The Effect of Cold Treatment of Parboiled Rice with Lowered Glycaemic Potency on Consumer Liking and Acceptability †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Rice Products
- Australian imported raw medium-grain white rice (SunRice®, Sydney, Australia), which is widely available in Auckland, New Zealand. It was selected as the most commonly consumed staple rice and the control sample.
- Australian imported raw medium-grain brown rice (SunRice®, Sydney, Australia), which is widely available in Auckland, New Zealand. It was selected as a healthier alternative to medium grain white rice.
- Parboiled rice, produced and imported from Thailand (RealRice®, Auckland, Thailand imported). It was selected as the healthiest alternative based on the results from a previous in vitro study on rice starch digestibility and glucose release [1].
2.2. Cooking Method
2.3. Storing and Reheating Method
2.4. Participants
2.5. Consumer Questionnaire
2.6. Consumer Liking Testing and Acceptability
2.7. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Consumer Questionnaire
3.2. Liking of the Sensory Characteristics
3.3. Acceptability
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lu, L.; Monro, J.; Lu, J.; Rush, E. Effect of Cold Storage, Reheating, and Particle Sizes on In Vitro Glucose Release and Starch Digestibility among Five Rice Products in Auckland, New Zealand. J. Rice Res. 2016, 4, 171. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, L.; Venn, B.; Lu, J.; Monro, J.; Rush, E. Effect of Cold Storage and Reheating of Parboiled Rice on Postprandial Glycaemic Response, Satiety, Palatability and Chewed Particle Size Distribution. Nutrients 2017, 9, 475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ong, M.; Blanshard, J. Texture determinants in cooked, parboiled rice. I: Rice starch amylose and the fine structure of amylopectin. J. Cereal Sci. 1995, 21, 251–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomlins, K.; Manful, J.; Larwer, P.; Hammond, L. Urban consumer preferences and sensory evaluation of locally produced and imported rice in West Africa. Food Qual. Prefer. 2005, 16, 79–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Barber, S.; De Barber, C. Rice bran: Chemistry and technology. In Rice; Luh, B.S., Ed.; Springer Science: New York, NY, USA, 1991; Volume 2, pp. 732–781. [Google Scholar]
- Marshall, W.; Wadsworth, J. Rice Science and Technology; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Heinemann, R.; Behrens, J.; Lanfer-Marquez, U. A study on the acceptability and consumer attitude towards parboiled rice. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2006, 41, 627–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, L.; Turner, M.; Fitzgerald, M.; Stokes, J.; Witt, T. Review of the effects of different processing technologies on cooked and convenience rice quality. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 59, 124–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ares, G.; Giménez, A.; Vidal, L.; Zhou, Y.; Krystallis, A.; Tsalis, G.; Symoneaux, R.; Cunha, L.; de Moura, A.; Claret, A. Do we all perceive food-related wellbeing in the same way? Results from an exploratory cross-cultural study. Food Qual. Prefer. 2016, 52, 62–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lawless, H.; Heymann, H. Sensory Evaluation of Food: Principles and Practices; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2013; Volume 5999. [Google Scholar]
- Steptoe, A.; Pollard, T.M.; Wardle, J. Development of a measure of the motives underlying the selection of food: The food choice questionnaire. Appetite 1995, 25, 267–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Department of Health and Ageing. The Biology and Ecology of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) in Australia; Office of the Gene Technology Regulator: Canberra, Australia, 2005.
- Gacula, M.; Rutenbeck, S. Sample size in consumer test and descriptive analysis. J. Sens. Stud. 2006, 21, 129–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Macfie, H.J.; Bratchell, N. Design to balance the effects of odour of presentation and first order carry-over effects in Hall tests. J. Sens. Stud. 1989, 4, 129–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Park, J.; Kim, S.; Kim, K. Effect of milling ratio on sensory properties of cooked rice and on physicochemical properties of milled and cooked rice. Cereal Chem. 2001, 78, 151–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Influence of Pre-Washing on Quality of Cooked Rice Maintained at a Constant Temterature (Influence of Cooking Conditions on Quality of Cooked Rice, 1). Available online: http://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=JP2007001794 (accessed on 20 October 2018).
- Bett-Garber, K.; Lea, J.; Champagne, E.; McClung, A. Whole-grain rice flavor associated with assorted bran colors. J. Sens. Stud. 2012, 27, 78–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lyon, B.; Champagne, E.; Vinyard, B.; Windham, W. Sensory and instrumental relationships of texture of cooked rice from selected cultivars and postharvest handling practices. Cer. Chem. 2000, 77, 64–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muhihi, A.; Gimbi, D.; Njelekela, M.; Shemaghembe, E.; Mwambene, K.; Chiwanga, F.; Malik, V.S.; Wedick, N.M.; Spiegelman, D.; Hu, F.B. Consumption and acceptability of whole grain staples for lowering markers of diabetes risk among overweight and obese Tanzanian adults. Glob. Health 2013, 9, 26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed][Green Version]
- Monge-Rojas, R.; Mattei, J.; Fuster, T.; Willett, W.; Campos, H. Influence of sensory and cultural perceptions of white rice, brown rice and beans by Costa Rican adults in their dietary choices. Appetite 2014, 81, 200–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhang, G.; Malik, V.S.; Pan, A.; Kumar, S.; Holmes, M.D.; Spiegelman, D.; Lin, X.; Hu, F.B. Substituting brown rice for white rice to lower diabetes risk: A focus-group study in Chinese adults. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2010, 110, 1216–1221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sudha, V.; Spiegelman, D.; Hong, B.; Malik, V.; Jones, C.; Wedick, N.; Hu, F.; Willett, W.; Bai, M.; Ponnalagu, M.; et al. Consumer Acceptance and Preference Study (CAPS) on brown and undermilled Indian rice varieties in Chennai, India. J. Am. Coll. Nutr. 2013, 32, 50–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saba, A.; Vassallo, M.; Shepherd, R.; Lampila, P.; Arvola, A.; Dean, M.; Winkelmann, M.; Claupein, E.; Lähteenmäki, L. Country-wise differences in perception of health-related messages in cereal-based food products. Food Qual. Prefer. 2010, 21, 385–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shepherd, R.; Dean, M.; Lampila, P.; Arvola, A.; Saba, A.; Vassallo, M.; Claupein, E.; Winkelmann, M.; Lähteenmäki, L. Communicating the benefits of wholegrain and functional grain products to European consumers. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 25, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kwofie, E.; Ngadi, M. A review of rice parboiling systems, energy supply, and consumption. Renew. Sust. Energ Rev. 2017, 72, 465–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, M.; Hasan, A.; Islam, M. Study on the period of acceptability of cooked rice. J. Bangladesh Agric. Univ. 2008, 6, 401–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Heinemann, R.; Fagundes, P.; Pinto, E.; Penteado, M.; Lanfer-Marquez, U. Comparative study of nutrient composition of commercial brown, parboiled and milled rice from Brazil. J. Food Compost. Anal. 2005, 18, 287–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, S.; Mohanraj, R.; Sudha, V.; Wedick, N.M.; Malik, V.; Hu, F.B.; Spiegelman, D.; Mohan, V. Perceptions about varieties of brown rice: A qualitative study from Southern India. J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 2011, 111, 1517–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Heiniö, R.; Noort, M.; Katina, K.; Alam, S.; Sozer, N.; de Kock, H.; Hersleth, M.; Poutanen, K. Sensory characteristics of wholegrain and bran-rich cereal foods–A review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 47, 25–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Deveriya, M. Consumer Acceptability of Aromatic and Non-Aromatic Rice. Master’s Thesis, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, USA, August 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Lu, Q.; Chen, Y.; Takashi, M.; Motonobu, K.; Li, Z. Adaptability of four-samples sensory tests and prediction of visual and near-infrared reflectance spectroscopy for Chinese indica rice. J. Food Eng. 2007, 79, 1445–1451. [Google Scholar]
- Hori, K.; Purboyo, R.; Jo, M.; Kim, S.; Akinaga, Y.; Okita, T.; Kang, M. Comparison of sensory evaluation of aromatic rice by consumers in East and South-east Asia. Int. J. Consum. Stud. 1994, 18, 135–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prescott, J. Comparisons of taste perceptions and preferences of Japanese and Australian consumers: Overview and implications for cross-cultural sensory research. Food Qual. Prefer. 1998, 9, 393–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Behrens, J.; Heinemann, R.; Lanfer-Marquez, U. Parboiled rice: A study about attitude, consumer liking and consumption in São Paulo, Brazil. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2007, 87, 992–999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wansink, B. Response to “Measuring consumer response to food products”. Sensory tests that predict consumer acceptance. Food Qual. Prefer. 2003, 14, 23–26. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edwards, N. Re: “A critical review of visual analogue scales in the measurement of clinical phenomena”. Res. Nurs. Health 1991, 14, 81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Demographic Variables | Total (n = 91) | Gender | Ethnic Group 1 | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Male (n = 34, 37.4%) | Female (n = 57, 62.6%) | European and Others (n = 58, 63.7%) | East Asian (n = 33, 36.3%) | ||
Average age (years, 95% CI) | 38.9 (35.9, 41.9) | 39.4 (35.1,43.8) | 38.6 (34.5,42.7) | 42.5 (38.5, 46.6) | 32.6 (29.3, 35.9) |
Age group (%) | |||||
18–35 years | 49.5% | 41.2% | 54.4% | 37.9% | 69.7% |
36–55 years | 36.3% | 47.1% | 29.8% | 43.1% | 30.3% |
56 over | 14.2% | 11.7% | 15.8% | 19.0% | 0% |
Average time per month consumer eats rice (n, 95% CI)) | 19.0 (15.5, 22.5) | 21.4 (15.9, 27.0) | 17.6 (13.0,22.2) | 10.7 (8.6,12.8) | 33.6 (27.1,40.2) |
Times per month consumer eats rice (%) | |||||
4–10 | 37.4% | 23.5% | 45.6% | 55.2% | 6.1% |
11–20 | 24.2% | 26.5% | 22.8% | 29.3% | 15.2% |
20+ | 38.5% | 50.0% | 31.6% | 5.5% | 78.8% |
Amount of cooked rice consumed per month (grams) 2 | 2850 (2330, 3380) | 3210 (2380, 4050) | 2640 (1950, 3330) | 1610 (1300, 1910) | 5050 (4060, 6030) |
Commonly consumed rice types (%)3 | |||||
Refined, white | 65.9% | 67.6% | 64.9% | 67.2% | 63.6% |
Wholegrain, brown | 34.1% | 32.4% | 35.1% | 32.8% | 36.4% |
Parboiled | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
Common Cooking method (%) | |||||
Boiled or steamed freshly | 46.2 % | 47.1% | 46.6% | 39.7% | 57.6% |
Stir-fried | 38.5% | 41.1% | 36.8% | 51.7% | 15.2% |
Boiled or steamed freshly and reheated 4 | 15.4% | 11.8% | 17.5% | 8.6% | 27.3% |
Where consumer prepare rice (%) | |||||
Home prepared | 41.8% | 38.2% | 43.9% | 39.7% | 45.5% |
Restaurant and take-away | 58.2% | 61.8% | 56.1% | 60.3% | 54.5% |
Rice Sample | Liking of the Sensory Characteristics 1,2 (mean (mm) (95% CI)) | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Colour | Texture | Flavour | Taste | |
Freshly cooked parboiled rice | 59.1 (53.8, 63.1) | 55.2 (49.8, 60.6) | 50.6 (44.9, 56.3)a | 48.8 (43.1, 54.6)a |
Freshly cooked medium-grain brown rice | 60.1 (55.0, 65.2) | 58.0 (52.9, 63.1)a | 59.2 (54.2, 64.2)b | 50.9 (45.7, 56.2)a |
Freshly cooked medium-grain white rice | 59.1 (54.1, 64.2) | 46.3 (40.0, 52.5)b | 43.1 (37.5, 48.8)a | 42.9 (37.1, 48.7)b |
Reheated parboiled rice | 61.3 (56.1, 66.4) | 52.5 (46.3, 58.6) | 57.2 (51.6, 62.8)b | 54.3 (48.4, 60.2)a |
Reheated medium-grain brown rice | 60.9 (55.7, 66.0) | 52.1 (46.0, 58.2) | 56.8 (51.2, 62.4)b | 53.9 (48.1, 59.8)a |
Reheated medium-grain white rice | 58.6 (54.4, 62.8) | 47.8 (42.5, 53.1)b | 45.3 (39.5, 51.1)a | 42.0 (36.2, 47.7)b |
Total | 59.7 (57.5, 61.7) | 52.0 (49.6, 54.3) | 52.0 (49.7, 54.4) | 48.8 (46.4, 51.2) |
Rice Sample | Overall Acceptability VAS (mm)1,2 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Cluster 1 (n = 14) | Cluster 2 (n = 14) | Cluster 3 (n = 36) | Overall (n = 64) | |
Freshly cooked parboiled rice | 74.7 (64.6, 84.8) a | 51.4 (42.8, 60.0) a | 40.5 (32.6, 48.4) a | 52.8 (47.1, 58.5) |
Freshly cooked medium grain brown rice | 61.8 (50.8, 72.9) bd | 56.0 (46.6, 65.4) a | 57.2 (48.5, 65.8) bc | 57.9 (52.2, 63.7) |
Freshly cooked medium grain white rice | 25.4 (14.3, 36.5) c | 55.8 (46.3, 65.2) a | 45.8 (37.1, 54.5) ac | 44.1 (38.4, 49.9) |
Reheated parboiled rice | 56.1 (47.9, 64.3) b | 34.7 (27.7, 41.7) b | 74.3 (67.9, 80.7) b | 56.2 (50.4, 61.9) |
Reheated medium grain brown rice | 55.7 (47.6, 63.9) b | 34.5 (27.6, 41.4) b | 73.8 (67.4, 80.2) d | 55.8 (50.0, 61.5) |
Reheated medium grain white rice | 64.7 (54.7, 74.6) abd | 39.9 (31.4, 48.4) b | 51.5 (43.6, 59.3) ac | 50.8 (45.1, 56.5) |
F-value | 18.83 | 6.48 | 10.42 | 2.97 |
P-value | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 | 0.012 |
© 2018 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 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Lu, L.W.; Monro, J.; Lu, J.; Rush, E. The Effect of Cold Treatment of Parboiled Rice with Lowered Glycaemic Potency on Consumer Liking and Acceptability. Foods 2018, 7, 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7120207
Lu LW, Monro J, Lu J, Rush E. The Effect of Cold Treatment of Parboiled Rice with Lowered Glycaemic Potency on Consumer Liking and Acceptability. Foods. 2018; 7(12):207. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7120207
Chicago/Turabian StyleLu, Louise Weiwei, John Monro, Jun Lu, and Elaine Rush. 2018. "The Effect of Cold Treatment of Parboiled Rice with Lowered Glycaemic Potency on Consumer Liking and Acceptability" Foods 7, no. 12: 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods7120207