Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 232 items for :

  • sensory panel x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All
Full access

Stacy A. Adams, Ellen T. Paparozzi, and W.W. Stroup

`Dark Red Annette Hegg' poinsettias (Euphorbia pulcherrima Willd. ex Klotzsch) were grown in a 1 peat : 1 perlite : 1 vermiculite medium using a pinched production schedule with varying N and S fertilizer application rates. Fifty-six treatments consisting of eight N levels (100 to 275 mg·L−1 in 25-mg·L−1 increments) and seven S levels (0 to 75 mg·L−1 in 12.5-mg·L−1 increments) were supplied. Other required nutrients were supplied at commercial recommendations for all treatments. Foliage of each plant was evaluated quantitatively by chromometer readings every 3 weeks. Marketability was determined by sensory evaluations from commercial producers, retailers, and consumers. Results indicated distinct color differences (hue, chroma, value) between S levels of 0 and 12.5 mg·L−1 and a slight difference between S at 12.5 and 25 mg·L−1. The foliage of plants receiving 0 S was lighter, more vivid, and more yellow-green in color. As N levels increased, there was a linear response; foliage became more green, darker, and more dull. Commerical and consumer evaluators rated plants that received S at 0 or 12.5 mg·L−1 at all N levels and plants receiving N at 100 mg L−1 as unmarketable. This research indicates that `Annette Hegg' poinsettia requires S at a minimum of 25 mg·L−1 and N at a minimum of 125 mg·L−1 for commercial acceptance, and commercial N application rates may be greatly reduced when adequate S is supplied.

Full access

Maite A. Chauvin, Matthew Whiting, and Carolyn F. Ross

cherry quality and sensory evaluation. A trained panel was employed to evaluate sensory properties of cherries and to compare trained panel performance to analytical assessments ( Cliff et al., 1996 ). Results showed a moderate correlation (r = 0

Free access

Domingos P.F. Almeida and Maria Helena Gomes

individually weighing 15 numbered fruit throughout the storage period. Sensory evaluation. A 10-member permanent panel trained in sensory analyses of foodstuffs was given kiwifruit samples with maturity stages ranging from green to overripe. The panel

Full access

Gerardo Lopez, M. Hossein Behboudian, Gemma Echeverria, Joan Girona, and Jordi Marsal

a commercial orchard and related the instrumental evaluation of fruit quality to the sensory attributes. For the latter we used, in two sessions, a nine-member panel of trained judges and a 40-member panel of consumers. We therefore expect the

Free access

Steven J. McKay, James M. Bradeen, and James J. Luby

.g., Chauvin et al., 2010 ; Karlsen et al., 1999 ). Sensory panels have been used to dissect the texture trait characteristics of apple genotypes, frequently a small number of named cultivars (e.g., Daillant-Spinnler et al., 1996 ; Harker et al., 2002

Free access

Angelos I. Deltsidis, Charles A. Sims, and Jeffrey K. Brecht

* values for the two experiments were 20.7 ± 0.65 and 29.4 ± 0.46. The sensory quality of the tomato fruit was evaluated by the consumer panel in terms of aroma liking, overall liking, texture liking, and flavor liking. Washed and dried tomatoes were cut

Full access

Travis Robert Alexander, Carolyn F. Ross, Emily A. Walsh, and Carol A. Miles

product). Sensory evaluation of cider quality was performed using a trained panel and an e-tongue. Sensory panels, involving screened individuals trained to describe their sensory experiences using specific terminology and metrics, are often used to guide

Free access

Xavier Vallverdu, Joan Girona, Gemma Echeverria, Jordi Marsal, M. Hossein Behboudian, and Gerardo Lopez

calculated as 100 × (dry weight/fresh weight). The dry weight of each sample was obtained after drying to a constant weight in a forced-air draft oven at 65 °C. The sensory evaluation involved two panels: a panel of 44 consumers and a panel of nine trained

Full access

Margaret A. Cliff, Kareen Stanich, and Peter M.A. Toivonen

were presented in random order on a white tray. Table 1. Sensory attributes used for evaluating ‘Skeena’ sweet cherry by the trained panel ( n = 14) on 100-unit unstructured line scales, labeled at 10 and 90 units with the terms “low” and “high

Free access

Molly Felts, Renee T. Threlfall, John R. Clark, and Margaret L. Worthington

= scar present). Table 1. Lexicon developed for fresh-market muscadine grape attributes by a descriptive sensory panel with eight trained panelists. Design and statistical analysis After harvest, the fruit from each of the six genotypes were completely