Advanced Analytical Techniques for Food Texture and Rheology: A Comprehensive Guide for Researchers and Scientists

Abstract

This article provides a comprehensive examination of modern analytical techniques for characterizing food texture and rheology, tailored for researchers, scientists, and drug development professionals. It explores the fundamental principles of food deformation and flow, details advanced methodological applications including rheology and Texture Profile Analysis (TPA), addresses common troubleshooting and optimization challenges in complex matrices, and validates techniques through correlation with sensory data. The scope extends from foundational concepts to emerging technologies like AI and biomimetic sensing, offering a robust framework for applications in food science and related biomedical fields such as dysphagia management and oral drug delivery.

The Fundamentals of Food Texture and Rheology: Principles and Instrumentation

Food rheology is defined as the science concerned with the deformation and flow of food matter under the influence of specified forces [1] [2]. This discipline provides the fundamental principles for qualitatively and quantitatively describing the mechanical properties of foods, which can be characterized as viscous (liquid-like), viscoelastic (showing both liquid and solid properties), or elastic (solid-like) materials [3]. Within the broader context of analytical techniques for food texture and rheology research, understanding these properties is critical as they determine food behavior during industrial processing, influence stability during storage, and dictate the sensory texture and mouthfeel perceived by consumers [3] [4]. Rheological measurements thus serve as an essential tool for process engineering, quality control, and predicting sensory outcomes in both food and pharmaceutical development.

Core Rheological Concepts and Material Functions

Fundamental Parameters

The relationship between applied force and material response is described by three fundamental parameters, often explained using the two-plates model [5]:

• Shear Stress (Ï„): The force (F) applied per unit area (A), measured in Pascals (Pa). Formula: Ï„ = F / A [5].
• Shear Rate (γ̇): The velocity gradient within the material, measured in reciprocal seconds (s⁻¹). Formula: γ̇ = v / h, where v is velocity and h is the shear gap [5].
• Viscosity (η): The material's internal resistance to flow, calculated as the ratio of shear stress to shear rate, measured in Pascal-seconds (Pa·s). Formula: η = τ / γ̇ [5].

Classification of Fluid Behaviors

Food materials exhibit a wide spectrum of flow behaviors, broadly classified as follows [1] [2]:

Table 1: Classification of Fluid Flow Behaviors in Foods

Fluid Type	Defining characteristic	Viscosity vs. Shear Rate	Food Example
Newtonian	Constant viscosity, independent of shear rate or time.	Constant	Water, milk, honey, plant oils [1] [5]
Non-Newtonian	Shear-thinning (Pseudoplastic)	Viscosity decreases with increasing shear rate.	Decreases	Sauces, dressings, soups [1]
	Shear-thickening (Dilatant)	Viscosity increases with increasing shear rate.	Increases	Some concentrated starch suspensions [1]
	Thixotropic	Viscosity decreases over time under constant shear, recovering when shear is removed.	Time-dependent	Yogurt, some gels [1]
	Rheopectic	Viscosity increases over time under constant shear.	Time-dependent	Some rare food foams [1]
Viscoelastic	Exhibits both elastic (solid) and viscous (liquid) properties.	--	Cheese, bread dough, gummy candies [3] [2]
Material with Yield Stress	Requires a minimum stress (yield stress) to initiate flow.	--	Ketchup, mayonnaise, margarine [6]

The following diagram illustrates the logical relationship for classifying fluid foods based on their rheological tests and responses:

Experimental Protocols for Rheological Analysis

Key Instrumentation: Rheometer

A rheometer is the primary instrument for comprehensive rheological testing, capable of both rotational and oscillatory measurements [2]. It applies a controlled stress or strain to a sample and measures the resulting response. Key components include the measuring geometry (e.g., cone-plate, plate-plate, concentric cylinders) selected based on the sample type [2]. The following workflow details a standard approach for characterizing a food sample.

Protocol 1: Amplitude Sweep to Determine Linear Viscoelastic Region (LVER)

Purpose: To identify the maximum deformation a material can withstand without irreversible structural breakdown, which is crucial for setting parameters for subsequent oscillatory tests [2].

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare samples of consistent size and shape. For soft solids or gels, a biopsy punch can create cylindrical specimens (e.g., 8mm diameter x 10mm height) [7].
• Geometry Selection: Choose an appropriate geometry (e.g., plate-plate for soft solids, vane rotor for gel-like samples prone to wall-slip) [2].
• Loading: Carefully load the sample onto the rheometer plate, ensuring no air bubbles are trapped. Trim excess sample if necessary.
• Experimental Parameters:
  • Mode: Oscillation (strain-controlled).
  • Frequency: Keep constant at 1 Hz.
  • Strain: Logaritmically increase from a low value (e.g., 0.01%) to a high value (e.g., 100%).
  • Temperature: Hold constant (e.g., 20°C or 37°C for oral processing simulations).
• Data Analysis: Plot storage modulus (G') and loss modulus (G") against strain. The LVER is the strain range where G' and G" remain constant. The yield stress is identified as the point where G' drops significantly, indicating structure failure [2].

Protocol 2: Frequency Sweep to Characterize Viscoelasticity

Purpose: To understand the time-dependent mechanical spectrum of a material and classify it as a viscoelastic solid, liquid, or gel [2].

Procedure:

• Prerequisite: Perform Protocol 1 to determine a strain value within the LVER.
• Experimental Parameters:
  • Mode: Oscillation.
  • Strain: Set to a fixed value within the LVER (e.g., 0.5%).
  • Frequency: Logaritmically vary over a wide range (e.g., 0.1 to 100 rad/s).
• Data Analysis: Plot G' (elastic response) and G" (viscous response) versus frequency.
  • A viscoelastic solid (e.g., firm cheese) displays G' > G" across the entire frequency range.
  • A viscoelastic liquid (e.g., yogurt) displays G" > G' at low frequencies, with curves potentially crossing at higher frequencies.
  • A gel shows G' and G" largely independent of frequency and parallel to each other [2].

Protocol 3: Flow Curve Analysis for Viscous Properties

Purpose: To model the shear-rate-dependent viscosity of fluid foods, which is critical for process design like pumping, piping, and mixing [6].

Procedure:

• Geometry Selection: Use concentric cylinders for low-viscosity liquids or cone-plate for higher viscosity fluids [2].
• Experimental Parameters:
  • Mode: Rotation.
  • Shear Rate: Logaritmically increase from low to high values (e.g., 0.1 to 1000 s⁻¹), relevant to the process being simulated.
• Data Analysis: Plot shear stress (Ï„) versus shear rate (γ̇). Fit the data to appropriate rheological models [6]:
  • Power Law (Ostwald-de Waele): τ = K * γ̇^n (For shear-thinning/thickening fluids without yield stress)
  • Herschel-Bulkley: τ = τ₀ + K * γ̇^n (For fluids with a yield stress, Ï„â‚€)
  • Casson: τ^(1/2) = τ₀^(1/2) + (η * γ̇)^(1/2) (Often used for chocolate and suspensions)

Data Presentation and Analysis

Quantitative Rheological Parameters of Food Models

Rheological testing provides quantitative metrics that can be correlated with food texture and processability.

Table 2: Measured Rheological and Textural Parameters of Select Meat Products

Product Type	Stiffness (kPa)	Storage Modulus, G' (kPa)	Loss Modulus, G" (kPa)	Primary Rheological Character
Plant-Based Turkey	418.9 ± 41.7	50.4 ± 4.1	25.3 ± 3.0	Elastic Solid (High)
Animal Sausage	Measured	Measured	Measured	Viscoelastic Solid
Animal Hotdog	Measured	Measured	Measured	Viscoelastic Solid
Tofu (Extra Firm)	56.7 ± 14.1	5.7 ± 0.5	1.3 ± 0.1	Elastic Solid (Low)

Data adapted from a comparative study of plant-based and animal meats, demonstrating the ability of instrumental rheology to quantify textural differences [7].

Common Rheological Models for Liquid Foods

Selecting the correct model is essential for predicting flow behavior in engineering applications.

Table 3: Rheological Models for Characterizing Liquid Food Flow Curves

Model Name	Equation	Parameters	Typical Food Applications
Newtonian	τ = η * γ̇	η: Constant viscosity	Water, milk, honey, sugar syrups [6]
Power Law	τ = K * γ̇^n	K: Consistency index (Pa·sⁿ)n: Flow behavior index	Sauces, purees, juice concentrates [6]
Herschel-Bulkley	τ = τ₀ + K * γ̇^n	τ₀: Yield stress (Pa)K: Consistency index (Pa·sⁿ)n: Flow behavior index	Ketchup, mayonnaise, margarine [6]
Casson	τ^(1/2) = τ₀^(1/2) + (η * γ̇)^(1/2)	τ₀: Yield stress (Pa)η: Plastic viscosity (Pa·s)	Chocolate, suspensions [6]

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Key Reagents and Materials for Food Rheology Research

Item	Function/Application	Example Use Case
Rheology Modifiers (Thickeners/Gelling Agents)
Xanthan Gum	Polysaccharide that provides strong shear-thinning and stability; resistant to enzymes.	Used in sauces, dressings, and dysphagia diets for controlled flow [8] [9].
Guar Gum	Galactomannan that increases viscosity; susceptible to hydrolysis by alpha-amylase.	Used as a thickener in beverages and ice creams [9].
Starch (e.g., Maize)	Native or modified starch granules that swell in water to form viscous pastes or gels.	Used as a cost-effective thickener in soups, puddings, and gravies [8].
Model Food Systems
Polystyrene Latex Suspensions	Idealized, monodisperse spherical particles for fundamental suspension studies.	Used as a model system to develop and validate scaling laws for suspension rheology [8].
Enzymes
Alpha-Amylase	Digestive enzyme that hydrolyzes starch.	Used in vitro to simulate oral processing and study time-dependent viscosity breakdown of starch-based thickeners [9].
Measuring Geometries
Cone-Plate	Absolute geometry for homogeneous shear, ideal for high-viscosity fluids.	Measuring viscosity of polymer solutions or polymer melts [2] [5].
Plate-Plate	Absolute geometry, adjustable gap, suitable for soft solids and suspensions with particles.	Testing gels, pastes, or samples that require slight gap adjustments [2].
Concentric Cylinders	Absolute geometry ideal for low- to medium-viscosity liquids.	Analyzing viscosity of emulsions, milk, or beverages [2] [5].
Vane Rotor	Relative geometry that minimizes wall-slip and structure disruption for gel-like samples.	Testing the yield stress of yogurt, tomato ketchup, or other shear-sensitive gels [2].
IGF1Rtide	IGF1Rtide, CAS:172615-51-9, MF:C73H114N18O22, MW:1595.819	Chemical Reagent
1h-Pyrimido[1,6-c][1,3]oxazepine	1H-Pyrimido[1,6-c][1,3]oxazepine|CAS 183156-04-9	High-purity 1H-Pyrimido[1,6-c][1,3]oxazepine for research. Explore fused heterocycle applications in medicinal chemistry and tracer development. For Research Use Only. Not for human or veterinary use.

Application in Food and Pharmaceutical Development

The application of food rheology extends across multiple domains. In product development, it helps create plant-based meat alternatives with textures matching animal meat, as quantified by stiffness and viscoelastic moduli [7]. In process design, rheological data ensures pump selection, pipe sizing, and heat exchanger design are optimized to avoid issues like pipeline blockage or inefficient sterilization [3]. For sensory prediction, rheological parameters like storage modulus and viscosity are highly correlated with textural attributes such as hardness, creaminess, and smoothness, enabling the prediction of sensory outcomes through instrumental data [3] [10] [4]. Finally, in medical food and pharmaceutics, specialized rheological methods like Ultrasonic Spinning Rheometry (USR) are employed to evaluate the time-resolved viscosity of dysphagia diets in the presence of salivary amylase, crucial for patient safety [9].

Texture is a fundamental sensory property of food, defined as all the mechanical, geometrical, and surface attributes of a product perceptible by mechanical, tactile, visual, and auditory receptors [4]. In food science, understanding these attributes is critical as they directly influence consumer acceptance, enjoyment, and perceived quality [11]. Sensory texture perception is inherently multimodal, arising from the complex interplay between a food's physical properties and physiological processing during mastication, oral manipulation, and swallowing [12]. The perception of texture attributes cannot be directly related to a single physical property but is instead strongly related to oral processing dynamics, including how food structures break down, interact with saliva, and coat oral surfaces [12].

From a rheological perspective, texture attributes can be categorized into three distinct classes: mechanical properties (related to stress-strain behavior, such as hardness and elasticity), geometrical properties (related to particle size, shape, and orientation, such as grittiness), and surface properties (related to moisture and fat content, such as creaminess) [4]. These properties collectively contribute to the overall mouthfeel experience and are crucial for product development, quality control, and predicting consumer preference [13]. This document provides a structured framework for the analytical characterization of key sensory texture attributes within the context of advanced rheological research.

Classification and Definition of Key Attributes

Sensory texture attributes are diverse and can be qualitatively described using specialized lexicons developed through rigorous sensory science methodologies [14]. Table 1 provides definitions, underlying mechanisms, and common food models for primary texture attributes.

Table 1: Key Sensory Texture Attributes: Definitions and Mechanisms

Attribute	Sensory Definition	Primary Underlying Physical/Structural Mechanism	Common Food Models/Examples
Creaminess	A smooth, rich, and velvety mouthfeel associated with dairy fats [15].	Homogeneous distribution of fat droplets or particles, low friction (lubrication), and viscous response [12] [4].	Cream, full-fat milk, custard, mayonnaise.
Graininess	A sensation of small, perceptible particles in the mouth [11].	Presence of discrete particles (e.g., sugar crystals, protein aggregates) with specific size and shape (geometrical property) [4].	Gritty yogurts, coarse-grain mustard, some protein bars.
Crispiness	A combination of a brittle fracture upon initial bite with an accompanying characteristic sound [12].	Rigid, cellular, or layered structure that fractures suddenly and completely with low moisture content [12].	Potato chips, fresh apples, crispy bacon.
Chewiness	The sustained, elastic resistance requiring multiple jaw movements before the food can be swallowed [16].	High degree of cross-linking in protein or polysaccharide networks, requiring significant mechanical work to fracture [7].	Beef jerky, caramel, chewy candy, steak.
Firmness/Hardness	The force required to achieve a given deformation or compression [7] [4].	Resistance to deformation from a combination of structural integrity and elastic modulus [7].	Hard cheeses (Parmesan), raw carrots, firm tofu.
Astringency	A complex tactile sensation of dryness, roughness, and puckering throughout the oral cavity [12].	Interaction of polyphenols with salivary proteins, leading to aggregation, precipitation, and reduced lubrication [4].	Red wine, strong tea, unripe fruits.

Quantitative Profiling and Correlations with Instrumental Data

Linking subjective sensory perceptions to objective instrumental measurements is a central goal of food rheology research. Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA) is a cornerstone technique for this purpose, wherein trained panels develop a consensus vocabulary and quantify the intensity of each attribute using structured scales [17] [14] [13]. This sensory profiling generates quantitative data that can be statistically correlated with instrumental metrics.

Table 2 presents representative quantitative data from texture Profile Analysis (TPA) and rheology, demonstrating how these measurements can differentiate products and predict sensory attributes.

Table 2: Quantitative Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) and Rheological Data for Various Food Products

Product Type	Stiffness (kPa)	Storage Modulus, G' (kPa)	Loss Modulus, G'' (kPa)	Correlated Sensory Attributes (Intensity Scale 0-10)
Plant-Based Turkey	418.9 ± 41.7	50.4 ± 4.1	25.3 ± 3.0	Firmness (8.5), Chewiness (7.8) [7]
Animal Sausage	Data within plant-based extremes	Data within plant-based extremes	*Data within plant-based extremes	Firmness (6.5), Chewiness (6.0) [7]
Tofu (Extra Firm)	56.7 ± 14.1	5.7 ± 0.5	1.3 ± 0.1	Firmness (4.0), Fracturability (3.5) [7]
Model Yogurt (Creamy)	Not Specified	1.2 ± 0.2	0.5 ± 0.1	Creaminess (9.0), Graininess (1.0) [4]
Model Yogurt (Grainy)	Not Specified	1.1 ± 0.2	0.5 ± 0.1	Creaminess (5.0), Graininess (7.5) [4]

Data adapted from studies on plant-based and animal meats [7] and complex dairy systems [4]. Values are presented as Mean ± Standard Deviation where available.

Experimental Protocols for Sensory and Instrumental Analysis

Protocol 1: Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA) for Sensory Profiling

Principle: A trained panel identifies and quantifies the sensory attributes of a product to create a complete sensory profile [14] [13].

Workflow Diagram: Sensory Evaluation Workflow

Procedure:

• Panel Selection and Training: Select 8-12 panelists based on sensory acuity. Train them over multiple sessions (e.g., 10-15 sessions of 1-2 hours) to recognize and consistently score predefined attributes using reference standards [14] [13]. For cham-cham analysis, panelists were trained to score attributes on a 0-10 intensity scale [14].
• Lexicon Development: In a focus group setting, panelists generate terminology to describe the product's appearance, aroma, flavor, and texture. The lexicon is refined to a final list of unambiguous attributes with clear definitions, as shown in the study of Indian cham-cham where attributes like "firmness" and "rancid" were defined [14].
• Sample Presentation: Present samples monadically (one at a time) in randomized, three-digit-coded containers at a controlled, product-appropriate temperature (e.g., 15°C for dairy products) [14]. Provide neutral palate cleansers (e.g., deionized water, unsalted crackers).
• Attribute Intensity Scoring: Panelists evaluate each sample and score the intensity of each attribute on a structured scale (e.g., a 10 cm line scale or a 0-10 numerical scale) [14].
• Data Analysis: Analyze scores using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to identify significant differences between samples. Use multivariate techniques like Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to reduce data dimensionality and visualize product relationships [14].

Protocol 2: Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) Using a Universal Testing Machine

Principle: This double compression test simulates the action of chewing and extracts parameters correlated with sensory perceptions [7] [18].

Workflow Diagram: Instrumental Texture Analysis

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare uniform cylindrical samples (e.g., 8 mm diameter, 10 mm height) using a biopsy punch or custom cutter [7]. Allow samples to equilibrate to room temperature (e.g., 25°C) before testing.
• Instrumental Setup: Use a texture analyzer equipped with a cylindrical probe. Set test parameters to mimic oral processing: a compression strain of 50-75% of the original height, a crosshead speed corresponding to a moderate strain rate, and a brief pause between the two compression cycles [7].
• Test Execution: Perform the double compression test. The instrument records the force-time curve throughout the two cycles.
• Data Analysis: Calculate key TPA parameters from the force-time curve:
  • Hardness: Peak force during the first compression cycle.
  • Cohesiveness: Ratio of the area under the second compression curve to the area under the first compression curve (Aâ‚‚/A₁).
  • Springiness: The distance the sample recovers in height during the time between the end of the first bite and the start of the second bite.
  • Chewiness: The product of Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness [7].

Protocol 3: Dynamic Rheological Characterization

Principle: Oscillatory rheometry measures the viscoelastic properties of foods by applying a small amplitude sinusoidal shear strain/stress without disrupting the sample's internal structure [7] [4].

Procedure:

• Sample Loading and Geometry Selection: Select an appropriate geometry (e.g., parallel plate, cone-and-plate) based on sample characteristics. Load the sample carefully to avoid shearing or incorporating air bubbles. Ensure the sample completely fills the gap.
• Amplitude Sweep: Perform an amplitude sweep at a constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz) to determine the linear viscoelastic region (LVR), where the storage (G') and loss (G'') moduli are independent of the applied strain.
• Frequency Sweep: Conduct a frequency sweep within the LVR (e.g., from 0.1 to 100 rad/s) at a constant strain. This test simulates the timescale of processing and eating.
• Data Interpretation:
  • The Storage Modulus (G') quantifies the solid-like, elastic component of the material.
  • The Loss Modulus (G'') quantifies the liquid-like, viscous component.
  • The Loss Tangent (tan δ = G''/G') describes the material's behavior: tan δ < 1 indicates solid-dominant behavior (gel), while tan δ > 1 indicates liquid-dominant behavior (sol) [7] [4].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Essential Materials for Texture and Rheology Research

Category / Item	Function / Relevance in Research
Texture Analyzer	A universal testing machine configured for food testing. Used to perform TPA, puncture tests, and shear tests to obtain fundamental and empirical texture measurements [7] [4].
Rheometer	An instrument for fundamental rheological characterization. Used to perform oscillatory (amplitude, frequency sweeps) and steady shear tests to determine viscoelastic properties (G', G'') and flow behavior [7] [4].
Tribological Cell/Attachment	A device that measures lubricating properties (friction coefficient) between surfaces simulating tongue-palate contact. Critical for understanding attributes like creaminess and astringency [4].
Reference Standards (e.g., Sucrose, NaCl, Viscosity Oils)	Used for calibrating sensory panels (taste references) and instruments (rheometers). Ensure reproducibility and accuracy across different sessions and laboratories [14] [13].
Food Thickeners (e.g., Guar Gum, Xanthan Gum, Starch)	Model food ingredients used to systematically modify the viscosity and viscoelasticity of experimental systems, allowing researchers to study the specific impact of rheology on sensory perception [16] [4].
Gelling Agents (e.g., Gelatin, κ-Carrageenan, Curdlan)	Used to create model foods with controlled gel structures and fracture properties. Essential for studying the sensory perception of firmness, elasticity, and brittleness [18].
Mca-YVADAP-Lys(Dnp)-OH	Mca-YVADAP-Lys(Dnp)-OH, MF:C53H64N10O19, MW:1145.1 g/mol
Tiprenolol Hydrochloride	Tiprenolol Hydrochloride, CAS:13379-87-8, MF:C13H22ClNO2S, MW:291.84 g/mol

The scientific understanding of food texture and rheology is fundamental to product development, quality control, and predicting consumer acceptance. Rheology, the science of deformation and flow, and texture analysis, the measurement of mechanical characteristics, provide objective insights into material properties that correlate with sensory perception [19] [20]. While traditional rheometers characterize fundamental material properties under simple shear or extension, texture analyzers simulate complex mechanical actions like chewing or spreading, and tribometers probe the frictional interactions critical to mouthfeel [21] [22]. This application note details the operational principles, standard protocols, and integrated application of these three instrumental classes within food research, providing a framework for comprehensive material characterization.

Technical Specifications of Rheometers, Texture Analyzers, and Tribometers

The following table summarizes the core function, measured parameters, and typical applications of each instrument type for easy comparison.

Table 1: Comparative Overview of Rheometers, Texture Analyzers, and Tribometers

Instrument	Core Function	Primary Measured Parameters	Typical Food Applications
Rheometer [23] [24] [20]	Measures flow and deformation behavior under controlled stress or strain.	Viscosity, viscoelastic moduli (G', G"), yield stress, creep compliance, relaxation modulus.	Determining sauce thickness, yogurt gel strength, dough rheology, and melting properties of cheese.
Texture Analyzer [19] [25]	Simulates mechanical actions (e.g., compression, puncture) to measure textural properties.	Hardness, fracturability, chewiness, adhesiveness, springiness, cohesiveness.	Quantifying crispiness of chips, firmness of cheese, spreadability of butter, and freshness of bread.
Tribometer [26] [27]	Measures friction and wear between two surfaces in contact.	Coefficient of Friction (COF), friction force, wear volume.	Predicting creaminess, smoothness, or grittiness of products like ice cream, chocolate, or sauces during oral processing.

Detailed Instrument Specifications

For procurement and experimental design, the specific technical capabilities of each instrument category are critical. Rotational rheometers, for instance, are defined by their torque range and kinematic capabilities.

Table 2: Detailed Technical Specifications for Common Instrument Models

Instrument Type & Model	Key Technical Specifications	Measurement Ranges
Rotational Rheometer (NETZSCH Kinexus) [23]	- Motor Type: Ultra-low inertia- Control Modes: Stress-controlled (CS) and Strain-controlled (CR) [24]- Geometry: Cone-and-plate, parallel plate, coaxial cylinders	- Torque (Viscometry): 1.0 nNm to 250 mNm- Torque (Oscillation): 0.5 nNm to 250 mNm
Texture Analyzer (Stable Micro Systems) [19]	- Drive System: Vertical traveling arm- Measurement: Force via load cell- Test Types: Compression, tension, extrusion, bending, shear	- Force Capacity: Varies by model (e.g., up to 500 N for heavy-duty testing)
Tribometer (Kett Heidon H37 3D) [26]	- Type: 3D Portable Friction Tester- Measurement: Coefficient of Friction (COF)- Design: Handheld, operates at any angle	- Measurement Time: < 10 seconds per test- Applications: Liquids, films, plastics, cosmetics, foods

Experimental Protocols for Food Characterization

Protocol 1: Determining Yield Stress and Viscoelasticity using a Rotational Rheometer

Application: Quantifying the spreadability of mayonnaise and the gel strength of yogurt [23] [20].

Principle: The yield stress is the minimum stress required to initiate flow, distinguishing solid-like from liquid-like behavior. Viscoelastic moduli (G' - storage modulus and G" - loss modulus) characterize a material's solid-like and liquid-like nature, respectively, under small deformations.

Materials & Reagents:

• Instrument: Rotational rheometer (e.g., NETZSCH Kinexus series) [23]
• Geometry: Parallel plate (e.g., 25 mm or 50 mm diameter) or cone-and-plate
• Software: rSpace or equivalent
• Consumables: Solvent and lint-free wipes for cleaning, sample loading spatula

Procedure:

• Instrument Preparation: Initialize the rheometer and set the temperature control system to 25°C. Select and mount the appropriate parallel plate geometry. Clean the geometry and lower plate thoroughly with solvent.
• Sample Loading: Carefully load the test sample (e.g., mayonnaise or yogurt) onto the center of the lower plate. Raise the upper geometry to the designated measuring gap (e.g., 1.0 mm for parallel plates), trimming excess sample from the edges.
• Yield Stress Measurement:
  • Select a controlled shear stress (CSS) ramp mode.
  • Program a logarithmic increase in shear stress from 0.1 Pa to 100 Pa over a 3-minute period.
  • Plot the resulting viscosity or shear rate against the applied stress.
  • Identify the yield stress as the stress value where a significant decrease in viscosity occurs or where the material begins to flow continuously.
• Viscoelasticity Measurement (Amplitude Sweep):
  • Set the instrument to oscillatory mode.
  • Program an amplitude sweep with a constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz) and an increasing oscillatory strain from 0.01% to 100%.
  • Record the elastic modulus (G') and viscous modulus (G") as a function of strain.
  • The linear viscoelastic region (LVR) is identified where G' and G" remain constant. The relative magnitude of G' and G" within the LVR indicates whether the material is more solid-like (G' > G") or liquid-like (G" > G').

Protocol 2: Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) of a Cheese Sample

Application: Objectively quantifying the firmness, springiness, and cohesiveness of cheese [19].

Principle: TPA is a two-bite compression test that mimics the action of the jaw, deconstructing texture into multiple quantitative parameters.

Materials & Reagents:

• Instrument: Texture Analyzer (e.g., TA.XTplus from Stable Micro Systems) [19]
• Probe: Cylindrical probe (e.g., P/36R, 36 mm diameter)
• Software: Exponent or equivalent
• Sample Preparation: Cheese block cut into uniform cubes (e.g., 20mm x 20mm x 20mm)

Procedure:

• Instrument Setup: Calibrate the texture analyzer for force and distance. Install the cylindrical probe. Set the test speed to 1.0 mm/s and the target deformation to 50% of the sample's original height.
• Test Programming: Program a two-cycle compression test with a 5-second pause between cycles.
• Sample Testing: Place a single cheese cube centrally on the base plate. Start the test. The probe will compress the sample, retract, pause, and then compress it again.
• Data Analysis: From the resulting force-time curve, calculate the following key parameters [19]:
  • Hardness: The peak force during the first compression cycle.
  • Springiness: The distance the sample recovers during the time between the end of the first bite and the start of the second bite.
  • Cohesiveness: The ratio of the area under the second compression curve to the area under the first compression curve (Area2 / Area1).
  • Chewiness: The product of Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness (only for semi-solid foods).

Protocol 3: Evaluating Lubricity and Mouthfeel using a Tribometer

Application: Correlating frictional properties with the creamy mouthfeel of a beverage or the astringency of a polyphenol-rich solution [21] [22].

Principle: The coefficient of friction (COF) between a synthetic surface (mimicking the tongue) and a material (food bolus) under simulated oral conditions provides a physical measure related to sensory attributes like smoothness, creaminess, and astringency.

Materials & Reagents:

• Instrument: Tribometer (e.g., Kett Heidon H37 or pin-on-disk configuration) [26] [27]
• Contact Elements: A soft polymer ball (mimicking tongue) and a rotating disk, or two parallel surfaces.
• Lubricant/Test Sample: The food product or a simulated food bolus (e.g., beverage mixed with artificial saliva).
• Artificial Saliva: Prepared according to standard recipes (e.g., containing mucin, salts).

Procedure:

• System Setup: Initialize the tribometer and set the temperature to 37°C. Select and install the appropriate contact elements (e.g., a soft polymer ball as the stationary pin and a smooth disk as the rotating surface).
• Sample Preparation: If necessary, mix the food sample with artificial saliva to simulate a food bolus. Ensure the mixture is homogeneous.
• Test Execution:
  • Apply a normal load representative of oral conditions (e.g., 1 N).
  • Set the disk to rotate at a sliding speed relevant to oral processing (e.g., 10 - 100 mm/s).
  • Apply the prepared sample to the contact interface to ensure lubrication.
  • Start the test and record the frictional force over time.
• Data Analysis: Calculate the coefficient of friction (COF) as the ratio of the frictional force to the normal force. A lower COF is generally correlated with sensory attributes like creaminess and smoothness, while specific frictional curves can be indicative of astringency [22].

Integrated Workflow for Comprehensive Food Analysis

A holistic understanding of food texture and mouthfeel requires the integration of data from all three instrumental techniques. The following diagram illustrates a logical workflow for their combined application.

Diagram 1: Integrated workflow for texture and rheology analysis.

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following table lists key materials and reagents essential for conducting the experiments described in this note.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Item Name	Function/Application	Specification Notes
Parallel Plate Geometry [23]	Standard measuring system for rotational rheometry of soft solids and semi-solids.	Typically 25-50 mm diameter; serrated surfaces can prevent sample slip.
Cylindrical Probe (P/36R) [19]	Used for Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) to compress samples uniformly.	36 mm diameter is common for cheese, gels, and baked goods.
Artificial Saliva [22]	Simulates the chemical environment of the mouth in tribological and breakdown studies.	Often contains mucin, electrolytes, and buffers to pH 6.8-7.2.
Soft Polymer Contact [22]	Mimics the soft, deformable surface of the tongue in tribological testing.	Made from PDMS or similar elastomers with defined elastic modulus.
Standard Calibration Oils	Verifies the accuracy and calibrates the torque response of a rheometer.	Certified oils with known viscosity across a range of shear rates.
Texture Analyzer Calibration Weight [19]	Provides traceable force calibration for texture analyzers.	Typically 5 kg or 10 kg mass, certified to international standards.

Linking Microstructure to Macroscopic Behavior and Sensory Perception

The textural properties of a food product are a primary determinant of its quality, stability, and consumer acceptance. These properties form a critical chain of causality: the microstructure of a food—the spatial arrangement of its constituent components at the microscopic level—directly dictates its macroscopic rheological and textural behavior, which in turn is perceived by consumers as specific sensory attributes such as creaminess, hardness, or crispness [21] [22]. Understanding these relationships is essential for rational food design and optimization.

This document provides detailed application notes and protocols for researchers aiming to quantitatively link these three domains. We present a suite of complementary techniques for characterizing microstructure, measuring macroscopic material properties, and correlating these measurements with sensory perception, providing a comprehensive framework for advanced food texture and rheology research.

Characterizing Food Microstructure

The first step in linking structure to function is the quantitative characterization of the food's architecture. Microstructural analysis moves beyond qualitative description to provide quantifiable metrics that can be correlated with physical properties.

Fractal Image Texture Analysis

Fractal analysis is a powerful method for quantifying the complexity and roughness of food surfaces and internal structures from digital images. The core principle is that many natural and processed food structures exhibit self-similarity across different scales of observation, which can be described by the Fractal Dimension (FD) [28]. A higher FD indicates a more complex, rougher, or more space-filling structure.

Protocol: Fractal Dimension Calculation via Box-Counting Method (BCM)

• Objective: To quantify the surface roughness or microstructural complexity of a food sample from a digital image.
• Materials and Reagents:
  • Food samples (e.g., chocolate, potato chips, bread crust, gels)
  • Calibrated digital microscope (e.g., Nikon SMZ-2T) or flatbed scanner
  • Computer with image analysis software (e.g., ImageJ with FracLac plugin, MATLAB)
  • Standardized lighting chamber to ensure uniform illumination
• Procedure:
  • Sample Preparation and Image Acquisition: Prepare a flat, representative surface of the sample. For surface analysis, a 1 cm x 1 cm area is typical. Capture grayscale images at a standardized magnification (e.g., 10x) and resolution. Ensure consistent, diffuse lighting to minimize shadows and specular reflection [28].
  • Image Pre-processing: Convert the image to 8-bit grayscale. Apply a consistent threshold to create a binary (black and white) image if necessary, separating the feature of interest from the background.
  • Grid Overlay: Overlay the binary image with a series of grids composed of squares (boxes) of side length ε. Use a sequence of box sizes, typically following a geometric series (e.g., 2, 4, 8, 16, 32... pixels).
  • Box Counting: For each box size ε, count the number of boxes, N(ε), that contain at least one part of the structure (i.e., at least one white pixel).
  • Data Analysis and FD Calculation: Plot log(N(ε)) versus log(1/ε). The data should approximate a straight line. The Fractal Dimension (FD) is calculated as the absolute value of the slope of the line of best fit through these points [28].
    • FD = - lim (ε→0) [ log N(ε) / log ε ]

Application Example: This method has been successfully applied to differentiate food surfaces. For instance, at 10x magnification, chocolate FD was measured at 2.12 ± 0.02, while a rougher potato surface had an FD of 2.41 ± 0.02 [28]. Furthermore, it can track microstructural changes, such as the increase in FD during starch gelatinization or the surface changes due to chocolate blooming.

Table 1: Fractal Dimension of Selected Food Surfaces (adapted from [28])

Food Material	Average Fractal Dimension (FD)	Visual Texture Description
Chocolate	2.12	Smooth
Apple	2.21	Slightly Rough
Carrot	2.31	Moderately Rough
Potato	2.41	Rough
Pumpkin	2.49	Very Rough

Measuring Macroscopic Behavior

The mechanical and flow properties of food materials are the macroscopic manifestation of their microstructure. Rheology and texture analysis provide the quantitative link between the two.

Advanced Rheological Profiling

Rheology is the science of the deformation and flow of matter. Food materials are often viscoelastic, meaning they exhibit both solid-like (elastic) and liquid-like (viscous) properties [21] [29].

Protocol: Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS)

• Objective: To deconstruct the nonlinear viscoelastic response of a food material, providing insight into its structural integrity and yield behavior under large deformations that simulate processing or mastication.
• Materials and Reagents:
  • Controlled-stress or controlled-strain rheometer with a Peltier temperature control unit
  • Parallel plate or cone-and-plate geometry (typically 20-50 mm diameter)
  • Solvent trap to prevent sample drying
• Procedure:
  • Sample Loading: Carefully load the sample onto the rheometer's bottom plate. Lower the upper geometry to the desired gap, ensuring the sample fills the gap uniformly. Trim excess sample and apply a thin layer of low-viscosity silicone oil to the exposed edge to prevent evaporation.
  • Linear Viscoelastic Region (LVER) Determination: Perform an amplitude sweep at a constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz) to determine the critical strain (γ_c) where the microstructure begins to break down (where storage modulus G' decreases by a defined percentage, e.g., 5%).
  • LAOS Test: At a fixed frequency (e.g., 1 rad/s), perform oscillatory tests at strain amplitudes that extend well beyond the LVER (e.g., from 0.1% to 1000%).
  • Data Analysis: Analyze the raw oscillatory stress waveform. The nonlinear response is characterized by harmonic distortions. Key parameters include [21]:
    • Harmonic Ratios (I₃/I₁, Iâ‚…/I₁): Quantify the extent of waveform distortion.
    • Stress Decomposition: Separate the stress response into elastic and viscous components, revealing behaviors like strain-stiffening or strain-softening.

Application Example: LAOS is ideal for characterizing complex fluids like yogurt, revealing how protein networks break down under the large strains encountered during spooning and swallowing [21] [30].

Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)

TPA is an instrumental technique that imitates the mastication process by applying a two-cycle compression to a food sample, yielding multiple textural parameters from a single test [29] [19].

Protocol: Instrumental TPA

• Objective: To simulate oral processing and obtain quantitative, reproducible measurements of key textural attributes.
• Materials and Reagents:
  • Texture Analyzer (e.g., TA.XTplus from Stable Micro Systems)
  • Cylindrical probe (e.g., 75 mm diameter compression platen)
  • Universal 5 kg load cell
• Procedure:
  • Sample Preparation: Prepare samples of uniform size and shape (e.g., cylinders 20 mm high and 25 mm in diameter).
  • Test Setup: Set a two-cycle compression test with a target strain of 50-75% of the original sample height. The time between the two compressions should be standardized (e.g., 5 seconds). The test speed is typically 1-2 mm/s.
  • Data Analysis: Extract parameters from the resulting force-time curve [29] [19]:
    • Hardness: Peak force of the first compression cycle.
    • Cohesiveness: Ratio of the area under the second compression to the area under the first compression (Aâ‚‚/A₁).
    • Springiness: The distance the sample recovers between the end of the first cycle and the start of the second cycle.
    • Adhesiveness: The negative force area representing the work required to pull the probe away from the sample.

Table 2: Key Macroscopic Tests and Their Correlations with Microstructure and Sensory Perception

Technique	Measured Parameters	Structural Insight	Related Sensory Attribute
Dynamic Oscillatory Rheology	Storage Modulus (G'), Loss Modulus (G''), Loss Tangent (tan δ)	Gel strength, network connectivity, viscoelastic balance	Firmness, thickness, spreadability
LAOS	Nonlinear viscoelastic parameters (I₃/I₁, plastic strain)	Structural integrity and yield behavior under large deformation	Ease of swallowing, smoothness
Texture Profile Analysis	Hardness, Cohesiveness, Springiness, Adhesiveness	Mechanical stability, internal bonding, recovery	Chewiness, gumminess, stickiness
Tribology	Friction coefficient	Lubrication properties, surface interaction	Creaminess, smoothness, astringency [22]
Creep/Stress Relaxation	Retarded compliance, relaxation time	Long-term stability, molecular mobility	Spreadability, tenderness [21]

Correlating Instrumental Data with Sensory Perception

The final, critical step is to establish quantitative relationships between instrumental measurements and human perception.

Data-Driven Psychorheology

Modern approaches use machine learning (ML) to build predictive models that link complex rheological and textural data to sensory scores [30].

Protocol: Developing a Predictive Sensory Model

• Objective: To create a machine learning model that predicts sensory scores from instrumental data.
• Materials and Reagents:
  • Instrumental dataset (e.g., from rheology, TPA)
  • Sensory data from trained panel (e.g., Quantitative Descriptive Analysis)
  • Computer with ML software environment (e.g., Python with scikit-learn, R)
• Procedure:
  • Data Collection: Generate a wide range of product variants (e.g., by modifying formulation or process). For each variant, acquire a comprehensive set of instrumental parameters and corresponding sensory scores from a trained descriptive panel.
  • Feature Engineering: Preprocess the data (normalization, handling missing values). Use techniques like Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to reduce dimensionality if needed.
  • Model Training: Split the data into training and testing sets. Train a regression model (e.g., Random Forest, Support Vector Machine) to predict each sensory attribute from the instrumental features.
  • Model Validation & Interpretation: Validate the model's performance on the test set using metrics like Root Mean Square Error (RMSE). Perform feature importance analysis (e.g., Permutation Importance) to identify which rheological/textural parameters are most critical for predicting a specific sensory attribute [30].

Application Example: A study on 105 yogurt samples used this protocol to predict thickness, stickiness, and swallowing effort from LAOS and other rheological data. The model achieved high accuracy, and feature analysis revealed which nonlinear parameters were most important during different stages of oral processing (scooping, first bite, swallowing) [30].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

Table 3: Key Reagents and Materials for Texture and Rheology Research

Item	Function/Application
Standard Reference Materials	Calibration of rheometers and texture analyzers to ensure data accuracy and inter-laboratory reproducibility.
Food-Grade Gelling Agents (e.g., Pectin, Gelatin, Xanthan Gum, Gellan Gum)	Model system creation to systematically study the effect of specific microstructures on macroscopic properties [21].
Inulin & Dietary Fibers	Used to modify texture and rheology, particularly in low-fat or gluten-free formulations, allowing study of fiber-matrix interactions [21].
Particle Size Analyzer	Characterizes the particle size distribution of dispersions (e.g., in chocolate, sauces), a critical microstructural parameter affecting flow and sensation [21].
Edible Oils and Emulsifiers (e.g., Lecithin)	For studying emulsion-based foods; emulsifiers stabilize microstructure, affecting stability, rheology, and lubricity [21].
Texture Analyzer with Multiple Fixtures	A versatile instrument for performing TPA, tensile tests, and bending tests, mimicking a wide range of mechanical actions [19].
dodoviscin A	dodoviscin A, CAS:1372527-25-7, MF:C27H32O9, MW:500.544
Idetrexed trisodium	Idetrexed trisodium, CAS:1097638-00-0, MF:C32H30N5Na3O10, MW:713.6 g/mol

Integrated Workflow and Visualizing the Logical Pathway

The following diagram synthesizes the protocols and concepts outlined in this document into a logical workflow for linking microstructure to sensory perception.

The markets for processed and plant-based foods are experiencing significant growth, driven by converging trends of convenience, health consciousness, and sustainability. This section provides a quantitative overview of the current market landscape and its projected evolution.

Global Market Size and Growth Trajectory

Table 1: Global Market Overview for Processed and Plant-Based Foods

Market Segment	Market Size (2025)	Projected Market Size (2035)	CAGR (2025-2035)
Processed Fruit & Vegetable	USD 77 billion [31]	USD 111.6 billion [31]	3.8% [31]
Overall Processed Food	USD 6,671.45 billion [32]	USD 9,812.03 billion [32]	3.9% [32]
Plant-Based Food	USD 14,225.3 million [33]	USD 44,181.9 million [33]	12.0% [33]

The data reveals that the plant-based food sector is growing at a rate approximately three times faster than the overall processed food market, indicating a powerful shift in consumer preferences and a key area for scientific and industrial focus [33] [32].

Segment-Level Market Distribution

Understanding the internal composition of these markets is crucial for targeting research and development efforts.

Table 2: Key Market Segment Breakdown (2025)

Market	Leading Segment	Market Share	Key Growth Region	Regional CAGR
Processed Fruit & Vegetable	Capacity: <100 ML [31]	35% [31]	Japan [31]	8.3% [31]
Plant-Based Food	Type: Meat Substitutes [33]	47.8% [33]	USA [33]	12.6% [33]
Plant-Based Food	Source: Pea [33]	35.6% [33]	European Union [33]	12.0% [33]

Analytical Framework: Linking Market Trends to Texture Research

The identified market trends translate directly into specific analytical challenges and opportunities in food texture and rheology research. The core objective is to develop methods that can quantitatively predict and control sensory perception.

Experimental Protocols for Texture Analysis

To address the challenges outlined above, robust and reproducible experimental protocols are essential. The following are detailed methodologies for key analytical techniques.

Protocol 1: Correlating Instrumental Rheology with Sensory Thickness

This protocol is designed to establish a quantitative link between instrumental measurements and the sensory perception of thickness, a critical parameter for products like plant-based beverages and shakes [34].

1. Objective: To develop a predictive model for sensory thickness based on fundamental rheological parameters. 2. Materials & Reagents: * Test Samples: Plant-based beverage variants (e.g., differing in protein type/concentration, stabilizer content). * Instrument: Controlled-stress rheometer equipped with a concentric cylinder or cone-and-plate geometry. * Software: Rheometer control and data analysis software. 3. Procedure: * Step 1: Sample Preparation. Equilibrate all samples to 25°C ± 0.5°C for a minimum of 2 hours before testing. * Step 2: Flow Curve Measurement. Program the rheometer to perform a steady-state flow sweep, measuring shear stress (τ) as a function of shear rate (˙γ) over a range of 0.1 s⁻¹ to 1000 s⁻¹. * Step 3: Viscoelasticity Measurement. Perform a dynamic oscillatory test within the linear viscoelastic region (LVER). Record the storage modulus (G') and loss modulus (G") as a function of frequency (0.1 to 100 rad/s) at a fixed strain. * Step 4: Data Fitting. Fit the steady-state flow data to the Power Law (Ostwald-de Waele) model: τ = K˙γⁿ, where K is the consistency index and n is the flow behavior index. * Step 5: Sensory Validation. Conduct a trained panel sensory evaluation using a quantitative descriptive analysis (QDA) method for "thickness" and "creaminess." Use a minimum of 12 trained panelists. * Step 6: Statistical Correlation. Perform multivariate regression analysis (e.g., PLS-R) to correlate instrumental parameters (K, n, G' at 10 rad/s) with sensory panel scores.

Protocol 2: Tribological Analysis for Astringency and Creaminess

Tribology, the study of friction and lubrication, is critical for understanding mouthfeel attributes like astringency and creaminess that rheology alone cannot fully capture [34].

1. Objective: To characterize the lubricating properties of food samples to predict sensory astringency and creaminess. 2. Materials & Reagents: * Test Samples: Plant-based protein suspensions, dairy-alternative creams, beverage models. * Instrument: Tribometer with a ball-on-disc configuration, often integrated with a rheometer. Surfaces should mimic oral mucosa (e.g., soft PDMS). * Simulated Saliva: Standardized solution containing mucin and electrolytes. 3. Procedure: * Step 1: System Preparation. Clean the tribological surfaces thoroughly. If using a soft surface, ensure it is properly mounted and pre-conditioned. * Step 2: Saliva Pre-coating. Pre-coat the tribological surfaces with a defined volume (e.g., 1 mL) of simulated saliva and incubate for 5 minutes to form a pellicle-like layer. * Step 3: Friction Coefficient Measurement. Introduce the test sample onto the pre-coated surface. Program the tribometer to measure the coefficient of friction (COF) as a function of sliding speed, typically from 1 mm/s to 1000 mm/s, under a constant low load. * Step 4: Data Acquisition. Record the full Stribeck curve, which captures the boundary, mixed, and hydrodynamic lubrication regimes. * Step 5: Data Analysis. Extract key parameters from the Stribeck curve: the boundary friction coefficient (low speed), the mixed regime profile, and the onset of the hydrodynamic regime. * Step 6: Sensory Correlation. A high boundary friction coefficient often correlates with sensory astringency, while a low, stable friction profile in the mixed regime is associated with creaminess. Correlate these parameters with sensory panel data.

Protocol 3: AI-Enhanced Image Analysis for Graininess and Particulate Characterization

This protocol leverages AI to objectively quantify visual and textural defects like graininess, which is a common challenge in plant-based products and minimally processed foods [34] [35].

1. Objective: To objectively quantify the degree of graininess and particulate uniformity in food pastes and spreads. 2. Materials & Reagents: * Test Samples: Plant-based cheese alternatives, protein spreads, yogurt analogues. * Instrument: High-resolution flatbed scanner or digital microscope camera; computer with image analysis software (e.g., ImageJ, Python with OpenCV/TensorFlow libraries). 3. Procedure: * Step 1: Image Acquisition. Place a thin, uniform layer of sample on a glass slide or Petri dish. Capture high-resolution (≥ 600 dpi) digital images under standardized lighting conditions. Include a scale bar for calibration. * Step 2: Image Pre-processing. Convert images to grayscale. Apply filters to reduce noise and enhance contrast. Use thresholding techniques to create a binary image separating particles from the background. * Step 3: AI Model Analysis. Input the pre-processed images into a pre-trained Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) model designed for particle analysis. The model should be trained to identify and segment individual particles. * Step 4: Feature Extraction. The algorithm will output quantitative data for each particle, including: * Particle Density: Number of particles per unit area. * Size Distribution: Mean, median, and D90 of particle diameter. * Circularity: A measure of how circular the particles are (4πArea/Perimeter²). * Step 5: Graininess Index Calculation. Calculate a composite "Graininess Index" (GI) that weights particle density and size. For example: GI = (Particle Density) × (Mean Particle Area). * Step 6: Validation. Correlate the calculated GI with sensory scores for "graininess" from a trained panel to validate the model's predictive power.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Reagent Solutions

The following table details essential materials and reagents required for the experimental protocols described in this document.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Food Texture Analysis

Item	Function/Application	Experimental Protocol
Simulated Saliva	A standardized solution containing mucins and electrolytes; used to pre-coat tribological surfaces to mimic the oral environment for realistic friction measurements [34].	Protocol 2 (Tribology)
Plant Protein Isolates	Purified proteins (e.g., from pea, fava bean, lentil) used as primary ingredients to create model systems for studying texturization and sensory performance [33] [36].	Protocols 1, 2, 3
Reference Standards	Materials with certified rheological properties (e.g., standard oils, polymer solutions) for regular calibration of rheometers and tribometers to ensure data accuracy and inter-lab reproducibility.	Protocols 1, 2
PDMS Friction Pairs	Soft, elastomeric surfaces used in the ball-on-disc configuration of a tribometer to mimic the soft, deformable nature of the tongue and oral mucosa [34].	Protocol 2 (Tribology)
CNN Model for Particle Analysis	A pre-trained artificial intelligence model capable of identifying, counting, and sizing particles in food images; crucial for the objective quantification of texture defects like graininess [34] [35].	Protocol 3 (Image Analysis)
Pimelic Acid-d4	Pimelic Acid-d4, MF:C7H12O4, MW:164.19 g/mol	Chemical Reagent
Furaltadone-D5	Furaltadone-D5, CAS:1015855-64-7, MF:C13H16N4O6, MW:329.32 g/mol	Chemical Reagent

Methodologies in Practice: Rheological Tests and Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)

Rheology, defined as the study of the deformation and flow of matter, serves as a fundamental discipline in food science for characterizing the mechanical properties of food materials [37] [38]. The term itself originates from the Greek word "rhei," meaning "to flow" [5] [38]. In the context of a broader thesis on analytical techniques for food texture, rheology provides the critical link between a food's microstructure and its macroscopic sensory properties, such as mouthfeel, spreadability, and creaminess [22] [21]. Food rheology analyzes mechanical properties by describing strain and flow behavior under various stresses and time conditions, applying to complex structured substances like polymers, emulsions, and biological materials [38]. Rheological instrumentation has thus become an essential tool in food analytical laboratories for characterizing ingredients, predicting product performance, and ultimately, consumer acceptance [21].

The core principles of rheology are built upon several key parameters. Shear stress (τ), measured in Pascals (Pa), is defined as the force (F) applied per unit area (A) [5] [38]. Shear rate (ẏ), with a unit of reciprocal seconds (s⁻¹), represents the velocity gradient within the material [5]. The ratio of shear stress to shear rate defines the viscosity (η), or a material's resistance to flow, measured in Pascal-seconds (Pa·s) [5] [37]. These parameters are crucial for a scientific description of a material's flow behavior, and their accurate measurement is the focus of various rheological methods [5].

Core Methodologies and Theoretical Framework

Rheological methods can be broadly categorized based on the magnitude of deformation applied to the sample and the type of data collected. The following table summarizes the core methodologies, their applications, and key parameters for food texture analysis.

Table 1: Core Rheological Methods for Food Texture Analysis

Method Category	Specific Technique	Primary Applications in Food	Key Measured Parameters
Small Deformation	Dynamic Oscillatory Amplitude Sweep	Gel strength, molecular interactions, structure stability	Storage Modulus (G'), Loss Modulus (G"), Critical Strain (γc) [21] [39]
	Dynamic Oscillatory Frequency Sweep	Shelf-life prediction, formulation stability	G'(ω), G"(ω), tan δ (G"/G') [39]
Large Deformation	Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS)	Texture under processing/chewing conditions	Nonlinear viscoelastic parameters, yield behavior [21]
	Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)	Simulated chewing, sensory correlation	Hardness, Springiness, Cohesiveness, Chewiness [40] [7]
Flow Curve Analysis	Steady Shear Rate Sweep	Pumping, spreading, pouring behavior	Viscosity (η) vs. Shear Rate (ẏ), Yield Stress (τy) [5] [37] [39]

Small Deformation Techniques: Probating Linear Viscoelasticity

Small deformation techniques are designed to probe the internal structure of a material without causing significant, irreversible damage. These methods are performed within the Linear Viscoelastic Region (LVR), where the stress response is directly proportional to the applied strain, and the material's microstructure remains intact [39].

Amplitude Sweep is a fundamental oscillatory test that identifies the LVR and assesses the mechanical strength of a food's structure. The test involves applying an oscillating strain or stress over a defined range of amplitudes at a constant frequency and temperature [39]. Below the critical strain (γc), the material's structure is stable, and the elastic modulus (G') and viscous modulus (G") remain constant. Exceeding γc leads to the onset of structural breakdown, marked by a decrease in G' [39]. This test is crucial for determining the maximum deformation a sample can withstand before yielding and is widely used for gels, yogurts, and semi-solid foods.

Frequency Sweep tests characterize the time-dependent viscoelastic behavior of a material. Conducted at a constant strain within the LVR, the test measures G' and G" as a function of oscillation frequency (ω), which is analogous to timescale [39]. A frequency-independent G' that dominates over G" (G' > G") indicates a solid-like, elastic gel structure (e.g., a strong pectin gel). Conversely, a strong frequency dependence and G" approaching or crossing over G' suggests a more fluid-like, viscous structure [21] [39]. This test helps predict long-term stability and shelf-life, as low frequencies simulate long-term gravitational forces during storage.

Large Deformation and Failure Techniques

Large deformation methods are designed to understand material behavior under conditions that mimic processing (e.g., mixing, pumping) or consumption (e.g., chewing), where the material's structure may break down or fail.

Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS) is an advanced technique that extends oscillatory testing beyond the LVR into the nonlinear region [21]. While traditional small-amplitude tests provide information about the structure at rest, LAOS deconvolutes the linear and nonlinear viscoelastic responses, offering detailed insights into structural integrity, yield behavior, and breakdown mechanisms under conditions relevant to processing and oral processing [21]. This method is particularly valuable for correlating rheological parameters with sensory attributes like firmness and spreadability in complex food matrices such as gels and emulsions [21].

Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) is a widely used large deformation method that simulates the chewing action of the mouth using a texture analyzer [40] [7]. The test involves a double compression cycle of a food sample, from which a force-time curve is generated [7]. Key textural parameters are extracted from this curve, including Hardness (peak force of the first compression), Springiness (how well the sample recovers its height after the first compression), Cohesiveness (how well the sample withstands a second deformation relative to the first), and Chewiness (the energy required to masticate the solid food) [40] [7]. A study on plant-based and animal meats successfully used TPA to quantify texture, reporting sample stiffness values ranging from 419 kPa for plant-based turkey to 57 kPa for tofu [7].

Flow Curve Analysis for Viscous Behavior

Flow curve analysis characterizes the viscous flow properties of fluid and semi-fluid foods under steady shear. This is critical for understanding behavior during processes like pumping, spreading, and pouring [5] [37].

The most common test is a Shear Rate Ramp, where the shear rate is increased (upward ramp) and often decreased (downward ramp) over a defined range, while the resulting shear stress is measured [5]. The viscosity is then calculated as the ratio of shear stress to shear rate. Materials are classified based on their flow curves:

• Newtonian Fluids: Exhibit a linear relationship between shear stress and shear rate, resulting in a constant viscosity (e.g., water, dilute colloidal dispersions, simple hydrocarbons) [37].
• Non-Newtonian Fluids: Display a non-linear relationship, where viscosity changes with the applied shear rate or stress [37] [39]. This category includes:
  • Shear-Thinning (Pseudoplastic): Viscosity decreases with increasing shear rate (e.g., paints, cosmetics, many polymer solutions and suspensions) [37] [39].
  • Shear-Thickening (Dilatant): Viscosity increases with increasing shear rate (e.g., moist beach sand, some concentrated suspensions) [37] [39].
  • Yield Stress: A critical stress (Ï„y) must be exceeded for the material to start flowing. The material behaves like a solid below this stress (e.g., toothpastes, mayonnaise) [39].

Table 2: Flow Behaviors and Model Fitting for Food Materials

Flow Behavior	Defining Characteristic	Example Foods	Common Mathematical Model
Newtonian	Constant viscosity, regardless of shear rate	Water, milk, honey, simple oils	Newton's Law: τ = ηẏ [37]
Shear-Thinning	Viscosity decreases with increasing shear rate	Ketchup, yogurt, salad dressing, juice concentrates	Power Law: τ = Kẏⁿ (n<1) [37]
Shear-Thickening	Viscosity increases with increasing shear rate	Cornstarch-water mixture, some custards	Power Law: τ = Kẏⁿ (n>1) [37]
Yield Stress	Requires a minimum stress to initiate flow	Mayonnaise, margarine, chocolate	Herschel-Bulkley: τ = τy + Kẏⁿ [37]

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Small Deformation Analysis via Amplitude and Frequency Sweep

This protocol outlines the steps to characterize the linear viscoelastic region and viscoelastic properties of a semi-solid food material (e.g., yogurt or vegetable puree) using a rotational rheometer with a parallel plate geometry.

Table 3: Research Reagent Solutions for Rheological Testing

Item / Solution	Function / Rationale
Rotational Rheometer	Instrument capable of controlled stress/strain and oscillatory measurements [5] [38].
Parallel Plate Geometry (e.g., 40 mm diameter)	Preferred for heterogeneous samples; allows easy loading and cleaning; gap is adjustable [5] [38].
Solvent Trap or Humid Hood	Prevents sample drying at the edge during testing, which is crucial for aqueous systems.
Temperature Control Unit (Peltier)	Maintains constant temperature (e.g., 20°C or 25°C) for reproducible results [37].
Standard Reference Fluid (e.g., Silicone Oil)	Used for instrument calibration and validation of torque/position sensors.

Procedure:

• Instrument Calibration and Setup: Ensure the rheometer is calibrated for inertia and torque. Select and clean the parallel plates. Set the temperature control system to the desired test temperature (e.g., 25°C) and allow it to equilibrate.
• Sample Loading: Carefully load the test sample onto the center of the bottom plate. Bring the upper plate down to the desired measuring gap (e.g., 1 mm). Trim excess sample from the plate edges smoothly and apply a thin layer of low-viscosity silicone oil around the sample edge to prevent evaporation.
• Amplitude Sweep:
  • Test Type: Oscillatory strain/stress.
  • Fixed Parameters: Constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz or 6.283 rad/s) and temperature.
  • Variable Parameter: Strain (γ) from 0.01% to 100%.
  • Measurement: Record the storage modulus (G'), loss modulus (G"), and complex viscosity (η*) as a function of strain.
  • Outcome: Identify the critical strain (γc), which is the end of the Linear Viscoelastic Region (LVR), typically where G' drops to 95% of its plateau value.
• Frequency Sweep:
  • Test Type: Oscillatory strain/stress.
  • Fixed Parameters: Constant strain (selected from within the LVR, e.g., 0.5%) and temperature.
  • Variable Parameter: Angular frequency (ω) from 100 rad/s to 0.1 rad/s.
  • Measurement: Record G', G", and tan δ (G"/G') as a function of frequency.
  • Outcome: Analyze the mechanical spectrum to determine if the material is gel-like (G' > G", both largely frequency-independent) or fluid-like (G" > G' at low frequencies).

Protocol 2: Flow Curve Analysis for a Shear-Thinning Fluid

This protocol describes how to obtain the flow curve and model the viscosity function of a non-Newtonian, shear-thinning food fluid such as a sauce or soup.

Procedure:

• Instrument and Sample Preparation: Use a rotational rheometer equipped with a cone-plate or concentric cylinder geometry (the latter is suitable for lower viscosity or particle-containing fluids). Load the sample as described in Protocol 1, ensuring no air bubbles are trapped.
• Equilibration: Allow the sample to equilibrate at the test temperature for at least 5 minutes to ensure thermal homogeneity and to allow any residual stress from loading to relax.
• Shear Rate Ramp:
  • Test Type: Controlled shear rate (CSR) or controlled shear stress (CSS).
  • Profile: Program a logarithmic or linear ramp of shear rate from low to high (e.g., 0.1 s⁻¹ to 1000 s⁻¹), followed by a ramp from high back to low. Use a sufficient dwell time at each shear rate to reach steady-state flow.
  • Measurement: The instrument records the shear stress (Ï„) at each applied shear rate (ẏ). Viscosity (η) is calculated as Ï„/ẏ.
• Data Analysis:
  • Flow Curve Plotting: Plot viscosity (η) versus shear rate (ẏ) and shear stress (Ï„) versus shear rate (ẏ) on log-log scales.
  • Model Fitting: Fit the downward (or equilibrium) flow curve data to an appropriate rheological model, such as the Power Law (Ostwald-De Waele) or Herschel-Bulkley model, using regression analysis. The Power Law model (Ï„ = Kẏⁿ) is common, where K is the consistency index and n is the flow behavior index (n < 1 for shear-thinning).
  • Thixotropy Assessment: The area between the upward and downward ramps on the shear stress vs. shear rate plot indicates the degree of thixotropy—the time-dependent breakdown and recovery of structure [37] [39].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Reagents and Materials

Table 4: Essential Reagents and Materials for Rheological Testing of Foods

Category / Item	Specific Examples	Function and Application Note
Rheometer Systems	Rotational Rheometer (stress- or strain-controlled)	The core instrument for oscillatory and steady shear measurements [5] [38]. Capillary Rheometer: used for very high shear rates, relevant to extrusion and chewing [38].
Measuring Geometries	Parallel Plate, Cone-Plate, Concentric Cylinder	Parallel Plate: best for heterogeneous samples and gels. Cone-Plate: provides uniform shear rate. Concentric Cylinder: ideal for low-viscosity fluids [5] [38].
Calibration Standards	Standard Oils (certified viscosity), Inertia Standard, Gap Height Standard	Essential for instrument calibration, ensuring accuracy and reproducibility of torque, normal force, and rotational position measurements.
Temperature Control	Peltier Plate, Circulating Bath, Evaporation Suppressor	Precise temperature control is critical as viscosity and moduli are highly temperature-sensitive [37].
Sample Preparation Tools	Spatulas, Syringes, Sample Loading Pots, Trimming Blade	For consistent, bubble-free loading of samples into the rheometer geometry, which is key for reproducible results.

Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) is a fundamental instrumental technique in food science that quantifies the textural properties of food materials by simulating the human biting action through a two-cycle compression test. This method provides objective, reproducible data that correlates well with sensory evaluation, making it invaluable for research and development, quality control, and product formulation in the food and pharmaceutical industries. By generating a force-time curve during mechanical compression, TPA extracts key parameters including hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, and adhesiveness, which collectively describe a product's mechanical behavior and mouthfeel. This application note details the experimental protocols, data interpretation, and practical applications of TPA within the broader context of analytical techniques for food texture and rheology research, providing researchers and scientists with a standardized framework for textural characterization.

Texture Profile Analysis is a double compression test designed to imitate the action of the human jaw during mastication. Originally developed in the 1960s and refined over subsequent decades, TPA has become a cornerstone technique for quantifying mechanical textural properties that directly influence consumer perception and product acceptability [41]. The test involves compressing a bite-sized sample twice in a reciprocating motion that mimics the first two bites, with the resulting force-time curve analyzed to extract parameters that correlate with sensory evaluations performed by trained panels.

The relationship between TPA and food rheology is fundamental to understanding material behavior under deformation. While rheology primarily focuses on the deformation and flow of matter, particularly under small-strain conditions suitable for elucidating fundamental structural properties, TPA operates primarily in the large-deformation regime more relevant to actual eating processes such as chewing, biting, and swallowing [42]. This large-strain testing provides critical information about fracture properties and structural failure that small-strain rheological measurements cannot capture, making TPA an essential complementary technique in the comprehensive characterization of food texture. For researchers in both food and pharmaceutical development, TPA offers a standardized methodology to quantify textural attributes that determine product stability, processability, and ultimately, consumer acceptance.

Theoretical Foundations and Mechanical Principles

TPA is grounded in the mechanical response of materials to compressive forces, with the test simulating the mastication process through controlled deformation. When a food sample undergoes compression, its internal structure resists deformation through various mechanisms depending on its composition, microstructure, and physical state. The primary principle involves applying a predetermined strain to a sample and measuring the resulting forces throughout the compression cycle, generating a characteristic force-time curve that encapsulates the material's mechanical properties.

The texture profile obtained reflects the rheological behavior of the material under conditions that approximate oral processing. According to food rheology principles, materials can exhibit ideal elastic (solid-like), ideal viscous (liquid-like), or viscoelastic (combined) behavior [42]. TPA parameters effectively quantify the viscoelastic nature of foods under large deformations, bridging the gap between fundamental rheological properties and sensory perception. The mechanical properties measured through TPA are influenced by the material's structural elements, including macromolecular organization, phase distribution, and intermolecular interactions, which collectively determine how the material fractures, flows, and recovers during mastication.

The double compression design is particularly significant as it allows for the assessment of both initial texture (first compression) and how the texture changes during chewing (second compression). This provides insights into the breakdown pattern of the material, which affects taste release, swallowing ease, and overall sensory experience. The analytical approach connects instrumental measurements with textural properties perceived by consumers, enabling researchers to establish quantitative relationships between formulation, structure, and sensory attributes.

TPA Parameters and Their Significance

The force-time curve generated during Texture Profile Analysis yields multiple parameters that quantitatively describe textural attributes. The table below summarizes the key TPA parameters, their definitions, and sensory correlations:

Table 1: Key Parameters in Texture Profile Analysis

Parameter	Definition	Sensory Correlation	Interpretation
Hardness	Maximum force during first compression cycle [43]	Firmness perceived between molar teeth	Higher values indicate firmer materials
Fracturability	Force at first significant break during first compression (if present) [43]	Tendency to fracture suddenly	Present in brittle materials; absent in ductile materials
Springiness	Ratio of time difference between second and first compression	Degree to which sample returns to original height after deformation	Recovery ability; higher values indicate more elastic materials
Cohesiveness	Ratio of positive area under second compression to first compression [43]	Strength of internal bonds	Internal bond strength; higher values indicate better cohesion
Adhesiveness	Negative force area after first compression withdrawal [43]	Force required to remove material from palate	Work needed to overcome attractive forces; stickiness
Chewiness	Product of Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness	Energy required to masticate solid food to swallowing consistency	Relevant for semisolid foods only
Resilience	How quickly material recovers from deformation during first compression withdrawal	Rate of structural recovery	Elastic recovery capacity

These parameters collectively provide a comprehensive profile of how a material behaves during mastication. The specific parameter values and their relationships vary significantly across different food types, enabling researchers to classify materials based on their mechanical properties and predict sensory responses to structural changes caused by formulation adjustments or processing modifications.

Experimental Protocol for Texture Profile Analysis

Equipment and Reagent Solutions

Table 2: Essential Research Equipment and Materials for TPA

Item	Specification	Function/Purpose
Texture Analyzer	Stable Micro Systems, TA.XT Plus or equivalent	Controlled compression/decompression cycles
Compression Probe	Cylindrical (e.g., 50-100mm diameter) or plate	Applies uniform force to sample
Load Cell	Capacity appropriate for sample hardness (e.g., 5-50kg)	Force measurement during compression
Sample Preparation Tools	Cork borers, blades, cutters	Standardized sample geometry
Calibration Weight	Certified mass matching load cell capacity	Instrument verification
Temperature Control Chamber	Optional accessory	Testing at specific temperatures

Sample Preparation Protocol

• Sample Sizing: Prepare samples with uniform geometry, typically cylindrical shapes (height: 15-25mm; diameter: 15-25mm). For irregular shapes, use a cork borer or custom cutter to ensure dimensional consistency [41]. Sample size should be proportional to the probe size, typically 75-80% of probe diameter.

• Temperature Equilibration: Bring samples to consistent temperature before testing, as texture properties are temperature-dependent. For most foods, room temperature (20-25°C) is appropriate unless studying thermal effects.

• Handling Considerations: Handle delicate samples carefully to prevent pre-test damage. For sticky materials, consider minimal use of food-grade lubricants on contact surfaces to prevent adhesion not representative of actual properties.

Instrument Configuration and Test Parameters

• Probe Selection: Choose appropriate compression platen based on sample size and properties. For most foods, a flat plate with diameter larger than the sample is recommended.

• Test Settings:

  • Test Speed: 1-2 mm/s for approach, 1-5 mm/s for compression (depending on sample brittleness)
  • Strain Level: 50-75% of original height (food-dependent; higher strains for rubbery foods)
  • Time Between Cycles: 1-5 seconds (allows partial sample recovery)
  • Trigger Force: 0.05-0.1N (initiates test upon sample contact)
  • Data Acquisition Rate: 200-500 points per second

• Calibration Procedure: Perform instrument calibration using certified weights according to manufacturer specifications before each testing session. Verify probe alignment and movement accuracy.

Execution and Data Collection

• Sample Mounting: Position sample centrally on the base plate to ensure uniform compression.

• Test Initiation: Start test sequence; instrument will approach sample, detect contact, and initiate compression cycles.

• Replication: Conduct minimum of 10 replicates per sample type to account for natural variations.

• Data Recording: Software automatically records force-time data and calculates TPA parameters.

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Analysis of Force-Time Curve

The TPA force-time curve provides the primary data from which all parameters are derived. A typical curve exhibits the following characteristics:

• First Compression Cycle: Begins with a steep rise in force as the probe contacts and compresses the sample, reaching a peak (hardness) before decreasing as the probe withdraws. For brittle materials, a sharp peak (fracturability) may appear before the maximum compression force [43].

• Relaxation Period: As the probe withdraws after first compression, the force decreases, potentially dropping below zero (negative force region) if the sample adheres to the probe, indicating adhesiveness.

• Second Compression Cycle: The force increases again as the probe compresses the sample a second time, typically reaching a lower peak force than the first cycle due to structural breakdown during the first compression.

Interpretation of Parameter Values

The quantitative values obtained for each parameter must be interpreted in the context of the specific material being tested:

Table 3: Typical TPA Parameter Ranges for Different Food Categories

Food Category	Hardness (N)	Cohesiveness	Springiness	Adhesiveness (N·s)
Hard Brittle Foods	High (50-200)	Low (0.2-0.4)	Low (0.3-0.5)	Low (0-0.1)
Soft Elastic Foods	Medium (10-50)	High (0.5-0.7)	High (0.7-0.9)	Medium (0.1-0.5)
Gummy/Sticky Foods	Variable	Medium (0.4-0.6)	Medium (0.5-0.7)	High (0.5-2.0)
Firm Cohesive Foods	High (50-150)	High (0.6-0.8)	High (0.7-0.9)	Low (0-0.2)

The relationship between parameters provides insights into structural properties. For example, a high hardness with low cohesiveness indicates a brittle material that fractures easily, while high hardness with high cohesiveness suggests a tough, rubbery material requiring more mastication effort. The ratio between first and second compression parameters reveals the material's breakdown behavior, which affects flavor release and swallowing characteristics.

Correlation with Sensory Data

Successful TPA implementation requires validation against sensory evaluation. Researchers should conduct correlation studies between instrumental TPA parameters and sensory panel assessments to establish predictive relationships. Typically, hardness shows strong correlation with sensory firmness (R² > 0.8), while cohesiveness and springiness correlate with sensory chewiness and elasticity, respectively [41]. These relationships may vary across product categories, necessitating product-specific calibration.

Applications in Food and Pharmaceutical Research

TPA has diverse applications across multiple research domains:

• Product Development: Formulators use TPA to optimize texture by quantifying the effects of ingredient substitutions, processing changes, or storage conditions. For instance, TPA can determine the optimal starch-hydrocolloid blend to achieve desired chewiness in bakery products or the effect of emulsifiers on spreadability in fat-based products.

• Quality Control: TPA serves as a quantitative quality indicator for raw materials and finished products, detecting deviations from textural specifications. Automated TPA systems can be implemented in production environments for continuous quality monitoring.

• Shelf-life Studies: Researchers employ TPA to track textural changes during storage, establishing correlations between instrumental measurements and sensory degradation. This is particularly valuable for staling baked goods, softening fruits, or hardening confectionery products.

• Pharmaceutical Applications: In drug development, TPA characterizes the textural properties of medicated chews, lozenges, and biodegradable polymers used in controlled-release formulations, where mechanical properties influence drug release profiles and patient compliance.

• Fundamental Research: TPA helps establish structure-function relationships by correlating mechanical properties with microscopic structure observations, providing insights into how molecular interactions and phase distributions manifest as macroscopic texture.

Limitations and Methodological Considerations

While TPA provides valuable quantitative data, researchers should acknowledge its limitations:

• Strain Rate Dependency: TPA parameters are sensitive to compression speed, which must be standardized for comparative studies. Rates should approximate actual eating speeds (1-5 mm/s) for maximum sensory relevance.

• Sample Geometry Effects: Variations in sample size and shape affect absolute parameter values, necessitating strict standardization of preparation protocols.

• Temperature Sensitivity: Textural properties are highly temperature-dependent, requiring rigorous temperature control during testing.

• Anisotropy Issues: Foods with directional structures (muscle fibers in meat, air cells in baked goods) may exhibit different properties depending on compression orientation.

• Sensory Correlation Limits: While TPA parameters generally correlate well with sensory evaluation, the relationships are not always linear or consistent across product categories, requiring validation for each specific application.

Emerging technologies such as near-infrared spectroscopy and hyperspectral imaging are being integrated with traditional TPA to provide complementary structural information [41]. These non-invasive techniques enhance understanding of the structural basis for observed mechanical properties.

Texture Profile Analysis remains an essential analytical technique for quantifying the mechanical properties of food and pharmaceutical materials through simulated biting action. The standardized two-cycle compression test provides multiple parameters that collectively describe textural attributes relevant to sensory perception and product functionality. When implemented with careful attention to sample preparation, instrument calibration, and test parameter selection, TPA generates reproducible, objective data that complements fundamental rheological measurements and sensory evaluation. For researchers investigating the relationships between formulation, structure, and texture, TPA offers a valuable toolkit for optimizing product quality, stability, and consumer acceptance across diverse applications.

Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) is a fundamental instrumental technique in food science and product development that provides objective quantification of textural properties. Originally developed at the General Foods Corporation Technical Centre in 1963, TPA simulates the mastication process through a double compression test, often called the "two-bite test," using a texture analyzer to mimic the human mouth's biting action [44]. This method translates subjective sensory experiences into quantifiable mechanical parameters that correlate well with sensory evaluation, making it invaluable for both research and quality control applications [43] [45].

The significance of TPA extends across multiple industries, from food science to pharmaceutical development, where texture serves as a critical quality attribute influencing consumer acceptance and product performance. By measuring key parameters such as hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, and adhesiveness, researchers can systematically characterize material properties, optimize formulations, and ensure batch-to-batch consistency [4] [7]. The test's ability to provide multiple textural metrics from a single experiment makes it particularly efficient for comprehensive product characterization, though this same efficiency demands careful interpretation to avoid misuse or misinterpretation of parameters [46].

Fundamental TPA Parameters and Their Interpretation

Mechanical Definitions and Sensory Correlations

The following table summarizes the core TPA parameters, their mechanical definitions, and what they reveal about material properties and sensory perception.

Table 1: Fundamental TPA Parameters and Their Interpretation

Parameter	Mechanical Definition	Sensory Correlation	Interpretation Guide
Hardness	Maximum force (N or g) during the first compression cycle [43].	Perceived firmness or resistance to biting [45].	Higher values indicate firmer, more resistant materials.
Cohesiveness	Ratio (A₂/A₁) of the positive areas under the second to first compression curves [43] [44].	Internal structural strength and how well the material holds together [45].	Ranges from 0 (crumbly) to 1 (highly cohesive).
Springiness	Ratio (L₂/L₁) of the deformation lengths in the second to first compressions [44].	Degree of material recovery after deformation [45].	Higher values indicate better elastic recovery.
Adhesiveness	Negative force area (N·s or g·s) during the first probe withdrawal (A₃) [43] [44].	Work required to overcome attractive forces between food and mouth surfaces [43].	Larger negative area indicates greater stickiness.

Advanced Parameter Interactions

Beyond the fundamental parameters, TPA derives secondary characteristics that describe more complex textural properties. Gumminess, the product of hardness and cohesiveness, describes the energy required to disintegrate a semi-solid food to a state ready for swallowing [44]. Chewiness, calculated as gumminess × springiness (or hardness × cohesiveness × springiness), quantifies the energy needed to masticate a solid food until it is ready for swallowing [44]. These calculated parameters demonstrate how primary TPA metrics interact to describe complex sensory experiences.

The dimensional analysis of TPA parameters reveals their fundamental physical nature. Hardness, fracturability, and gumminess share force dimensions (MLT⁻²), while adhesiveness and chewiness represent work or energy (ML²T⁻²) [44]. Cohesiveness and springiness are dimensionless ratios, explaining their utility in comparing samples tested under different conditions or geometries.

TPA Experimental Protocol and Standardization

Core Methodology and Workflow

A standardized TPA test follows a specific sequence of operations to ensure reproducible and meaningful results. The diagram below illustrates the generalized workflow for planning, executing, and analyzing a TPA experiment.

Diagram 1: TPA Experimental Workflow. The process begins with sample and instrument preparation, proceeds through the two-bite compression sequence, and concludes with data analysis.

Critical Experimental Factors and Standardization

Standardizing TPA methodology is essential for obtaining reproducible and comparable results. Recent research on chicken salami demonstrates how test parameters significantly influence results [47]. Key factors requiring standardization include:

• Compression Ratio: This represents the percentage deformation applied to the sample. Studies show higher compression ratios (e.g., 50% vs. 30%) significantly increase measured hardness and chewiness while decreasing cohesiveness [47]. A compression ratio of 40-75% is typical for many solid foods.

• Test Speed: The speed of probe movement affects the rate of deformation, with higher speeds (e.g., 3 mm/s vs. 1 mm/s) increasing hardness, springiness, and chewiness measurements while decreasing adhesiveness due to reduced contact time [47].

• Sample Dimensions: Cylindrical samples with consistent diameter-to-height ratios are recommended. Increasing slice thickness (e.g., from 15 mm to 25 mm) raises measured hardness and adhesiveness while reducing cohesiveness [47].

• Trigger Force: The force value that initiates the test should be sufficient to ensure contact without pre-compressing the sample, typically 0.05-0.1 N for soft materials.

Without strict control of these parameters, cross-study comparisons become problematic, highlighting the need for standardized protocols specific to product categories [7] [46].

Research Reagent Solutions and Essential Materials

Table 2: Essential Materials and Equipment for TPA Experiments

Category	Item	Function/Application
Instrumentation	Texture Analyzer [46]	Primary instrument for applying controlled compression and measuring force response.
Probes	Cylindrical Compression Platten [44]	Standard probe for simulating the biting action during TPA tests.
Sample Preparation	Biopsy Punch [7]	Creates uniform cylindrical samples with consistent dimensions for reproducible results.
Reference Materials	Soy Protein Isolate [48]	Model ingredient for studying protein-starch interactions and plant-based product texture.
	Whey Protein Concentrate [49]	Dairy protein used in hybrid extrudates to improve fibrous structure in plant-based analogs.
	Xanthan Gum [50]	Hydrocolloid used to modify viscosity and textural properties in semi-solid foods.
Analytical Tools	Chemometric Software [48]	Statistical tools for modeling complex ingredient interactions and predicting texture.

Application in Product Development: Case Study

Plant-Based vs. Animal Meat Characterization

The application of TPA in characterizing plant-based and animal meats demonstrates its utility in product development. A 2025 study systematically compared eight commercial meat products (five plant-based, three animal) using TPA and rheology [7]. The research revealed that:

• Stiffness values varied by an order of magnitude, from 418.9 ± 41.7 kPa for plant-based turkey to 56.7 ± 14.1 kPa for tofu.
• Animal meat products (turkey, sausage, and hotdog) consistently ranked within the extremes defined by plant-based products.
• Key discriminators included stiffness, storage modulus, and loss modulus, which proved more consistent and meaningful than some traditional TPA parameters suffering from definitional variability.

This application highlights TPA's role in quantifying the viscoelastic texture spectrum, enabling manufacturers to target specific mechanical properties when developing meat alternatives [7]. The study confirmed that modern food fabrication techniques can successfully replicate the mechanical properties of processed animal meat, with protein-starch interactions playing a crucial role in determining final textural properties [48].

Data Presentation and Statistical Analysis

Table 3: Stiffness and Viscoelastic Properties of Meat Products (Adapted from [7])

Product Type	Specific Product	Stiffness (kPa)	Storage Modulus, G' (kPa)	Loss Modulus, G'' (kPa)
Plant-Based	Plant-Based Turkey	418.9 ± 41.7	50.4 ± 4.1	25.3 ± 3.0
	Tofu (Extra Firm)	56.7 ± 14.1	5.7 ± 0.5	1.3 ± 0.1
Animal	Turkey Sausage	215.3 ± 22.4	28.9 ± 2.3	12.7 ± 1.1
	Hotdog	189.7 ± 18.6	25.1 ± 1.9	11.2 ± 0.9

The data reveal that plant-based meats can span and even exceed the texture range of animal products, providing formulation flexibility. Statistical analysis of such data typically includes Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to identify significant differences between products and formulations, with post-hoc tests establishing homogeneous groups [47]. Advanced chemometric methods, including polynomial regression models, can further elucidate complex ingredient interactions and their effects on multiple texture parameters [48].

Common Analytical Challenges and Methodological Considerations

Limitations and Misapplications

Despite its widespread utility, TPA presents several analytical challenges that researchers must address:

• Parameter Misinterpretation: Applying TPA parameters designed for solid foods to liquid or semi-solid systems can yield misleading results [50]. For instance, the calculated cohesiveness of water equals one, clearly demonstrating improper application of the parameter [50].

• Lack of Standardization: Inconsistent test conditions across studies (compression ratio, speed, sample geometry) create significant challenges for comparative analysis [7] [46] [47]. This variability has led some researchers to question the reliability of certain TPA parameters [46].

• Geometrical Limitations: TPA primarily evaluates mechanical properties but struggles with geometrical attributes (e.g., graininess, fineness) and surface properties, which often require complementary techniques like microscopy or tribology [4].

Emerging Techniques and Complementary Methods

Innovative approaches are emerging to address TPA limitations and provide additional texture characterization dimensions:

• Fluorescence Anisotropy (FA): This technique quantifies structural anisotropy (directional dependence) in food matrices, particularly valuable for characterizing fibrous structures in plant-based meats and stretched cheese [49]. FA can distinguish between different protein structures, such as higher anisotropy in mozzarella compared to cagliata cheese due to its fibrous pasta-filata stretching process [49].

• Tribological Measurements: These methods assess lubricational properties between surfaces, providing insights into mouthfeel characteristics like smoothness, astringency, and creaminess that complement TPA data [4].

• Acoustic Measurements: Analysis of sound emissions during fracture events can characterize crispiness and brittleness in crunchy foods, adding an auditory dimension to texture profiling [4].

These advanced techniques, combined with standardized TPA protocols, create a comprehensive analytical toolkit for multidimensional texture characterization in both food and pharmaceutical applications.

Rheology, the study of the flow and deformation of matter, is fundamental to food science, impacting areas from processing efficiency to sensory perception. While fundamental rheological measurements provide valuable data, advanced techniques such as Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS), extensional rheology, and interfacial rheology offer deeper insights into the complex behavior of food materials under realistic conditions. These methods probe material responses beyond the linear viscoelastic region, characterizing structural changes that occur during actual processing, oral consumption, and storage [51] [52]. Food materials are typically soft condensed matter with hierarchical nano- and microstructures, existing as suspensions, emulsions, foams, biopolymer gels, and mixtures [52]. Understanding their behavior requires techniques that can capture nonlinear viscoelasticity, flow-induced orientation, and interfacial phenomena.

LAOS is particularly valuable because it subjects materials to deformations large enough to induce nonlinear behavior, mimicking the large and rapid deformations experienced during industrial processing and oral consumption [51]. Extensional rheology measures a material's response to stretching forces, which is critical for understanding processes like chewing, swallowing, and thread formation [53]. Interfacial rheology focuses on the mechanical properties of the thin layers formed by surfactants, proteins, or particles at fluid-fluid interfaces, which are crucial for the formation and stability of emulsions and foams [54]. Together, these techniques provide a comprehensive toolkit for linking food microstructure to macroscopic properties and functionality, enabling the rational design of food products with desired textures and stabilities.

Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS) Rheology

Theoretical Foundations and Data Analysis

In dynamic oscillatory shear measurements, a sinusoidal deformation is applied to a material. In the linear viscoelastic region (SAOS), the stress response is sinusoidal, characterized by strain-independent storage (G′) and loss (G″) moduli. However, when the strain amplitude exceeds a critical value, the material enters the nonlinear regime (LAOS), where the stress response becomes distorted, and the rheological parameters become functions of both strain amplitude and frequency [51]. This nonlinear response contains rich information about the transient microstructure and its breakdown under deformation [51].

Analyzing the complex LAOS response requires sophisticated mathematical approaches. Two primary methods are used:

• Fourier Transform Rheology (FTR): This method transforms the distorted time-domain stress signal into a frequency-domain spectrum. The nonlinearity manifests as odd higher harmonics (n=3, 5, 7,...) in the spectrum [51]. The stress response is represented as: σ(t;ω,γ₀) = γ₀ ∑ₙ[odd] [G′ₙ(ω,γ₀) sin(nωt) + G″ₙ(ω,γ₀) cos(nωt)] [51]. While FTR is a sensitive indicator of nonlinearity, the physical meaning of higher harmonics can be ambiguous [51].

• Fourier Transform coupled with Chebyshev Decomposition (FTC): This framework, developed by Ewoldt et al., provides more physically intuitive parameters. The stress is decomposed into elastic and viscous harmonic contributions, yielding nonlinear viscoelastic moduli [51]. Key parameters include the large-strain elastic modulus (G′L) and the small-strain elastic modulus (G′M), which describe the strain-stiffening or strain-softening behavior. Similarly, the viscous counterparts (η′L and η′M) describe the shear-thickening or shear-thinning nature of the material [55].

Table 1: Key LAOS Parameters and Their Physical Interpretation

Parameter	Description	Physical Interpretation
G′ₗ	Large-strain elastic modulus	Elastic modulus at the maximum strain, related to the structure at large deformations.
G′ᴍ	Minimum-strain elastic modulus	Elastic modulus at the minimum strain, related to the structure at small deformations.
S	Strain-stiffening ratio S = (G′ₗ - G′ᴍ)/G′ₗ	S > 0: Strain-stiffening S < 0: Strain-softening
η′ₗ	Large-strain viscous modulus	Viscous modulus at the maximum strain rate.
η′ᴍ	Minimum-strain viscous modulus	Viscous modulus at the minimum strain rate.
T	Shear-thickening ratio T = (η′ₗ - η′ᴍ)/η′ₗ	T > 0: Shear-thickening T < 0: Shear-thinning
I₃/I₁	Normalized third harmonic intensity	Quantitative measure of the degree of nonlinearity.

Experimental Protocol for LAOS Analysis

Objective: To characterize the nonlinear viscoelastic properties of a semisolid food material (e.g., yogurt, dough, or tomato paste) and relate them to its microstructure and stability.

Materials and Equipment:

• Strain-controlled rheometer with parallel plate or cone-and-plate geometry
• Temperature control unit (e.g., Peltier system)
• Sample preparation tools

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare the sample according to the standard protocol. For yogurt, this involves fermentation and careful loading onto the rheometer plate to minimize pre-shear. For dough, standard mixing and resting protocols must be followed [51] [55].
• Instrument Calibration: Perform routine calibrations on the rheometer (e.g., inertia, motor, and transducer calibration) and ensure the geometry is clean and dry.
• Loading and Trimming: Load the sample onto the lower plate of the rheometer and lower the upper geometry to the desired gap. Trim excess sample carefully to ensure a consistent geometry and minimize edge effects.
• Temperature Equilibration: Allow the sample to equilibrate at the test temperature (e.g., 20°C or 25°C) for a sufficient time (e.g., 5 minutes) to ensure thermal uniformity.
• Amplitude Sweep Test:
  • Set a constant angular frequency (e.g., ω = 10 rad/s, representative of oral processing timescales).
  • Program the rheometer to apply a logarithmically increasing strain amplitude (γ₀) from a value within the linear region (e.g., 0.1%) to a value well into the nonlinear region (e.g., 1000%).
  • Record the resulting stress waveform at each strain point.
• Data Analysis:
  • Lissajous-Bowditch Curves: Plot the stress (σ) versus strain (γ) for one complete cycle at selected strain amplitudes. These closed loops provide a visual fingerprint of the material's nonlinearity [55].
  • Parameter Extraction: Use specialized software to apply the FTC analysis. Extract parameters such as G′M, G′L, S, T, and the harmonic intensities (I₃/I₁) as functions of strain amplitude [51] [55].
  • Interpretation: Correlate the extracted parameters with structural attributes. For instance, a positive S value in a fat crystal network indicates strain-stiffening behavior, while a negative S value in a weak gel suggests structural breakdown [51].

Diagram 1: LAOS experimental workflow and data analysis pathway.

Applications in Food Research

LAOS has been successfully applied to study a wide range of food systems, providing insights that are not accessible via linear rheology.

• Dairy Products: In yogurt, LAOS differentiates between fat-free, low-fat, and high-fat formulations. Higher fat content typically leads to greater strain-stiffening (S > 0) due to the deformation of fat globules and their network [55]. LAOS can also monitor gelation processes and syneresis.
• Dough and Bakery Products: LAOS reveals structural changes during dough aging and the molecular breakdown of dough networks. It can assess the impact of additives and storage conditions on dough quality [51].
• Protein Gels and Pastes: The nonlinear response of protein gels (e.g., tuna myofibrillar protein) and concentrated suspensions (e.g., tomato paste) is sensitive to pH and ionic strength, reflecting changes in the cross-linked network structure [51] [55].

Table 2: LAOS Research Reagent Solutions for Food Analysis

Material / System	Key LAOS Parameters	Function and Relevance
Wheat Flour Dough	S (Stiffening Ratio), I₃/I₁ (Nonlinearity)	Probes gluten network strength and breakdown during large deformations.
Fat Crystal Networks (e.g., in shortening)	G′L, G′M, S	Characterizes the plasticity and yield behavior of the crystal network.
Yogurt (Varying Fat %)	S, T, G′L	Differentiates products based on fat content and gel microstructure.
Starch-Polysaccharide Mixtures	G′M, I₃/I₁	Investigates polymer interactions and phase separation under shear.
Protein-Polysaccharide Complexes	S, T	Evaluates stability of interfacial layers and emulsion texture.

Extensional Rheology

Principles and Measurement Techniques

Extensional rheology, also known as elongational rheology, measures the resistance of a material to a stretching or stretching flow. This type of deformation is dominant in many food processes such as fiber spinning, coating, swallowing, and the breaking of threads or sheets [53]. The extensional viscosity is a critical property that can differ significantly from the shear viscosity, especially for complex, viscoelastic fluids containing polymers.

The key parameter is the extensional viscosity (ηₑ), which is defined as the ratio of tensile stress to extensional strain rate. For a Newtonian fluid, the Trouton ratio (ηₑ/η, where η is the shear viscosity) is 3. For polymeric fluids and many food hydrocolloids, this ratio can be much greater, highlighting the importance of direct measurement [53]. Several techniques are employed to measure extensional flow properties:

• Capillary Breakup Extensional Rheometry (CaBER): This is a common method for low-viscosity fluids. A small droplet of the sample is placed between two plates, which are rapidly separated to form a filament. The subsequent thinning and breakup of the filament are monitored by a laser. The evolution of the filament diameter over time is used to calculate the extensional viscosity and relaxation time of the material [53].
• Filament Stretching Extensional Rheometry (FiSER): Suitable for a wider range of viscosities, this method involves stretching a fluid filament at a constant strain rate between two end-plates. It provides a direct measurement of the tensile stress and is well-suited for studying strain-hardening behavior [53].

Experimental Protocol for Extensional Rheology (CaBER)

Objective: To determine the extensional relaxation time and apparent extensional viscosity of a food hydrocolloid solution (e.g., okra mucilage).

Materials and Equipment:

• Capillary Breakup Extensional Rheometer (CaBER)
• High-speed camera or laser micrometer
• Temperature control system
• Sample solutions at defined concentrations and pH levels

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare okra mucilage extracts at desired concentrations (e.g., 0.25% to 2.50% w/w) in buffers at pH 4.0 and pH 7.0 to study pH effects [53]. Ensure the sample is homogeneous and free of air bubbles.
• Instrument Setup: Configure the CaBER instrument. Set the initial plate diameter (e.g., 3-6 mm), the final gap height (typically 2-5 times the initial gap), and the stretching time, which should be shorter than the fluid's breakup time.
• Loading: Place a small sample droplet on the lower plate. Bring the upper plate down to the initial gap setting, ensuring the sample wets both plates.
• Stretching and Data Acquisition: Trigger the rapid separation of the plates to the final gap. Simultaneously, initiate the recording of the filament's mid-point diameter (D(t)) over time using the laser micrometer or high-speed camera. Continue recording until the filament breaks.
• Data Analysis:
  • Diameter Thinning: Plot the filament diameter (D(t)) versus time. For a viscoelastic fluid obeying the Oldroyd-B model, the thinning follows an exponential decay: D(t) = D₀ exp(-t/(3λ)), where λ is the extensional relaxation time [53].
  • Relaxation Time: Fit the linear region of the plot of ln(D(t)) versus time. The relaxation time λ is obtained from the negative inverse of the slope.
  • Extensional Viscosity: The apparent extensional viscosity can be calculated from the stress and strain rate during the thinning process.

Applications in Food Research

Extensional rheology provides unique information that complements shear rheology, particularly for products that are stretched or spun.

• Hydrocolloid Characterization: Okra mucilage shows strong concentration and pH dependence in extensional flow. At neutral pH, the polymers are more extended, leading to higher extensional viscosities and more pronounced elastic behavior compared to acidic pH, where the polymers adopt a compact conformation [53].
• Dough and Bread Making: Extensional properties like strain-hardening are critical for dough gas retention and oven spring during baking. A good strain-hardening behavior allows the dough to expand without rupturing, resulting in a finer crumb structure and larger loaf volume.
• Cheese and Processed Foods: The stringiness and stretchability of melted cheese are directly related to its extensional rheology. This is a key quality attribute for products like pizza cheese.

Diagram 2: CaBER protocol for extensional rheology.

Table 3: Extensional Rheology Research Reagent Solutions

Material / System	Key Extensional Parameters	Function and Relevance
Okra Mucilage	Extensional Relaxation Time (λ), Apparent Extensional Viscosity (ηₑ)	Links polymer conformation (pH-dependent) to stretchability.
Wheat Dough	Strain-Hardening Index, Rupture Strain	Predicts gas cell stability and final bread volume.
Melted Cheese	Melt-Stretchability, Tensile Stress at Break	Quantifies functional performance for applications like pizza.
Thickening Gums (e.g., Guar, Xanthan)	Extensional Viscosity, Trouton Ratio	Assesses efficiency in stabilizing against breakup.

Interfacial Rheology

Fundamentals of Interfacial Deformation

Interfacial rheology characterizes the flow and deformation of two-dimensional layers at fluid-fluid interfaces (e.g., air-water or oil-water). These layers, formed by adsorbed surfactants, proteins, or particles, play a critical role in stabilizing emulsions and foams [54]. The mechanical strength of these interfacial films determines their resistance to coalescence and Ostwald ripening. There are two main modes of deformation:

• Interfacial Dilational Rheology: This technique involves changing the interfacial area (A) and measuring the resulting change in interfacial tension (γ). The complex interfacial dilational modulus, E, is defined as E = dγ / dlnA [54]. It is decomposed into an elastic (or storage) modulus, E' = |E| cosδ, which represents the recoverable energy, and a viscous (or loss) modulus, E'' = |E| sinδ, which represents the energy dissipated as flow [54]. Measurements are often performed using oscillating pendant drop instruments or Langmuir troughs with oscillating barriers.

• Interfacial Shear Rheology: This method involves shearing the interface at a constant area to measure its resistance to flow. The equations are analogous to bulk shear rheology, with the complex interfacial shear modulus G. The commercial techniques include the magnetic rod method, rotating ring, and rotating bicone methods [54]. The magnetic needle method, which oscillates a needle at the interface, is noted for its high sensitivity [54].

Experimental Protocol for Interfacial Shear Rheology (Magnetic Needle)

Objective: To measure the viscoelastic properties of an adsorbed protein layer at an oil-water interface and correlate it with emulsion stability.

Materials and Equipment:

• Interfacial shear rheometer with magnetic rod/double-wall ring attachment
• Langmuir trough (optional, for controlling interfacial packing)
• Tensiometer for interfacial tension measurement
• Oil phase (e.g., purified sunflower oil) and aqueous buffer solution
• Protein solution (e.g., β-lactoglobulin, sodium caseinate)

Procedure:

• Interface Preparation: Carefully pour the aqueous phase into a clean Langmuir trough or the rheometer container. Gently add the oil phase on top to form a clean, quiescent interface.
• Adsorption: Inject a known volume of the protein solution into the aqueous subphase and allow sufficient time (e.g., 2-4 hours) for the proteins to adsorb and form a viscoelastic film at the interface. The interfacial tension will decrease and stabilize.
• Place Magnetic Needle: Gently place a Teflon-coated magnetic needle onto the interface.
• Frequency Sweep Test:
  • Apply a constant, small oscillatory strain (within the linear viscoelastic region of the interface) to the needle via an oscillating magnetic field.
  • Sweep over a frequency range (e.g., 0.01 to 1 Hz).
  • Measure the resulting torque on the needle to determine the interfacial storage modulus (G′ᵢ) and loss modulus (G″ᵢ) as functions of frequency.
• Data Analysis:
  • Plot G′ᵢ and G″ᵢ versus frequency. A predominantly elastic interface (G′ᵢ > G″ᵢ) over a wide frequency range is often indicative of a strong, stable film that can resist coalescence in emulsions.
  • Correlate the magnitude of G′ᵢ with the long-term stability of emulsions prepared with the same protein.

Applications in Food Research

Interfacial rheology is indispensable for understanding and designing emulsified and foamed food products.

• Emulsion Stability: The stability of mayonnaise, sauces, and dressings is directly linked to the interfacial rheology of the adsorbed layer of proteins (e.g., egg yolk proteins) or polysaccharides. A highly viscoelastic interface prevents droplet coalescence [54] [56].
• Foam Stability: The stability of beer heads and espresso foam depends on the mechanical properties of the adsorbed surfactants and proteins at the air-water interface. Interfacial rheology can predict foam half-life and bubble size distribution [54].
• Digestive Studies: Specialized setups allow for the study of interfacial layers under simulated gastric conditions. This helps understand how bile salts or enzymes displace or hydrolyze interfacial films, controlling lipid digestion and nutrient release [54].

Table 4: Key Parameters and Reagents for Interfacial Rheology

Material / System	Key Interfacial Parameters	Function and Relevance
Protein Isolates (e.g., Whey, Soy)	Interfacial Elastic Modulus (G′ᵢ), Dilational Modulus (E')	Evaluates protein's emulsifying capacity and film strength.
Small Molecule Surfactants	E', E''	Studies kinetics of adsorption and film fluidity.
Food-Grade Particles (Pickering)	G′ᵢ, Yield Stress	Designs ultra-stable emulsions via particle jamming at interface.
Biopolymer Mixtures (e.g., Protein-Gum)	G′ᵢ, E'	Investigates synergistic interactions for enhanced stability.

The quantitative analysis of food texture and rheology is fundamental to product development, quality control, and predicting consumer acceptance. Rheology, the study of material deformation and flow, and texture analysis, the measurement of mechanical properties, provide critical objective data that correlates with sensory perception [3] [57]. Within the broader thesis on analytical techniques for food research, this document presents detailed application notes and experimental protocols for investigating gels, emulsions, and products within the dairy and bakery sectors. These case studies are designed to equip researchers and scientists with standardized methodologies for characterizing complex food matrices, from fundamental rheological tests to advanced texture profile analysis.

Case Study 1: Protein-Based Emulsion Gels

Background and Application

Emulsion gels are gelled matrices containing dispersed emulsion droplets, functioning as semi-solid systems with tunable mechanical properties and superior stability compared to traditional emulsions [58]. They are promising functional colloids for controlled release, fat replacement, and probiotic delivery. Protein-based emulsion gels, utilizing whey, soy, or casein, are of particular interest due to the excellent emulsifying and gelling properties of proteins [58].

Experimental Protocol: Fabrication and Rheological Analysis of Whey Protein Emulsion Gels

Objective: To fabricate a heat-set whey protein emulsion gel and characterize its viscoelastic properties using oscillatory rheometry.

Research Reagent Solutions:

Reagent/Material	Function in the Experiment
Whey Protein Isolate	Biopolymer that forms the gelling matrix at high temperatures.
Medium Chain Triglyceride (MCT) Oil	Lipid phase (dispersed phase) of the emulsion.
Cinnamaldehyde (optional)	Functional bioactive; can modify interfacial properties and gel structure.
Distilled Water	Continuous aqueous phase for hydration and dissolution of protein.

Methodology:

• Emulsion Preparation: Hydrate whey protein isolate (e.g., 10% w/w) in distilled water with constant stirring for at least 2 hours at 4°C to ensure complete dissolution. Add MCT oil (e.g., 20% w/w) and any lipophilic bioactives (e.g., 0.02% capsaicinoids) to the protein solution. Pre-homogenize the mixture using a high-speed blender for 1 minute, then pass it through a high-pressure homogenizer for 3-5 cycles at 50-100 MPa to form a fine emulsion [58].
• Gelation (Heat-Set): Transfer the emulsion to a sealed container and heat it in a water bath at 90°C for 20 minutes to induce gelation via protein denaturation and aggregation. Immediately after heating, cool the gel in an ice bath and store at 4°C for a minimum of 12 hours to allow structure maturation [58].
• Rheological Analysis: Using a rotational rheometer with a parallel plate or concentric cylinder geometry, perform an oscillatory temperature sweep from 20°C to 90°C and back at a rate of 2°C/min, a constant frequency of 1 Hz, and a strain within the linear viscoelastic region (determined by a prior amplitude sweep). This measures the storage modulus (G′) and loss modulus (G″) to monitor gel formation and melting. Conduct a frequency sweep (0.1 to 100 Hz) at a constant strain and 25°C to evaluate the mechanical spectrum of the final gel [3] [58].

Data Interpretation and Expected Outcomes

A successful gel formation is indicated by G′ surpassing G″ during the heating ramp and both moduli reaching a plateau. The final gel should exhibit a solid-like behavior where G′ is largely independent of frequency [58]. The addition of bioactive compounds like cinnamaldehyde can soften the gel structure, leading to a lower G′ and faster disintegration, which can be quantified from the rheological data [58].

Case Study 2: Dairy Products - Cheese Texture Profile Analysis

Background and Application

The texture of dairy products like cheese is a critical quality attribute directly linked to consumer satisfaction. Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) is a double-compression test that simulates the action of the jaw, providing objective measurements that correlate well with sensory evaluation [59] [43]. It is essential for quality assurance, optimizing formulations, and studying the effects of processing and storage.

Experimental Protocol: TPA of Hard Cheese

Objective: To determine key textural parameters of a hard cheese sample using Texture Profile Analysis.

Research Reagent Solutions:

Reagent/Material	Function in the Experiment
Hard Cheese Sample (e.g., Cheddar)	The test material for texture measurement.
Cylinder or Spherical Probe	The probe that applies compression to the sample.
Texture Analyzer	Instrument that performs the controlled deformation and records force-time data.

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare the cheese by cutting it into uniform cubes (e.g., 15mm x 15mm x 15mm). Condition the samples at the standard testing temperature (e.g., 10-12°C) for at least 2 hours before analysis to ensure consistent results [59].
• Instrumental Setup: Mount a cylindrical probe (e.g., 50mm diameter) or a spherical probe on the texture analyzer. Set the test parameters to a double compression cycle. Typical settings for hard cheese include:
  • Test Speed: 1 mm/s
  • Compression Strain: 50% of the original sample height (for fracturability, a higher strain may be needed)
  • Time Between Compressions: 5 seconds
  • Trigger Force: 5 g [59] [43]
• Analysis: Perform the TPA test. The software will generate a force-time curve from which textural parameters are automatically calculated (see data table below).

Data Interpretation and Expected Outcomes

The TPA curve allows for the extraction of multiple parameters. For hard cheeses, high hardness and fracturability are typically expected.

Table 1: Textural Parameters Derived from TPA

Parameter	Definition	Correlation to Sensory Perception
Hardness	Peak force during the first compression cycle.	Perceived firmness.
Fracturability	The force at the first significant break in the curve during the first compression.	Brittleness or tendency to crumble.
Springiness	The degree to which the sample returns to its original height after the first compression.	Elasticity or rubberiness.
Cohesiveness	Ratio of the area under the second compression to the area under the first compression.	Internal strength of the sample's structure.
Adhesiveness	The negative force area representing work to pull the probe away.	Stickiness to teeth/palate.
Chewiness	The product of Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness.	Work required to masticate a solid sample.

Case Study 3: Bakery Products - Dough Rheology and Final Product Texture

Background and Application

Dough is a classic viscoelastic material, and its rheological properties directly impact processing and final baked product quality. Fundamental rheology can predict dough behavior during mixing, sheeting, and fermentation, while texture analysis of the final product is crucial for quality control [57] [60]. This case study examines the effect of fiber-rich ingredient addition.

Experimental Protocol: Effect of Brewers' Spent Grain on Dough and Focaccia

Objective: To evaluate the impact of 50% Brewers' Spent Grain (BSG) substitution on the viscoelastic properties of dough and the textural profile of baked focaccia.

Research Reagent Solutions:

Reagent/Material	Function in the Experiment
Wheat Flour (Control)	Standard material for comparison.
Brewers' Spent Grain (BSG) Flour	Fiber-rich ingredient to modify rheology and texture.
Water	Hydrating agent for dough formation.

Methodology:

• Dough Formulation: Prepare dough samples with a 1:1 ratio of wheat flour to BSG flour (RBSG from rye/barley or BBSG from barley). A control dough should be made with 100% wheat flour. Hydrate the flour mixtures with an appropriate amount of water to achieve similar consistency [60].
• Fundamental Rheological Testing: Use a rotational rheometer with a parallel plate geometry. Perform an oscillatory amplitude sweep at a constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz) to determine the linear viscoelastic region (LVR). Then, conduct a frequency sweep (e.g., 0.1 to 100 Hz) at a strain within the LVR to measure the storage modulus (G′) and loss modulus (G″) [60].
• Baking and Texture Analysis: Bake the doughs into focaccias under standardized conditions. Perform a TPA test on the cooled baked product using a texture analyzer with a cylindrical probe, applying a 50% compression strain.

Data Interpretation and Expected Outcomes

The addition of BSG is expected to significantly alter the dough's rheology and the final product's texture. The following table summarizes quantitative findings from a similar study:

Table 2: Rheological and Textural Impact of 50% BSG Addition [60]

Parameter	Control (WF)	RBSG (50%)	BBSG (50%)	Implication
Dough G′ (Pa)	Baseline	Increased	Increased	Stronger, more solid-like dough structure.
Dough G″ (Pa)	Baseline	Increased	Increased	Increased viscous component.
Loss Tangent (tan δ)	Baseline	Decreased	Decreased	Dough becomes less fluid-like and more elastic.
Focaccia Hardness	Baseline	+10%	Not Reported	Firmer final product texture.
Focaccia Chewiness	Baseline	+12%	Not Reported	Requires more work to masticate.
Cookie Fracturability	Baseline	Not Reported	+20%	Cookies are more brittle.

The data demonstrates that BSG addition increases the complex viscosity and gel strength of the dough, leading to a firmer and chewier baked product, which is valuable information for product formulation [60].

Overcoming Analytical Challenges: Troubleshooting in Complex Food Matrices

In the field of food texture and rheology research, the integrity of analytical data is paramount. Sensor calibration drift and sample preparation artifacts represent two significant challenges that can compromise the validity of research outcomes, leading to inaccurate texture profiles and erroneous rheological data. Calibration drift refers to the gradual deviation of instrument measurements from a known standard over time, while sample preparation artifacts are unintended alterations to a sample's physical or chemical properties introduced during handling. Within the context of a broader thesis on analytical techniques for measuring food texture, this document provides application notes and detailed protocols to identify, prevent, and correct these issues, thereby ensuring the generation of reliable and reproducible data in both academic and industrial settings.

Understanding and Mitigating Sensor Calibration Drift

The Causes and Impacts of Calibration Drift

In food rheology studies, sensors in instruments like rheometers and texture analyzers are susceptible to calibration drift due to environmental and operational stressors [61]. This drift directly compromises the accuracy of key texture measurements, including hardness, chewiness, and viscosity.

The primary environmental stressors triggering drift include [61]:

• Dust and Particulate Accumulation: Particulates can settle on and obstruct sensor elements, physically blocking their surface and altering their sensitivity and responsiveness. This leads to deviations in data, such as overestimation of a gel's firmness.
• Humidity Variations: High humidity can cause condensation on sensor components, leading to short-circuiting or corrosion, while low humidity may cause desiccation of sensitive elements. This is particularly detrimental to electrochemical sensors and can affect the measurement of moisture-related texture attributes.
• Temperature Fluctuations: Sudden changes or extreme temperatures can cause physical expansion or contraction of sensor materials and electronics, leading to misalignment and component stress. This is critical during thermal stability tests of fats or gels.

Operational factors, such as the harsh thermal cycling experienced during Clean-in-Place (CIP) processes in simulated production environments, are also major contributors. Testing has shown that some sensors can drift by less than 0.2°C after 1000 thermal cycles, while others may fail completely after just two cycles [62].

Quantitative Data on Drift Triggers and Frequencies

Table 1: Common Environmental Stressors and Their Impact on Sensor Calibration

Stressor	Physical Effect on Sensor	Impact on Texture/Rheology Data
Dust Accumulation	Obstructs sensor elements; alters sensitivity [61]	False readings in firmness (e.g., for fruits, gels); altered viscosity curves
High Humidity	Condensation leading to short-circuiting or corrosion [61]	Erroneous moisture content analysis; affects water activity correlates
Low Humidity	Desiccation of sensor elements [61]	Drift in measurements of dry, brittle foods (e.g., crackers, biscuits)
Temperature Fluctuations	Expansion/contraction causing misalignment & material stress [61]	Inaccurate thermal rheology data (e.g., melting profile of chocolate)
Thermal Cycling (CIP)	Fatigue of electronic components, leading to drift and failure [62]	Reduced accuracy in process-scale rheological measurements

Table 2: Recommended Calibration Frequencies for Different Conditions

Operational Context	Recommended Calibration Interval	Justification
Stable Lab Environment	Every 6-12 months	Low stressor exposure; minimal drift expected [61]
High-Precision Research	Before critical experiments or quarterly	Ensures data integrity for publication and development [61]
High Dust/Particulate Environment	Monthly or quarterly	Prevents buildup that obstructs sensors and causes deviations [61]
Environments with Extreme Humidity/Temperature Swings	Seasonal or quarterly	Counters physical and chemical changes induced by climate [61]
Harsh Processes (e.g., frequent CIP)	Continuous monitoring with "Calibration Check" technology	Immediate notification of deviations is required due to rapid drift potential [62]

Experimental Protocol: Identification and Correction of Calibration Drift

Objective: To proactively identify calibration drift in a texture analyzer or rheometer and perform a corrective calibration using traceable standards.

Materials and Reagents:

• Texture Analyzer or Rheometer
• Certified calibration weight (e.g., 1 kg ± 0.01%) for force verification
• Certified viscosity standard (e.g., 1000 mPa·s ± 1% at 25°C)
• Manufacturer-provided calibration jigs and fixtures
• Data logging software

Procedure:

• Pre-Test Functional Check: Visually inspect the sensor for physical damage or contamination. Power on the instrument and observe for any error codes or unusual behavior from the internal diagnostics [62].
• Verification Measurement: a. For Texture Analyzers: Mount the calibration weight and perform a compression test using a standard protocol. Record the measured force and compare it to the known value of the weight. A deviation exceeding the manufacturer's specification (e.g., >0.5% of full scale) indicates drift. b. For Rheometers: Load the certified viscosity standard. Perform a viscosity measurement at the specified temperature and shear rate. Record the measured viscosity and compare it to the standard's certificate.
• Corrective Calibration: a. If a deviation is confirmed, initiate the instrument's internal calibration routine as per the manufacturer's manual. b. Follow the on-screen instructions, which typically involve applying the certified standard (weight or fluid) and allowing the instrument to adjust its internal parameters.
• Post-Calibration Verification: Repeat the verification measurement (Step 2) to confirm that the instrument now reads within the accepted tolerance.
• Documentation: Record the date, pre- and post-calibration values, standard used, and the name of the operator in a calibration logbook. Modern sensors with IO-Link can automatically store this data, including operating hours and event messages [62].

Workflow for Managing Calibration Drift

The following diagram illustrates a systematic workflow for the monitoring, identification, and management of calibration drift.

Preventing Sample Preparation Artifacts

Sample preparation is a critical step in food analysis, as the complex matrix of foods often requires pre-treatment to isolate target analytes or make the sample suitable for instrumentation [63]. Artifacts introduced here can lead to a complete misrepresentation of the food's true texture and rheological properties. For instance, over-homogenization can destroy the native structure of a meat sample, making it appear more tender than it is, while incorrect moisture control can drastically alter the viscosity profile of a sauce or beverage [18].

Common sources of artifacts include:

• Structural Damage: Grinding, chopping, or blending can mechanically degrade food microstructure, affecting parameters like chewiness and springiness measured by Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) [18].
• Temperature Fluctuations: During preparation, heat can cause protein denaturation or starch gelatinization, permanently altering viscoelastic properties [18].
• Improper Hydration/Solvent Use: Traditional methods like Soxhlet extraction or liquid-liquid extraction use large volumes of solvent, which can leach or modify components, affecting subsequent analysis and generating hazardous waste [63].
• Oxidation: Exposure to air during preparation can oxidize fats and pigments, changing the sample's composition and rheological behavior.

Advances in Green and Micro-Sample Preparation

The field is moving towards green analytical chemistry principles, which aim to minimize or eliminate the use of hazardous solvents, reduce energy consumption, and decrease waste [63]. These approaches often also reduce artifacts by being gentler and faster.

Key techniques include:

• Solid-Phase Microextraction (SPME): A solvent-free technique where a fiber coated with an extracting phase is exposed to the sample (or its headspace) to extract and concentrate analytes. It combines extraction and enrichment in a single step, minimizing the alteration of volatile flavor and aroma compounds that influence perceived texture [63].
• Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE): Uses solvents at high temperatures and pressures to improve extraction efficiency and speed while significantly reducing solvent consumption compared to methods like Soxhlet [63] [64].
• Microwave-Assisted Extraction (MAE): Utilizes microwave energy to heat solvents and samples rapidly, reducing extraction time and solvent volume, though care must be taken to avoid overheating and degrading thermolabile components [63].

Experimental Protocol: Standardized Sample Preparation for Meat Texture Analysis

Objective: To prepare a consistent and representative meat sample for Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) while minimizing the introduction of preparation artifacts.

Materials and Reagents:

• Core biopsy tool (e.g., 1" diameter)
• Sharp blade or band saw
• Double-bagged plastic bags and water bath (for thermal processing)
• Texture Analyzer equipped with a cylindrical probe
• Moisture-proof container for storage
• Ruler and digital caliper

Procedure:

• Sampling: a. From a homogeneous section of the muscle, use a core biopsy tool to extract cylindrical samples parallel to the muscle fiber orientation [18]. b. If a core tool is unavailable, carefully cut samples into uniform cylinders (e.g., 1 cm x 1 cm) using a sharp blade or saw, ensuring cuts are made cleanly to avoid compressing or tearing the sample.
• Thermal Processing (if applicable): a. Place samples in double-bagged plastic bags and immerse in a controlled temperature water bath. b. Cook to a target internal temperature (e.g., 75°C), monitored with a thermocouple. Standardize the heating rate and endpoint temperature across all samples. c. Immediately after cooking, chill the samples in an ice bath to halt thermal degradation.
• Equilibration: a. Prior to testing, allow samples to equilibrate to room temperature (e.g., 20-25°C) for a fixed duration (e.g., 1 hour). This ensures consistent thermal rheology across the sample set.
• Pre-Test Measurement: a. Precisely measure the height and diameter of each sample cylinder using digital calipers.
• Texture Profile Analysis (TPA): a. Perform a two-bite compression test on the texture analyzer. b. Typical TPA Settings: 50-70% compression strain, a crosshead speed of 1-2 mm/s, and a 1-5 second pause between cycles [18].
• Documentation: Record all preparation parameters: sample dimensions, cooking time/temperature, equilibration time, and TPA settings.

Workflow for Robust Sample Preparation

The following diagram outlines a generalized, robust workflow for sample preparation, designed to minimize the introduction of artifacts.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Key Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Reagents for Texture and Rheology Studies

Item	Function/Application	Technical Notes
Certified Calibration Weights	Verifying force accuracy of texture analyzers.	Must be traceable to national standards; choose a weight close to the instrument's typical measurement range.
Certified Viscosity Standards	Calibrating rheometers and viscometers.	Available in various viscosities; select a standard with a value in the range of your samples.
SPME Fibers	Solventless extraction of volatile compounds for GC-MS analysis of flavor/aroma, which correlates with texture perception.	Available with different coatings (e.g., PDMS, CAR/PDMS, DVB/CAR/PDMS) for selective extraction [63].
Core Biopsy Tools	Obtaining geometrically uniform samples from bulk food materials (e.g., meat, cheese).	Minimizes structural damage and ensures reproducible cross-sectional area for compression tests [18].
Reference Materials	Standard materials with known texture/rheology properties (e.g., certified gel standards).	Used for method validation and inter-laboratory comparison.

Vigilance against sensor calibration drift and sample preparation artifacts is non-negotiable for high-quality food texture and rheology research. By understanding the root causes, implementing the detailed protocols provided for calibration verification and standardized sample preparation, and leveraging modern tools and "green" micro-techniques, researchers can significantly enhance the reliability and accuracy of their data. This rigorous approach ensures that scientific conclusions and product development decisions are based on the true properties of the food material, ultimately advancing the field of food science.

Food rheology, the study of how food materials deform and flow under applied forces, is fundamental to understanding and controlling food texture, processing, and stability [42]. Many food products exhibit non-ideal behaviors, meaning their flow properties are not constant but change in complex ways depending on applied forces and time. These behaviors include shear thinning, where viscosity decreases under force, and thixotropy, a time-dependent recovery of viscosity after the force is removed [65]. For researchers and product developers, analyzing these properties is essential for predicting product performance during processing (e.g., pumping, mixing), ensuring desired sensory attributes (e.g., mouthfeel, spreadability), and maintaining stability during storage [42] [3].

The ability to quantify these behaviors bridges the gap between a product's microstructure and its macroscopic properties. For instance, thixotropic behavior is an important quality characteristic for paints and coatings, influencing leveling and preventing sagging, and is equally critical for food products like ketchup, lotions, and gels [65]. This application note provides detailed protocols for characterizing these non-ideal behaviors, focusing on industry-relevant tests and analyses.

Theoretical Framework and Key Concepts

Defining Non-Ideal Flow Behaviors

Understanding the distinctions between different non-Newtonian behaviors is the first step in accurate characterization.

• Thixotropy: This property describes fluids and gels that become thinner under a constant applied force (shear stress) and then fully recover their initial viscosity after the force is removed over an appropriate period [65]. This is a time-dependent structural regeneration. The internal structure of the material breaks down during shearing and rebuilds during rest. A classic example is ketchup, which flows easily when squeezed but thickens again on the plate to prevent running [65].
• Shear Thinning (Pseudoplasticity): This behavior is characterized by an instantaneous decrease in viscosity with increasing applied shear rate [65]. The structural breakdown is immediate and reversible, but it is not inherently time-dependent in the same way as thixotropy. All thixotropic materials exhibit shear-thinning behavior, but not all shear-thinning materials are thixotropic [65].
• Rheopexy: This is the opposite of thixotropy, where a material's structural strength increases while shearing [65]. This phenomenon is relatively rare but can be found in some suspensions like latex dispersions.

The Impact on Food and Product Development

The rheological properties of food materials are critical for multiple aspects of product development and manufacturing. They determine the processability of materials in manufacturing pipelines, the stability of products under various storage conditions, and key sensory texture and mouthfeel attributes [3]. Quantitative measures of rheological properties can be highly correlated with sensory textural attributes, particularly for fluid foods, providing an objective method to predict sensory panel results or consumer acceptance [3].

Experimental Protocols for Characterization

This section outlines standardized protocols for measuring time-dependent and shear-dependent behaviors using a rotational rheometer.

Protocol 1: The Three-Interval Thixotropy Test (3ITT)

The 3ITT is a powerful step-test for quantifying time-dependent structural recovery and is considered one of the most common test methods for thixotropy [65].

Principle: The test simulates a product's behavior before (at rest), during (application), and after (recovery) a real-world process like spreading, painting, or pumping by subjecting it to controlled shear intervals [65].

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare the sample according to standardized preparation protocols, ensuring consistent temperature and handling to prevent pre-shearing. For many soft solid foods, loading with a spatula without applying air bubbles is critical.
• Instrument Setup: Equip a rotational rheometer with a appropriate geometry (e.g., parallel plate, cone-and-plate). Set and maintain the test temperature (e.g., 20°C or 37°C) relevant to the application using a Peltier system.
• Interval 1 (Rest State - Low Shear): Apply a constant low shear rate (e.g., 0.1 s⁻¹) for a defined period (e.g., 60 s). Record the resulting equilibrium viscosity (η₁). This serves as the reference viscosity of the sample's initial structure [65].
• Interval 2 (Application - High Shear): Immediately switch to a constant high shear rate (e.g., 100 s⁻¹) for a defined period (e.g., 30 s). Record the viscosity (η₂). The drop in viscosity indicates the extent of structural decomposition due to shear-thinning behavior [65].
• Interval 3 (Recovery - Low Shear): Immediately return to the same low shear rate used in Interval 1 for a prolonged period (e.g., 180 s). Monitor the viscosity (η₃) recovery over time [65].

Data Analysis:

• Recovery Ratio: Calculate the percentage of viscosity recovered after a specific time (t) in Interval 3: Recovery (%) = (η₃(t) / η₁) * 100 [65].
• Time for Given Recovery: Determine the time required for the viscosity to recover to a predefined percentage (e.g., 50% or 80%) of its initial value (η₁) [65].

Protocol 2: Hysteresis Loop Method

While noted in modern standards as less comprehensive for measuring recovery, the hysteresis loop method is a simple technique for evaluating the amount of structural breakdown under shear [65].

Principle: The sample is subjected to a linearly increasing (upwards ramp) and then decreasing (downwards ramp) shear rate. The area between the two ramps, the hysteresis area, indicates the energy required to break down the material's structure and is related to its time-dependent behavior [65].

Procedure:

• Sample and Instrument Setup: Follow steps 1 and 2 from Protocol 1.
• Upwards Ramp: Increase the shear rate linearly from a low value (e.g., 1 s⁻¹) to a high value (e.g., 100 s⁻¹) over a fixed time (e.g., 120 s).
• Optional Holding Time: Maintain the high shear rate for a brief period (e.g., 30 s).
• Downwards Ramp: Immediately decrease the shear rate linearly from the high value back to the low starting value over the same fixed time (e.g., 120 s).

Data Analysis:

• Hysteresis Area: Plot shear stress versus shear rate. The area enclosed between the upwards and downwards ramps is the hysteresis area. A positive area indicates structural breakdown, while a negative area suggests structural build-up during shearing (rheopexy) [65].

Table 1: Summary of Key Rheological Test Protocols

Test Method	Controlled Parameter	Measured Output	Key Analytical Metric	Application Simulation
3ITT (Step Test)	Shear Rate (CSR) or Shear Stress (CSS)	Viscosity over time	Recovery ratio, Recovery time	Pumping, spreading, and subsequent stability
Hysteresis Loop	Shear Rate (ramp)	Shear Stress vs Shear Rate	Hysteresis loop area	Structural breakdown during mixing or application

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Quantitative Analysis of Thixotropy

The following table compiles typical quantitative data for various material types, illustrating the range of behaviors encountered.

Table 2: Quantitative Thixotropic Behavior in Different Material Types

Material Category	Example Product	Typical Viscosity Recovery (3ITT)	Hysteresis Area	Key Interpretation
Strongly Thixotropic	Some Paints, Paraffin Oil	~80% after 60s [65] / Full recovery in hours [65]	Large	Excellent sag resistance and leveling; full structure recovery.
Weakly Thixotropic/ Non-Thixotropic	Yogurt [65]	Remains thinner than initial state (<100%) [65]	Small to none	Permanent structural breakdown after shearing (e.g., stirring).
Rheopectic	Latex Dispersions [65]	N/A (Structure builds with shear)	Negative (per loop test)	Structure strengthens with mechanical input; rare behavior.

Common Pitfalls in Interpretation

• Confusing "Thixotropic Index": The term "Thixotropic Index" (TI) is often used misleadingly. Sometimes, it refers to the ratio of viscosities at two different rotational speeds (e.g., 5 rpm and 50 rpm). This ratio quantifies time-independent shear-thinning behavior, not time-dependent thixotropy. A more accurate term for this is the "Shear Thinning Index" [65].
• Over-relying on Hysteresis: The hysteresis loop method does not include an interval to evaluate structural recovery under truly low shear conditions, limiting its validity for a complete assessment of thixotropy according to modern standards [65].

The Scientist's Toolkit: Research Reagent Solutions

Table 3: Essential Materials and Instruments for Rheological Analysis

Item Name	Function/Application
Rotational Rheometer	The primary instrument for applying controlled shear stress or shear rate and measuring the resulting deformation or viscosity. Capable of both rotational and oscillatory tests [65].
Parallel Plate Geometry	A common measuring system for rheometers, ideal for viscous liquids, pastes, and soft solids. Allows easy loading and cleaning. Gap can be adjusted.
Cone and Plate Geometry	Provides a constant shear rate throughout the sample gap, ideal for homogeneous materials. Excellent for absolute viscosity measurements.
Peltier Temperature Control System	Essential for maintaining precise and stable temperature during measurements, as rheological properties are highly temperature-sensitive [66].
Standard Reference Fluids	Newtonian fluids with known viscosities used for calibration and validation of the rheometer's performance.

Experimental Workflow and Logical Relationships

The following diagram illustrates the logical workflow for selecting the appropriate test and analysis method based on the material's behavior and the research objective.

Advanced Applications and Future Directions

The application of rheology is expanding with the development of sustainable and functional foods. Rheological techniques are crucial for characterizing the quality of alternative protein sources (e.g., legume-based proteins, algae, cultured meat, edible insects) and gluten-free doughs to ensure they meet textural and sensory expectations [67].

Furthermore, techniques like Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS) are moving beyond the linear viscoelastic region to probe material structure under large deformations, which are more relevant to real processing conditions and the eating experience (e.g., chewing, spreading) [68]. Tribology, the study of friction and lubrication between surfaces, has also emerged as a complementary discipline to rheology for understanding oral processing and mouthfeel, as it characterizes the lubrication properties of food between the tongue and palate [68].

Within the framework of analytical techniques for food texture and rheology research, the precise characterization of material properties is paramount for product development, quality control, and predicting consumer acceptance. Food matrices can be broadly categorized based on their mechanical responses, with hard-brittle and soft-elastic materials representing two fundamental classes. The analytical challenge lies in selecting and optimizing testing protocols that accurately capture the distinct failure and deformation behaviors of these diverse systems. This application note provides detailed methodologies for quantifying the key textural properties of hard-brittle and soft-elastic foods, leveraging fundamental and advanced rheological techniques to provide researchers with robust, data-driven insights.

Theoretical Foundations: Rheological Properties and Food Texture

The mechanical properties of foods are defined by their behavior when subjected to external forces, expressed as stress (force per unit area) [69]. The material's response to this stress is deformation, or strain, and the relationship between the two is the domain of rheology [69]. For solid-like foods, texture is often the sensory manifestation of these underlying mechanical properties.

• Ideal Solid and Liquid Behavior: The behavior of complex food systems can often be interpreted using simple models. An ideal elastic (Hookean) solid deforms proportionally to the applied stress, while an ideal viscous (Newtonian) liquid flows with a shear rate proportional to the applied shear stress [1].
• Viscoelasticity: Most foods are viscoelastic, exhibiting both solid and liquid characteristics. Their rheological properties can be modeled using mechanical analogs that combine springs (elastic element) and dashpots (viscous element) [69].
• Key Textural Parameters: Instrumental tests extract specific parameters that correlate with sensory perception. Hardness is the peak force during the first compression cycle. Fracturability is the force at the first significant break during compression. Cohesiveness is the ratio of the work done during the second compression to that of the first, indicating internal bond strength. Springiness is the rate at which a deformed material returns to its original shape once the deforming force is removed [43] [70].

Material Classification and Test Selection

The selection of an appropriate test is contingent upon a fundamental understanding of the material's expected response. The table below summarizes the defining characteristics and primary analytical goals for hard-brittle versus soft-elastic food matrices.

Table 1: Characteristics and Analytical Objectives of Hard-Brittle vs. Soft-Elastic Foods

Property	Hard-Brittle Foods	Soft-Elastic Foods
Example Products	Cookies, hard candies, potato chips, crackers	Processed cheese, gelatin gels, marshmallows, some fresh cheeses
Structural Characteristic	Rigid, limited molecular mobility, prone to catastrophic fracture	Flexible polymer networks, high molecular mobility, capable of large deformations
Primary Analytical Goal	Measure fracture force and energy; quantify brittleness	Quantify deformation recovery, gel strength, and degree of softness
Typical Force-Deformation Curve	Sharp, linear rise to a high peak force followed by a sudden, dramatic drop	More gradual, curvilinear rise to a lower peak force, with significant recovery

Experimental Protocols for Hard-Brittle Foods

The analysis of hard-brittle foods focuses on their fracture mechanics. The primary objective is to obtain quantitative data on the force and energy required to induce structural failure.

Three-Point Bending Test

This method is ideal for products with a consistent internal structure and regular geometry, such as cookie sticks or chocolate bars [70].

• Objective: To determine the flexural strength (hardness) and brittleness.
• Equipment: Texture Analyzer or Universal Testing Machine equipped with a Three-Point Bending Jig.
• Probe/Fixture: A punch with a defined radius (e.g., R1) and a supporting base with two fulcrums. The maximum distance between fulcrums is typically 100 mm [70].
• Sample Preparation: Samples should be of uniform geometry and size. For example, rectangular bars with dimensions of 80mm (length) x 10mm (width) x 8mm (height).
• Protocol:
  • Set the testing machine to compression mode.
  • Place the sample across the two supporting fulcrums.
  • Set the crosshead speed to 1 mm/sec.
  • Lower the punch until it makes contact with the sample's midpoint.
  • Continue the compression until the sample fractures.
  • Record the force-deformation curve.
• Data Analysis:
  • Breaking Strength (Hardness): The maximum force (N) recorded at sample fracture.
  • Apparent Elastic Modulus: Calculated from the initial slope of the force-deformation curve, indicating stiffness.

Compression/Extrusion Test with Ball Probe

This test is suitable for irregularly shaped or particulate hard-brittle foods like snacks and breakfast cereals [70].

• Objective: To evaluate crispiness and fracturability.
• Equipment: Texture Analyzer with a Ball Extrusion Jig or a Kramer Shear Cell.
• Probe/Fixture: A ball probe or a multi-blade Kramer Shear Cell.
• Sample Preparation: A representative sample weight (e.g., 30g of cereal) is placed in the sample cell.
• Protocol:
  • Set the testing machine to compression mode.
  • For a ball probe, compress the sample at a fixed speed (e.g., 1 mm/sec) until the sample fractures and extrudes around the ball.
  • When using a Kramer Shear Cell, the blades compress and shear the sample simultaneously.
  • Record the force-time curve.
• Data Analysis:
  • Fracturability: The force at the first significant peak on the curve.
  • Crispiness: Characterized by a jagged waveform with multiple force peaks, indicative of sequential fracture events. The number of peaks and the steepness of the initial curve inclination are key indicators [70].

Experimental Protocols for Soft-Elastic Foods

The analysis of soft-elastic foods focuses on their deformation recovery and flow properties under stress. The primary objective is to characterize their viscoelastic nature.

Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)

TPA is a double compression test that simulates the action of the human bite, providing multiple textural parameters from a single test [43].

• Objective: To quantify hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, and gumminess in a single test.
• Equipment: Texture Analyzer equipped with a flat-plate or cylindrical compression probe.
• Probe/Fixture: A large-diameter compression platen (e.g., 75 mm) to prevent sample extrusion.
• Sample Preparation: Prepare bite-size cubic or cylindrical samples (e.g., 20mm x 20mm x 20mm). Sample preparation must be highly consistent.
• Protocol:
  • Set the testing machine to TPA (double compression) mode.
  • Set the target strain to 70-75% of the sample's original height.
  • Set the crosshead speed to 1-2 mm/sec.
  • A hold time of 1-5 seconds between compressions is typically used to allow for partial sample recovery.
  • Perform the test and record the force-time curve.
• Data Analysis [43]:
  • Hardness: Peak force (N) during the first compression cycle (Anchor 2).
  • Fracturability: The first significant peak before the highest peak in the first compression (if present).
  • Cohesiveness: Ratio of the positive area under the second compression curve to the positive area under the first compression curve (Area 4 / Area 2).
  • Springiness: The distance the sample recovers between the end of the first bite and the start of the second bite (Time 3 / Time 1).

Small-Strain Oscillatory Rheology

This fundamental test probes the linear viscoelastic region (LVR) to understand the material's microstructure without causing destructive breakdown [42] [21].

• Objective: To determine the viscoelastic moduli (G', G'') and the critical strain (yield point).
• Equipment: Controlled-Stress or Controlled-Strain Rheometer with a parallel plate or cone-and-plate geometry.
• Probe/Fixture: Parallel plate geometry (e.g., 40 mm diameter) with a gap size set to 1 mm.
• Sample Preparation: Samples should be homogeneous and carefully loaded to avoid air incorporation and pre-shearing.
• Protocol:
  • Strain Sweep: At a constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz), increase the oscillatory strain from 0.01% to 100%. This identifies the LVR and the yield point where the structure begins to break down.
  • Frequency Sweep: Within the LVR (e.g., at 0.5% strain), perform an oscillation over a frequency range (e.g., 0.1 to 100 rad/s).
• Data Analysis:
  • Elastic (Storage) Modulus (G'): Represents the solid-like, energy-storing component of the material.
  • Viscous (Loss) Modulus (G''): Represents the liquid-like, energy-dissipating component.
  • Yield Strain/Stress: The point where G' drops precipitously, indicating the end of the LVR and the onset of flow.

Data Integration and Comparative Analysis

The quantitative data derived from the aforementioned protocols provide a comprehensive profile for each material class. The following workflow and table synthesize the analytical approach and expected outcomes.

Diagram 1: Food Texture Analysis Workflow

Table 2: Summary of Optimized Test Parameters and Expected Outcomes

Test Method	Target Food Class	Key Measured Parameters	Typical Values (Examples)	Correlation to Sensory Perception
Three-Point Bending	Hard-Brittle	Breaking Force (N), Stiffness (N/mm)	Cookie: High Breaking ForceChocolate: Medium Breaking Force	Firmness, Crispness, Brittleness
Compression/Extrusion	Hard-Brittle	Fracturability (N), Jaggedness of Curve	Potato Chip: Low Fracturability,High JaggednessBreakfast Cereal: Variable	Crispiness, Crunchiness
Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)	Soft-Elastic	Hardness (N), Cohesiveness (Ratio), Springiness (Ratio)	Gelatin Gel: Medium Hardness,High Cohesiveness & SpringinessProcessed Cheese: Low Hardness, Medium Cohesiveness	Firmness, Springback, Gumminess
Oscillatory Rheology	Soft-Elastic	Storage Modulus G' (Pa), Loss Modulus G'' (Pa), Yield Stress (Pa)	Elastic Gel: G' > G''Weak Gel: G' ≈ G''	Firmness, Spreadability, Creaminess

Essential Research Reagent Solutions

The following reagents and materials are fundamental for the preparation and analysis of model food systems in texture and rheology research.

Table 3: Key Research Reagents and Materials for Food Texture Analysis

Reagent/Material	Function in Research	Application Example
Pectin	Gelling agent and stabilizer; controls viscosity and water binding.	Used to create model jam or jelly systems for studying the effect of hydrocolloid type and concentration on spreadability and gel strength [71].
Gelatin	Thermoreversible gelling agent derived from collagen.	Used to prepare standard elastic gels (as per JIS K 6503) for calibrating instruments and studying the effect of bloom strength on texture [70].
Whey Protein Concentrate (WPC)	Functional protein that gels upon heating, contributing to structure.	Used in model systems, often in blends with plant proteins, to create fibrous structures in soft-elastic matrices like meat analogs [49].
Pea Protein Isolate (PPI)	Plant-based protein used to formulate structural networks.	A key ingredient in plant-based extrudates studied for its ability to form anisotropic, meat-like textures [49].
Sodium Chloride (NaCl)	Modifies ionic strength, impacting protein solubility and network formation.	Used in studies on cheese and protein gels to investigate its effect on rheological properties like gel strength and water-holding capacity [21].

The optimization of analytical tests for hard-brittle and soft-elastic foods is a critical component of modern food texture and rheology research. By applying the specific protocols outlined in this document—ranging from fundamental mechanical tests like three-point bending and TPA to advanced rheological techniques like oscillatory shear—researchers can move beyond qualitative descriptions to obtain quantitative, reproducible data. This rigorous, material-property-focused approach enables the precise formulation of products with targeted sensory attributes, accelerates the development of novel food matrices such as plant-based alternatives, and ensures robust quality control standards throughout the product lifecycle.

In food texture and rheology research, data integrity is the cornerstone of reliable and comparable scientific findings. It ensures that results are accurate, reproducible, and trustworthy. Standardized methodologies, developed by international standards organizations such as ASTM International and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), provide the critical framework to achieve this integrity. These protocols establish uniform testing procedures, specifications, and terminology, enabling researchers across academia and industry to generate consistent and verifiable data [72] [4].

This document outlines the pivotal role of ASTM and ISO standards in food texture analysis. It provides detailed application notes and experimental protocols designed for researchers and scientists engaged in the development and quality control of food and related pharmaceutical products. By adhering to these standardized methods, professionals can effectively minimize variability, strengthen the validity of their research, and drive innovation in product development.

Standardized Methods for Food Texture and Rheology

Standardized methods for measuring food properties are broadly categorized into two areas: texture analysis, which focuses on the mechanical and sensory attributes of solid and semi-solid foods, and rheology, which studies the flow and deformation of liquid and semi-solid materials.

Key ASTM and ISO Standards

The following tables summarize the core standards essential for ensuring data integrity in food texture and rheology research.

Table 1: Standardized Methods for Food Texture Analysis

Standard Number	Title	Key Measured Parameters	Application Notes
ASTM E1871-17 [72]	Standard Test Method for Measurement of Food Texture Profile	Hardness, Springiness, Cohesiveness, Chewiness	Uses a Texture Profile Analyzer (TPA) to simulate two bites. Correlates instrumental measurements with sensory perception.
ISO 11036:2016 [72]	Sensory Analysis — Methodology — Texture Profile	Hardness, Adhesiveness, Cohesiveness	Utilizes a trained human panel for subjective texture assessment. Requires careful panel training and calibration.
Various Imitative Methods [73] [4]	e.g., Volodkevitch Bite Set, Kramer Shear Cell	Firmness, Toughness, Tensile Strength	Uses specialized fixtures (e.g., imitation "teeth") to mimic specific oral processing actions like biting and shearing.

Table 2: Standardized Methods for Rheological Analysis

Standard Number	Title	Key Measured Parameters	Application Notes
ASTM D2196-20 [74]	Test Methods for Rheological Properties of Non-Newtonian Materials by Rotational Viscometer	Apparent Viscosity, Shear Thinning, Thixotropy	Essential for characterizing sauces, dressings, and batters. Measures viscosity across a range of shear rates (0.1 s⁻¹ to 50 s⁻¹).
ASTM D3835-16 [75]	Test Method for Determination of Properties of Polymeric Materials by Capillary Rheometer	Melt Viscosity, Shear Sensitivity, Die Swell	Although designed for polymers, it is applicable to food melts and highly viscous food materials at processing shear rates. Technically equivalent to ISO 6721-10.

The Relationship Between Standardized Methods and Data Integrity

The implementation of these standards creates a structured pathway from method selection to data integrity, ensuring that every step is controlled, documented, and reproducible.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

This section provides step-by-step methodologies for key standardized tests to ensure proper implementation in the laboratory.

Protocol 1: Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) according to ASTM E1871-17

Principle: This method uses a Texture Profile Analyzer (TPA) to double-compress a food sample, simulating the action of two bites. The resulting force-time curve is analyzed to derive multiple textural parameters in a single test [72].

Equipment and Reagents:

• Texture Analyzer (e.g., TA1 from AMETEK or MultiTest-dV from Mecmesin) equipped with a 500 N or 1000 N load cell.
• Flat Plate Compression Probe (typically 50-100 mm diameter).
• Texture Analysis Software (e.g., NEXYGENPlus).
• Analytical Balance.
• Samples: Uniformly shaped food products (e.g., cheese, gel, bread).

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare samples of uniform size and geometry (e.g., cubes or cylinders). For gels or soft solids, a height of 20 mm is typical. Record sample dimensions and temperature [73].
• Instrument Calibration: Calibrate the texture analyzer for force and distance according to the manufacturer's instructions. Ensure the compression plate is parallel to the base.
• Test Configuration:
  • Pre-test Speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Test Speed: 1.0 - 5.0 mm/s (depending on sample)
  • Post-test Speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Target Strain: 50-75% of original sample height (must be consistent for all samples)
  • Time Between Compressions: 3-5 seconds
  • Trigger Force: 0.1 N [73]
• Test Execution: Place the sample centrally on the base plate. Initiate the test cycle. The probe will compress the sample to the set strain, retract, wait for the set time, and then compress again.
• Data Analysis: The software will generate a curve from which the following parameters are calculated [72] [73]:
  • Hardness: Peak force of the first compression.
  • Cohesiveness: Ratio of the area under the second compression to the area under the first compression (Area2 / Area1).
  • Springiness: The distance the sample recovers in height between the end of the first bite and the start of the second bite.
  • Chewiness: Product of Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness (for solid foods).
  • Gumminess: Product of Hardness × Cohesiveness (for semi-solid foods).

Protocol 2: Rheological Analysis of Non-Newtonian Fluids per ASTM D2196-20

Principle: This method uses a rotational viscometer to measure the apparent viscosity and thixotropic behavior of non-Newtonian fluid foods over a range of shear rates [74].

Equipment and Reagents:

• Rotational Viscometer with appropriate spindles (e.g., coaxial cylinder, cone and plate).
• Temperature-Controlled Water Bath or Peltier System.
• Griffin Beaker (600 mL low form).
• Samples: Non-Newtonian food fluids (e.g., ketchup, yogurt, pudding, salad dressing).

Procedure:

• Sample Preparation: Gently stir the sample to ensure uniformity without incorporating air. Allow the sample to rest for a specified time (e.g., 5 minutes) to allow recovery from pre-shear history.
• Temperature Equilibration: Pour the sample into the beaker and attach it to the viscometer's temperature control unit. Equilibrate the sample to the specified test temperature (e.g., 25°C ± 0.5°C).
• Test Method A (Single Point Viscosity):
  • Select an appropriate rotational speed (shear rate).
  • Lower the spindle into the sample and start the measurement.
  • Record the apparent viscosity after the reading stabilizes.
• Test Method B (Shear Thinning and Thixotropy):
  • Program a stepped ramp of increasing rotational speeds (e.g., 0.3, 0.6, 1.5, 3, 6, 12, 30, 60 RPM), holding each speed for a fixed time (e.g., 30 s).
  • Immediately after the ascending ramp, run a descending ramp with the same speeds and hold times.
  • Plot viscosity vs. shear rate. The drop in viscosity with increasing shear rate indicates shear thinning. The area between the ascending and descending curves indicates the degree of thixotropy [74].
• Data Recording: Report the viscosity at each shear rate, the model of viscometer and spindle used, the test temperature, and the sample history.

The Scientist's Toolkit: Essential Research Reagents and Materials

The reliability of standardized testing depends on the consistent use of appropriate materials and instruments.

Table 3: Essential Research Reagents and Materials for Texture and Rheology Testing

Item	Function & Importance	Application Example
Texture Analyzer [73] [76]	Core instrument for applying controlled forces and deformations to measure mechanical properties.	Performing TPA (ASTM E1871-17) on a cheese sample to quantify hardness and springiness.
Rotational Viscometer [74]	Measures the viscosity and flow behavior of fluids under varying shear conditions.	Characterizing the shear-thinning behavior of a new salad dressing formulation (ASTM D2196-20).
Specialized Fixtures & Probes [73] [76]	Mimic specific actions (biting, cutting, spreading) to measure relevant empirical properties.	Using a Volodkevitch Bite Set to measure the toughness of a meat analog; using a Kramer Shear Cell to measure the firmness of french fries.
Standard Reference Materials	Used for instrument calibration and verification to ensure measurement accuracy and traceability.	Calibrating a texture analyzer with a certified weight; verifying viscometer performance with a standard oil of known viscosity.
Software with Standard Methods Library [73]	Controls the instrument, acquires data, and performs calculations according to built-in standard methods, ensuring protocol adherence.	Running a pre-configured test for ASTM E1871-17, which automatically calculates TPA parameters from the force-time curve.

The rigorous application of ASTM and ISO standards is fundamental to ensuring data integrity in food texture and rheology research. These protocols provide the necessary framework for generating precise, accurate, and reproducible data, which is critical for robust R&D, stringent quality control, and successful regulatory submissions. As the field advances, the integration of these standardized methods with advanced statistical analysis and novel instrumental techniques will further enhance our ability to predict and control complex sensory attributes [4]. For researchers, mastering and implementing these standards is not merely a procedural task but a core component of scientific excellence and innovation in product development.

Navigating Cost and Expertise Barriers in Method Implementation

The textural properties of food are critical determinants of consumer acceptance, processing functionality, and quality control. In scientific terms, texture refers to the physical properties of a food that are perceived by the senses, particularly touch and mouthfeel, encompassing attributes such as hardness, crunchiness, smoothness, and creaminess [77]. Rheology, closely related, is the study of the flow and deformation of materials under different conditions, describing how food materials respond to stress and strain during processing and consumption [77]. These properties are not merely sensory concerns; they influence the processability of food materials in manufacturing pipelines, the stability of products under various storage conditions, and even the digestion and absorption of food components in the human gastrointestinal tract [3].

For researchers and scientists in both food and pharmaceutical development, the instrumental evaluation of these properties is essential. However, implementing these analytical techniques presents significant challenges, primarily revolving around high initial investment for specialized equipment, the need for specialized expertise to operate instruments and interpret data, and ongoing maintenance and operational costs [78]. This application note provides a structured framework to navigate these barriers, offering detailed protocols and cost-conscious strategies for implementing robust texture and rheology analysis methods.

Analytical Techniques: Core Principles and Cost-Benefit Analysis

The instrumental evaluation of food texture and rheology can be broadly categorized into two methodological approaches: Texture Profile Analysis (TPA), which simulates the chewing action of the mouth, and rheological tests, which investigate flow and deformation properties.

Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)

TPA is a double compression test that simulates the biting action of the mouth, generating a force-time curve from which multiple textural parameters are extracted [43]. This method is highly valued for its strong correlation with sensory evaluation.

Rheological Analysis

Rheology provides fundamental insights into a material's flow and deformation behavior. It is defined as the science used for qualitatively and quantitatively describing materials' deformation and flow behaviors [3]. Rheological measurements can be conducted in rotational or oscillatory modes to characterize materials as viscous, viscoelastic, or elastic [3].

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Texture and Rheology Instrumental Methods

Method	Key Measured Parameters	Typical Instrument Cost Range	Expertise Requirement	Primary Applications
Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)	Hardness, Fracturability, Springiness, Cohesiveness, Adhesiveness [43]	Medium-High (Texture Analyzer)	Medium (requires method optimization and data interpretation skills)	Solid and semi-solid foods (cheese, gels, baked goods) [43]
Rotational Rheometry	Viscosity, Yield Stress, Thixotropy, Flow Behavior [71]	High (Research-grade Rheometer)	High (requires deep understanding of fluid mechanics)	Fluids and semi-solids (sauces, creams, melts) [71]
Viscometry	Viscosity (single-point or flow curve)	Low-Medium (Viscometer)	Low (basic operation)	Quality control of simple liquids, syrups [71]
Powder Rheology	Cohesion Strength, Wall Friction Angle [71]	High (Specialized Powder Cell)	Medium-High	Powder flowability, packaging (milk powder, creamer) [71]

Table 2: Cost-Breakdown and Barrier Analysis for Method Implementation

Cost Component	Texture Analysis	Rheological Analysis	Strategies for Cost Mitigation
Initial Capital Investment	$$$	$$$$	Utilize contract testing services; procure refurbished instruments; seek shared equipment grants.
Specialized Training	$$	$$$	Leverage online resources and vendor training; develop in-house expertise through focused projects.
Method Development & Validation	$$	$$$	Start with standardized methods (e.g., ASTM, ISO); collaborate with academic partners [78].
Consumables & Probes	$ (Replaceable probes)	$$ (Measuring geometries, plates)	Proper maintenance extends lifespan; source generic consumables where validation permits.
Data Analysis Software	Often included	Often licensed separately	Explore open-source analysis tools; ensure software training is maximized.

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) for Semi-Solid Foods

This protocol is optimized for products like yogurt, processed cheese, or gel-like substances to quantify key textural attributes objectively [43].

3.1.1 Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

Table 3: Essential Materials for TPA

Item	Function/Description
Texture Analyzer	Universal Testing Machine equipped with a load cell and a compression probe.
Cylindrical Compression Probe (e.g., 25-75 mm diameter)	Probe that performs the double compression cycle to simulate biting.
Platform & Sample Holder	A flat, rigid base to hold the sample container securely.
Standard Reference Materials (e.g., Agar gels of known concentration)	For instrument calibration and method validation.
Sample Preparation Tools	Corers, slicers, or molds to prepare samples of uniform geometry (e.g., 10mm height x 20mm diameter cubes/cylinders).
Timer & Temperature Control	To ensure consistent sample temperature during testing.

3.1.2 Step-by-Step Methodology

• Sample Preparation: Prepare samples as uniform cylinders (e.g., 20 mm diameter x 20 mm height). Condition samples to a consistent testing temperature (e.g., 4°C for refrigerated products) for at least 2 hours prior to analysis.
• Instrument Calibration: Calibrate the texture analyzer for force and distance using standard weights and a calibration block according to the manufacturer's instructions.
• Parameter Setting: Program the analyzer with the following test parameters, which may require optimization for specific products:
  • Test Type: Compression
  • Pre-test Speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Test Speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Post-test Speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Target Mode: Strain (typically 50-75% of original sample height)
  • Time Between Compressions: 5 seconds
  • Trigger Force: 0.1 N (to detect the sample surface)
• Test Execution: Place one sample specimen centrally on the platform beneath the probe. Initiate the test. The probe will perform two consecutive compression cycles with a pause in between.
• Data Acquisition: The software records a force-time graph. A minimum of 10 replicates per sample type is recommended for statistical significance.
• Data Analysis: Extract the following parameters from the TPA curve as annotated in Figure 1:
  • Hardness: The peak force during the first compression cycle (First Peak).
  • Fracturability: The force at the first significant break in the curve during the first compression (if present).
  • Adhesiveness: The negative force area representing the work necessary to pull the probe away from the sample after the first compression.
  • Springiness: The ratio of the time between the start of the second compression and the second peak to the time between the start of the first compression and the first peak.
  • Cohesiveness: The ratio of the area under the second compression curve to the area under the first compression curve.

3.1.3 Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the sequential stages of the TPA test and the corresponding data output.

Figure 1: Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) Workflow. The diagram outlines the five key stages of a TPA test, culminating in the extraction of primary textural parameters from the force-time data.

Protocol 2: Flow Behavior and Yield Stress Analysis for Non-Newtonian Fluids

This protocol characterizes the flow properties of complex fluids like ketchup, mayonnaise, or chocolate melts, determining critical points such as yield stress—the force required to initiate flow [71].

3.2.1 Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

Table 4: Essential Materials for Flow Behavior Analysis

Item	Function/Description
Rotational Rheometer	Instrument capable of controlled shear stress (CSS) or shear rate (CSR) measurements.
Parallel Plate or Cone-Plate Geometry	Measuring systems that provide uniform shear rate; cone-plate is preferred for absolute viscosity.
Peltier Temperature Control System	Essential for maintaining precise temperature during measurements [71].
Solvent Trap	Prevents solvent evaporation from the sample during testing.
Standard Oils (e.g., NIST-traceable)	For calibration of rheometer torque and viscosity.

3.2.2 Step-by-Step Methodology

• Instrument Preparation: Power on the rheometer and Peltier system, allowing it to stabilize at the desired test temperature (e.g., 25°C). Calibrate the instrument according to the manufacturer's guidelines.
• Geometry and Gap Setting: Select an appropriate parallel plate geometry (e.g., 40 mm diameter). Set the measuring gap to a pre-defined distance (e.g., 1 mm) and ensure the geometry and base plate are clean and dry.
• Sample Loading: Apply the sample to the center of the bottom plate. Carefully lower the upper geometry to the measuring gap. Trim excess sample from the geometry edge to minimize edge effects. Allow the sample to equilibrate thermally for 2-5 minutes.
• Flow Curve Measurement: Program a logarithmic shear rate ramp (e.g., from 0.1 to 100 s⁻¹). Execute the measurement. This curve allows for the modeling of viscosity and the determination of the fluid type (e.g., shear-thinning).
• Yield Stress Estimation (Oscillatory Method):
  • Switch to the oscillatory mode.
  • Perform an amplitude sweep at a constant frequency (e.g., 1 Hz), increasing the applied shear stress from a very low value.
  • The yield point is identified as the stress value where the storage modulus (G') shows a significant decrease, indicating the breakdown of the material's internal structure.
• Data Modeling: Fit the flow curve data to appropriate rheological models, such as the Herschel-Bulkley model ((\tau = \tau0 + K \dot{\gamma}^n)), where (\tau) is shear stress, (\tau0) is yield stress, (K) is consistency index, (\dot{\gamma}) is shear rate, and (n) is flow behavior index [77].

3.2.3 Workflow Visualization

The following diagram illustrates the logical decision process for selecting the appropriate rheological test based on the material's properties and the parameters of interest.

Figure 2: Rheological Test Selection Workflow. This diagram guides the selection of rotational or oscillatory tests based on the parameter of interest (flow vs. structural properties), leading to the extraction of key rheological parameters.

Implementing robust methods for food texture and rheology analysis is fraught with challenges related to cost and expertise. However, as demonstrated in this application note, a strategic approach that leverages detailed, standardized protocols, makes informed decisions about equipment and method selection based on cost-benefit analysis, and utilizes a clear "Scientist's Toolkit" can significantly lower these barriers. The future of this field points toward the integration of multi-modal techniques, including rheology, tribology, and tactile sensing, to build more comprehensive predictive models for sensory perception [34]. By adopting the frameworks and protocols outlined herein, research and development teams can accelerate method implementation, optimize resource allocation, and generate high-quality, reproducible data that drives innovation in food and pharmaceutical product development.

Correlation and Validation: Bridging Instrumental Data with Sensory Perception

Establishing Robust Correlations Between Instrumental and Sensory Data

In food science, texture is a critical quality attribute defined as all the mechanical, geometrical, and surface attributes of a product perceptible through mechanical, tactile, and, where appropriate, visual and auditory receptors [4]. While sensory evaluation directly captures human perception, instrumental methods provide precise, objective measurements of physical properties. Establishing robust correlations between these domains is essential for predicting consumer acceptance, optimizing product development, and ensuring quality control in food and related industries [4] [79].

This application note provides detailed protocols for linking instrumental measurements with sensory texture data, enabling researchers to build predictive models that can streamline product development and quality assurance processes.

Theoretical Foundations

Key Texture Attributes and Their Physical Counterparts

Food texture is a multi-dimensional property. The Szczesniak classification system categorizes textural characteristics into mechanical properties (e.g., hardness, cohesiveness), geometrical properties (e.g., graininess), and surface properties [79]. Each sensory attribute corresponds to specific physical phenomena that can be instrumentally quantified.

• Hardness, perceived as the force required to compress a substance, is mechanically measured as the peak force during the first compression cycle [80] [79].
• Cohesiveness, the degree to which a substance holds together, is instrumentally calculated as the ratio of the areas under the second and first compression cycles in a Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) [80].
• Elasticity/Springiness, the rate at which a deformed material returns to its original state, is measured as the height recovery between compression cycles [80].
• Fracturability/Brittleness, the force with which a material fractures, is measured as the force at the first significant break during compression [79].

Rheological Principles in Sensory Perception

Rheology—the study of deformation and flow—provides fundamental measurements that correlate with texture perception. Viscosity correlates with thickness perception, while viscoelastic properties (G', G") determined through oscillatory rheology relate to perceived firmness and spreadability [3] [81]. Recent advances in Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shearing (LAOS) can better mimic the extreme deformations occurring during mastication, improving correlation with sensory data [30].

Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Integrated Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)

Principle: This double compression test mimics the jaw's action during chewing, providing multiple texture parameters in a single test [80].

Equipment Requirements:

• Universal Testing Machine or Texture Analyzer with 50 N load cell
• Flat plate or cylindrical probe (diameter typically 25-75 mm)
• Controlled temperature environment

Sample Preparation:

• Prepare cylindrical samples (height 10-20 mm, diameter 25-50 mm) using a cork borer or custom cutter [80].
• For heterogeneous samples, ensure structural consistency across replicates.
• Condition samples to room temperature (20°C) unless testing temperature effects.

Procedure:

• Set crosshead speed to 1-2 mm/s for approach and compression.
• Program two consecutive compression cycles to 25-75% of original sample height.
• Include a 1-5 second pause between compressions to allow for partial recovery.
• Conduct minimum of 6-10 replicates per sample type.

Data Acquisition Parameters:

• Hardness: Maximum force (N) during first compression cycle.
• Cohesiveness: Ratio (Areaâ‚‚/Area₁) of second to first compression cycle areas.
• Springiness: Distance (mm) the sample recovers between cycles.
• Chewiness: Calculated as Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness.
• Resilience: Ratio (A₃/Aâ‚„) of upstroke to downstroke area in first compression [80].

Protocol 2: Sensory Evaluation Panel Training

Principle: Trained panelists provide quantitative assessments of texture attributes using standardized procedures, creating the reference data for instrumental correlation [79].

Panel Selection and Training:

• Select 8-12 panelists based on sensory acuity and availability.
• Conduct minimum ten 1-hour training sessions using reference standards.
• Train panelists on attribute definitions and standardized evaluation techniques.

Reference Standards and Intensity Scales:

• Hardness: Cream cheese (soft) to hard candy (hard) on 9-point scale.
• Fracturability: Graham crackers (low) to peanut brittle (high).
• Chewiness: White bread (low) to beef jerky (high).

Sensory Evaluation Procedure:

• Present samples in randomized, blind-coded containers under controlled lighting.
• Provide palate cleansers (water, unsalted crackers) between samples.
• Instruct panelists to evaluate specific attributes using standardized techniques:
  • For hardness: "Place sample between molar teeth and bite down evenly" [79].
  • For cohesiveness: "Compress between teeth and evaluate deformation before rupture" [79].
  • For springiness: "Compress partially between teeth; remove force and evaluate recovery" [79].
• Record intensity scores on structured scales (typically 1-9 or 1-15 points).

Protocol 3: Correlation Analysis Using Machine Learning

Principle: Statistical and machine learning models identify relationships between instrumental measurements and sensory responses, enabling prediction of sensory attributes from instrumental data [30].

Data Preprocessing:

• Standardize both instrumental and sensory data to zero mean and unit variance.
• Perform exploratory analysis (PCA) to identify outliers and patterns.

Model Development:

• Split data into training (70-80%) and test (20-30%) sets.
• Train multiple models (Random Forest, PLS, Neural Networks) on training set.
• Use k-fold cross-validation (k=5-10) to optimize hyperparameters.

Model Validation:

• Apply optimized model to test set data.
• Calculate performance metrics: R², Root Mean Square Error (RMSE).
• For yogurt texture prediction, models have achieved RMSE values below 6 on a 100-point scale [30].

Table 1: Key Instrumental Parameters and Their Sensory Correlates

Sensory Attribute	Instrumental Measurement	Typical Correlation Range (R²)	Measurement Protocol
Hardness	Maximum compression force (N)	0.80-0.95	TPA first peak force [80]
Springiness	Height recovery ratio	0.75-0.90	TPA distance recovery [80]
Cohesiveness	Area ratio (A₂/A₁)	0.70-0.85	TPA cycle area ratio [80]
Chewiness	Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness	0.75-0.90	TPA calculated parameter [80]
Thickness	Apparent viscosity (mPa·s)	0.85-0.95	Rheometry at 50 s⁻¹ [30]
Fracturability	Force at first break (N)	0.80-0.90	TPA fracture force [79]

Data Integration and Modeling Workflow

The following diagram illustrates the comprehensive workflow for establishing correlations between instrumental and sensory data, from experimental design through to model deployment:

Advanced Techniques and Applications

Emerging Technologies

• Ultrasound Analysis: Non-destructive technique assessing structural integrity, moisture distribution, and fat content through acoustic wave propagation [82].
• Fluorescence Anisotropy: Measures structural orientation in protein matrices, particularly valuable for evaluating fibrous textures in plant-based meats and dairy products [49].
• Tribology: Studies friction properties between surfaces, correlating with mouthfeel attributes like smoothness, creaminess, and astringency [4].

Data-Driven Psychorheology

Machine learning approaches are revolutionizing texture prediction. A recent study with 105 yogurt formulations used Random Forest models to predict sensory attributes from rheological data with high accuracy [30]. Feature importance analysis identified key rheological parameters influencing specific sensory perceptions during different oral processing stages (scooping, first bite, repeated shear, swallowing) [30].

Table 2: Essential Research Reagent Solutions for Texture Analysis

Category	Specific Items	Function & Application	Example Use Cases
Reference Materials	Gum drops, Cream cheese, Peanut brittle, Hard candy	Calibrate sensory panels; validate instrumental measurements	Standardizing hardness scale [79]
Rheology Modifiers	Xanthan gum, Starches, Gelatin, Pectin	Modulate viscosity and viscoelastic properties; model building	Emulsion stability studies [81]
Protein Systems	Whey Protein Concentrate, Pea Protein Isolate, BSA	Create model food systems with controlled texture	Plant-based meat analogs [49]
Calibration Standards	Standard oils, Siliconese, Certified reference materials	Verify instrument accuracy and precision	Rheometer calibration [81]

Establishing robust correlations between instrumental and sensory data requires meticulous experimental design, standardized protocols, and appropriate statistical modeling. The integrated approach outlined in this application note—combining TPA, trained sensory panels, and machine learning—provides a framework for developing predictive models that can transform product development cycles. As advanced technologies like ultrasound and fluorescence anisotropy mature, they will further enhance our ability to quantify and predict the complex sensory experience of food texture, enabling more efficient creation of products that meet consumer expectations for texture and mouthfeel.

Food texture and rheology are critical quality attributes that significantly influence consumer acceptance, product stability, and processing efficiency [4] [83]. Within food research and development, analytical techniques for characterizing these properties are broadly categorized into destructive and non-destructive methods. This classification is fundamental to selecting appropriate methodologies for quality control, product development, and fundamental research. Destructive methods, while providing valuable mechanical and rheological data, necessitate the alteration or complete consumption of the sample during testing. In contrast, non-destructive techniques allow for repeated measurements on the same sample without compromising its integrity, enabling longitudinal studies and 100% quality inspection in industrial settings [84] [85].

The choice between these approaches involves careful consideration of the specific research or quality control objective, the nature of the food matrix, required measurement precision, and operational constraints. This document provides a structured comparative analysis, detailed application notes, and standardized protocols to guide researchers in selecting and implementing the most appropriate techniques for their specific applications within food texture and rheology research.

Fundamental Principles and Classification of Techniques

Defining Texture and Rheology in Foods

Food texture is defined by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) as "all the mechanical, geometrical, and surface attributes of a product perceptible by means of mechanical, tactile, and, where appropriate, visual and auditory receptors" [4] [10]. These attributes are typically categorized into three distinct groups:

• Mechanical Properties: Characteristics related to the body's response to stress, including primary parameters (hardness, cohesiveness, viscosity, elasticity, adhesion) and secondary parameters (brittleness, chewiness, gumminess).
• Geometrical Properties: Features related to the size, shape, and orientation of particles within the food matrix (e.g., grittiness, graininess, fibrousness).
• Surface Properties: Attributes reflecting the interaction of the food surface with the oral mucosa, often influenced by moisture and fat content (e.g., moistness, oiliness, creaminess) [4] [83].

Rheology, the study of the deformation and flow of matter, provides the fundamental principles for understanding the mechanical properties of foods. It characterizes how food materials respond to applied forces, which directly correlates to sensory perceptions of texture [21].

Categorization of Analytical Methods

Analytical methods for assessing these properties are systematically classified based on their principle of operation and their impact on sample integrity.

Diagram 1: A hierarchical classification of food texture analysis techniques, segmented into destructive and non-destructive categories with common examples.

Comprehensive Technique Comparison Tables

The following tables provide a detailed comparison of the characteristics, applications, and limitations of destructive and non-destructive techniques.

Destructive Techniques: Characteristics and Applications

Table 1: Overview of common destructive techniques used in food texture and rheology analysis.

Technique	Measured Parameters	Typical Food Applications	Sample Throughput	Correlation with Sensory
Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)	Hardness, Springiness, Cohesiveness, Chewiness, Resilience [80]	Cultured meat, cheese, bread, gels, processed foods [80]	Medium (requires sample preparation)	High for mechanical properties [86]
Warner-Bratzler Shear	Toughness, Firmness, Maximum Shear Force [4]	Meat tenderness, firm fruits and vegetables	Medium	High for meat tenderness [86]
Fundamental Rheometry	Elastic (G') & Viscous (G") Moduli, Yield Stress, Complex Viscosity [21]	Semi-solids, emulsions, sauces, dough, protein gels [21]	Low (requires precise geometry)	Moderate to High, requires model coupling [21] [4]
Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS)	Nonlinear viscoelasticity, Structural breakdown [21]	Complex fluids (yogurt, ketchup), soft solids	Low	Potentially high for oral processing [21]

Table 2: Strengths and limitations of destructive techniques.

Technique	Key Strengths	Inherent Limitations
Texture Profile Analysis (TPA)	Provides multiple textural parameters from a single test; Well-established and standardized [80]	Results are instrument-dependent; Does not fully replicate complex oral processing [4]
Fundamental Rheometry	Provides absolute material properties; Enables in-depth structural insight [21]	Often requires homogeneous samples; Can be time-consuming; High-end instruments are costly
All Destructive Methods	Typically high precision and accuracy for targeted parameters; Direct measurement of mechanical properties [86]	Sample is lost or altered; Not suitable for in-line quality control or longitudinal studies on a single sample [85]

Non-Destructive Techniques: Characteristics and Applications

Table 3: Overview of emerging non-destructive techniques for food texture analysis.

Technique	Measured Parameters (Indirect)	Typical Food Applications	Sample Throughput	Correlation with Sensory
Acoustic/Vibration Analysis	Stiffness, Resonant Frequency, Damping Properties [85]	Watermelon ripeness, apple crispiness, snack fragility [85]	High (potential for in-line)	High for crispiness and crunchiness [4]
Near-Infrared (NIR) Spectroscopy	Chemical composition (water, fat, protein), Firmness prediction [84]	Grains, fruits, dairy products, meat [84]	Very High	Moderate, based on chemometric models [84]
Hyperspectral Imaging (HSI)	Spatial distribution of composition, Texture prediction via machine learning [84] [10]	Meat tenderness, fruit firmness, grain quality [84]	Medium to High	Promising, but model-dependent [10]
X-ray Computed Tomography (X-CT)	3D Internal Structure, Porosity, Void Distribution, Crack Detection [84] [87]	Bread, dairy products, porous foods, fruits with internal defects [84] [87]	Low	Provides structural data linked to texture [87]

Table 4: Strengths and limitations of non-destructive techniques.

Technique	Key Strengths	Inherent Limitations
Acoustic/Vibration Analysis	Rapid and can be applied to entire product; Excellent for brittle/crispy foods [85]	Sensitive to external noise; Sample positioning can affect results
Optical Spectroscopy (NIR, HSI)	Extremely fast; Rich spectral information for multivariate analysis; Excellent for in-line use [84]	Indirect measurement (requires calibration models); Models are product-specific
X-ray CT	Unparalleled visualization of internal microstructure; True 3D quantitative data [84] [87]	High equipment cost; Relatively slow data acquisition and processing
All Non-Destructive Methods	Enables 100% batch testing and longitudinal studies; No sample waste; Suitable for in-line control [84] [85]	Mostly indirect measurement, requiring robust calibration; Initial setup and model development can be complex

Detailed Experimental Protocols

Protocol 1: Destructive Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) of a Cultured Meat Analogue

This protocol outlines the standard procedure for determining the textural properties of solid and semi-solid foods using a double compression test, adapted from a study on cultured meat characterization [80].

1.0 Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

Table 5: Key materials and instrumentation for TPA.

Item	Specification/Function
Universal Testing Machine	Equipped with a 50 N load cell (e.g., ZwickiLine). Capacity may vary based on sample hardness [80].
Compression Platens	Flat, cylindrical plates (≥ 50 mm diameter) made of rigid, non-porous material (e.g., acrylic, stainless steel).
Sample Preparation Tools	8 mm - 25 mm diameter cork borer or precision knife; microtome blade or sharp knife; template for uniform height [80].
Cultured Meat Sample	Frankfurt-style sausage or similar, stored at 4°C. Equilibrate to room temperature (20-25°C) for 1 hour before testing [80].
Timer	For recording relaxation time between compressions.

2.0 Sample Preparation

• Using an 8-25 mm diameter cork borer, punch cylindrical cores from the cultured meat sample, ensuring structural integrity and avoiding obvious fat or connective tissue spots.
• Using a microtome blade or sharp knife and a height template, carefully trim the cylinders to a uniform height of 10-20 mm. The height-to-diameter ratio should be approximately 1:1 to prevent undue shear during compression.
• Record the precise initial height (Hâ‚€) and diameter (D) of each sample cylinder for subsequent stress/strain calculations.

3.0 Instrumental Configuration

• Mount the flat compression platen on the load cell of the texture analyzer.
• Set the test type to "TPA" or "Double Compression."
• Define the test parameters based on the sample properties [80]:
  • Pre-test speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Test speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Post-test speed: 1.0 mm/s
  • Target strain: 50% of the original sample height (Hâ‚€). This is a critical parameter for comparability.
  • Time between compressions: 3-5 seconds.
  • Trigger force: 0.1 N (to ensure the test starts upon contact).

4.0 Experimental Procedure & Data Acquisition

• Place one sample cylinder vertically and centered on the stationary base plate of the texture analyzer.
• Initiate the test cycle. The platen will descend, compress the sample to 50% of its original height, retract, wait for the set time, and then perform a second identical compression cycle.
• The force-time curve is recorded for the entire cycle. A minimum of six replicates per sample type is recommended for statistical significance [80].
• Clean the platens between samples to prevent cross-contamination.

5.0 Data Analysis and Interpretation Calculate the primary TPA parameters from the force-time diagram as follows [80]:

• Hardness (N): The peak force (F₁) during the first compression cycle.
• Springiness (dimensionless): The ratio of the time taken to achieve the peak force during the second compression (tâ‚‚) to the time taken during the first compression (t₁). It can also be calculated as the distance the sample recovers between the end of the first bite and the start of the second bite (Lâ‚‚/L₁).
• Cohesiveness (dimensionless): The ratio of the area under the second compression curve (Aâ‚‚) to the area under the first compression curve (A₁).
• Chewiness (N): The product of Hardness × Cohesiveness × Springiness. This parameter is only meaningful for solid foods.
• Resilience (dimensionless): The ratio of the area during the withdrawal of the first compression (A₃) to the area during the downstroke of the first compression (Aâ‚„).

Diagram 2: Sequential workflow for conducting a Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) test.

Protocol 2: Non-Destructive Acoustic Vibration Analysis for Fruit Firmness

This protocol describes a method for assessing the texture and ripeness of fruits, such as watermelons and apples, by analyzing their acoustic response to a mechanical impact [85].

1.0 Research Reagent Solutions & Essential Materials

Table 6: Key materials and instrumentation for acoustic vibration analysis.

Item	Specification/Function
Acoustic/Vibration Sensor	High-sensitivity microphone or accelerometer for capturing sound/vibration signals.
Signal Impact Device	A small, controlled-impact pendulum or an electromagnetic shaker.
Data Acquisition (DAQ) System	A system to digitize the analog signal from the sensor at a high sampling rate (≥ 44.1 kHz).
Signal Processing Software	Software (e.g., MATLAB, LabVIEW, Python with SciPy) for Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) and frequency domain analysis.
Fruit Sample	Watermelon, apple, or other spherical/oval fruits with a firm surface.

2.0 Sample Preparation and Setup

• Select fruits of uniform size and shape. Label and record the mass of each fruit.
• Suspend the fruit using a soft, elastic net or place it on a soft, vibration-absorbing foam pad to isolate it from external vibrations and allow it to vibrate freely.
• Firmly attach the accelerometer (if used) to the fruit's surface at a designated point (e.g., the equator) using a non-damaging adhesive or a gentle clamp. Alternatively, position the microphone at a fixed distance (e.g., 5-10 cm) from the point of impact.

3.0 Instrumental Configuration

• Connect the sensor to the DAQ system.
• Set the sampling frequency to a minimum of 44.1 kHz to capture the full spectrum of relevant acoustic frequencies.
• Calibrate the system by applying a known force or using a reference sound source.

4.0 Experimental Procedure & Data Acquisition

• Using the impact device, deliver a light, consistent tap to the fruit at a point opposite the sensor. The impact should be sufficient to elicit a clear vibrational response but not damage the fruit.
• Trigger the DAQ system to record the vibration signal for a short period (1-2 seconds) immediately following the impact.
• Repeat the impact and recording process for a minimum of 5-10 times per fruit, at different points around its equator, to account for natural variation.
• Perform this procedure on a calibration set of fruits with a known range of firmness (e.g., measured by destructive Magness-Taylor puncture).

5.0 Data Analysis and Interpretation

• Process the recorded time-domain signal to remove noise (e.g., using a band-pass filter).
• Perform a Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) on the cleaned signal to convert it from the time domain to the frequency domain.
• Identify the dominant resonant frequency (f) from the resulting frequency spectrum. In many fruits, a higher resonant frequency is correlated with greater stiffness and firmness, while a lower frequency indicates a softer, riper fruit [85].
• Develop a prediction model (e.g., linear or multiple regression) by correlating the measured resonant frequencies of the calibration set with their destructively measured firmness values.
• Use this model to predict the firmness of unknown samples based on their acoustic signatures.

Integrated Data Analysis and Correlation with Sensory Perception

A critical goal of instrumental texture analysis is to predict human sensory perception. This requires robust statistical models to bridge instrumental data and sensory evaluations.

Statistical Modeling for Prediction

Machine learning and multivariate statistical techniques are increasingly employed to establish these correlations [10]. For example, multiple regression analysis can be used with TPA data to predict sensory attributes like chewiness or hardness. Similarly, Partial Least Squares (PLS) regression is commonly used to model the relationship between spectral data from NIR or HSI and sensory texture profiles [84] [10]. These models transform objective measurements into predictions of subjective consumer experiences, which is invaluable for product development.

Decision Framework for Technique Selection

The choice between destructive and non-destructive methods is not a matter of superiority but of context. The following workflow diagram provides a logical pathway for selecting the most appropriate technique based on research goals and constraints.

Diagram 3: A decision framework for selecting between destructive and non-destructive texture analysis methods based on project requirements.

In the field of food texture and rheology research, the development of predictive models has accelerated with the integration of machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) [88] [30]. However, the utility of any predictive model is contingent upon the robustness and reliability of its outputs, making rigorous validation frameworks not merely beneficial but essential [10]. These frameworks, comprised of statistical methods and structured protocols, ensure that models accurately generalize from experimental data to real-world applications, thereby bridging the gap between empirical research and practical food product development [34] [4]. Within a thesis on analytical techniques for food texture, a chapter on validation provides the critical lens through which the trustworthiness of data and models is evaluated [89].

This document outlines application notes and protocols for establishing such validation frameworks. It is structured to guide researchers and scientists through the core principles of model validation, from initial data preparation to final performance assessment, with a specific focus on applications in food rheology and sensory texture prediction. The accompanying diagrams, tables, and detailed methodologies are designed to be directly applicable in a research setting, ensuring that predictive models for attributes like hardness, creaminess, or astringency are both statistically sound and scientifically defensible.

Core Conceptual Framework

Predictive modeling in food science typically follows a workflow that transforms raw data into a validated predictive tool. The core of validation lies in assessing a model's predictive accuracy—its ability to make reliable predictions on new, unseen data [10]. This is fundamentally different from simply achieving a good fit to the data on which the model was trained, a pitfall known as overfitting.

A robust validation framework for food texture research should be built on several key pillars, which are visualized in the workflow below.

Key Validation Principles

• Data Fidelity and Preprocessing: The validation process begins with the assurance of data quality. Raw data from rheometers, texture analyzers, and sensory panels must be cleaned and normalized to remove noise and systematic error [89]. Feature selection techniques are often employed to identify the most relevant rheological parameters (e.g., from LAOS measurements) that influence the sensory texture attribute of interest, thereby improving model efficiency and interpretability [30].
• Core Validation Techniques: To obtain an unbiased estimate of model performance, it is crucial to test the model on data that was not used during training.
  • Hold-Out Validation: The dataset is split into a training set (e.g., 70-80%) for model building and a testing set (e.g., 20-30%) for final evaluation [30].
  • K-Fold Cross-Validation: A more robust technique where the data is partitioned into k subsets (typically k=5 or 10). The model is trained k times, each time using a different fold as the test set and the remaining folds for training. The final performance is the average across all k trials, providing a more stable estimate of accuracy [88].
  • Stratified Sampling: When splitting data, it is important to maintain the distribution of the target variable (e.g., the proportion of "hard" vs "soft" samples) across both training and test sets. This prevents bias and ensures both sets are representative of the overall population [10].
• Performance Metrics: Quantifying model performance requires metrics tailored to the type of prediction problem (regression or classification). Common metrics, as utilized in psychorheology studies, include Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) and R-squared (R²) [30]. For classification tasks (e.g., classifying a texture as "grainy" or "smooth"), metrics like accuracy, precision, and recall are more appropriate [10].

Application Note: Validating a Psychorheological Model for Yogurt

Objective: To develop and validate a machine learning model that predicts sensory texture attributes (thickness, stickiness) of yogurt based on its rheological properties [30].

Research Reagent Solutions & Materials

Table 1: Essential materials and instruments for psychorheological model development.

Item Name	Function/Description	Application in Validation
Controlled Yogurt Samples	105+ samples varying in milk powder content and whey separation time [30].	Provides the foundational dataset with controlled variation in texture for model training and testing.
Rotational Rheometer	Instrument to apply controlled shear stress/strain and measure material response [4] [90].	Generates fundamental rheological data (e.g., viscosity, LAOS parameters) as input features for the model.
Trained Sensory Panel	Human assessors trained to evaluate specific texture attributes on a quantitative scale [4] [91].	Provides the target (ground truth) data for the model; sensory scores are the output variable to be predicted.
Texture Analyzer	Instrument for empirical texture measurement (e.g., TPA) [4] [91].	Can provide supplementary or comparative objective data to correlate with sensory and rheological data.
ML Software Library	e.g., Scikit-learn, TensorFlow [30].	Provides the algorithmic toolkit for implementing models (Random Forests, etc.) and validation methods (k-fold CV).

Experimental Protocol & Workflow

The following protocol details the steps for building and validating the predictive model.

Step 1: Data Acquisition

• Rheological Data: For each yogurt sample, perform rheological measurements. This should include flow curves to obtain viscosity and, critically, Large-Amplitude Oscillatory Shear (LAOS) testing. LAOS data provides insights into nonlinear viscoelastic behavior that closely mimics the conditions in the mouth during eating [30].
• Sensory Data: Conduct sensory evaluation with a trained panel. Each assessor scores each yogurt sample for attributes like "thickness" and "stickiness" on a defined scale (e.g., 0-100). Use appropriate sensory methods like Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (QDA) to ensure data consistency [4]. The mean panel scores for each sample and attribute serve as the target variables.

Step 2: Data Preprocessing and Feature Engineering

• Clean the dataset to handle any missing values or outliers.
• Normalize the rheological parameters (features) to a common scale (e.g., Z-score normalization) to prevent models from being biased by the magnitude of certain measurements.
• Conduct feature importance analysis (e.g., using Permutation Importance within a Random Forest model) to identify which rheological parameters (e.g., a specific LAOS modulus, yield stress) are most predictive of each sensory attribute. This step simplifies the model and enhances interpretability [30].

Step 3: Model Training and Validation

• Select a model algorithm suitable for regression tasks, such as Random Forest Regression [30].
• Split the entire dataset into a training set (e.g., 80%) and a hold-out test set (20%). The hold-out test set is locked away and not used until the very end.
• On the training set only, perform 5-Fold Cross-Validation to tune the model's hyperparameters. This process involves training the model 5 times on different 80% portions of the training set and validating on the remaining 20%, iterating to find the best model settings.
• Once hyperparameters are set, train the final model on the entire training set.

Step 4: Final Model Evaluation

• The final, single evaluation of the model's predictive accuracy is performed on the hold-out test set that the model has never seen during training or tuning.
• Calculate performance metrics like RMSE and R² by comparing the model's predictions against the actual sensory panel scores from the test set. An RMSE value below 6 on a 100-point scale indicates good predictive performance in this context [30].

The logical relationship between the dataset and the model's performance is summarized below.

Statistical Methods & Performance Metrics

Quantitative Validation Metrics

The performance of a validated model is quantitatively expressed using a standard set of metrics. The choice of metric depends on whether the prediction is a continuous value (regression) or a category (classification).

Table 2: Key statistical metrics for validating predictive models in food texture research.

Metric	Formula	Interpretation in Food Texture Context	Application Example
Root Mean Square Error (RMSE)	( RMSE = \sqrt{\frac{1}{n}\sum{i=1}^{n}(yi - \hat{y}_i)^2} )	Measures the average magnitude of prediction error in the units of the target variable. Lower values are better. A key benchmark for sensory scores on a fixed scale [30].	An RMSE of 5.5 for "thickness" on a 100-point scale means predictions are, on average, 5.5 points away from the actual panel score [30].
R-Squared (R²)	( R^2 = 1 - \frac{\sum{i=1}^{n}(yi - \hat{y}i)^2}{\sum{i=1}^{n}(y_i - \bar{y})^2} )	Represents the proportion of variance in the sensory attribute that is explained by the rheological model. Ranges from 0 to 1, with higher values indicating a better fit.	An R² of 0.85 for "stickiness" means 85% of the variation in sensory stickiness is captured by the rheological inputs [30].
Accuracy	( Accuracy = \frac{Correct Predictions}{Total Predictions} )	The proportion of correct texture classifications (e.g., "grainy" vs. "fine") made by the model. Used for categorical outcomes [10].	A model classifying chocolate as "grainy" or not achieved 94% accuracy against human detection thresholds [10].
Mean Absolute Error (MAE)	( MAE = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^{n}	yi - \hat{y}i	)	Similar to RMSE but less sensitive to large outliers, as it does not square the errors. Provides a linear score of average error.	Useful for providing an intuitive, non-penalized understanding of average prediction error magnitude.

Advanced Validation: Addressing Data Complexity

As food texture data becomes more complex, advanced statistical techniques are required to ensure robust validation.

• Feature Importance analysis: After validating a model, techniques like Permutation Importance are used to interpret it. This method randomly shuffles each feature and measures the resulting drop in the model's performance. A large drop indicates that the feature (e.g., a specific viscous modulus) is important for accurately predicting the sensory texture [30].
• Handling Multicollinearity in Rheological Data: Rheological measurements are often highly correlated. While feature selection can mitigate this, techniques like Principal Component Analysis (PCA) can be used as a preprocessing step. PCA creates a new set of uncorrelated variables (principal components) that capture the majority of the variance in the original data, which can then be used as model inputs to improve stability [88].
• Validation for Small Datasets: In cases with limited samples (e.g., n<50), the standard train-test split may be unreliable. Here, Leave-One-Out Cross-Validation (LOOCV), an extreme form of k-fold CV where k equals the number of samples, can be employed to maximize the data used for training while still providing a rigorous validation estimate [10].

The implementation of systematic validation frameworks is a critical component of modern food texture and rheology research. By adhering to protocols that emphasize rigorous data splitting, the use of cross-validation, and the application of relevant performance metrics, researchers can move beyond simple correlations to develop predictive models that are truly reliable. This statistical rigor ensures that models predicting complex sensory attributes from instrumental data are accurate, interpretable, and fit-for-purpose, thereby accelerating product development and quality control in the food industry. As the field evolves with larger datasets and more complex AI models, the principles outlined in these application notes will remain the bedrock for ensuring predictive accuracy and building scientific trust in data-driven discoveries.

The Role of AI and Machine Learning in Predictive Texture Modeling

Texture is a critical quality attribute defined as all the mechanical, geometrical, and surface attributes of a product perceptible through mechanical, tactile, visual, and auditory receptors [4]. Within food science and rheology research, predictive texture modeling aims to establish quantitative relationships between a food's physical properties and its sensory perception. Traditional methods rely on labor-intensive sensory panels and instrumental measurements that often struggle to capture the complex, multi-parameter nature of texture perception [86]. The integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) is revolutionizing this field by enabling accurate prediction of sensory texture from objective physical measurements, thereby accelerating product development and quality control [92] [30].

Current AI/ML Approaches in Texture Prediction

Neural Networks for Sensory Prediction

A research group at Purdue University's Transport Phenomena Laboratory has developed a specialized sensory-based autoencoder—a type of neural network—to predict texture perception from physical food properties [92]. This model addresses a fundamental challenge in food design: the complex, non-linear relationship between measurable physical properties and subjective sensory perception. The system is particularly innovative as it functions effectively with very small datasets (trained on just a few bouillon samples), overcoming a significant hurdle in applied food science where large, structured datasets are often unavailable [92]. The model employs cross-validation statistical methods to ensure reliability with limited data points, rigorously testing its ability to generalize without overfitting [92].

Data-Driven Psychorheology

In a comprehensive study on yogurt texture, researchers applied machine learning regression models to predict sensory attributes from rheological measurements [30]. After preparing 105 yogurt samples with varying whey separation times and milk powder content, they characterized rheological behavior using Large-Amplitude Oscillatory Shearing (LAOS) and other measurements that reflect flow conditions during consumption [30]. Sensory panels then evaluated attributes like thickness, stickiness, and swallowing ease. The resulting predictive model achieved root mean square error values below 6 on a 100-point scale, demonstrating high predictive accuracy [30]. Through feature importance analysis, the study identified key rheological parameters influencing each sensory attribute, linking them to specific oral processing stages: scooping, first bite, repeated shear, and swallowing [30].

Comparative Analysis of Modeling Approaches

Table 1: AI/ML Approaches in Predictive Texture Modeling

Approach	Application	Data Requirements	Key Advantages	Reported Performance
Sensory-based Autoencoder [92]	Predicting mouthfeel perception of liquids	Small datasets (few samples)	Works with limited data; Cross-validation for reliability	Accurate predictions from limited bouillon sample data
ML Regression (Random Forests) [30]	Yogurt sensory texture prediction	Medium datasets (105 samples)	Identifies key rheological parameters; Links to oral processing stages	RMSE <6 on 100-point scale for thickness, stickiness, swallowing
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) [93]	Reducing texture measurement dimensions	Varies with application	Reveals correlations between instrumental measurements and sensory attributes	Identified key components: Oil/Crispiness and Hardness/Density

Experimental Protocols for AI-Based Texture Modeling

Protocol 1: Developing a Sensory Predictive Model for Fluids

Objective: To develop an AI model that predicts sensory texture perception from instrumental measurements of fluid foods.

Materials and Instruments:

• Rheometer (stress-controlled or strain-controlled)
• Texture analyzer
• Standardized sensory evaluation facilities
• Data processing software (Python with scikit-learn, TensorFlow, or PyTorch)

Methodology:

• Sample Preparation: Prepare a minimum of 10-15 samples with controlled variations in ingredients or processing parameters to generate texture diversity [92].
• Instrumental Characterization:
  • Perform fundamental rheological measurements (viscosity flow curves, oscillatory measurements)
  • Conduct mechanical tests (penetration, compression) relevant to the food type
  • Extract quantitative parameters from the measurements (yield stress, consistency index, loss tangent, etc.)
• Sensory Evaluation:
  • Train a sensory panel (8-12 members) using standardized texture references
  • Evaluate samples using quantitative descriptive analysis or temporal methods
  • Assess key attributes such as thickness, creaminess, slipperiness on standardized scales
• Data Integration and Model Development:
  • Compile instrumental parameters and sensory scores into a structured dataset
  • Implement sensory-based autoencoder architecture with encoding/decoding layers
  • Apply cross-validation techniques (k-fold or leave-one-out) to ensure model reliability with limited data
  • Train the model to minimize reconstruction error between predicted and actual sensory scores
• Model Validation:
  • Test model performance on holdout samples not used in training
  • Validate predictions with additional sensory testing
  • Use permutation importance analysis to identify most influential instrumental parameters

Protocol 2: Data-Driven Psychorheology for Semi-Solid Foods

Objective: To establish correlations between rheological measurements and sensory texture attributes using machine learning.

Materials and Instruments:

• Rheometer with LAOS capabilities
• Tribometer for lubrication properties
• Controlled sample preparation equipment
• Statistical analysis software (Python, R)

Methodology:

• Design of Experiments:
  • Identify critical processing variables (e.g., whey separation time, milk powder content for yogurt)
  • Use experimental design methods (e.g., response surface methodology) to create sample variations [30]
• Rheological Characterization:
  • Perform SAOS (Small-Amplitude Oscillatory Shear) to characterize linear viscoelasticity
  • Conduct LAOS (Large-Amplitude Oscillatory Shear) to simulate conditions during eating
  • Implement tribological measurements to assess lubricational properties
  • Extract both traditional and novel rheological parameters (e.g., intracycle metrics from LAOS)
• Sensory Mapping:
  • Conduct descriptive analysis with trained panel for specific texture attributes
  • Consider temporal methods (TDS, TCATA) for dynamic texture perception [4]
  • Ensure ethical compliance and panelist consent for sensory evaluation
• Machine Learning Pipeline:
  • Preprocess data: normalization, feature scaling
  • Implement Random Forest regression or other ensemble methods
  • Train model to predict sensory scores from rheological parameters
  • Perform feature importance analysis to identify critical rheological properties
• Interpretation and Application:
  • Relate important rheological parameters to oral processing stages
  • Develop formulation guidelines based on model insights
  • Validate model with prototype samples targeting specific texture profiles

Table 2: Research Reagent Solutions for Texture Analysis

Reagent/Instrument	Function in Texture Analysis	Application Examples
Stress-Controlled Rheometer	Measures fundamental rheological properties under defined shear conditions	Viscosity, yield stress, viscoelastic moduli characterization [30] [4]
Texture Analyzer	Empirical measurement of mechanical properties through compression, penetration, extrusion	Firmness, hardness, cohesiveness evaluation [86] [4]
Tribological Cell	Quantifies lubricational properties between surfaces simulating oral conditions	Smoothness, astringency, fat-related mouthfeel assessment [4]
LAOS (Large-Amplitude Oscillatory Shear)	Characterizes non-linear viscoelastic behavior under deformation amplitudes relevant to processing and consumption	Predicting texture breakdown during mastication [30]
Machine Learning Libraries (scikit-learn, TensorFlow)	Developing predictive models linking instrumental and sensory data	Creating neural networks and regression models for texture prediction [92]

Visualization of Methodologies

AI-Driven Texture Prediction Workflow

AI Texture Modeling Workflow

Oral Processing and Texture Perception Pathway

Texture Perception Pathway

Applications and Future Perspectives

The applications of AI in predictive texture modeling extend across multiple domains. In food product development, these approaches enable reverse-engineering of textures while managing ingredient costs and quality [92]. For specific population groups like the elderly or those with swallowing difficulties, AI tools can design foods with precisely controlled textures that balance safety and palatability [92]. The emerging field of alternative protein development utilizes technologies like 3D imaging, hyperspectral imaging, and finite element method (FEM) simulations to decode and replicate complex structures like meat marbling [94].

Future advancements will likely focus on improving the evaluation of texture attributes related to geometrical properties (graininess, fineness), which remain challenging for current rheological and tribological methods [4]. The integration of advanced statistical methods with fundamental material measurements shows promise for enhancing prediction accuracy [4]. As AI becomes more integrated into food innovation networks, we can anticipate growth in applications ranging from quality control pipelines to personalized nutrition [92] [95].

The integration of AI and machine learning into predictive texture modeling represents a paradigm shift in food science, enabling more precise, efficient, and objective translation of instrumental measurements into human sensory experience. These approaches provide researchers with powerful tools to accelerate development while maintaining focus on the consumer experience.

Within food science, the precise quantification of texture and rheology is paramount for product development, quality control, and consumer satisfaction. Traditional methods, while valuable, often involve destructive testing, subjective sensory panels, or lack spatial resolution. Emerging, non-destructive technologies are now transforming this landscape. This application note focuses on two such powerful tools: hyperspectral imaging (HSI) for spatially-resolved compositional analysis and acoustic analysis for contactless texture assessment. HSI, which combines spectroscopy with digital imaging, is establishing itself as a transformative technique for the non-destructive, real-time, and high-resolution analysis of food at various production stages [96]. This note details the principles, provides validated experimental protocols, and outlines data analysis workflows to enable researchers to integrate these advanced tools into their research on food texture and rheology.

Hyperspectral imaging merges spectroscopic and imaging technologies to simultaneously obtain both spatial and spectral information for every pixel in a food sample [97]. Unlike traditional RGB or multispectral imaging (which captures 3-10 broad bands), HSI captures hundreds of narrow, contiguous wavelength bands, generating a continuous spectral signature for each pixel [98]. This creates a three-dimensional data cube, often referred to as a hypercube, with two spatial dimensions and one spectral dimension.

The fundamental principle behind HSI is that when light interacts with a material, specific chemical bonds absorb and reflect light at characteristic wavelengths. In the context of food, these spectral signatures are directly influenced by chemical composition and physical structure. For instance, in the shortwave infrared (SWIR: 900–2500 nm) range, key absorption features can be detected: O-H bonds in water molecules absorb at around 1925 nm, C-H bonds in lipids absorb at 1724 and 1762 nm, and crystalline sucrose has a characteristic peak at 1435 nm [99]. By analyzing these subtle spectral variations, HSI can map the distribution of components like moisture, fat, and protein, all of which are critical determinants of a food's rheological behavior and final texture [100] [99].

Table 1: Common Hyperspectral Imaging Regions in Food Analysis

Spectral Region	Wavelength Range	Primary Applications in Food	Example Food Products
Visible-Near Infrared (VIS-NIR)	400–1000 nm	Sensory analysis, color measurement, defect (bruise) detection, maturity classification [101]	Fruits, vegetables, meat, grains
Near Infrared (NIR)	780–1100 nm	Moisture content, protein analysis, particle size [99]	Flour, powdered products, grains
Shortwave Infrared (SWIR)	900–2500 nm	Fat, moisture, and sugar distribution; quantitative composition analysis [99]	Meat, fish, confectionery, baked goods

Applications in Food Texture and Rheology Research

The ability of HSI to correlate chemical composition with physical structure makes it exceptionally powerful for predicting and understanding food texture.

• Meat Quality Assessment: HSI is extensively used to predict texture-related attributes in meat. It can evaluate moisture and protein contents, as well as fat distribution (marbling), which are directly correlated with tenderness, juiciness, and chewiness [100] [18]. The technology can non-destructively grade and classify pork and beef based on these quality parameters, providing a scientific basis for optimizing processing techniques like heating and high-pressure treatment, which alter protein structure and gelation behavior [18].
• Baked Goods and Moisture Management: The texture of baked products is highly dependent on moisture distribution. HSI can visually map moisture migration in a slice of bread or multi-component products (e.g., a crispy shell with a moist filling) over shelf life [99]. This is critical for predicting and controlling textural changes like softening or sogginess, which are key rheological failures.
• Fruit and Vegetable Maturity and Defect Detection: The texture of fresh produce is a critical quality attribute. HSI in the Vis-NIR range has proven highly accurate for classifying maturity and detecting early-stage defects and bruises, which manifest as changes in firmness and cellular structure before they are visible to the human eye [101]. This allows for non-destructive sorting and prediction of shelf-life.

Table 2: Hyperspectral Imaging for Predicting Rheological and Sensory Properties

Food Product	Quality Attribute	Spectral Region	Common Analytical Model	Application Purpose
Cooked Ham	Water & Protein Content [97]	NIR/SWIR	PLSR [97]	Quality classification & texture prediction
Beef/Pork	Fat Content & Marbling [100] [97]	NIR/SWIR	PLSR, SVM [97] [96]	Grading, tenderness prediction
Fruits (Apples, Citrus)	Firmness, Bruises, Maturity [101]	Vis-NIR	PLSR, LDA [101]	Defect detection, texture analysis, shelf-life prediction
Bread/Biscuits	Moisture Distribution [99]	SWIR	PLSR [99]	Optimization of baking process, texture control

Detailed Experimental Protocol: Hyperspectral Imaging

The following protocol provides a step-by-step methodology for conducting a hyperspectral imaging study to map moisture distribution in baked goods, a key factor in rheological properties.

Research Reagent Solutions and Materials

Table 3: Essential Materials and Equipment for HSI Analysis

Item Name	Function/Description	Example Specification
Hyperspectral Imaging System	Captures spatial and spectral data. A push-broom scanner is ideal for inline or lab-based analysis.	Specim SWIR camera (1000–2500 nm) [99]
Calibration Standards	Used for radiometric (dark & white) calibration to ensure accurate spectral data.	White Spectralon tile, lens cap for dark reference
Stable Illumination System	Provides consistent, uniform lighting to prevent shadows and spectral noise.	Halogen lamps with stable DC power supply
Motorized Translation Stage	Moves the sample precisely relative to the camera for push-broom scanning.	Stepper motor-controlled linear stage
Data Acquisition Software	Controls the camera, stage, and illumination; captures and stores the hypercube.	OEM software (e.g., Specim, Resonon) or LabVIEW
Chemometrics Software	For preprocessing, model development, and data visualization.	MATLAB, Python (with scikit-learn, HyperSpy), Unscrambler

Step-by-Step Procedure

• Sample Preparation:

  • Prepare samples of uniform size and shape (e.g., 2 cm thick slices of bread). Ensure a representative set that covers the expected range of moisture variation.
  • Allow samples to equilibrate to room temperature (20°C ± 1°C) to minimize condensation and temperature-related spectral drift.

• System Setup and Calibration:

  • Spatial Calibration: Place a ruler or an object of known dimensions in the field of view to establish the spatial resolution (pixels/mm).
  • Radiometric Calibration: Capture a dark reference image (with the lens covered) and a white reference image (using a standard white tile). This corrects for dark current and non-uniform illumination. The white reference should be acquired under the same integration time as the sample scans.
  • Wavelength Calibration: Verify the wavelength accuracy of the system using a spectral lamp (e.g., Mercury-Argon) or materials with known sharp spectral features, as per the manufacturer's guidelines.

• Image Acquisition:

  • Place the sample on the motorized stage, ensuring it is flat and fully within the camera's field of view.
  • Set the camera parameters (integration time, gain, scanning speed) to optimize signal-to-noise ratio without saturating the sensor.
  • Acquire the hyperspectral image of the sample using the push-broom technique, where the camera captures a line of spatial information across all wavelengths as the stage moves.

• Data Preprocessing:

  • Convert raw digital numbers to reflectance (R) using the formula: ( R = \frac{\text{Sample Image} - \text{Dark Reference}}{\text{White Reference} - \text{Dark Reference}} ).
  • Apply spectral preprocessing techniques to the extracted spectra to enhance the signal. Common methods include:
    • Savitzky-Golay Smoothing: Reduces high-frequency noise.
    • Standard Normal Variate (SNV): Corrects for scatter effects and surface roughness.
    • First or Second Derivative: Removes baseline offsets and resolves overlapping peaks.

• Model Development and Validation:

  • Reference Analysis: Use a standard method (e.g., oven drying for moisture) to obtain ground truth data for a subset of samples.
  • Chemometric Analysis: Use the preprocessed spectral data and reference values to build a predictive model.
    • Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) is the most common algorithm for quantitative analysis like predicting moisture content [99] [101] [96].
    • Split the data into a calibration set (e.g., 70%) to build the model and a validation set (e.g., 30%) to test its predictive performance.
  • Model Evaluation: Assess the model using metrics such as Root Mean Square Error of Prediction (RMSEP) and the coefficient of determination (R²) for the validation set.

• Visualization and Interpretation:

  • Apply the validated model to the entire hypercube to generate a prediction map. This map visually displays the spatial distribution of the property of interest (e.g., moisture) across the sample, with colors representing concentration levels [99].

Hyperspectral Imaging Analysis Workflow

Data Analysis and Integration with Rheological Models

The vast, information-rich datasets generated by HSI require robust multivariate analysis methods to extract meaningful information. The choice of algorithm depends on whether the goal is classification (e.g., quality grade) or regression (e.g., predicting a continuous value like hardness).

• Linear Methods: Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is an unsupervised method used for data exploration, outlier detection, and dimensionality reduction. Partial Least Squares Regression (PLSR) is the most widely used linear method for building quantitative models that relate spectral data (X-matrix) to reference measurements (Y-matrix), such as texture analyzer readings [96].
• Non-Linear and Machine Learning Methods: For more complex, non-linear relationships in food matrices, methods like Support Vector Machines (SVM) and artificial neural networks often achieve superior performance [101] [96]. Recent advancements also involve the fusion of spectral and spatial information and the use of deep learning models for even more accurate assessments [100].

The true power for texture research lies in fusing HSI data with rheological measurements. A calibration model can be developed where HSI spectra are the input (X) and instrumental texture parameters (e.g., hardness from a texture analyzer, storage modulus from a rheometer) are the response (Y). Once validated, this model can be used to predict the rheological properties of new samples based on HSI data alone, enabling rapid, non-destructive screening.

HSI and Rheological Data Fusion Logic

Hyperspectral imaging is rapidly moving from a research tool to an industrial solution. Key future trends include device miniaturization and cost reduction, making the technology more accessible [100] [98]. Furthermore, the integration of artificial intelligence, particularly deep learning, is set to further improve the analysis of complex hyperspectral datasets [100]. The push for standardized protocols and data-sharing initiatives will also be crucial for wider adoption and reproducibility [100] [96]. Market analyses project the global hyperspectral imaging market in agriculture to exceed $400 million by 2025, with over 60% of precision agriculture systems utilizing it for crop monitoring, underscoring its transformative potential [98].

In conclusion, hyperspectral imaging represents a paradigm shift in food texture and rheology research. Its ability to provide non-destructive, spatially-resolved, and quantitative analysis of key compositional factors makes it an indispensable tool for the modern food scientist. When coupled with traditional rheological data through robust chemometric models, HSI enables a deeper, more fundamental understanding of the structure-function relationships that govern food texture, paving the way for accelerated product innovation and enhanced quality control.

Conclusion

The analytical landscape for food texture and rheology is rapidly advancing, moving beyond traditional methods to an integrated approach that combines rheology, tribology, and multi-modal tactile sensing. The key takeaway is the critical importance of correlating objective instrumental measurements with subjective sensory perception to accurately predict consumer acceptance and product performance. Future directions point toward the increased use of AI for predictive modeling and texture discovery, the application of 3D printing for personalized nutrition textures, and the expansion of these techniques into biomedical research. This holds significant promise for developing specialized foods for clinical populations, such as those with dysphagia, and for optimizing the mouthfeel and bioavailability of oral pharmaceuticals, creating a direct bridge between food science and clinical applications.

References

• 1. testing of Rheological foods [https://people.umass.edu/mcclemen/581Rheology.html]
• 2. in Rheology Testing – How a Rheometer... | Technology Networks Food [https://www.technologynetworks.com/applied-sciences/articles/rheology-in-food-testing-how-a-rheometer-works-and-what-it-can-tell-you-364448]
• 3. Introduction: Measuring Properties of Rheological | SpringerLink Foods [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-27134-3_1]
• 4. Methods and instruments for the evaluation of food texture: Advances and perspectives - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963996925004995]
• 5. Basics of rheology | Anton Paar Wiki [https://wiki.anton-paar.com/en/basics-of-rheology/]
• 6. Rheology of liquid foods under shear flow conditions: Recently used models - PubMed [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37726094/]
• 7. Texture profile analysis and rheology of plant-based and animal meat - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11885209/]
• 8. Effects of rheology modifiers on the flow curves of idealised and food suspensions - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0268005X00000023]
• 9. A method for evaluating time‐resolved rheological functionalities of fluid foods - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9544376/]
• 10. A systematic review of data and models for predicting food flavor and texture - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12274706/]
• 11. - (Principles of Food Science) - Vocab, Definition... | Fiveable Texture [https://fiveable.me/key-terms/principles-food-science/texture]
• 12. Colloidal aspects of texture perception [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19457463/]
• 13. Descriptive sensory analysis: past, present and future - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963996901000709]
• 14. Quantitative descriptive analysis and principal component analysis for sensory characterization of Indian milk product cham-cham - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4837733/]
• 15. How Texture Influences Your Taste in Food and Beverages [https://www.linkedin.com/advice/0/how-does-texture-food-affect-you-taste-ksbjc]
• 16. How to Add Texture to Food: Simple Tricks for Crunch, Creaminess ... [https://www.capecrystalbrands.com/blogs/cape-crystal-brands/how-to-add-texture-to-food-1]
• 17. An Overview of Sensory Characterization Techniques: From Classical Descriptive Analysis to the Emergence of Novel Profiling Methods - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8834440/]
• 18. New Techniques of Meat Quality Assessment for Detecting Meat Texture [https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9717/13/3/640]
• 19. Texture Analysis - A Beginner's Guide | Stable Micro Systems [https://www.stablemicrosystems.com/BeginnersGuideToTextureAnalysis.html]
• 20. Rheometer - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/rheometer]
• 21. Advanced Rheological for Techniques and... | SpringerLink Texture [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-0716-4787-5_16]
• 22. Methods and instruments for the evaluation of food : Advances... texture [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40263828/]
• 23. Rotational Rheometers - NETZSCH Analyzing & Testing [https://analyzing-testing.netzsch.com/en/products/rotational-rheometers]
• 24. Rheometer - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rheometer]
• 25. How a texture analyzer works | Mecmesin | Texture Analysis [https://www.textureanalyzers.com/how-texture-analyzer-works]
• 26. The Vast and Varied Uses for a Tribometer: Could Your Work Benefit? [https://blog.kett.com/the-vast-and-varied-uses-for-a-tribometer-could-your-work-benefit]
• 27. Tribometer - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribometer]
• 28. Description of food surfaces and microstructural changes using fractal image texture analysis - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0260877401001777]
• 29. Mastering Food : A Comprehensive Guide Rheology [https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-guide-food-rheology-texture-analysis]
• 30. Data-driven psychorheology: application to yogurt sensory ... texture [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00397-025-01492-0]
• 31. Fruit & Vegetable Processed Size, Demand & Market to... Trends 2025 [https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/processed-fruits-and-vegetables-market]
• 32. –2035 | Opportunities by Region Processed food Market 2025 [https://www.businessresearchinsights.com/market-reports/processed-food-market-118445]
• 33. - Plant Growth & Based to 2035 Food Market Trends 2025 [https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/plant-based-food-market]
• 34. and instruments for the evaluation of Methods ... | CoLab food texture [https://colab.ws/articles/10.1016/j.foodres.2025.116162]
• 35. Advanced Food Analysis Technologies Set New Benchmarks in Safety and Sustainability [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/advanced-food-analysis-technologies-set-new-benchmarks-in-safety-and-sustainability]
• 36. Global plant - based . trends - 2025 and ingredients Plant based foods [https://www.innovamarketinsights.com/trends/plant-based-trends-2025/]
• 37. 101 – Learning the Basics Rheology [https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=16985]
• 38. | PPTX Rheology methods [https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/rheology-methods/50678360]
• 39. Testing of Structured Fluids Rheological [https://www.azom.com/article.aspx?ArticleID=12097]
• 40. Analysis Essentials Food Texture [https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-guide-food-texture-analysis]
• 41. (PDF) irjet- texture profile analysis of food and tpa measurements... [https://www.academia.edu/44838185/IRJET_TEXTURE_PROFILE_ANALYSIS_OF_FOOD_AND_TPA_MEASUREMENTS_A_REVIEW_ARTICLE]
• 42. Food Rheology - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/food-science/food-rheology]
• 43. - Understand the Texture and the Profile of data Analysis test analysis [https://www.stablemicrosystems.com/blog/2025/understand-your-texture-profile-analysis-tests-and-analysis/]
• 44. profile analysis | PPTX Texture [https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/texture-profile-analysis/238920665]
• 45. Measurement of Instrumental Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) of Foods | SpringerLink [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-68636-9_17]
• 46. Texture Analysis Professionals Blog: How to do TPA properly [https://textureanalysisprofessionals.blogspot.com/2020/04/how-to-do-tpa-properly.html]
• 47. The Journal of Food » Submission » STANDARDIZATION OF... [https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/gida/issue/95331/1747368]
• 48. New Chemometric Analysis Explores How Soy Protein and Starch Interactions Shape Food Texture | Spectroscopy Online [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/new-chemometric-analysis-explores-how-soy-protein-and-starch-interactions-shape-food-texture]
• 49. Fluorescence Anisotropy Offers New Insights into Food Texture and Structure | Spectroscopy Online [https://www.spectroscopyonline.com/view/fluorescence-anisotropy-offers-new-insights-into-food-texture-and-structure]
• 50. (PDF) Parameters of Texture Profile Analysis [https://www.academia.edu/50155334/Parameters_of_Texture_Profile_Analysis]
• 51. Frontiers | Advances in large amplitude oscillatory shear Rheology of... [https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/food-science-and-technology/articles/10.3389/frfst.2023.1130165/full]
• 52. Rheology of food materials - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1359029410000798]
• 53. Extensional and shear rheology of a food hydrocolloid - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0268005X17310172]
• 54. Interfacial rheology - Wikipedia [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interfacial_rheology]
• 55. (Large Amplitude Oscillatory Shear) Applications... | SpringerLink LAOS [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-27134-3_4]
• 56. Rheology and interfacial properties at Campden BRI [https://www.campdenbri.co.uk/services/rheology-interfacial-properties.php]
• 57. Rheology | Baking Processes | BAKERpedia [https://bakerpedia.com/processes/rheology/]
• 58. Engineering Emulsion as Functional Colloids Emphasizing Gels ... Food [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9152362/]
• 59. Dairy Product Texture Analysis | Stable Micro Systems [https://www.stablemicrosystems.com/DairyProductTesting.html]
• 60. The Rheology and Textural Properties of Bakery Products Upcycling Brewers’ Spent Grain [https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/12/19/3524]
• 61. which environmental stressors trigger calibration | Clarity drift [https://www.clarity.io/blog/which-environmental-stressors-most-often-trigger-calibration-drift-and-necessitate-shorter-calibration-intervals]
• 62. check technology, the temperature Calibration that checks... sensor [https://www.foodmag.com.au/calibration-check-technology-the-temperature-sensor-that-checks-itself/]
• 63. Overview of Green Sample Techniques in Preparation Food Analysis [https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/55202]
• 64. Advances in Sample for Preparation Food Analysis [https://www.chromatographyonline.com/view/advances-sample-preparation-food-analysis]
• 65. Basics of thixotropy | Anton Paar Wiki [https://wiki.anton-paar.com/en/basics-of-thixotropy/]
• 66. Mastering Food Rheology: The Ultimate Guide [https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-guide-to-food-rheology]
• 67. Frontiers | Rheological Properties of Functional and Future Foods [https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/70342/rheological-properties-of-functional-and-future-foods]
• 68. Advances in rheological measurements of food products - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214799317301479]
• 69. Mechanical Property of Food - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/food-science/mechanical-property-of-food]
• 70. Evaluation and Determination of Food Properties Texture [https://www.ssi.shimadzu.com/industries/automotive-materials-testing/food-texture/index.html]
• 71. investigation of Rheological | Anton Paar Wiki food [https://wiki.anton-paar.com/en/basics-of-rheology/rheological-investigation-of-food/]
• 72. methods Food by texture and test - EssFeed standardized ASTM ISO [https://essfeed.com/food-texture-test-methods-standardized-by-astm-and-iso-food-texture-test-methods-standardized-by-astm-and-iso/]
• 73. What is Food Texture and How is it Measured [https://www.ametektest.com/learningzone/library/articles/what-is-food-texture-and-how-is-it-measured]
• 74. D2196 Standard Test Methods for Rheological Properties of Non-Newtonian Materials by Rotational Viscometer [https://store.astm.org/d2196-20.html]
• 75. D3835 Standard Test Method for Determination of Properties of Polymeric Materials by Means of a Capillary Rheometer [https://store.astm.org/d3835-16.html]
• 76. | Mecmesin Texture Testing [https://www.mecmesin.com/test-type/texture-testing]
• 77. Texture and Rheology in Food Chemistry [https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/ultimate-guide-texture-rheology-food-chemistry]
• 78. How Food Works — In One Simple Flow ( Texture ) 2025 [https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-food-texture-works-one-simple-flow-2025-b0tmf]
• 79. Rheology [https://people.brandeis.edu/~sekuler/SensoryProcessesMaterial/rheology.html]
• 80. Application of texture analysis methods for the characterization of cultured meat | Scientific Reports [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-07785-1]
• 81. Rheology for the food industry - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0260877404003401]
• 82. Ultrasound in the Food Industry: Mechanisms and Applications for Non-Invasive Texture and Quality Analysis - PMC [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12191474/]
• 83. Food Texture - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics [https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/food-science/food-texture]
• 84. Color and Texture Methods | SpringerLink Measurement [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-031-95048-3_16]
• 85. Emerging nondestructive techniques to quantify the textural properties... [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36757668/]
• 86. Texture measurement approaches in fresh and processed foods — A review - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0963996913000732]
• 87. | Shimadzu Food ... : SHIMADZU CORPORATION Textures Food [https://www.shimadzu.com/messe/exhibition/food-science/texture/index.html]
• 88. Big data analytics in food industry: a state-of-the-art literature review | npj Science of Food [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41538-025-00394-y]
• 89. (DOC) Application of Statistical Techniques in Food Science | Perkins Muredzi - Academia.edu [https://www.academia.edu/5952899/Application_of_Statistical_Techniques_in_Food_Science]
• 90. Mastering Food and Texture Rheology [https://www.numberanalytics.com/blog/mastering-food-texture-rheology]
• 91. Texture analysis of food | PPTX | Oral care | Personal Care [https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/texture-analysis-of-food/77920766]
• 92. From lab to table: Purdue Food Science research predicts ... texture [https://ag.purdue.edu/news/2025/05/from-lab-to-table-purdue-food-science-research-predicts-texture-with-machine-learning.html?image]
• 93. GitHub - stark4079/ Food _ Texture _ Analysis [https://github.com/stark4079/Food_Texture_Analysis]
• 94. ces.tech/ces-innovation-awards/ /next-meat-powered-by... [https://www.ces.tech/ces-innovation-awards/2025/next-meat-powered-by-foodructure-and-rheomer/]
• 95. A systematic review of data and models for predicting flavor and... food [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40689288/]
• 96. Strategies for analysing hyperspectral imaging data for food quality and safety issues – A critical review of the last 5 years - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026265X25013487]
• 97. for Nondestructive Hyperspectral Quality... | SpringerLink Imaging Food [https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-0716-4787-5_13]
• 98. In Agriculture Market: Hyperspectral Advances... Imaging 2025 [https://farmonaut.com/blogs/hyperspectral-imaging-in-agriculture-market-2025-advances]
• 99. Food quality and composition analysis with hyperspectral imaging - Specim [https://www.specim.com/food-quality-and-composition-analysis-with-hyperspectral-imaging/]
• 100. of Applications technology in the hyperspectral industry imaging food [https://www.nature.com/articles/s44287-024-00033-w?error=cookies_not_supported&code=d93515eb-cffe-45ab-bd7d-9008e96cd095]
• 101. Rapid and noninvasive sensory analyses of food products by hyperspectral imaging: Recent application developments - ScienceDirect [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924224421001527]