Note. Consumer Awareness of the Main Sensory Attributes of Tepache,a Traditional Fermented Fruit Beverage

Abstract

Four tepache samples (a traditional fermented fruit beverage) from four different sources obtained by different fermentation processes were sensory evaluated. A paired comparison test between the samples was carried out in a monadic sequential fashion in six sessions with 70 consumers each. A sample processed by double fermentation received the highest mean scores for the first impression and overall acceptance and in the sensory attributes of appearance, consistency, odor, flavor and sweetness/sourness ratio. Principal component analysis indicated that appearance, odor, flavor, first impression and overall acceptance are highly intercorrelated. That sample was also the most preferred beverage in the comparative test. Flavor intensity was significantly different in all of the paired comparisons. No significant differences were found in the overall acceptance evaluations between genders. A fairly good correlation was found between overall acceptance and consumers who drank the beverage once a week.

Keywords

tepache fermented fruit beverage sensory analysis attributes consumers acceptance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

ASTM (1979). American Society for Testing and Materials. Manual on Consumer Sensory Evaluation. pp. 13–19. Philadelphia: ASTM.

Durán L. and Costell E. (1999). Review: Perception of taste. Physiochemical and psychophysical aspects. Food Science and Technology International 5: 299–309.

INEGI (1997). Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, Geografia e Informatica. Estadísticas sociodemográficas: Estructurán ocupada por grupos de ingreso porcentual de la problación entidad federativa. Mexico DF: INEGI.

INEGI (2000). Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, Geografia e Informatica. Estadísticas sociodemográficas: Salario mínimo general nacional y por área geográfica, 1990– 2000. INEGI, Mexico DF.

Lawless H. and Heymann H. (1998). Sensory Evaluation of Food, Principles and Practices. New York: Chapman and Hall. pp. 430–601.

Martens M. (1999). A philosophy for sensory science. Food Quality and Preference 10: 233 – 244.

Meiselman H.L. (1994). A measurement scheme for developing institutional products. In: MacFie H.J.H. and Thomson D.M.H. (eds.), Measurement of Food Preferences, London: Blackie Academic and Professional. pp. 1–23.

Moskowitz H.R. (1994). Product optimization. In: MacFie H.J.H. and Thomson D.M.H. (eds.), Measurement of Food Preferences. London: Blackie Academic and Professional. pp. 97–136.

Moskowitz H.R. (1995). Food Quality: conceptual and sensory aspects. Food Quality and Preference 6: 157–162.

10.

Munoz A. (1999). Aspectos criticos en el diseno de pruebas con consumidores. In: Memorias II Simposio Iberoamericano de Análisis Sensorial. SENSIBER México. Mexico DF: Universidad Iberoamericana. pp. 71–88.

11.

Munoz A. and Chambers E. IV (1993). Relating sensory measurements to consumer acceptance of meat products. Food Technology 47(11): 128–134.

12.

Pastor M.V. , Costell. E. , Izquierdo. L. , and Durán. L. (1996). Sensory profile of peach nectars. Evaluation of assessors and attributes by generalized procrustes analysis. Food Science and Technology International 2: 219– 230.

13.

Pedrero F.D. and Pangborn. R.M. (1989). Evaluación sensorial de los alimentos. Métodos analíticos. Mexico DF: Alhambra Mexicana. pp. 63–107.

14.

Rubio M.T., Lappe P., Wacher C. and Ulloa M. (1993). Estudio microbiano y quimico de la fermentación de soluciones de piloncillo inoculadas con tibicos. Revista Latinoamericana de Microbiología 35: 19–31.

15.

Santamaria F.J. (1942). Diccionario general de americanismos. Mexico DF: Pedro Robredo.

16.

Santamaria F.J. (1959). Diccionario de mejicanismos. Mexico DF: Porrua.

17.

Shutz H.G. (1994). Appropriateness as a measure of cognitive-contextual aspects of food acceptance. In: Macfie H.J.H. and Thomson D.M.H. (eds.), Measurement of Food Preferences. London: Blackie Academic and Professional. pp. 25–49.

18.

Siret F. and Issanchou S. (2000). Traditional process: influence on sensory properties and on consumers' expectation and liking Application to ‘‘pate de campagne.’’ Food Quality and Preference 11: 217–228.

19.

Stampanoni R. Ch. (1993). Influence of acid and sugar content on sweetness, sourness and the flavor profile of beverages and sherbets. Food Quality and Preference 4: 169–176.

20.

Ulloa M. and Herrera T. (1979). Aspectos generales sobre etnologia, microbiologia y quimica de bebidas fermentadas indigenas de Mexico. Revista de la Sociedad Mexicana de Historia Natural 39.

21.

Ulloa M. and Herrera T. (1982). Estado actual del conocimiento sobre la microbiologia de bebidas fermentadas indigenas de México: Pozol, Tesguino, Pulque, Colonche y Tepache. Anales del Instituto de Biología UNAM (1976–1982) Serie Botánica 47 – 53: 145–153.

22.

Ulloa M., Herrera T. and Lappe P. (1987). Fermentaciones tradicionales indígenas de México. Serie de Investigaciones-Sociales 16. México DF: Instituto Nacional Indigenista. pp. 33–39.