Consumer Preferences of Jalapeño Pepper in the Mexican Market
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
- (a)
- Product knowledge, which includes questions on consumption motivations, frequency, place of purchase, and quantities purchased.
- (b)
- Fruit attributes and jalapeño pepper commercialization, aspects related to the appreciated characteristics of the fruit such as color, aroma, size, consistency, width, degree of pungency, striping, weight, the absence of bruises, the absence of physiological damage, shape, price, the appearance of the product, the identification the of origin and shelf life [30,31].
- (c)
- Problems and improvements observed, aspects that, according to the consumer, should be attended to and improved by the producer.
- (d)
- Perceptions of future trends, aspects that play a role as determinant factors in jalapeño commercialization [32]. The identified statements were previously commented on and analyzed in a discussion group formed by experts in the matter and researchers involved in the study.
- (e)
- Other products; this section delved into demand for agro-industrial products and other types of peppers consumed.
- (f)
- Consumer characteristics, and aspects related to age, education, gender, profession, place of residence, and income.
Sample and Fieldwork
3. Results
3.1. Jalapeño Pepper Consumption, Purchasing and Demand Habits
3.2. Consumer Segmentation Based on Geographic Region
- (a)
- Northwest Region
- (b)
- North-Central Region
- (c)
- Northeast Region
- (d)
- South-Central Region
- (e)
- Southeast Region
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jiang, J.; Cen, H.; Zhang, C.; Lyu, X.; Weng, H.; Xu, H.; He, Y. Nondestructive quality assessment of chili peppers using near-infrared hyperspectral imaging combined with multivariate analysis. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2018, 146, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- FAOSTAT Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Statistics Division. 2022. Available online: http://faostat.fao.org (accessed on 1 June 2022).
- OECD Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos. Persectivas Agrícolas 2021–2030. 2022. Available online: https://www.fao.org/publications/card/es/c/CB5339ES (accessed on 20 June 2022).
- SIAP Secretaría de Agricultura, Ganadería, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentación. Avances de Siembras y Cosechas por Estado y Año Agrícola. 2022. Available online: http://siap.gob.mx (accessed on 24 March 2022).
- Galindo, G. El servicio de asistencia técnica a los productores de chile seco en Zacatecas. Convergencia 2007, 14, 137–165. [Google Scholar]
- Tansini, R. Economía para no Economistas; Universidad de la República, Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Departamento de Economía: Montevideo, Uruguay, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Rahman, S.M.E.; Mele, M.A.; Lee, Y.T.; Islam, M.Z. Consumer preference, quality, and safety of organic and conventional fresh fruits, vegetables, and cereals. Foods 2021, 10, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lancaster, K.J. A new approach to consumer theory. J. Political Econ. 1996, 74, 132–157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, J.; Jun, J.; Arendt, W. Understanding customers’ healthy food choices at casual dining restaurants: Using the Value-Attitude-Behavior model. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2015, 48, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sans, P.; Combris, P. World meat consumption patterns: An overview of the last fifty years (1961–2011). Meat Sci. 2015, 109, 106–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Testa, L.; Grigioni, G.; Panea, B.; Pavan, E. Color and marbling as predictors of meat quality perception of Argentinian consumers. Foods 2021, 10, 1465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grunert, G.; Bredahl, L.; Brunso, K. Consumer perception of meat quality and implications for product development in the meat sector—A review. Meat Sci. 2004, 66, 259–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SE Secretaria de Economía. Logística de Centrales de Abasto. 2008. Available online: http://www.elogistica.economia.gob.mx/work/models/elogistica/Resource/1/1/images/ABASTO0812.pdf (accessed on 1 March 2022).
- Boca, D. Factors influencing consumer behavior in sustainable fruit and vegetable consumption in Maramures County, Romania. Sustainability 2021, 13, 1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ben Hassen, T.; El Bilali, H.; Allahyari, M.S.; Morrar, R. Food attitudes and consumer behavior towards food in conflict-affected zones during the COVID-19 pandemic: Case of the Palestinian territories. Br. Food J. 2022, 124, 2921–2936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Massaglia, S.; Merlino, V.M.; Borra, D. Marketing strategies for animal welfare meat identification: Comparison of preferences between millennial and conventional consumers. Qual. Access Success 2018, 19, 305–311. [Google Scholar]
- Chung, J.E.; Yu, J.P.; Pysarchik, D.T. Cue utilization to assess food product quality: A comparison of consumers and retailers in India. Int. Rev. Retail Distrib. Consum. Res. 2006, 16, 199–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Toledano, B. Variedades de melocotón con mayor potencial económico: Un estudio de caso en el norte de México. ITEA Inf. Técnica Económica Agrar. Rev. Asoc. Interprof. Desarro. Agrar. 2021, 117, 598–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jaeger, S.R.; Antúnez, L.; Ares, G.; Johnston, J.W.; Hall, M.; Harker, F.R. Consumers’ visual attention to fruit defects and disorders: A case study with apple images. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2016, 116, 36–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lombart, C.; Millan, E.; Normand, J.M.; Verhulst, A.; Labbé-Pinlon, B.; Moreau, G. Consumer perceptions and purchase behavior toward imperfect fruits and vegetables in an immersive virtual reality grocery store. J. Retail. Consum. Serv. 2019, 48, 28–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Godrich, S.; Kent, K.; Murray, S.; Auckland, S.; Lo, J.; Blekkenhorst, L.; Devine, A. Australian consumer perceptions of regionally grown fruits and vegetables: Importance, enablers, and barriers. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Danojević, D.Đ.; Glogovac, S.K.; Moravčević, Đ.Ž.; Medić-Pap, S. Preferences of Serbian consumers towards different pepper fruits. Food Feed. Res. 2021, 48, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Castellón, E.; Chávez, L.; Carrillo, C.; Vera, M. Preferencias de consumo de chiles (Capsicum annuum L.) nativos en los valles centrales de Oaxaca, México. Rev. Fitotec. Mex. 2012, 35, 27–35. [Google Scholar]
- López, P. El Chile de Agua: Un chile típico de los Valles Centrales de Oaxaca. Rev. Agroproduce 2007, 16, 8–12. [Google Scholar]
- Rodríguez-Del Bosque, L.A. Preferencia del consumidor por el chile piquín en comparación con otros chiles en el noreste de México. Rev. Chapingo Ser. Hortic. 2005, 11, 279–281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Medina, T.; Rodríguez-Del-Bosque, L.A.; Villalón, H.; Pozo, O.; Ramírez, M.; López, R.; Lara, M.; Gaona, G.; Cardona, A.; Mora, A. El chile piquín (Capsicum annuum L. var. aviculare) en el noreste de México. Aspectos ecológicos y socioeconómicos. Biotam 2002, 13, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- López, L.; Fernández, M.; Costa, R.; Franco, J.; Badillo, T. Creencias sobre el consumo de chile y la salud en la ciudad de México. Salud Públ. 1995, 37, 339–343. [Google Scholar]
- Sánchez-Toledano, B.I.; Cuevas-Reyes, V.; Kallas, Z.; Zegbe, J.A. Preferences in ‘Jalapeño’ Pepper Attributes: A Choice Study in Mexico. Foods 2021, 10, 3111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kotler, P.; Keller, L. Marketing Management, 12th ed.; Pearson Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2006; 816p. [Google Scholar]
- Sánchez-Toledano, B.; Zegbe, J.A.; Cuevas-Reyes, V.; Camarena-Gómez, D.; López-Santiago, M. Caracterización de los intermediarios en el mercado del melocotón mexicano. ITEA-Inform. Téc. Econ. Agrar. 2019, 115, 270–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peñaherrera, V.; Carpio, C.; Sandoval, L.; Sánchez, M.; Cabrera, T.; Guerrero, P.; Borja, I. Efecto del etiquetado de semáforo en el contenido nutricional y el consumo de bebidas gaseosas en Ecuador. Panam. Salud Publica 2019, 42, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Verdú, J. Desarrollo y validación de una escala de medición de la calidad percibida del vino tinto. In Proceedings of the XI Congreso Nacional de la Asociación Científica de Economía y Dirección de la Empresa (ACEDE), Zaragoza, España, 18 September 2001; p. 12. [Google Scholar]
- INEGI Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía. Encuesta Nacional Agropecuaria: Resultados Generales. 2022. Available online: http://www.inegi.gob.mx (accessed on 20 September 2021).
- Sánchez-Toledano, B.; Zegbe, J.; Rumayor, A. Propuesta para evaluar el proceso de adopción de las innovaciones tecnológicas. Rev. Mex. Cienc. Agric. 2013, 4, 855–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Malhotra, K. Investigación de Mercados, 5th ed.; Pearson Prentice Hall: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2008; p. 805. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.; Anderson, E.; Tatham, R.; Black, W. Multivariate Data Analysis; Prentice-Hall International, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 1998; p. 730. [Google Scholar]
- DataMéxico. Acerca de México. 2022. Available online: https://datamexico.org/es/profile/geo/mexico?comorbilityOption=hospitalizedOption&covidMetricSelector=withoutProcessOption#empleo-evolucion-poblacion-ocupada (accessed on 16 June 2022).
- Monkkonen, P.; Paloma Giottonini, M.; Comandon, A. Socioeconomic Segregation in Mexico City: Scale, Social Classes, and the Primate City; Van Ham, M., Tammaru, T., Ubarevičienė, R., Janssen, H., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 329–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kruskal, B. Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling: A Numerical Method. Psychometrika 1964, 2, 115–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schifferstein, H.N.; Wehrle, T.; Carbon, C.C. Consumer expectations for vegetables with typical and atypical colors: The case of carrots. Food Qual. Prefer. 2019, 72, 98–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reynolds, A.; Percepciones y Preferencias del Consumidor de Palmito Fresco. Caso: Unión de asociaciones de productores de plantines y palmito. Perspectivas 2013, 61–104. Available online: http://www.scielo.org.bo/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1994-37332013000200003&lng=es&tlng=es (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- Cavaliere, A.; Ventura, V. Mismatch between food sustainability and consumer acceptance toward innovation technologies among Millennial students: The case of Shelf Life Extension. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 175, 641–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vázquez, M.; Olguín, J.A.; Fayos, O.; González, A.V.; Espada, E.; Ferreiro, M.; Palma, M. Influence of fruit ripening on the total and individual capsaicinoids and capsiate content in Naga Jolokia peppers (Capsicum chinense Jacq.). Agronomy 2020, 10, 252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Aguirre, E.; Muñoz, V. El chile como Alimento. 2015. Available online: https://amc.edu.mx/revistaciencia/images/revista/66_3/PDF/Chile.pdf (accessed on 1 April 2023).
- Marshall, J.; Doperlski, V.L. Jalapeño pepper pungency as a quality control factor for process cheese. J. Dairy Sci. 1981, 64, 627–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lillywhite, M.; Simonsen, E.; Uchanski, E. Spicy Pepper Consumption and Preferences in the United States. HortTechnology 2013, 23, 868–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jaffee, S.; Henson, S.; Unnevehr, L.; Grace, D.; Cassou, E. The Safe Food Imperative: Accelerating Progress in Low- and Middle-Income Countries; Agriculture and Food Series; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2019; Available online: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/30568 (accessed on 25 March 2022).
- Aung, M.; Chang, S. Traceability in a food supply chain: Safety and quality perspectives. Food Control 2014, 39, 172–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pethick, W.; Ball, J.; Banks, G.; Hocquette, F. Current and future issues facing red meat quality in a competitive market and how to manage continuous improvement. Anim. Prod. Sci. 2011, 51, 13–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SENASICA Servicio Nacional de Sanidad, Inocuidad y Calidad Agroalimentaria. Trazabilidad de Productos Agroalimentarios. 2022. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/senasica/articulos/trazabilidad-de-productos-agroalimentarios (accessed on 1 April 2022).
- Metref, H.; Calvo, D. Señalización de la calidad y análisis de los beneficios asociados a la trazabilidad. Análisis del mercado del atún en España. ITEA 2016, 112, 421–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Engo, N.; Fuxman, A.; González, C.; Negri, L.; Polenta, G.; Vaugagna, S. Desarrollo sobre las Exigencias Sobre Calidad e Inocuidad de Alimentos en el Mundo (2025), 1st ed.; Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2015; p. 290.
- Sangerman, D.; Larqué, B.; Navarro, A.; Schwentesius, R.; Nieto, C.; Cuevas, J. Estudio de mercado de aguacate, guayaba y durazno en el Distrito Federal, México. Rev. Mex. Cienc. Agríc. 2011, 2, 925–938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sumaya, M.; Suárez, T.; Cruz, N.; Alanís, E.; Sanpedro, J. Innovación de productos de alto valor agregado a partir de la tuna mexicana. Rev. Mex. Agronegocios 2010, 9, 435–441. [Google Scholar]
- Shafie, F.; Rennie, D. Consumer Perceptions towards Organic Food. Procedia-Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 49, 360–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Massaglia, S.; Borra, D.; Peano, C.; Sottile, F.; Merlino, M. Consumer Preference Heterogeneity Evaluation in Fruit and Vegetable Purchasing Decisions Using the Best–Worst Approach. Foods 2019, 8, 266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Babin, J.; Harris, G. CB Consumer Behaviour; Nelson Education: Toronto, ON, Canada, 2023; 368p. [Google Scholar]
- Lockshin, L.; Jarvis, W.; D’Hauteville, F.; Perrouty, J. Using simulations from discrete choice experiments to measure sensitivity to brand, region, price, and awards in wine choice. Food Qual. Prefer. 2006, 17, 166–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Banović, M.; Fontes, M.A.; Barreira, M.M.; Grunert, K.G. Beef quality perception at the point of purchase: A study from Portugal. Food Qual. Prefer. 2009, 20, 335–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sample * | Mexican Population ** | ||
---|---|---|---|
Feature | % | Feature | % |
Age | |||
18–24 years | 15.2 | 18–24 years | 22.9 |
25–29 years | 9.8 | 25–29 years | 10.7 |
30–34 years | 10.6 | 30–34 years | 9.5 |
35–39 years | 9.8 | 35–39 years | 10.3 |
40–44 years | 13.1 | 40–44 years | 9.6 |
45–49 years | 14.7 | 45–49 years | 8.7 |
50–54 years | 9.0 | 50–54 years | 8.1 |
55–59 years | 6.8 | 55–59 years | 7.1 |
More than 60–65 years | 11.0 | 60–65 years | 13.1 |
Gender | |||
Female | 66.0 | Female | 51.4 |
Male | 34.0 | Male | 48.6 |
Academic level | |||
Elementary school | 12.3 | Elementary school | 54.5 |
Middle school | 21.2 | Middle school | 12.0 |
High school | 27.8 | High school | 17.5 |
University | 38.7 | University | 16 |
Monthly income level | |||
Less than $5000 | 46.1 | Less than MXN 5000 | 35 |
Between MXN 5001 and MXN 10,000 | 31.7 | Between MXN 5001 and MXN 10,000 | 9.7 |
Between MXN 10,001 and MXN 15,000 | 13.1 | Between MXN 10,001 and MXN 15,000 | 14.4 |
Between MXN 15,001 and MXN 20,000 | 6.0 | Between MXN 15,001 and MXN 20,000 | 21.4 |
More than MXN 20,001 | 3.1 | More than $30,001 | 19.5 |
Frequency of Consumption | Percentage of the Sample | Amount Consumed | Percentage of the Sample |
---|---|---|---|
Daily, Monday to Friday | 13.3 | Less than half a kilogram | 56.1 |
Some weekdays | 49.6 | Between half a kilogram to a kilogram | 35.3 |
Weekends | 26.6 | Between one kilogram and two kilograms | 7.7 |
Less than once a month | 10.5 | More than three kilograms | 0.8 |
Regions | External Color | Aroma Characteristic | Size | Consistency | Width | Pungency Degree | Striped | Weight | Absence of Physiological Damage | Price | External Appearance | Origin Identification | Shelf Life |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Northwest | Glossy dark emerald green a | 3.0 b | Medium (5 to 7.5 cm) b | Medium and lower to the touch b | Indifferent ab | Moderately spicy (5 thousand to 7 thousand USc) a | 0–10% and from 10–15% ab | 25–30 g a | No damage a | From MXN 10–MXN 15 a | 4.0 b | 3.3 a | 4.4 a |
north-Central | Glossy dark emerald green a | 4.0 ab | Medium (5 to 7.5 cm) b | Indifferent ab | Indifferent ab | Moderately spicy (5 thousand to 7 thousand USc) a | 0–10% and from 10–15% ab | 25–30 g a | No damage a | From MXN 10–MXN 15 a | 4.2 ab | 3.6 a | 3.9 a |
Northeast | Glossy dark emerald green a | 4.0 ab | Large (8 to 10 cm) a | High to the touch a | Indifferent ab | Moderately spicy (5 thousand to 7 thousand USc) a | 0–10% a | 25–30 g a | No damage a | From MXN 10–MXN 15 a | 4.2 b | 3.7 a | 4.4 a |
south-Central | Glossy dark emerald green a | 4.0 ab | Medium (5 to 7.5 cm) b | Medium and lower to the touch b | Medium (3.0 to 3.5) b | Moderately spicy (5 thousand to 7 thousand USc) a | 0–10% and from 10–15% ab | 25–30 g a | No damage a | From MXN 10–MXN 15 a | 4.4 a | 3.5 a | 4.4 a |
Southeast | Glossy dark emerald green a | 5.0 a | Indifferent ab | Medium and lower to the touch b | Large (3.5 to 405 cm) a | Moderately spicy (5 thousand to 7 thousand USc) a | From 10–15% b | 25–30 g a | No damage a | From MXN 10–MXN 15 a | 4.3 b | 3.8 a | 4.0 a |
Characteristics | Region (%) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Northwest | North-Central | Northeast | South-Central | Southeast | |
Consumer preference | |||||
Processed jalapeño peppers | 59.5 | 38.1 | 41.2 | 25.3 | 58.0 |
Fresh jalapeño | 39.0 | 59.5 | 58.8 | 73.3 | 38.5 |
Smoked jalapeño | 1.5 | 2.3 | 0.0 | 1.5 | 3.5 |
Consumption motivations | |||||
Multifunctionality of use | 18.5 | 20.9 | 33.3 | 17.5 | 8.9 |
High pungency degree | 14.2 | 9.3 | 11.1 | 13.9 | 4.7 |
Low pungency degree | 7.0 | 11.4 | 5.6 | 4.1 | 17.8 |
Aroma | 7.9 | 8.1 | 2.8 | 2.7 | 15.1 |
Taste | 44.8 | 43.7 | 38.9 | 57.2 | 51.9 |
Others (color, nutritional value, etc.) | 7.6 | 6.6 | 8.3 | 4.6 | 1.5 |
Consumption frequency | |||||
Some days during the week | 51.5 | 74.4 | 76.5 | 16.0 | 65.0 |
Daily, Monday to Friday | 20.0 | 17.0 | 23.5 | 7.5 | 10.5 |
On weekends | 15.0 | 4.4 | 0.0 | 59.8 | 16.5 |
Less than once a month | 13.5 | 4.2 | 0.0 | 16.8 | 8.0 |
Consumption amounts | |||||
Less than half a kilo | 78.5 | 44.4 | 11.5 | 54.8 | 62.5 |
Half to one kilo | 19.0 | 49.1 | 58.5 | 30.8 | 32.0 |
One to two kilos | 2.5 | 6.0 | 23.5 | 12.5 | 5.0 |
More than three kilos | 0.0 | 0.5 | 5.9 | 1.3 | 0.5 |
Place of purchase | |||||
Open-air markets | -- | -- | 47.0 | 45.4 | -- |
Supermarket | 58.3 | -- | 52.9 | 29.0 | 24.3 |
Traditional shop | 25.6 | 54.4 | -- | 25.4 | 41.2 |
Markets | 15.9 | 45.5 | -- | -- | 34.5 |
Problems they observe | |||||
Size | -- | 36.0 | -- | 18.6 | 29.3 |
Taste | -- | -- | -- | 17.2 | -- |
External appearance | 38.2 | 25.2 | 46.4 | 33.0 | 20.6 |
Price | 29.1 | 38.7 | 28.5 | 31.1 | 31.5 |
Shelf life | 32.6 | -- | 25.0 | -- | -- |
Degree of itching | -- | -- | -- | -- | 18.6 |
Agro-industrial products * | |||||
Sauce | 62.5 | 37.3 | 30.0 | 40.9 | 37.3 |
Cheese | -- | 17.4 | 32.5 | 22.6 | 17.4 |
Canned | 35.0 | 27.5 | 37.2 | 37.0 | 27.7 |
Snack | -- | 17.7 | -- | -- | 17.6 |
Substitutes | |||||
Serrano pepper | 41.5 | 16.6 | 64.7 | 39.4 | 14.6 |
Tree chili | -- | -- | -- | 19.6 | -- |
Dry pepper | -- | 24.4 | 35.2 | 24.4 | 25.9 |
Poblano pepper | -- | -- | -- | 16.4 | -- |
Habanero pepper | -- | 53.8 | -- | -- | 47.7 |
Dried chili peppers | 31.0 | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Bell pepper | 22.5 | -- | -- | -- | -- |
Xcatic pepper | -- | -- | -- | -- | 11.8 |
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. |
© 2023 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
Sánchez Toledano, B.I.; Camarena Gómez, D.M.J.; López Santiago, M.A.; Cuevas Reyes, V. Consumer Preferences of Jalapeño Pepper in the Mexican Market. Horticulturae 2023, 9, 684. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9060684
Sánchez Toledano BI, Camarena Gómez DMJ, López Santiago MA, Cuevas Reyes V. Consumer Preferences of Jalapeño Pepper in the Mexican Market. Horticulturae. 2023; 9(6):684. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9060684
Chicago/Turabian StyleSánchez Toledano, Blanca Isabel, Dena María Jesús Camarena Gómez, Marco Andrés López Santiago, and Venancio Cuevas Reyes. 2023. "Consumer Preferences of Jalapeño Pepper in the Mexican Market" Horticulturae 9, no. 6: 684. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9060684
APA StyleSánchez Toledano, B. I., Camarena Gómez, D. M. J., López Santiago, M. A., & Cuevas Reyes, V. (2023). Consumer Preferences of Jalapeño Pepper in the Mexican Market. Horticulturae, 9(6), 684. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae9060684