and serves as an important index for the prediction and
evaluation of a landslide (He, 2005). On the one hand, soils in sliding
zone are basically unsaturated due to rainfall infiltration or
water level fluctuation of reservoir (Riemer, 1992; Furuya et al.,
1999; Wang et al., 2008); on the other hand, a large number

of cases show that the deformation of landslides always takes a

long period of time, which means that time-dependent properties

of landslide soils are observed. According to this understanding,

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

 Supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (50879044)
and Master’s Degree Thesis Excellent Training Funds of Three Gorges University

2.1. Farming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
2.1.1. Cultivar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
2.1.2. Crop season and country of origin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
2.2. Pod storage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
2.3. Fermentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
2.3.1. Fermentation method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
2.3.2. Microflora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
2.3.3. Duration of fermentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
2.3.4. Aeration during fermentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
2.3.5. Starter cultures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
2.4. Drying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
2.4.1. Duration and temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175
2.4.2. Method of drying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
2.5. Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
3. Discussion of potential benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .177
3.1. Chocolate flavour profile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
3.2. Process optimization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178
3.3. Health promotion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ45 45254736; fax: þ45 45256005.
E-mail address: renzo@dtu.dk (R. Akkerman).
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Food Control
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/foodcont
0956-7135/$ e see front matter
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2012.05.054
Food Control 29 (2013) 167e187
4. Further research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .179
5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .180
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185
1. Introduction
The chocolate supply chain is very long, complex and includes
many different actors. It begins with the cocoa farmers, who grow,

harvest, extract, ferment, dry, and pack the cocoa beans. Then, the
cocoa beans from several farmers are collected and often mixed by
local buyers, traders, local buying stations, and exporters until they
reach the chocolate manufacturing plant. Several characteristics of
chocolate strongly depend on the processes done at the very
beginning of the supply chain. Flavour compounds like polyphenol
and flavour precursors like free amino acids and reducing sugars, are
formed during the fermentation that cocoa farmers do right after
harvesting the cocoa pods. Due to theMaillard reaction, which takes
place during the roasting process done by the chocolate manufacturer,
flavour precursors are transformed into flavour compounds,
like aldehydes and pyrazines. These flavour compounds are
responsible for the flavour profile of the finished chocolate (de Brito
et al., 2001).
Different studies and surveys show differences in the farming
practices regarding growing, fermenting and drying the cocoa
beans; not only between countries, but also between farmers
within the same country. Most of the cocoa beans produced

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

worldwide are produced by small-sized farmers, and then
combined in larger and larger batches until the chocolate manufacturer
is reached. As the farmers’ activities are responsible for
defining many of the qualitative characteristics of the cocoa beans,
it is easy to imagine that the chocolate manufacturers often receive
very heterogeneous batches of cocoa beans due to the various
farming practices. Furthermore, the small economical resources of
cocoa farmers do not permit them to make accurate analysis for
identifying the cocoa cultivar, so, very often mislabelled cocoa
beans are traded (Motamayor et al., 2008).

تعداد صفحه : 21
تکه هایی از متن ترجمه فارسی به عنوان نمونه :

Christmas giving, are a well-researched area (Clarke, 2006,
2008). However, self-gifting is a performative process because
these actions relate to an individual’s inner thoughts and
comments which act as both predictors and outcomes for
particular or potential purchase decisions. Hence, self-gifting

differs from traditional gift purchases because the requirement

of asking others about gift preferences is eliminated. Previous
research has not examined the antecedents of self-gifting

behavior and the effect on post purchase regret. Shoppers often

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

face many purchase decisions during half yearly, Black Friday
or post-Christmas clearance sales events. One such decision is

misfit between system and clinical practice were more common, so, the ability of the new technology to fit to

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

Data mining is the search for valuable information in large
volumes of data [1]. With the increase of availability of databases
containing structures, mining techniques especially designed for
this type of data are becoming more and more important [2]. To

improve both software productivity and quality, software engineers

are increasingly applying data mining algorithms to various
Software Engineering tasks [3].

The progress in data acquisition and successful development of

این مطلب را هم بخوانید :

storage technology at cheaper rates, along with limited human
capabilities in analyzing and understanding big databases have