Effect of the alcohol content on sensory perception of the fruit spirits

Fruit spirits must have an aroma of the raw material, which is balanced by ethanol.  Since many aroma compounds are more soluble in ethanol than in water, ethanol is the most important carrier of aroma compounds. The alcohol concentration seems to be crucial for the sensory profile of spirits. Alcoh...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inActa agriculturae slovenica Vol. 119; no. 4
Main Authors ŠEKERIĆ, Arman, BLESIĆ, Milenko, DRKENDA, Pakeza, SPAHO, Nermina
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published University of Ljubljana Press (Založba Univerze v Ljubljani) 13.12.2023
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Fruit spirits must have an aroma of the raw material, which is balanced by ethanol.  Since many aroma compounds are more soluble in ethanol than in water, ethanol is the most important carrier of aroma compounds. The alcohol concentration seems to be crucial for the sensory profile of spirits. Alcohol content of 40% vol is the standard alcoholic strength of fruit spirits. Regulations specify a minimum alcohol content of 37.5% vol. However, ethanol reduction can result in change in sensory profile of spirits. The aim of this research is to determine whether lowering the alcohol content of spirits may make them less acceptable to customers. On this occasion, 5 pairs of fruit spirits were sensory tested: pear, plum, apple, raspberry, and grape spirits, each with a commercial and reduced alcohol concentration to 37.5% vol. The results showed that customers can recognize the difference in alcohol content of fruit spirits and dilution to lower alcohol content led to decreasing aroma for all tastes fruit spirits.  However, typicality and intensity of fruit odour and the overall note of the spirits, were very similar perceived for Williams, plum and grape spirits whereas apple and raspberry spirits showed better characteristic at higher alcohol content.
ISSN:1854-1941
1854-1941
DOI:10.14720/aas.2023.119.4.15939