High‐intensity sweeteners in espresso coffee: ideal and equivalent sweetness and time–intensity analysis

The efficient substitution of sucrose by a sweetener in beverages requires the application of some sensory techniques. First, one must determine the concentrations of the sweeteners under study, equivalent in sweetness to the ideal sucrose concentration. In addition, it is fundamental to determine which is most similar to sucrose. The objectives of this study were to determine the ideal sweetness for espresso coffee and the equivalent concentrations in sweetness of different sweeteners, as well as characterise the time–intensity profile of each sweetener in relation to sweetness. The sweeteners evaluated were sucralose, aspartame, neotame, a cyclamate/saccharin mixture (2:1) and stevia. The sucrose concentration considered ideal by consumers was 12.5% (w/v), and the equivalent concentrations of the sweeteners were 0.0159% for sucralose, 0.0549% for aspartame, 0.0016% for neotame, 0.0359% for the cyclamate/saccharin mixture and 0.0998% for stevia. The time–intensity analysis indicated that possibly the sweeteners neotame, aspartame and sucralose would be the best substitutes for sucrose.     

Different sweeteners in peach nectar: Ideal and equivalent sweetness

Many articles have been published with negative visions related to sugar, because people believe that its intake is related to obesity. For this reason, artificial sweeteners have received special attention. In order to substitute sucrose successfully, it is necessary to know previously sweetener concentrations that would be used and their sweetness equivalency related to sucrose. Hence, the objectives of this study were to determine the ideal sweetness in a peach nectar sweetened with sucrose, using a just-about-right scale, and the equivalent sweetness of samples sweetened with aspartame; cyclamate/saccharin blend 2:1; stevia; sucralose and acesulfame-K, using Magnitude Estimation. The concentration of sucrose considered as ideal by the consumers was 10%, with sweeteners’ equivalent concentrations of 0.054% for aspartame; 0.036% for cyclamate/saccharin blend 2:1; 0.10% for stevia; 0.016% for sucralose and 0.053% for acesulfame-K.     

Use of just-about-right scales and penalty analysis to determine appropriate concentrations of stevia sweeteners for vanilla yogurt

With the mainstream emergence of natural sweeteners such as stevia, which is available in different commercial formulations, suitability for yogurt needs to be validated. The present study aimed to determine the appropriate concentration level of 3 processed stevia sweeteners/supplements in commercial plain low-fat yogurt flavored with natural vanilla. Three different levels of sucrose, aspartame, an erythritol and 95% rebaudiana A stevia sweetener, a 95% pure mix of maltodextrin and steviol glycosides, and a cold water stevia extract were used in the study. The just-about-right level for each sweetener and consumer acceptability of each naturally flavored low-fat vanilla yogurt were evaluated. Results from penalty analysis demonstrated that only 0.7% of stevia containing maltodextrin and 95% steviol glycoside was necessary, whereas higher levels (between 4.0 to 5.5%) were more appropriate for stevia containing erythritol and 95% rebaudiana A or cold water extract of stevia, respectively. The concentrations of stevia sweeteners used influenced the perceived sweetness and sourness. In general, consumers disliked the yogurt sweetened with stevia or aspartame, and neither disliked nor liked the yogurt sweetened with sucrose, which was largely driven by perceived sourness of the base yogurt. The findings underline the importance of careful selection of stevia type and concentration as well as optimizing yogurt cultures and fermentation conditions before product launch.     

Sensory Studies of High Potency Multiple Sweetener Systems for Shortbread Cookies with and without Polydextrose

Time-intensity (TI) sweetness and bitterness curves determined for six potent sweetener combinations with and without polydextrose were compared to sucrose in shortbread cookies. Hardness, fracturability and cohesiveness of shortbreads were determined. Sweetener combinations of aspartame/cyclamate, aspartame/cyclamate/saccharin, acesulfame K/saccharin, aspartame/saccharin/acesulfame K, acesulfame K/aspartame and aspartame/saccharin gave sweetener TI profiles similar to that of sucrose. Bitterness TI profiles were similar for all potent sweetener combinations but higher than for sucrose. Polydextrose increased hardness and fracturability and decreased cohesiveness of cookies compared to those made with high potency sweeteners without polydextrose. Textural characteristics of polydextrose cookies approached those of sucrose shortbreads.     

Ideal and relative sweetness of high intensity sweeteners in mango nectar

The aim of this study was to analyse the ideal and relative sweetness of mango nectar with high intensity sweeteners. The ideal sweetness of the samples sweetened with sucrose at 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5% and 15%, was analysed using an acceptance test with a just‐about‐right (JAR) scale and 100 consumers of mango nectar. The magnitude estimation method was then used to determine the relative sweetness of the high intensity sweeteners. Six samples were prepared and one sweetener added to each: sucrose, sucralose, 100:50:1 acesulfame‐K/sucralose/neotame blend, 1:1 thaumatin/sucralose blend and stevia with 97% of rebaudioside. The ideal sweetness analysis revealed that 6.84% was the ideal concentration of sucrose. The relative sweetness analysis showed that neotame presented the highest sweetening power, being 6026 times sweeter than sucrose with respect to the mango nectar containing 7% of sucrose, followed by sucralose (627), thaumatin/sucralose blend 1:1 (549), acesulfame‐K/sucralose/neotame blend 100:50:1 (259) and stevia (134).     

Sensory Quality of Selected Sweeteners: Aqueous and Lipid Model Systems

The sweetness characteristics of sucrose, fructose, aspartame, acesulfame K, sodium saccharin and calcium cyclamate were studied in aqueous and lipid model food systems with and without lemon or vanilla flavoring. Anchored linear scales were used to evaluate sweetened model systems for initial, maximum and residual sweetness intensity and nonsweet aftertaste. Data were analyzed by analyses of variance. Flavor did not influence sweetness, except where residual sweetness was more intense in lemon and vanilla solutions than in plain solutions. No sweetener was perceived exactly like sucrose. Intensity and sweetness profiles varied between systems and among sweeteners. Character of the food system influenced perceptions of sweetness and aftertaste.     

A comparison of aspartame and sucrose with respect to carryover effects in yogurt

Sensory profiling tests were carried out on natural, unsweetened yogurt consumed directly after yogurt sweetened with sucrose, aspartame or mixtures of aspartame + acesulfame K. There was no evidence that residual sweetness or bitterness from aspartame, either alone or blended, was perceived in the natural yogurt although sourness appeared to be masked. Natural yogurt had the highest bitter aftertaste when preceded by yogurt containing sucrose, which was explained as a contrast effect. In repeated consumption tests, flavored fruit yogurts tended to increase in sweetness and decrease in sourness over the rounds of repeated consumption, independent of sweetener type. Commercial samples of strawberry yogurt were not separated into groups according to sweetener type by a simple grouping test.     

Sensory properties of some synthetic high‐intensity sweeteners in water solutions

BACKGROUND: When sucrose is eliminated from products to meet consumers' demand for calorie‐free products and substitutes are used, sweetness becomes an important characteristic. The objective of this study was to compare sensory properties of four sucrose substitutes: aspartame, acesulfame K, sodium saccharin and sodium cyclamate in water solutions. RESULTS: The lowest concentrations of sweeteners such as 0.35 g kg^?1 for aspartame and acesulfame K showed an equi‐sweet level relative to approx. 55 g kg^?1 aqueous sucrose solution, whereas 2.3 g kg^?1 sodium cyclamate and 0.4 g kg^?1 sodium saccharin relative to approx. 65 g kg^?1. Aspartame had almost the same sweetness potency as acesulfame K, whereas the remaining sweeteners differed completely. The four sweeteners showed their specific sensory profiles. Besides the characteristics of sweetness and bitterness, metallic and astringent attributes plus warming and cooling effects were found. CONCLUSIONS: Of the four sweeteners, aspartame and sodium cyclamate can be considered as the best sucrose substitutes due to their similar sensory profiles to the sucrose. The data showing the interdependence between sweetness intensity of the sweeteners and sucrose are useful as a quick and easy indicator of the sweetener amount having equi‐sweet levels relative to sucrose. Copyright © 2009 Society of Chemical Industry     

A COMPARISON OF ARTIFICIAL SWEETENERS' STABILITY IN A LIME-LEMON FLAVORED CARBONATED BEVERAGE

Three intense sweeteners, aspartame, acesulfame‐K and sucralose, were incorporated singly in lime‐lemon flavored carbonated beverage in optimized concentrations on a sucrose equivalence basis at controlled pH conditions. The beverages were stored for 60 days at 4, 27 and 37C and the sweetener concentration determined by HPLC. The loss of aspartame was maximum (29.5%) while that of sucralose was minimum (1.9%) at the end of 60 days' storage at 37C. In the case of acesulfame‐K, the loss was 6.1%. Sucralose was more stable than the other sweeteners.     

Analysis of various sweeteners in low‐sugar mixed fruit jam: equivalent sweetness,time‐intensity analysis and acceptance test

For a sweetener to successfully replace sucrose in food formulations, studies must first be conducted to determine the concentrations of the sweeteners to be used and their equivalent sweetness compared with sucrose. After establishing the optimal concentration of each sweetener, it is necessary to determine which is more similar to sucrose. The objective of this study was to determine the equivalent amount of different sweeteners, necessary to promote the same degree of ideal sweetness in mixed fruit (marolo, sweet passion fruit and soursop) jam and to characterise the time–intensity profile and consumer acceptance. With respect to the mixed fruit jam containing 40% (w/w) of sucrose, sucralose presented the highest sweetening power, being 1033.59 times sweeter than sucrose, followed by sucralose/acesulfame‐K/neotame 5:3:0.1 (982.80), sucralose/steviol glycoside 2:1 (862.67), sucralose/acesulfame‐K 3:1 (847.45) and sucralose/thaumatin 1:0.6 (284.29). The sweeteners had a time–intensity sweetness profile similar to sucrose and a time–intensity bitterness profile different from sucrose but similar among themselves. In relation to sensory acceptance, a significant difference between the low‐sugar jam and the traditional jam was not observed.     

Influence of Package Visual Cues of Sweeteners on the Sensory‐Emotional Profiles of Their Products

Substantial evidence suggests influence of color, physical state, and other extrinsic features on consumer perception and acceptability of food products. In this study, 560 subjects evaluated liking and emotional responses associated with 5 sweeteners (sucralose, stevia, saccharin, aspartame, and sucrose) under 2 eliciting conditions: control (brand name only) and informed (brand name/packet image), to assess impact of the packet color. For a given condition, 5 identical tea samples each labeled with a sweetener type were rated for sweetness and overall liking (9‐point) and emotions (5‐point). Nonsignificant interactions between eliciting condition and sweetener type were found for liking attributes and emotions (except peaceful), indicating their independent effects. However, overall differences existed among sweetener types and eliciting conditions based on both hedonic and emotional responses (MANOVA, P < 0.05), suggesting modulating effects of packet color on sweetener type in the sensory‐emotion space. The sensory‐emotion profile for sucrose was separate from that of nonnutritive sweeteners, with statistically significant Mahalanobis distances among sample centroids. Increases in positive emotion intensities contrasted with a decrease in negative emotion intensities were observed for some sweeteners moving from the control to informed condition. Sweetness liking was strongly correlated with the emotion satisfied (sucralose, saccharin) only in the control condition, whereas it was strongly correlated with the emotions pleased and satisfied (stevia), disgusted (aspartame), and satisfied (sucrose) only in the informed condition. Overall, results suggested that sensory liking and emotions during the consumption experience are related not entirely to the type of sweetener, but also the color of the packet.     

Sensory Characteristics of Sucralose and other High Intensity Sweeteners

The sensory characteristics of the high potency sweetener sucralose were studied relative to sucrose, aspartame, saccharin, and acesulfame-K in a simple aqueous system. Trained panelists provided sweetness intensity estimates for each sweetener at six concentration steps using magnitude estimation. Taste profiles were obtained using category scaling procedures. Results indicated that (a) sucralose, aspartame, and sucrose had similar taste properties, (b) the psychophysical sweetness function of sucralose was similar to the other sweeteners studied, and (c) sweetness potencies of all sweeteners were concentration dependent with sucralose having the highest potency values ranging from 400–700 times the sweetness of sucrose on a weight basis.     

Chocolate Milk with Chia Oil: Ideal Sweetness,Sweeteners Equivalence,and Dynamic Sensory Evaluation Using a Time‐Intensity Methodology

The ideal sucrose concentration and equivalent concentrations of the stevia, sucralose, aspartame, and neotame in chocolate milk with chia oil as well as the dynamic behavior of certain sensory attributes were investigated using a time‐intensity methodology. The use of just‐about‐right (JAR) identified an ideal sucrose concentration of 9% (w/w). In addition, the magnitude estimation method showed that stevia had the lowest sweetness power whereas neotame presented the highest. Furthermore, the time‐intensity analysis indicated that there was no significant change between the maximum intensities of the sweetness for any evaluated sweeteners. In general, the desired sensory profile and some economic considerations are decisive on the choice of which sweetener is better to be used in chocolate milk formulation added with chia oil.     

Time-Intensity Parameters of Selected Carbohydrate and High Potency Sweeteners

Time-intensity (TI) sweetness curves were generated and ten TI parameters were determined for selected carbohydrate and high potency sweeteners. Samples were evalutated by trained panelists at 5% sucrose equivalency (SEV) in water for sucralose, sucrose, fructose, aspartame, cyclamate, acesulfame-K and saccharin and at 9% SEV in water and a buffered model beverage system for sucralose, sucrose, fructose, aspartame and cyclamate. When compared within each system, differences in temporal properties appeared to be concentration and media dependent. No differences in onset characteristics were observed among equisweet groups. Aftertaste characteristics differed among sweeteners only .at 9% SEV in water where high potency sweeteners tended to have somewhat longer aftertaste than nutritive sweeteners.     

Formulation optimisation of a whey lemon beverage using a blend of the sweeteners aspartame and saccharin

Product formulations based on combinations of two sweeteners were optimised in a sweetened paneer whey lemon beverage (WLB) by organoleptic panels. The binary sweetener blend aspartame/saccharin (70:30, 0.0425%) scored the highest based upon comparison with the best‐optimised single sweetener aspartame (0.07%) in WLB and had nonsignificant differences with the control WLB sweetened with sucrose in all sensory attributes. This best binary blend showed maximum synergy in sweetness intensity (14.4%) and overall acceptability (7.5%) in respect of a single sweetener aspartame. The multiple‐sweetener approach involving use of binary blend (0.0425%) resulted in 39% reduction of usage level when compared with single sweetener aspartame (0.07%).     

Sensory Quality of Selected Sweeteners: Unbaked and Baked Flour Doughs

Sucrose, fructose, aspartame, acesulfame K, sodium saccharin, and calcium cyclamate were studied in unbaked and baked shortbreadtype cookies. Sweeteners were evaluated for initial, maximum, and residual sweetness intensity and nonsweet aftertaste for effects of lemon and vanilla flavor on sweetness character. Type of sweetener influenced sweetness quality in unbaked and baked cookies. Intensities and sweetness profiles for the six sweeteners differed between unbaked and baked cookies, particularly for aspartame. Sweetness of sucrose and saccharin were perceived similarly in baked cookies, but they differed in quality and intensity of nonsweet aftertaste. Flavor did not affect initial, maximum, or residual sweetness but nonsweet aftertaste was less intense in lemon and plain unbaked cookies than in vanilla-flavored unbaked cookies.     

Intake of saccharin, aspartame, acesulfame K and cyclamate in Italian teenagers: present levels and projections

The intake of saccharin, aspartame, acesulfame K and cyclamate was assessed in 212 Italian teenagers aged 13-19 in 1996. Total daily intake of intense sweeteners was assessed on the basis of dietary records (14 consecutive days). The sweetener content of sugar-free products (soft drinks, candies, chewing gums, yoghurts, jam and table-top sweeteners) was provided by manufacturers. Sugar-free products were consumed by 77% of the subjects. Mean daily intake among consumers was 0.24mg/kg body weight (bw) for cyclamate (13 subjects), 0.21mg/kg bw for saccharin (9 subjects), 0.03mg/kg bw for aspartame (162 subjects), and 0.02mg/kg bw for acesulfame K (56 subjects). No subject exceeded the ADI (Acceptable Daily Intake) of an intense sweetener. Projections based on the present levels of use of intense sweeteners in sugar-free products and on the dietary pattern observed in the sample suggest that approaching the ADI could be possible only if subjects with high intakes of both soft drinks and table-top sugar substituted these items with respectively sugar-free beverages and table-top sweeteners containing either saccharin or cyclamate.     

The influence of natural sweetener (Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni) on bioactive compounds content in chokeberry juice

The aim was to determine the differences in nutritional quality between chokeberry juices sweetened with sucrose and green stevia powder. The quality of chokeberry juices during refrigerated storage was studied. Chokeberry juices with added green stevia powder had the higher content of analyzed bioactive compounds in comparison with juice samples sweetened with sucrose; vitamin C content increased up to two times, total phenol content up to 6% and antioxidant capacity for 3%. The content of studied bioactive compounds and antioxidant capacity during storage in period of 30 and 60 days was significantly reduced with the exception of steviol glycosides which content was not significantly reduced during the storage period.

Practical applications

Chokeberry juice is a popular, widespread product of chokeberry fruit characteristic for the dark intense red color, slightly unpleasant, bitter taste and extremely rich bioactive compounds content. Because of high nutritional quality, chokeberry juice is often consumed but with the biggest barrier of characteristic astringent taste which can be diminished by addition of sweetener. Producers often combine a low‐cost sweeteners like sucrose which shows numerous negative effects on human health. A good alternative to the sucrose and artificial sweeteners are natural sweeteners extracted from the plant material like steviol glycosides. Except sweetness, stevia products like green powder shows beneficial effect on the bioactive compounds content in the juices sweetened with it. Juices sweetened with stevia shows increased content of bioactive compounds, so such product may represent quality product from category of functional food.     

Low‐calorie Sweeteners and Other Sugar Substitutes: A Review of the Safety Issues

Sugar‐free or reduced‐sugar foods and beverages are very popular in the United States and other countries, and the sweeteners that make them possible are among the most conspicuous ingredients in the food supply. Extensive scientific research has demonstrated the safety of the 5 low‐calorie sweeteners currently approved for use in foods in the United States–acesulfame K, aspartame, neotame, saccharin, and sucralose. A controversial animal cancer study of aspartame conducted using unusual methodology is currently being reviewed by regulatory authorities in several countries. No other issues about the safety of these 5 sweeteners remain unresolved at the present time. Three other low‐calorie sweeteners currently used in some other countries–alitame, cyclamate, and steviol glycosides–are not approved as food ingredients in the United States. Steviol glycosides may be sold as a dietary supplement, but marketing this product as a food ingredient in the United States is illegal. A variety of polyols (sugar alcohols) and other bulk sweeteners are also accepted for use in the United States. The only significant health issue pertaining to polyols, most of which are incompletely digested, is the potential for gastrointestinal discomfort with excessive use. The availability of a variety of safe sweeteners is of benefit to consumers because it enables food manufacturers to formulate a variety of good‐tasting sweet foods and beverages that are safe for the teeth and lower in calorie content than sugar‐sweetened foods.