Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (1)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = miniature Kramer shear cell

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
19 pages, 1431 KiB  
Article
Assessment of the Miniature Kramer Shear Cell to Measure Both Solid Food and Bolus Mechanical Properties and Their Interplay with Oral Processing Behavior
by María Dolores Álvarez, Jaime Paniagua and Beatriz Herranz
Foods 2020, 9(5), 613; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9050613 - 11 May 2020
Cited by 12 | Viewed by 5678
Abstract
This study assessed the usefulness of the miniature Kramer shear cell to determine relevant instrumental parameters of solid foods and bolus counterparts, examining their relationships with oral processing behaviors to obtain greater knowledge about the texture perception process. Six solid foods with different [...] Read more.
This study assessed the usefulness of the miniature Kramer shear cell to determine relevant instrumental parameters of solid foods and bolus counterparts, examining their relationships with oral processing behaviors to obtain greater knowledge about the texture perception process. Six solid foods with different textural properties were tested. Bolus mechanical properties were also determined by means of cone penetration tests and rheological measurements, and their particle size distributions by sieving. Oral processing behavior (chewing time, number of chews, chewing rate, eating rate) and food saliva uptake (SU) of a young volunteer and a panel of 39 untrained participants were analyzed. The Kramer mechanical properties were very suitable for detecting different levels of food and bolus textural hardness and fracturability and the associated degrees of fragmentation achieved during mastication. Chewing time and number of chews were highly correlated with Kramer food and bolus mechanical properties for the single subject and for the panel’s oral processing behaviors. For the single subject, SU and eating rate also showed strong correlations with food and bolus mechanical properties, unlike chewing rate and food moisture content (FMC). In contrast, eating rate, FMC, and SU did not vary with the oral activities of the panel. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

Back to TopTop