Beyond the Traditional Mountain Emmental Cheese in “Ţara Dornelor”, Romania: Consumer and Producer Profiles, and Product Sensory Characteristics
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Evaluation of Consumer Preferences
2.2. Socio-Demographic Characteristics
2.3. Investigation of the Producer Profile
2.4. Sensory Characteristics of Dorna Swiss Cheese
2.5. Statistical Analysis of Data
3. Results
3.1. Consumer Preferences
3.2. Clustering of Consumers Based on Consumption Frequency
3.3. The Producer Profile
3.4. Dorna Swiss Cheese Sensory Characteristics
4. Discussion
4.1. The Consumer Profile
4.2. The Producer Profile
4.3. Dorna Swiss Cheese Sensory Characteristics
4.4. Limitations of This Study
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Codex Stan 269-1967; Codex Alimentarius Codex Standard for Emmental. 2008. Available online: https://www.fao.org/input/download/standards/194/CXS_269e.pdf (accessed on 10 April 2024).
- Roy Choudhury, N. Emmental Cheese Market Outlook. 2023. Available online: https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/organic-cheese-market (accessed on 10 April 2024).
- Torrico, D.D.; Fuentes, S.; Gonzalez Viejo, C.; Ashman, H.; Dunshea, F.R. Cross-cultural effects of food product familiarity on sensory acceptability and non-invasive physiological responses of consumers. Food Res. Int. 2019, 115, 439–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Go, J.E.; Kim, M.R.; Chung, S.J. Acquired (dis)liking of natural cheese in different repeated exposure environment. Food Res. Int. 2017, 99, 403–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Slade, P.; Michler, J.D.; Josephson, A. Foreign geographical indications, consumer preferences, and the domestic market for cheese. Appl. Econ. Perspect. Policy 2019, 41, 370–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Caspia, E.L.; Coggins, P.C.; Schilling, M.W.; Yoon, Y. The Relationship Between Consumer Acceptability and Descriptive Sensory Attributes in Cheddar Cheese. J. Sens. Stud. 2005, 21, 112–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Necula, D.; Tamas-Krumpe, O.; Feneșan, D.; Ungureanu-Iuga, M.; Ognean, L. Analysis of the milk raw materials used in the production of Dorna Swiss cheese in different seasons. Ukr. Food J. 2023, 12, 265–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kilcawley, K.N.; Faulkner, H.; O’Callaghan, T.F.; McAuliffe, S.; Hennessy, D.; Stanton, C.; O’Sullivan, M.G.; Kerry, J.P. Impact of different forage types on the volatile and sensory properties of bovine milk. In Proceedings of the Sustainable Meat and Milk Production from Grasslands, Cork, Ireland, 17–21 June 2018; EGF: Cork, Ireland, 2018; Volume 23, pp. 751–753. [Google Scholar]
- O’Callaghan, T.F.; Mannion, D.T.; Hennessy, D.; McAuliffe, S.; O’Sullivan, M.G.; Leeuwendaal, N.; Beresford, T.P.; Dillon, P.; Kilcawley, K.N.; Sheehan, J.J.; et al. Effect of pasture versus indoor feeding systems on quality characteristics, nutritional composition, and sensory and volatile properties of full-fat Cheddar cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2017, 100, 6053–6073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khattab, A.R.; Guirguis, H.A.; Tawfik, S.M.; Farag, M.A. Cheese ripening: A review on modern technologies towards flavor enhancement, process acceleration and improved quality assessment. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 88, 343–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giaccone, D.; Revello-Chion, A.; Galassi, L.; Bianchi, P.; Battelli, G.; Coppa, M.; Tabacco, E.; Borreani, G. Effect of milk thermisation and farming system on cheese sensory profile and fatty acid composition. Int. Dairy J. 2016, 59, 10–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braghieri, A.; Pacelli, C.; Riviezzi, A.M.; Di Cairano, M.; Napolitano, F. Promoting the direct sale of pasta filata cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2022, 105, 7334–7343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williams, V.; Flannery, O.; Patel, A. Eco-score labels on meat products: Consumer perceptions and attitudes towards sustainable choices. Food Qual. Prefer. 2023, 111, 104973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carlos, A.E.; Humberto, G.M.; Carlos, A.E.; Humberto, G.M.; Espinoza-ortega, A.; Martínez-garcía, C.G.; Thomé-ortiz, H.; Vizcarra-bordi, I. Motives for food choice of consumers in Central México. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 2744–2760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASRO SR 6345:1995; Milk and Dairy Products. Sensory Analysis Standard. Emerald Publishing: Bingley, UK, 1995.
- Menozzi, D.; Yeh, C.H.; Cozzi, E.; Arfini, F. Consumer Preferences for Cheese Products with Quality Labels: The Case of Parmigiano Reggiano and Comté. Animals 2022, 12, 1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Castada, H.Z.; Hanas, K.; Barringer, S.A. Swiss cheese flavor variability based on correlations of volatile flavor compounds, descriptive sensory attributes, and consumer preference. Foods 2019, 8, 78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liggett, R.E.; Drake, M.A.; Delwiche, J.F. Impact of flavor attributes on consumer liking of Swiss cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 466–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Drake, S.L.; Gerard, P.D.; Drake, M.A. Consumer preferences for mild cheddar cheese flavors. J. Food Sci. 2008, 73, 449–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ojeda, M.; Etaio, I.; Valentin, D.; Dacremont, C.; Zannoni, M.; Tupasela, T.; Lilleberg, L.; Pérez-Elortondo, F.J. Effect of consumers’ origin on perceived sensory quality, liking and liking drivers: A cross-cultural study on European cheeses. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 87, 104047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jacquot, L.; Berthaud, L.; Sghaïr, A.; Diep, C.; Brand, G. The influence of “tastiness” and “healthiness” labels in cheese flavor perception. Chemosens. Percept. 2013, 6, 53–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kusz, B.; Kilar, J. Consumers’ preferences for places to purchase local dairy products. Agrolife Sci. J. 2020, 9, 198–204. [Google Scholar]
- Bonadonna, A.; Peira, G.; Giachino, C.; Molinaro, L. Traditional cheese production and an EU labeling scheme: The Alpine cheese producers’ opinion. Agriculture 2017, 7, 65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonadonna, A.; Duglio, S.; Bollani, L.; Peira, G. Mountain Food Products: A Cluster Analysis Based on Young Consumers’ Perceptions. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bonadonna, A.; Duglio, S. A Mountain Niche Production: The Case of Bettelmatt Cheese in the Antigorio and Formazza Valleys (Piedmont–Italy). Qual. Success 2016, 17, 80. [Google Scholar]
- Boatto, V.; Rossetto, L.; Bordignon, P.; Arboretti, R.; Salmaso, L. Cheese perception in the North American market: Empirical evidence for domestic vs imported Parmesan. Br. Food J. 2016, 118, 1747–1768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunert, K.G. Food quality and safety: Consumer perception and demand. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 2005, 32, 369–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Topcu, Y.; Dağdemir, V. Turkish Consumer Purchasing Decisions Regarding PGI-labelled Erzurum Civil Cheese. Alınteri Zirai Bilim. Derg. 2017, 32, 69–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Linder, M.O.; Sidali, K.L.; Busch, G. Mountain beef and wine: Italian consumers’ definitions and opinions on the mountain labelling-scheme. Econ. Agro-Aliment. Food Econ. 2021, 23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- van der Maesen, L.J.G. The wealth of forage plant species. Wagening. Agric. Univ. Pap. 1996, 96, 83–92. [Google Scholar]
- Bisig, W.; Fröhlich-Wyder, M.T.; Jakob, E.; Wechsler, D. Comparison between Emmentaler PDO and generic emmental cheese production in Europe. Aust. J. Dairy Technol. 2010, 65, 206–213. [Google Scholar]
- D’amico, D.J. Microbiological quality and safety issues in cheesemaking. In Cheese and Microbes; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2014; pp. 251–309. [Google Scholar]
- Elek, S. Evaluating the benefits and risks of organic raw milk cheese. In Challenges in the Production of Organic Cheeses Made from Raw Milk; University of Hohenheim: Stuttgart, Germany; Aarhus University: Aarhus, Denmark, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Monteiro, D.; Lucas, M. Conjoint measurement of preferences for traditional cheeses in Lisbon. Br. Food J. 2001, 103, 414–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Daly, D.F.M.; McSweeney, P.L.H.; Sheehan, J.J. Split defect and secondary fermentation in Swiss-type cheeses—A review. Dairy Sci. Technol. 2010, 90, 3–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez, L.M.; Ritvanen, T.; Joutsjoki, V.; Rekonen, J.; Alatossava, T. The role of copper in the manufacture of Finnish Emmental cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2011, 94, 4831–4842. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Necula, D.; Ungureanu-Iuga, M.; Dan, S.D.; Tamas-Krumpe, O.; Ognean, L. Analysis of the mineral profile of milk and Swiss cheese from Ţara Dornelor in relation to seasonal and technological factors. Stud. UBB Chem. 2023, 68, 35–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Faulkner, H.; O’Callaghan, T.F.; McAuliffe, S.; Hennessy, D.; Stanton, C.; O’Sullivan, M.G.; Kerry, J.P.; Kilcawley, K.N. Effect of different forage types on the volatile and sensory properties of bovine milk. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 1034–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Faccia, M.; Maggiolino, A.; Natrella, G.; Zizzadoro, C.; Mazzone, A.; Poulopoulou, I.; Bragaglio, A.; De Palo, P. Ingested versus inhaled limonene in sheep: A pilot study to explore potential different transfer to the mammary gland and effects on milk and Caciotta cheese aroma. J. Dairy Sci. 2022, 105, 8143–8157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moran, L.; Aldezabal, A.; Aldai, N.; Barron, L.J.R. Terpenoid traceability of commercial sheep cheeses produced in mountain and valley farms: From pasture to mature cheeses. Food Res. Int. 2019, 126, 108669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zuliani, A.; Contiero, B.; Schneider, M.K.; Arsenos, G.; Bernués, A.; Dovc, P.; Gauly, M.; Holand, Ø.; Martin, B.; Morgan-Davies, C.; et al. Topics and trends in Mountain Livestock Farming research: A text mining approach. Animal 2021, 15, 100058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fröhlich-Wyder, M.T.; Bachmann, H.P. Cheeses with propionic acid fermentation. In Cheese: Chemistry, Physics and Microbiology; Fox, P.F., McSweeney, P.L.H., Cogan, T.M., Guinee, G.T.P., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2004; Volume 2, ISBN 0122636538. [Google Scholar]
- White, S.R.; Broadbent, J.R.; Oberg, C.J.; McMahon, D.J. Effect of Lactobacillus helveticus and Propionibacterium freudenrichii ssp. shermanii combinations on propensity for split defect in Swiss cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 2003, 86, 719–727. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Characteristic | Frequency | Percentage |
---|---|---|
Gender | ||
Male | 162 | 40 |
Female | 106 | 60 |
Age (years) | ||
<18 | 2 | 1 |
18–40 | 75 | 28 |
41–60 | 159 | 59 |
>60 | 32 | 12 |
Revenue (EUR) | ||
<360 | 19 | 7 |
360–600 | 59 | 22 |
600–1000 | 127 | 47 |
>1000 | 63 | 24 |
Education | ||
Primary/general studies | 7 | 3 |
High school diploma | 63 | 23 |
University degree | 198 | 74 |
Family members number | ||
1 | 17 | 6 |
2 | 63 | 24 |
3–5 | 168 | 63 |
>5 | 20 | 7 |
Swiss cheese consumer | ||
Yes | 254 | 95 |
No | 14 | 5 |
Attribute | Frequency | Percent |
Quantity (g) | ||
100–100 | 40 | 15.7 |
200–500 | 136 | 53.5 |
500–1000 | 69 | 27.2 |
>1000 | 9 | 3.5 |
Price willing to pay (EUR/kg) | ||
<5 | 33 | 13.0 |
5–15 | 97 | 38.2 |
15–20 | 87 | 34.3 |
20–25 | 31 | 12.2 |
>25 | 6 | 2.4 |
Purchase place | ||
agro-food market | 20 | 7.9 |
supermarket | 72 | 28.3 |
local store | 3 | 1.2 |
dairy store | 130 | 51.2 |
particular houses | 28 | 11.0 |
online | 1 | 0.4 |
Factor * | Mean | SE | SD |
---|---|---|---|
Price | 3.04 | 0.07 | 1.06 |
Taste and flavor | 4.41 | 0.05 | 0.75 |
Appearance and texture | 4.23 | 0.05 | 0.79 |
Producer | 3.98 | 0.07 | 1.06 |
Product history | 3.67 | 0.07 | 1.15 |
Health | 4.09 | 0.06 | 0.99 |
Mood | 3.10 | 0.08 | 1.22 |
Ingredients | 4.43 | 0.06 | 0.90 |
Popularity/advertising | 3.30 | 0.08 | 1.20 |
Convenience | 3.30 | 0.07 | 1.15 |
Nutritional value | 3.88 | 0.07 | 1.09 |
Group | Low | Medium | High | ANOVA | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Attribute | Frequency | Percent | Frequency | Percent | Frequency | Percent | F | p |
Quantity (g) | 0.11 | 0.9 | ||||||
100–200 | 19 | 17.9 | 9 | 12.7 | 12 | 15.6 | ||
200–500 | 54 | 50.9 | 40 | 56.3 | 42 | 54.5 | ||
500–1000 | 30 | 28.3 | 21 | 29.6 | 18 | 23.4 | ||
>1000 | 3 | 2.8 | 1 | 1.4 | 5 | 6.5 | ||
Price willing to pay (EUR/kg) | 1.36 | 0.26 | ||||||
<5 | 14 | 13.2 | 8 | 11.3 | 11 | 14.3 | ||
5–15 | 46 | 43.4 | 25 | 35.2 | 26 | 33.8 | ||
15–20 | 35 | 33.0 | 28 | 39.4 | 24 | 31.2 | ||
20–25 | 10 | 9.4 | 9 | 12.7 | 12 | 15.6 | ||
>25 | 1 | 0.9 | 1 | 1.4 | 4 | 5.2 | ||
Purchase place | 7.56 | <0.01 | ||||||
agro-food market | 13 | 12.3 | 2 | 2.8 | 5 | 6.5 | ||
supermarket | 38 | 35.8 | 14 | 19.7 | 20 | 26.0 | ||
local store | 1 | 0.9 | 2 | 2.8 | 40 | 51.9 | ||
dairy store | 48 | 45.3 | 42 | 59.2 | 12 | 15.6 | ||
particular houses | 5 | 4.7 | 11 | 15.5 | 5 | 6.5 | ||
online | 1 | 0.9 | 2 | 2.8 | 20 | 26.0 |
Group | Low | Medium | High | F-Value | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Factor † | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | |
Price | 3.27 a | 0.97 | 2.93 ab | 0.95 | 2.81 b | 1.20 | 5.02 * |
Taste and flavor | 4.38 a | 0.76 | 4.46 a | 0.63 | 4.40 a | 0.83 | 0.29 |
Appearance and texture | 4.26 a | 0.69 | 4.14 a | 0.90 | 4.26 a | 0.80 | 0.61 |
Producer | 3.96 a | 1.03 | 4.07 a | 0.98 | 3.91 a | 1.18 | 0.44 |
Product history | 3.49 a | 1.09 | 3.77 a | 1.11 | 3.81 a | 1.24 | 2.15 |
Health | 3.88 b | 1.06 | 4.14 ab | 0.88 | 4.35 a | 0.93 | 5.39 * |
Mood | 3.18 a | 1.08 | 3.07 a | 1.25 | 3.01 a | 1.37 | 0.44 |
Ingredients | 4.44 a | 0.88 | 4.48 a | 0.84 | 4.35 a | 0.98 | 0.41 |
Popularity/advertising | 3.29 a | 1.16 | 3.24 a | 1.14 | 3.35 a | 1.31 | 0.16 |
Convenience | 3.21 a | 1.11 | 3.42 a | 1.18 | 3.31 a | 1.19 | 0.74 |
Nutritional value | 3.59 b | 1.16 | 4.01 a | 1.02 | 4.14 a | 0.98 | 6.64 * |
Variable | Null Hypothesis | Significance | Decision |
---|---|---|---|
Consumption | |||
Quantity | The distribution is the same across low-, medium- and high-consumption categories | 0.927 | Retain the null hypothesis |
Price willing to pay | 0.312 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Purchase place | 0.001 | Reject the null hypothesis | |
Factors affecting purchase decision | |||
Price | The distribution is the same across low-, medium- and high-consumption categories | 0.010 | Reject the null hypothesis |
Taste and flavor | 0.825 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Appearance and texture | 0.767 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Producer | 0.797 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Product history | 0.050 | Reject the null hypothesis | |
Health | 0.003 | Reject the null hypothesis | |
Mood | 0.627 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Ingredients | 0.706 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Popularity/advertising | 0.826 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Convenience | 0.452 | Retain the null hypothesis | |
Nutritional value | 0.001 | Reject the null hypothesis |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Necula, D.; Ungureanu-Iuga, M.; Ognean, L. Beyond the Traditional Mountain Emmental Cheese in “Ţara Dornelor”, Romania: Consumer and Producer Profiles, and Product Sensory Characteristics. Agriculture 2024, 14, 621. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14040621
Necula D, Ungureanu-Iuga M, Ognean L. Beyond the Traditional Mountain Emmental Cheese in “Ţara Dornelor”, Romania: Consumer and Producer Profiles, and Product Sensory Characteristics. Agriculture. 2024; 14(4):621. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14040621
Chicago/Turabian StyleNecula, Doru, Mădălina Ungureanu-Iuga, and Laurenț Ognean. 2024. "Beyond the Traditional Mountain Emmental Cheese in “Ţara Dornelor”, Romania: Consumer and Producer Profiles, and Product Sensory Characteristics" Agriculture 14, no. 4: 621. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture14040621