4.6 Article

Farm to Sensory Lab: Taste of Blueberry Fruit by Children and Adults

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE
卷 82, 期 7, 页码 1713-1719

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1750-3841.13760

关键词

adults; blueberry; children; fruit; hedonics; taste

资金

  1. Eunice Kennedy Shriver Natl. Inst. of Child Health and Human Development [R01HD37119]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The average American child eats fewer fruits than recommended. Although taste is the primary motivator for food intake among children, little research has systematically measured children's liking of fruit and determined whether their preferences differ from adults. We phenotyped 49 children and their mothers to determine: (1) their liking of the taste of 3 blueberry cultivars (Arcadia, Keecrisp, and Kestrel) from 2 harvests for which total soluble solids were determined using a handheld Brix refractometer; (2) the association between liking and blueberry sugar content; and (3) the most preferred level of fructose, one of the primary sugars in blueberry fruit. Multiple methods, identical for all participants, assessed which cultivar they liked best. Dietary intake, determined via 24-h dietary recall, revealed most children (73%) and adults (92%) did not meet dietary guidelines for fruit intake. We found that during the 1st harvest, Keecrisp was sweeter by 4 degrees Brix than either Arcadia or Kestrel and was the cultivar most preferred by both children and adults. For the 2nd harvest, mothers liked each of the cultivars equally, but children preferred Arcadia, which was 2 degrees Brix sweeter than the other 2 cultivars. Like other sugars, children's most preferred concentration of fructose was significantly higher than that of adults. In sum, children appear to be more sensitive to smaller variations in sweetness than are adults. Identifying drivers of fruit preference and assessing children's liking for whole fruits are important steps in developing strategies to increase fruit consumption among children.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据