Authors:
Alexandra Maria Uivărășan, Snehal Gite, Anca Peter, Leonard Mihaly Cozmuța, Camelia Nicula, Anca Mihaly Cozmuța
Volume 30, Issue 4;
Pages: 438-450; 2024
ISSN: 2069-0053 (print), Agroprint;
ISSN (online): 2068-9551
Abstract
This study examines the effect of adding fish hydrolysate to energy bars, on consumer acceptability. Among the five types of fish hydrolysate energy bars prepared with different amounts of hydrolysate (0%, 1%, 3%, 5% and 10%), consumer preferences indicated a positive sensory evaluation only for the products with 0% and 1%. The sample containing 0% hydrolyzed fish had the highest value of the "general acceptability" parameter, while the sample containing 10% hydrolysate presented the lowest value. The 0% hydrolyzed (standard) sample received the highest overall acceptability score (8.29, p > 0.05) from male panelists (28.09% of participants). In the case of panelists residing in the city (56.18% of participants), the highest value for general acceptability was obtained by bars with 0% hydrolyzed. Village participants (43.82% of the participants) attributed the highest degree of general acceptability to the sample with 1% hydrolyzed. They rated the hardness, appearance and color of the samples differently, indicating a great variability between them (p < 0.05). According to age, the bars with 3% hydrolyzed scored highest for "color" (7.89), the samples with 10% hydrolysate had the highest scores for "hardness" (7.47) and "stickiness" (7.38), and the samples with 1% hydrolyzed were the most valued for "texture" (7.96) and "stickiness" (7.38). Unfortunately, energy bars with higher protein content (3%, 5% and 10% hydrolyzed) were rejected by consumers due to the "unpleasant smell of fish" and the "very pronounced" taste given by the presence of hydrolysate, requiring an improvement of the technological process.
MENU
