Thesis Culinary Arts

0
DEVELOPMENT AND ACCEPTABILITY OF A HEALTHY

GOURMET MEAL USING WILD GREENS
A Thesis Manuscript
submitted to the Faculty of the
Graduate School of Hospitality Management
Philippine Womens University
Taft Avenue, Manila
In partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Science in Culinary Arts
REDEN COSTA
April 2013
1
Chapter 1
THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
Introduction
Gourmet is a cultural ideal associated with the culinary arts of fine food
and drink, or haute cuisine, which is characterized by refined, even elaborate
preparations and presentations of aesthetically balanced meals of several
contrasting, often quite rich courses. The term and its associated practices are
usually used positively to describe people of refined taste and passion (McGrath,
2007). Gourmet may describe a class of restaurant, cuisine, meal or ingredient of
high quality, of special presentation, or high sophistication (Kamp, 2006).
Gourmet cooking is essentially an art. One considers balances between
textures and colors, the lasting, memorable effect it has on the diner, and there is
an element of striving for perfection that only comes with practice. One uses
decorative
garnishes
that
basic
cooking
doesn't
bother
with,
and
variety/uniqueness is the key. Cooking time is much more critical as it affects

color, texture, and taste. The ingredients are meant to impress so often they are
more rare and/or expensive (Irving, 2009).
The world food scene today is focused on local sustainable ingredients.
Food grown, cooked and eaten within a reasonable distance of where its
consumed always tastes better. Many wild edible plants are nutritionally rich and
can supplement nutritional requirements, especially vitamins and micronutrients
(Ali-Shtayeh et al., 2008).
2
Wild greens are traditionally important items of diet in many Filipino
homes. Apart from the variety which they add to the menu, they are valuable
sources of nutrients especially in rural areas where they contribute substantially
to protein, mineral, vitamins, fiber and other nutrients which are usually in short
supply in daily diets. Besides, they add flavor, variety, taste, color and aesthetic
appeal to what would otherwise be a monotonous diet. They are in abundance in
the Philippines (Lugod and de Padua, 1989).
Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) continues to constitute a major health problem
in developing countries like the Philippines (Faber, Venter and Benade, 2001),
with a total of 250 million children suffering from VAD and over 3 million
manifesting clinical signs. This is a serious public health problem in the lowincome populations such as the Philippines (Haskell et al., 2004).
According to Faber et al. (2001), the essential role of vitamin A in vision
and eye health has been recognized as a critical factor in health and survival of
individuals. The Recommended Energy and Nutrient Intake (RENI) of vitamin A is
400 micrograms per day for 7-9 year old Filipino children (FNRI-DOST, 2002).
Males aged 19 to more than 65 years old have Vitamin A RENI of 550
micrograms per day, while females in the same age group have 500 micrograms
(FNRI-DOST, 2002). For pregnant women, the recommended vitamin A intake is
800 micrograms, while for lactating women the recommended vitamin A intake is
900 micrograms.
Although an abundance of plant sources rich in
-carotene is available
to most households, people in developing countries still suffer from VAD. This
3
may be caused by lack of knowledge, lack of care and the apparently lower
vitamin A activity of the pro-vitamin ( -carotene-rich) foods (Louw, 2001).
As such, this study emphasized the significance of edible wild greens in
supplementing vitamin A deficiency among target consumers of gourmet meal.
This research was conducted to develop a healthy gourmet meal comprising of
main course, soup, salad and dessert prepared with local wild greens. It is the
aim of this study to determine the effect of using alugbati, pako and pansitpansitan on the sensory characteristics, theoretical nutrient content and overall
acceptability of the developed gourmet meal.
Background of the Study

Consumers now demand higher quality in all aspects of life. Gourmet
dishes are developed to produce food with superior sensory qualities and
sophistication compared to other cuisines (Novelli, 2004).
For centuries, the greens have helped Filipinos endure through lean times,
and they still do today, but they are also a beloved food and a delicacy. Many
Filipinos keep a knife and a few plastic bags for the spontaneous gathering of
wild greens, be it from a river banks, or along a busy roadside.
Wild greens form the cheapest source of nutrients. Wild greens also rank
among the world's most nutritionally potent superfoods (Afolayan and Jimoh,
2009; De Caluw, 2010). Alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan are popular wild
greens of the Philippines with healing and therapeutic properties which help in
combating several diseases and provide valuable source of nutrients. These wild
4
greens have incredible energizing and healing powers and they are generally
free. Most Filipinos know these plants already and they are very easy to
recognize and find (Lugod and de Padua, 1989).
According to modern nutritional studies, the consumption of wild greens
brings numerous health benefits (Block, 1991). Wild greens are a source of
vitamins, folic acid, antioxidants, carotenoids and many other valuable chemicals
(Hasler, 2002; Pieroni et al., 2002; Tapsell et al., 2006). Wild greens may be a
particularly rich source of these compounds and are more likely to be free of
agricultural pollutants.
After being dismissed for many years, wild plants are now being used in
some of the best restaurants in the world and people travel long distances to
taste them. Wild plants are now celebrated, raised up to become stars of the new
cuisine (Irving, 2009). However, the culinary uses of wild edible greens that grow
in the Philippines such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan are still unknown in
terms of their nutritional content, taste and aroma.
Though many of the local wild greens are still unexplored in their culinary
potential, modern chefs around the world mainly use wild plants for their diverse
and interesting aromas. Incorporating wild greens in various cuisines would result
in sustainability and acceptability for providing nutritional security.
The researcher believes that this study would encourage chefs to use and
learn more about local wild edible greens that would help bring people into a
greater awareness of the wild ingredients available in the Philippines. This would
help foragers to communicate with chefs and chefs to exchange knowledge with
5
each other, as well as showing people that it is possible to use wild greens as
vegetables, herbs, and spices in the development of dishes.
Raising peoples awareness about the edibility and palatability of wild
greens found in the environment will allow them to see it through different eyes:
ones knowledge makes the natural world meaningful, and this meaningfulness
compels one to protect and preserve the larger system of which everybody is a
part.
The researcher likewise believes that the problem of having not enough
food on the table could be addressed. Food producers could be encouraged to
include cultivation of wild greens in extensive scale. Furthermore, households
and individuals will reflect on their food preparation and consumption practices
and habits to eat healthy, thereby improving their overall quality of life.
As such, this study utilized local wild greens, namely: alugbati, pako and
pansit-pansitan in the development of a gourmet meal.
Statement of the Problem

This study will be conducted to develop gourmet dishes using local wild
greens.
Specifically, this answered the following research problems:
1.
What are the sensory characteristics of the developed gourmet meal

using different formulations of wild green in terms of the following:
a. general appearance,
b. color,
c. aroma,
d. texture, and
e. taste?
6
2.
Is there a significant difference in the sensory characteristics of the

developed gourmet meal prepared using three local wild greens such
3.
as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan?

Is there a significant difference in the ratings of the two groups of
panelist such as: a) trained panelists (culinary instructors), and b)
experts (chefs) with regard to sensory characteristics and overall
acceptability of the developed gourmet meal prepared with three local
4.
wild greens such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan?

Are the nutritional contents of the most acceptable gourmet meal meet
the recommended vitamin A based on Recommended Energy and
5.
Nutrient Intake (RENI) for Filipino adults?

What is the direct material cost in the production of gourmet meal?
Hypotheses
To answer the objectives of this study, the hypotheses that were tested
are:
H1. There is no significant difference in the sensory characteristics of the
developed gourmet meal prepared with three local wild greens such as alugbati,
pako and pansit-pansitan.
H2. There is no significant difference in the overall acceptability of the
developed gourmet meal prepared with three local wild greens such as alugbati,
pako and pansit-pansitan.
H3. There is no significant difference in the ratings of the two groups of
panelist such as: a) trained panelists (culinary instructors), and b) experts (chefs)
with regard to sensory characteristics and overall acceptability of the developed
7
gourmet meal prepared with three local wild greens such as alugbati, pako and
pansit-pansitan.
Scope and Limitations of the Study

The study focused on the development of a complete gourmet meal
comprising of a main course (chicken scallopini), clear soup, salad (green salad)
and desert (buco smoothies) which will be prepared using different formulations
of local wild greens. The wild greens that were utilized were alugbati, pako and
pansit-pansitan. The gourmet dishes that were tested with local wild greens
include chicken scallopine, clear soup, green salad and buco smoothies.
Two groups of panelists were invited to participate in this experimental
study, namely: 15 culinary instructors from Cavite State University, Indang, Cavite
and 15 chefs in Cavite. These two groups of panelist evaluated the sample
gourmet dishes for general appearance, color, aroma, texture, taste and overall
acceptability. The 9- point hedonic scale was used to evaluate the sensory
properties and overall acceptability of the developed gourmet dishes using wild
greens.
Significance of the Study
The abundance of nutritious local wild greens in the Philippines prompted
the researcher to find alternative ways of developing gourmet meal using local
and abundant ingredients such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan.
It is hoped that this study would benefit the following:
8
Hotel and restaurant management faculty and students. The results
of this study would expand the knowledge of faculty members and HRM students
in the development of recipes utilizing local wild greens.
Gourmet chefs. It is hoped that the results of the experiment will assist
chefs in finding the culinary potential of local wild greens and use them in the
kitchen.
Consumers. It is hoped that this study would be appreciated by
consumers particularly health food lovers on benefits to the immune system
these wild greens provide.
Local community. The use of local wild greens in the production of
gourmet dishes would hopefully help sustain the local economy and upholds the
way of life of local farmers.
Future researchers. Finally, this study may also serve as valuable
reference to students and other researchers conducting related study.
Definition of Terms
For the purposes of clarity to establish a common frame of reference for
the study, the following terms are defined operationally as they were used in this
study:
9
Aroma refers to total (positive) olfactory impression gained from breathing
through the nose and from expiratory olfaction of the food.
Blind test refer to food samples which are presented without any
distinguishing features relating to treatment used.
Coding refers to the procedure wherein food samples are given a code
and tested with their identity unknown to the subjects in order to eliminate the
influences of the type of treatment used and product marking. The code can take
the form of a 3-digit random number or a letter.
Gourmet meal refers to an elegant meal meticulously prepared with great
taste intended for the family.
Food expert refers to formally qualified assessor who possesses
specialist technical knowledge and experience and who is responsible for testing
particular products/product groups. In this study, this referred to qualified gourmet
chefs who will evaluate the sensory and overall acceptability of gourmet dishes
produced with wild greens.
Hedonic test refers to an affective test to evaluate the popularity of an
aroma, appearance, taste/flavor, texture or off-flavor impression.
Overall acceptability refers to overall sensory assessment based on a
combination of all characteristic attributes contributing to sensory quality which
influence the acceptability or rejection of food products.
Panel refers to group of assessors selected to take part in a sensory test.
Sensory evaluation is a scientific discipline used to evoke, measure,
analyze and interpret reactions to those characteristics of foods and materials as
10
they are perceived by the senses. It is a subjective product examination using the
human senses. This will be performed by the participants to detect, identify, and
evaluate characteristics of the gourmet dishes using wild greens utilizing all of
the sensory pathways (olfactory, visual, gustatory, auditory, and tactile).
Taste refers to the taste qualities, sweet, sour, salty and bitter. In principal
this means all gustatory, olfactory and haptic impressions that occur as a result of
taking food into the mouth
Taste/flavor refers to the sum of olfactory, gustatory, thermal and haptic
impressions. It includes the intensity to which the food taste and smell.
Wild greens are leafy greens collected from the wild and used as a
substitute for other vegetables eaten raw, boiled, cooked in casseroles, and as
herbs. For this study, wild greens will refer to alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan.
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
A view of the work done by several scholars helps in planning future

research in the use of wild greens to various cuisines. Hence, the literature
related to local wild greens and studies on the use of wild greens in different
11
dishes are reviewed to substantiate the kind of study undertaken. Keeping in
view the objectives set forth in this study, the relevant references available are
critically reviewed in this chapter.
Alugbati
Alugbati (Basella rubra Linn., B. alba Linn.)
also known as arogbati;
dundula; grana; ilaibakir; libato; Ceylon spinach, Malabar spinach, Indian

spinach, Climbing spinach (Eng.); and Lokuei or luo kui shu (Chinese) is one
of the most popular indigenous leafy vegetables in the Philippines. Originally
from India, it is usually found in settled areas, in hedges, old cultivated areas
throughout the Philippines. It is extensively grown in market gardens and home
gardens and is being sold even in supermarkets in Visayas and Mindanao. It is
also cultivated in tropical Asia, Africa and the Malaya (DTI, PCCARD and DOST,
2009).
Its leaves are somewhat fleshy, ovate or heart-shaped. The fruit is fleshy
and stalkless, which turn purple when mature. The young stems, shoots, and
leaves are usually blanched. The edible species Basella rubra has red flowers
and bright purple-red stem while Basella alba, which is more popular, has green
leaves and stems (DTI, PCCARD and DOST, 2009). Alugbati production in 2006
was 32,303 tons from 2,482 hectares. It is grown almost anywhere, but major
producers were Iloilo, Zamboanga del Norte and Negros Oriental (Bureau of
Agricultural Statistics, 2006).
Varieties
12
There are three common types of alugbati: Basella alba with green stern
and oval to almost round leaves; Basella rubra with red stems and green, oval to
round leaves; and a third type, which is a hybrid of the two. The Institute of Plant
Breeding of the University of the Philippines Los Baos (IPB-UPLB) has released
two stopgap varieties in 1981 through its Germplasm Registration and Release
Office: the red-stemmed Pulahan and the green-stemmed Luntian.
Uses and Nutritional Value

Alugbati has a pleasant, mild spinach flavor that some may find earthy. It
is slimy when overcooked, which makes it an excellent thickening agent in soups
and stews. The purplish dye from the ripe fruit is used is used as food color and
as rouge for the face. The cooked roots are used to treat diarrhea, while cooked
leaves and stems are used as laxative. The flowers are used as antidote for
poison. A paste of the root is used as a rubefacient or applied to swellings. A
paste of the leaves is applied externally to treat boils.
Per 100 grams edible portion, alugbati leaves contain the following:
Properties
Water (g)
Energy (kcal)
Protein (g)
Fat (g)
Carbohydrates (g)
Crude Fiber (g)
Ash (g)
Calcium (mg)
Phosphorous (mg)
Amount
92.5
23.0
2.0
0.3
3.0
0.9
2.2
128.0
40.0
13
Iron (mg)
Beta-carotene (g)
Vitamin A (RE-g)
Thiamine (mg)
Riboflavin (mg)
Niacin (mg)
Ascorbic acid (mg)
4.9
2735.0
456.0
0.04
0.12
0.50
89.0
Source: The Philippine Food Composition Tables (1997). Food and

Nutrition Research Institute- Department of Science and
Technology (FNRI-DOST)
Pansit-pansitan
The pansit-pansitan (Peperomia Pellucida) is an herb also known as
ulasiman-bato, olasiman-ihalas and tangon-tangon in the Philippines. It
belongs to the family Piperaceae, comprising of about 5 genera and 1,400
species. The genus Peperomia represents nearly half of the Piperaceae.
Peperomia pellucida herb can be commonly found in many South American
countries, and in Asia. The plant grows 15 to 45 cm, its shiny light-green leaves
are succulent, well-spaced, and heart shaped. This herb thrives in loose, humid
soils under the shade of trees, especially during rainy seasons, (dos Santos et
al., 2001).
Peperomia pellucida has been used for treating multitude of disease like
abdominal pain, gout, headache, renal disorders, acne, and abscess. It has been
used in salads or as cooked vegetable to help in the treatment of rheumatic joint
pain (Khan and Omoloso, 2002).
14
There are numerous chemical investigations, primarily focusing on the
essential oils of the plant, one study identified 71 compounds from the essential
oils of piperaceae species with Sesquiterpenes was found to be the major
constituent. Cartotol was the major hydroxylated sesquiterpene in the chemical
analysis of P. pellucida. Flavonoids, phytosterols, arylpropanoids, substituted
styrenes, and a dimeric ArC2 compound or pellucidin A has been isolated. These
compounds have a documented anti-inflammatory, chemotherapeutic, and
analgesic properties found in P. pellucida in crude form (dos Santos et al., 2001).
Peperomia pellucida is one of the 10 recommended herbal medicines
promoted by the Department of Health (DoH). This herb particularly used to treat
gout and arthritic conditions, this is also being advocated by the Philippine
medicinal plant website, (DoH).
The leaves and stalk of pansit-pansitan are edible. It can be harvested,
washed and eaten as fresh salad. Taken as a salad, pansit-pansitan helps relive
rheumatic pains and gout. An infusion or decoction (boil 1 cup of leaves/stem in 2
cups of water) can also be made and taken orally - 1 cup in the morning and
another cup in the evening. It can be used as facial rinse for complexion
problems. It is also good for kidney problems as it cleanses the kidneys (dos
Santos et al., 2001).
Per 100 grams of edible portion of pansit-pansitan or ulasimang bato, it
contains the following:
Properties
Water (g)
Amount
97.2
15
Energy (kcal)
Protein (g)
Fat (g)
Carbohydrates (g)
Crude fiber (g)
Ash (g)
Calcium (mg)
Phosphorous (mg)
Iron (mg)
Beta-carotene (g)
Vitamin A (RE-g)
Thiamin (mg)
Niacin (mg)
Ascorbic acid (mg)
11.00
0.5
0.5
1.1
0.7
0.7
94.0
13.0
4.3
1250.0
208.0
0.01
0.1
2.0

Pako
Pako is part of the Athyrium genus and its scientific name is Athyrium
esculentum. It is known as linguda in northern India, referring to the curled
fronds. It is an edible fern found throughout Asia and Oceania. It is probably the
most commonly consumed fern (Kagyung et al., 2010)
It is a terrestrial fern with a creeping rhizome and stout black roots on the
undersurface. The rootstocks are stout, the caudex erect, woody thickened,
bearing many blank, wiry roots, and the tip clothed with brown linear scales. The
stipes are green and somewhat smooth, 20 to 50 cm long. The fronds are 2- or
3- pinnate, 50 to 80 cm long, about half as wide as long. The pinnules are
lanceolate, 2 to 3 cm long and rather coarsely toothed. The sori are superficial,
arranged in pairs on the side of the veins, or veinlets (DENR, 2003).
16
Pako is a characteristic plant on gravel bars and banks of swift streams. It
is widely distributed in the Philippines. It is propagated vegetatively and by
spores (DENR, 2003).
Variety
Pako and its variations is a local name shared by many medicinal
plants: (1) Pako - Athyrium esculentum; (2) Pakong-alagdan - Blechnum
orientale; (3) Pakong-anuanag, pako, buhok-virgin, dila-dila - Onychium
siliculosum; (4) Pakong-gubat, pakong kalabao, Pityrogramma calomelanos; (5)
Pakong-parang
Pteris
ensiformis;
(6)
Pakong-roman
Ceratopteris
thalictroides; (7) Pakong-tulog, pakong-cipres, Selaginella tamariscina; (8)

Pakong buwaya - Cyathea contaminans (DENR, 2003).
The young fronds of this fern are much desired and are eaten in all parts
of the country, either raw or cooked. They are used as a leafy vegetable, or as an
ingredient in salads or stews and they are even pickled. Pako is a fair source of
calcium, a very excellent source of phosphorous and a good source of iron and
vitamin B (DENR, 2003).
Decoction of the rhizomes and young leaves, simple or sugared, used for
hemoptysis and coughs. In India, boiled young fronds taken with boiled rice as
vegetables for laxative effect. In gardening, wiry roots sold as "osmunda roots"
for growing orchids, esp. Cattleyas. Mature fronds used as fodder in livestock.
Per 100 grams edible portion, pako leaves contain the following:
17
Properties
Water (g)
Energy (kcal)
Protein (g)
Fat (g)
Carbohydrates (g)
Crude Fiber (g)
Ash (g)
Calcium (mg)
Phosphorous (mg)
Iron (mg)
Beta-carotene (g)
Vitamin A (RE-g)
Riboflavin (mg)
Niacin (mg)
Ascorbic acid (mg)
Amount
89.9
44.0
3.8
1.7
3.3
1.3
1.3
36.0
76.0
3.0
3100.0
517.0
0.1
1.9
10.0

Vitamin A as an Essential Nutrient for Human Health

Promoting dietary change to improve vitamin A intake has been
recommended as a feasible long-term strategy in combating vitamin A deficiency
(VAD) among humans (WHO, 1994).
Vitamin A is a fat-soluble vitamin and an essential micronutrient for
humans, because the body cannot produce it (Tompson et al., 2005). According
to Hands (2000), vitamin A comprises a large family of fat-soluble compounds,
including retinoids (animal foods) and carotenoids (plant foods). There are three
active forms of vitamin A in the body, namely retinol, retinal and retinoic acid.
18
These are collectively known as retinoids (Tompson et al., 2005; Ensminger et
al., 1999).
Vitamin A is essential for the health and well-being of an individual and
performs many essential functions in the human body. It helps to keep all the
cells on the inner and outer surface of the body healthy so that it is difficult for
microorganisms to enter the body. Vitamin A also plays a major overall role in the
bodys immune system. The eyes need vitamin A in order to function properly, to
maintain their health, and to see in dim light. Thus, vitamin A plays an importan
role in maintaining good eyesight (Tompson et al., 2005; Ensminger et al., 1999;
Hands, 2000; Reddy, 1999). Vitamin A can be obtained from foods naturally rich
in vitamin A, pro-vitamin A, vitamin A supplements and foods fortified with vitamin
A (WHO, 1994; Faber et al., 2001).
Vitamin A is needed by the human body for many physiologically important
functions, the most obvious deficiency symptom being blindness, preceded by
night blindness (XN) and Bitot's spots (X1B). These and other ocular
manifestations are termed xerophthalmia or "dry eye". Xerophthalmia affects 2.8
to 3 million children under five years of age. Vitamin A is also of great importance
for growth and development of bone tissue, normal function of skin and mucous
membranes, normal reproductive health and in the immune defense (Ross,
1992). The non-ocular manifestations are largely hidden from view and do not
provide a ready basis for specific clinical diagnosis. However, subclinical
deficiency affects an estimated 251 million children under five years of age. The
results of a meta-analysis of studies performed on vitamin A supplementation and
19
young child mortality concluded that improving a low to marginal vitamin A status
will reduce the risk of death due to infectious diseases by 23% (Beaton et al.,
1993).
Gourmet
Gourmet food is a style of cooking that is found in any type of food,
whether it is Italian, French, Modern American, Asian, or any other cuisine.
Gourmet food, by definition, is a high-quality food that is more sophisticated and
takes greater preparation. But it is also a state of mind. There is no one
ingredient that one can add to turn a simple dish into a gourmet one. There is
certainly no one way to cook a standard meal so that it becomes gourmet. There
are many methods, many styles, and many recipes that one can use to make a
simple food into a gourmet food (Kendrick, 2012).
Brinlee (u.d.) stated that many people associate gourmet food with great
taste. However, taste is not everything there are other factors that make a food
gourmet. One of the things that make a food a gourmet food is meticulous
preparation. Often, a cook will have to carefully monitor a dish as it cooks in
order to get it just right. Many gourmet foods are designed to be served under the
right conditions so over-cooking or under-cooking can ruin a gourmet dish
(Brinlee, u.d.).
Quality and price of the food is also a big factor in what classifies food as
gourmet. Certain foods have always been more costly than others. That is
because these foods are high in quality and more expensive (Brinlee, u.d.).
20
But preparation and quality are not the only things that make a food a
gourmet food. Ingredients play a big role. Generally, the cook is going to need
more than a dash of salt and pepper to turn a simple dish into a gourmet dish. It
all depends on what kind of cuisine one is preparing. Some of these ingredients
might not be used more than once or twice a year. They can also be quite
expensive. Sometimes, the ingredients might also be hard to find (Kendrick,
2012).
The business of gourmet cuisine is more than just cooking a dish and
slapping it down in a big mess on a plate. Many cooks and critics view gourmet
food as an art. It is about creating something unique that is not seen at the dinner
table every other night. It is about putting ones soul into what he cooks. Gourmet
dish at some of the finer restaurants is often presented on a plate with a bit of
artistic flair. When preparing gourmet food, it is often like creating a masterpiece
work of art that appeals to ones vision as well as ones taste (Kendrick, 2012).
Sensory Evaluation
Sensory analysis uses human senses to consistently measure such food
characteristics as taste, texture, smell, and appearance in a controlled
environment. The information collected assists the food industry in addressing
consumer demands and introducing new and improved products (Stone and
Sidel, 2004).
According to Stone and Sidel (2004) sensory evaluation can be divided
into two categories of testing: objective and subjective. In objective testing, the
21
sensory attributes of a product are evaluated by a selected or trained panel. In
subjective testing, the reactions of consumers to the sensory properties of
products are measured. The power of sensory evaluation is realized when these
two elements are combined to reveal insights into the way in which sensory
properties drive consumer acceptance and emotional benefits. Linking sensory
properties to physical, chemical, formulation and/or process variables then
enables the product to be designed to deliver optimum or appropriate consumer
benefits.
Descriptive sensory evaluation identifies, describes and quantifies the
sensory attributes of a food material or product using human subjects (Einstein,
1991). These human subjects are trained to describe the complete profile of food
products in all sensory parameters such as appearance, taste, aroma, smell or
odor and texture/mouthfeel characteristics. A descriptive sensory panel
comprising of people trained to consistently and reliably identify and quantify
individual sensory characteristics of a particular food material (Meilgaard, Civille,
and Carr, 2007).
Consumer sensory evaluation is a process for evaluation personal
opinions of current or potential customers of a particular product in terms of
specific sensory attributes or overall liking (Resurreccion, 1998).
Meilgaard and colleagues (2007) emphasized that sensory testing can
determine the impact of scaling up kitchen and/or pilot samples to large-scale
production and is invaluable in determining whether raw ingredient changes or
22
modifications to the production process, e.g. for cost reduction or change of
supplier, will impact on sensory quality and/or product acceptability.
In terms of quality assurance, it can be used as part of a QA programme
on raw materials. In addition, sensory testing can set consumer acceptability
limits for sensory specifications used during quality testing (MacFie, 2007).
For those products susceptible to taints, sensory testing can ensure
substandard products are not released onto the market. For many products, the
sensory properties deteriorate ahead of microbial quality and so, in tandem with
microbial tests, sensory testing can be used to determine shelf life and product
variability through the supply chain.
From a marketing perspective, sensory and consumer testing can inform
understanding concerning product preferences and acceptability. It can provide
the data to support marketing claims such as best ever, new creamier, and
most preferred. It can also ensure that sensory properties work in synergy with
brand communication and advertising.
Moskowitz et al. (2006) purport that sensory and consumer testing is
widely employed in the research arena. It is used at a more fundamental level to
investigate new technologies to aid product development and to understand
consumer behavior.
Furthermore, multidisciplinary investigations linking sensory testing with,
for example instrumental analyses, brain-imaging techniques, psychophysical
tests and genomics provide a wider understanding of the mechanisms involved in
23
sensory perception and the variations that exist within the population (MacFie,
2007).
Successful sensory testing is driven by setting clear objectives, developing
robust experimental strategy and design, applying appropriate statistical
techniques, adhering to good ethical practice and successfully delivering
actionable insights that are used to inform decision-making. Appropriate training
is crucial to ensure that the sensory professional has the necessary technical
capability and interpersonal skills (Moskowitz et al., 2006).
General Appearance
Appearance is the visual quality of a food. It is one of the five dimensions
used to evaluate food. Overall appearance includes all visible sensory attributes
such as color, size and shape as well as surface texture (Cardello, 1994).
Appearance is commonly used by consumers to infer food product quality;
frequently this is the only cue available, especially at the moment of purchase
(Schrder, 2003). Flavor involves sensory attributes like taste, specific flavor,
aroma and sweetness. It can be defined as the complex combination of the
olfactory, gustatory, and trigeminal sensations perceived during tasting (Shrder,
2003).
Aroma
Aroma is the smell that emanates from food. Along with appearance,
texture, flavor and taste, aroma is one of the five dimensions used to evaluate a
24
product. Aroma is the odor of a food, resulting from the process that involves the
course of volatiles through the nasal passages located in the nose, when a
person inhales them (voluntarily or otherwise) (Meilgaard et al., 1999).
It is believed that aroma is more important than taste in determining the
overall appreciation of food (Taylor and Linforth, 1996). Volatile compounds that
are perceived by the odors receptors either directly through the nose (nasal
reception) or indirectly through the pharynx during eating or drinking (retro-nasal
perception) are called "aroma compounds" (Pierce and Halpern, 1996).
Furthermore, it has to be emphasized that changes in stimuli occur when a food
is ingested or masticated. This affects the rate of release and concentration of
both tastants and odorants (Halpern, 1977).
Texture
Texture is another important parameter which affects shelf life of food and
consumer acceptance (Pomeranz and Meloan, 1994). When a food generates a
physical sensation in the mouth (hard, soft, crisp, moist, dry), the consumer uses
these sensory attributes as reference parameters for judging food quality (fresh,
stale, tender, ripe). Texture is referred as the tactile feel properties, measured as
geometrical, mechanical and moisture properties by the tactile nerves in the
surface of the skin of the hand, lips, or tongue (Piggott, 1988). Overall liking can
be defined as a complex expression of liking of the product as a whole.
Taste
25
Taste in this study is experienced exclusively by the tongue, and not in
conjunction with the sense of smell. The non-volatile compounds that are
perceived by the tongue are called taste compounds (sweet, sour, salty, bitter,
astringent and pungent) (Frank et al., 1989). The interaction between substances
that contribute to the taste of food, e.g. acids or salts is very important for the
perception of aroma compounds. The appreciation of food is very much
depending on the synergy between taste and aroma (Pomeranz and Meloan,
1994).
Studies on the Use of Wild Greens in Dishes

A study was conducted by Kulkarni (2003) to explore the utility of
underutilized leafy vegetables to enrich routine diets for nutrition security. Five
underutilized leafy vegetables were selected on the basis of the micronutrient
profile (drumstick, chakramuni, bengal gram leaves, chandanabatta leaves and
sambar soppu) and 14 value added traditional foods were developed by
incorporating these at different levels (10 or 25 or 50%). The products were
evaluated for sensory characteristics using nine point hedonic scales by 10 semi
trained judges. The results showed that coconut chutney with sambar soppu
scored highest for all sensory attributes followed by bisebilebath and little millet
upma with drumstick leaves and the least scores were obtained for barnyard
millet upma with drumstick leaves.
Kaur and Kochar (2005) carried out a study on organoleptic evaluation of
preparations using underexploited greens (greens of cauliflower, radish, turnip
26
and carrot). To evaluate the products for sensory attributes Hopkins seven point
scale was used. The study revealed that the most acceptable level for prantha
with radish and cauliflower greens was 30 percent whereas; in case of carrot and
turnip greens it was 50 per cent. The respective scores for overall acceptability
ranged from 5.42 (cauliflower greens) to 6.02 (radish greens). Bhurji prepared by
using cauliflower greens scored highest (6.08). Puri with turnip and carrot greens
was scored 5.54 and 6.52 at 50 and 60 per cent incorporation respectively.
Acceptable pulav could be developed by incorporating carrot and turnip greens at
30 and 40 percent with scores 5.78 and 5.52 respectively. Pakora prepared by
incorporating cauliflower and radish leaves at 40 per cent was best acceptable
with scores of 5.42 and 6.30, respectively.
Nande et al. (2007) studied acceptability of recipes prepared from different
varieties of betel leaves. Three recipes namely coconut burfi, cutlet and muthia
were developed and the recipes prepared from spinach served as control. Sixty
grams of leaves was incorporated in coconut burfi and cutlet whereas, 70 g
leaves was incorporated in muthia preparation. Coconut burfi prepared from
sweet betel leaves was given high scores ranging from 4.17 (color) to 4.34
(taste) on five point scale followed by kapuri betel leaves (3.61 to 4.17) and
bangla betel leaves (2.54 to 3.50) respectively. Burfi with spinach received high
scores of 4.5. Cutlets prepared from kapuri betel leaves (3.83 to 4.49) were
highly acceptable and very close to spinach cutlets (4.17 to 4.61) for all sensory
characteristics followed by cutlets prepared from sweet betel leaves (3.67 to
4.34) and bangla betel leaves (2.45 to 4.17). Muthia with betel leaves and control
27
showed significant difference for their overall acceptability (t = 3.1, P<0.01 for
spinach versus sweet; t = 2.2, P<0.05 for spinach versus kapuri and t = 9.2, P<
0.01 for spinach versus bangla betel leaves).
Synthesis
The literatures contained in this chapter indicate the description, uses and
nutritional values of using wild greens as food and medicine. Likewise, the
studies discussed on the literature review have outlined different ways of utilizing
wild greens as an ingredient in dishes.
This study reviewed the literatures presented in this chapter to lend
empirical
to acceptable
the findings
of this
study.
Acceptable
and
Healthy
Gourmet Mealofprepared
Wild Greens
Different
Sensory
Formulations
evaluation
for
ofsupport
the
Wild
most
Greens
usingwild
greens
in the development
gourmetwith
meal
Alugbati
Chicken
scallopini
Pako
Theoretical nutrient content analysis of the developed gourmet
meal
based on RENI
Pansit-pansitan
Clearacceptability
soup
Test for significant differences in sensory ratings and overall
Conceptual Framework
Green salad
The Input-Process-Output model was adopted in this study. Figure 1
Standard recipes for Gourmet Meal

Ingredients
illustrates the research paradigm of the study.
Processes
Cooking technologies
INPUTS
PROCESS
FEEDBACK
Buco smoothies
OUTPUT
28
Figure 1. The Research Paradigm
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
29
This chapter discusses the research design, the data collection, and the
statistical and mathematical tools that were used.
Research Design
This study employed within-subjects experimental research design.
According to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007), experimental research design
is a systematic and scientific approach to research in which the researcher
manipulates one or more variables, and controls and measures any change in
other variables. In a within subjects design, every single participant is subjected
to every single treatment. It looks for differences between treatment conditions
within the same group of participants. A within subjects design is often called a
repeated-measures design because the research study repeats measurements
of the same individuals under different conditions (Montgomery, 1997).
In this study, participants were tested under all experimental lots to study
the effect of three different local wild greens on the sensory characteristics,
nutrient content and overall acceptability of the developed gourmet meal.
The advantage of within subjects design is that it requires relatively few
participants and it essentially eliminated all of the problems based on individual
differences that are the primary concern of a between-subjects designs - a
within-subjects design has no differences between groups and each individual
serves as his or her own control or baseline (Montgomery, 1997).
30
This experimental research was undertaken to develop a gourmet meal
using three local wild greens.
Panel Selection
Two groups of panelist were utilized for this study: the trained laboratory
panel and the expert sensory panel. They were preselected on the basis of good
health conditions, time availability and absence of allergies to wild plants.
Initial orientation session was conducted by the researcher where
panelists received detailed explanation about the descriptive organoleptic
methodology and general description of the gourmet meal products.
A. Trained Laboratory Panel

Fifteen HRM faculty members from Cavite State University, Main Campus
will be invited to participate in sensory evaluation of food samples. These faculty
members have a National Certificate II (NC II) in commercial cooking which is
issued by TESDA when a candidate has demonstrated competence in all units of
competency that comprised the qualification for commercial cooking. They were
chosen since they have knowledge and experience in food production and
preparation. They were classified as trained laboratory panel with particular
sensory abilities, which are trained in order to participate in a test group.
B. Expert Sensory Panel
31
A convenience sample of 15 chefs in Cavite will be selected as the expert
sensory panel. The chefs that were used as the expert sensory panel in the
panel, with the assumption that they had more formal training on what to look for
in a gourmet meal sample in terms of preparation, presentation, general
appearance, color, aroma, texture and taste.
Methods
This study developed a gourmet meal that utilized three local wild greens
such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan. The process involved three
experimental lots and a control. This study determined which among the three
local wild greens are best suited in the development of the gourmet dishes.
The experimental lots were as follows:
Gourmet
Dish
Experimental Lot
Lot 0
(control)
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 3
Chicken
scallopini
Without wild
green
300 g pako
450 g alugbati
950 g pansitpansitan
Clear Soup
250 g
cauliflower
250 g pako
250 g alugbati
Green salad
250 g lettuce
350 g pako
380 g alugbati
Buco smoothies
Without wild
green
15 g pako
12.5 g alugbati
80 g pansitpansitan
32
Ingredients
The following are the ingredients and procedure in the production of the
three gourmet dishes using local wild greens:
A. Chicken Scallopini
Source: Retrieved from http://allrecipes.com/recipe/chicken-scallopini/?
scale=6&ismetric=0
Experimental Lot
(in grams)
Ingredients
Lot 0
6 skinless, boneless chicken breast
halves
Wild green (alugbati/pako/pansitpansitan)
Cloves garlic, pressed
Lot 1
600
Lot 2
600
600
0
Lot 3
600
300
450
950
Butter, softened
170
170
170
170
All-purpose flour
187
187
187
187
Salt and ground black pepper to

taste
10
10
10
10
33
Sliced mushrooms
300
300
300
300
Capers, or to taste
20
20
20
20
Lemon juice
32
32
32
32
White wine
90
90
90
90
Chicken-flavored demi-glace, or to
taste
90
90
90
90
Chopped fresh parsley, or to taste
10
10
10
10
6 lemon slices
30
30
30
30
1545
1845
1995
2495
Total Formula (in g)
34
Preparation of chicken cutlets - In a small bowl, stir together the garlic and butter
until well combined. Set aside. Place a chicken breast half on a work surface with
the thick side facing to the right, and place the left hand down on the chicken breast.
Using a very sharp knife, carefully cut the chicken breast from the thick side to about
1/2 inch from the edge of the thin side, in a horizontal cut. Open the cut chicken
breast and spread it out like an open book. Using a meat mallet, gently pound the
butterflied chicken breast out until it's an even thickness.
Place the flour into a shallow dish, and dredge each chicken breast on both sides
with flour. Melt the garlic butter in a large skillet over medium heat until it stops
foaming, and cook each chicken breast until golden brown on both sides, 6 to 8
minutes per side. Sprinkle each breast with salt and pepper. Remove the chicken
breasts to a platter, and keep warm.
Cook and stir the mushrooms in the same skillet as the chicken until the mushrooms
have absorbed the remaining butter in the skillet and have begun to turn brown at
the edges. Stir in wild greens, capers, lemon juice, white wine, and chicken demiglace, and stir to combine. Reduce to a simmer. Adjust salt and pepper again, and
stir the parsley into the sauce.
Remove the chicken breasts to plates, and serve the sauce over the chicken.
Garnish each serving with a lemon slice.
Figure 2. Process Flow Chart in the Preparation of Chicken Scallopine
35
B. Clear Soup
Source: http://localfoods.about.com/od/winter/r/CauliflowerSoup.htm
Experimental Lot
(in grams)
Ingredients
Lot 0
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 3
Cauliflower, chopped
250
150
100
50
Wild green, chopped
250
250
45
550
45
Butter
45
45
Onion, roughly chopped
150
150
150
150
Salt
Garlic, chopped
12
12
12
400
12
400
Chicken or vegetable broth
400
400
Freshly ground white pepper
Freshly grated nutmeg
Finely chopped parsley
865
1015
965
1215
36
In a large pot over medium heat, melt 15 g. butter. Add onions and salt. Cook,
stirring occasionally and adjusting heat so onions are cooking but not
browning, until onions look starchy and a bit creamy, about 5 minutes. Add
garlic and cook until fragrant, about 1 minute.
Add cauliflower (and/or wild greens), stir to combine, cover and cook 3
minutes. Add broth, bring to a boil, reduce heat to maintain a steady simmer
and cook until cauliflower is tender to the bite, about 10 minutes.
Pure soup with a hand-held blender or, whirl in batches in a blender or food
processor until smooth.
Stir in pepper and nutmeg.
Add milk and cook over medium-low heat until hot. Taste and add more salt,
pepper, and/or nutmeg to taste.
Add the parsley butter swirl, melt remaining 30 g butter and stir in parsley.
37
Figure 3. Process Flow Chart in the Preparation of Clear Soup
C. Green Salad
Source: http://www.simply-salads.com/cucumber-salad-recipes.html
Experimental Lot
(in grams)
Ingredients
Lot 0
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 3
250
150
100
50
350
380
300
800
300
Cucumber
300
300
Carrot
150
150
150
150
Tomatoes, quartered
250
250
250
250
Canned tuna, drained and flaked
320
320
320
65
320
65
Hard-boiled egg, sliced
65
65
Salt and pepper
12
12
12
12
Vinaigrette
Croutons
50
50
50
50
1652
1632
2002
Lettuce, chopped
Wild green, chopped
1402
38
Combine all the ingredients in a bowl and toss to

evenly coat.
Serve immediately, or prepare it up to a few

hours in advance and keep it in the refrigerator
until needed.
Figure 4. Process Flow Chart in the Preparation of Green Salad
D. Buco Smoothies
Source: http://dishismylife.wordpress.com/2010/08/21/bucosmoothies/
Ingredients
Experimental Lot
39
(in grams)
Lot 0
Lot 1
Lot 2
Lot 3
15
12.5
186
80
186
Buco meat, shredded
186
186
Coco sap
15
15
15
15
Evaporated milk
120
120
120
120
Crushed ice
250
250
250
250
571
586
583.5
651
Wild green, mashed
Combine all the ingredients in a blender and stir

to evenly mix.
In a blender, blend all the ingredients until

smooth.
40
Figure 5. Process Flow Chart in the Preparation of Buco Smoothies
Sensory Evaluation
Sensory evaluation was used to assess the acceptability of the gourmet
meal utilizing three local wild greens such as alugbati, pansit-pansitan and pako
to determine the level of its acceptance or rejection by panel members. Two
separate sensory testing for trained panel and expert panel were conducted
between January and February 2013.
Prior to sensory evaluation of food samples, panel members were
informed on what to do. The researcher explained the experimental procedure
and instructions on how to answer the score card.
The prepared recipes will be subjected to sensory evaluation. Sensory
evaluation will be done by a trained panel consisting of 15 culinary instructors
and experts consisting of 15 chefs using seven-point hedonic scale.
Clean and sterile utensils will be provided for serving food samples.
Samples will be coded with numbers and will be served individually. Food
samples will be presented individually by experimental lots. Each of the
participants will evaluate the sensory characteristics of the developed gourmet
meal using three local wild greens.
41
The panel will be given sufficient amount of samples at room temperature
in white glass containers of same size and shape. The evaluation will be carried
out in a quiet, odor-free room maintaining ideal conditions for testing. Each
panelist will be given a score card shown in Appendix A and will be asked to
evaluate the samples for different attributes viz. general appearance, color,
texture, aroma, taste and overall acceptability. A separate score card will be
provided for each gourmet dish in a test session.
Basic sensory method for food evaluation will be used. Hedonic test will
be used to measure the sensory characteristics and overall acceptability of each
of the food samples.
A 7-point hedonic scale will be used in the sensory evaluation and overall
acceptability evaluation of coded food samples. The categories will be converted
to numerical scores ranging from 1 to 7.
The hedonic scale that will be used is represented as:
7 Very Good
6 Moderately Good
5 Good
4 Fair
3 Very Fair
42
2 Poor
1 Very Poor
Theoretical Nutrient Content Analysis

All dishes will be subjected for nutritional assessment. Appendix B shows
the theoretical nutrient content analysis of each of the ingredients included in the
preparation of chicken scallopini, clear soup, green salad and buco smoothies.
Data Collection
Permission to conduct this study will be secured from the Research
Adviser. Likewise, permission to conduct sensory tests to professionals and
expert evaluators will be secured from the Dean of Graduate School of
Hospitality Management of Philippine Womens University, Manila. Once
approval is granted, informed consent will obtained from target panel members.
Panel members grouped into trained laboratory panelists and expert
panelists will participate in this experiment. Sensory evaluation will conducted
from January to February 2013.
43
Statistical Treatment
Frequency counts, weighted mean and percentages will be used for
descriptive variables. The analysis of data will be done using t-test and F
statistics. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to determine if there is a significant
difference among the food samples in terms of all the parameters that will be
measured such as: general appearance, color, texture, taste, nutrient content
and overall acceptability. T-test will be used to determine if there is a significant
difference between the ratings of two groups of panelist with regard to sensory
characteristics and overall acceptability of the food samples prepared using three
local wild greens. Significance will be accepted at 5% level.
Chapter 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter discusses the sensory characteristics of the developed

gourmet meal using different formulations of wild green; the comparison in the
sensory characteristics of the developed gourmet meal prepared using three
local wild greens such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan; the comparison in
the ratings of the two groups of panelist such as: a) trained panelists (culinary
44
instructors), and b) experts (chefs) with regard to sensory characteristics and
overall acceptability of the developed gourmet meal prepared with three local
wild greens such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan; the nutritional contents
of the most acceptable gourmet meal based on Recommended Energy and
Nutrient Intake (RENI) for Filipino adults; and the direct material cost in the
production of gourmet meal.
Sensory Characteristics of the Developed Gourmet Meal using Different

Formulations of Wild Green
The sensory characteristics of the developed gourmet meal using different
formulations of wild green was evaluated by trained laboratory panel and expert
panelists in terms of general appearance, color, aroma, texture, and taste.
A. Clear Soup
The sensory characteristics of clear soup across treatment are
summarized in Tables 1 to 5.
Table 1. General appearance of clear soup across treatment
Treatment
Lot 0 = 250 g cauliflower
Lot 1 = 250 g pako
Mean
3
0
3
5.800
0
4.833
Std.
Deviatio
n
General Appearance
Interpretation
Moderately
Acceptable
.94989 Slightly Acceptable
.76112
45
Lot 2 = 250 g alugbati

Lot 3 = 550 g pansitpansitan
0
3
0
3
0
3
5.133
3
5.166
7
1.33218 Slightly Acceptable

Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Adjectival Interpretation
Highly Acceptable
Moderately Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Neither Acceptable nor Unacceptable
Slightly Unacceptable
Moderately Unacceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in Table 1, the highest weighted mean of 5.8 was noted in the
control (T0) or clear soup with 250 g cauliflower indicating that the general
appearance of clear soup in the control (Lot 0) was moderately acceptable to
panelists. This was followed by Lot 3 or clear soup with 550 g pansit-pansitan (
x = 5.1667) indicating that it was slightly acceptable to the panelists.
Similarly, clear soup in Lot 2 (250 g alugbati) and in Lot 1 (250 g pako) were
slightly acceptable to panelists with weighted mean of 5.13 and 4.83,
respectively.
The weighted mean scores by experimental lot showed that clear soup
without wild greens (T0) recorded the highest rating in general appearance while
clear soup with 250 g pako (Lot 1) had the lowest rating in general appearance.
46
Results suggest that clear soup without wild greens was rated more favorably in
general appearance than clear soup with wild greens.
Table 2. Color of clear soup across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 250 g pako
Lot 3 = 550 g pansit-pansitan
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Color
Interpretation
5.8000
.76112 Moderately Acceptable
4.8333
.94989 Slightly Acceptable
5.1333
5.1667
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
With regards to color of clear soup (Table 2), the control (Lot 0) posted the
highest weighted mean of 5.8 indicating that the color of clear soup with 250 g
cauliflower was moderately acceptable. The remaining experimental lots (Lot 1,
Lot 2 and Lot 3) were only slightly acceptable to panelists as supported by the
weighted means of 5.1667 (Lot 3), 5.1333 (Lot 2), and 4.8333 (Lot 1),
47
respectively. Findings reveal that clear soup without wild greens had more
acceptable color as compared to clear soup with wild greens.
Table 3. Aroma of clear soup across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 250 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Aroma
Interpretation
5.8000
.76112
4.8333
.94989
Slightly Acceptable
5.1333
1.33218
5.1667
1.39168
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
Data on Table 3 show that with regards to aroma, clear soup from the
control (Lot 0) recorded the highest weighted mean of 5.8 suggesting that the
aroma of clear soup with 250 g cauliflower was moderately acceptable to panel
members while the aromas of clear soup from Lot 3 ( x = 5.1667), Lot 2 ( x =
5.1333) and Lot 1 ( x = 4.8333), were slightly acceptable to the panel
48
members, respectively. Results indicate that clear soup without wild greens had
more acceptable aroma as compared to clear soup with wild greens.
Table 4. Texture of clear soup across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 250 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Std.
Texture
Deviation
Interpretation
5.8000
.92476
Mean
5.0333
1.09807
Slightly Acceptable
4.9333
1.14269
Slightly Acceptable
5.3000
1.26355
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in the table above, the texture of clear soup from the control
(T0) was moderately acceptable to the panelists. On the other hand, the
textures of clear soup on Lot 3 ( x = 5.30), Lot 1 ( x = 5.0333) and Lot 2 ( x
= 4.9333) were only slightly acceptable to the panel members. This indicates
49
that clear soup without wild greens were more acceptable in texture than clear
soup that utilized wild greens.
Table 5. Taste of clear soup across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 250 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Texture
Interpretation
5.9333
1.04826
5.1333
1.19578
Slightly Acceptable
5.2667
1.08066
Slightly Acceptable
5.3000
1.39333
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
50
Table 5 shows that the taste of clear soup from the control (T0) had the
highest weighted mean of 5.9333 followed by clear soup produced with 550 g
pansit-pansitan (Lot 3). This means that clear soup from the control and Lot 3
were both moderately acceptable in taste as rated by the panelists. On the
other hand, the taste of clear soup on Lot 3 ( x = 5.30) and Lot 1 ( x =
5.1333) were only slightly acceptable to the panel members. Findings suggest
that clear soup produced in the control (T0) and with 550 g pansit-pansitan (Lot
3) had the most acceptable taste while the lowest rated in terms of taste was
clear soup with pako.
B. Chicken Scallopini
The sensory characteristics of the main course, the chicken scallopini
across treatment are summarized in Tables 6 to 10.
Table 6. General appearance of chicken scallopini across treatment
Treatment
Mean
Lot 0 = without wild green
3
0
Lot 1 = 300 g pako
3
0
3
0
6.166
7
5.233
3
4.866
7
Std.
Deviatio
n
.64772
General Appearance
Interpretation
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
.89763
Slightly Acceptable
1.19578
51
3
0
4.800
0
1.09545
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in Table 6, the highest weighted mean of 6.1667 was recorded

in the control (T0) or chicken scallopini without wild green indicating that the
general appearance of chicken scallopini
in the control (Lot 0) was highly
acceptable to panelists. This was followed by Lot 1 or chicken scallopini with

300 g pako ( x = 5.2333) indicating that it was slightly acceptable to the
panelists. Similarly, chicken scallopini in Lot 2 (450 g alugbati) and in Lot 3 (950 g
pansit-pansitan) were slightly acceptable to panelists with weighted mean of
4.8667 and 4.80, respectively.
The results showed that chicken scallopini without wild greens (T0)
recorded the highest rating in general appearance while chicken scallopini with
wild greens were rated only as slightly acceptable in general appearance by the
panel members. Results suggest that chicken scallopini without wild green was
rated more favorably in general appearance than chicken scallopini with wild
greens.
52
Table 7. Color of chicken scallopini across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 300 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Color
Interpretation
5.6000
1.24845
5.3000
1.02217
5.0667
1.25762
Slightly Acceptable
5.1000
.99481
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
With regards to color of chicken scallopini (Table 7), the control (Lot 0)
posted the highest weighted mean of 5.6 followed by Lot 1 (300 g pako)
indicating that the colors of chicken scallopini in the control and Lot 1 were
moderately acceptable to the panel members. The remaining experimental lots ,
Lot 2 and Lot 3, were only slightly acceptable to panelists as supported by the
weighted means of 5.0667 and 5.10, respectively. Findings indicate that similar
ratings in the color of chicken scallopini were found on chicken scallopini without
wild greens and chicken scallopini with 300 g pako (T1).
53
Table 8. Aroma of chicken scallopini across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 300 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
5.9000
.99481
5.3333
.84418
5.4333
1.22287
5.1000
1.32222
Aroma
Interpretation
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
Table 3 shows that with regards to aroma, chicken scallopini in the control
(Lot 0), Lot 1, and Lot 2 had ratings of moderately acceptable aroma as
supported by weighted means of 5.90, 5.33, and 5.43, respectively. This means
that chicken scallopini without wild green (T0), with 300 g pako (T1) and with 450
g alugbati (T2) were comparable in aroma.
In contrast, the lowest weighted mean of 5.1 was recorded in Lot 3 (950 g
pansit-pansitan) suggesting that the aroma of chicken scallopini in Lot 3 was only
slightly acceptable to the panel members. Results imply that chicken scallopini
54
with 300 g pako (Lot 1) and with 450 g alugbati (Lot 2) had similar aroma with the
control.
Table 9. Texture of chicken scallopini across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 300 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
5.6000
1.06997
Texture
Interpretation
Slightly Acceptable
5.1667
.94989
Slightly Acceptable
5.2667
1.17248
Slightly Acceptable
5.2000
1.06350
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in Table 9, the texture of chicken scallopini from the control (T0)
had the highest weighted mean of 5.6 suggesting that it was moderately
acceptable to the panelists. On the other hand, the textures of chicken scallopini
on Lot 3 ( x = 5.20), Lot 2 ( x = 5.2667) and Lot 1 ( x = 5.1667) were only
slightly acceptable to the panel members. This indicates that chicken scallopini
55
without wild greens had more acceptable texture than chicken scallopini that
utilized wild greens.
Table 10. Taste of chicken scallopini across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 300 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Texture
Interpretation
6.0333
.99943
4.8333
1.23409
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
4.9333
.98027
Slightly Acceptable
5.2667
1.36289
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
Table 10 shows that the taste of chicken scallopini from the control (T0)
had the highest weighted mean of 6.033 suggesting that it was moderately
acceptable to the panelists. The remaining experimental lots such as Lot 3 ( x
56
= 5.2667), Lot 2 ( x = 4.9333), and Lot 1( x = 4.8333) were only slightly
acceptable to the panelists.
This means that chicken scallopini from the control were rated highest in
terms of taste compared to chicken scallopini with wild greens. Hence, chicken
scallopini without wild green had the most acceptable taste while chicken
scallopini with wild green were rated lower in taste by the panelists.
C. Green Salad
The sensory characteristics of the green salad across treatment are
Table 16. General appearance of green salad across treatment
Treatment
Mean
Lot 0 = 250 g lettuce
3
0
Lot 1 = 350 g pako
3
0
3
0
Lot 3 = 800 g pansitpansitan
3
0
6.100
0
5.833
3
5.600
0
5.433
3
Std.
Deviatio
n
General Appearance
Interpretation
.88474
Moderately
Acceptable
.94989
Moderately
Acceptable
1.13259
Moderately
Acceptable
1.10433
Moderately
Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
57
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in Table 16, the highest weighted mean of 6.1 was recorded in
the control (T0) or green salad with 250 g lettuce indicating that the general
appearance of green salad in the control (Lot 0) was moderately acceptable to
panelists. This was followed by Lot 1 or green salad with 350 g pako ( x =
5.8333) indicating that it was also moderately acceptable to the panelists.
Similarly, green salad in Lot 2 (380 g alugbati) and in Lot 3 (800 g pansitpansitan) were moderately acceptable to the panelists with weighted means of
4.8667 and 4.80, respectively.
The results suggest that green salad with and without wild greens were
comparable in general appearance since all experimental lots were rated as
moderately acceptable.
Table 17. Color of green salad across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 350 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
5.7667
1.10433
Color
Interpretation
5.5333
1.50249
58

3
0
3
0
5.5000
1.27982
5.4333
1.07265
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
With regards to color of green salad, all the experimental lots including the
control (Lot 0) were moderately acceptable to the panel members. The highest
weighted of 5.7667 was noted in the control (Lot 0= 250 g lettuce) followed by Lot
1 (350 g pako) with weighted mean of 5.5333. The colors of green salad in Lot 2
and Lot 3 had weighted means of 5.5 and 5.4333, respectively.
Results revealed that the color of green salad were similar across
experimental lots. This means that green salad with or without wild greens had
generally comparable evaluations in terms of color.
Table 18. Aroma of green salad across treatment
Treatment
Lot 1 = 350 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
Mean
Std.
Deviation
6.0000
1.17444
5.4667
5.4333
1.38298
1.10433
Aroma
Interpretation
59
0
3
0
5.8000
1.18613
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
Table 18 shows that with regards to aroma, green salad produced in all
experimental lots had similar adjectival ratings of moderately acceptable as
evidenced by the weighted means of 6.0, 5.8, and 5.46, and 5.43 for Lot 0, Lot
3, Lot 1 and Lot 2, respectively. This means that green salad with or without wild
greens were comparable in aroma.
Table 19. Texture of green salad across treatment
60
Treatment
Lot 1 = 350 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
6.0667
1.01483
Texture
Interpretation
5.8000
1.24291
5.6000
1.30252
5.5667
1.19434
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
Data on Table 19 shows that the textures of green salads across all
experimental lots were moderately acceptable to the panelists. The highest
weighted mean of 6.0667 was noted in the control (T0) followed by Lot 1 ( x =
5.80), Lot 2 ( x = 5.60) and Lot 3 ( x = 5.5667). This indicates that green
salads with and without wild greens had similar ratings in texture across
treatment.
61
Table 20. Taste of green salad across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 350 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Texture
Interpretation
6.2000
1.03057
Highly Acceptable
5.7000
1.05536
5.4000
1.16264
5.3667
1.18855
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in Table 20 the taste of green salad from the control (T0) had
the highest weighted mean of 6.2 suggesting that it was highly acceptable to
the panelists. The remaining experimental lots such as Lot 1 ( x = 5.70), Lot 2 (
x = 5.40), and Lot 3( x = 5.3667) were moderately acceptable to the
panelists.
62
Data suggest that green salad from the control or with 250 g lettuce was
rated highest in terms of taste compared to green salad with wild greens. Hence,
green salad without wild green had the most acceptable taste while green salad
with wild greens were rated lower in taste by the panelists.
D. Buco Smoothies
The sensory characteristics of the buco smoothies across treatment are
Table 21. General appearance of buco smoothies across treatment

Treatment
Mean

Lot 1 = 15 g pako
Lot 2 = 12.5 g alugbati
30
30
30
30
5.7667
4.7333
5.1333
5.1667
Std.
Deviation
1.38174
.98027
1.07425
1.28877
General Appearance
Interpretation
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
63
The table above shows that the highest weighted mean of 5.7667 was
recorded in the control (T0) or buco smoothies without wild green indicating that
the general appearance of buco smoothies in the control (Lot 0) was moderately
acceptable to panelists. The remaining experimental lots prepared with wild
greens, on the other hand, were only slightly acceptable in general appearance.
The results imply that buco smoothies without wild greens or the control
had more favorable ratings in general appearance compared to buco smoothies
with wild greens.
Table 22. Color of buco smoothies across treatment
Treatment
Lot 1 = 15 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Color
Interpretation
5.8000
1.09545
5.0000
1.23176
5.0667
1.28475
5.1333
.97320
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
64
Table 22 shows that the highest weighted mean of 5.1 was recorded in
the control (T0) or buco smoothies without wild green indicating that the color of
buco smoothies in the control (Lot 0) was moderately acceptable to panelists.
On the other hand, the remaining experimental lots prepared with wild greens
were only slightly acceptable in color.
The results suggest that buco smoothies without wild greens or the
control had more favorable ratings in color compared to buco smoothies with wild
greens.
Table 23. Aroma of buco smoothies across treatment

Treatment
Lot 1 = 15 g pako
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Aroma
Interpretation
5.9667
1.35146
5.4333
1.22287
4.8333
1.01992
5.0667
1.38796
Slightly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
65
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856

Highly Unacceptable
With regards to aroma, buco smoothies produced in the control (Lot 0 =

without wild green) and in Lot 1 (15 g pako) were rated as moderately
acceptable by the panelists as supported by the weighted means of 5.9667 and
5.4333, respectively. On the other hand, buco smoothies produced in Lot 2 (12.5
g alugbati) and in Lot 3 (80 g pansit-pansitan) were rated as slightly acceptable
by the panel members as supported by the weighted means of 4.833 and 5.0667,
respectively.
Findings indicate that the aroma of buco smoothies in Lot 0 and Lot 1
were rated highest by the panel members. This also imply that the aroma of buco
smoothies without wild green and with 15 g pako were generally the same. In
contrast, the lowest rated buco smoothies in terms of aroma was prepared with
12.5 g alugbati (Lot 2).
Table 24. Texture of buco smoothies across treatment
Treatment
Lot 1 = 15 g pako
Scale:
N
3
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
Mean
Std.
Deviation
Texture
Interpretation
5.8667
1.19578
5.3000
1.02217
5.2000
1.29721
Slightly Acceptable
5.5000
1.00858
66
Weighted Mean for

Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
In terms of texture, Table 24 shows that buco smoothies produced without

wild green (Lot 0), with 15 g pako (Lot 1) and with 80 g pansit-pansitan (Lot 3)
had similar ratings of moderately acceptable. The highest weighted mean of
5.8667 was noted in the control (T0) followed by Lot 3 ( x = 5.50) and Lot 1 (
x = 5.30). The lowest rated buco smoothies in terms of texture was recorded in
Lot 2 with weighted mean of 5.2.

The results indicate that buco smoothies without wild green (control), buco
smoothies with 15 g pako (Lot 1) and buco smoothies with 80 g pansit-pansitan
(Lot 3) were generally comparable in texture. Conversely, the texture of buco
smoothies prepared with 12.5 g alugbati or Lot 2 had the lowest rating.
Table 25. Taste of buco smoothies across treatment

Treatment
N
3
Std.
Texture
Deviation
Interpretation
6.2000 1.12648 Moderately Acceptable
Mean
67
Lot 1 = 15 g pako
0
3
0
3
0
3
0
5.4333
1.33089
4.7333
1.28475
Slightly Acceptable
4.7667
1.10433
Slightly Acceptable
Scale:
Weighted Mean for
Interpretation
6.142 - 7.000
5.285 - 6.141
4.428 - 5.284
3.571 - 4.427
2.714 - 3.570
1.857 - 2.713
1.000 - 1.856
Highly Acceptable
Slightly Acceptable
Highly Unacceptable
As shown in Table 20 the taste of buco smoothies in the control (T0) and
Lot 1 (15 g pako) were moderately acceptable to the panelists as supported by
the weighted mean of 6.2 and 5.4333, respectively. The remaining experimental
lots such as buco smoothies in Lot 2 ( x = 4.7333) and Lot 3 ( x = 4.7667)
had taste that were moderately acceptable to the panelists.
Data suggest that the taste of buco smoothies prepared without wild green
was comparable to the taste of buco smoothies prepared with 15 g pako. In
contrast, the taste of buco smoothies with 12.5 g alugbati had the lowest rating in
taste.
68
Difference in the Sensory Characteristics of the Developed Gourmet Meal

Prepared using Three Local Wild Greens
Analysis of variance was used to determine the differences in the sensory
characteristics of the developed gourmet meal using local wild greens across
treatment. Tables 26 to 30 summarize the results of the statistical analysis.
Table 26. Results of the Friedman Analysis of Variance on the sensory

characteristics of clear soup across treatment
N
d
f
Fr
value
pvalue
Decision
Interpretation
General
Appearance
30
12.149**
0.007
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Color
30
15.397**
0.002
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Aroma
30
20.904**
0.000
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Texture
30
8.457ns
0.057
Accept Ho
Not significant
Taste
30
12.041**
0.007
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Parameter
Overall
30 2 10.765*
0.013
Reject Ho
Significant
Acceptability
** = significant at 1% level; *= significant at 5% level, ns = not significant,
As shown in Table 26, highly significant differences were found in the

general appearance (Fr = 12.149, p = 0.007), color (Fr = 15.397, p = 0.002),
aroma (Fr = 20.904, p = >.001), and taste (Fr = 12.041, p = 0.007) of clear soup
across experimental treatments. Meanwhile, significant difference was found in
the overall acceptability of clear soup across treatment (Fr = 10.765, p = 0.013).
69
This indicates that the null hypothesis of no significant differences in the sensory
characteristics of clear soup in terms of general appearance, color, aroma and
taste prepared with three local wild greens was rejected. Likewise, the null
hypothesis of no significant difference in the overall acceptability of clear soup
prepared with three local wild greens was rejected.
On the other hand, no significant difference was found in the texture of
clear soup across treatment. The computed Fr of 8.457 was not significant at 5
percent level (p = 0.057). Hence, the null hypothesis of no significant difference
in the textures of clear soup prepared with three local wild greens was accepted.

characteristics of chicken scallopini across treatment
N
d
f
Fr
value
pvalue
Decision
Interpretation
General
Appearance
30
35.656**
0.000
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Color
30
7.068ns
0.070
Accept Ho
Not significant
Aroma
30
10.873*
0.012
Reject Ho
Significant
Texture
30
6.600ns
0.086
Accept Ho
Not significant
Taste
30
17.019**
0.001
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Parameter
Overall
30 2 15.462** 0.001
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Acceptability
Data on Table 27 show that, highly significant differences were found in

the general appearance (Fr = 35.656, p = > 0.001), taste (Fr = 17.019, p =
0.001), and overall acceptability (Fr = 15.462, p = 0.001) of chicken scallopini
70
across experimental lots. Meanwhile, significant difference was found in the
aroma of chicken scallopini across treatment (Fr = 10.873, p = 0.012). This
indicates that the null hypothesis of no significant differences in the sensory
characteristics of chicken scallopini in terms of general appearance, aroma and
taste prepared with three local wild greens was rejected. Likewise, the null
hypothesis of no significant difference in the overall acceptability of chicken
scallopini prepared with three local wild greens was rejected.
On the other hand, no significant difference was found in the color (Fr =
7.068, p = 0.070) and texture (Fr = 6.6, p = 0.086) of chicken scallopini across
treatment. Hence, the null hypothesis of no significant difference in the color and
texture of chicken scallopini prepared with three local wild greens was accepted.

characteristics of green salad across treatment
N
d
f
Fr
value
pvalue
Decision
Interpretation
General
Appearance
30
17.205**
0.001
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Color
30
3.197ns
0.362
Accept Ho
Not significant
Aroma
30
8.392*
0.039
Reject Ho
Significant
Texture
30
6.518ns
0.089
Accept Ho
Not significant
Taste
30
17.675**
0.001
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Parameter
Overall
30 2
3.367ns
0.338
Accept Ho
Not significant
Acceptability
71
Table 28 shows that, highly significant differences were found in the
general appearance (Fr = 17.205, p = 0.001) and taste (Fr = 17.675, p = 0.001),
of green salad across experimental lots while significant difference was found in
the aroma of green salad across treatment (Fr = 8.392, p = 0.039). This indicates
that the null hypothesis of no significant differences in the sensory characteristics
of green salad in terms of general appearance, aroma and taste prepared with
three local wild greens was rejected.
On the other hand, no significant difference was found in the color (Fr =
3.197, p = 0.362), texture (Fr = 6.518, p = 0.089) and overall acceptability (Fr =
3.367, p = 0.338) of green salad across treatment. Hence, the null hypothesis of
no significant difference in the color and texture of green salad prepared with
three local wild greens was accepted. Likewise, the null hypothesis of no
significant difference in the overall acceptability of green salad prepared with
three local wild greens was accepted.
72
characteristics of buco smoothies across treatment
N
d
f
Fr
value
pvalue
Decision
Interpretation
General
Appearance
30
19.279**
0.000
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Color
30
10.394*
0.015
Reject Ho
Significant
Aroma
30
18.036**
0.000
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Texture
30
4.004ns
0.261
Accept Ho
Not significant
Taste
30
25.972**
0.000
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Parameter
Overall
30 2 27.173** 0.000
Reject Ho
Highly Significant
Acceptability
As shown in Table 29, significant differences were found in the sensory
characteristics of buco smoothies across experimental treatments. All computed
Fr values in terms of general appearance (Fr = 19.279, p = > 0.001), color (Fr =
10.394, p = 0.015), aroma (Fr = 18.036, p = >.001), texture (Fr = 4.004, p =.261),
and taste (Fr = 25.972, p = >0.001) were significant at five percent level.
Likewise, highly significant difference was found in the overall acceptability ( Fr =
27.173, p = > 0.001) of buco smoothies across experimental lots. The results
imply that the null hypothesis of no significant difference in the sensory
characteristics of buco smoothies was rejected. Meanwhile, the null hypothesis of
no significant difference in the overall acceptability of buco smoothies prepared
with three local wild greens was also rejected.
73
The results pointed to the existence of heterogeneity in the sensory
characteristics and overall acceptability of buco smoothies prepared with local
wild greens.
Difference in the Ratings of the Two Groups of Panelist such as: a) Trained
Panelists (Culinary Instructors), and b) Experts (Chefs) with regard to
Sensory Characteristics and Overall Acceptability of the Developed
Gourmet Meal Prepared with Three Local Wild Greens such as Alugbati,
Pako and Pansit-Pansitan
74
Vitamin A Content of the Most Acceptable Gourmet Meal based on RENI for
Filipino Adults
The vitamin A contents of the most acceptable gourmet meal such as:
clear soup, chicken scallopini, green salad and buco smoothies prepared with
different levels of wild green were evaluated in terms of the recommended
Vitamin A intake for Filipino adults as shown in Tables 31 to 34.
Table 31. Vitamin A content of clear soup prepared with 250 g alugbati (Lot 2)
Quantity
(in grams)
Vit. A Content
(per 100 g)
Cauliflower, chopped
100
Alugbati, chopped
250
45
Ingredients
Butter
Onion, roughly chopped
Salt
Garlic, chopped
150
3
12
400
Chicken or vegetable broth
456
411
Tr
0
Total Vit. A
Content
(g RE)
8.00
1140.00
184.95
Tr
0
Freshly ground white pepper
Tr
Tr
Freshly grated nutmeg
Finely chopped parsley
258
965
1340.69
Vit. A (g RE)
Recommended Vitamin A for
7.74
75
adults (based on RENI)

Males, y
19-29
550
30-49
550
50-64
550
65+
550
Females, y
19-29
500
30-49
500
50-64
500
65+
500
Except for the control (Lot 0), the most acceptable clear soup based on
the findings of the study was clear soup prepared with 250 g alugbati (Lot 2).
Table 31 shows that the vitamin A content of clear soup prepared with 250 g
alugbati (Lot 2) totaled to 1340.69 g. The recommended vitamin A for male and
female adults from age 19 to 65+ was 550 g and 500 g, respectively.
Comparing the total vitamin A content of clear soup to the recommended vitamin
A, it can be said that the clear soup prepared with 250 g alugbati (Lot 2) more
than meet the recommended vitamin A intake for Filipino adults.
Table 32. Vitamin A content of chicken scallopini prepared with 950 g pansitpansitan (Lot 3)
76
Ingredients
6 skinless, boneless chicken
breast halves
Pansit-pansitan
Quantity
(in grams)
31
Total Vit. A
Content
(g RE)
186.0
208
1,976.0
Vit. A Content
(per 100 g)
600
950
6
Cloves garlic, pressed

411
Butter, softened
170
All-purpose flour
187
Salt and ground black pepper to

taste
Sliced mushrooms
Capers, or to taste
138
27.6
10
300
20
Tr
Lemon juice
White wine
Chicken-flavored demi-glace, or
to taste
27
24.3
258
25.8
90
90
10
6 lemon slices
30
Tr
2495
Tr
2938.4
Table 32 continued
Tr
32
Chopped fresh parsley, or to

taste
698.7
Vit. A (g RE)
77
Males, y
19-29
550
30-49
550
50-64
550
65+
550
Females, y
19-29
500
30-49
500
50-64
500
65+
500
With regards to main course, except for the control (Lot 0), chicken
scallopini prepared with 950 g pansit-pansitan (Lot 3) was the most acceptable
formulation across treatment. As shown in Table 32, the vitamin A content of
chicken scallopini prepared with 950 g pansit-pansitan (Lot 3) totaled to 2938.4
g. The recommended vitamin A for male and female adults from age 19 to 65+
was 550 g and 500 g, respectively. This means that the total vitamin A content
of chicken scallopini more than meet the recommended vitamin A intake for
Filipino adults.
78
Table 33. Vitamin A content of green salad prepared with 350 g pako (Lot 1)
Ingredients
Lettuce, chopped
Pako, chopped
Quantity
(in grams)
300
Total Vit. A
Content
(g RE)
450.0
517
1,809.5
Vit. A Content
(per 100 g)
150
350
Tr
Cucumber
300
1668
Carrot
Tr
2,502.0
150
63
Tomatoes, quartered
Canned tuna, drained and
flaked
Hard-boiled egg, sliced
Salt and pepper
250
0
89
57.9
320
65
12
0
Vinaigrette

5
7.5
Croutons
157.5
3.8
50
1652
4980.6
Vit. A (g RE)
Males, y
19-29
550
30-49
550
79
50-64
550
65+
550
Females, y
19-29
500
30-49
500
50-64
500
65+
500
Except for the control (Lot 0), green salad prepared with 350 g pako (Lot
1) was the most acceptable formulation across treatment. As presented in Table
33, the vitamin A content of green salad prepared with 350 g pako (Lot 1) totaled
to 4980.6 g. The recommended vitamin A for male and female adults from age
19 to 65+ was 550 g and 500 g, respectively. This means that the total vitamin
A content of green salad more than meet the recommended vitamin A intake for
Filipino adults.
Table 34. Vitamin A content of buco smoothies prepared with 15 g pako (Lot 1)
Ingredients
Quantity
(in grams)
Vit. A Content
(per 100 g)
Total Vit. A
Content
(g RE)
517
Pako, mashed
15
77.6
0
Buco meat, shredded
186
0
0
Coco sap
15
0
116
Evaporated milk
120
139.2
80
0
Crushed ice
250
586

216.75
Vit. A (g RE)
Males, y
19-29
550
30-49
550
50-64
550
65+
550
Females, y
19-29
500
30-49
500
50-64
500
65+
500
Buco smoothies prepared with 15 g pako (Lot 1) was the most acceptable
formulation across experimental lots. Table 34 shows that the vitamin A content
of buco smoothies prepared with 15 g pako (Lot 1) totaled to 216.75 g. This
level of vitamin A did not meet the recommended vitamin A for male and female
adults from age 19 to 65+ which were 550 g and 500 g, respectively. However,
it should be noted that all other dishes included in the gourmet meal more than
meet the recommended vitamin A for Filipino adults. Since buco smoothies was
81
the dessert of the entire gourmet meal, other dishes such as chicken scallopini,
green salad and clear soup would more than compensate the recommended
vitamin A for Filipino adults.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Afolayan, A. and Jimoh, F. (2009). Nutritional quality of some wild leafy

vegetables in South Africa. International Journal of Food Science and
Nutrition 60 (5): 424-431.
Beaton, G.H., Martorell, R., Aronson, K., Edmonston, B., McCabe, G., Ross, A.
and Harvey, B. (1993). Effectiveness of vitamin A supplementation in the
control of young child morbidity and mortality in developing countries,
United Nations Administrative Committee on Coordination/Subcommittee
on Nutrition. ACC/SCN State-of-the-Art Series Nutrition Policy Discussion
Paper No. 13, Toronto, 1993.
82
Block, G. (1991). Dietary guidelines and the results of food consumption surveys.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 53, 356S357S.
Brinlee, D. (u.d.). What Makes A Food A Gourmet Food? Retrieved on October
17, 2012 from http://www.askdeb.com/food/gourmet/
Bureau of Agricultural Statistics. (2006). Alugbati production. Retrieved
November
8,
2012
from
http://countrystat.bas.gov.ph/?
cont=12&pageid=59555B5A1D
737166767A78671D056D677A1D066C77667D646118056D74617B64611
A4A5A58
Cohen, L., Manion, L and Morrison, K. R. B. (2007). Research Methods in
Education. 6th edition. London: Routledge.
Couplan, F. Guide nutritionnel des plantes sauvages et cultives. France:
Delachaux & Niestle.
De Caluw, E., Halamov, K., and Van Damme, P. (2010). Tamarindus indica L.
A review of traditional uses, phytochemistry and pharmacology. Afrika
Focus 23(1): 53-83
Department of Environment and Natural Resources [DENR]. (2003). DENR
Recommends No. 12 Foods from the Wilderness. Compiled by Polinag,
M.A. Ecosystem Research and Development Bureau, DENR, 20 p.
Department of Trade and Industry [DTI], Philippine Council for Agriculture,
Forestry and Natural Resources [PCCARD] and Department of Science
and Technology [DOST]. (2009). Alugbati Production Guide. Retrieved
83
November
10,
2012
from
http://www.dti.gov.ph/uploads/DownloadableFiles/alugbati_prod.pdf
dos Santos, D. P.R., de Lima Moreira, D., Franklin Guimares, E. and Coelho
Kaplan, M.A. (2001). Essential oil analysis of 10 Piperaceae species from
the Brazilian Atlantic forest. Phytochemistry 58, 547-551.
Ensminger, A. H., Ensminger, M. E., Konlande, J. E. & Robson, J. R. K. (1995).
The Concise Encyclopedia of Foods and Nutrition. London: CRC Press.
Faber, M. and Benade, A. J. S. (2002). Integrated home-gardening and
community-based growth monitoring activities to alleviated vitamin A
deficiency in a rural village in South Africa. Food, Nutrition and Agriculture,
32, 1-11.
Food and Nutrition Research Institute- Department of Science and Technology
[FNRI-DOST]. (1997). The Philippine Food Composition Tables.
Food and Nutrition Research Institute- Department of Science and Technology
(FNRI-DOST) (1997). The Philippine Food Composition Tables.
Frank, R.A., Ducheney, K. & Mize, S.J.S. (1989). Strawberry odor, but not red
color, enhances the sweetness of sucrose solutions. Chem. Sens. 14,
371-377.
Halpern, B.P. (1977). Psychophysics of Taste. In: Beauchamp, G.K., Bartoshuk,
L.M. (eds.). Tasting and smelling. Handbook of perception and cognition.
2nd Edition. Academic Press, San Diego, 77-123.
Hands, E. S. (2000). Nutrient in foods. USA: Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins.
84
Hasler, C.M. (2002). Functional foods: benefits, concerns and challengesa
position paper from the American council on science and health. Journal
of Nutrition 132, 37723781.
Irving, M. (2009). The Forager Handbook. UK: Ebury Press, 2009.
Kagyung, R., Gajurel, P.R., Rethy, P. and Singh, B. (2010). Ethnomedicinal plants
used for gastro-intestinal diseases by Adi tribes of Dehang-Debang
Biosphere Reserve in Arunachal Pradesh. Indian Journal of Traditional
Knowledge, 9(3), 496-501.
Kamp, D. (2006). The United States of Arugula: How We Became a Gourmet
Nation. Doubleday Broadway.
Kaur, T. J., and Kochar, G. K. (2005). Organoleptic evaluation and retention of
vitamin
in
commonly
consumed
food
preparations
using
underexploited greens. Indian J. Nutr. Diet, 42: 425-431.

Kendrick, P. (2012). The Intolerant Gourmet, Pippa Kendrick, HarperCollins
Publishers, London, UK, 240 P.
Khan M. R. & Omoloso, A. D. (2002). Antibacterial activity of Hygrophila stricta
and Peperomia Pellucida. Fitoterapia, 73(3), 251-254.
Kulkarni, L. R. (2003). Documentation, valuearization and promotion of
underutilized foods for nutrition security of school children. Ph.D. Thesis.,
Uni. Agri. Sci., Dharwad.
Lugod, G.C. and de Padua, L. (1989). Wild food plants of the Philippines. Vol. 1,
University of the Philippines Los Baos, Laguna, 66 p.
85
MacFie, H.J.H. (2007). Consumer Led Food Product Development. Woodhead
Publishing Limited, Cambridge, UK.
McGrath, C. (January 26, 2007). In Arizona back country, a gourmet life.
International Herald Tribune.
Meilgaard, M., Civille, C.V. & Carr, B.T. (2007). Sensory Evaluation Techniques,
4th ed. CRC, Boca Raton, FL.
Moskowitz, H.R., Beckley, J.H. & Resurreccion, A.V.A. (2006). Sensory and
Consumer Research in Food Product Design and Development. Blackwell
Publishing, Ames, I A.
Nande, P., Dudhmogre, S. and Vali, S. A. (2007). Evaluation of nutritive value and
acceptability of recipes prepared from spinach and betel leaves. The
Indian J. Nutr. Diet, 44: 476-483.
Novelli, N. (2004). Niche Tourism: Contemporary Issues, Trends and Cases.
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Pierce, J. & Halpern, B.P. (1996). Orthonasal and retronasal identification based
upon vapor phase input from common substances. Chem. Sens. 21, 529543.
Pieroni, A., Janiak, V., Durr, C.M., Ludeke, S., Trachsel, E., Heinrich, M., 2002. In
vitro antioxidant activity of non-cultivated vegetables of ethnic Albanians in
southern Italy. Phythotherapy Research 16, 467473.
Pomeranz, Y. & Meloan, CE. (1994). Food analysis: Theory and practice.
Chapman & Hall Corp., New York.
86
Reddy, V. (1999). Prevention of micronutrient deficiencies the need for a foodbased approach. World Agricultural Forum 1999, World Congress.
Ross, A.C. (1992). Vitamin A status: relationship to immunity and the antibody
response. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med, 200, 303-320.
Shtayeh, M. S., Jamous, R. M., Al-Shafie, J. H., Elgharabah, W. A. (2008).
Traditional knowledge of wild edible plants used in Palestine (Northern
West Bank): A comparative study. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed, 4, 13.
Stone, H. & Sidel, J.L. (2004). Sensory Evaluation Practices. Academic Press,
New York.
Tapsell, L.C., Hemphill, I., Cobiac, L., Patch, C.S., Sullivan, D.R., Fenech, M.,
Roodenrys, S., Keogh, J.B., Clifton, P.M., Williams, P.G., Fazio, V.A. &
Inge, K.E. (2006). Health benefits of herbs and spices: the past, the
present, the future. The Medical Journal of Australia 185, S424.
Taylor, A.J. & Linforth, R.S.T. (1996). Flavor research in the mouth. Trends Food
Sci. Technol. 7, 444-447.
Tompson, J. and Manore, M. (2005). Nutrition; an applied approach. New York:
Pearson Benjamin Cummings.
87
88
Appendix A
SCORE CARD FOR EVALUATION OF THE DEVELOPED GOURMET MEAL
Name of the Judge: ________________________________
Date: ___________________________
Instruction: Please check the appropriate column for your evaluation of each of the food samples presented using a
7-point hedonic scale. Each food sample will be evaluated in terms of general appearance, color, aroma, texture, taste
and overall acceptability.
Please write the number for your evaluation using the scale below:
7 = Highly Acceptable
6 = Moderately Acceptable
5 = Slightly Acceptable
4 = Neither Acceptable nor Unacceptable
3 = Slightly Unacceptable
2 = Moderately Unacceptable
1 = Highly Unacceptable
89
Soup
PARAMETER
General Appearance
Soup:
Low consistency
Vegetables are cut uniformly to ensure
an attractive soup
Size is large enough to be identifiable
but small enough to eat with spoon
Ingredients do not appear overcooked
There is no visible fat or scum
Vegetables do not turn brown and
cooked by sweating
Salad:
Ingredients are distinct or identifiable
and neatly cut and uniform in shape &
size
Ingredients are arranged neatly in
appropriate container
Simple and natural arrangement but
appetizing
Main Course:
Ingredients are tender and appropriate in
size & shape
Chicken is cut in reasonable size
Dessert:
Serve in an attractive glass
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Salad
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Main Course
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Dessert
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Lot
3
90
Soup
PARAMETER
Color
Soup:
Stock/liquid/broth is clear and color is
consistent with the main ingredients
Salad:
With varied colors but not over mixed
and no yellowing of leaves and
vegetables
Main Course:
Chicken and sauce is golden brown
Dessert:
Attractive and dominantly green
Aroma
Soup:
No distinct odor
Salad:
Smells sweet but not bitter
Main Course:
With fragrant aroma
Dessert:
Sweet and refreshing aroma
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Salad
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Main Course
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Dessert
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Lot
3
91
Soup
PARAMETER
Texture
Soup:
Chicken meat are not overcooked
Salad:
With crunchy and soft ingredients
Main Course:
With thick sauce/consistency and chicken
meat is not dry but glace
Dessert:
Thick and smooth
Taste
Soup:
Mild saltiness, seasoning are balance with
no additive (predominant salt is not an
obvious taste)
True flavor with no taste of burned
ingredients or off flavor
Ingredients complement each other
Salad:
With a little taste of salt and pepper
Main Course:
With thick sauce and flavorful
Moderately seasoned with salt and
pepper
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Salad
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Main Course
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Dessert
Lot
3
Lot
0
Lot
1
Lot
2
Lot
3
92
With no taste of burned ingredients

Chicken is properly seasoned
Dessert:
Creamy and no aftertaste
Appendix B
THEORETICAL NUTRIENT CONTENT OF DEVELOPED GOURMET MEAL
93
Appendix Table 1. Nutrient composition per 100 grams of each ingredient used in the production of chicken scallopini
NUTRIENT COMPOSITION
CHICKEN
SCALLOPINI
INGREDIENTS
Wate
r
(g)
Energ
y
(kcal)
Protei
n
(g)
Fat
(g)
Carbohydrat
e
(g)
Crud
e
Fiber
(g)
Ash
(g)
Calciu
m
(mg)
Phosphoru
s
(mg)
Iron
(mg)
Retino
l
(g)
carotene
(g)
Vit.
A
(RE
)
(g)
Thiami
n
(mg)
Riboflavin
(mg)
Niaci
n
(mg)
Ascorbic
Acid
(mg)
Chicken breast
73.1
131
21.6
5.0
0.0
0.2
1.0
24
162
1.0
30
31
0.06
0.06
97
Alugbati
92.5
23
2.0
0.3
3.0
0.9
2.2
128
40
4.9
2735
45
6
0.04
0.12
0.5
89
Pako
89.9
44
3.8
1.7
3.3
1.3
1.3
36
76
3.0
3100
51
7
0.00
0.10
1.9
10
Pansit-pansitan
97.2
11
0.5
.05
1.1
0.7
0.7
94
13
4.3
1250
20
8
0.01
0.00
0.1
Garlic (bulb)
66.5
129
7.0
0.3
24.6
(2.5)
1.6
28
121
1.2
0.23
0.08
0.4
Butter
16.0
772
0.5
85.
5
0.0
0.1
1.5
18
18
0.6
355
335
411
0.01
0.01
Tr
94
All-purpose flour
12.3
352
12.6
0.8
73.7
(3.3)
0.6
82
105
4.4
0.02
0.11
5.2
Salt
10.3
128
0.0
0.0
31.9
0.0
57.
8
267
27
5.5
Tr
Tr
Tr
255
10.95
3.2
6
64.81
26.5
437
173
28.8
6
156
29
9
0.109
0.24
1.142
21
23
2.3
0.4
2.5
(1.8)
1.2
40
54
0.4
0.02
0.10
1.8
23
2.36
0.8
6
4.89
3.2
40
10
1.67
83
13
8
0.018
0.13
9
0.652
Ground black
pepper
Mushrooms -canned
93.6
Capers
Lemon juice
91.4
42
0.5
1.6
6.3
(0.1)
0.2
0.2
Tr
Tr
0.04
0.02
0.2
45
White wine
92.6
30
0.07
0.0
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.00
0.02
0.1
Chicken-flavored
demi-glace
4.1
306
15.3
22.
3
11.0
47.
3
58
143
18
25
10
27
0.84
0.14
2.7
Fresh parsley
84.2
58
4.0
0.9
8.4
(6.5)
2.5
264
46
1.8
1550
25
8
0.17
0.18
0.9
117
95
91.4
42
0.5
1.6
6.3
(0.1)
0.2
0.2
Tr
Tr
0.04
0.02
0.2
45
Lemon
Appendix Table 2. Nutrient composition per 100 grams of each ingredient used in the production of clear soup
CLEAR SOUP
INGREDIENTS
Wate
r
(g)
Energ
y
(kcal)
Protei
n
(g)
Fat
(g)
Carbohydrat
e
(g)
Crud
e
Fiber
(g)
Ash
(g)
Calciu
m
(mg)
Phosphoru
s
(mg)
Iron
(mg)
Retino
l
(g)
caroten
e
(g)
Vit.
A
(RE
)
(g)
Thiami
n
(mg)
Riboflavin
(mg)
Niaci
n
(mg)
Ascorbic
Acid
(mg)
Cauliflower
91.7
32
2.1
0.3
5.2
(2.1)
0.7
41
42
0.8
45
0.05
0.12
0.7
82
Alugbati
92.5
23
2.0
0.3
3.0
0.9
2.2
128
40
4.9
2735
45
6
0.04
0.12
0.5
89
Pako
89.9
44
3.8
1.7
3.3
1.3
1.3
36
76
3.0
3100
51
7
0.00
0.10
1.9
10
Pansit-pansitan
97.2
11
0.5
.05
1.1
0.7
0.7
94
13
4.3
1250
20
8
0.01
0.00
0.1
Butter
16.0
772
0.5
85.5
0.0
0.1
1.5
18
18
0.6
355
335
411
0.01
0.01
Tr
96
Onion
87.0
52
1.7
0.3
10.5
(2.0)
0.5
40
51
0.6
Tr
Tr
0.04
0.01
0.4
Salt
10.3
128
0.0
0.0
31.9
0.0
57.
8
267
27
5.5
Tr
Tr
Tr
Garlic (bulb)
66.5
129
7.0
0.3
24.6
(2.5)
1.6
28
121
1.2
0.23
0.08
0.4
Chicken broth
86.2
61
1.7
1.8
9.5
0.8
14
0.7
25
0.02
0.02
0.4
White pepper
11.4
2
296
10.4
2.12
68.61
1.5
9
0.265
176
14.3
1
Tr
0.02
0.12
6
0.21
2
Nutmeg
14.3
525
5.84
36.3
1
49.29
20.8
184
213
3.04
16
0.346
1.3
Fresh parsley
84.2
58
4.0
0.9
8.4
(6.5)
2.5
264
46
1.8
1550
25
8
0.17
0.18
0.9
117
97
Appendix Table 3. Nutrient composition per 100 grams of each ingredient used in the production of green salad
GREEN SALAD
INGREDIENTS
Wate
r
(g)
Energ
y
(kcal)
Protei
n
(g)
Fat
(g)
Carbohydrat
e
(g)
Crud
e
Fiber
(g)
Ash
(g)
Calciu
m
(mg)
Phosphoru
s
(mg)
Iron
(mg)
Retino
l
(g)
caroten
e
(g)
Vit.
A
(RE)
(g)
Thiami
n
(mg)
Riboflavin
(mg)
Niaci
n
(mg)
Ascorbic
Acid
(mg)
Lettuce
94.1
22
1.3
0.4
3.4
0.6
0.8
97
34
3.4
1800
300
0.06
0.11
0.5
19
Alugbati
92.5
23
2.0
0.3
3.0
0.9
2.2
128
40
4.9
2735
456
0.04
0.12
0.5
89
Pako
89.9
44
3.8
1.7
3.3
1.3
1.3
36
76
3.0
3100
517
0.00
0.10
1.9
10
Pansit-pansitan
97.2
11
0.5
.05
1.1
0.7
0.7
94
13
4.3
1250
208
0.01
0.00
0.1
Cucumber
95.9
16
0.6
0.2
2.9
(0.5)
0.4
22
17
0.4
Tr
Tr
0.02
0.02
0.1
10
Carrot
86.7
52
1.5
0.4
10.5
(3.4)
0.9
69
38
2.1
10005
166
8
0.04
0.04
0.8
93.0
27
0.9
0.3
5.2
(1.5)
0.6
31
26
1.0
380
63
0.05
0.03
0.6
34
98
Tomato
Tuna flakes, canned
54.3
309
15.4
26.7
1.7
0.1
1.9
16
105
0.7
0.01
0.10
9.4
Egg, whole boiled
72.1
170
13.9
12.4
0.7
0.0
0.9
73
180
3.5
85
25
89
0.09
0.46
0.1
Salt
10.3
128
0.0
0.0
31.9
0.0
57.
8
267
27
5.5
Tr
Tr
Tr
White pepper
11.4
2
296
10.4
2.12
68.61
1.5
9
0.265
176
14.3
1
Tr
0.02
0.12
6
0.21
2
Vinaigrette
66.2
5
143.7
5
0.5
0.40
28.13
0.0
18.75
37.5
0.63
18.75
0.006
0.01
3
6.25
Croutons, seasoned
3.6
465
10.8
6.7
63.5
95
140
2.83
32.5
7.5
0.505
0.42
4.65
99
Appendix Table 4. Nutrient composition per 100 grams of each ingredient used in the production of buco smoothies
BUCO
SMOOTHIES
INGREDIENTS
Water
(g)
Energy
(kcal)
Protei
n
(g)
Fat
(g)
Carbohydrat
e
(g)
Crud
e
Fiber
(g)
Ash
(g)
Calciu
m
(mg)
Phosphoru
s
(mg)
Iron
(mg)
Retino
l
(g)
caroten
e
(g)
Vit.
A
(RE)
(g)
Thiami
n
(mg)
Riboflavin
(mg)
Niaci
n
(mg)
Ascorbic
Acid
(mg)
Buco meat
80.6
102
1.4
5.3
12.1
(6.6)
0.6
10
54
0.7
0.02
0.02
0.6
Alugbati
92.5
23
2.0
0.3
3.0
0.9
2.2
128
40
4.9
2735
456
0.04
0.12
0.5
89
Pako
89.9
44
3.8
1.7
3.3
1.3
1.3
36
76
3.0
3100
517
0.00
0.10
1.9
10
Pansit-pansitan
97.2
11
0.5
.05
1.1
0.7
0.7
94
13
4.3
1250
208
0.01
0.00
0.1
Coco sap
7.6
369.4
1.3
1.8
89.2
2.2
6.0
79
1.6
0.01
0.01
0.2
Evaporated milk
71.3
148
7.7
0.12
11.7
0.0
1.5
313
202
2.0
110
35
116
0.41
0.39
0.2
23.4
Ice, crushed
99.8
100

Thesis Culinary Arts

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Thesis Culinary Arts

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

0

DEVELOPMENT AND ACCEPTABILITY OF A HEALTHY

variety/uniqueness is the key. Cooking time is much more critical as it affects

Background of the Study

Statement of the Problem

What are the sensory characteristics of the developed gourmet meal

Is there a significant difference in the sensory characteristics of the

as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan?

wild greens such as alugbati, pako and pansit-pansitan?

Nutrient Intake (RENI) for Filipino adults?

Scope and Limitations of the Study

A view of the work done by several scholars helps in planning future

also known as arogbati;

dundula; grana; ilaibakir; libato; Ceylon spinach, Malabar spinach, Indian

Uses and Nutritional Value

Source: The Philippine Food Composition Tables (1997). Food and

Source: The Philippine Food Composition Tables (1997). Food and

thalictroides; (7) Pakong-tulog, pakong-cipres, Selaginella tamariscina; (8)

Source: The Philippine Food Composition Tables (1997). Food and

Vitamin A as an Essential Nutrient for Human Health

Studies on the Use of Wild Greens in Dishes

Standard recipes for Gourmet Meal

Figure 1. The Research Paradigm

A. Trained Laboratory Panel

B. Expert Sensory Panel

Salt and ground black pepper to

Chopped fresh parsley, or to taste

Total Formula (in g)

Figure 2. Process Flow Chart in the Preparation of Chicken Scallopine

Wild green, chopped

Onion, roughly chopped

Chicken or vegetable broth

Freshly ground white pepper

Freshly grated nutmeg

Finely chopped parsley

Total Formula (in g)

Stir in pepper and nutmeg.

Canned tuna, drained and flaked

Hard-boiled egg, sliced

Salt and pepper

Combine all the ingredients in a bowl and toss to

Serve immediately, or prepare it up to a few

Figure 4. Process Flow Chart in the Preparation of Green Salad

Buco meat, shredded

Total Formula (in g)

Wild green, mashed

Combine all the ingredients in a blender and stir

In a blender, blend all the ingredients until

Theoretical Nutrient Content Analysis

This chapter discusses the sensory characteristics of the developed

Sensory Characteristics of the Developed Gourmet Meal using Different

Table 1. General appearance of clear soup across treatment

Lot 2 = 250 g alugbati

1.33218 Slightly Acceptable

Table 2. Color of clear soup across treatment

.76112 Moderately Acceptable

.94989 Slightly Acceptable

1.33218 Slightly Acceptable

1.39168 Slightly Acceptable

Table 3. Aroma of clear soup across treatment

Table 4. Texture of clear soup across treatment

Table 5. Taste of clear soup across treatment