Acceptability fourth range vegetables with different disinfection protocols
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The preference for ready-to-prepare or ready-to-eat vegetables, so-called fourth range vegetables or minimally processed vegetables has been increasing in Chile as well as in other developing countries. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the acceptability of ‘fresh-cut products’, treated by different disinfection protocols, with consumers from Santiago Province in Chile. In order to achieve such objective, a study was designed considering two phases, first a qualitative phase aimed to explore concepts and perception of consumers, followed by a sensory analysis phase, aimed to assess consumer’s acceptability to samples treated with different sanitation protocols. For first phase, data were collected by using focus groups technique to explore consumer´s opinion about fresh cut produce and their perception to sanitization process to be used in elaboration of such products. On second phase, samples of carrots (Daucus carota L.), cabagge (Brassica oleracea L.) and letucce (Lactuca sativa L.) were processed with different sanitization protocols and then assessed by using a five points hedonic scale, with non-trained sensory panelist who assessed sensory attributes (color, odor, flavor and freshness) of samples. In relation to results, on the one hand, results from focus group suggest that there are differences in consumer´s perception to different sanitization protocols proposed, being perception chlorine based protocols worse compared to protocols based on peracetic acid and activated water. Sensory analysis suggests different degree acceptability for all vegetables studied with lowest acceptability the protocol based on water - sodium hypochlorite.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Those authors who have publications with this journal accept the following terms of the License Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0):
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
The journal is not responsible for the opinions and concepts expressed in the works, they are the sole responsibility of the authors. The Editor, with the assistance of the Editorial Committee, reserves the right to suggest or request advisable or necessary modifications. They are accepted to publish original scientific papers, research results of interest that have not been published or sent to another journal for the same purpose.
The mention of trademarks of equipment, instruments or specific materials is for identification purposes, and there is no promotional commitment in relation to them, neither by the authors nor by the publisher.
How to Cite
References
Artés, F. y Allende, A. (2005). Minimal fresh processing of vegetables, fruits and juices. In Emerging Technologies for Food Processing, 677–716. Elsevier Ltd. Disponible en: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780126767575500281(Consultado 7 Nov. 2012).
Barrett, D.M.; Beaulieuand, J.C. y Shewfelt. R. (2010). Color, flavor, texture, and nutritional quality of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables: desirable levels, instrumental and sensory measurement, and the effects of processing. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 50(5): 369–389.
Berthmann, J.; Jansen, A.; Haversmans, R.; Nederkoorn, C.; Kremers, S. y Roefs, A. (2015). Bits and pieces. Food texture influences food acceptance in young children. Appetite, (84):181-187.
Bruhn, C.M. (2007). Enhancing consumer acceptance of new processing technologies. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 8(4): 555–558.
Caradonna, T.; Marangi, M.; Del Chierico, F.; Ferrari, N.; Reddel, S.; Bracaglia, G.; Normanno, G.; Putignani, L. y Giangaspero, A. (2017). Detection and prevalence of protozoan parasites in ready-to-eat packaged salads on sale in Italy. Food Microbiology, (67): 67-75.
Carballo, D.; Moltó, J.; Berrada, H. y Ferrer, E. (2018). Presence of mycotoxins in ready-to-eat food and subsequent risk assesment. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 121: 558-565.
Castro, M.; Basualdo, M.; Gómez, C.; Díaz, E. y Ugnia, L. (2018). inocuidad en ensaladas de hortalizas mínimamente procesadas listas para su consumo. Ab Intus, 1(1): 37-42.
De Barcellos, M.D.; Kügler, J.O. ;Grunert, K.G.; Van Wezemael, L.; Pérez-Cueto, F.J.A.; Ueland,Ø y Verbeke, W. (2010). European consumers’ acceptance of beef processing technologies: A focus group study. Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 11(4):721–732.
Friese, S. (2012). ATLAS.ti 7 User Guide and Reference. Scientific Software Development GmbH. Disponible en: http://atlasti.com/wp- content/uploads/2014/05/atlasti_v7_manual_20 1312.pdf?q=/uploads/media/atlasti_v7_manual_201312.pdf (Consultado 7 Nov. 2012).
Grunert, K.G. (2005). Consumer behaviour with regard to food innovations: quality perception and decision making. En: Innovation in agri- food systems. W.M.F. Jongen and M.T.G. Meulenberg (eds.). Wageningen Academic Publishers, Wageningen, Netherlands, 57–85.
Hang, Q.; Qinggguo, H. y Yen-Con, H. (2018). Effectiveness of electrolyzed oxidizing water treatment in removing pesticide residues and its effect on produce quality. Food Chemistry, 239: 561-568.
IBM (2012). IBM SPSS Statistics.Available at http://www-1.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/(Consultado 15 October 2012).
Loan, H.N.; Jacxsens, L.; Kurshed, A.A. y Meulenaer, B.D. (2015). 3-Chlorotyrosine formation in ready-to-eat vegetables due to hypochlorite treatment and its dietary exposure and risk assessment. Food Research International, 186-193.
López, A. (2003). Manual para la preparación y venta de frutas y hortalizas. Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentación. Boletín de Servicios Agrícolas de la FAO 151.Balcarce, Argentina, 179 p.
Manzocco, L.; Alongi, M.; Lagazio, C.; Sillani, S. y Nicoli, M.C. (2017). Effect of temperature in domestic refrigerators on fresh-cut iceberg salad quality and waste. Food Research International, 102: 129-135.
Machado, I.; Meireles, A.; Fulgencio, R.; Merguhao, M. y Simoes, L. (2016). Disinfection with neutral electrolyzed oxidizing water to reduce microbial load and to prevent biofilm regrowth in the processing of fresh-cut vegetables. Food and Bioproducts Processing, (98): 333-340.
Mir, S.; Shah, M.; Mir, M.; Dar. B.; Greiner, R. y Roohinejad, S. (2018). Microbiological contamination of ready-to-eat vegetable salads in developing countries and potential solutions in the supply chain to control microbial pathogens. Food Control, 85: 235-244.
Pollard, J.; Kirk, S.F.L. y Cade, J.E. (2002). Factors affecting food choice in relation to fruit and vegetable intake: a review. Nutrition Research Reviews, 15(2): 373–387.
Sáez, T.L.; Aravena, N.A. y Díaz, R.C. (2018). Uso de harina de hojas de quínoa (Chenopodium quinoa W.) como ingrediente innovador, para la elaboración de alimentos de uso humano. Idesia (Chile), 36: 233-242. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718- 34292018005000602.
Saini, R.; Young Ko, E. y Keum, Y. (2017). Minimally processed ready-to-eat baby-leaf vegetables: Production, processing, storage, microbial safety, and nutritional potential. Food Reviews International, 33 (6): 644-663.
Schnettler, B.; MIranda, H.; Lobos, G.; Orellana, L.; Sepúlveda, J.; Denegri, M.; Etchebarne, S.; Mora, M. y Grunert, K.G. (2015). Appetite, (89): 203-214.
Shen, C.; Norris, P.; Williams, O.; Hagan, S. y Ka Wang, L. (2016). Generation of chlorine by- products in simulated wash water. Food Chemistry, (190): 97-102.
Sillani, S. y Nassivera, F. (2015). Consumer behavior in choice of minimally processed vegetables and implications for marketing strategies. Trends in food science and technology, 46(2-B): 339-345.
Sobral, M.; Nunes, C.; Maia, A.; Ferreira, P. y Coimbra, M. (2017). Conditions for producing long shelf life fruit salads processed using mild pasteurization. LWT - Food Science and Technology, 85 (Part B): 316-323.
Toivonen, P.M.A. y Brummell, D.A. (2008). Biochemical bases of appearance and texture changes in fresh-cut fruit and vegetables. Postharvest Biology and Tech., 48(1):1–14.
Verbeke, W., Frewer, L.; Scholderer, J. y De Brabander, H. (2007). Why consumers behave as they do with respect to food safety and risk information. Analytica Chimica Acta, 586(1-2): 2–7.
Vranic, M.L.; Denoya, G. y Sanow, C. (2016). Por qué agregarles valor a las frutas mediante el desarrollo de productos frutihortícolas cuarta Gama. Instituto Tecnología de Alimentos (ITA), CIA, INTA. B. Aires, Argentina. Disponible en: http://inta.gob.ar/sites/default/files/script-tmp-29-_porqu_agregarlevalor_a_las_frutas_mediante_el_d.pdf (Consulta 24 octubre 2016).