Group Title: Citrus Station mimeo series - Florida Citrus Commission ; 62-1
Title: Color and flavor of commercial samples of Florida frozen concentrated orange juices
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00072410/00001
 Material Information
Title: Color and flavor of commercial samples of Florida frozen concentrated orange juices
Series Title: Citrus Station mimeo series
Physical Description: 2, 3 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Huggart, R. L
Citrus Experiment Station (Lake Alfred, Fla.)
Florida Citrus Commission
Publisher: Florida Citrus Experiment Station :
Florida Citrus Commission
Place of Publication: Lake Alfred FL
Publication Date: 1961
 Subjects
Subject: Frozen concentrated orange juice -- Quality -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Orange juice -- Flavor and odor -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: R.L. Huggart ... et al..
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "July 20, 1961."
Funding: Citrus Station mimeo report ;
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00072410
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 75260054

Full Text





Citrus Station Mimeo Series 62-1
July 20, 1961

Color and Flavor of Commercial Samples of Florida Frozen Concentrated
Orange Juices

R. L. Huggart, R. W. Barron, M. D. Maraulja and F. W. Wenzel


Samples of commercial frozen orange concentrate have been collected semi-
monthly for seven citrus seasons from Florida processing plants. Samples were
not collected during the 1955-56 season. The color of the concentrates has
been determined using a Hunter Color Difference Meter. This instrument gives
three Hunter color values designated as "a", "b" and "Rd". Differences in the
chromaticity, which include both hue and saturation, in objects of different
color are indicated by the "a" and "b" values. A positive "a" value indicates
redness, while a negative "a" value signifies greeness; positive and negative
"b" values designate yellowness and blueness, respectively. When an object
does not possess any hue, such as a white or a black object, then the "a" and
"b" values will be zero. The luminous reflectance, which is the percentage of
the incident light reflected from a surface, is indicated by the Hunter "Rd"
value. A "Rd" value of zero would result when the color of an ideal black
object is measured since no light would be reflected. Objects having color
differences because of variations in lightness, such as a light gray or a dark
gray object, would show different "Rd" values, the value being larger for the
light gray object.

Visual comparison of many samples of orange concentrate has shown that the
order of importance of the Hunter readings in indicating visual color differences
or relative color quality is "a", "Rd" and "b"; the "a" value is undoubtingly the
most important.

Color measurements of commercial frozen orange concentrates, as well as those
of the reconstituted juices, have been reported and discussed in the mimeographed
reports distributed at the Annual Processors' Meetings held each year at the
Florida Citrus Experiment Station, Lake Alfred; also, in the following publications.

1. Huggart, R. L. and F. W. Wenzel. 1954. Measurement and control
of color of orange concentrate. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 67: 210-216.

2. Huggart, R. L. and F. W. Wenzel. 1955. Color differences of
citrus juices and concentrates using the Hunter Color Difference Meter.
Food Technol. 2: 27-29.

3. Wenzel, F. W., R. W. Barron, R. L. Huggart, R 0eniand,
M. D. Maraulja. 1958. Comparison of color and flav frozen.
concentrated orange juice. Proc. Fla. State Hort. S 7: 274-27
u 1961 1

Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station, ',' '
Lake Alfred, Florida. --
1041 b 7/20/61 FWW







-2-


Information is given in Tables 1 and 2 concerning the relative color
quality of commercial frozen orange concentrates collected during the seven
citrus seasons. The relative color quality indicated is based on the individual
Hunter "a" and "Rd" values, although each of these two values are interrelated
and dependent to some extent on each other, as well as on the Hunter "b" value.
In using the relative color quality terms ranging from "excellent" to "poor",
it is considered that the color quality of orange concentrate is directly pro-
portional to the "a" value, which is a measure of the red component of the
color; also, that the color quality is inversely proportional to the lightness
or whiteness of the color, as measured by the Hunter "Rd" value.

In the examination of the data in Tables 1 and 2, it should be remembered
that major freezes occurred during the 1957-58 season. It should also be noted
that the results reported include those from the examination of samples from
the entire packing season and, therefore, include both midseason and late season
packs of frozen orange concentrate.

Briefly, the following conclusions are indicated by the data in Tables 1 and
2. The relative color quality based upon the Hunter "a" values or redness, as
shown in Table 1, varies throughout the seven year period. Such variations are
believed to be chiefly caused by both fruit varietal and seasonal variations in
the color of the orange juices; also, by processing procedures, such as blending
of concentrates having different Hunter "a" values. The somewhat undesirable
lightness or whiteness in the color of the concentrates increased during most of
the seasons from 1953-54 to 1959-60, as shown by data in Table 2; however, such
changes have not occurred to any major extent over the last three seasons,
1958-59 through 1960-61. Increasing the amount of minute or fine pulp particles
in an orange concentrate will result in an increase in the "Rd" value, which
indicates an increase in the lightness or whiteness of the color. Results,
based on the Hunter "b" values or yellowness, indicated a gradual increase in the
yellowness of the concentrates over the entire seven seasons. Tabulation of this
data is not given in this report.

Data presented in Table 3 show the relative flavor quality of the samples
of commercial frozen orange concentrate collected over the seven season period.
Attached are the directions given to members of the flavor panel who graded
these products. Concentrates graded "good" or "fair" are considered to be of
acceptable flavor quality. It is evident from the data in Table 3 that the
relative flavor quality has varied during the seven seasons. The overall flavor
of the frozen orange concentrates, packed when late season oranges were available,
was always better than that of concentrates packed during the midseason when
greater quantities of early and midseason oranges were used. Flavorwise, the
best season was that of 1954-55 and the poorest season was that of 1957-58 during
which major freezes occurred in Florida.
It should be noted that the relative flavor grades listed in Table 3 for the
1960-61 season are based upon the first or initial flavor evaluation by the taste
panel. A second evaluation of the flavor of these samples is in progress at this
time but has not yet been completed.

Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
1041 c 7/20/61 FWW








Table 1. Frequency distribution of relative color quality for samples of
commercial frozen concentrated orange juices collected from Florida processing
plants during seven citrus seasons
Concentrates
Relative .Number of samples and season -
color 220 215 212 193 197 187 195
quality 2 1953-54 1954-55 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61
% of samples
Excellent 2.7 2.8 14.1 0.5 4.6 10.2 4.6
Very good 25.0 17.7 30.6 11.9 27.4 33.7 34.4
Good 20.4 24.2 13.7 26.5 13.2 26.8 26.6
Fair 37.8 32.1 37.8 39.3 34.0 28.3 31.3
Poor 14.1 23.2 3.8 21.8 20.8 1.0 3.1
1 Samples collected semi-monthly from December through June, inclusively, during
each processing season.
2 Relative color quality based on Hunter Color Difference Meter "a" values, which
are a measure of the red component in the visual orange color of the concen-
trate.


Table 2. Frequency distribution of relative color quality for samples of
commercial frozen concentrated orange juices collected from Florida processing
plants during seven citrus seasons
Concentrates
Relative Number of samples and season
color 220 215 212 193 197 187 195
quality 2 1953-54 1954-55 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61
% of samples
Excellent 19.5 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Very good 41.3 31.6 17.5 11.9 14.2 5.9 10.8
Good 29.6 44.2 40.1 47.7 34.1 35.9 40.0
Fair 8.7 16.3 30.6 35.2 40.1 43.4 37.0
Poor 0.9 1.0 11.8 5.2 11.6 14.8 12.2
1 See footnote 1 on Table 1.
2 Relative color quality based on Hunter Color Difference Meter "Rd" values,
which are a measure of the lightness. Lightness is that attribute of color
that permits it to be classed as equivalent to some achromatic color ranging
from black to white. As the lightness component in the visual orange color
of the concentrate increases, an increase in whiteness in the color of the
product results.


Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
1041 7/20/61 FWW










INSTRUCTIONS TO TASTE PANEL


Flavor Evaluation of Frozen Concentrated Orange Juices

Samples: Reconstituted commercial frozen 420 Brix orange
concentrates.


Directions:


(a) Grade for flavor on the following basis and do
not consider other factors, such as color or separation.


Excellent
Very good
Good
Fair


8-7
6-5


Poor 4-3
Very poor 2
Unpalatable 1


Use excellent, good, or fair only if the juice in your
opinion is acceptable as frozen orange concentrate, and
therefore, would be repurchased by you.


(b) If you score a sample of juice 4 or lower, indicat-
ing that the product is not acceptable as frozen orange
concentrate, and therefore, would not be repurchased by
you, then indicate all of the flavor defects responsible
for the poor flavor quality.

Indicate flavor defects using only the following descriptive
terms. If necessary, other terms will be added to this list.
If you are not sure of the type of flavor defect in any
juice, which you score 4 or lower, then indicate that it is
nondescript.


Flavor Defects


Too sour (acid)
Too sweet
Excessive peel oil
Too bitter
Too astringent


Heated
Buttermilk
Cardboard
Castor oil
Tallowy


Immature fruit
Overmature fruit
Stale fruit
Insipid


Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
1042 7/20/61 FW













Table 3. Frequency distribution of average flavor grades for samples of
commercial frozen concentrated orange juices collected from Florida processing
plants during seven citrus seasons
Number of samnles and season
Relative 221 215 212 193 197 187 195
flavor 1953-54 1954-55 1956-57 1957-58 1958-59 1959-60 1960-61
grade 1 % of samples

-Midseason packs
Good 14 35 34 1 8 21 23
Fair 73 62 65 89 86 79 76
Poor 13 3 1 10 6 0 1
Totals 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Late season packs
Good 56 71 61 23 72 49 64
Fair 43 27 38 73 28 51 36
Poor 1 2 1 4 0 0 0
Totals 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

Total packs for entire season
Good 34 52 47 12 33 35 41
Fair 59 46 52 81 63 65 58
Poor 7 2 1 7 4 0 1
Totals 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

1. ..It.. .ft tIPft I ,,,, ,a A ,teIA +". ehe + a i 'hla +-


oWncein. J. %WQ L U WVV VA L eJ gr e go o V
consumers; non-acceptable products are graded "poor".


Florida Citrus Commission and
Florida Citrus Experiment Station,
Lake Alfred, Florida.
1041 a 7/20/61 FWW


. rw V




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs