Truffle flavored commercial products veracity and sensory analysis from truffle and non-truffle consumers

The price of the truffle species Tuber melanosporum and Tuber magnatum can be up to fifty times higher, or even more, than the cheapest edible truffle species due to their appreciated aroma and low production levels. This aroma is seriously affected after the application of treatments for the conservation of food products, usually thermal (freezing or sterilization). Hence, many of the truffled products that are retailed are characterized by the use of truffle species of low economic value and the addition of flavoring substances. Most of the time, the added flavorings do not mimic fresh truffle aroma and do not correspond to the truffle species appearing in the ingredients list and the statement of identity. These products sometimes include pictures of truffles or the term ‘white or black truffle’ in the label, which might confuse the consumer. To study this practice in the food industry, 51 products were evaluated through instrumental techniques determining truffle species presence by microscopy and molecular techniques, as well as the level of truffle flavorings added by HS-GC-MS analysis and by sensory perception scale. Finally, a sensory analysis of eight products was carried out by consumers distributed into two groups, those who had previously tasted fresh truffles and those who had not. Lower-value truffle species such as Tuber aestivum and Tuber indicum were frequently found in products in which the labeling did not indicate so. Also, 48% of the products contained high levels of added flavorings. In the sensory analysis, non-consumers of truffles rated flavored products more positively (up to 2 more points in some products) than truffle consumers. Also, this group associated negative attributes (weird and disappointing) to products elaborated with real black truffle, whereas truffle consumers associated positive attributes (truffle flavor, truffle smell and gourmet) to them.