IDENTIFICATION OF DIFFERENT SAMPLES OF GUGGULU THROUGH SENSORY EVALUATION TECHNIQUE

  • Kruti Y Vyas Dept. of Rasa Shastra and Bhaishajya Kalpana Including Drug Research
  • Shukla Vj Gujarat Ayurved University
  • Galib . Dept. of Rasa Shastra and Bhaishajya Kalpana Including Drug Research
  • Prajapati Pk Dept. of Rasa Shastra and Bhaishajya Kalpana Including Drug Research

Abstract

Objective: Present study is aimed to evaluate an efficacy of the two-Alternative Forced Choice (2-AFC) sensory methods in detecting differences between Fresh and old samples of Guggulu.

Methods: Both samples of Guggulu were evaluated through 2-AFC method.

Results: 2-AFC method for this purpose was sensitive but specificity to identify the sample was less.

Conclusion: 2-AFC method is sensitive to differentiate two samples of Guggulu i.e. fresh and old.

Keywords: 2-alternative forced choice, Commiphora wightii, Fresh Guggulu, Old Guggulu, Sensory evaluation

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Acharya YT. Editor. Caraka Samhita of Agnivesa, Sutra Sthana, Chapter 9/7, Ayurveda Dipika commentary by chakrapani, Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashan, New Delhi; 2009.
2. Acharya YT. editor. Susruta, Susruta Samhita, sutra sthana 36/15, Nibandhasanghraha commentary by Shri Dalhanacharya, Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashana, Varanasi; 2003.
3. Satyavati GV. Effect of an indigenous drug on disorders of lipid metabolism with special reference to atherosclerosis and obesity (Medoroga) M. D. thesis (Doctor of Ayurvedic Medicine). Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi; 1966.
4. Mishra B, Vaisya R. Editors. Bhavaprakasha of Shri Bhavamishra, madhyakhanda, vataraktadhikara/191-192. Vidhyodini Hindi Commentary. Vol. 1. 9th ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskita Bhavana; 2002.
5. Mishra B, Vaisya R. Editors. Bhavaprakasha of Shri Bhavamishra, Purva khanda, Karpuradi Varga/42. Vidhyodini Hindi Commentary. Vol. 1. 9th ed. Varanasi: Chaukhambha Sanskita Bhavana; 2002.
6. Harry T Lawless, hildegarde Heymann. chapter-1 Introduction In: sensory evaluation of food–principle and practices. 2nd ed. publisher: Springer New York: Dordrecht Heidelberg London; 2010. p. 17.
7. Ennis DM. Relative power of difference testing methods in sensory evaluation. Food Tech. 1990;44:114, 116, 117.
8. Sarah E Kemp, Tracey Hollowood, Joanne Hort. “Sensory Evaluation–A Practical Handbook”. 1st ed. A John Wiley and sons Ltd. Publcation; 2009.
9. Vidhyasagar P. Editor. Sarngadhara Samhita of Sarngadharacarya, Prathama Khanda, 1/44. 6th ed. Varanasi: Chaukhamba Surbharati Prakashana; 2005.
10. Anonymous. Minutes of Division Business Meeting. Institute of Food Technologists–Sensory Evaluation Division, IFT, Chicago, IL; 1975.
11. Meiselman HL. Critical evaluation of sensory techniques. Food Quality Preference 1993;4:33–40.
12. Christi M Heintz, adel A kader. Procedures for the sensory evaluation of horticulture crops. Hort Sci 1983;18:18-22.
13. Shri Bhavamishra. Bhavaprakasha, Karpuradi Varga, 42, ’Vidhyodini’hindi Commentry. 11th ed. Varanasi: Chokhambha Sanskita Bhavana; 2010.
14. Christi M Heintz, adel A kader. Procedures for the sensory evaluation of horticulture crops. Hort Sci 1983;18:80.
15. JR López-Aguilar, G Valerio-Alfaro, JA Monroy-Rivera, LA Medina-Juáre, M O’Mahony, O Angulo. Evaluation of a simple and sensitive sensory method for measuring rancidity in soybean oils. Grasas Y Aceites 2006;57:149-54.
Statistics
268 Views | 830 Downloads
How to Cite
Vyas, K. Y., S. Vj, G. ., and P. Pk. “IDENTIFICATION OF DIFFERENT SAMPLES OF GUGGULU THROUGH SENSORY EVALUATION TECHNIQUE”. International Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vol. 7, no. 11, Aug. 2015, pp. 102-5, https://innovareacademics.in/journals/index.php/ijpps/article/view/7684.
Section
Original Article(s)