A mouthfeel modifying essence

Abstract

The application discloses a mouthfeel modifying essence, characterized by comprising the following components: 40-50 parts of drinking pure water; 40-60 parts of alcohol; 8-12 parts of rebaudioside; 0.1-1 part of neomethyl hesperetin dihydrochalcone; 0-1 part of sweet orange oil; 0-1 part of maltol; and 0-1 part of butyl-tetradecanolide. The application can improve the adverse flavor generated by the sweetener by reasonably utilizing the synergistic effect between the fragrance raw materials.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention relates to the field of flavor manufacturing, in particular to a flavor for modifying taste. Background Art

[0002] As consumers around the world increasingly prioritize their health, reducing sugar intake has become a widespread concern. Sugar substitutes are becoming increasingly common across various food categories. However, their safety and flavor profile remain controversial. Reducing sugar levels often fails to satisfy consumer taste preferences, and sugar substitutes are currently unable to completely replace the taste of sugar.

[0003] my country has always been relatively rigorous in the use of sugar substitutes. The sweeteners approved for use in GB2760-2014 include: N-[N-(3,3-dimethylbutyl)]-La-asparto-L-phenylalanine 1-methyl ester, saccharin sodium, sodium cyclamate, calcium cyclamate, isomalt, asparagine methyl ester, asparagine methyl ester acesulfame, maltitol and maltitol liquid, sorbitol and sorbitol liquid, D-mannitol, xylitol, erythritol, stevioside, licorice and monopotassium and tripotassium oxalate, acesulfame potassium, glycyrrhizinamide, La-aspartyl-N-(2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-3-thimethylene sulfide)-D-alaninamide, lactitol, mogroside, sucralose, and thaumatin.

[0004] Artificial sweeteners have a high sweetness intensity and sensory properties similar to sucrose, but they can also have bitter and metallic notes in addition to their sweetness. The current sweetener market boasts a wide variety of products with varying properties and flavors. However, despite this vast array of products, no single sweetener can truly replace sucrose. Blending different sweeteners can also produce synergistic and potent effects, with significant variations in their time-to-intensity profiles.

[0005] The number of new sugar substitute products is growing rapidly in developed countries, and their proportion in the total sweetened product market is also significant. In countries like the United States and Japan, new sugar substitute products already account for over 50% of the market. In China, however, the sugar substitute market is just beginning to gain momentum, leaving broad room for growth.

[0006] Some international food companies, such as Nestlé and PepsiCo, have upgraded and refined their products to reduce sugar. However, domestic consumers are currently less enthusiastic about sugar substitutes, primarily due to their poor taste. Flavoring, a method for improving taste, can address this significant shortcoming. It's no surprise that, for both international and domestic food and beverage companies, upgrading product flavors is essential to the sugar reduction trend.

[0007] Different sweeteners used in different products have different flavor characteristics. For example, while saccharin and sucrose reach their peak value around 15 seconds, fructose peaks earlier, resulting in a brief burst of sweetness that lasts for a shorter time. This can also lead to a flavor that lacks lingering flavor.

[0008] The sweetness peak of flavors like neohesperidin dihydrochalcone, thaumatin, and glycyrrhizin is delayed, and the sweetness lasts longer than sucrose, resulting in a lingering aftertaste and a lack of freshness. Taste-modifying flavors utilize the different properties of flavoring ingredients to address the various issues associated with different sweeteners. Summary of the Invention

[0009] In order to overcome the above-mentioned defects of the prior art, the object of the present invention is to provide a taste-modifying flavor.

[0010] In order to achieve the purpose of the present invention, the technical solution adopted is:

[0011] A taste-modifying flavor, comprising:

[0012] Drink 40-50 parts of purified water;

[0013] 40-60 parts of alcohol;

[0014] 8-12 parts of transglucosyl steviol glycoside;

[0015] Neomethylhesperidin dihydrochalcone 0.1-1 part;

[0016] 0-1 part sweet orange oil;

[0017] Maltol 0-1 part;

[0018] 0-1 part of butyl-tetradecalactone.

[0019] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the amount of the purified drinking water is 45 parts.

[0020] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the alcohol is 41.9-43.5 parts.

[0021] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the amount of the transglucosyl steviol glycoside is 8-12 parts.

[0022] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the amount of the neomethyl hesperidin dihydrochalcone is 0.2-1 parts.

[0023] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the amount of the sweet orange oil is 0.01-0.5 parts.

[0024] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the amount of maltol is 0.02-0.5 parts.

[0025] In a preferred embodiment of the present invention, the amount of butyl-tetradecalactone is 0.01-0.4 parts.

[0026] The beneficial effects of the present invention are:

[0027] The flavor produced by the present invention's research is suitable for use in various beverages, dairy products, and other foods that incorporate sweeteners. Due to the inherent sugar-lowering effect of the food itself, the sweetener provides the product's sweetness, requiring little or no sugar. However, the characteristic flavor of the sweetener itself can lead to unpleasant flavors such as a thin mouthfeel, a long lingering sensation, and an unpleasant or off-flavored taste. Adding the flavor produced by the present invention's research significantly improves the sweetness of the product, bringing it closer to the pre-sugar-lowering flavor.

[0028] Using this as a model, you can gain a deep understanding of the sweetness and flavor profile of sweeteners. It can also serve as a good reference when preparing other types of flavor essences for sugar-lowering products. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

[0029] Figure 1 To analyze different transglucosyl steviol glycosides by liquid chromatography to obtain their total ion Figure 1 .

[0030] Figure 2 To analyze different transglucosyl steviol glycosides by liquid chromatography to obtain their total ion Figure 2 .

[0031] Figure 3 To analyze different transglucosyl steviol glycosides by liquid chromatography to obtain their total ion Figure 3 .

[0032] Figure 4 It refers to the sweetness release of common sweeteners when the concentration is the same as that of sucrose. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0033] In order to make the purpose, technical solutions and advantages of the present invention more clear, the present invention is further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. However, it should be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are only used to illustrate the present invention and are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention.

[0034] The principle of the present invention is:

[0035] Targeted analysis of transglucosyl steviol glycosides or neomethyl hesperidin dihydrochalcone by liquid chromatography (see Figure 1-3) are sweet, aromatic ingredients. Different sweetener ratios are formulated based on the varying amounts of these ingredients, either enhancing or suppressing the sweetness of the product. Furthermore, by leveraging the characteristics of different products and addressing varying taste requirements, effective modules are assembled to address specific issues.

[0036] Comparative analysis of the sweetness release of commonly used sweeteners at the same multiples as sucrose. Figure 4 shown.

[0037] By combining the above analysis and statistical results, the aroma characteristics are analyzed in combination with sensory analysis.

[0038] Select different sweeteners, combine with different food formulas, add developed taste-modifying flavors, and compare their sweetness and aroma performance.

[0039] Through multiple experiments, based on the aroma characteristics of different raw materials and their performance in the products, we concluded that the optimal ratio of taste-modifying flavors in various sweetener products is as follows:

[0040] Taste Modifying Flavor Example 1

[0041] 45 servings of pure drinking water;

[0042] Alcohol 43.47 parts;

[0043] 10 parts of transglucosyl steviol glycoside;

[0044] 1 part of neomethyl hesperidin dihydrochalcone;

[0045] 0.5 parts of sweet orange oil;

[0046] 0.02 parts of maltol;

[0047] 0.01 parts of butyl-tetradecalactone.

[0048] Taste Modifying Flavor Example 2

[0049] 45 servings of pure drinking water;

[0050] Alcohol 46.05 parts;

[0051] 8 parts of transglucosyl steviol glycoside;

[0052] 0.5 parts of neomethyl hesperidin dihydrochalcone;

[0053] 0.2 parts of sweet orange oil;

[0054] 0.05 parts of maltol;

[0055] 0.2 parts of butyl-tetradecalactone.

[0056] Taste Modifying Flavor Example 3

[0057] 45 servings of pure drinking water;

[0058] Alcohol 41.89 parts;

[0059] 12 parts of transglucosyl steviol glycoside;

[0060] 0.2 parts of neomethyl hesperidin dihydrochalcone;

[0061] 0.01 part of sweet orange oil;

[0062] 0.5 parts of maltol;

[0063] 0.4 parts of butyl-tetradecalactone.

[0064] Taste Modifying Flavor Comparative Example 4

[0065] 45 servings of pure drinking water;

[0066] Alcohol 46.97 parts;

[0067] 6 parts of transglucosyl steviol glycoside;

[0068] 2 parts of neomethyl hesperidin dihydrochalcone;

[0069] 0.01 part of sweet orange oil;

[0070] 0.01 part of maltol;

[0071] 0.01 parts of butyl-tetradecalactone.

[0072] The application examples and comparative examples of Example 1 are shown in Table 1 below:

[0073] Table 1

[0074]

[0075]

[0076] The application examples and comparative examples of Example 2 are shown in Table 2 below:

[0077] Table 2

[0078]

[0079] The application examples and comparative examples of Example 3 are shown in Table 3 below:

[0080] Table 3

[0081]

[0082] The above formula and all comparative examples were subjected to aroma testing and aroma evaluation by perfumers. According to GBT14454.2-2008 "Fragrance Aroma Evaluation Method", 8 experts were invited to conduct sensory evaluation and give scores.

[0083] Specifically, the sensory evaluation method is to select 8 evaluators who are sensitive to sweetness and conduct simulated evaluation in the early stage, which shows that these sensory evaluators can distinguish the differences between samples with different degrees of sweetness.

[0084] At the same time, a sucrose solution with the same theoretical value was provided to all sensory evaluators as a control sample. The sensory evaluators were asked to score the sample within a range of 1 to 5 points based on how close the aroma of the sample was to the sweetness of the control sample. The closer the sample was to the control sample, the higher the score; if the sample had an odor, a sharp aroma, or a bland aroma, the score would be lower.

[0085] Finally, the evaluation scores of the same embodiment or comparative example samples given by the eight evaluators were statistically analyzed and eliminated using the Q test method, and the evaluation scores were averaged. The following results were obtained (see Table 4).

[0086] Table 4

[0087] serial number Sensory evaluation value Recipe 1 3 Recipe 2 3.2 Recipe 3 4.5 Recipe 4 4 Recipe 5 3.8 Recipe 6 4.8 Recipe 7 2.5 Recipe 8 3 Recipe 9 3.7

[0088] Sensory evaluation was conducted on the three formulations, and the results are as follows:

[0089] Formula 3: Compared with the sweetness of Formula 1 in Example 1 without adding taste-modifying essence, the overall fullness of Formula 3 is significantly improved, and the retention feeling in the middle and back parts is significantly reduced, and the overall taste is cleaner. While Formula 2 in Comparative Example 4 is added, the sweetness is improved to a certain extent, but the retention feeling in the middle and back parts is not significantly reduced, and the after-sweetness is still serious.

[0090] Formula 6: Compared to Formula 4, the addition of the taste-modifying flavoring Example 2 resulted in a better overall taste, significantly improving the lingering and astringent sensations caused by the tea powder and sweetener. Formula 5, which also included Comparative Example 4, did not significantly improve the sweetness of the tea. Instead, the added aftersweetness intensified the tea's astringency and lingering sensation.

[0091] Formula 9: Adding the flavor-modifying essence of Example 3 to Formula 6 effectively enriched the overall sweetness and better masked the metallic and off-flavor notes in the back end. Adding the formula of Comparative Example 4 improved the overall sweetness somewhat, but had no significant effect on masking off-flavors.

[0092] According to the actual application results, it can be found that the reasonable use of the synergistic effect between the aromatic raw materials can effectively improve the unpleasant flavor produced by sweeteners.

[0093] At the same time, the product's flavor is closer to the good taste of added sucrose. This also better caters to consumers' concerns about health and demand for healthy foods, and will drive the development of new sugar substitute products in the future, focusing on safety, reliability, high sweetness, ease of production, low price, naturalness, good sweetness characteristics, stable properties, and low or zero calories.

[0094] The protection scope of the present invention includes but is not limited to the above embodiments. The protection scope of the present invention is based on the claims. Any replacement, deformation, and improvement of the technology that can be easily thought of by those skilled in the art fall within the protection scope of the present invention.

Claims

1. A taste-modifying flavor for sweeteners, characterized in that: The composition is as follows: 45 parts of drinking purified water; Alcohol 41.9-43.5 parts; 8-12 parts of transglucosyl steviol glycoside; Neomethylhesperidin dihydrochalcone 0.2-1 part; 0.01-0.5 parts of sweet orange oil; Maltol 0.02-0.5 parts; 0.01-0.4 parts of butyl-tetradecalactone.

Images