Storage Time and Temperature on the Sensory Properties Broccoli

Typically, broccoli arrives at the store within 7–14 days of harvest and is kept refrigerated until purchased or considered waste. To date, information has been limited on how this time on the shelf or storage temperature affects the sensory attributes that contribute to broccoli purchase or repurchase. In this study, 100 consumers performed acceptance tests and a check-all-that-apply (CATA) section to characterize sensory changes in two cultivars of broccoli (‘Diplomat’ and ‘Emerald Crown’) stored at two temperatures (0 °C and 4 °C) over five time points: 0, 14, 21, 28, and 42 days. Due to quality degradation during storage, the overall liking of broccoli decreased regardless of holding temperature and variety. This was in accordance with a decrease in sweetness and an increase in bitterness intensity. However, there were differences between varieties in which Diplomat had more sensory changes at higher temperatures and only Emerald showed negative changes to its appearance in color. Lastly, the CATA data revealed the attributes responsible for modulating the consumer acceptance of broccoli such as tastes, colors and flavors (e.g., grassy, musty, dirt-like). This information can be used to better inform shelf-life determinations of broccoli. Additionally, these changes in taste, odor, texture, and color can inform those interested in investigating the biochemical processes related to broccoli storage

Storage Time and Temperature on the Sensory Properties Broccoli

Typically, broccoli arrives at the store within 7–14 days of harvest and is kept refrigerated until purchased or considered waste. To date, information has been limited on how this time on the shelf or storage temperature affects the sensory attributes that contribute to broccoli purchase or repurchase. In this study, 100 consumers performed acceptance tests and a check-all-that-apply (CATA) section to characterize sensory changes in two cultivars of broccoli (‘Diplomat’ and ‘Emerald Crown’) stored at two temperatures (0 °C and 4 °C) over five time points: 0, 14, 21, 28, and 42 days. Due to quality degradation during storage, the overall liking of broccoli decreased regardless of holding temperature and variety. This was in accordance with a decrease in sweetness and an increase in bitterness intensity. However, there were differences between varieties in which Diplomat had more sensory changes at higher temperatures and only Emerald showed negative changes to its appearance in color. Lastly, the CATA data revealed the attributes responsible for modulating the consumer acceptance of broccoli such as tastes, colors and flavors (e.g., grassy, musty, dirt-like). This information can be used to better inform shelf-life determinations of broccoli. Additionally, these changes in taste, odor, texture, and color can inform those interested in investigating the biochemical processes related to broccoli storage

Storage Time and Temperature on the Sensory Properties Broccoli

Typically, broccoli arrives at the store within 7–14 days of harvest and is kept refrigerated until purchased or considered waste. To date, information has been limited on how this time on the shelf or storage temperature affects the sensory attributes that contribute to broccoli purchase or repurchase. In this study, 100 consumers performed acceptance tests and a check-all-that-apply (CATA) section to characterize sensory changes in two cultivars of broccoli (‘Diplomat’ and ‘Emerald Crown’) stored at two temperatures (0 °C and 4 °C) over five time points: 0, 14, 21, 28, and 42 days. Due to quality degradation during storage, the overall liking of broccoli decreased regardless of holding temperature and variety. This was in accordance with a decrease in sweetness and an increase in bitterness intensity. However, there were differences between varieties in which Diplomat had more sensory changes at higher temperatures and only Emerald showed negative changes to its appearance in color. Lastly, the CATA data revealed the attributes responsible for modulating the consumer acceptance of broccoli such as tastes, colors and flavors (e.g., grassy, musty, dirt-like). This information can be used to better inform shelf-life determinations of broccoli. Additionally, these changes in taste, odor, texture, and color can inform those interested in investigating the biochemical processes related to broccoli storage

The contribution of texture contrasts and combinations to food acceptance across cultures

Texture has long been considered an important attribute for food acceptance. However, which specific textural characteristics contribute to overall acceptance of a food is not well understood. It has been suggested that texture contrasts and combinations are a universal feature in giving foods a desirable texture, yet this notion is largely based upon anecdotal data. This study uses multiple survey research methods to assess the importance of texture contrast and combinations across cultures (Poland, U.S.A., and Singapore). Participants (N = 288) completed a survey that included overt measures of food texture contrast importance as well as free response questions regarding texture. The overall importance of texture for food liking was not different across the populations. However, the participants from Singapore and Poland gave more importance to a desirable food having multiple textures than the U.S.A. cohort. When looking at free responses, participants were twice as likely to mention combinations (multiple textures) with a texture contrast when describing foods they liked, in comparison to foods they disliked. This was observed across all three cultures. However, the type and quantity of texture terms used within combinations were different among cultures. For instance, Singaporeans enjoyed more texturally diverse food combinations than the other two cultures. These findings highlight the importance of texture contrasts and combinations in three distinct cultures

Genome-Editing of <i>FtsZ1</i> for Alteration of Starch Granule Size in Potato Tubers

Genome-editing has enabled rapid improvement for staple food crops, such as potato, a key beneficiary of the technology. In potato, starch contained within tubers represents the primary product for use in food and non-food industries. Starch granules are produced in the plastids of tubers with plastid size correlated with the size of starch grana. The division of plastids is controlled by proteins, including the tubulin-like GTPase FtsZ1. The altered expression of FtsZ1 has been shown to disrupt plastid division, leading to the production of “macro-plastid”-containing plants. These macro-chloroplast plants are characterized by cells containing fewer and enlarged plastids. In this work, we utilize CRISPR/Cas9 to generate FtsZ1 edited potato lines to demonstrate that genome-editing can be used to increase the size of starch granules in tubers. Altered plastid morphology was comparable to the overexpression of FtsZ1 in previous work in potato and other crops. Several lines were generated with up to a 1.98-fold increase in starch granule size that was otherwise phenotypically indistinguishable from wild-type plants. Further, starch paste from one of the most promising lines showed a 2.07-fold increase in final viscosity. The advantages of enlarged starch granules and the potential of CRISPR/Cas9-based technologies for food crop improvement are further discussed

Supporting good quality, community-based end-of-life care for people living with dementia: the SEED research programme including feasibility RCT

Background In the UK, most people with dementia die in the community and they often receive poorer end-of-life care than people with cancer. Objective The overall aim of this programme was to support professionals to deliver good-quality, community-based care towards, and at, the end of life for people living with dementia and their families. Design The Supporting Excellence in End-of-life care in Dementia (SEED) programme comprised six interlinked workstreams. Workstream 1 examined existing guidance and outcome measures using systematic reviews, identified good practice through a national e-survey and explored outcomes of end-of-life care valued by people with dementia and family carers (n = 57) using a Q-sort study. Workstream 2 explored good-quality end-of-life care in dementia from the perspectives of a range of stakeholders using qualitative methods (119 interviews, 12 focus groups and 256 observation hours). Using data from workstreams 1 and 2, workstream 3 used co-design methods with key stakeholders to develop the SEED intervention. Worksteam 4 was a pilot study of the SEED intervention with an embedded process evaluation. Using a cluster design, we assessed the feasibility and acceptability of recruitment and retention, outcome measures and our intervention. Four general practices were recruited in North East England: two were allocated to the intervention and two provided usual care. Patient recruitment was via general practitioner dementia registers. Outcome data were collected at baseline, 4, 8 and 12 months. Workstream 5 involved economic modelling studies that assessed the potential value of the SEED intervention using a contingent valuation survey of the general public (n = 1002). These data informed an economic decision model to explore how the SEED intervention might influence care. Results of the model were presented in terms of the costs and consequences (e.g. hospitalisations) and, using the contingent valuation data, a cost–benefit analysis. Workstream 6 examined commissioning of end-of-life care in dementia through a narrative review of policy and practice literature, combined with indepth interviews with a national sample of service commissioners (n = 20). Setting The workstream 1 survey and workstream 2 included services throughout England. The workstream 1 Q-sort study and workstream 4 pilot trial took place in North East England. For workstream 4, four general practices were recruited; two received the intervention and two provided usual care. Results Currently, dementia care and end-of-life care are commissioned separately, with commissioners receiving little formal guidance and training. Examples of good practice rely on non-recurrent funding and leadership from an interested clinician. Seven key components are required for good end-of-life care in dementia: timely planning discussions, recognising end of life and providing supportive care, co-ordinating care, effective working with primary care, managing hospitalisation, continuing care after death, and valuing staff and ongoing learning. Using co-design methods and the theory of change, the seven components were operationalised as a primary care-based, dementia nurse specialist intervention, with a care resource kit to help the dementia nurse specialist improve the knowledge of family and professional carers. The SEED intervention proved feasible and acceptable to all stakeholders, and being located in the general practice was considered beneficial. None of the outcome measures was suitable as the primary outcome for a future trial. The contingent valuation showed that the SEED intervention was valued, with a wider package of care valued more than selected features in isolation. The SEED intervention is unlikely to reduce costs, but this may be offset by the value placed on the SEED intervention by the general public. Limitations The biggest challenge to the successful delivery and completion of this research programme was translating the ‘theoretical’ complex intervention into practice in an ever-changing policy and service landscape at national and local levels. A major limitation for a future trial is the lack of a valid and relevant primary outcome measure to evaluate the effectiveness of a complex intervention that influences outcomes for both individuals and systems. Conclusions Although the dementia nurse specialist intervention was acceptable, feasible and integrated well with existing care, it is unlikely to reduce costs of care; however, it was highly valued by all stakeholders (professionals, people with dementia and their families) and has the potential to influence outcomes at both an individual and a systems level. Future work There is no plan to progress to a full randomised controlled trial of the SEED intervention in its current form. In view of new National Institute for Health and Care Excellence dementia guidance, which now recommends a care co-ordinator for all people with dementia, the feasibility of providing the SEED intervention throughout the illness trajectory should be explored. Appropriate outcome measures to evaluate the effectiveness of such a complex intervention are needed urgently. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN21390601. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research, Vol. 8, No. 8. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information