Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Chewing Gum Production Quality Delivery Bioactive Compounds
Chewing Gum Production Quality Delivery Bioactive Compounds
Review
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: Background: Chewing gum has an amazing statistics. The entire industry is worth $25 billion and
Received 9 April 2016 annually 1.74 trillion sticks of chewing gum are produced. It would account for 290 billion hours'
Received in revised form duration of staying in mouth if each piece of gum was chewed for 10 min every year. Concerning these
4 July 2016
statistics at least smoke cessation, oral health and new form of drug delivery system potentials of
Accepted 7 July 2016
Available online 9 July 2016
chewing gum are clear. Therefore, fundamentals of chewing gum should be realized in detail to take the
advantage of this product.
Scope and approach: In this review, due to limited studies concerning chewing gum in food science and
Keywords:
Chewing gum
technology area, key points in production, quality parameters and bioactive compounds delivering
Flavor properties of chewing gum were reviewed with aim to show promising study areas to researchers.
Texture Production of different types of gums, ingredients used, sensory and texture properties and potential
Bioactive compounds future functions of chewing gums were discussed with a special emphasis on the bioactive compounds
carrier properties of chewing gum.
Key findings and conclusions: Encapsulation not only improved a sensation of flavor for a long period
when applied in the chewing gum but also had a potential to give functionality to chewing gum. Only
recently the idea of healthy chewing gums and using chewing gum as an alternative form of drug de-
livery system have been developed. Therefore, food technologists should give attention to this promising
subject of producing chewing gums having long lasting flavors, being biodegradable and forming a type
of functional confection consumed with pleasure by everyone.
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction the type of final product they are composed of various ingredients
such as sugar, polyols, gum base, aroma, acidulants, colors, sweet-
The consumption of confectionery products has grown eners and different additives, (Valduga, Lazzari, Xardanega, & Di
tremendously in recent years, especially among children and Luccio, 2012). It is a two-phase product and consists of water-
teenagers (Carbonell-Baaranchina, Garcia, Sanchez Soriano, Aracil, soluble continuous phase and - discontinuous phase which is
& Burlo, 2002) and chewing gum is a popular confectionery gum base. These phases are generally mixed in proportion of 1:3,
product worldwide (Wong, Yu, Curran, & Zhou, 2009; Yang, Yin, & respectively. Flavoring ingredient concentration of chewing gum is
Shao, 2011). It is consumed by a diverse set of consumers. Also approximately 1% (Potineni & Peterson, 2008a). Chewing gum is
accessibility is another advantage (Hearty, Lau, & Roberts, 2014). generally produced from chicle, a natural latex raw material, or
Especially, people enjoy it as a confection and latterly as an aid in polyisobutylene (Baysal, Ozbek, & Akman, 2010).
oral hygiene and an alternative to smoking (McGowan, Padua, & Chewing gum plays an important role in the confectionery in-
Lee, 2005). dustry (Valduga et al., 2012). Moreover, chewing gums have been
Chewing gums have rubbery-like structure and depending on produced for treating disorder/disease conditions like inhibition of
dental disorders, appetite arrangement delivery, smoking mi-
metics, carriers of functional ingredients and regulation of stress
and mood changes (Deshpande & Jadad, 2008; Hearty et al., 2014;
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (N. Konar).
Hetherington & Regan, 2011; Ribelles, Guinot, Mayne, & Bellet,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2016.07.003
0924-2244/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
30 N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38
2010; Smith, Chaplalin, & Wadsworth, 2012). 80 weight % sugar and glucose syrup mixed with gum base. The
According to Euromonitor International Gmbh, the sales value in main difference between sugar chewing gum and sugar-free
chewing gum market is 25 billion dollars in the world in 2014 chewing gum depends on substitution of different sugar alcohols
(Euromonitor, 2014). Annual chewing gum consumption rate in and high intensity sweeteners for sugar and glucose syrup. Con-
America was reported to be 160e180 sticks per person. Although cerning the coated chewing gum, coating is used to improve visual
these statistical data showed that chewing gum market is very impact of the product and control of the water activity and shelf life.
huge, studies about chewing gum is scarce. Chewing gum will be Sugar, sugar-free and coated chewing gum with different flavors,
expected to attract great attention from industry and scientific shapes and sizes are produced in the industry. Chewing gum having
world in the near future for several reasons including its high the property of blowing bubbles due to film forming characteristics
consumption rate, importance of chewing gum market in the is called a bubble gum. Concerning the other type of gums, center-
confectionery industry and potential health benefits by delivering filled gums has flavored liquid in the form of soft mass in its center.
bioactive compounds. Therefore, from production to quality pa- Depending on its shapes there are also ball gum, stick gum, ribbon
rameters of the finished product, critical aspects of chewing gum gum, tab gum, tube gum, dragee gum and wrap gum in the market.
was reviewed with special emphasis on its potential of delivering Moreover, for various human needs, tailormade chewing gums can
bioactive compounds. This study will provide insight into the be made which is called functional gum. Vitamins and minerals can
optimization of formulation and manufacturing process to obtain be added to gum giving practical function to it.
the product with desired quality. The present work included clas- Medicated chewing gums include pharmaceutical or nutraceu-
sification of chewing gums, ingredients used in the formulation, tical compounds which are released in a controlled manner during
production processes, quality parameters and opportunities in chewing and therefore they are accepted as drug delivery systems
terms of delivering bioactive compounds. (Maggi, Conte, Nhamias, Grenier, & Vergnault, 2013). According to
the European Pharmacopoeia and report prepared for pharma-
2. Classification, ingredients and process ceutical dosage forms in 1991 by the Committee for Medicinal
Products for Human Use (CPMP), medicated chewing gums are
2.1. Classification described as “solid single dose preparations with a base consisting
mainly of gum that are intended to be chewed but not to be
Chewing gums are mainly classified into 4 groups: (i) sugar swallowed, providing a slow steady release of the medicine con-
chewing gum, (ii) sugar-free chewing gum, (iii) coated chewing tained” (Paradkar, Gajra, & Patel, 2015). Chewing gums are attrac-
gum and (iv) medicated chewing gum. tive and effective alternative drug delivery systems when these
General composition of sugar and sugar-free chewing gums is factors are considered; people of all age savorily chew gums, release
summarized in Fig. 1. Sugar chewing gums contain almost of active substance can be controlled, buccal drug administration
for the treatment of local oral diseases can be effective and it can
make oral administration very convenient (Yang, Wang, & Zhang,
2004). They are suitable for therapeutic uses such as preventing
oral cavity, treatment of motion sickness and otitis media, smoke
cessation, pain reliever, antioxidant, oral antifungal, alertness, anti-
nausea, anti-emetic, anti-septic, healing, etc. since they are chewed
in the mouth for a long duration. Moreover since the bioactive
compound or drug is absorbed by oral mucose, chewing gums can
provide a faster onset of therapeutic effect and potentially reduce
gastrointestinal and hepatic first-pass metabolism of susceptible
drugs (Maggi et al., 2013). Investigations on the bioavailability and
distribution of some active substances in tissue showed the ad-
vantages of chewing gums (Yang et al., 2004).
2.2. Ingredients
of chewing gum is assumed to have some effects on the elution Concerning huge chewing gum consumption, 250 thousand
characteristics of odorants. Therefore, examining the impact of the tons of gum base waste arises per year, which is a significant
composition of chewing gum on the aroma release will also be one environmental problem since this waste is non-biodegradable. In
of the future challenges (Itobe et al., 2012). order to clean this waste, significant expenditures are made.
Therefore, it is important to fabricate chewing gums with biode-
2.2.1. Gum base gradable compounds. While the primary focus of the various pat-
A properly selected base provides the chewing gum with its ents describing the process of gum base production has been on
mechanical masticatory properties (Tisdale & Wilkins, 2014). The texture aspects, interest in creating a gum base material that is
main composition of chewing gum is base gum or base mass biodegradable and green product, has been gaining momentum,
(20e30%) (Valduga et al., 2012). Gum base includes elastomer and has been the subject of many patents (Raithore, 2012). For
(10e30%), elastomer solvent (2e18%), polyvinyl acetate (15e45%), instance, using zein as a gum base was tried due to its non-adhesive
emulsifier (2e10%), low molecular weight polyethylene and biodegradable properties (McGowan et al., 2005). The results
(0.5e15.0%), waxes (0.5e10.0%), plasticizer (20e35%) and fillers indicated that zein can be used as a gum base; however, more
(0.0e5.0%). Although exact compositions of gum bases are gener- studies are required to optimize formulation and production pro-
ally a trade secret, they usually include elastomers and resins, along cesses of such natural chewing gums.
with fats, waxes, emulsifiers, fillers and antioxidants (Fritz, 2006).
Several synthetic polymers are now usual choice as elastomers 2.2.2. Water-soluble base
in a base, with the most popular being co-polymers of styrene- In water-soluble phase, sugar sweeteners (60%) such as
butadiene and isobutylene-isoprene as well as poly (isobutylene), dextrose, sucrose, fructose, maltose, dextrin, galactose and dried
polyisoprene and polyethylene (Tisdale & Wilkins, 2014). Regular invert sugar can be used with corn syrups (18e20%), sugar alcohols
chewing gum contains 20e30% of gum base while sugar-free ones (<1.0%), glycerin (<1.0%) and flavor (0.5e1.0%) for sugar chewing
has up to 30% base on average (Fritz, 2006; Tisdale & Wilkins, 2014). gum. Particle size of the sucrose is important in sensory properties
Amount and type of gum base determine textural properties of gum of the end product. Large particles can result in gritty texture in the
especially the stickiness and chewiness (McGowan et al., 2005). product. For sugar-free chewing gums, sugar alcohols (also act as
Gum base composition affects binding of flavor compounds. Espe- bulking agent) (50e60%), glycerin (5.0e6.0%), flavor (1.0e15.0%)
cially polarity of gum base ingredients defines mechanism of and high intensity sweeteners (0.01e3.0%) can be used (Potineni,
binding (Sotsman, Potineni, McMillan, & Antennuci, 2009). 2007).
Accordingly, elastomer choice can also play an important role for High-intensity sweeteners and polyols are widely used as sugar-
aroma release of chewing gum. If affinity between elastomer and free chewing gum ingredients owing to their sweetness and non-
flavor compound is high, flavor is perceived during masticating for caloric characteristics (Siefarth et al., 2011). In addition, they are
a longer time, which is a privileged parameter for the quality of a accepted as non-cariogenic substances (not promote the develop-
chewing gum. The solvent of elastomers is generally terpene resins. ment of dental caries) since bacteria, e.g. Streptococcus mutans, can
When terpene resins are used in lower amounts mastication not use polyols as an energy source for their reproduction and
characteristics are affected negatively. However, when used in growth. The sugar alcohols (polyols) involving sorbitol, mannitol,
higher amounts in this case gum stickiness to tooth surface xylitol, maltitol, lactitol, hydrogenated isomaltulose and hydroge-
increases. nated starch hydrolysates are typically used in sugar-free chewing
A chewing gum base is a non-edible, inert and insoluble sub- gums (Potineni, 2007). Xylitol and menthol can be added to the
stance used as a support for the soluble portion of chewing gum formulation alone or in combination with different flavors (Santos
which is suitable for human consumption (various sugars, polyols et al., 2014). However, xylitol is commonly used in combination
and flavors). When considering suitability of a material for pro- with lower cost polyols such as sorbitol, lactitol, or mannitol due to
duction of chewing gum base, the degree of stickiness, elasticity its relatively high cost. Polyols are used with high intensity
and pliability are important factors. Pliability, elasticity and firm- sweeteners (aspartame, asesulfame K and thaumatin) since they
ness of chewing gum during mastication in mouth are important are not as sweet as sucrose. Otherwise, low sweetness can be
quality parameters evaluated during grading of the product. perceived by consumers, which adversely affects the attractiveness
In general, chewing gum utilizes a combination of natural or of the products. In some chewing gums, antioxidants are also added
synthetic elastomers such as polymers of limonene or other diter- to the formulation. Chewing gum generally contains antioxidants
penes with rosin-glycerol esters in the formulation (Tisdale & such as BHT, BHA (Edin, Fida-Lassang, & Schmaltz, 2010) and to-
Wilkins, 2014). FDA approved the usage of gum-rosin-derived es- copherols. Antioxidants are used in the formulation to protect some
ters as a food additive in the chewing gum (Wang et al., 2011). It can components present in gum base (Fritz, 1999).
be concluded that polyvinyl acetate is one of the key ingredients in
a successful chewing gum base formulation due to its nontoxic 2.3. Production process
nature and having physical characteristics and masticatory prop-
erties most suitable for chewing gum base manufacturing (Tisdale Fig. 2 shows conventional production process of chewing gum.
& Wilkins, 2014). As seen, after treating gum base at temperature between 70 and
Texturizers or fillers are the low cost ingredients that modify the 120 C, depending on the machinability, liquid plasticizer (e.g.
texture of gum base as well as help in processing. Some examples of glycerin, polyols) is added with or without emulsifier and they are
texturizers are calcium carbonate, magnesium and aluminum sili- mixed for 2e8 min. Then approximately two thirds of the colorants
cate and magnesium. Use of certain texturizers such as calcium and sugar are added and the obtained mixture is kneaded for
carbonate poses a problem in formulations that require addition of 1e4 min. After that the kneading/mixing levels are reduced and the
acidic flavors since acid readily reacts with calcium carbonate. This rest of sugar is added. Then, flavor agent is added and mixing
not only results in loss of acids but also can damage chewing gum proceeds for 1e4 min. Depending on the formulation, if required,
packages and candy coated gums due to production of carbon di- antioxidants, humectants and fillers are added and the mixture is
oxide gas. In such cases, talc is commonly used since it does not kneaded/mixed for more 1e4 min. After rolling process, thinning
react when in contact with acids, however the cost is high and/or cutting processes take place. Regarding coated chewing
(Raithore, 2012). gum, in this step, coating is applied by ingredients such as sugar
32 N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38
3.1. Texture
33
34 N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38
in chewing gum models were investigated in some studies (De (2003) studied the various thermodynamic parameters such as
Ross, 2003). partitioning coefficients, activity coefficients, Henry constants,
molar heat of solution between flavor compounds and gum bases
3.2. Flavor by using Inverse Phase Chromatography (IGC). Greater affinity be-
tween the gum base and flavoring compounds results in slower
As it is normally expected from chewing gum that it should release or lastingness during mastication and vice versa (Potineni &
release a proper amount of flavor over a longer duration when Peterson, 2008a). Therefore, optimization of gum base/flavor
compared with the other products (Blee et al., 2011). Thereby, compound type used in the formulation is essential for the pro-
release period of flavor of chewing gum is considered as main duction of the chewing gum with desired quality in terms of flavor
evaluation quality criterion (Wong et al., 2009). Flavor is a more release.
substantive quality parameter for chewing gum than for other food In order to adapt the texture and release of flavor compound to
stuffs, because the flavor of chewing gum is strongly required with those of conventional sugar-containing food products, knowledge
an excellent characteristics of in-mouth release such as immediate of the physicochemical interactions between volatile constituents
flavor impression, long duration of perception of odorants during of a food matrix is of great importance (Siefarth et al., 2011). The
chewing, excellent odor quality and appropriate intensity (Itobe distribution of the flavor compounds between the phases of
et al., 2012; Ovejero-Lopez et al., 2004). chewing gum depends on the compound affinity for each phase
Considering the importance of flavor release in chewing gum, and historically has been related to the compound hydrophobicity
development of suitable analytical techniques to observe volatile (Potineni & Peterson, 2008a). It appeared that the in-mouth elution
release from chewing gum during production, storage and con- of odorants from the chewing gum to saliva was the partition
sumption periods has drawn attention (Wong et al., 2009) since the phenomenon between the hydrophobic chewing gum base and
estimation of flavor release from complex food matrices like hydrophilic medium (saliva). Therefore, it can be presumed the
chewing gum is backbreaking (Siefarth et al., 2011). The mecha- hydrophobicity/hydrophilicity (polarity) of each odorant would
nisms of flavor release and perception in chewing gum can be have an influence on the amounts of eluted odorants from the
better understood by combining analytical methods that monitor chewing gum (Itobe et al., 2012). Harrison (2000) studied flavor
the release profiles of key flavor stimuli near the receptors with release mechanism for different volatile substances considering log
sensory evaluation (Potineni & Peterson, 2008b). The flavor cP in chewing gum models and they found that flavor compounds
perception in chewing gum includes the releasing behavior of the having low log cP values were determined to release faster and
corresponding flavor from the product and their transport via the deplete more quickly than ones having higher value. Sotsman et al.
retronasal route to the nasal cavity, where aroma perception takes (2009) found that the release profile of volatiles from chewing
place (Itobe et al., 2012). Firstly, receptors in mouth and nose sense gums was determined by the hydrophilicity of the volatiles. Rela-
the flavor of food and then produce signals. These signals are pro- tively hydrophilic compounds (log P < 1.8) were released fastest
cessed in the neural system (Davidson, Linforth, Hollowod, & and reached their maximum in the first several min of chewing
Taylor, 1999). Mastication of chewing gum may elicit a regular while compounds with log P > 1.8 showed an increasing release
pattern of velum opening and consequently volatile delivery to the continually over the entire chewing period. Uneven distribution of
upper airway as it is eaten (Blee et al., 2011). The process of aroma flavor compound during chewing could be accepted as quality
perception involves many steps. First, odorants are released from defect, which can be eliminated by controlled release of flavor
the chewing gum and diluted with saliva during chewing. They are compounds through encapsulation.
then volatilized into the headspace of the oral cavity and trans- Flavor in chewing gums could not be released completely, which
ported through the retronasal route to the nasal cavity, where they may be associated with the matrix of the product. Findings related
interact with the receptors in the olfactory epithelium. The infor- with chewed gum indicated that most of the aromatizer substances
mation about sensation are converted to electric signals by re- were still observed in the bolus (Krause, Henson, & Reineccius,
ceptors. As a result of transportation of the signals to the brain the 2011). In the study carried by Yamano and Tezuka (1979) it was
aroma is sensed. Therefore, the in-mouth release of each odorant highlighted that after 10 min chewing 23e27% of the incorporated
during chewing would be affected by each step in the process (Itobe D-carvone and L-menthol had been released from the gum bolus,
et al., 2012). Odorant release in mouth is also important for over- and after 60 min it was only 58e62%. In the other study, the effect
coming jungle mouth, which is one of the most attractive reasons of the flavor compound, gum hardness, chewing efficiency and
for consumption of chewing gum in daily life. presence of plasticizer on flavor release behavior was studied and it
Although flavorings exist in low concentrations (about 0.4%e was concluded that after 30 min mastication 10e50% of the volatile
1.0%) in the final gum formula, it is the second in importance after flavor compounds were released depending on these factors
gum base considering quality of the end product (Wong et al., mentioned (De Ross, 2003). Different researches were conducted to
2009). The release of flavor compounds from chewing gum has optimize flavor release for chewing gum. In the study performed by
been traditionally predicted in the flavor/gum industry based on Santos et al. (2014), the analysis of Time-Intensity in chewing gum
thermodynamic parameters of log P (hydrophobicity and polarity found that the release of xylitol and menthol can be controlled by
indicator) or log cP (Gum Base-to-Water Partitioning Coefficient: microcapsules and by this way it is possible to prolong the cooling
vapour pressure and volatility indicator) (Potineni & Peterson, sensation. Also, by high encapsulation efficiency, menthol provided
2008a). These two parameters provide information about release a long duration of flavor when applied in the chewing gum. The
properties of corresponding flavor compounds for chewing gum addition of saliva has important effects on the retronasal aroma
matrix. release and their release profiles. Therefore further investigation
Atmospheric pressure chemical ionization mass spectroscopy will be needed in order to understand the influence of saliva (Itobe
(APCI-MS), Proton Transfer Reaction (PTR)-MS and sensory time- et al., 2012).
intensity (TI) methods used to monitor release characteristics of Non-equilibrium partition model was performed to monitor
volatile compounds in chewing gum systems. Additionally, in the releasing mechanism of different hydrophobic compounds in the
study carried out by Zhang, Cheong, Yu, Curran, and Zhou (2014) chewing gum model systems (De Ross and Wolswinkel, 1994).
and Wong et al. (2009) flavor release in chewing gums is studied Linear interaction between the release of flavor compounds and log
by HS-SPME e GC/MS technique. Also, Niederer, Le, and Cantergiani cP value was determined for the first 5 min (thermodynamic
N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38 35
control). For longer chewing periods, the use of log cP was not (McGowan et al., 2005). Quality of the chewing gums are
appropriate due to low relation between log cP and flavor release. commonly evaluated by Time-Intensity (TI) sensory analysis due to
Flavor release after 5 min was more explained by diffusion and its effectiveness (Davidson et al., 1999; Druizer, Bloom, & Findlay,
mastication efficiency. 1996; Guinard, Zoumas-Morse, Walchak, & Simpson, 1997; McGo-
In other studies, relation between gum sweetness and flavor wan & Lee, 2006; Neyraud, Prinz, & Dransfield, 2003; Ovejero-
sensation was also investigated (Davidson et al., 1999; Davidson, Lopez, Bro, & Bredie, 2005; Santos et al., 2014), since it provides
Linforth, Hollowood, Taylor, 2000). It is believed that the most beneficial results for the monitoring of changes in flavor intensity
substantial parameter for the duration of sensation of flavor in- as a function of time (Delarue & Loescher, 2004).
tensity in the chewing gum is the rate of sweetness release Regarding solid foods, mass transfer occurs between the solid
regardless of volatile release (Krause et al., 2011). In other words, matrix and the mouth liquid phase (saliva) and then the direction of
flavor is perceived for longer times when chewing gum has high transfer is towards to the gas phase (breath). In this circumstances,
sweetness level (Krause et al., 2011). Davidson et al. (1999) inves- the amount and structure of matrix and flavor found in mouth can
tigated the release characteristics of menthone and sucrose from play an important role in aroma release, while the matrix degra-
chewing gum system where panelists evaluated mint flavor in- dation level and the effective surface area are influenced by
tensity over time. As a result of this study, correlation between mastication intensity and duration (Linforth et al., 2005). The
reduction of mint flavor intensity and sucrose concentration with findings implied that variation in gum composition can be analyzed
respect to time was reported. In another study, which was per- by both instrumental and sensory methods, procuring suitable re-
formed by Raithore (2012), the flavor release profiles for both sults (Ovejero-Lopez et al., 2004). Blee et al. (2011) investigated the
aroma and high intensity sweetener compounds were highest for variation in vivo volatile release between panelists consuming
the sample formulated with the least water-soluble polyol different types of confectionery. They noted that the chewing gum
(mannitol) and lowest for sample with the most water-soluble gave maximum constituent release, which was affected by chewing
polyol (sorbitol). Unique polyol-flavor interactions were reported intensity in oral processing and volatile delivery. Krause et al.
by Raithore (2012) concerning flavor delivery; the aroma com- (2011) reported that investigating the flavor release by a kind of
pounds were mainly influenced by the polyol type whereas the chewing device can provide repeatable and robust results than that
high intensity sweetener by particle size. carried out by panelists.
Also, increasing intensity of flavor release is more proportional Flavor release analyses in minted chewing gum can be carried
to bolus weight in low-fat foodscompared to high-fat foods, which out using instrumental and sensory tests (Ovejero-Lopez et al.,
can result from selective adhesion of fat to the oral cavity surfaces 2004) and in general agreement was observed between APCI-MS
and by this way effective surface area required for the lipophilic and TI observations. However, although by means of in vivo
flavor release can vary (Linforth, Blissett, & Taylor, 2005). However, studies it can be possible to obtain information about the interac-
flavor release of compounds depend on chemical structure of them, tion between flavor release and perception duration, the applied
namely, their hydrophobic or hydrophilic nature since according to methods have drawbacks which can be eliminated by artificial
the previous studies, positive correlation between retention of chewing devices (Krause et al., 2011). For instance, the volatile
lipophilic compounds and fat content was mentioned in dairy delivery differences observed across the panel may represent var-
desserts (Gonzalez-Toma s, Bayarri, Taylor & Costell, 2007; Van iations in velum opening as a result of differences in mouth
Ruth, de Witte, & Rey Uriarte, 2004). On the contrary, greater movement (Blee et al., 2011).
concentrations of fats and oils typically lead to reduction in vola- Since eating is a dynamic process, the influence of texture on
tility of hydrophobic odorants like long-chain aldehydes (Kersiene, flavor release and sensation was studied by in vivo studies
Adams, Dubra, De Kimpe, & Leskauskaite, _ 2008). The fat's mecha- (Raithore, 2012). In the study of Ovejero-Lopez et al. (2004), it was
nism of action on food flavor is very complex (Arancibia, Castro, concluded that the retronasal concentration and sensibility of the
Jublot, Costell, & Bayarri, 2015). It was reported that fats affect peppermint oil was affected by its concentration level (0.5e2% w/
the flavor release due to the two factors: (i) being a solvent for w) added to the gum. The sweeteners' (sorbitol or xylitol) effect
lipophilic flavor compounds and (ii) its effect on texture (Arancibia was less apparent. In the other study, sweetness and peppermint
et al., 2015). De Roos (1997) reported that among the food in- perceptions in chewing gum were determined using dual-attribute
gredients lipids have the greatest effects on the partitioning of and it was found that faster release of sweetness increased the
flavor compounds between corresponding materials and the duration and intensity of sweet perception, as well as the duration
gaseous phase. of peppermint flavor (Druizer et al., 1996). In the study of Davidson
et al. (1999), delivery of sucrose and menthone in chewing gum
3.3. Sensory system during masticating was determined in-mouth and in-nose,
respectively. They indicated that the panelists’ perception of mint
The sensory response to an added flavor in chewing gum is flavor followed sucrose release rather than menthone release. The
mainly influenced by the rate and extent of the in-mouth flavor temporal analysis of the chemical stimuli, with simultaneous TI
release which depends on the partition between the different analysis provided unequivocal evidence of the perceptual interac-
phases (chewing gum-saliva-air) and mass transfer rate (Harrison, tion between nonvolatile and volatile flavor compounds from
2000; Itobe et al., 2012). Mouthfeel is the sensation produced by chewing gum (Davidson et al., 1999).
physical stimulation of receptors in the mouth such as by texture or Color is one of the decisive sensory parameters affecting con-
temperature (Raithore, 2012). The taste and aroma perceptions sumer acceptability of the products. In addition, the stability of the
were tested individually, but then the amount in-nose remains coloring compounds against mouth condition is also important
fairly constant over long periods of time (Davidson et al., 1999). since chewing gum can be repeatedly used in a day. Therefore,
To achieve an understanding of the dynamic process of food stable coloring compounds could be used in chewing gum formu-
flavor perception, it is necessary to apply time-resolved research lations. Encapsulated coloring agents could provide color stability
methods (Ovejero-Lopez et al., 2004). A time-intensity (TI) study is for a longer time. In the study performed by Charanioti et al. (2015),
a widely used relevant tool to observe the intensity variance. In this the chewing gum samples produced with saffron and beetroot
method, the association between intensity of the corresponding coloring extracts encapsulated in gum Arabic-modified starch
material and duration of its perception is described graphically showed the greatest a* (for beetroot) and b* (for saffron) values
36 N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38
indicating a better protection. the stability of the product, as well as the use of lactic acid in place
of citric acid.
4. Opportunities for delivering bioactive compounds In the studies related with development of functional chewing
gums, physical and chemical properties of bioactive compounds
Chewing gum is different from other food products in terms of should be investigated considering characteristics of foods used as
the fact that it is chewed for long periods without being swallowed a carrier of bioactive compounds. For instance, owing to the high
in mouth (Davidson et al., 1999). As known, it is not directly eaten, it hydrophilic characteristics of chewing gums, the strong attraction
is masticated with teeth in mouth (Yang et al., 2011), and different leads to deprivation of volatile organic compounds upon concen-
compounds present in the chewing gum can be absorbed to body tration (Wong et al., 2009). Also, chewing gums are composed of
during chewing. During the chewing process, bioactive compounds many different ingredients which have tendency to interact with
are released from chewing gum matrix into saliva. After release, themselves and with the active substance (Maggi et al., 2013).
they could reach the stomach by absorption or swallowing mech- Particle size of the bioactive compound could be regarded as
anisms (Chandran, Ravi, Vipin, & Augusthy, 2014). another factor. The particle size of the active ingredient should be
There are very limited studies (Abbasi, Rahimi, & Azizi, 2009; kept below approximately 100 mm to avoid unpleasant gritty
Charanioti, Nikoloudaki, & Tzia, 2015; Santos et al., 2014; Yang feeling during chewing (Chandran et al., 2014).
et al., 2004) on chewing gums evaluating use of microcapsules in In the studies about improvement of functional foods, deter-
food science and technology field. However, it has substantial ad- mination of needs and characteristics of target consumer groups
vantages when compared with the other confectionery products and consumption patterns is of capital importance. Hearty et al.
which are produced at elevated temperature levels. Chewing gum (2014) noted that older children consume more chewing gum
is the most suitable media for encapsulated and un-encapsulated than younger children and adolescents chew much more than older
bioactive substances due to its fabrication conditions where adults in Europe.
extreme heat and moisture conditions are not applied (Santos et al., The results obtained from studies related with improvement of
2014). These characteristics of chewing gum enable the food in- medicated chewing gum can direct researches carried out in food
dustry to produce functional, nutritional and dietetic chewing technology area. As a result of both in vivo and in vitro studies,
gums (Abbasi et al., 2009). although drug release performance during chewing had less vari-
In the study performed by Yang et al. (2004), chewing gum ability during storage, it should be controlled since gum matrix is
containing catechins were prepared by applying a novel dispersion semi-solid and may be affected by mastication which can signifi-
and hot-melt fluid bed coating method. The effect of varying levels cantly influnce the delivery characteristics of the drug (Maggi et al.,
of Eudragit® coating to the granules on the prolonged release of 2013). Also, the taste of active ingredient must be within the
catechins from chewing gum was investigated. They noted that PVC acceptable limits (Chandran et al., 2014).
was not an ideal material for sustained release of catechins, which Release of most water-soluble components from chewing gum
were added chewing gum as tea polyphenols. Improved formula- was sustained not more than 5 min, which is not sufficient for the
tions (Yang et al., 2004) and process optimization of chewing gum effective treatment (Yang et al., 2004). Also, Delarue and Loescher
are demanded so that controlled and sustained release of bioactive (2004) found out that some consumers chew for few min and
compounds can be achieved. Also, for essential oil, microencapsu- then they substitute it with fresh gum. On the contrary other ones
lation technology is required to achieve controlled release of target may chew the same gum for half-a-day or more. So that, low dose
compound (Xiao, He, & Zhu, 2014). One of the obvious applications active ingredients are the prime candidates for the formulation of
of microencapsulated ingredients (particularly acids) is their functional chewing gums (Chandran et al., 2014).
insertion in chewing gum where microcapsules can be ruptured by Mineral and vitamin deficiencies could be eliminated by incor-
mucus (chemical activity) or by chewing (physical rubs) to release porating of these ingredients in the chewing gum. Stability and
their contents in a controlled manner in order to achieve a long- extractability of them from gum matrix to saliva can be improved
lasting acidic taste (Abbasi et al., 2009). by using encapsulated forms of them. Important bioactive com-
Another advantage of chewing gums in delivering bioactive pounds such as fatty acids, carotenoids, tocopherols, flavonoids,
compounds is that generally chewing gums are not swallowed and polyphenols, phytosterols are hydrophobic nature (Kris-Etherton
they are low calorie products. Therefore, in recent years when et al., 2002); therefore, their transportation to saliva from chew-
obesity is a big problem throughout the world, such products ing gum matrix could be a problem. However, encapsulation en-
providing less energy to body have attracted attention in terms of ables the water solubility of these substances.
delivering functional compounds. In recent years plant-based volatile aroma compounds have
Selection of encapsulation techniques and encapsulating agents attracted interest due to their antimicrobial, insecticides and fun-
is very important according to the results of the study performed by gicides characteristics (Boulogne, Petit, Ozier-Lafontaine, Desfon-
Xiao et al. (2014) for encapsulation efficiency to increase stability of taines, & Loranger-Merciris, 2012; Schwab, Davidovich-Rikanati, &
bioactive compounds. The other aim of microencapsulation is to Lewinsohn, 2008); therefore, they can be used to improve the shelf-
reduce probable interactions between ingredients to maintain life (Ayala-Zavala, Gonzalez-Aguilar, & Del-Toro-Sanchez, 2009)
desired color, flavor and texture characteristics of the foodstuffs and health benefits of food products (Keiler, Zierau, & Kretzschmar,
during shelf life (Abbasi et al., 2009). 2013). Some of the plant sourced volatile compounds were hexanal,
As mentioned above, water content of gum base is low, and the hexyl acetate, neral, geranial, vanillin, terpinen-4-ol, linalool, a-
matrix of the gum can preserve the active compounds from terpineol (Ayseli & Ayseli, 2016). Such volatile compounds could be
extrinsic factors such as oxygen, light and humidity, which can used in chewing gum formulation due to their health benefits and
reduce or eliminate chemical degradation reactions and growth of aroma providing characteristics.
microorganisms (Maggi et al., 2013). In addition, shelf life and Health benefit effects of microalgae were reported and they
stability can further be improved by optimization of process and included polyunsaturated fatty acids (Eicosapentaenoic acid, g-
ingredients. The impact of sodium lactate addition and storage linolenic acid, arachidonic acid, docosahexaenoic acid), sterols
conditions on the stability of chewing gums was investigated by (brassicasterol, stigmasterol), pigments (phycocyanin, phycoery-
Valduga et al. (2012). They noted that sodium lactate incorporation trin, b-carotene, astaxanthin, lutein, zeaxanthin, canthaxanthin),
to the formulation in concentrations of 1.08% on dry basis improved proteins, enzymes and vitamins (Vitamins C, K, B12, A and E) (De
N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38 37
Jesus Raposo, de Morais, & de Morais, 2013). Therefore, microalgae D. D. Roberts, & A. J. Taylor (Eds.), Flavor release (pp. 99e111). Washington DC:
American Chemical Society.
can be added at concentrations depending on the quality of
De Jesus Raposo, M. F., de Morais, R. M. S. C., & de Morais, A. M. M. B. (2013). Health
chewing gum to improve nutritional and functional properties of applications of bioactive compounds from marine microalgae. Life Sciences, 93,
the products. 479e486.
During production of chewing gum with functional property, De Roos, K. B. (1997). How lipids influence food flavor. Food Technology, 51, 60e62.
De Ross, K. B. (2003). Effect of texture and microstructure on flavor retention and
uniform distribution of the corresponding bioactive compound is release. International Dairy Journal, 13(8), 593e605.
critical. Therefore, production method should be determined De Ross, K. B., & Wolswinkel, K. (1994). Non-equilibrium partition model for pre-
considering this situation. In fusion method, high temperature dicting flavor release in the mouth. In H. Maarse, & D. G. van den Heij (Eds.), vol.
35. Proceedings of the 7th Weurman flavour research Symposium, Noordwijkerhout
levels are applied for melting of gum base, which causes deterio- (pp. 15e31). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Trends in flavor research; Proceedings of the
ration of bioactive compounds. If the bioactive compound is added 7th Weurman Flavour Research Symposium, Noordwijkerhout.
at lower temperature levels the homogeneity of it in chewing gum Delarue, J., & Loescher, E. (2004). Dynamic of food preferences: A case study with
chewing gums. Food Quality and Preferences, 15(7e8), 771e779.
is very difficult due to high viscous character of the sample. Deshpande, A., & Jadad, A. R. (2008). The impact of polyol containing chewing gums
Regarding the methods mentioned, direct compression method is on dental caries; a systematic review of original randomized controlled trials
suitable for the manufacturing of chewing gum for delivery aims. and observational studies. Journal of American Dentist Associations, 139,
1602e1604.
Druizer, L. M., Bloom, K., & Findlay, C. J. (1996). Dual-attribute time intensity
5. Conclusion measurement of sweetness and peppermint perception of chewing gum.
Journal of Food Science, 61(3), 636e638.
Edin, K., Fida-Lassang, N., & Schmaltz, L. (2010). Determination of butylated
In food science and technology area, awareness of potential uses hydroxytoluene in chewing gum using GC-MS. Concordia College Journal of
of chewing gum is scarce due to lack of scientific studies conducted Analytical Chemistry, 1, 14e18.
Euromonitor. (2014). http://blog.euromonitor.com/2014/07/new-confectionery-
about chewing gum. There are wide range of chewing gum benefits
data-what-is-it-telling-us.html Accesed 08.02.16.
from freshening breath to acting as a pleasant way to take vitamins Fritz, D. (1999). Chewing gum technology. In E. B. Jackson (Ed.), Sugar confectionery
and medicine. However, to improve these functions of chewing manufacture. Gaithersburg, Maryland: An Aspen Publication.
Fritz, D. (2006). Formulation and production of chewing gum and bubble gum. Lon-
gum, detailed understanding of chewing gum ingredients, pro-
don, UK: Kennedys Publications Ltd.
duction process, interaction of flavor or bioactive compounds Gonzalez-Tom as, L., Bayarri, S., Taylor, A. J., & Costell, E. (2007). Flavour release and
release behavior with its texture and ingredients are necessary. perception from model dairy custards. Food Research International, 40, 520e528.
Therefore, importance of chewing gum should be appreciated to Guinard, J. X., Zoumas-Morse, C., Walchak, C., & Simpson, H. (1997). Relation be-
tween saliva flow and flavor release from chewing gum. Physiology & Behavior,
take the advantage of this enjoyable confection which can become a 61(4), 591e596.
tailor-made product for various human needs. According to the Harrison, M. (2000). Mathematical models of release and transport of flavors from
results it could be concluded that chewing gum is a promising foods in the mouth of the olfactory epithelium. In D. D. Roberts, & A. J. Taylor
(Eds.), Flavor release (vol. 763, pp. 179e191). Washington DC: Oxford University
confection providing the most hospitable environment for bioac- Press.
tive compounds due to the mild production conditions and having Hearty, A., Lau, A., & Roberts, A. (2014). Chewing gum in Europe: A survey intakes in
the longest duration of remaining in mouth among other foods. France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. Food Additives and Contaminants: Part
A, 31(7), 1147e1157.
Therefore, more scientific studies should be conducted in food Hetherington, M. M., & Regan, M. F. (2011). Effects of chewing gum on short-term
science and technology area to disclose potentials of chewing gum. appetite regulation in moderately restrained eaters. Appetite, 57, 475e482.
Itobe, T., Kumazawa, K., Inagaki, S., & Nishimura, O. (2012). A new approach to
estimate the elution characteristics of odorants in chewing gum during
References chewing. Food Science and Technology Research, 18(2), 295e302.
Keiler, A. M., Zierau, O., & Kretzschmar, G. (2013). Hop extracts and hop substances
Abbasi, S., Rahimi, S., & Azizi, M. (2009). Influence of microwave-microencapsulated in treatment of menopausal complaints. Planta Medica, 79(7), 576e579.
citric acid on some sensory properties of chewing gum. Journal of Microen- Kersiene, M., Adams, A., Dubra, A., De Kimpe, N., & Leskauskaite, _ D. (2008). In-
capsulation, 26(1), 90e96. teractions between flavour release and rheological properties in model custard
Arancibia, C., Castro, C., Jublot, L., Costell, E., & Bayarri, S. (2015). Colour, rheology, desserts: Effect of starch concentration and milk fat. Food Chemistry, 108,
flavour release and sensory perception of dairy desserts. Influence of thickener 1183e1191.
and fat content. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 62, 408e416. Krause, A. J., Henson, L. S., & Reineccius, G. A. (2011). Use of a chewing gum device to
Ayala-Zavala, J. F., Gonzalez-Aguilar, G. A., & Del-Toro-Sanchez, L. (2009). Enhancing perform a mass balance on chewing gum components. Flavor and Fragrance
safety and aroma appealing of fresh-cut fruits and vegetables using the anti- Journal, 26, 47e54.
microbial and aromatic power of essential oils. Journal of Food Science, 74(7), Kris-Etherton, P. M., Hecker, K. D., Bonanome, A., Coval, S. M., Binkoski, A. E.,
84e90. Hilpert, K. F., et al. (2002). Bioactive compounds in foods: Their role in the
_ (2016). Flavors of the future: Health benefits of flavor
Ayseli, M. T., & Ayseli, Y.I. prevention of cardiovascular disease and cancer. The American Journal of Med-
precursors and volatile compounds in plant foods. Trends in Food Science and icine, 113(9), 71e88.
Technology, 48, 69e77. Linforth, R. S. T., Blissett, A., & Taylor, A. J. (2005). Differences in the effect of bolus
Baysal, A., Ozbek, N., & Akman, S. (2010). A practical solid sampling method for the weight on flavor release into the breath between low-fat and high-fat products.
determination of lead in chewing gum by electrothermal atomic absorption Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 53, 7217e7221.
spectrometry. Food Chemistry, 123, 901e904. Maggi, L., Conte, U., Nhamias, A., Grenier, P., & Vergnault, G. (2013). Evaluation of
Blee, N., Linforth, R., Yang, N., Brown, K., & Taylor, A. (2011). Variation in aroma accelerated stability test conditions for medicated chewing gums. Drug Devel-
release between panelists consuming different types of confectionary. Flavour opment and Industrial Pharmacy, 39(10), 1500e1507.
and Fragrance Journal, 26, 186e191. McGowan, B. A., & Lee, S.-Y. (2006). Comparison of methods to analyze time-
Boulogne, I., Petit, P., Ozier-Lafontaine, H., Desfontaines, L., & Loranger-Merciris, G. intensity curves in corn zein chewing gum study. Food Quality and Preference,
(2012). Insecticidal and antifungal chemicals produced by plants: A review. 17(3e4), 296e306.
Environmental Chemistry Letters, 10(4), 325e347. McGowan, B. A., Padua, G. W., & Lee, S.-Y. (2005). Formulation of corn zein chewing
Carbonell-Barrachina, A. A., Garcia, E., Sanchez Soriano, J., Aracil, P., & Burlo, F. gum and evaluation of sensory properties by the time-intensity method. Journal
(2002). Effcets of raw materials, ingredients, and production lines on arsenic of Food Science, 70(7), S475eS481.
and copper concentrations in confectinery. Journal of Agricultural and Food Neyraud, E., Prinz, J., & Dransfield, E. (2003). NaCl and sugar release, salivation and
Chemistry, 50, 3738e3742. taste during mastication of salted chewing gum. Physiology & Behavior, 79(4e5),
Chandran, S., Ravi, S., Vipin, K. V., & Augusthy, A. R. (2014). Formulation and eval- 731e737.
uation of medicated chewing gums containing methyl prednisolone IP. Inter- Niederer, B., Le, A., & Cantergiani, E. (2003). Thermodynamic study of two different
national Journal of ChemTech Research, 6(11), 4810e4816. chewing-gum bases by inverse gas chromatograph. Journal of Chromatography
Charanioti, C., Nikoloudaki, A., & Tzia, C. (2015). Saffron and beetroot extracts A, 996(1e2), 189e194.
encapsulated in maltodextrin, gum arabic, modified starch and chitosan: Ovejero-Lopez, I., Bro, R., & Bredie, W. L. P. (2005). Univariate and multivariate
Incorporation in chewing gum system. Carbohydrate Polymers, 127, 252e263. modeling of flavor release in chewing gum using time-intensity: A comprasion
Davidson, J. M., Linforth, R. S., Hollowod, T. A., & Taylor, A. J. (1999). Effect of sucrose of data analytical methods. Food Quality and Preferences, 16(4), 327e343.
on the perceived flavor intensity of chewing gum. Journal of Agricultural and Ovejero-Lopez, I., Haahr, A.-M., Van Den Berg, F., & Bredie, W. L. P. (2004). Flavor
Food Chemistry, 47, 4336e4340. release measurement from gum model system. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Davidson, J. M., Linforth, R. S. T., Hollowood, T. A., & Taylor, A. J. (2000). In Chemistry, 52, 8119e8126.
38 N. Konar et al. / Trends in Food Science & Technology 55 (2016) 29e38
Paradkar, M., Gajra, B., & Patel, B. (2015). Formulation development and evaluation composition on flavor release from chewing gum. In J. L. Le Quere, &
of medicated chewing gum of anti-emetic drug. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal. P. X. Etievant (Eds.), Flavour research at the dawn of the twenty-first Century (pp.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2015.02.017. 252e255). Cachan: Lavoisier.
Potineni, R. V. (2007). Mechanisms of flavor release and perception in sugar-free Tisdale, E., & Wilkins, C. (2014). Method development for compositional analysis of
chewing gum. PhD Thesis. US: The Pennsylvania State University, The Grad- low molecular weight poly(vinyl acetate) by matrix assisted/laser desorption-
uate School, Department of Food Science. mass spectrometry and its application to analysis of chewing gum. Analytica
Potineni, R. V., & Peterson, D. G. (2008a). Mechanisms of flavor release in chewing Chimica Acta, 820, 92e103.
gum: Cinnamaldehyde. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 56, Valduga, E., Lazzari, M. R., Xardanega, R., & Di Luccio, M. (2012). Evaluation of sugar
3260e3267. inversion in chewing gum added of sodium lactate. Journal of Food Process
Potineni, R. V., & Peterson, D. G. (2008b). Influence of flavor solvent on flavor release Engineering, 35, 37e53.
and perception in sugar-free chewing gum. Journal of Agricultural and Food Van Ruth, S. M., de Witte, L., & Rey Uriarte, A. (2004). Volatile flavor analysis and
Chemistry, 56, 3254e3259. sensory evaluation of custard desserts varying in type and concentration of
Raithore, S. (2012). Effect of polyols on flavor release during mastication of sugar-free carboxymethyl cellulose. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 52,
confections. PhD Thesis (p. 166). University of Minnesota. 8105e8110.
Ribelles, L. M., Guinot, J. F., Mayne, A. R., & Bellet, D. L. J. (2010). Effects of xylitol Wang, J., Yao, K., Korich, A. L., Li, S., Ma, S., Ploehn, H. J., et al. (2011). Combining
chewing gum on salivary flow rate, pH, buffering capacity and presence of renewable gum rosin and lignin: Towards hydrophobic polymer composites by
Streptococcus mutans in saliva. European Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, 11, controlled polymerization. Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry,
9e14. 49, 3728e3738.
Santos, M. G., Carpinteiro, D. A., Thomazini, M., Rocha-Selmi, G. A., da Cruz, A. G., Wong, S. W., Yu, B., Curran, P., & Zhou, W. (2009). Characterizing the release of flavor
Rodrigues, C. E. C., et al. (2014). Coencapsulation of xylitol and menthol by compounds from chewing gum through HS-SPME analysis and mathematical
double emulsion followed by complex coacervation and microcapsule appli- modeling. Food Chemistry, 114, 852e858.
cation in chewin gum. Food Research International, 66, 454e462. Xiao, Z., He, L., & Zhu, G. (2014). The preparation and properties of three types of
Schwab, W., Davidovich-Rikanati, R., & Lewinsohn, E. (2008). Biosynthesis of plant microcapsules of sweet orange oil using alginate and chitosan as wall material.
derived flavor compounds. Plant Journal, 54(4), 712e732. Flavour and Fragrance Journal, 29, 350e355.
Siefarth, C., Tyapkova, O., Beauchamp, J., Schweiggert, U., Buettner, A., & Bader, S. Yamano, T., & Tezuka, S. (1979). Journal of Food Hygiene Society of Japan, 20, 456.
(2011). Influence of polyols and bulking agents on flavor release from low Yang, X., Wang, G., & Zhang, X. (2004). Release kinetics of catechins from cheing
viscosity solutions. Food Chemistry, 129, 1462e1468. gum. Journal of Pharmaceutical Science, 93(2), 293e299.
Smith, A. P., Chaplalin, K., & Wadsworth, E. (2012). Chewing gum occupational Yang, Y., Yin, J., & Shao, B. (2011). Simultaneous determination of five aluminumlake
stress, work performance and wellbeing. An intervention study. Appetite, 58, dyes in chewing gum by HPLC with photodiode array detection. Food Additives
1083e1086. and Contaminants, 28(9), 1159e1167.
Sotsman, K., Potineni, P. V., McMillan, E., & Antennuci, R. N. (2009). In A. Hansel, & Zhang, J., Cheong, M.-W., Yu, B., Curran, P., & Zhou, W. (2014). Second Order Kinetic
J. Dunkl (Eds.), 4th International Conference on Proton transfer (pp. 61e65). Modelling of head space solid phase microextraction of flavors released from
Insbruck: Insbruck University Press. selected food model systems. Molecules, 19, 13894e13908.
Soutmann, K., Van Lochem, R., & De Roos, K. (2003). The Influence of gum base