BEER TASTE BEVERAGE

Abstract

Provided is a beer-taste beverage comprising 1000 ppb by mass or less of 4-vinylguaiacol, and having an ethyl n-butyrate content of 140 ppb by mass or more, a ratio of the content (unit: ppb by mass) of ethyl n-butyrate to the content (unit: ppb by mass) of γ-nonalactone [ethyl n-butyrate/γ-nonalactone] is 23 or less.

Claims

1. A beer-taste beverage comprising 1000 ppb by mass or less of 4-vinylguaiacol, and having an ethyl n-butyrate content of 140 ppb by mass or more, a ratio of the content (unit: ppb by mass) of ethyl n-butyrate to the content (unit: ppb by mass) of γ-nonalactone [ethyl n-butyrate/γ-nonalactone] is 23 or less.

2. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the content of γ-nonalactone is 3 ppb by mass or more.

3. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein a ratio of the total content (unit: ppb by mass) of ethyl n-butyrate and γ-nonalactone to the content (unit: ppb by mass) of 4-vinylguaiacol [(ethyl n-butyrate+γ-nonalactone)/4-vinylguaiacol] is 1.7 to 12.0.

4. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the beer-taste beverage has a bitterness unit of less than 60 BUs.

5. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the beer-taste beverage is a fermented beer-taste beverage.

6. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the beer-taste beverage has an original extract (O-Ex) concentration of 4.0 to 20.0% by mass.

7. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the beer-taste beverage has a total polyphenol content of 60 to 300 ppm by mass.

8. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the beer-taste beverage has a proline concentration of 3.5 to 60.0 ppm by mass.

9. The beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, wherein the beer-taste beverage has a malt ratio of 50 to 100% by mass.

10. A beer-taste beverage wherein a ratio of the total content (unit: ppb by mass) of ethyl n-butyrate and γ-nonalactone to the content (unit: ppb by mass) of 4-vinylguaiacol [(ethyl n-butyrate+γ-nonalactone)/4-vinylguaiacol] is 1.7 to 12.0.

11. A method for producing a beer-taste beverage according to claim 1, comprising the step of adding yeast to raw materials including water and malt to perform alcoholic fermentation.

12. The method for producing a beer-taste beverage according to claim 11, wherein the yeast is top fermenting yeast.

Description

EXAMPLES

[0211] Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in more detail with reference to Examples. However, the present invention is not limited by these Examples.

Examples 1 to 18 and Comparative Examples 1 to 14

[0212] <Preparation of Beverage>

[0213] Crushed barley malt and an enzyme were added to a preparation tank containing 120 L of hot water. Then, the temperature was elevated in stages and held, and malt residues were removed by filtration to obtain wort. Then, the wort was added to a wort kettle, further hop was added, and molasse was added, if necessary, at the malt ratio described in Tables 1 to 4 to perform boiling treatment. After the boiling treatment, solid-liquid separation treatment was performed, and the obtained clear wort was cooled, followed by aeration with oxygen to obtain a pre-fermentation liquid before yeast addition.

[0214] To the pre-fermentation liquid thus obtained, beer yeast (top fermenting yeast) was added, and the mixture was fermented using a predetermined fermentation temperature and fermentation time and further subjected to a maturation period for approximately 1 week. Then, the yeast was removed by filtration. Then, extract adjustment water and each component were added for preparation, if necessary, such that 4VG, ethyl n-butyrate, γ-nonalactone, and an original extract attained the values described in Tables 1 to 4 to obtain each beer-taste beverage.

[0215] In each of Examples and Comparative Examples, the type of the enzyme, the amount of the enzyme added, the timing of addition thereof, the set temperature and the holding time in each temperature region in preparing wort, etc. were appropriately set and each adjusted so as to attain the total polyphenol content and the proline content shown in Tables 1 to 4. The contents of 4VG, ethyl n-butyrate, and γ-nonalactone were adjusted by appropriately setting the type of the yeast and the fermentation conditions and then adding each component, if necessary, so as to attain the contents shown in Tables 1 to 4.

[0216] <Sensory Evaluation>

[0217] The beverages obtained in Examples 1 to 18 and Comparative Examples 1 to 14 and cooled to approximately 4° C. were tasted by six regularly trained panelists and evaluated for the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverages” of each beverage at 0.1 intervals of scores in the range of 3 (maximum value) to 1 (minimum value) on the basis of scoring criteria given below, and average scores from the six panelists were calculated. The results are shown in Tables 1 to 4.

[0218] For the evaluation, samples conformable to the criteria “3”, “2” and “1” given below were provided in advance, and the criteria were standardized among the panelists. In any sensory evaluation of Tables 1 to 4, difference by 2.0 or more in score to the same beverage was not confirmed among the panelists.

[0219] [Criteria for Presence or Absence of Fresh Scent Suitable for Beer-Taste Beverage] [0220] “3”: Strong fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage was perceived. [0221] “2”: Fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage was perceived. [0222] “1”: Little fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage was perceived.

[0223] [Criteria for Presence or Absence of Sweet Scent Suitable for Beer-Taste Beverage] [0224] “3”: Strong sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage was perceived. [0225] “2”: Sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage was perceived. [0226] “1”: Little sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage was perceived.

[0227] From the results of evaluating the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” described above, each beer-taste beverage was comprehensively evaluated on four scales according to criteria given below. [0228] “A”: The evaluation of both of the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” was 2.5 or more. [0229] “B”: The evaluation of both of the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” was 2.0 or more and did not correspond to the evaluation “A”. [0230] “C”: The evaluation of one of the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” was less than 2.0. [0231] “D”: The evaluation of both of the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” was less than 2.0.

TABLE-US-00001 Table 1 Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Content of 4VG ppb by 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 mass Content of ethyl ppb by 242 180 180 180 180 180 220 220 220 n-butyrate mass Content of ppb by 26.0 32.7 24.0 15.7 12.0 9.4 40.0 29.3 19.1 γ-nonalactone mass Original extract % by 12.5 9.3 9.3 7.5 9.3 4.5 11.3 12.5 12.5 concentration mass Total polyphenol ppm by 180 134 134 108 134 65 164 180 180 content mass Malt ratio % by 100 75 75 60 75 51 90 100 100 mass Bitterness unit BUs 18.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 20.0 25.0 16.4 18.0 18.0 Proline ppm by 30.0 16.7 16.7 10.9 16.7 5.5 24.5 30.0 30.0 concentration mass [Ethyl n-butyrate]/ — 9.3 5.5 7.5 11.5 15.0 19.1 5.5 7.5 11.5 [γ-nonalactone] [Ethyl n-butyrate + — 2.68 2.13 2.04 1.96 1.92 1.89 2.60 2.49 2.39 γ-nonalactone]/[4VG] Presence or absence of 2.7 2.0 2.2 2.7 2.8 3.0 2.3 2.7 2.8 fresh scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Presence or absence of 2.7 3.0 2.8 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.2 2.5 2.8 sweet scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Comprehensive evaluation A B 8 B 8 B B A A

TABLE-US-00002 Table 2 Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Content of 4VG ppb by 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 mass Content of ethyl ppb by 220 270 270 300 300 300 300 500 500 n-butyrate mass Content of ppb by 14.7 36.0 23.5 54.5 40.0 26.1 20.0 90.9 26.0 γ-nonalactone mass Original extract % by 9.3 12.5 12.5 12.5 9.3 12.5 9.3 15.0 12.5 concentration mass Total polyphenol ppm by 134 180 180 180 134 180 134 217 180 content mass Malt ratio % by 75 100 100 100 75 100 75 100 100 mass Bitterness unit BUs 20.0 18.0 18.0 18.0 20.0 18.0 20.0 50.0 18.0 Proline ppm by 16.7 30.0 30.0 30.0 16.7 30.0 16.7 36.1 30.0 concentration mass [Ethyl n-butyrate]/ — 15.0 7.5 11.5 5.5 7.5 11.5 15.0 5.5 19.2 [γ-nonalactone] [Ethyl n-butyrate + — 2.35 3.06 2.94 3.55 3.40 3.26 3.20 5.91 5.26 γ-nonalactone]/[4VG] Presence or absence of 2.3 2.7 2.8 2.0 2.2 2.7 2.8 2.0 2.3 fresh scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Presence or absence of 2.3 2.8 2.7 3.0 2.8 2.3 2.2 3.0 2.3 sweet scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Comprehensive evaluation B A A B B B 8 B B

TABLE-US-00003 Table 3 Compara- Compara- Compara- Compara- Compara- Compara- Compara- Compara- Compara- tive tive tive tive tive tive tive tive tive Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Content of 4VG ppb by 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 mass Content of ethyl ppb by 68 69 75 93 100 108 111 113 114 n-butyrate mass Content of ppb by 34.7 20.3 17.3 35.3 33.6 23.0 23.5 23.0 22.6 γ-nonalactone mass Original extract % by 13.0 11.0 11.2 12.1 13.6 13.2 9.8 11.0 11.6 concentration mass Total polyphenol ppm by 197 136 142 185 130 183 140 126 217 content mass Malt ratio % by 100 100 67 100 100 100 67 67 100 mass Bitterness unit BUs 35.0 20.8 20.2 29.9 42.4 21.3 23.6 21.0 27.6 Proline ppm by 31.3 26.4 18.1 29.3 32.9 31.8 15.9 17.7 27.9 concentration mass [Ethyl n-butyrate]/ — 2.0 3.4 4.4 2.6 3.0 4.7 4.7 4.9 5.1 [γ-nonalactone] [Ethyl n-butyrate + — 1.03 0.90 0.93 1.28 1.33 1.31 1.34 1.36 1.37 γ-nonalactone]/[4VG] Presence or absence of 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.6 1.6 fresh scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Presence or absence of 2.4 1.8 1.6 2.2 2.2 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 sweet scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Comprehensive evaluation C D D c C D D D D

TABLE-US-00004 Table 4 Comparative Comparative Comparative Comparative Comparative Example 10 Example 11 Example 12 Example 13 Example 14 Content of 4VG ppb by 100 100 1500 3000 100 mass Content of ethyl ppb by 116 128 148 171 1200 n-butyrate mass Content of ppb by 43.2 23.6 40.7 35.5 43.2 γ-nonalactone mass Original extract % by 13.0 15.9 12.5 11.1 13.0 concentration mass Total polyphenol ppm by 135 140 132 140 135 content mass Malt ratio % by 100 100 67 67 100 mass Bitterness unit BUS 18.1 61.3 18.3 11.6 18.1 Proline ppm by 31.2 38.4 20.1 17.9 31.2 concentration mass [Ethyl n-butyrate]/ — 2.7 5.4 3.6 4.8 27.8 [γ-nonalactone] [Ethyl n-butyrate + — 1.59 1.52 0.13 0.07 12.43 γ-nonalactone]/[4VG) Presence or absence of 1.4 1.8 1.6 1.8 3.0 fresh scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Presence or absence of 1.8 1.6 2.0 2.0 1.0 sweet scent suitable for beer-taste beverage Comprehensive evaluation D D C C C

[0232] As seen from the results shown in Tables 1 and 2, the beverages prepared in Examples 1 to 18 offered perceivable well-balanced fresh scent and sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage. On the other hand, as seen from the results shown in Tables 3 and 4, the beverages prepared in Comparative Examples 1 to 14 offered unbalanced fresh scent and sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage because at least one of the fresh scent and the sweet scent was weak.

Examples 19 to 27 and Comparative Example 15

[0233] <Preparation of Beverage>

[0234] 4VG was added to the beverage prepared in Example 1 to prepare a beverage having the content of 4VG shown in Table 5.

[0235] <Sensory Evaluation>

[0236] The beverages obtained in Examples 1 and 19 to 27 and Comparative Example 15 and cooled to approximately 4° C. were tasted by six regularly trained panelists and evaluated for the “presence or absence of unsuitable smoke scent” of each beverage at 0.1 intervals of scores in the range of 3 (maximum value) to 1 (minimum value) on the basis of scoring criteria given below, and average scores from the six panelists were calculated. The results are shown in Table 5.

[0237] For the evaluation, samples conformable to the criteria “3”, “2” and “1” given below were provided in advance, and the criteria were standardized among the panelists. In any sensory evaluation of Table 5, difference by 2.0 or more in score to the same beverage was not confirmed among the panelists.

[0238] [Criteria for Presence or Absence of Unsuitable Smoke Scent] [0239] “3”: No unsuitable smoke scent was perceived. [0240] “2”: Little unsuitable smoke scent was perceived. [0241] “1”: Strong unsuitable smoke scent was perceived.

TABLE-US-00005 Table 5 Example Example Example Example Example Example 1 19 20 21 22 23 Content of 4VG ppb by 100 200 300 400 500 600 mass Presence or absence 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 of unsuitable smoke scent Example Example Example Example Comparative 24 25 26 27 Example 15 Content of 4VG ppb by 700 800 900 1000 1100 mass Presence or absence 2.3 2.2 2.0 2.0 1.7 of unsuitable smoke scent

[0242] As seen from the results shown in Table 5, the beverages prepared in Examples 1 and 19 to 27 suppressed unsuitable smoke scent. On the other hand, unsuitable smoke scent was strongly perceived in the beverage prepared in Comparative Example 15.

[0243] Each beverage prepared in Examples 19 to 27 and Comparative Example 15 was sensorily evaluated for the “presence or absence of fresh scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” and the “presence or absence of sweet scent suitable for a beer-taste beverage” by the same method as mentioned above, and comprehensively evaluated on three scales according to the same criteria as described above from the evaluation thereof. As a result of the comprehensive evaluation, the beverages of Examples 19 to 27 were given “A” or “B” in the evaluation, whereas the beverage of Comparative Example 15 was given “C” in the evaluation.