Alphasoft

All experiments were performed in triplicates and reported as mean ± SE (Standard Error). Tukey’s HSD (Honestly Significant Difference) was conducted for multiple comparisons using XLStat (Version 2023.1.6, Lumivero, Denver, CO, USA), and differences with p < 0.05 were indicated as statistically significant. Partial least square regression was used to model the correlation between electronic senses and human panel data. Pearson’s correlation was used to determine the correlation between the descriptive aroma attributes and furaneol content in the strawberries (XLStat, Version 2023.1.6, Lumivero, Denver, CO, USA). AlphaSoft (Version 2021-7.2.8, AlphaMOS, Toulouse, France) was used to generate Principal Component Analysis (PCA) plots of strawberry samples for their corresponding e-nose and e-tongue data as well as to correlate these instrumental data with descriptive analysis.

A 20 g sample was mixed with 80 mL distilled water for 1 min in a homogenizer (Polytron PT-2500 E, Kinematica AG, Malters, Switzerland). The solution was filtered and the supernatant was extracted, diluted, and placed in a glass container. For the electronic tongue analysis (Astree V, Alpha MOS, Toulouse, France), 0.1 M HCl, 0.1 M NaCl, and 0.1 M MSG were used as the references to measure the sourness, saltiness, and umami, respectively, and draw the taste profile. The taste sensors were as follows: NMS (umami), CTS (saltiness), AHS (sourness), with PKS, ANS, SCS and CPS sensors used as standards. The taste profile was obtained as a radar chart using AlphaSoft (Alpha MOS, Toulouse, France).

Electronic tongue analysis was performed according to Lee et al [14 (link)] with slight modifications. The ground meat samples (5 g) were homogenized with the addition of 100 mL deionized distilled water at 10,000 rpm for 30 s (T25 digital ULTRA-TURRAX; Ika Works, Germany). The samples were centrifuged at 2,265×g for 10 min (Continent 512R; Hanil Co., Ltd., Korea) and the supernatants were filtered (No. 4; Whatman International Ltd., UK). Taste attributes of the samples were analyzed using an electronic tongue (Astree; Alpha MOS, Toulous, France). Taste screening was performed using Alpha soft (Alpha MOS, France) to compare the relative taste intensities of the samples using the following equation:
where X and m are the mean sensor values for each and the total group, respectively, and σ represents the deviation of the sensor value within the total group. Relative taste intensity was measured on a 10-point scale. For the AHS and NMS sensors, the value $\frac{X-m}{\sigma }$ was subtracted from 2.5, as lower sensor values of AHS and NMS indicate higher taste intensities.