Food pairing from the perspective of the ‘volatile compounds in food’ database

Advanced Food Analysis

TNO | Knowledge for businesss

KvL

-Z.0

8-0

6.6

44

Ep

Miriam Kort*,Ben Nijssen,Katja van Ingen-Visscher,Jan Donders

TNO Quality of Life,P.O. Box 360,3700 AJ Zeist,The Netherlands

* P +31 30 694 48 89 F +31 30 694 48 94 Miriam.Kort@tno.nl

DatabaseDr. Weurman started the database “Volatile

Compounds in Food” (VCF) in 1963. With this database

he wanted to show that many different food products

contain the same volatile compounds. The database

can be consulted via Internet on bases of subscription.

In the edition released in 2007 a “compare” function is

offered as a new option as shown.

Food pairing theoryBased on the fact that aroma of foods is so important

for the way we perceive them, a hypothesis can be put

forward: if the major volatile molecules of two foods

are the same, they might taste (and smell) nice when

eaten together.

Bernard Lahousse and Lieven de Couvreux from

Belgium also are supporter of the flavour pairing

theory. They are making a list of 250 food products

each with their main flavour components. The

similarity between a certain product and others are

shown graphically on their Internet site. The more

flavours food products have in common the shorter

the distance between the food products.

The supporters of Food Pairing use this theory as a

tool to inspire. The craftsmanship and the experience

of a chef are still needed to translate this inspiration

into a good recipe.

Sensory testThree students from the Junior College of Utrecht

developed a basic approach to prove whether the

hypothesis of food pairing is valid.

A panel of 50 students was asked to evaluate the taste

of 7 ingredients. These ingredients were evaluated

as such and in combinations of two ingredients.

The evaluations were spread over four days. Scores

were given in a range from 1 (awful) to 7 (very nice).

When the score for the two combined ingredients

was higher than the average score for the two

separate ingredients, the combination was accepted

as successful. According to food pairing theory this

should be the case when the two ingredients share

some characteristic flavour compounds.

The following ingredients were used in all their

combinations (each combination was mixed to a

puree):

• Pear • Beef

• Tomato • Cauliflower

• Potato • Anise

• Chocolate

It was determined how often the combination of

two ingredients was scored higher than the average

calculated score. The taste is nicer than expected

when the percentage of panel members with a higher

score is above ca. 60 %. This proved to be the case for

5 combinations:

• anise- chocolate (97.2 %)

• cauliflower- pear (85.3 %)

• cauliflower-chocolate (83.3 %)

• potato-pear (79.4 %)

• cauliflower-potato (73.5 %)

The validity of the food pairing theory was evaluated.

The absolute numbers of common compounds for all

ingredient combinations were extracted from the VCF

database (Table 1) and their common characteristic

compounds were determined on the basis of

experiences of TNO (Table 2).

Table 1. Absolute number of common compounds for all

ingredient combinations.

Table 2. Percentage of common characteristic compounds.

Highlighted are the successful combinations according to the

sensory evaluation.

From Table 2 it can be concluded that the food pairing

theory is not valid when based on the principles of

this experiment.

DiscussionThe sensory test can be commented in several ways.

In the first place the circumstances under which

the panel members had to evaluate the samples

(blindfolded) and the way the products were served

(cold puree) will not be found in practice. Furthermore

the assumption that ‘the combination of two

ingredients is considered successful when the score

for the combination is higher than the average of the

scores of the separate ingredients’, can be debated.

The way cooks use the food pairing theory is almost

the opposite of the basis of the sensory test. They

do not use a panel or statistics. The combination of

ingredients is given a nice appearance to influence the

eater. The portions of ingredients are balanced to the

preference of the cook and, last but not least, more

ingredients are used to improve the overall taste.

References1. www.vcf-online.nl

2. Food for Design, www.foodpairing.be

3. K. Janssens, S. Darweesh and M. Jansen. Thesis: Can

one dispute about taste? Junior College Utrecht 2008.

FOODPAIRINGw w w . f o o d p a i r i n g . b e

CHOCOLATE

© 2 0 0 8 f o o d f o r d e s i g n . b e

Bilberry

CranberryCauliflower

Chicory

Radish

cottage

Carrot

Coffee

Cream

Kiwi

Apple

Raspberry

Soybean fried

Strawberry

cheddar

gruyere

parmesan

Yoghurt

Vanilla bourbon

Oyster

Rhubarb

Buttermilk Almond

Blue

Beetroot

TortillasGrilled beef

OrangeTamarind

Boletales

Black currant

Grilled pigeon

CHOCOLATE

Pear Tomato Potato Cocoa Beef C.flower AnisePear 85Tomato 25 392Potato 9 66 97Chocolate 25 157 52 557Beef 15 145 97 154 488Cauliflower 5 34 23 26 28 48Anise 1 15 5 13 2 1 44

Pear Tomato Potato Cocoa Beef C.flower AnisePearTomato 16

Potato 3 42

Chocolate 2 43

Beef 0 21 34 24

Cauliflower 0 21 20 15 17

Anise 0 11 6 7 0 0