Study evaluates flavor profiles of sweet potato wines, highlighting the impact of cooking methods and saccharification treatments.
This study systematically investigated the effects of cooking methods (steaming vs . roasting) and saccharification treatment on the flavor profile of sweet potato wines using a novel whole-pulp fermentation process without aging. The volatile compounds were analyzed via HS-SPME-GC-MS and HS-GC-IMS, taste profiles were assessed using an electronic tongue, and consumer perception was evaluated through Check-All-That-Apply (CATA). Results demonstrated that the flavor of wines produced in this study differed significantly from commercial sweet potato wines made by traditional methods. Steaming preserved a refreshing and pure taste, reducing undesirable flavors and achieving the highest consumer preference (41.67%). In contrast, roasting promoted Maillard and caramelization reactions, leading to higher contents of alcohols, esters, terpenes, and furans, but also intensified off-flavors. Saccharification exerted method‑dependent effects: when combined with steaming, it increased fruity and floral esters and terpenes despite elevating bitterness; when combined with roasting, it suppressed off‑flavors and improved taste balance, resulting in a 27.08% preference rate. This study provides a scientific basis for optimizing sweet potato wine production and underscores the potential of whole-pulp fermentation in developing high-value, differentiated sweet potato alcoholic beverages. ● Multi-technique approach (GC-MS, GC-IMS, electronic tongue, CATA) revealed distinct flavor profiles among processing methods. ● Roasting increased aroma compound diversity but intensified off-flavors; saccharification showed method-dependent effects. ● Steaming without saccharification preserved a refreshing taste and achieved the highest consumer preference (41.67%). ● Compared to eight commercial sweet potato wines, the novel wines exhibited distinct volatile fingerprints, particularly enriched in fruity esters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yuan et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: