Production of citrus fruit in California has a substantial impact on the economy of the state, bringing in greater than $2.2 billion in 2016 alone (National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017). Fresh and processed navel oranges (C. sinensis) alone contributed greater than $706 million in 2016 (National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017). In the 2015–16 season, navel oranges produced for fresh market consumption represented a large portion of all citrus fruit produced in California, at 42% of total volume (National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017).
Improving liking for a product requires consumer testing. Data from consumers are often nondescriptive, with consumers providing information solely about their liking. While this information is useful in determining which product each group of consumers may prefer, combining this information with detailed analysis of the sensory or chemical properties of a product allows for characterization of the drivers of liking for each consumer segment that is uncovered by preference mapping (Schlich, 1995). This technique has shown success in characterizing the preferences of consumers for different products in multiple markets (Greenhoff and MacFie, 1994; Guinard et al., 2001; Helgesen et al., 1997; Naes and Risvik, 1996; Schlich, 1995; Sidel and Stone, 1993; Thybo et al., 2004; Yackinous et al., 1999). Data analysis consisting of partial least squares (PLS) regression to relate instrumental and descriptive analysis measures of sensory attributes to consumer liking has also been successful in the past for identifying key attributes that drive consumer preferences (Helgesen et al., 1997; Tenenhaus et al., 2005; Thybo et al., 2004).
Past work with navel oranges has found that high-quality fruit often has high concentrations of sugar in relation to acid (Ivans et al., 1987; Jordan et al., 2001; Obenland et al., 2009). Both sugar and acid components are measured by growers to determine whether the fruit is market ready by use of the California Standard. The California Standard indeed is a quality measurement, based on soluble solids concentration and acid concentration, that aims to enhance consumer acceptability of the fruit (Ferguson and Grafton-Cardwell, 2014). In other commercial citrus categories such as grapefruits, mandarins, and other oranges, a minimum ratio of soluble solids to acid [SSC/titratable acidity (TA)] is required before the fruit is deemed acceptable for market (Ferguson and Grafton-Cardwell, 2014). This standard was changed in 2012 for navel oranges as it was found that the SSC/TA ratio is not a strong predictor of consumer liking (Jordan et al., 2001; Obenland et al., 2009). The new standard provides a quality rating proportional to the concentrations of both sugar and acid instead of relying on their ratio and is defined as
This study set out to fulfill four objectives: 1) to uncover preference segmentation of adult and child consumers with respect to commercially available navel oranges; 2) to identify the key sensory attributes that drive liking for each preference cluster of consumers; 3) to characterize these segments using demographic, usage, and psychographic information collected through an exit survey; and 4) to test the appropriateness of the current California Standard for navel oranges as it applies to consumers.
Ferguson, L. & Grafton-Cardwell, E.E. 2014 Citrus production manual. UCANR Publications, Richmond, CA
Gao, Z., House, L.O., Gmitter, F.G. Jr, Valim, M.F., Plotto, A. & Baldwin, E.A. 2011 Consumer preferences for fresh citrus: Impacts of demographic and behavioral characteristics Intl. Food Agribus. Mgt. Rev. 14 23 40
Goldenberg, L., Yaniv, Y., Kaplunov, T., Doron-Faigenboim, A., Carmi, N. & Porat, R. 2015 Diversity in sensory quality and determining factors influencing Mandarin flavor liking J. Food Sci. 80 S418 S425
Greenhoff, K. & MacFie, H.J.H. 1994 Preference mapping in practice. p. 137–166. In: Measurement of food preferences. Springer, Boston, MA
Guinard, J-X., Uotani, B. & Schlich, P. 2001 Internal and external mapping of preferences for commercial lager beers: Comparison of hedonic ratings by consumers blind versus with knowledge of brand and price Food Qual. Prefer. 12 243 255
Lawless, H.T. & Heymann, H. 2010 Sensory evaluation of food - principles and practices. Springer, New York, NY
Martens, M. & Martens, H. 1986 Partial least squares regression. Stat. Proc. Food Res. p. 293–359
Naes, T. & Risvik, E. 1996 Multivariate analysis of data in sensory science. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) 2017 Citrus Fruits 2017 Summary USDA, NASS, Washington D.C. <http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/CitrFrui/CitrFrui-08-31-2017.pdf>
Obenland, D., Collin, S., Mackey, B., Sievert, J., Fjeld, K. & Arpaia, M.L. 2009 Determinants of flavor acceptability during the maturation of navel oranges Postharvest Biol. Technol. 52 156 163
Plotto, A., Baldwin, E., McCollum, G., Manthey, J., Narciso, J. & Irey, M. 2010 Effect of liberibacter infection (Huanglongbing or “Greening” disease) of citrus on orange juice flavor quality by sensory evaluation J. Food Sci. 75 S220 S230
Qannari, E.M., Vigneau, E., Luscan, P., Lefebvre, A.C. & Vey, F. 1997 Clustering of variables, application in consumer and sensory studies Food Qual. Prefer. 8 423 428
Rothman, L. & Parker, M.J. 2009 Just-about-right scales: Design, usage, benefits, and risks. ASTM Manual MNL63. ASTM Intl., Conshohocken, PA
Schlich, P. 1995 Preference mapping: Relating consumer preferences to sensory or instrumental measurements. Colloq. INRA, Dijon, France
Tenenhaus, M., Pagès, J., Ambroisine, L. & Guinot, C. 2005 PLS methodology to study relationships between hedonic judgements and product characteristics Food Qual. Prefer. 16 315 325
Thybo, A.K., Kühn, B.F. & Martens, H. 2004 Explaining Danish children’s preferences for apples using instrumental, sensory and demographic/behavioural data Food Qual. Prefer. 15 53 63
Yackinous, C., Wee, C. & Guinard, J-X. 1999 Internal preference mapping of hedonic ratings for Ranch salad dressings varying in fat and garlic flavor Food Qual. Prefer. 10 401 409