Historical grains in modern gastronomy: A case study of artisan breads

IF 3.2 2区 农林科学 Q2 FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Madeleine Jönsson , Karin Gerhardt , Karin Wendin
{"title":"Historical grains in modern gastronomy: A case study of artisan breads","authors":"Madeleine Jönsson ,&nbsp;Karin Gerhardt ,&nbsp;Karin Wendin","doi":"10.1016/j.ijgfs.2025.101165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>While modern wheat has been bred for improved yields and baking properties, heritage cereals have recently gained increased recognition for their nutritional profiles and resilience towards climate change. This increased interest in heritage cereals calls for deepened understanding of their sensory attributes and consumer acceptance. Hence, this study evaluated bread based on two heritage wheats (Öland and Källunda) and a modern wheat mix by the means of quantitative descriptive sensory analysis (<em>n</em> = 8) and consumer liking (<em>n</em> = 47) using a 9-point hedonic scale. The sensory profiles of the three breads were similar, with differences mainly in the crust's brownness, roasted odor, chewiness, and hardness. These differences were not linked to whether the wheat was heritage or modern. Overall, consumers gave positive scores for the crumb and crust of all three bread types: Öland (6.38 and 6.87), Källunda (6.53 and 6.19), and Modern (6.26 and 6.49). Among all participants, 68.1 %–85.1 % gave positive scores for the breads. Öland wheat crust was better liked than crust from Källunda wheat, which related to less roasted odor, brown appearance, chewy and hard textures. The study's implications for gastronomy includes that heritage wheat can be used like modern varieties without impeding sensory quality, making them versatile for various foods and cuisines.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48594,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science","volume":"40 ","pages":"Article 101165"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878450X25000666","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

While modern wheat has been bred for improved yields and baking properties, heritage cereals have recently gained increased recognition for their nutritional profiles and resilience towards climate change. This increased interest in heritage cereals calls for deepened understanding of their sensory attributes and consumer acceptance. Hence, this study evaluated bread based on two heritage wheats (Öland and Källunda) and a modern wheat mix by the means of quantitative descriptive sensory analysis (n = 8) and consumer liking (n = 47) using a 9-point hedonic scale. The sensory profiles of the three breads were similar, with differences mainly in the crust's brownness, roasted odor, chewiness, and hardness. These differences were not linked to whether the wheat was heritage or modern. Overall, consumers gave positive scores for the crumb and crust of all three bread types: Öland (6.38 and 6.87), Källunda (6.53 and 6.19), and Modern (6.26 and 6.49). Among all participants, 68.1 %–85.1 % gave positive scores for the breads. Öland wheat crust was better liked than crust from Källunda wheat, which related to less roasted odor, brown appearance, chewy and hard textures. The study's implications for gastronomy includes that heritage wheat can be used like modern varieties without impeding sensory quality, making them versatile for various foods and cuisines.

Abstract Image

现代美食中的历史谷物:以手工面包为例
现代小麦是为了提高产量和烘焙性能而培育的,而传统谷物最近因其营养成分和对气候变化的适应能力而获得了越来越多的认可。对传统谷物兴趣的增加要求加深对其感官属性和消费者接受程度的理解。因此,本研究以两种传统小麦(Öland和Källunda)和一种现代小麦混合为基础,通过定量描述性感官分析(n = 8)和消费者喜好(n = 47),使用9分的享乐量表来评估面包。三种面包的感官特征相似,主要差异在于面包皮的棕色度、烘烤气味、嚼劲和硬度。这些差异与小麦是传统的还是现代的无关。总体而言,消费者对Öland(6.38和6.87)、Källunda(6.53和6.19)、Modern(6.26和6.49)三种面包的面包屑和面包皮都给予了正面评价。在所有参与者中,68.1% - 85.1%的人给面包打了积极的分数。Öland小麦皮比Källunda小麦皮更受欢迎,这与烘烤气味少,外观呈褐色,质地有嚼劲和硬度有关。这项研究对美食学的启示包括,传统小麦可以像现代品种一样使用,而不会影响感官质量,使它们可以用于各种食物和烹饪。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science
International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
10.50%
发文量
170
审稿时长
45 days
期刊介绍: International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science is a peer-reviewed journal that explicitly focuses on the interface of food science and gastronomy. Articles focusing only on food science will not be considered. This journal equally encourages both scientists and chefs to publish original scientific papers, review articles and original culinary works. We seek articles with clear evidence of this interaction. From a scientific perspective, this publication aims to become the home for research from the whole community of food science and gastronomy. IJGFS explores all aspects related to the growing field of the interaction of gastronomy and food science, in areas such as food chemistry, food technology and culinary techniques, food microbiology, genetics, sensory science, neuroscience, psychology, culinary concepts, culinary trends, and gastronomic experience (all the elements that contribute to the appreciation and enjoyment of the meal. Also relevant is research on science-based educational programs in gastronomy, anthropology, gastronomic history and food sociology. All these areas of knowledge are crucial to gastronomy, as they contribute to a better understanding of this broad term and its practical implications for science and society.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信