Chahan Yeretzian Coffee is a relatively young beverage that has only been known about since the 1h century. Initially consumed by the aristocracy, coffee has devel- ‘oped since the early 20th century into one of the world's most popular beverages and is now part ‘of our daily routine and lifestyle. it also repre- sents a major source of income for many coffee producing countries and is a significant business sector in consumer countries, The triumph of this beverage may have been driven by various fac- tors, but there is no doubt that ‘ts unique flavor is the prime reason for its amazing success. Here we will review current knowledge on the aroma of coffee from a chemical and analytical perspec~ tive and outline future trends. Its believed that most coffee aroma compounds have already been Identified and quantified. Yet litle is understood about how these aroma compounds are gener~ ated from green coffee precursors during roasting. A true definition of the aroma of freshly roasted andlor brewed coffee is very elusive and some ‘aroma compounds start to degrade the moment they form. Furthermore, research on interindivid~ ual differences in the sensation and perception of coffee aromas is stil in its infancy. After re- viewing our current knowledge on coffee aroma ‘compounds, we will outline recent developments in time-resolved analysis in three fields: 6. Coffee 6.1 Coffee Aroma ~ From the Seed to the Cup... 107 6.2. The Sensory Experience of Coffee 108 6.3. Coffee Aroma Compounds. no 6.4 Analytical Techniques for Coffee Aroma Analysts us 6.8.1 Gas Chromatography 5 61-2. Olfactometry. 5 6.5 Trends and New Developments | in Coffee Aroma Analysis. us 651 Times Rested Anaya Techniques. us 6.5.2 Moving Towards ‘an Individualized Aroma Science... 120 6.5.3 Predicting Sensory Profile from Instrumental Measurements... 121 6.6 What Next?... 122 References. 122 1. Aroma formation during roasting 2. Aroma extraction curing espresso preparation and 3. In-mouth release during consumption. Finally, we will adcress predictive models for sensory profiles derived from instrumental mea~ surements ~ possibly the holy gral of aroma 6.1 Coffee Aroma — From the Seed to the Cup ‘The aroma of a freshly prepared cup of coffee is the final expression and perceptible result of a long chain Of transformations that link the seed to the cup [6.1] Figure 6.1 outlines various factors that impact the aroma of coffee. The final cup is the result of the in- terplay between genetic predispositions, environmental ‘and climatic factors, harvest and post-harvest prac- tices, sorting, grading, storage and transpon, processing steps such as roasting, grinding and extraction and fi- nally consumption practices. This long journey can be ‘condensed into three key factors: Predisposition —> Transformation > Consumption. All three play a spe- cific and important role in the aroma of coffee. Predisposition: The green colfee variety (genetics) specific set of chemical precursors forms the basis for the aromas that will later develop during the subsequent transformation steps. Transformation: Even the best coffee will be ruined if ‘not properly processed. The art and science of ete ating an exceptional sensory experience isto master ‘every one of these transformations. The agronomy, yoro@zhaw.ch rE)velaued Parte Food and Flavors climate, harvest practices and post-harvest treatment already start to modulate the genetic predisposition of the coffee beans. However, the smell and taste of {green beans provide no cues as to what they might become once roasted. The most significant step in the transformation process is roasting. It unlocks the potential of the green bean and creates the coffee 6.2 The Sensory Experience of Coffee ‘There may be different reasons for the rapid and con- tinuing tise of coffee’s popularity. However, the prime driver for the increase is its unique set of sensory qualities. To better appreciate the multifaceted sen- sory experience elicited by a cup of coffee, one can Fig. 6.1 The aroma of coffee is the final expression and perceptible result of along chain of transformations, hich link the seed to the cup. The aroma is influenced by genetic, agricultural, chemical and technical factors. However, the human factor interme of the skill and care taken by all those involved in these transformations is just as important Consumption: The way we prepare and consume our coffee greatly affects the flavor we perceive. How- ver, beyond the perceptible quality in the cup, by ‘choosing to buy a certain coffee, consumers show their support for all the work that has happened along the value chain and reward agronomic, eco- logical and business practices that they wish to reinforce. ‘schematically decompose it into four different compo- nents (Fig. 6.2). 1, Chemical and physical properties: This first and best understood factor of the sensory experience yere@zhaw.chCates | 62 The Sensory Experience of offer 109 Payehology From se ‘The product (sensory active *Calare compounds) {Memories "Volatile aroma compounds + Expectations + Taste compounds Mood + Coolisg & pungent compounds + Artenton/alerness Texture + Social context color + Taste odor receptor densities ‘Transduction fom receptors fo ‘central nervous system + teractions between sensory rodalties ‘Swallowing + Saliva production and composition Fig. 6.2 The sensory experience of coffee is truly a holistic one. But, to understand it beter, it ean be schematically ‘decomposed into four components elicited from coffee is exclusively related to the product itself, without reference to how it is con- sumed and the actual consumer. These properties can be precisely measured by objective instrumen- tal or analytical techniques and mainly focus on the concentration of aroma and taste compounds, Cemperature and texture (viscosity, % total solids, color). A lot of previous research into coffee aroma has focused on extracting, identifying and quantify ing aroma active compounds in eoflee. 2. The consumption process: A specific eup of cof- fee might have a precisely measurable composition ff aroma compounds, yet these compounds may be released in-mouth and transported 10 the sen- sory receptors differently from person to person, Teading to interindividual differences, Individual characteristics in consumption patterns (volume of sip, breathing shythm, swallowing pattern, move- ‘ment ofthe coffee in the mouth, ee.) and in-mouth physiognomy and physiology (shape of nasal cavity, amount and composition of saliva) will modulate the sensory experience and lead to interindividual Gifferences in the sensory experience, even if con- suming exactly the same coffce (6.2-10]. Indeed a given coffee will not taste the same for differ. ent people. This second factor therefore concerns the process of drinking and all aspects related to the physiological and physical environment in the ‘mouth that Ieads to the liberation of the aroma and its transport from the oral to the nasal cavity, where the olfactory receptors are located, By recognizing the factors involved in a person's perception of cof- fee aroma, it has been possible to develop novel analytical approaches that open the way to individ- ualized aroma science [6.1113]. The neurological make-up of individuals: Besides individual differences in consumption patterns and {n-mouth characteristics, the sensory experience is also modulated by individual differences in the ini- tial sensation atthe level of individual receptors as well as final and conscious perception. Sensation refers to the process of sensing our environment through touch, taste, sight, sound, and smell [6.14 16}. This information is sent to our brains in raw form where perception comes into play. Percep- tion is the way we interpret these sensations and therefore make sense of everything around ws, It is affected by a complex transduction process from activation of the multiple sensory receptors to the final response pattern atthe level ofthe central ner- ‘Yous systems, where interactions from other senses ay be integrated [6.1719]. The individual sen- sory experience is therefore not only affected by the composition of sensory active compounds in the coffee and modulated by the individual's in- ‘mouth characteristics and consumption habits. In- dividuals also differ in their neurological and physi- ological make-up. Like the in-mouth environment, this make-up will lead to an individually modu- lated sensory experience. Hence, the same coffee may elicit distinctively different sensory experi- ences for different people. Numerous reports have demonstrated the impact of anatomical and physio- logical differences on aroma perception [6.2023]. A particularly well-studied case is bitter percep- tion (sensitivity to 6-n-propylthiouracyl (PROP) or yoro@zhaw.ch relaued‘no. Parts | Food and Flavors eg|aued Finer phenylthiocarbamide (PTC). Ithas been established that individuals may vary in the extent to which they perceive biter tasting compounds (6.24) and that this inheritable trait is related tothe density of fangiform papillae onthe tongue [625,26], There ae reports that PROP sensitivity affects macronu- trient selection [6.27]. Furthermore, the inability of some people to perceive specific odor, termed anosmia, is also well known (6.28,29}. 6.3 Coffee Aroma Compounds Describing the sensory perceptions we experience whilst sipping a cup of coffee is not easy. It isthe re- ult of « complex multisensory experience involving all of our senses including olfaction, taste, touch, trigemi- nal sensation, vision, and possibly hearing. ‘Aroma is an odor; it is often referred to as a smell and is sensed by receptors in the nose. An impor- tant distinction is made between the orthonasal and the retronasal aroma. When we have coffee in front of us, ‘we can smell it We call this the orthonasal, or above- the-food aroma. VOCs, released from the coffee, en- ter our nasal cavity during inhalations and reach the olfactory epithelium. The olfactory centers reside very high along the roof of the nasal cavity just below and between the eyes. They cover an area of Sem? and contain some 10-20 million receptor cells. In order for these centers to be stimulated, the odor molecules, have to be inhaled into the nose and carried up to the roof of the nose. The second type of aroma of signifi- cance to consumers is the aroma released in the mouth when drinking coffee. While coffee is in the mouth and also after swallowing, volatile compounds are released from the food and are transported by various airflows weet | Oe i ‘action | epee Pcl Tigi Fig. 6.3 Our senses represent our windows to the world and to our cup of coffee 4. Psychology and cognition: Finally, individual his- tory, past experiences, expectations, product faril- iarity [6.30, 31], psychosocial and cognitive factors such as culture, mood, and conditioning and social context can all affect the way a person experiences a cup of coffee (6.30, 32-39} In Sect. 6.3, we will review the current status of what makes coffee smell so good (6.40, 41}. (mouth movement, respiration) from the oral cavity to the pharynx, passing the soft palate (velum palatinum). ‘When exhaling, volatiles are swept up by the airflow ‘coming from the oral cavity and the lungs and are re- leased through the nose. During their transport from the oral cavity through the pharynx to the nasal cav- ity, VOCs pass along the olfactory epithelium and may ‘tigger an olfactory perception. This aroma is termed the retronasal or in-mouth aroma, and is related to the ‘aroma as perceived during eating or drinking. Taste, or gustation, is the sensation of saltiness, sweetness, sourness, bitterness and umami (savoriness). Flavor is the combination of taste and smell. Another {important additional sensation to describe the flavor of coffee is the body. It can be light, ike a dry light wine, ‘or it can be heavy, like a red wine. The perception of ir- ritants is mediated not by taste and smell receptors, but by other chemosensitive receptors. The perceptual char- acteristics of chemical irvtation, or chemesthesis, are ‘mediated by nonspecific, multimodal somatosensory fibers and are a property ofthe skin [6.16]. These chem- ical sonsos are complemented by the physical senses of sight or vision, hearing and touch (somatorensation). Figure 6.3 summarizes the multidimensional space of the sensory experience, Among the various sensory modalities, aroma (smell) is of paramount importance to the quality of cof- fee, Hence, in the remains of this chapter we will focus ‘on volatile coffee aroma compounds. In order for cof- fee to be sensed by our nose (o have a smell) aromatic volatile organic compounds (VOCs) have to be released from the brew and reach the olfactory epithelium, are- ‘gion in the upper part of the nasal cavity that contains the nerve endings that allow us to smell. Scientific efforts to elucidate the origin of the rich ‘and distinctive aroma of coffee, and ultimately to under- stand whar makes that coffee smell so good (6.40,41] ‘can be traced back to 1880 when Bernheimer, a German scientist, identified the first few volatile compounds in coffee 6.72]. But the first significant progress can most yoro@zhaw.chCottee | 63 Coftee Aroma Compounds ‘Table 6.1 Flavor active VOCs in Arabica coffee (after [6.42)). The first column lists 72 VOCs, classified into 15 different groups ‘of chemical compounds (aftr [6.19, 30, 43-69)) 2-Methybtanal 96173 20700 ‘Rancid, almond-ike, tasty 13 2.Methylpropanal 782 - ‘Toasty, cary, cheesy, dak chocolate ethereal, = fivity malty. pangent 3-Methybtanal 590-863 18600 Fruity, almondstk,twsy, ethereal, chocolat, peachy, 035, fat Fay, green, cucumber, ts Acealdehyde 75070 13900) —__-Pangent, ethereal, rsh iting, penetrating. uty, 07 sty “4 Methoxybenzaldehyde mus = ‘Sweet, powdery vanilla tise, woods, coumarin, ” creamy Phenylacetadehyde 171 ‘Sweet, ity, hone, floral fermented 5 Propanal 13386 17400 Ethereal pungent, earthy, alcoholic 10 i 2 Mathybutyie aid 116530 25000 ‘Acie, fut, dry, eheese 10 3-Methybutyrie aid 503-742 18060-32180 Cheesy, dairy, aidc, sour, pungent, fruity, stinky +700 te Biy/-2-methyloaprate 148279-1 49 Fruity, berry os Bity13-mehylouyrate su7asn-703 14 Fri 06 rr Pusfual 9801-1 5840-19370 Sweet, owa, woody. bead, caamellc 20 2(MethyioymethyDferad TSS = ‘Smole, roast, onion, gate, ulfrous, pungent, veg= — 2 furry methyl sulrous table, hocseraish 2-Paruamthano! aceatfurfuyl 623-17-6 24520-40040 Onion, gal, sufurous, punget, vegetable, = ecto horeeradih 2 Methyl furan sues = ‘Bumt, chereal (mild), gasoline acetone, chocolate = S-Methy-2turanenbonyaldehyde/ 620-020 = ‘Sweet, aramelic, beady brown, coffer ke 6000 methyl frfral Furfury] formate 1ips9rs Ethereal - orfryl maby! ether 13679454 — Roasted colle - FFurfury] dsulide were ‘Sulfurous, coffee routed chicken, meaty, onion, cab- = age | Sulfur-containing compounds Dimetiy wisulide 3658808 28 ‘Sulfwous, cooked onion, savory, meaty cabbagelike 0.001, Bis(2-methyl-3furyDésulide — 28588-75.2 — ‘Meaty, roasted salon, onion, slfrous 0.00076 Methiona, 3266493 215-210 Boiled potatoe, musty, tomato, eahy, vegetable, 02 creamy nO 5 Mercapi-$ meth! bul S0145.106 130 ‘Green blackeurant, heal, ty, roasted sweaty 0.035 formate 2 Parry! 98.022 1080-5080 Roasted (cotfee-ike, slurs oon 2 Methy!-3foranhiol 258-741 60-55 ‘Sulfrous, meaty fishy, metalic, baled 007 S-Mercapto-methylbuylacstate 50745023. 75 Rosy tity, slfurons, sweet 5 3-Methyl-2-butene--hil sun4s6 13 Sulfwous, smoky, leek, onion 0.0008 ‘Methanetiol 74981 4550 ‘Roten eggs, meat o fs, cabbage garlic, cheesy oor 3 Methionine ene fay, wine 5 24DimeliylSethysazle $8205.67 = ‘Naty, roasted, meaty, eahy = yere@zhaw eh e9laued‘12 Part | Food and Flavors Table 6.1 (continued) | methyL3@QH)-furanone 3188-00-9 7580-30000 Sweet, ned, btry, naty ‘0.005 2iylbaydroxy-Smethyl- 7753810916800 ‘Sweet, aramel, andy ey 32H} fcanone (homofuranc) SHydroxy-4S-dimetyL-2(5H)- — 2866435-9 1-11.47 Exemely ewes, suong caramel maple, burt saga, 20 {ranone (otlone) cofee 4 ydioxy-2,5-dimethyl 32H) 3658-773 10930-112000 | Sweet, candy, caramel, strawberry, gar 10 aranone (acaneo!) 5 Byl-3-hydeony-4-methyL 144831607 104-160 Seasoning like, caramel ike 1 2(9H)-franone(abexon) S.Bbylbbydeoxy-2-metbyl 27538096 17300 ‘Sweet, caramel, bread, maple brown sugar burnt 115 3H} fcanone Ret 1-0eten--one 431295 - Herbal. mushroom, earthy, most. dirty 0.0036 2.3exadione ve ‘urn, utey, caramel, choclate ream, creamy, = ‘ruil, pea sweet 23-Botandione 431.03.8 48400-50800 _Burey,ereany, fay oly sweet, vanilla 03. 2.Pentanedione (600-166 3540-39600 Buttery, caramel, creamy, penetrating, sweet 0 £4 ycroxypheny!)-2butanone 5471-512 1 ‘Sweet iy, en jam, raspberry ripe, floral rasp. 1-10 ery ketone) 1-2-Furanyl)-2-batnone snonsss = Rummy - (€-Pedamascenone 25725.93-4 195-255 Honey like, ity apple, rose, honey, tobacco, sweet 0.00075 | Phenolic compounds Gusiacol 90.051 2000-17970 Phenolic. bunt, smoke, spice, vanilla, woody 25 Buy guaiacol 2785.39: 400-2800 Spy, smoky, bacon, pheno, clove 35 4.Vinyl guaiacol ‘7186-61-0 $000-64800 Spey, dry woody fesh amber, cedar, roasted peanst 0.75. Vasilis 121-385 2290-4800 Sweet, vanilla creamy 28 Pym 2.3.Dimesbylpyrazine 5910-894 2580-6100 Nutty, coffee, peant bute, walnut, caramel. leather 800 2.5 Dimethylpyrazine 123.320 4550-11730 Cocoa, roasted nuts, roast eet, woody, grass, medical 80 23DietylSmethyipyranine 1138-040 73-95, Roasted nts, musty, meaty, vegetable, roasted hazelnut 0.09 (bazulna pyrazine) 2-BUylsSdimethylpyanine ——27018.05.6 55.830 Roasted aus oot ‘2EMhy LS 6-dimethy-pyrazine 13360.65-1 2570-5980 Potato, cocoa roasted, my 86 (6.6-oe0a pyrazine) 2Methoxy-3 S-dimethylpyarine 13925-07011 ath, burt, almonds, roasted mus, coffee ‘0.006 (GS-cocoa pyrazine) 2Methoxy-32- 246s3-009 — ‘Green, pea geen, bell pepper - ‘methylpropylpyazine 2Methoxy-Sisopropyipyaaine 25773404 24 Baty, pe, bean ooo 2S Benyl2eiyLs- 81589322 — Earthy = methyipyrazine 67DibjdeoSmeylsHey- 2877-480 — ‘Roasted ats, cary, baked potate, peanut roasted = lopentapyreine Ethypyrazine 3925.00 = Peanut butter, musty, ny, woody, roasted coco 4000 yr Pyridine 1086-1 21280-65520 Fey 7 Pyrrole 109.977 = ‘Sweet, ny, eer = Met! pyrole sess Smoky, woody, herbal negative notes: defective beans — yere@zhaw ehCattee | 6:3 Coffee toma Compounds 19 ‘Table 6.1 (continued) a 3 Linalool 7706 Flowery, its range, erpene, Waxy, £88 on * Limonene 1384655 (Cts, hetbal, expen, carpbor 4 Geraniol 1062-1 = ‘Sweet, fra, ry, rose, waxy, eirus 1 * The second column shows the range of reported concentrations in ppb (g/g) in rusted Arabica coffee. For some VOCs no information on conceniratons could be found in the erate NIneates where diferent sensory detection thresholds were found, the ose include inthe able corresponds tothe lowest one reported. All sensory Uuesholds were determined in water excep: 1 Matrix unknown 2 Threshold measured hy frst iting compounds in ethanol in defined concentration and then dissolving them in water (Got linaiool -> as R lsaloo) 5. Determined ineazolic solution 9.5% 4 Determined in elute 5. Determined in beer 6, Determined in ait likely be attibuted to Reichenstein and Staudinger, oi 1926, dented and patented ever import ‘compounds in coffee (6.73, 74]. Mainly foeled by progress in anaiytcal techniques in patclat {5 chromatography (GC), the number of publications ‘on coffee aroma and the number of identified cof- fee VOCs has rapidly increased since then. Today, around 1000 VOCS have been reported in coffee, which includes compounds from both green and roasted cof- fee (675). For many years, scientists concentrated on ident- fying the VOCs in coffee. But already by the 1970s it had become clear that only a smal faction of these volatiles ~ perhaps 5% ~ are odoriferous and hence rel- th Ak or a ‘a om. ren ow, “8, roo xt » ao an 2 Fig. 6.4 These 12 compounds are considered of particular ‘importance to the aroma of coffee. The numbers in brack- ts, below the formula, correspond to the numbers behind ‘the names in Table 6.2 (rst column) evant to the aroma, As a result, the focus has shifted towards these few sensory relevant aroma-active com- pounds in the headspace (HS) of coffee (the airspace above the coffee). ‘Several instrumental methods have been developed to achieve the following objectives: to identify and ‘quantify the odor-relevant volatiles, to assess their odor impact and note, and to recombine coffee aromas from the identified and quantified main aroma compounds. Given the extensive differences in coflee genetics, ge- ‘graphical origins, cultivation practices and processing techniques, its not surprising that publications on cof- fee aroma composition differ in terms of the relative {importance placed on the main aroma compounds. Con- sequently, while there has been extensive investigation {nto the main aroma volatiles in coffee, individual stud- {es often report slightly different sets of volatiles that are representative of the particular aroma of the cof- fee being studied, Furthermore, the different method ological sirategies and analytical approaches used for ‘measuring VOC compositions are an additional source of variability in the ranking of the main aroma com- pounds, Hence, in order to eliminate variability due to differences between varieties for example, we have fo- cused in Table 6.1 on just the Arabica variety. In-depth studies by Grosch and his coworkers on the identification and quantification of flavor active VOCs, the determination of their odor thresholds and extrac tion yields, already concluded in the mid-1990s that less than 30 VOCs are important to the aroma of roasted cof- fee (6.44, 46,48, 76-79]. Omission experiments further suggest that the actual number of indispensable coffee aroma compounds could be as small as nine (6.49, 51, 52, 80]. Based on this more focused and detailed work, condensed list of coffee aroma VOCs has been com- yoro@zhaw.chos eolaued Food and Flavors the extracvbeverage (calculated from (6.70). (8) Extraction yield (after {6.70}. (e) Compounds wiose absence was significant for most panclists when omitted from the aroma model (after (6.49)). The numbers in brackets, behind the ‘compound names, correspond tothe numbers ofthe structures shown in Fig. 6.4 (last column) 2-Methyipropanal (1) 2400 760 1400 39 x 2-Methylbtanal 2) 2600 870 1600062 x 3 -Methylbatanal (3) 17000570 000 x 23:Butandione 4900 2100 3900079 23-Pentandione 35000 1600 3000035 4 iydroxy 2.5 -dimetyl 32 aro 1400007200 1900095, 2(5)-Eubyl-é-hydrory-52)-methyl-3(2-furanone 16000400 1500 93, Vein 410210 390095 earthy te 2-Edby-3S-dimetbylpyrazine (4) 400 1 079 x 2-Btheny13,5-dimetbylyrazine (3) 8 1 1935 x 2.4. Dithy-Smethygyraine (6) 100 36 oa x 2-Btheny-3- predictive model Cotes i measured withthe analytical instrument and the sensory profile is predicted using the proitve statistical model developed in top 2 Fig. 6.12 Predicting sensory profiles from instrumental measurements: A three-step approach m/z values. They have tentatively been assigned as 3: 2-butanone; m/z 75: methylacetate; m/z 81 furfurylaleohol; m/2 83: 2-methylturan; m/z 87: 2- 3- methylbutanal (57%); diacetyl (43%) [6.11]. The time resolution used for recording the nose-space spectra was 0:5 seconds. This example demonstates thatthe coffee aroma thatreaches the olfactory receptors can vary over alarge range belween assessors. The raction and composition of VOCs that are actualy released fom a food in the mouth and transported to the olfactory receptors de- pends not just on the composition of the food but is strongly modulated by anatomic and physiologi char- acteristics of the person, and may be further modulated by the person's consumption and breathing patter. This is a demonstation of what we may already all know ~ a given coffee or food does not tase the same to every- boy 6.5.3 Predicting Sensory Profile from Instrumental Measurements Improved strategies and methods for the correlation of sensory and instrumental analysis are being developed With the ultimate objective of predicting the sensory profile from instrumental measurements. While this represents a truly challenging endeavor, it is often con- sidered the holy grail of flavor science [6.109111]. ‘The strategy presented in [6.109] ean schematically be described as a three-step process, as outlined in Fig. 6.12. In the first step a range of coffees were ana- lyzed by instrumental techniques (e., PTR-MS and/or GC-MS) and are profiled by a trained sensory panel. ‘The second step concerns the development of a math- ematical or statistical model that predicts the sensory profiles based on measured instrumental data, In the third step, in order to validate the predictive model, a se- Cosi Arpesio Cotes Coffee ium Diner eu, Bier Acid Covoa Acid Cocoa BunerTottee | Roasted ButerToffee J Roasted Woody Woody © Mest y he ser pa Pret hy cone ger ping of oma dove te ep Fig. 6.13 Comparison of predicted sensory profiles, based on in- strumental measurements (PTR-MS) and sensory profiles for 0 selected coffees. The coffees analyzed here were two single serve coffee capsules from Nespresso, a Cosi and an Arpeggio yoro@zhaw.ch solauedolaued Parte Food and Flavors ties of coffees were measured by instrumental methods and the sensory profiles predicted based on the model developed in step 2. Subsequently, the same coffees ‘were profiled by the sensory panel and the profiles com- pared to the predicted ones. Ifthe match was considered satisfactory, the model was successfully validated and ccan be applied to predict the sensory profiles of coffee, ‘based on measured instrumental data, 6.6 What Next? For much of the past, research into coffee aroma fo- cused on the identification, quantification and qualifica- tion of main coffee aroma compounds, and it is believed ‘that essentially all relevant compounds have been iden- tified. Consequently, the focus is shifting towards new fields, We see three major trends (among others) that wwe believe will dominate research into coffee aroma in the years to come, ‘Technological and analytical progress in instrumen- tation, and online techniques with high time resolu- tion and very high sensitivity will certainly be one of the most prominent and relevant instrumental develop- ments Understanding individual eoffee flavor perception and preferences is a second major field of research that ‘wall atract significant attention, Novel tools and strate gies will be developed to measure the volatile aroma compounds delivered breath-by-breath to the nose at ‘an individual level. Understanding the basis ofthe di ferences in aroma delivery during coffee drinking and sensation/perception will contribute to the development of individualized aroma science, Predicting the sensory profile of eoffee from instru- ‘mental measurements is possibly the most significant References In Fig. 6.13, the application of a model that was developed specifically for Nespresso single serve cof- fees was applied to two capsules (6.109, 110], Predicted sensory profiles, generated using a formerly established predictive model based on PTR-MS measurements, are ‘superimposed on the sensory profiles of the same cap- sules created by a sensory panel. Clearly, a very good ‘match was achieved, challenge in flavor science and will certainly attract ‘major attention and effort for many more years to come. ‘Today, flavor science is moving into a discipline that is truly multidisciplinary and that requires a new breed Of scientists [6.12]. What was once the playground of food and flavor scientists and analytical chemists is to- day a complex scientific platform where experts from biology, psychophysics, psychology, organic chemistry, analytics, material sciences, physics, mathematics and health meet with food and flavor scientists to work in concert Acknowledgments. This work would not have been possible without the help and support of many col- Teagues and friends with whom T have been able to share my fascination for my work on the sci- fence of coffee aroma. They are: Werner Lindinger, ‘Alfons Jordan, Martin Graus, Imre Blank, Philippe Pollien, Santo Ali, Christian Lindinger, Ralf Zim- mermann, Ralph Dorfner, Alexia N. Gloess, Bar ‘bara Schénblichler, Flurin Wieland, Marco Wellinge. ‘Samo Smrke, Sebastian Opitz, José A. Sanchez and ‘many more, 6.1 Gantergian’, H. Brevard, ¥. Krebs, A. Feria~ Morales, R. Amado, C. Yerelzian: Characterisation of the aroma of green Mexican coffee and icen= tification of mouldyrearthy defect, Eur. Food Res Technol. 22, 648-857 (2001) A Buettner: Influence of human salivary enzymes ‘on odorant concentration cnanges occuring in vivo. 1. Esters and thiols, J Agric. Food Chem. 50, 3283— 3289 (2002) 1h Buettner, J. Beauchamp: Chemical input ~ Sen~ sory output: Diverse modes of physiology-flavour interaction, Food Qua. Prefer. 21, 915-92 (2010) ‘A Buettner, A. Bees, C Hannig, M. Settles: Obser~ vation of the swallowing process by application 52 63 5a of videottuaroscopy and real-time magnetic reso- nance imaging-consequences fr retronasal aroma simulation, Chem. Senses 26, 211-1219 200}) 65 A Buettner, A Beer, C Hannig, M. Settles, P. Schieberle: Physiological and analytical studies ‘on flavor perception dynamics as induced by the eating and swallowing process, Food Qual. Prefer. 133, 497-506 (2002) 6.6 A. Buettner, S. Otto, A. Beer, M. Mestres, P. Schieberle, T. Hummel: Dynamics of retronasal aroma perception during consumption: Cross- Tinking ‘on-line breath analysis with mecico analytical tools to elucidate a complex process, Food Chem. 108, 234-1246 (2008), naw.chCotter References 67 68 69 6.0 6.3, 6.21 |, Buettner, P, Schleberle: Changes in the con- centrations of key fruit odorants Induced by mas- lication. In: Flavor Release, ed. by D.D. Roberts, 4. Taylor (AS, Washington 2000) A. Buettner, PSchieberle: Exnaled odorant mea surement (EX0M) = A new approach to quantity ‘the degree of in-mouth release of food aroma compounds, LWT Food Sci. Technol. 33, 553-559 (2000) A, Buettner, Schieberle: Influence of mastication fn the concentrations of aroma volatiles ~ Some aspects of favour release and flavour perception, Food chem. 71, 347-354 (2000) M. Mestres,N. Moran, A. Jordan, A. Buettner: Aroma release and retronasal perception during and af= ‘ter consumption of favored whey protein gels with gifferent textures. In viv release analysts, J Agric, Food Chem. 53, 403-109 (2006) C Yeretzian, P. Pollen, C. Uindinger, 5, Ali: Indi~ vigualization of flavor preferences: Toward a con: sumer-centric and individualized aroma science, Compr Rev. Food Sci Food Saf 3, 152-159 (2004) Iolank, M. Wust, C Yeretzian: Expression of mul~ tidisciplinary flavor science: Research highlights from the 12th Weurman Symposium, J Agric Food. Chem. 57, 9857-9858 (2008), J.B. German, ¢. Yeretzlan, VB. Tolstoguzov: Ol faction, where nutition, memory and immunity Intersect. In: Flavours and Fragrances, 6. by RG. Berger (Springer, Belin, Heidelberg 2007) P. Mombaerts, F Wang, ©. Dulac, SK. Chao, AA, Nemes, M. Mendelsohn, J. Edmandson, R. Axel Visualizing an olfactory sensory map, Cell 87, 675~ 685 (1995) P. Mombaerts: Molecular biology of odorant re~ ceptors in vertebrates, Annu. Rev. Neuroscl. 22, 47-509 (1999) 4. Delviche: The impact of perceptual interactions fn perceived flavor, Faod Qual. Prt. 15, 17-105 (2004) RJ. Stevenson, J. Prescott, R.A. Boakes: Confusing ‘tastes and smells: How odours can influence the perception of sweet and sour tastes, chem. Senses 26, 627-635 (1998) 4, Prescot, V Johnstone, J Francs: Odour-taste in teractions: Effects of attentional strategies ducing exposure, Chem. Senses 28, 331-340 (2004) JS Ribeiro, RF Tebl, F Augusto, M.M.C. Ferreira: Simultaneous optimization of the microextraction of coffe volatiles using response surface method ‘logy and principal component analysis, hemom. Intell. Lab. syst 102, 45-52 (2010) M. Damm, J. Vent, M. Schmidt, P. Thelssen, HE. Eee, J. lotsth T. Hummel: Intranasal volume and olfacory function, Chem. Senses 27, 831-839 (2002) K, Zhao, PW. Scherer, .A. Hallo, P. Dalton: effect of anatomy on human nasal air flow and odor~ ant transport pattems: Implications for olfacion, hem, Senses 29, 365-379 (2003) AT. Hornung, 01). Smith, 0.8. Kurtz, T. White D.A. Leopold fect of nasal dilaors an nasal struc 6.00 iaw.ch tures, snitfing strategies, and olfactory ability, Rhi- nology 39, 84-87 (2001) D.A. Leopold: The relationship between nasal anatomy and human olfaction, Laryngoscope 98, 32-138 (1988) LM, Bartoshuk, V.B. Durty, LJ. Mille PTCIPROP tasting: Anatomy, pschophysics, and sex effects, Physiol. Behav. 56, 95~171 (1992) LH. Snyder Inherited taste deficiency, Sclence 7 151-152 (1931) U.K. Kim, E. Jorgenson, HK. Coon, M. Leppert, N. isch, D. Drayna: Positional cloning ofthe hu: man quantitative tat locus uncerlyng tase sen sitivity to phenylthiocarbamide, Science 299, 1221~ 125 (2003), MM. Kamphuls, M.S, Westerterp-Plantenga: PRO? sensitivity affects macronutrient selection, Physiol Behav. 79, 167-172 (2003) 5. Rssouling, Ml. Shevell, RJ. Zatorre, M. Jones= Gotman, M.D. Schloss, K. Oudjhane: Children who can't smell the coffee: Isolated congenital anos- mia. Child Neurol. 13, 168-172 (1988) N.D. Abolmaali V. Hietschold, TJ. Vogl, KB. HUt- tenbrink, T. Himmel: MR evaluation in patients with izoiated anosmia since birth or early child= hood, Am. J, Neuroradiol. 23, 157-164 (2002) W. Grosch: Specify of the human nose in perceiving food odorants, Weurman Flavour Res Symp. (2000) pp. 218-219, CReverdy, , Selle EP Kster,E. Ginon,C. Lange: Etfect of sensory education on food preferences in thildren, Food Qual. Preference 24, 794-B0K (2010) ED. Capalai: Conditioned food preferences. In: Why We Eat What We Et: The psychology of Eating, e. by ED. Capaldi (American Psychological associa~ tion, Washington 1986) P. Rozin: Towards a Psychology of Food Choice {In~ sutut Danone, Bruxelles 1998) FA. Lucas: Sclafani Flavor preferences conditioned by high-fat versus high-carbohyarate diets vary as 3 function of session length, Physiol. Behav. 66, 389-395 (1998) © Perea, F. Lucas, A, Scafani: Increased favor acceptance and. preference conditioned by the Postingestve actions of glucose, Physiol. Behav. (6, 483-492 (998) ILA. Mennella,6.X. Beauchamp: Favor experiences during formula feecing are related to preferences during childnood, Early Hum. Dev, 68,782 (2002) AMD. Hitsch, 5.6. Harts, J. Fawcett, A. Hits’ What Flavor i Your Personality? Discover Who You 4re by Looking at What You Eat (Sourcebooks, Naperville 2001) J. Mojet, EP Koster: Texture and flavour memory in foods: An incidental learning experiment, Appetite 38, 10-117 (2002) © Sulmont, 5. issanchou: &P. Koster Selection of ‘odorants for memory tests on the basis of familiar ity, perceived complexity, pleasantness, similarity and identification, chem. Senses 27, 307-317 (2002) W. Grosch: Warum rent Kaffee so gut? Chem, in unserer Zeit 30, 125-133 (1995) oy g|aued