Next Article in Journal
The Effect of Different Processing Methods on Metabolite Profiles by Comparative Metabolomics in Kernels and Sprouted Seeds of Foxtail Millet
Previous Article in Journal
Ultrasound-Assisted Extraction Optimization and Cultivar Screening for Polyphenol Recovery from Thinned Peach Fruit: A Comprehensive Evaluation of 179 Cultivars
Previous Article in Special Issue
From Information to Satisfaction: Unravelling the Impact of Sustainability Label on Fish Liking Experiences
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 14
Issue 11
10.3390/foods14111898
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Chefs’ Attitudes and Sensory Analysis of Invasive Crayfish (Faxonius limosus) Meat: Psychological and Culinary Aspects

by
Maja Paunić
1,*,
Jasmina Lazarević
2,
Dubravka Škrobot
2,
Ivana Čabarkapa
2,
Stefan Šmugović
1,
Milica Vidosavljević
2 and
Miloš Županjac
2
1
Department of Geography, Tourism and Hotel Management, Faculty of Sciences, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
2
Institute of Food Technology, University of Novi Sad, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2025, 14(11), 1898; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111898
Submission received: 17 April 2025 / Revised: 15 May 2025 / Accepted: 24 May 2025 / Published: 27 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Factors Affecting the Choice and Consumption Behavior Towards Aquatic Products)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Considering the growing significance of sustainable gastronomy and the need for controlling the populations of invasive species, the aim of this study is to explore chefs’ attitudes toward the sensory and psychological aspects of using invasive crayfish meat (Faxonius limosus) from the Danube. The study was conducted using a survey questionnaire with a sample of 210 respondents, employing a consumption restriction scale based on various psychological aversions to non-traditional food sources. Binary logistic regression indicated a significant impact of psychological aversion on the likelihood of accepting this raw material. Thirty chefs participated in the sensory evaluation of the crayfish meat. The results revealed that the meat has potential for broad application in the preparation of gastronomic products.

1. Introduction

The spiny-cheek crayfish Faxonius limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) is a native species to the eastern part of North America. This species, introduced to Europe over a century ago, is now present in over 20 countries (Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain) and is considered as one of the most significant invasive aquatic species in European inland waters. Due to its invasive nature, it is classified as a species of general concern according to EU regulations on invasive alien species (IAS) [1,2,3,4,5].
The population of F. limosus is expanding along the Danube River basin [6,7]. It was first recorded in Serbia in 2002 near Apatin, and its presence has since been documented along the entire course of the Danube River and its tributaries [8]. The spread rate varies from 13 to 24.4 km per year, depending on ecological conditions [9]. Given its high expansion rate, it is assumed that the current invasive range of this species in Serbia is broader than previously known. The lack of focus for the management and cooperation further complicates its control of invasive alien species (IAS) [5,10].
Owing to its strong adaptability to various environmental conditions, it is capable of inhabiting a range of water bodies, including rivers, ponds, lakes, tributaries, and canals, with differing water qualities [11]. This omnivorous species feeds on aquatic plants, fish eggs, and invertebrates, posing a significant threat to biodiversity. It disrupts native ecosystems by predating on local species, consuming plant matter that forms critical habitats, and outcompeting native species for food and shelter.
The spiny-cheek crayfish shows several characteristics, such as strong adaptability, rapid maturation, short lifespan, high fecundity, and second mating period, which facilitate its fast population growth, giving it high invasive potential. Additionally, the negative impact of the spiny-cheek crayfish F. limosus on the native crayfish populations in Europe is expressed in competition for habitats, in which the invader is more adaptive, it is a carrier of crayfish plague, it is lethal for the European native crayfish, it can destabilize riverbanks, and it can modify other habitats, due to its burrowing behavior causing substantial economic damage [12]. Generally, the economic damage caused by invasive species could cost Europe billions of Euros per year and damage costs are continuing to rise [13].
The meat of this crayfish is a high-quality food product that is rich in protein (18–20%) and low in fat (0.14–1.69%), and it has a significant content of omega-3 fatty acids [10,14,15]. It is characterized by easy digestibility and low energy value (76 kcal) [14,15]. It is also a good source of minerals [16,17]. Despite its nutritional value, research on its sensory characteristics and applications in diet is limited [18]. Studies in the U.S. suggest that ecosystem preservation strategies could encourage its use as food [19].
However, consumers often reject such products due to cultural norms, aversion to invasive species, and psychological barriers [20,21,22]. Taste aversion—avoidance of certain tastes or types of food—further diminishes the likelihood of accepting invasive crayfish as a food source [23,24,25,26,27].
Aversion to new food products is associated with both personal and social factors. Personal factors include disgust toward new foods [28,29,30], while social factors are linked to cultural norms and circumstances [28,31,32]. Although there are recommendations to introduce invasive crayfish into the diet [19,33,34,35], the role of psychological factors in food acceptance and the potential for gastronomic preparation remains underexplored.
Studies in the EU mainly focus on algae and jellyfish, while invasive crayfish species remain neglected [36]. Research shows that food neophobia, unfamiliarity with the product, and a lack of awareness of sensory characteristics are major barriers to the acceptance of new food options. The majority of studies deal with insect consumption [25,27,37,38,39,40], while research on the sensory aspects of new food products is scarce [41].
Considering the aforementioned challenges and limitations, this research aims to investigate chefs’ attitudes toward the sensory and psychological aspects of using invasive river crayfish meat. After identifying these attitudes, a sensory evaluation of Faxonius limosus meat was conducted to determine its meat profile, acceptability, and recommendations for its use in gastronomic products.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Area

The research area covers the territory of the Republic of Serbia, through which the Danube River flows over a distance of 588 km, making it the river with the longest course through a single country. Of this length, about 390 km flows through the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina [42]. For this reason, the area of Vojvodina was selected as the research site for this study (Figure 1). The crayfish specimens subject to sensory evaluation were captured near the area of Stari Slankamen. The samples were microbiologically safe, following the criteria defined by the European Commission Regulation No. 2073/2005 [43] on microbiological criteria for food and its amendments under Regulation (EC) No. 1441/2007 [44]. Microbiological safety of the evaluated samples was confirmed in a previous study by Lazarević et al. [10], titled “Invasive Crayfish Faxonius limosus: Meat Safety, Nutritional Quality and Sensory Profile”.
Catering professionals involved in the survey were employed in catering establishments in the territory of Vojvodina, where they influence regional food preferences [45,46].
Foods 14 01898 g001
Figure 1. Research location (adapted and taken from Paunić et al.) [47].
Figure 1. Research location (adapted and taken from Paunić et al.) [47].
Foods 14 01898 g001

2.2. Research Design

Research exploring the attitudes of professional chefs toward the invasive river crayfish Faxonius limosus, as well as the sensory characteristics of this resource, is scarce and limited. Therefore, this study was designed and conducted in two phases: a survey and a sensory evaluation.
The questionnaire used in the research was developed in three stages: literature review, pilot testing, and final implementation.
It consists of three sections:
  • Sociodemographic data, including gender, age, and education level. These were collected using closed-ended questions with predefined answer options.
  • Psychological and sensory attitudes—Questions related to psychological and sensory perceptions were based on the Insect Phobia Scale (IPS), originally developed to measure fear and aversion to insects [25,27,48,49,50]. Its application was extended to cover fear and aversion toward unusual or unfamiliar food sources [51]. The original scale was adapted to suit the research topic and cultural context, in consultation with experts in gastronomy and hospitality. Responses were measured on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree).
  • Behavioral intentions—This section assessed participants’ willingness to use invasive crayfish meat in gastronomic products, based on the framework developed by Castro and Chambers [25]. The expressed attitudes allowed for an evaluation of the participants’ readiness to incorporate invasive crayfish meat into culinary practices.
Pilot testing was conducted in hospitality establishments across Vojvodina. The aim was to identify and eliminate potential ambiguities in question formulation. Participants were invited to comment on the clarity of the statements and mark any that were confusing or vague. Based on the feedback, minor adjustments were made to the wording and order of the items. The results indicated that the instrument was clear and comprehensible. In line with recommendations from the literature, the pilot sample size exceeded 10% of the planned main sample [52], involving 30 participants.
The study involved head chefs from various establishments. One representative from each establishment completed the survey. Participants were randomly selected based on probability sampling. The questionnaires were distributed electronically, based on the contact list of the National Association of Chefs of Serbia. Data collection occurred from 15 February to 15 April 2024. A total of 210 valid questionnaires were collected. All participants were first informed about the nature and the scope of the study, after which they gave their consent to participate voluntarily.
The second phase of the research was sensory profiling. Sensory analysis was carried out by a sensory panel consisting of thirty professional culinary chefs (7 females and 23 males, aged between 30 and 55 years). They had previously participated in the survey and were selected based on their expertise (at least three years of professional experience as chefs), knowledge, motivation, and availability. The chefs involved in the study were classified as semi-trained panelists, given their culinary expertise and prior experience in identifying, describing, and differentiating sensory attributes gained through formal university coursework. Culinary professionals cannot be considered sensory experts, but rather traditionally and experientially skilled in recognizing the sensory preferences and inclinations of their restaurant guests with respect to specific types of food [53].
Before the testing session, the panelists agreed on 32 descriptors related to crayfish meat that were used for sensory profiling. These are presented in Table 1.
The final set of descriptors was created through a consensus process, led by an experienced panel leader. This process included defining each descriptor and establishing assessment techniques. After the profiling session, panelists were asked to score the overall acceptability of each sample using a 9-point scale labeled on the left with 1 = “dislike very much” and on the right with 9 = “like very much.”
Finally, in the third phase of the Hedonic Analysis, panelists were asked to suggest how each sample could be used in the preparation of different types of meals and which type of wine would best complement the meal. The responses were grouped into categories: salad, pasta, risotto, appetizer, soup, main course, white wine, and red wine.
The samples, consisting of two pieces of crayfish meat each, were served individually in odorless plastic containers. Each sample was presented within 5 min of preparation and assigned a unique three-digit random code. A cup of water was made available to participants for palate cleansing. The evaluation occurred in individual sensory booths, each equipped with appropriate lighting, ventilation, and controlled temperatures. Participants were given written information about the study and signed an informed-consent form prior to their involvement.
The sensory evaluation of crayfish meat was conducted at the Accredited Sensory Laboratory of the Institute of Food Technology, University of Novi Sad, which was designed in compliance with international standards for sensory evaluation test rooms [54].
Descriptive statistics were used to present the basic characteristics of the sample (gender, age, and education level), including mean (M), standard deviation (SD), and frequencies expressed as percentages. This approach allows for a general overview of the sample and prepares data for further analysis [55]. Scale reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha, with values above 0.7 considered acceptable and above 0.8 considered very good [56]. To compare attitudes between genders, an independent t-test was conducted, while one-way ANOVA was used to examine differences across age and education groups [57,58]. Post hoc tests were performed following significant ANOVA results [55]. Binary logistic regression was applied to predict positive or negative attitudes toward the consumption of invasive crayfish, identifying factors that significantly influence response likelihood [59].
Data processing was performed using the SPSS software program (version 24.0 for Windows). Data entry into the created matrix was systematic, followed by validity testing. Missing-data analysis was conducted within the missing-value analysis module. To assess the randomness of missing-data distribution, Little’s test was applied, which is the standard method for evaluating whether data are missing randomly or systematically [60]. This test is crucial to ensure that missing data do not affect the validity of the research results.
In sensory evaluation, results represent a mean value ± standard deviation of three individual measurements. The data obtained in the sensory analysis were submitted to principal component analysis (PCA), and the obtained sensory map was used to analyze the sensory profile and acceptability of crayfish. To explore the relationship between selected meal types and crayfish samples, correspondence analysis (CA) was conducted on the frequency table of qualitative data. One-way ANOVA was used to determine statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) across all variables, followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison test, using the XLSTAT 2018.7 software package (Addinsoft) for the statistical analysis.

2.3. Ethical Statement

Ethical approval was obtained from two relevant ethics committees: the Ethics Committee for the Protection and Welfare of Experimental Animals at the University of Novi Sad, Serbia (no. 04–81/94, EK: I–2020–06–1); and the Ethics Committee of the Scientific Institute of Food Technology in Novi Sad, University of Novi Sad (no. 175/I/22-3). According to national regulations (Annex 4 of the “Official Gazette of RS”, No. 39/10), ethical approval is not required for research involving invertebrate animals, as was formally stated in the ethical documentation.
The survey research was conducted anonymously and did not involve the collection of any personal data from the respondents. As such, this kind of research does not require special Ethical Committee approval in Serbia, where the research was conducted, as it is in line with the national Law on Personal Data Protection (The Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, number 97/08; hereinafter, the Law). The national Law on Personal Data Protection is aligned with the current standards of the relevant European documents and, in particular, with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The Law applies to the processing of personal data in the context of the activities of a controller or a processor in the Republic of Serbia, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the Republic of Serbia or not.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Presentation of Survey Results

A total of 210 respondents participated in the study, of which 60% were male and 40% were female. The average age was 36 years (SD = 10). The majority of respondents had completed secondary education (50%), followed by higher education (40%), while the smallest group had completed primary education (10%). The age structure of the respondents is consistent with previous related studies. While most of the previous research focused on the general consumer population [61,62,63,64,65,66], this study, based on recommendations from authors who have dealt with the attitudes of vegetarians, focused on a specific target group—chefs in the hospitality industry [61]. Their perception is particularly important because they actively shape food trends, influence consumer attitudes, and decide whether to accept new products as raw materials for gastronomic offerings [67,68].
The perception of chefs is of particular importance because they not only directly influence consumers’ culinary choices but also play an active role in creating and steering food trends [69,70]. As professionals who select and combine ingredients on a daily basis, they make decisions about incorporating new products into menus and establishing gastronomic standards. Their attitudes largely determine the potential acceptance of innovative yet less conventional ingredients [71]. This is why understanding their attitudes and willingness to experiment is crucial for the successful integration of invasive river crayfish into contemporary gastronomic offerings.

3.2. Descriptive Statistics and Reliability of the Scale

The results of the Crayfish Meat Consumption Restriction Scale in the preparation of gastronomic products are presented below. Six variables measure different aspects of psychological and sensory aversion to gastronomic products made from invasive river crayfish. The mean values and standard deviations for each variable are presented in Table 2. Cronbach’s alpha for the scale is 0.87, indicating satisfactory reliability.
The research results show strong negative attitudes toward the consumption of invasive river crayfish from the Danube among the participants. The average responses on a psychological and sensory attitudes scale from 1 to 5 indicate a high degree of disgust (M = 4.2, SD = 1.1) and concern regarding the sensory and food safety aspects of consuming these crayfish. This may represent a significant barrier to their wider inclusion in restaurant offerings [53].
It is important to pursue further research of this kind, as few studies have explored the attitudes of restaurateurs toward sustainable practices [72]. The most prominent concern expressed by participants was related to the food safety of gastronomic products made from invasive crayfish (M = 4.6, SD = 0.9). This finding may reflect a lack of information regarding the safety of invasive river crayfish [73], or a lack of trust in their safety, possibly linked to the perception of the Danube as a potentially polluted ecosystem [74]. Previous studies conducted in Vojvodina suggest that hospitality employees generally demonstrate a lower level of competence in food safety-related matters [75,76].
The results also reveal strong biases concerning the sensory attributes of invasive crayfish meat. Participants voiced concerns that dishes prepared with this species possess an unpleasant, muddy flavor (M = 4.5, SD = 1.0) and exhibit inferior sensory qualities compared to other types of crayfish (M = 4.4, SD = 1.1). These attitudes are not unexpected, given that most chefs have no prior experience working with this ingredient and likely formed their opinions based on assumptions [77]. Negative perceptions may also be influenced by the association of the Danube with pollution, leading to the belief that the crayfish meat absorbs undesirable aromas, particularly those associated with mud [75]. Additionally, the lower evaluation compared to other crayfish types may stem from the more common use of marine crayfish in restaurants, which are perceived as being higher in quality [78,79,80].
Beyond sensory and health-related concerns, participants also viewed the consumption of these crayfish as socially unacceptable (M = 3.8, SD = 1.3) and not aligned with local gastronomic culture and tradition (M = 4.3, SD = 1.2). These findings underscore the influence of cultural barriers that may inhibit the adoption of new food sources within restaurant offerings [81,82]. Such attitudes may be rooted in the absence of tradition regarding the use of river crayfish in local cuisine, as in some cultures, they are considered less prestigious than other seafood varieties [77].

3.3. Differences in Participants’ Attitudes Toward Invasive River Crayfish Based on Sociodemographic Characteristics

The results indicate that gender, age, and education significantly influence chefs’ attitudes toward invasive river crayfish, highlighting demographic differences that may affect their acceptance in gastronomy.

3.3.1. Gender

The results of the t-test (Table 3) show a statistically significant difference between men and women (t = 2.4, p = 0.018), with women expressing significantly more negative attitudes (M = 4.4, SD = 1.1) compared to men (M = 3.9, SD = 1.0). Available studies suggest that women, particularly vegetarians, have shown greater acceptance of novel foods such as spirulina and seaweed [61,83]. However, other studies investigating the acceptance of new foods based on sociodemographic characteristics did not observe such differences [36]. It is important to note that studies in the field of food preferences often show that women tend to have stricter criteria when evaluating new or non-traditional foods, which could justify the findings of this study [84,85].

3.3.2. Age Groups

The results of the ANOVA test (Table 4) indicate a statistically significant difference between age groups (F = 4.2, p = 0.007), with the youngest group (18–29 years) having the most positive attitudes (M = 3.8, SD = 1.2), while the oldest group (50+ years) holds the most negative views (M = 4.5, SD = 1.1). Post hoc analysis shows that the attitudes of respondents over 50 years old are significantly more negative compared to the youngest group.
These results suggest that younger chefs are more open to innovations and are potentially more inclined to experiment with non-traditional ingredients [86]. In contrast, older chefs may be more tied to traditional culinary norms [87], which may lead to greater resistance to incorporating invasive crayfish into restaurant menus.

3.3.3. Education Level

The results of the ANOVA test (Table 5) show a significant difference in attitudes based on the education level of respondents (F = 5.3, p = 0.004), with the most negative attitudes found among respondents with basic education (M = 4.5, SD = 1.0), while those with higher education exhibit significantly more positive attitudes (M = 3.9, SD = 1.0). Post hoc analysis confirms that respondents with higher education have significantly more positive views compared to those with basic education.
These results suggest that higher education contributes to greater openness to new gastronomic concepts and experimentation with unconventional ingredients [88]. Additionally, respondents with higher education may be better informed about the ecological and economic aspects of using invasive species, which could contribute to their willingness to consider their use [89].

3.4. Regression Analysis

To examine the impact of the Scale of Restrictions on the Consumption of Crayfish Meat in the Preparation of Gastronomic Products, binary logistic regression was applied. The dependent variable was measured through “yes” and “no” responses. Out of 210 respondents, 42 (20%) expressed a positive attitude toward consuming invasive river crayfish, while 168 (80%) expressed a negative attitude.
The regression analysis (Table 6) revealed that all examined variables had a significant negative influence on respondents’ willingness to use invasive crayfish in dish preparation. The strongest effects were associated with perceptions of poor hygiene (B = −0.58, OR = 0.56, p < 0.001) and unpleasant taste (B = −0.52, OR = 0.60, p < 0.001), indicating that these are key factors in shaping negative attitudes. These findings are consistent with previous research emphasizing the role of hygiene and sensory characteristics—such as taste and texture—in the acceptance of novel food products [90,91,92].
Furthermore, the variables “idea of eating” (B = −0.45, OR = 0.64, p < 0.001) and “social acceptability” (B = −0.38, OR = 0.68, p = 0.006) were also significant predictors of negative attitudes toward the consumption of invasive crayfish. These results indicate that the acceptance of new food sources is shaped not only by individual preferences but also by broader societal factors [36,71,72]. The perception of social acceptability is particularly relevant in the hospitality context, where collective norms often influence ingredient selection and menu development [93,94].
In addition, the perception of crayfish as an inappropriate ingredient for gastronomic use (B = −0.41, OR = 0.66, p = 0.001) was significantly associated with psychological and sensory attitudes toward its use. This suggests that a lack of knowledge and experience in crayfish preparation may shape professional chefs’ perceptions [95,96]. The absence of crayfish in traditional cuisine and its limited availability both contribute to a cautious approach to its use, with gastronomic culture and tradition playing a central role in shaping attitudes toward the acceptance of novel food sources [97,98].
The findings also show that respondents generally express a negative attitude toward using invasive river crayfish from the Danube in the preparation of gastronomic products. Authors [99,100,101,102] emphasize the importance of educational campaigns aimed at reducing aversion and increasing openness toward novel ingredients. For this reason, the second part of the study included a sensory evaluation of crayfish meat, as taste is widely recognized as one of the key determinants in the acceptance of aquatic food products [64,66,103,104,105,106].

3.5. Sensory Evaluation of Crayfish Meat

Figure 2 presents the sensory map illustrating the sensory profiles and overall acceptability of the crayfish meat samples. Samples were considered acceptable if their mean score for overall liking was above 5.0 (neither like nor dislike). Acceptability scores ranged from 4.96 for Sample 2 to 6.54 for Sample 1, indicating that the samples were rated as neutral to slightly liked.
The lower acceptability of Sample 2, prepared using the poaching technique, can be attributed to the more pronounced presence of algae-like odor and flavor, which are generally considered unpleasant and often associated with a muddy taste [107]. This result highlights the importance of preparation methods in reducing or enhancing specific sensory attributes, particularly when dealing with unfamiliar or less conventional protein sources.
In contrast, Sample 1, prepared by frying it in butter, achieved the highest acceptability score. This is likely due to the presence of familiar and pleasant sensory attributes—especially the odor and flavor of butter, caramel flavor, and a pronounced sweetness. These findings align with previous studies suggesting that positive and recognizable sensory traits significantly contribute to the acceptance of non-traditional foods [108].
The results demonstrate that the method of thermal processing plays a critical role in shaping the sensory perception and acceptability of invasive crayfish meat. This opens opportunities for further exploration of culinary techniques that may improve the overall experience of such ingredients and facilitate their integration into contemporary gastronomic offerings.
In the qualitative analysis, a total of 82 meal suggestions were collected and categorized into six main groups: main course, pasta, risotto, appetizer, salad, and soup. The proposed meal categories showed a statistically significant association with the analyzed crayfish meat samples (χ2 = 25.313, p < 0.05), suggesting that the sensory properties of the samples had a meaningful influence on the panelists’ culinary ideas and perceptions of appropriate food pairings.
To further explore these associations, correspondence analysis (CA) was conducted using the frequency of suggested meal types for each sample, with the results visualized in Figure 3. The analysis was presented in a two-dimensional factor plane, where the first two dimensions accounted for approximately 100% of the total variance, indicating a strong explanatory power of the model.
Interpretation of the CA map revealed clear trends in panelists’ preferences:
  • Sample 1 (fried in butter) was predominantly associated with risotto and showed compatibility with both white and red wine. This may be due to its rich flavor profile and higher acceptability scores, as previously discussed.
  • Sample 2 (poached) was more frequently suggested for appetizers, salads, and soups, indicating that its lighter sensory profile may be better suited for cold or delicately flavored dishes.
  • Sample 3 (roasted) emerged as the most suitable option for pasta preparations, likely due to its more intense and robust flavor profile, which pairs well with starchy and sauce-based dishes.
These findings suggest that not only the acceptability, but also the perceived culinary applicability of invasive crayfish meat, depends largely on the chosen preparation method. The panelists, drawing from their professional experience, adapted their suggestions based on the sensory characteristics of each sample, reflecting a nuanced understanding of ingredient–function pairing in gastronomy [53]. Such results reinforce the importance of culinary context in shaping the acceptance and utilization of novel or underutilized food resources. They also emphasize the role of chefs as key mediators in the introduction of new ingredients into mainstream cuisine, particularly those that require careful handling or transformation to enhance their sensory appeal.

4. Conclusions

This study revealed predominantly negative attitudes among chefs toward the use of invasive crayfish from the Danube, primarily due to concerns regarding undesirable sensory characteristics and hygiene. Demographic factors such as gender, age, and education significantly influence these attitudes, with younger and more educated chefs showing a greater openness to innovation. Regression analysis indicates that the respondents’ willingness to prepare gastronomic products is influenced by their psychological and sensory perceptions.
Sensory analysis of crayfish meat samples showed varying levels of acceptability, which can significantly affect recommendations for its culinary use. This underscores the importance of understanding sensory attributes when incorporating invasive species into restaurant menus. Successful adaptation of crayfish-based dishes to their sensory profiles may increase acceptance and support wider use in gastronomy.
These findings may serve as a valuable source of inspiration for other regions and countries facing similar ecological and gastronomic challenges related to Faxonius limosus and other invasive species. By transforming ecological threats into culinary opportunities, the hospitality sector can contribute to environmental conservation and the development of gastronomic innovation.
In light of the results, future research should focus on developing standardized culinary techniques to enhance the sensory appeal of invasive crayfish, examining the impact of training and educational initiatives on chefs’ attitudes, and assessing consumer perceptions to determine the broader market potential of these species beyond professional kitchens.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.P. and J.L.; methodology, M.P. and D.Š.; validation, J.L., D.Š. and I.Č.; formal analysis, I.Č.; resources, I.Č.; data curation, M.P. and D.Š.; writing—original draft preparation, M.P. and S.Š.; writing—review and editing, M.V. and M.Ž.; visualization, S.Š.; supervision, J.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Science Fund of Republic Serbia, #GRANT No. 7417; “Reducing the negative impact of invasive crayfish Faxonius limosus in the Danube by smart exploitation of their meat and shells” DANUBEcare.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The survey research was conducted anonymously and did not involve the collection of any personal data from the respondents. As such, this kind of research does not require special Ethical Committee approval in Serbia, where the research was conducted, as it is in line with the national Law on Personal Data Protection (The Official Gazette of the Republic of Serbia, number 97/08; hereinafter: the Law). The national Law on Personal Data Protection is aligned with the current standards of the relevant European documents, and in particular with the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The Law applies to the processing of personal data in the context of the activities of a controller or a processor in the Republic of Serbia, regardless of whether the processing takes place in the Republic of Serbia or not. For the animal experiment, the ethical statement was obtained from the Ethics Committee for Protection and Welfare of Experimental Animals of the University of Novi Sad, Serbia (no. 04-81/94, EK: I-2020-06-1). The ethical statement was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Scientific Institute of Food Technology in Novi Sad, University of Novi Sad, Serbia (no. 175/I/22-3). The ethical statement was stated based on the National Regulations (Annex 4 of the “Official Gazette of RS”, No. 39/10), which clearly indicates that Ethic approval for research involving invertebrate animals is not required.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Regulation (EU) No. 2014/1143 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Prevention and Management of the Introduction and Spread of Invasive Alien Species. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/1143/oj (accessed on 22 October 2014).
  2. Regulation (EU) No. 2016/1141 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Adopting a List of Invasive Alien Species of Union Concern. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2016/1141/oj (accessed on 13 July 2016).
  3. Regulation (EU) No. 2017/1263 of the European Parliament and of the Council to Updating the List of Invasive Alien Species of Union Concern. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2017/1263/oj (accessed on 12 July 2017).
  4. Regulation (EU) No. 2018/968 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Risk Assessments in Relation to Invasive Alien Species. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2018/968/oj (accessed on 30 April 2018).
  5. Regulation (EU) No. 2019/1262 of the European Parliament and of the Council to Updating the List of Invasive Alien Species of Union Concern. Available online: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/1262/oj (accessed on 25 July 2019).
  6. Lipták, B.; Vitázková, B. A review of the current distribution and dispersal trends of two invasive crayfish species in the Danube Basin. Water Res. Manag. 2014, 4, 15–22. [Google Scholar]
  7. Lipták, B.; Vitázková, B.; Stloukal, E. First Record of the Spinycheek Crayfish (Orconectes limosus) in the Serbo-Romanian Tamiš River. Freshw. Crayfish 2013, 19, 229–232. [Google Scholar]
  8. Karaman, I.; Machino, Y. Occurrence of the spiny-cheek crayfish (Orconectes limosus) and the Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) in Serbia. Crayfish News 2004, 26, 19–20. [Google Scholar]
  9. Puky, M.; Schád, P. Orconectes limosus colonizes new areas fast along the Danube in Hungary. Bull. Fr. Pêche Piscic. 2006, 380, 919–926. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Lazarević, J.; Čabarkapa, I.; Rakita, S.; Banjac, M.; Tomičić, Z.; Škrobot, D.; Radivojević, G.; Kalenjuk Pivarski, B.; Tešanović, D. Invasive Crayfish Faxonius limosus: Meat Safety, Nutritional Quality and Sensory Profile. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 16819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Zorić, K.; Atanacković, A.; Tomović, J.; Vasiljević, B.; Tubić, B.; Paunović, M. Diversity of Alien Macroinvertebrate Species in Serbian Waters. Water 2020, 12, 3521. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Buřič, M. Biology of Spiny-Cheek Crayfish (Orconectes limosus, Rafinesque, 1817) Under Conditions of the Czech Republic and the Study of Factors Influencing Its Invasive Spreading. Ph.D. Thesis, University of South Bohemia, České Budějovice, Czechia, 24 September 2009. [Google Scholar]
  13. Turbelin, A.J.; Hudgins, E.J.; Catford, J.A.; Cuthbert, R.N.; Diagne, C.; Kourantidou, M.; Roiz, D.; Courchamp, F. Biological invasions as burdens to primary economic sectors. Glob. Environ. Change 2024, 87, 102858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Harlioglu, M.; Köprücü, K.; Yilmaz, O. The effects of dietary n−3 series fatty acid on the fatty acid composition, cholesterol and fat-soluble vitamins of pleopodal eggs and stage 1 juveniles in a freshwater crayfish. Astacusleptodactylus (Eschscholtz). Aquacultures 2012, 356, 310–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Śmietana, N.; Panicz, R.; Sobczak, M.; Śmietana, P.; Nędzarek, A. Spiny-Cheek Crayfish, Faxonius limosus (Rafinesque, 1817), as an Alternative Food Source. Animals 2021, 11, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Iwar, M.; Amu, C.M. Nutrient and anti-nutrient composition of processed crayfish (Atyagabonensis) from River Benue, Nigeria. Sustain. Agri Food Environ. Res. 2021, 9, 205–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Stanek, M.; Borejszo, Z.; Dąbrowski, J.; Janicki, B. Fat and cholesterol content and fatty acid profiles in edible tissues of spiny-cheek crayfish, Orconecteslimosus (Raf.) from Lake Gopło (Poland) December. Arch. Pol. Fish. 2011, 19, 241–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Chen, B.; Xu, X.; Chen, Y.; Xie, H.; Zhang, T.; Mao, X. Red.Red Swamp Crayfish (Procambarus clarkii) as a Growing Food Source: Opportunities and Challenges in Comprehensive Research and Utilization. Foods 2024, 13, 3780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Taylor, C.A.; DiStefano, R.J.; Larson, E.R. Towards a cohesive strategy for the conservation of the United States’ diverse and highly endemic crayfish fauna. Hydrobiologia 2019, 846, 39–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Siegrist, M.; Hartmann, C. Consumer Acceptance of Novel Food Technologies. Nat. Food 2020, 1, 343–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Florack, A.; Koch, T.; Haasova, S.; Kunz, S.; Alves, H. The Differentiation Principle: Why Consumers Often Neglect Positive Attributes of Novel Food Products. J. Consum. Psychol. 2021, 31, 684–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Siddiqui, S.A.; Zannou, O.; Karim, I.; Kasmiati; Awad, N.M.H.; Gołaszewski, J.; Heinz, V.; Smetana, S. Avoiding Food Neophobia and Increasing Consumer Acceptance of New Food Trends—A Decade of Research. Sustainability 2022, 14, 10391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Vidigal, M.C.T.R.; Minim, V.P.R.; Simiqueli, A.A.; Souza, P.H.P.; Balbino, D.F.; Minim, L.A. Food Technology Neophobia and Consumer Attitudes toward Foods Produced by New and Conventional Technologies: A Case Study in Brazil. LWT 2015, 60, 832–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Park, B.K.; Cho, M.S. Taste Education Reduces Food Neophobia and Increases Willingness to Try Novel Foods in School Children. Nutr. Res. Pract. 2016, 10, 221–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Castro, M.; Chambers, E. Consumer Avoidance of Insect Containing Foods: Primary Emotions, Perceptions and Sensory Characteristics Driving Consumers Considerations. Foods 2019, 8, 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Romaniw, O.C.; Rajpal, R.; Duncan, A.M.; Keller, H.H.; Duizer, L.M. Nutrition in Disguise: Effects of Food Neophobia, Healthy Eating Interests and Provision of Health Information on Liking and Perceptions of Nutrient-Dense Foods in Older Adults. Foods 2021, 10, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Moruzzo, R.; Mancini, S.; Boncinelli, F.; Riccioli, F. Exploring the Acceptance of Entomophagy: A Survey of Italian Consumers. Insects 2021, 12, 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Lorenz, A.R.; Libarkin, J.C.; Ording, G.J. Disgust in response to some arthropods aligns with disgust provoked by pathogens. Glob. Ecol. Conserv. 2014, 2, 248–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Gmuer, A.; NuessliGuth, J.; Hartmann, C.; Siegrist, M. Effects of the degree of processing of insect ingredients in snacks on expected emotional experiences and willingness to eat. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 54, 117–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Hartmann, C.; Siegrist, M. Becoming an insectivore: Results of an experiment. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 51, 118–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Prokop, P.; Fančovičová, J. Self-protection versus disease avoidance. J. Individ. Differ. 2013, 34, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Looy, H.; Dunkel, F.V.; Wood, J.R. How then shall we eat? Insect-eating attitudes and sustainable foodways. Agric. Hum. Values 2014, 31, 131–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. O’Hea Miller, S.B.; Davis, A.R.; Wong, M.Y.L. The Impacts of Invasive Crayfish and Other Non-Native Species on Native Freshwater Crayfish: A Review. Biology 2024, 13, 610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. El-Sherif, S.A.; Abd El-Ghafour, S. Investigation of Quality Properties and Nutritional Values of Four Fish Species from Lake Qaroun, Egypt. Int. J. Chem Tech Res. 2016, 9, 16–26. [Google Scholar]
  35. Smetana, S.; Leonhardt, L.; Kauppi, S.M.; Pajic, A.; Heinz, V. Insect margarine: Processing, sustainability and design. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 264, 121670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Laureati, M.; De Boni, A.; Saba, A.; Lamy, E.; Minervini, F.; Delgado, A.M.; Sinesio, F. Determinants of consumers’ acceptance and adoption of novel food in view of more resilient and sustainable food systems in the eu: A systematic literature review. Foods 2024, 13, 1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Mancini, S.; Moruzzo, R.; Riccioli, F.; Paci, G. European Consumers’ Readiness to Adopt Insects as Food. A Review. Food Res. Int. 2019, 122, 661–678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Mishyna, M.; Chen, J.; Benjamin, O. Sensory Attributes of Edible Insects and Insect-Based Foods—Future Outlooks for Enhancing Consumer Appeal. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 95, 141–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Van Huis, A. Potential of Insects as Food and Feed in Assuring Food Security. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2013, 58, 563–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Van Huis, A.; Rumpold, B. Strategies to Convince Consumers to Eat Insects? A Review. Food Qual. Prefer. 2023, 110, 104927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hellwig, N.; Schubert, L.F.; Kirmer, A.; Tischew, S.; Dieker, P. Effects of wildflower strips, landscape structure and agricultural practices on wild bee assemblages–A matter of data resolution and spatial scale? Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2022, 326, 107764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Takić, L.; Mladenović-Ranisavljević, I.; Vasović, D. The Assessment of the Danube River Water Pollution in Serbia. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2017, 228, 380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Regulation (EC) No. 2073/2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX%3A32005R2073 (accessed on 15 November 2005).
  44. Regulation (EC) No 1441/2007 Amending Regulation (EC) No 2073/2005 on Microbiological Criteria for Foodstuffs. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2007/1441/oj (accessed on 5 December 2007).
  45. KalenjukPivarski, B.; Grubor, B.; Banjac, M.; Đerčan, B.; Tešanović, D.; Šmugović, S.; Radivojević, G.; Ivanović, V.; Vujasinović, V.; Stošić, T. The sustainability of gastronomic heritage and its significance for regional tourism development. Heritage 2023, 6, 3402–3417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Paunić, M.; KalenjukPivarski, B.; Tešanović, D.; Novaković, D.; Šmugović, S.; Šarenac, N.; Ivanović, V.; Mlinarević, P.; Marjanović, J. Gastronomic Identity Factors in the Function of Sustainable Gastronomy: A Case Study of Tourist Destinations in the Republic of Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sustainability 2024, 16, 8493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Paunić, M.; KalenjukPivarski, B.; Tešanović, D.; Ivanović, V.; Vujasinović, V.; GagićJaraković, S.; Vulić, G.; Ćirić, M. Intersectoral Linking of Agriculture, Hospitality, and Tourism—A Model for Implementation in AP Vojvodina (Republic of Serbia). Agriculture 2025, 15, 604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Mancini, S.; Sogari, G.; Menozzi, D.; Nuvoloni, R.; Torracca, B.; Moruzzo, R.; Paci, G. Factors predicting the intention of eating an insect-based product. Foods 2019, 8, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Menozzi, D.; Sogari, G.; Veneziani, M.; Simoni, E.; Mora, C. Eating novel foods: An application of the Theory of Planned Behaviour to predict the consumption of an insect-based product. Food Qual. Prefer. 2017, 59, 27–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sogari, G.; Bogueva, D.; Marinova, D. Australian consumers’ response to insects as food. Agriculture 2019, 9, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Damsbo-Svendsen, M.; Bom Frøst, M. Annemarie Olsen: A review of instruments developed to measure food neophobia. Appetite 2017, 113, 358–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Connelly, L.M. Pilot studies. Medsurg Nurs. 2008, 17, 411–412. [Google Scholar]
  53. Palczak, J.; Giboreau, A.; Rogeaux, M.; Delarue, J. How do pastry and culinary chefs design sensory complexity? Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2020, 19, 100182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. ISO 8589:2007/Amd 1:2014; Sensory Analysis—General Guidance for the Design of Test Rooms. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2015.
  55. Field, A. Discovering Statistics Using IBM SPSS Statistics, 6th ed.; Sage publications limited: London, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  56. George, D.; Mallery, P. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 4th ed.; Allyn & Bacon: Boston, MA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  57. Pallant, J. SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using IBM SPSS, 7th ed.; McGraw-Hill Education: New York, NY, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  58. Howell, D. Statistical Mezthods for Psychology, 8th ed.; Wadsworth Publishing Co. Inc.: Belmont, CA, USA; Wadsworth, OH, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  59. Hosmer, D.W.; Lemeshow, S. Applied Logistic Regression, 2nd ed.; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  60. Little, R.J.A.; Rubin, D.B. Statistical Analysis with Missing Data; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  61. Moons, I.; Barbarossa, C.; De Pelsmacker, P. The Determinants of the Adoption Intention of Eco-Friendly Functional Food in Different Market Segments. Ecol. Econ. 2018, 151, 151–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Torri, L.; Tuccillo, F.; Bonelli, S.; Piraino, S.; Leone, A. The Attitudes of Italian Consumers towards Jellyfish as Novel Food. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 79, 103782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. García-Segovia, P.; García Alcaraz, V.; Tárrega, A.; Martínez-Monzó, J. Consumer Perception and Acceptability of Microalgae Based Breadstick. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2020, 26, 493–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Michel, F.; Knaapila, A.; Hartmann, C.; Siegrist, M. A Multi-National Comparison of Meat Eaters’ Attitudes and Expectations for Burgers Containing Beef, Pea or Algae Protein. Food Qual. Prefer. 2021, 91, 104195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Weinrich, R.; Gassler, B. Beyond Classical van Westendorp: Assessing Price Sensitivity for Variants of Algae-Based Meat Substitutes. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2021, 63, 102719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Embling, R.; Neilson, L.; Randall, T.; Mellor, C.; Lee, M.D.; Wilkinson, L.L. ‘Edible Seaweeds’ as an Alternative to Animal-Based Proteins in the UK: Identifying Product Beliefs and Consumer Traits as Drivers of Consumer Acceptability for Macroalgae. Food Qual. Prefer. 2022, 100, 104613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Hwang, J.; Choe, J.Y. How to enhance the image of edible insect restaurants: Focusing on perceived risk theory. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2020, 87, 102464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Dion-Poulin, A.; Turcotte, M.; Lee-Blouin, S.; Perreault, V.; Provencher, V.; Doyen, A.; Turgeon, S. Acceptability of insect ingredients by innovative student chefs: An exploratory study. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2021, 24, 100362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Bertoldo, J.; Hsu, R.; Reid, T.; Righter, A.; Wolfson, J.A. Attitudes and beliefs about how chefs can promote nutrition and sustainable food systems among students at a US culinary school. Public Health Nutr. 2022, 25, 498–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Fusté-Forne, F.; Noguer-Juncà, E. Designing Michelin-starred menus from the perspective of chefs: Is the presence of local food worth a trip? Int. J. Food Des. 2024, 9, 9–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Mutlu, H.; Demircakmak, I.L.; Dogan, M. Menu Engineering in the Restaurant Business: A Study on Kitchen Chefs. J. Tour. Gastron. Stud. 2022, 10, 3537–3553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Bristow, R.; Jenkins, I. Spatial and temporal tourism considerations in liminal landscapes. Tour. Geogr. 2020, 22, 133–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Unal-Sengor, G.F.; Aksu, F.; Zeybek, Z.; Sandikci Altunatmaz, S.; Ozturan, S. Quality and Safety of Ready to Eat Food: Sous-vide Freshwater Crayfish (Astacus leptodactylus) with Dried Vegetable Mix and Garlic Oil. J. Culin. Sci. Technol. 2024, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Varble, S.; Secchi, S. Human consumption as an invasive species management strategy. A preliminary assessment of the marketing potential of invasive Asian carp in the US. Appetite 2013, 65, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Banjac, M.; Tešanović, D.; Grubor, B. Potentials for the development of gastronomic tourism in Vojvodina from the point of view of employees in the hospitality industry. In Proceedings of the 19th Contemporary Trends in Tourism and Hospitality Conference, Novi Sad, Serbia, 17–19 November 2022. [Google Scholar]
  76. Grubor, B.; KalenjukPivarski, B.; Đerčan, B.; Tešanović, D.; Banjac, M.; Lukić, T.; Živković, M.B.; Udovičić, D.I.; Šmugović, S.; Ivanović, V.; et al. Traditional and Authentic Food of Ethnic Groups of Vojvodina (Northern Serbia)—Preservation and Potential for Tourism Development. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ekincek, S.; Günay, S. A recipe for culinary creativity: Defining characteristics of creative chefs and their process. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2023, 31, 100633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Xu, H.; Wu, T.; Budhathoki, M.; Fang, D.S.; Zhang, W.; Wang, X. Consumption Patterns and Willingness to Pay for Sustainable Aquatic Food in China. Foods 2024, 13, 2435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Kalenjuk Pivarski, B.; Šmugović, S.; Tekić, D.; Ivanović, V.; Novaković, A.; Tešanović, D.; Banjac, M.; Đerčan, B.; Peulić, T.; Mutavdžić, B.; et al. Characteristics of Traditional Food Products as a Segment of Sustainable Consumption in Vojvodina’s Hospitality Industry. Sustainability 2022, 14, 13553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Šmugović, S.; Kalenjuk Pivarski, B.; Ivanović, V.; Tešanović, D.; Novaković, D.; Marić, A.; Lazarević, J.; Paunić, M. The Effects of the Characteristics of Catering Establishments and Their Managers on the Offering of Dishes Prepared with Traditional Food Products in Bačka Region, Serbia. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Tuorila, H.; Hartmann, C. Consumer responses to novel and unfamiliar foods. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2020, 33, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Günden, C.; Atakan, P.; Yercan, M.; Mattas, K.; Knez, M. Consumer Response to Novel Foods: A Review of Behavioral Barriers and Drivers. Foods 2024, 13, 2051. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Custódio, M.; Lillebø, A.I.; Calado, R.; Villasante, S. Halophytes as Novel Marine Products—A Consumers’ Perspective in Portugal and Policy Implications. Mar. Policy 2021, 133, 104731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Guiné, R.P.; Florença, S.G.; Barroca, M.J.; Anjos, O. The link between the consumer and the innovations in food product development. Foods 2020, 9, 1317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Mosikyan, S.; Dolan, R.; Corsi, A.M.; Bastian, S. A systematic literature review and future research agenda to study consumer acceptance of novel foods and beverages. Appetite 2024, 203, 107655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Vial, C.; Lamy, A.; Sebbane, M. Chefs Saddle Up—Perceptions of Horse Meat as a Sustainable Gastronomic Alternative in France. Foods 2025, 14, 638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Rosa, P.; Madeira, A.; Oliveira, J.; Palrão, T. How much is a chef’s touch worth? Affective, emotional and behavioural responses to food images: A multimodal study. Int. Congr. Peer Rev. Sci. Publ. 2023, 18, e0293204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Sörensen, P.M.; Mouritsen, O.G. Science education and public understanding of science via food, cooking, and flavour. Int. J. Gastron. Food Sci. 2019, 15, 36–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Seaman, A.N.; Franzidis, A.; Samuelson, H.; Ivy, S. Eating invasives: Chefs as an avenue to control through consumption. Food Cult. Soc. 2022, 25, 108–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Maina, J.W. Analysis of the factors that determine food acceptability. Pharma Innov. J. 2018, 7, 253–257. [Google Scholar]
  91. dos Santos Rocha, C.; Magnani, M.; de Paiva Anciens Ramos, G.L.; Bezerril, F.; Freitas, M.; Cruz, A.; Pimentel, T. Emerging technologies in food processing: Impacts on sensory characteristics and consumer perception. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2022, 47, 100892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Kröger, T.; Dupont, J.; Büsing, L.; Fiebelkorn, F. Acceptance of Insect-Based Food Products in Western Societies: A Systematic Review. Front. Nutr. 2022, 8, 759885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Zandstra, E.; Carvalho, A.; van Herpen, E. Effects of front-of-pack social norm messages on food choice and liking. Food Qual. Prefer. 2017, 58, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Filimonau, V.; Lemmer, C.; Marshall, D.; Bejjani, G. Restaurant menu re-design as a facilitator of more responsible consumer choice: An exploratory and preliminary study. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2017, 33, 73–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Pérez-Rodrigo, C.; Aranceta-Bartrina, J. Chapter 2—Role of gastronomy and new technologies in shaping healthy diets. In Gastronomy and Food Science, 2nd ed.; Galaknis, C., Ed.; Academic press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2021; pp. 19–34. [Google Scholar]
  96. Laque, P. From Meat to Plants: Leveraging Social Norms to Shift Food Choices in Quick Service Restaurants. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK, April 2024. [Google Scholar]
  97. Guiné, R.P.F.; Florença, S.; Barroca, M.J.; Anjos, O. The duality of innovation and food development versus purely traditional foods. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 109, 16–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Guiné, R.P.; Florença, S.G.; Aparício, M.G.; Cardoso, A.P.; Ferreira, M. Food knowledge for better nutrition and health: A study among university students in Portugal. Healthcare 2023, 11, 1597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Gurdian Curan, C. Effects of Sensory Cues on Product Acceptability and Consumer Perceptions, Emotions, and Behavior. Ph.D. Thesis, LSU University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  100. Kokkorou, M.; Spinelli, S.; Dinnella, C.; Monteleone, E. Interventions based on sensory-hedonic strategies and on nudging to facilitate vegetable and pulses consumption in the school environment. J. Food Sci. 2024, 23, e13312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  101. Okaiyeto, S.A.; Yu, S.H.; Deng, L.Z.; Wang, Q.H.; Prakash Sutar, P.; Wang, H.; Zhao, J.H.; Mujumdar, A.; Ni, J.B.; Hong-Wei Xiao, W.L. How to enhance the acceptability of insects food—A review. Food Front. 2024, 5, 311–328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Willeke, M.; Tsiami, A.; Lara, S.W. Tasting the Future: Sensory Evaluation and Perception of Insect-Based Products AmongGenZ and Millennials. Gastronomy 2025, 3, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Geertsen, J.L.; Allesen-Holm, B.H.; Giacalone, D. Consumer-Led Development of Novel Sea-Buckthorn Based Beverages. J. Sens. Stud. 2016, 31, 245–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Grahl, S.; Strack, M.; Mensching, A.; Mörlein, D. Alternative Protein Sources in Western Diets: Food Product Development and Consumer Acceptance of Spirulina-Filled Pasta. Food Qual. Prefer. 2020, 84, 103933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Lucas, S.; Gouin, S.; Lesueur, M. Seaweed Consumption and Label Preferences in France. Mar. Resour. Econ. 2019, 34, 143–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Henry, A.L.; Kyle, S.D.; Bhandari, S.; Chisholm, A.; Griffiths, C.E.M.; Bundy, C. Measurement, Classification and Evaluation of Sleep Disturbance in Psoriasis: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0157843. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Mendes, M.C.; Navalho, S.; Ferreira, A.; Paulino, C.; Figueiredo, D.; Silva, D.; Gao, F.; Gama, F.; Bombo, G.; Jacinto, R.; et al. Algae as food in Europe: An overview of species diversity and their application. Foods 2022, 11, 1871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Gondim de Albuquerque, J.; Escalona-Buendía, H.B.; de Souza Aquino, J.; da Silva Vasconcelos, M.A. Nopal beverage (Opuntia ficus-indica) as a non-traditional food: Sensory properties, expectations, experiences, and emotions of low-income and food-insecure Brazilian potential consumers. Food Res. Int. 2022, 152, 110910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Foods 14 01898 g002
Figure 2. Principal component analysis was conducted to evaluate the sensory profile and acceptability of crayfish meat samples, including Sample 1 (fried in butter), Sample 2 (poached), and Sample 3 (roasted). Descriptor labels were coded with “O_” to indicate odor attributes and “F_” to indicate flavor attributes.
Figure 2. Principal component analysis was conducted to evaluate the sensory profile and acceptability of crayfish meat samples, including Sample 1 (fried in butter), Sample 2 (poached), and Sample 3 (roasted). Descriptor labels were coded with “O_” to indicate odor attributes and “F_” to indicate flavor attributes.
Foods 14 01898 g002
Foods 14 01898 g003
Figure 3. Correspondence analysis for crayfish samples and meal categories cited by professional culinary chefs.
Figure 3. Correspondence analysis for crayfish samples and meal categories cited by professional culinary chefs.
Foods 14 01898 g003
Table 1. The list of attributes used for sensory evaluation of crayfish meat.
Table 1. The list of attributes used for sensory evaluation of crayfish meat.
AttributesDescriptorDefinitionTechnique
AppearanceWhite color nuanceIntensity of white colorVisually
Meat shinesGlossiness that the surface of meat can have, typically influenced by moisture and fat contents
Dots visibilityCharacteristic patterns on the crayfish meat
OdorAlgaeOdor produced by algaeOlfactory
Fresh fishThe distinct smell that fresh fish emits when it is freshly caught and properly handled
Cooked fishThe distinctive smell released when fish is prepared by cooking methods
ButterThe characteristic smell of butter, which can be described as creamy, rich
OilThe smell emitted by various types of oils
ShrimpThe odor emitted by shrimp, which can range from slightly briny or seafood
MudThe earthy smell produced by mud, typically described as damp, earthy, musty
Overall odor intensityOverall odor intensity of the sample
TasteSweetBasic taste produced by dilute aqueous solutions of natural or artificial substances such as sucroseGustatory
SaltyBasic taste produced by dilute aqueous solutions of various substances, such as sodium chloride
BitterBasic taste produced by dilute aqueous solutions of various substances, such as quinine or caffeine
SourGustatory complex sensation, generally due to presence of organic acids
UmamiBasic taste produced by dilute aqueous solutions of a certain kind of amino acid
FlavorAlgaeFlavor produced by algaeOlfactory, gustatory, and trigeminal sensations perceived during tasting
Fresh fishThe distinct flavor that fresh fish emits when it is freshly caught and properly handled
Cooked fishThe distinctive flavor released when fish is prepared by cooking methods
ButterThe characteristic flavor of butter, which can be described as creamy, rich
OilThe flavor emitted by various types of oils
ShrimpThe flavor emitted by shrimp, ranging from slightly briny to seafood
CaramelThe rich flavor that originates from the process of caramelization
Flavor persistenceThe length of time a specific flavor lingers in the mouth
TextureHardnessThe force required to achieve a given deformationThe begins during mastication (chewing) and is further assessed during the swallowing process.
ElasticityThe degree to which a deformed material returns to its original condition after the deforming force is removed
GumminessThe effort required to disintegrate the product to the state ready for swallowing
SoftnessThe ease with which a food deforms under slight pressure or force
JuicinessThe amount and release of liquid from a food product during chewing
ChewinessThe work required to masticate a solid product into a state ready for swallowing
GreasinessThe quantity or the quality of fat on the surface
Table 2. Mean values and standard deviations for each variable—Crayfish Meat Consumption Restriction Scale—in the preparation of gastronomic products.
Table 2. Mean values and standard deviations for each variable—Crayfish Meat Consumption Restriction Scale—in the preparation of gastronomic products.
VariableMean (M)SD
The idea of eating invasive crayfish from the Danube River causes me disgust/aversion.4.21.1
Consumption of invasive river crayfish from the Danube is not socially acceptable.3.81.3
I am afraid that food based on invasive river crayfish has an unpleasant taste resembling mud.4.51.0
I think that gastronomic products made from invasive river crayfish have worse sensory characteristics.4.41.1
I believe that dishes prepared from invasive river crayfish are not safe for health.4.60.9
I think that the use of invasive river crayfish from the Danube is not characteristic of our gastronomic culture and tradition.4.31.2
Table 3. Gender differences in perception of limitations in crayfish meat consumption for culinary products.
Table 3. Gender differences in perception of limitations in crayfish meat consumption for culinary products.
VariableMen (M ± SD)Women (M ± SD)t-test (t, p)
Disgust toward consumption of invasive crayfish3.9 ± 1.04.4 ± 1.1t = 2.4, p = 0.018
Health safety of crayfish4.2 ± 1.04.6 ± 0.9t = 2.1, p = 0.040
Sensory characteristics of crayfish meat4.0 ± 1.14.5 ± 1.0t = 2.3, p = 0.021
Social acceptability3.7 ± 1.24.1 ± 1.3t = 1.9, p = 0.060
Tradition in gastronomy3.9 ± 1.14.3 ± 1.2t = 2.0, p = 0.050
Table 4. Differences between age groups regarding limitations in crayfish meat consumption for culinary products.
Table 4. Differences between age groups regarding limitations in crayfish meat consumption for culinary products.
Age GroupMean (M)SDFp-ValuePost Hoc Differences
18–29 years3.81.24.20.00718–29 < 50+
30–49 years4.21.0
50+ years4.51.1
Table 5. Differences between education levels regarding limitations in crayfish meat consumption for culinary products.
Table 5. Differences between education levels regarding limitations in crayfish meat consumption for culinary products.
Education LevelMean (M)SDFp-ValuePost Hoc Differences
Basic4.51.05.30.004Higher < Basic
Secondary4.31.1
Higher4.51.1
Table 6. Regression analysis.
Table 6. Regression analysis.
VariableBSEWaldp-ValueOR95% CI
Idea of eating−0.450.1214.20.000.640.51–0.79
Social acceptability−0.380.147.40.0060.680.52–0.88
Unpleasant taste−0.520.1121.80.0000.600.48–0.74
Unpleasant consistency−0.490.1314.00.0000.610.48–0.78
Poor hygiene−0.580.1033.60.0000.560.45–0.69
Inappropriateness−0.410.1310.10.0010.660.52–0.84
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.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Paunić, M.; Lazarević, J.; Škrobot, D.; Čabarkapa, I.; Šmugović, S.; Vidosavljević, M.; Županjac, M. Chefs’ Attitudes and Sensory Analysis of Invasive Crayfish (Faxonius limosus) Meat: Psychological and Culinary Aspects. Foods 2025, 14, 1898. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111898

AMA Style

Paunić M, Lazarević J, Škrobot D, Čabarkapa I, Šmugović S, Vidosavljević M, Županjac M. Chefs’ Attitudes and Sensory Analysis of Invasive Crayfish (Faxonius limosus) Meat: Psychological and Culinary Aspects. Foods. 2025; 14(11):1898. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111898

Chicago/Turabian Style

Paunić, Maja, Jasmina Lazarević, Dubravka Škrobot, Ivana Čabarkapa, Stefan Šmugović, Milica Vidosavljević, and Miloš Županjac. 2025. "Chefs’ Attitudes and Sensory Analysis of Invasive Crayfish (Faxonius limosus) Meat: Psychological and Culinary Aspects" Foods 14, no. 11: 1898. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111898

APA Style

Paunić, M., Lazarević, J., Škrobot, D., Čabarkapa, I., Šmugović, S., Vidosavljević, M., & Županjac, M. (2025). Chefs’ Attitudes and Sensory Analysis of Invasive Crayfish (Faxonius limosus) Meat: Psychological and Culinary Aspects. Foods, 14(11), 1898. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14111898

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop