Biology subjects

Koosis, A. O.

Publications and source records attributed to Koosis, A. O..

3 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2026

Open-source benchmarking of dairy and dairy-free products

Dairy-free foods must reproduce diverse functions of dairy, from foam stabilization in a latte to acid-gel structure in yogurt and melt-stretch behavior in mozzarella. Public consumer benchmarks rarely compare these categories under a common protocol. Here we analyze data from the NECTAR Taste of the Industry 2026 study, a blinded, randomized, in-person evaluation of commercial dairy-free products and dairy benchmarks. The full study included 2,183 consumers and 112 products across ten categories, with 3,220 product evaluations and 79,027 recorded survey responses, including 35,762 product-linked responses. The ten categories included barista milk, butter, cheddar, cream cheese, creamer, ice cream, fluid milk, mozzarella, sour cream, and Greek style yogurt. Within each category, we compare a dairy benchmark with the dairy-free product selected post hoc as the category leader. Participants rated overall liking, flavor, texture and mouthfeel, appearance, similarity to dairy, and purchase intent on seven-point scales and completed check-all-that-apply questions. In exploratory category-specific equivalence tests using a chosen margin of {+/-}0.05 points, barista milk, creamer, and fluid milk meet this margin. Mozzarella has the largest paired deficit of -1.46 points (unadjusted, p < 0.001), followed by Greek style yogurt and butter; all three remain significant after Holm correction across the ten primary comparisons. Descriptive penalty analysis associates off-flavor, artificial or chemical notes, stale or cardboard notes, bitter taste, and lingering aftertaste with the largest reductions in liking. Together, these results establish the first open sensory benchmark for dairy and dairy-free products, demonstrate that sensory parity is already achievable in several beverage categories, and identify the product categories and sensory attributes that offer the greatest opportunities for future innovation.

bioengineering↗

bioRxiv2026

Texture Profile Analysis and Consumer Sensory Evaluation of Plant-Based and Conventional Breaded Shrimp

Plant-based seafood alternatives could reduce pressure on marine ecosystems, yet texture gaps between plant-based and conventional products limit consumer adoption. This study compared the textural properties and consumer acceptance of plant-based and conventional breaded shrimp to evaluate whether instrumental texture differences predict sensory differences. Texture Profile Analysis (TPA) was performed on four breaded shrimp products (n = 14-15 replicates per product), and consumer sensory evaluation (n = 107) used a within-subjects counterbalanced design assessing hedonic ratings, Just-About-Right attributes, Check-All-That-Apply descriptors, and purchase intent. TPA revealed that plant-based shrimp exhibited significantly higher hardness (14.9 {+/-} 1.0 N vs. 9.6 {+/-} 2.8 N), stiffness (592 {+/-} 40 kPa vs. 382 {+/-} 113 kPa), and chewiness (10.5 {+/-} 0.8 N vs. 2.5 {+/-} 1.1 N) compared to conventional shrimp (all p < 0.0001). However, consumer sensory evaluation revealed no significant differences between products for any hedonic attribute, JAR rating, CATA descriptor, or purchase intent (all p > 0.05 after FDR correction). Despite 1.6-fold greater hardness and 4.2-fold greater chewiness, plant-based breaded shrimp received comparable hedonic ratings to conventional shrimp, suggesting that the breaded format masks mechanical texture differences. Achieving TPA parity may not be necessary for consumer acceptance in breaded seafood applications. HighlightsO_LIPlant-based shrimp is 1.6x harder and 4.2x chewier than conventional C_LIO_LIConsumers reported no significant sensory differences between products C_LIO_LIBreaded format masks instrumental texture differences C_LIO_LITPA parity may not be required for consumer acceptance C_LI

bioengineering↗

bioRxiv2026

The Burger Battle: The Future is Blended

Texture is one of the major barriers to acceptance of sustainable protein products, yet the relationship between instrumental texture and consumer perception remains poorly understood. Here we combined consumer sensory evaluation and texture profile analysis to identify the factors that drive burger acceptance across blended, animal-based, and plant-based formulations. A total of 472 diners evaluated beef-mushroom (n = 171), turkey (n = 100), bean (n = 100), and pea (n = 101) burgers served in Stanford University dining halls, while texture profile analysis quantified physical texture (n = 10 per product). The beef-mushroom burger achieved the highest ratings for meatiness (77.0/100), tastiness (69.4/100), and moistness (61.8/100), and 78% of consumers rated its moistness as just-about-right. Although the pea burger exhibited mechanical properties similar to the beef-mushroom burger, including indistinguishable cohesiveness values (0.53 vs. 0.53), it received substantially lower ratings for meatiness (56.1 vs. 77.0), indicating that mechanical similarity alone does not ensure consumer acceptance. Across products, moistness emerged as the primary sensory limitation, with 58% of turkey consumers and 46% of bean consumers reporting insufficient moisture. Cohesiveness showed the strongest association with perceived meatiness (r = 0.82). These findings demonstrate that successful burger reformulation requires more than mechanical matching; products must reproduce the moisture, flavor, and eating experience associated with meat. Blended burgers may represent the most practical near-term strategy for reducing meat consumption without compromising eating quality.

bioengineering↗