Food Science and Preservation (한국식품저장유통학회지)

The Korean Society of Food Preservation (한국식품저장유통학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Identification of ideal size and drivers for consumer acceptability of apple

사과의 이상적인 크기와 소비자 기호도 결정인자 분석

  • Jung, Hee-Yeon (Food Distribution System Research Group, Korea Food Research Institute) ;
  • Kim, Sang-Sook (Food Distribution System Research Group, Korea Food Research Institute)
  • 정희연 (한국식품연구원 유통시스템연구단) ;
  • 김상숙 (한국식품연구원 유통시스템연구단)
  • Received : 2014.05.15
  • Accepted : 2014.09.16
  • Published : 2014.10.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The physicochemical characteristics and consumer perceptions of two Fuji cultivars (Fuji and Royal Fuji) with six different size groups (3D: 30~39, 4D: 40~49, 5D: 50~59, 6D: 60~69, 7D: 70~79, and 8D: 80~89 apples/15 kg) were investigated to identify the ideal size and the drivers of consumer acceptability of apples. For the physicochemical characteristics, the weight, volume, specific volume, L, a, and b colors, hardness, pH, acidity, and brix of apples were measured. A total of 100 consumers were asked to mark the intensity of the characteristics (size, redness, glossiness, surface roughness, apple odor, apple flavor, sweetness, sourness, hardness, crunchiness, and toughness) to determine the ideal characteristics of apples before they were asked to taste the apple products. The consumers evaluated the apple samples in terms of their appearance, odor, flavor, texture, and overall acceptability; the consumers' intent to purchase such apples and willingness to pay for them; and the intensity of the aforementioned characteristics. Compared to the ideal characteristics of apples, the actual apple samples were rated low in their apple odor, apple flavor, acidity, sweetness, hardness, and crispness. The ideal size of the apples was between 4D and 5D. Their overall acceptability was highly affected by their flavor, followed by their texture, odor, and appearance. The acceptability of the appearance was highly correlated with the glossiness (r = 0.80), volume, weight, redness (r = 0.73), and size (r = 0.72). The consumer acceptability of the apples increased with the decreased pH and the increased Brix, hardness, and color b values of the peeled apples. The apple flavor, sweetness, hardness, crispiness, juiciness, and toughness during mastication were noted as sensory drivers of consumer acceptability.

소비자들이 좋아하는 사과의 특성을 도출하고자 국내의 주된 사과 2품종(일반후지, 로얄후지), 6크기별(3D : 30~39개/15 kg; 4D : 40~49개/15 kg; 5D : 50~59개/15 kg; 6D : 60~69개/15 kg; 7D : 70~79개/15 kg; 8D : 80~89개/15 kg), 총 12사과시료에 대한 이화학 특성분석 및 소비자검사를 수행하였다. 사과의 이화학적특성분석 결과 일반후지 품종이 로얄후지 품종에 비해 pH, 껍질의 색도 a값(붉은 정도)는 낮고 경도, 산도, 당도, 과육의 색도 b값(노란 정도)이 높은 경향이 있었다. 소비자들이 생각하는 이상적인 사과의 특성은 본 실험에 사용된 사과보다 사과향, 사과맛, 신맛, 경도, 아삭거림성, 다즙성이 높았으며, 이상적인 사과의 크기는 4D~5D사이로서 한 개당 254 g~375 g 사이의 무게를 지닌 사과였다. 전반적으로 로얄후지에 비해 일반 후지의 기호도가 더 높았다. 기호도 항목(외관, 향, 맛, 조직감)중, 사과의 전반적인 기호도에 가장 상관이 높았던 항목은 맛의 기호도였으며, 조직감, 향, 외관의 기호도 순으로 나타났다. 전반적인 기호도와 외관 기호도간 낮은 상관계수는 외관 기호도만 독립적으로 평가한 본 실험 방법에 일부 기인하였다고 사료되며 이에 대한 확인을 위해 향후 시료제시방법에 따른 추가적인 연구가 필요하다. 소비자들은 외관면에서 윤기 및 붉은색이 강한 큰 사과를 좋아하였으며, 외관에 대한 정보 없이 일정한 크기의 과육만을 제공하여 평가한 소비자 기호도와 상관이 높은 이화학특성은 사과 상부의 껍질 및 과육의 색도 b값(각각 r=0.794, r=0.737), 과육의 경도(r=0.784), pH(r=-0.730)이었으며, 감각특성으로는 사과맛(r=0.984), 아삭거림성(r=0.860), 씹는동안 질김성(r=0.843), 경도(r=0.814), 다즙성(r=0.771), 단맛(r=0.761)으로 나타났다. 즉, 본 연구결과는 소비자들이 선호하는 후지사과의 특성은 중간크기(4D>, >5D)의 사과특유의 맛 및 단맛이 강하고, 아삭거림성, 씹힘성, 경도 및 다즙성이 높으며, 객관적으로는 pH가 낮고, 당도($^{\circ}Brix$)가 높고, 과육이 단단하며, 진한 노란(b value)색의 과육임을 보여주었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Choi YH, Lee SJ (2005) A survey on uses, preference and recognition of apple. Korean J Food Culture, 20, 204-213
  2. Chung HS, Moon KD, Choi JU (1999) Processing and MAP(modified atmosphere packaging) storage of fresh-cut apple using CA stored apples. Korean J Postharvest Sci Technol, 6, 351-356
  3. MAFRA (2013) Agriculture, food and rural affairs statistics yearbook. Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, Sejong-si, Korea, p 88, p 116
  4. Hwang TY, Son SM, Lee CY, Moon KD (2001) Quality changes of fresh-cut packaged fuji apples during storage. Korean J Food Sci Technol, 33, 469-473
  5. KREI (2007) Agricultural outlook 2007. Korean Rural Economic Institute, Seoul, Korea, p 710
  6. Kim KP, Park MS (2007) Consumer preferences for fruit size and their implication. Korean J Food Marketing Economics, 24, 26-39
  7. Kajikawa C (1998) Quality level and price in Japanese apple market. Agribusiness, 14, 227-234 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6297(199805/06)14:3<227::AID-AGR5>3.0.CO;2-2
  8. Kim KP, Kim YH, Park JH (2004) An analysis on the change of consumer's fruit purchasing behavior. J Rural Development, 27, 55-66
  9. Cho SD, Kim DM, Kim GH (2008) Survey on consumer perceptions of the sensory quality attributes of apple. Korean J Food Preserv, 15, 810-815
  10. Bonany J, Buehler A, Carbo J, Codarin S, Donati F, Echeverria G, Egger S, Guerra W, Hilaire C, Holler I, Iglesias I, Jesionkowska K, Konopacka D, Kruczynska D, Matinelli A, Pitiot S, Sansavini S, Stehr R, Schoorl F (2013) Consumer eating quality acceptance of new apple varieties in different European countries. Food Qual Pref, 30, 250-259 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2013.06.004
  11. Seppa L, Railio J, Vehkalahti K, Tahvonen R, Tuorila H (2013) Hedonic response s and individual definitions if an ideal apple as predictors of choice. J Sensory Studies, 28, 346-357 https://doi.org/10.1111/joss.12059
  12. aT (2013) Survey on major agricultural products in 2012. Korea Agro-Fisheries & Food Trade Corporation, Seoul, Korea, p 662
  13. Park SG (2013) Expansion of distribution for medium sized apple and pear breeds. Nongminnews October 18, Seoul, Korea p 10
  14. Lee JW, Kim SH, Hong SI, Jeong MC, Park HW, Kim DM (2003) Internal and external quality of fuji apples. Korean J Food Preserv, 10, 47-53
  15. Corollaro ML, Endrizzi I, Bertolini A, Aprea E, Dematte ML, Costa F, Biasioli F, Gaspen F (2013) Sensory profiling of apple: methodological aspects, cultivar characterization and postharvest changes. Postharvest Biol Tec, 77, 111-120 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.postharvbio.2012.10.010
  16. SAS (2008) SAS/STAT 9.2 User's Guide, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA
  17. Addinsoft (2014) Xlstat, Data analysis and statistics with MS excel. Addinsoft, Paris, France
  18. NAQS (2013) Agricultural standards notice no. 2013-42. National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service, Gimcheon-si, Korea, p 15
  19. Worch T, Le S, Punter P, Pages J (2013) Ideal profile method (IPM): The ins and outs. Food Qual Pref, 28, 45-49 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2012.08.001
  20. Manalo AB (1990) Assessing the importance of apple attributes: An agricultural application of conjoint analysis. Northeastern J Agric Res Econ, 19, 118-124
  21. Skreli E, Imami D (2012) Analyzing consumers' preference for apple attributes in Tirana, Albania. International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, 15, 137-156
  22. Bower JA, Saadat MA, Whitten C (2003) Effect of liking, information and consumer characteristics on purchase intention and willingness to pay more for a fat spread with a proven health benefit. Food Qual Pref, 14, 65-74 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-3293(02)00019-8

Cited by

  1. 'Picnic', a New Mid-season Apple Cultivar with Medium Size and Good Taste vol.33, pp.5, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7235/hort.2015.14182
  2. Quality characteristics and sensory evaluation of Fuji apple based on commodity price vol.23, pp.7, 2016, https://doi.org/10.11002/kjfp.2016.23.7.1065
  3. Determination of Quality Index Components in High-Acidity Cider Vinegar Produced by Two-Stage Fermentation vol.47, pp.4, 2015, https://doi.org/10.9721/KJFST.2015.47.4.431
  4. Relationship between quality characteristics and skin color of ‘Fuji’ Apples (Malus domestica Borkh.) vol.13, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-019-00112-9