，母智深. 不同豆类蛋白粉的属性和营养消化特性研究. 粮食与饲料工业. 2024(06): 19-23 .
11.	董阳阳，阿衣古丽·阿力木，阿依古扎尔·木合塔尔江，冯作山. 响应面优化真空包装羊肉块加工工艺. 中国调味品. 2023(01): 128-133 .
12.	冯子健，陈南，高浩祥，何强，曾维才. 茶多酚对酸奶发酵品质及抗氧化活性的影响. 食品工业科技. 2023(02): 143-151 . 本站查看
13.	邬帅帆. 食品镀铝包装的阻光性能评价. 现代食品. 2023(05): 189-192 .
14.	罗丽，付院生，陈万林，聂益晗，赵亚茹，王顺民. 鲜切莲藕超声-热处理护色工艺优化. 中国果菜. 2023(05): 17-21+28 .
15.	黄昊，林韡，杨强，童国强，胡志平，陈双，徐岩. 陈酿白酒中黄色呈色强度快速表征方法的研究. 食品与发酵工业. 2023(10): 245-250 .
16.	周弦，许蓉蓉，庄全典，高梦祥，江洪波. 生姜柠檬软糖的工艺优化. 食品工业. 2023(05): 91-95 .
17.	唐悦，杨旭. 食品的视觉效果对消费者感知及购买行为影响研究. 现代商业. 2023(10): 3-6 .
18.	孙雯，阎佳楠，来斌，王策，吴海涛. 负载褪黑素和枸杞粉的凝胶糖果的研制及特性研究. 食品工业科技. 2023(22): 201-209 . 本站查看
19.	王博，胡晓妍，于芳珠，刘登勇. 基于机器视觉技术制作烤羊肉比色卡. 食品工业科技. 2022(03): 10-17 . 本站查看
20.	巩雪. 超高压作用下扇贝闭壳肌色差变化探析. 包装学报. 2022(01): 70-80 .
21.	魏甜甜，魏勃，王承，李凯，谢彩锋，杭方学. 黄冰糖低温浸渍茉莉花制备风味糖浆工艺优化. 食品工业科技. 2022(12): 181-187 . 本站查看
22.	郭超男，年国芳，徐建宗，周建中. 25种新疆主栽辣椒品种品质分析. 食品安全质量检测学报. 2022(12): 4051-4058 .
23.	邓家棋，陈嘉澍，黄桂颖，冯卫华，雷梦琳，白卫东，安可靖，余元善，王辉，戴卓文，杨启财，杨婉媛. 基于感官喜爱度排序的广式佛手柑凉果的品质分析. 农产品加工. 2022(12): 82-87 .
24.	陈茜，张雪春，王振兴，何雪梅，孙健. 不同加工方式对香蕉片品质的影响. 南方农业学报. 2022(05): 1305-1315 .
25.	吴昕怡，田浩，牛之瑞，桂敏，潘俊，王瀚墨，周继伟，朱志妍，刘秀嶶. 基于熵权的TOPSIS和聚类分析评价方法的发酵辣椒品种适用性研究. 食品安全质量检测学报. 2022(22): 7314-7322 .
26.	张衍旭，邱智东，高英鑫，王野谌，董雪莲. 基于色差原理及指纹图谱对淡竹叶药材质量评价研究. 时珍国医国药. 2022(12): 3057-3061 .