↓ Skip to main content

Sweetener Blend Optimization by Using Mixture Design Methodology and the Electronic Tongue

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Food Science, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (74th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Readers on

mendeley
65 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
Sweetener Blend Optimization by Using Mixture Design Methodology and the Electronic Tongue
Published in
Journal of Food Science, August 2014
DOI 10.1111/1750-3841.12575
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Utilizing more than one sweetener has been shown to be an effective way to substitute sucrose in food products. The objective of this study was to apply the augmented simplex-centroid mixture design for the optimization of acceptable sweetener blends using coconut sugar, agave, and stevia. Sweetener blends were evaluated in aqueous solutions and gluten-free granola bars by a trained panel and consumers (n = 60). Significant differences were found between sweetener mixtures in solutions by both panelists and consumers (P < 0.05). Taste profiles for the sweetener solutions were also generated using the electronic tongue. Most consumer and trained intensity ratings were highly correlated (R(2) ≥ 0.79) with the electronic tongue taste profile analysis. Granola bars were also found to be significantly different (P < 0.05), with consumers preferring coconut sugar mixtures. Using contour plots and desirability function analysis, an optimal sweetener combination was found for a granola bar formulation of 89.9% coconut sugar, 6.1% agave, and 4% stevia. These results indicate that a mixture design can be a reliable way to develop new sweetener blends for product development.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 65 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Singapore 1 2%
Unknown 63 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 23%
Student > Master 10 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 11%
Professor 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 14 22%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 19 29%
Chemistry 6 9%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Engineering 5 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Other 10 15%
Unknown 18 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 February 2018.
All research outputs
#7,227,794
of 26,802,131 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science
#1,501
of 5,413 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#62,565
of 248,607 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science
#8
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,802,131 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,413 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 248,607 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.