Assesses how cooking methods influence the sensory and nutritional quality of tempeh, suggesting optimal preparation techniques.
Tempeh has considerable potential to meet the future needs for more plant-based alternatives to meat. However, many European consumers, are unfamiliar with tempeh. Consumer acceptance depends on its perceived sensory quality, which is affected by the suitability of the cooking method chosen for the intended dish. The aim of this study was to assess the sensory and nutritional quality of fava bean tempeh across different shapes, sizes and cooking methods. The tempeh was sliced (5 mm or 10 mm), cubed (10x10 mm or 20x20 mm) or minced followed bypan-frying, oven-baking or boiling. Descriptive sensory analysis, texture analysis, colour measurements, cooking loss and nutritional composition were used to evaluate the effects. Different sensory qualities of tempeh were achieved by changing the comminution techniqueand cooking method. Pan-frying resulted largely in samples having a golden colour (10.8 compared with 7.7 and 1.3 ) with reduced fermented flavour (9.2 to 10.7 and 12.4) and a crunchy texture (7.3 to 2.1 and 1.4), whereas the shape difference resulted in thin/small samples being slightly less spongy (5 mm < 10 mm and 10x10mm < 20x20mm). Mincing reduced the beany (10.4 to 8.1) and fermented odour (9.5 to 6.3) and flavour (10.7 to 8.3) and the spongy texture (7.6 to 4.4). Cooking loss was mainly caused by water loss, since the protein, carbohydrate and ash content of the cooked tempeh were comparable to that of raw tempeh when adjusted for weight change during cooking. However, the fat content increased when oil was used to cook the tempeh. • The sensory and nutritional quality of tempeh depends on cooking method and shape • Pan-frying resulted in a golden colour (10.8) and a crunchy texture (7.3) • Pan-frying also reduced fermented flavour (from 12.8 to 5.0) • Smaller or thinner samples resulted in a less spongy texture (2.4 instead of 5.3) • Tempeh loses water during cooking, while the protein content is retained
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Aaslyng et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: