Display options
Cite
Sharafi M, Hayes JE, Duffy VB. Masking Vegetable Bitterness to Improve Palatability Depends on Vegetable Type and Taste Phenotype. Chemosens Percept. 2013;6(1):8-19doi: 10.1007/s12078-012-9137-5.
Sharafi, M., Hayes, J. E., & Duffy, V. B. (2013). Masking Vegetable Bitterness to Improve Palatability Depends on Vegetable Type and Taste Phenotype. Chemosensory perception, 6(1), 8-19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-012-9137-5
Sharafi, Mastaneh, et al. "Masking Vegetable Bitterness to Improve Palatability Depends on Vegetable Type and Taste Phenotype." Chemosensory perception vol. 6,1 (2013): 8-19. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12078-012-9137-5
Sharafi M, Hayes JE, Duffy VB. Masking Vegetable Bitterness to Improve Palatability Depends on Vegetable Type and Taste Phenotype. Chemosens Percept. 2013 Mar 01;6(1):8-19. doi: 10.1007/s12078-012-9137-5. PMID: 23682306; PMCID: PMC3652488.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Chemosens Percept. 2013 Mar 01;6(1):8-19. doi: 10.1007/s12078-012-9137-5.

Masking Vegetable Bitterness to Improve Palatability Depends on Vegetable Type and Taste Phenotype.

Chemosensory perception

Mastaneh Sharafi, John E Hayes, Valerie B Duffy

Affiliations

  1. Department of Allied Health Sciences, College of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Connecticut, 358 Mansfield Road, Unit 2101, Storrs 06269 CT, USA.
  2. Department of Food Science, College of Agricultural Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University, 220 Food Science Building, University Park 16802 PA, USA.

PMID: 23682306 PMCID: PMC3652488 DOI: 10.1007/s12078-012-9137-5

Abstract

Consumption of dark green vegetables falls short of recommendations, in part, because of unpleasant bitterness. A laboratory-based study of 37 adults was used to determine bitter and hedonic responses to vegetables (asparagus, Brussels sprouts, kale) with bitter masking agents (1.33 M sodium acetate, 10 and 32 mM sodium chloride, and 3.2 mM aspartame) and then characterized by taste phenotype and vegetable liking. In repeated-measures ANOVA, aspartame was most effective at suppressing bitterness and improving hedonic responses for all sampled vegetables. Among the sodium salts, 32 mM sodium chloride decreased bitterness for kale and sodium acetate reduced bitterness across all vegetables with a tendency to increase liking for Brussels sprouts, as release from mixture suppression increased perceived sweetness. Participants were nearly equally divided into three 6-

Keywords: Bitter; Food preference; Genetics; Salt; Sweet; Taste; Vegetables

References

  1. Chem Senses. 2007 Mar;32(3):225-36 - PubMed
  2. Nature. 1997 Jun 5;387(6633):563 - PubMed
  3. Physiol Behav. 1978 Oct;21(4):609-13 - PubMed
  4. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000 Dec;72(6):1424-35 - PubMed
  5. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012 May;112(5):739-58 - PubMed
  6. Public Health Nutr. 2012 Aug;15(8):1474-82 - PubMed
  7. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2009 Jul;1170:558-68 - PubMed
  8. Chem Senses. 1995 Dec;20(6):609-23 - PubMed
  9. Appetite. 2009 Apr;52(2):410-5 - PubMed
  10. Prev Med. 2011 May;52(5):370-5 - PubMed
  11. Annu Rev Nutr. 2008;28:367-88 - PubMed
  12. Pharm Res. 2005 Nov;22(11):1970-7 - PubMed
  13. Appetite. 2012 Apr;58(2):543-53 - PubMed
  14. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Oct;96(4):889-901 - PubMed
  15. J Nutr Health Aging. 2009 Nov;13(9):769-75 - PubMed
  16. Pharm Res. 2002 Jul;19(7):1019-26 - PubMed
  17. Health Place. 2009 Dec;15(4):1064-70 - PubMed
  18. Physiol Behav. 2004 Aug;82(1):109-14 - PubMed
  19. Am J Clin Nutr. 1997 Aug;66(2):391-7 - PubMed
  20. Chem Senses. 2004 Jun;29(5):431-9 - PubMed
  21. Public Health Nutr. 2012 Feb;15(2):208-17 - PubMed
  22. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1998 Nov 30;855:793-6 - PubMed
  23. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1998 Nov 30;855:813-5 - PubMed
  24. Chemosens Percept. 2012 Dec 1;5(3-4):231-236 - PubMed
  25. Am J Clin Nutr. 1999 Jul;70(1):28-36 - PubMed
  26. Physiol Behav. 2011 Oct 24;104(5):1072-4 - PubMed
  27. Chem Senses. 1996 Jun;21(3):323-34 - PubMed
  28. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Jan;95(1):72-7 - PubMed
  29. Dev Psychobiol. 2003 Sep;43(2):120-7 - PubMed
  30. Public Health Rep. 1995 Jan-Feb;110(1):68-79 - PubMed
  31. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012 Feb;112(2):235-45 - PubMed
  32. Chem Senses. 2008 Mar;33(3):255-65 - PubMed
  33. Physiol Behav. 2005 Jan 17;83(5):821-31 - PubMed
  34. J Agric Food Chem. 2011 Nov 9;59(21):11764-71 - PubMed
  35. Curr Biol. 2012 Jun 5;22(11):1035-9 - PubMed
  36. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2009 Jul-Aug;41(4):242-53 - PubMed
  37. J Agric Food Chem. 2004 Jul 14;52(14):4508-14 - PubMed
  38. Chem Senses. 2009 May;34(4):333-9 - PubMed
  39. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2008 Oct;48(9):858-75 - PubMed
  40. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009 Jul;109(7):1220-6 - PubMed
  41. Physiol Behav. 1994 Dec;56(6):1165-71 - PubMed
  42. Physiol Behav. 2010 Jun 16;100(4):369-80 - PubMed
  43. Am J Prev Med. 2008 Jul;35(1):33-37 - PubMed
  44. Appetite. 2008 Jan;50(1):139-45 - PubMed
  45. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Nov;76(5):1101-5 - PubMed
  46. J Food Sci. 2012 Jun;77(6):S226-32 - PubMed
  47. J Comp Physiol Psychol. 1979 Jun;93(3):538-47 - PubMed
  48. Physiol Behav. 2000 Mar;68(5):691-7 - PubMed
  49. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2006 Jul-Aug;38(4):211-21 - PubMed
  50. Nutr Cancer. 1997;29(2):146-51 - PubMed
  51. J Sci Food Agric. 2011 Dec;91(15):2858-64 - PubMed
  52. Appetite. 1982 Dec;3(4):353-60 - PubMed
  53. Appetite. 2002 Feb;38(1):3-12 - PubMed
  54. Chemosens Percept. 2010 Dec 1;3(3-4):137-148 - PubMed
  55. Physiol Behav. 1985 Nov;35(5):779-83 - PubMed
  56. Chem Senses. 2010 Nov;35(9):801-12 - PubMed
  57. Physiol Behav. 2006 Feb 28;87(2):304-13 - PubMed
  58. Chem Senses. 2004 Jul;29(6):513-21 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support