한국작물학회지 (KOREAN JOURNAL OF CROP SCIENCE)

  • 제61권2호
  • /
  • Pages.92-97
  • /
  • 2016
  • /
  • 0252-9777(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2287-8432(eISSN)
한국작물학회 (The Korean Society of Crop Science)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

식미 관능평가 5가지 방법별 전문가와 일반인의 평가능력 비교

Comparison of the Sensory Ability of Experts and Untrained Panelists to Evaluate Cooked Rince by using Five Sensory Methods

  • 윤미라 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 곽지은 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 이정희 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 전재범 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 박향미 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 서정필 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 장재기 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 이춘기 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원) ;
  • 이점식 (농촌진흥청 국립식량과학원)
  • Yoon, Mi-Ra (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Kwak, Jieun (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Jeong-Heui (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Chun, Jaebuhm (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Park, Hyang-Mee (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Suh, Jung-Pil (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Jang, Jae-Ki (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Choon-Ki (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Jeom-Sig (National Institute Crop Science, Rural Development Administration)
  • 투고 : 2016.05.26
  • 심사 : 2016.06.07
  • 발행 : 2016.06.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 시험은 관능평가 5가지 방법별 전문가와 일반인의 평가능력을 비교하여 쌀 산업현장에서 일반인을 대상으로 이용 가능한 식미 관능평가 방법을 제시하고자 수행하였다. 품종 간 식미에서 단순차이 여부를 평가하기 위해 일-이점 검사 및 삼점검사를 수행한 결과 전문가 및 일반인 패널 모두 하이아미, 추청 및 다산 1호 간에는 유의한 차이가 있었다. 품종 간 식미특성 차이에 의한 선호도 평가를 위해 이점비교검사, 순위법 및 다시료비교검사를 수행하였다. 전문가 패널은 3가지 관능평가 방법 모두에서 하이아미 > 추청 > 다산 1호 순으로 좋은 것으로 평가하였다. 반면 일반인 패널에서는 이점비교검사와 순위법에서만 하이아미 > 추청 > 다산 1호 순으로 유의하게 좋은 것으로 평가하였으나, 다시료비교법에서는 하이아미와 추청 간에는 차이가 없는 것으로 나타났다. 이상의 결과 쌀 산업현장에서 일반인을 대상으로 식미관능평가 방법은 2개 품종 간 식미특성 차이를 평가하기 위해서는 이점비교검사법을, 3개 이상 품종 간 식미특성 차이를 평가하기 위해서는 순위법이 적합할 것으로 고찰된다.

This experiment aimed to compare the sensory ability of experts and untrained to evaluate three rice varieties by using five sensory evaluation methods. All panelists showed significant differences in their sensory abilities to distinguish among Haiami, Chucheong, and Dasan 1 rice varieties when using the duo-trio test and triangle test. The expert panelists showed a clear preference in the following order: Haiami > Chucheong > Dasan 1, when using the paired comparison test, ranking test, and multiple comparison test. However, the untrained panelists showed no significant differences in their sensory ability to distinguish between the Haiami and Chucheong varieties when using the multiple comparison test. The results indicate that, for sensory evaluation of cooked rice by untrained panelists, the paired comparison test is suitable for evaluating two samples and the ranking test is suitable for evaluating more than two samples.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Amerine, M. A., R. M. Pangborn, and E. B. Roessler. 1965. Principles of sensory evaluation of food. In: Food Science and Technology Monographs. Academic Press, New York.
  2. Choi, H. C. 2002. Current status and perspectives in varietal improvement of rice cultivars for high-quality and value-added products. Korean J. Crop Sci. 47(S) : 15-32.
  3. Ebitani, T., T. Umemoto, and M. Yano. 2002. QTL analysis of "Mido" value, an inbreed selection index for eating quality of rice, using progenies from a cross between japonica and indica variety. Breed. Sci. 52(Suppl.1) : 371.
  4. Kramer, A., G. Kahan, D. Cooper, and Papavasiliou. 1974. A non-parametric ranking method for the statistical evaluation of sensory data. Chemical Sensory and Flavor. 1 : 121-123. https://doi.org/10.1093/chemse/1.1.121
  5. Kim, K. O., and Y. C. Lee. 2003. Sensory evaluation of food. Hakyoun. p359.
  6. Lee, J. S., N. B. Park, J. H. Lee, J. H. Cho, Y. J. Won, H. M. Park, A. Chun, J. K. Jang, W. G. Hwa, G. H. Yi, and U. S. Yeo. 2012. Optimum milling degree for improving sensory quality of cooked rice. Korean J. Crop Sci. 57(4) : 359-364. https://doi.org/10.7740/kjcs.2012.57.4.359
  7. Lee, J. S., J. Kwak, M. R. Yoon, J. H. Lee, E. K. Aha, H. M. Park, Y. J. Woon, J. Y. Shon, J. H. Kim, J. P. Suh, A. Chun, J. B. Chun, and J. H. Lee. 2015. Cup Arrangement Ranking Method for a Rapid and Small-Sample Sensory Evaluation of Cooked Rice. Korean J. Breed. Sci. 47(2) : 105-110. https://doi.org/10.9787/KJBS.2015.47.2.105
  8. National Institute of Crop Science, Rural Development Administration. 2003. Evaluate the quality and taste of rice. Suwon, Korea.
  9. National Institute of Crop Science, Rural Development Administration. 2013. The 2nd workshop on analysis of rice quality, sensory evaluation and grain quality of rice. Suwon, Korea.
  10. ISO. 2004a. Sensory Analysis-Methodology-Duo-trio Test. ISO Standard 10399, Copyright Office, Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
  11. ISO. 2004b. Sensory Analysis-Methodology-Triangle test. ISO Standard 4120, Copyright Office, Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
  12. ISO. 2005. Sensory analysis-Methodology-Paired comparison test. ISO Standard 5495, Copyright Office, Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
  13. ISO. 2006. Sensory analysis-Methodology-Ranking. ISO Standard 8587, Copyright Office, Geneve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization.
  14. Okamoto, M. 1994. Studies on effect of chemical components on stickiness of cooked rice and their selection methods for breeding. Chugoku Agri. Report. 14 : 1-68.
  15. Rousseau, B., A. Mayer, and M. O'Mahony. 1998. Power and sensitivity of the same-different test: Comparison with triangle and duo-trio method. J. Sensory Studies. 13 : 149-173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-459X.1998.tb00080.x
  16. Shim, H. M. 2012. Sensitivity of repeated duo-trio test: The effects of reference chosen by preference. Ms. D. thesis. Ewha Womans University, Seoul. p66.
  17. Vaz-Pires, P., and P. Seixas. 2006. Development of new quality index method (QIM) schemes for cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis) and broadtail shortfin squid (Illex coindetii). Food Control: 17(12) : 942-949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2005.07.004