| 查看: 4221 | 回复: 46 | |||
| 【奖励】 本帖被评价6次，作者sxlc增加金币 4.25 个 | |||
| 当前主题已经存档。 | |||
| 当前只显示满足指定条件的回帖，点击这里查看本话题的所有回帖 | |||
[资源]
【转贴】感官分析【已搜索无重复】
|
|||
|
感官分析目前在国内研究不多，外文资料很多，特献上 感官分析手册及GB [ Last edited by 幻影无痕 on 2007-7-20 at 07:53 ] |
回复此楼» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐
 食品类～ |
» 猜你喜欢
索氏抽提奶粉脂肪，结果偏低何故？
已经有1人回复
-
肠道菌分离后形态差异大，测序却相近？
已经有3人回复
-
食品科学论文润色/翻译怎么收费?
已经有75人回复
-
Help: SSRN无法打开，如何删除预印本？寻找能登录 SSRN 的人 或 方法
已经有4人回复
-
英国利兹大学食品科学与营养学院博士研究生招聘（CSC联合培养）
已经有8人回复
-
求助新西兰租房签证
已经有0人回复
-
葡萄糖溶液喷雾干燥
已经有4人回复
-
凯氏定氮测粗蛋白：空白管竟藏大秘密
已经有0人回复
-
总膳食纤维测定：科研中的 “残渣” 逆袭记
已经有0人回复
|
日本：玉米做塑料用于手机框 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2007年4月17日 阅读次数: 124 新闻作者:admin 默认字体 9pt 10pt 11pt 12pt 13pt 14pt 15pt 16pt 17pt 18pt 20pt 25pt 新华社电 日本电气公司本月9日宣布，该公司新开发出以植物为原料的生物塑料，其热传导率与不锈钢不相上下。研究人员在以玉米为原料的聚乳酸树脂中加入长数毫米，直径0.01毫米的碳纤维和特殊的混合剂，使导热效率高的碳纤维互相结合，并成网状分布到聚乳酸树脂内部。这种生物塑料除导热性能好外，还具有重量轻、易成型、对环境污染小等优点，今后有望用于生产轻薄型的电脑、手机等产品的外框。 （资料来源：《北京晚报》） 相关报道（来源：新华网）： 2006年在吉林省长春市举办的第二届东北亚博览会上，一种用玉米作为材料生产出的塑料因其在能源和环保方面的双重效应而引起了人们的关注。 这种新型塑料是由上海同济大学和一家生物科技有限公司共同合作开发的。这项技术是通过细菌发酵从玉米中提取乳酸，制作成聚乳酸，然后制成塑料。前来参展的上海科技成果转化促进会的工作人员介绍，“玉米塑料”的应用面十分广阔，包括包装材料、日用塑料制品、纤维、农用地膜、医用材料等在内的多个领域。 有关专家认为，“玉米塑料”具有良好的经济效益。按目前全世界每年近2亿吨塑料的市场需求，“玉米塑料”将形成巨大的产业链，同时，因其减少石油资源消耗和对环境的“白色污染”，符合可持续发展和循环经济的要求，具有较好的应用前景。（褚晓亮） |
27楼2007-06-12 21:28:23
|
www.foodnetbase.com最新出版的外文书目 Modern Food Microbiology (6th Edition) 现代食品微生物学 http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=9645&fromuid=10459 Essentials of Food Sanitation 食品消毒学 http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=5324&fromuid=10459 Foodborne Pathogens-Hazards Risk Analysis and Control 食品中的致病菌：危害、风险分析和控制 http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=9760&fromuid=10459 Microbiological Risk Assessment in Food Processing http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=9642&fromuid=10459 实验室生物安全手册 http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=9985&fromuid=10459 微生物自学教材－Microbiology Demystified http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=9741&fromuid=10459 Laboratory Exercises in Microbiology 图文并茂－微生物实验练习 http://bbs.foodmate.net/viewthread.php?tid=9720&fromuid=10459 |
2楼2007-01-14 00:35:34
3楼2007-01-24 15:25:39
|
(R) The Flavour Profile Method (Arthur D. Little) This method was developed by Arthur. D. Little in the late 1940’s early 1950’s. It uses a panel of 4-6 trained panellists. Panellists are selected by screening for sensory acuity, interests, attitude and availability. A vocabulary is developed by exposure to a wide range of products from the product category to be assessed. The list is then reviewed and refined and reference standards and definitions applied to each term. The panellists examine the products and the results are reported to the panel leader. Through discussion in an open session lead by the panel leader, a consensus decision is reached for each sample. Aroma, flavour and amplitude, which is the balance or blending of the flavour, is assessed in this way. The scales used with this technique involve the use of numbers and symbols and therefore cannot be analysed statistically. This method is therefore a qualitative descriptive test. The main disadvantage with this type of test is that a dominant panel member or the panel leader could easily influence the panels decision. (R) Profile Attribute Analysis The Flavour Profile method was renamed the Profile Attribute Analysis with the introduction of numerical scales. Mean scores could then be calculated and the data statistically analysed. However consensus methods are still employed by some people. Again, this runs the risk of a result being skewed by a dominant personality in the group. (R) The Texture Profile Method This method was developed at General Foods in the 1960’s. It was based on the principles of the Flavour Profile method to assess the textural characteristics of a product. Textural characteristics are categorised into three groups, mechanical, geometrical and ‘other’ characteristics. 1. Mechanical: relating to the reaction of food to stress eg. hardness, chewiness and adhesiveness 2. Geometrical characteristics: relating to the size, shape and orientation of the particles within the food eg. grainy, fibrous and aerated 3. Other characteristics: relating to the perception of the moisture and fat contents of the food The order in which the characteristics are assessed is also very important. The order of assessment is first bite, “chewing” or masticatory second phase and residual or third phase. Panellists are selected on their ability to discriminate between textural differences in the product area to be trained. Six to ten panellists are suggested. Standardised terminology and rating scales are used for the assessments and each scale point is anchored with a specific food. Initially the technique used an expanded version of the Flavour Profile scale, however more recently category and line scales have been used. Panellists each make their own individual judgement and then depending on the type of scale used, a consensus decision is reached or statistical analysis is performed on the data. (R) Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA ) This method of descriptive analysis was developed in the 1970’s. Ten to twelve panellists are selected by screening for ability to discriminate between products, their ability to verbalise their perceptions and to work as a group. The first step is to expose the panellists to a wide range of products from the product category to be assessed. Each panellist individually lists as many descriptive words possible that describe differences between the products. Hedonic terms such as nice, good, bad, etc are not allowed. Through a group discussion, the list of descriptive words is narrowed down to remove duplications and redundant terms until a standardised vocabulary is reached. This standardised vocabulary then needs to be defined with verbal definitions or reference standards and anchor points for the scale agreed upon. The panel also decides the order in which the terms are to be assessed. During this process the panel leader only acts to facilitate the discussion and provide references but does not influence or lead the panel. Trial evaluations are then carried out using the agreed vocabulary and refinements may be made until the panel is happy with the terms used. The panel leader evaluates the results from these trial sessions and once confident the results are reliable andrepeatable the actual assessment can take place. The assessment and trial sessions are completed in sensory booths following the basic principles of sensory evaluation. An unstructured 6-inch or 15cm line scale is used to measure the intensities of the agreed characteristics. Several replicates (3+) are required to validate the data. Data is then analysed using an analysis of variance. The results are often displayed visually on a spider web or star diagram. Other Methods Other methods which you may come across in literature but which will not be discussed in detail in this workshop are: Spectrum Method This is a descriptive analysis technique developed by Civille to cover any or all of appearance, aroma, flavour, texture or sound characteristics. Panellists use a standardised lexicon of terms to evaluate the products. This method requires extensive training of the panel to use standardised scales anchored with multiple reference points and panellists are trained to use the scale identically. Data is analysed in a similar way to QDA. Time Intensity This is used to track the changes in perception of a particular attribute of a product over time. For example you might rate the intensity of mint flavour perceived in chewing gum over a 3 minute period. This can be measured using pencil and paper or using one of the sensory software packages with time intensity facilities. Free Choice Profiling Unlike other descriptive testing techniques this method does not use an agreed vocabulary to assess the samples. Each panellist generates their own list of terms and scales, although they must use these consistently for all samples. The data from this type of assessment is then analysed using Generalised Procrustes analysis. The main advantage of this technique is the time saved on training a panel, however interpretation of individual attributes can be subjective as the terms are not defined as with other descriptive testing methods. |
4楼2007-02-01 13:10:09