<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

HAL
open science

# Non-Volatile Compounds Involved in Bitterness and Astringency of Pulses: A Review

Adeline Karolkowski, Christine Belloir, Loïc Briand, Christian Salles

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

## ► To cite this version:

Adeline Karolkowski, Christine Belloir, Loïc Briand, Christian Salles. Non-Volatile Compounds Involved in Bitterness and Astringency of Pulses: A Review. Molecules, 2023, 28 (8), pp.3298. 10.3390/molecules28083298. [https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04066451](https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04066451)

HAL Id: hal-04066451

https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-04066451

Submitted on 12 Apr 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Review

# Non-Volatile Compounds Involved in Bitterness and Astringency of Pulses: A Review

Adeline Karolkowski <fnref n="1" />,<fnref n="2" />, Christine Belloir <fnref n="1" /> ID, Loïc Briand <fnref n="1" />,* and Christian Salles <fnref n="1" />,*,* ID

**Abstract:** Despite the many advantages of pulses, they are characterised by off-flavours that limit their consumption. Off-notes, bitterness and astringency contribute to negative perceptions of pulses. Several hypotheses have assumed that non-volatile compounds, including saponins, phenolic compounds, and alkaloids, are responsible for pulse bitterness and astringency. This review aims to provide an overview highlighting the non-volatile compounds identified in pulses and their bitter and/or astringent characteristics to suggest their potential involvement in pulse off-flavours. Sensorial analyses are mainly used to describe the bitterness and astringency of molecules. However, in vitro cellular assays have shown the activation of bitter taste receptors by many phenolic compounds, suggesting their potential involvement in pulse bitterness. A better knowledge of the non-volatile compounds involved in the off-flavours should enable the creation of efficient strategies to limit their impact on overall perception and increase consumer acceptability.

**Keywords:** pulses; off-flavours; bitterness; astringency; TAS2R; saponins; phenolic compounds; alkaloids

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /></figure>

### check for updates

**Citation:** Karolkowski, A.; Belloir, C.; Briand, L.; Salles, C. Non-Volatile Compounds Involved in Bitterness and Astringency of Pulses: A Review. *Molecules* **2023**, *28*, 3298. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules28083298

Academic Editor: Eugenio Aprea

Received: 10 March 2023

Revised: 31 March 2023

Accepted: 5 April 2023

Published: 7 April 2023

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>

**Copyright:** © 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

## 1. Introduction

Pulses, also called dried legume seeds, present nutritional, environmental, and functional interests compared to animal proteins [1–3]. However, the presence of off-flavours in these legumes constitutes an important obstacle to their consumption, which limits their use in food applications [4].

Negative organoleptic perceptions are named off-flavours or unpleasant flavours. They are the combination of off-notes (unpleasant odours and aromas), off-tastes (unpleasant tastes), and unpleasant trigeminal sensations. The off-notes in pulses are described as beany, grassy, pea, rancid, metallic, etc. and are due to the presence of some volatile compounds originating from seed metabolism during farming and process conditions and are now well-identified in pulses [4,5]. In contrast, much less is known about the taste compounds of pulses. Taste perceptions are caused by compounds that activate receptors on the tongue and the oral cavity [6]. Among the five basic tastes, bitterness is the only one to have been identified as an off-taste in pulses [4]. Another negative perception, astringency, which is a native trigeminal sensation, has been inventoried in many legumes, such as beans, lentils, and peas [7]. However, little is known about non-volatile compounds that are responsible for these off-flavours in pulses. These compounds are the object of this review.

Some molecules, including saponins, phenolic compounds, alkaloids, peptides, and free amino acids, are involved in the bitterness and/or astringency of pulses [4,8]. Moreover, new research suggests that 14 lipids and lipid oxidation products are involved in the bitterness of pea protein isolates [9]. Despite their potential involvement in pulse off-flavours, it is important to note that saponins, phenolic compounds, and alkaloids (detected in lupins and faba beans) come from a secondary metabolism and contribute

<footnote n="1">¹ Centre des Sciences du Goût et de l'Alimentation, CNRS, INRAE, Institut Agro, Université de Bourgogne, F-21000 Dijon, France; adeline.karolkowski@inrae.fr (A.K.); christine.belloir@inrae.fr (C.B.)</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² Groupe Soufflet (Ets J. Soufflet), 10400 Nogent-sur-Seine, France</footnote>

<footnote>* Correspondence: loic.briand@inrae.fr (L.B.); christian.salles@inrae.fr (C.S.)</footnote>
to plant defences in the case of biotic and abiotic stresses [10–14]. For example, the content of saponins was greater in pea samples exposed to very intense contamination with pathogens [11]. Research has mainly focused on the overall bitterness and/or astringency of pulse-based products and correlated these intensities with the compound content [15,16]. However, the number of potential non-volatile compounds is so important that it remains complicated to demonstrate their direct involvement in these off-flavours. Some researchers have extracted potential compounds from pulses of interest and have studied their bitter and/or astringent characteristics using sensorial analyses. For example, the extract of soyasaponins βb and DDMP (2,3-dihydro-2,5-dihydroxy-6-methyl-4H-pyran-4-one) in peas was described as bitter and astringent by panellists, which suggested their role in pea off-flavours [17]. Sensorial analyses are also completed via in vitro assays that highlight the interaction between a molecule and human bitter taste receptors (TAS2R—human type 2 taste receptor). Genistein and daidzein, two isoflavones in soybeans, were identified as bitter by panellists [18,19] and activated the TAS2R14 and TAS2R39 receptors [20,21]. These molecules should have an important contribution to bitterness in soybeans. Although the role of some compounds in the bitterness and astringency of pulses has been identified, there are still many hypotheses to be confirmed.

This review is focused on pulses. It aims to propose a concise overview highlighting the non-volatile compounds potentially responsible for their off-flavours. The first part defines the unpleasant perceptions in pulses related to non-nasal detection, such as bitterness and astringency, and compares in vitro and in vivo methods for the identification of bitter and/or astringent compounds. The second part highlights the non-volatile compounds (saponins, phenolic compounds and alkaloids) detected in pulses that have also been identified as bitter and/or astringent using sensorial analysis in legumes or other food products and through cellular-based functional TAS2R receptor assay. This cross-referencing of information would make it possible to identify new compounds responsible for off-flavours in pulses. Although peptides and free amino acids may be involved in pulse off-flavours, their sensorial aspect will not be discussed in this review because they are mainly formed during protein hydrolysis (fermentation/enzymatic hydrolysis, heat treatment, and wet protein extraction) [22,23]. Moreover, the tastes of free amino acids including their bitter activity have already been reviewed [24].

## 2. Highlighting of Bitter Taste and Astringent Perception

This part aims to define the bitter taste and astringency, a trigeminal sensation, that contribute to off-flavours in pulses. The bitter and astringent characteristics of molecules are often determined through sensorial analysis (in vivo methods). In addition, in vitro cellular assays have been used to measure receptor activation by sapid compounds and thus determine their involvement in bitterness. These in vivo and in vitro approaches are compared in this review.

### 2.1. *Generalities on Bitterness and Astringency*

* Bitterness

Bitterness is often unappreciated and an indicator of potential toxicity and/or bacterial contamination of foods to limit their ingestion [25]. The detection of bitter molecules, with a wide range of chemical structures, is achieved by a family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) called TAS2Rs [6,26]. GPCRs share a common architecture with seven transmembrane domains and a signal transduction mechanism involving a heterotrimeric G protein [27]. The transduction pathway is briefly presented in Figure 1 (see cellular mechanism).
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 1.** In vitro cellular test method used to study the activation of TAS2R by non-volatile compounds (for example, (-)-epicatechin) (adapted from [28,29]). Cellular mechanism—The activation of the receptor results in the dissociation of the chimeric Gα16Gust44 subunit (Gα-gustducin) from the βγ-subunits (Step ①). The βγ-subunits activate phospholipase C-β2 (PLC-β2) (Step ②), resulting in the formation of the second messenger inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate (IP3) (Step ③) [30]. Then, IP3 binds to its endoplasmic reticulum receptor, leading to the transient release of Ca²⁺ (from calcium stores) that is detected using a calcium-sensitive dye (Step ④) [31]. Most of the icons come from BioRender. TAS2R: type 2 taste receptor; C: concentration; AT: activation threshold; EC₅₀: half-maximum effective concentration to achieve 50% of the maximum amplitude of receptor activation.</figcaption></figure>

Humans have ~25 putative functional TAS2Rs [32]. The perception of bitter compounds varies widely between individuals due to genetic variations linked to polymorphism [33–39]. For example, individuals with the TAS2R38-AVI (alanine–valine–isoleucine) variant are not able to detect bitterness in a solution of phenylthiocarbamide, whereas
individuals with the TAS2R38-PAV (proline–alanine–valine) polymorphism are able to detect this compound [40,41]. Many factors such as age, pathology, medication, dietary habits and salivary composition, have been shown to alter bitter perception [30,31,42].

* Astringency

Astringency is one of the trigeminal sensations. Astringent molecules interact with the hydrophobic “pocket” of salivary proteins and lead to their precipitation. This causes drying, roughening, and puckering of the mouth epithelia. Tannins and other phenolic compounds are well-known to be astringent molecules. The polymer size, concentration, and galloylation of tannins can modify the astringent intensity [6]. However, the mechanism of astringency is still not as well-understood as that of bitterness. This perception may be detected by mechanoreceptors in the oral mucosa after an increase in friction forces at the surface of epithelial cells [43,44] or through the detection of the aggregation of the mucosa pellicle by transmembrane mucin (MUC1) [45]. Tannins exhibit a higher astringency threshold than flavonols. They are a source of harsh, drying and puckering astringent mouthfeels whereas flavonols induce velvety and silky mouthfeels [46,47]. These differences may be explained by two phenomena. The interactions between salivary and proteins may be more related to harsh, dry and puckering sensations, while interactions driven by the tongue or buccal mucosa cell lines may be more related to velvety and silky sensations [48]. These hypotheses still need to be tested with sensory results.

## 2.2. Sensory Identification of Bitterness and Astringency (In Vivo Test)

Sensory analyses have been used to describe the taste of pure compounds, especially bitterness and astringency. They reflect an overall sensation of bitterness/astringency perceived by a panel of individuals and consider the integration of the signal at the cerebral level [49]. First, panellists are trained to be familiar with the studied perceptions. In most studies, panellists are required to wear a nose-clip to prevent olfactory perceptions from impacting bitterness and astringency. Second, the human bitter or astringent detection threshold (DT) is determined with the three-alternative forced choice test consisting of a triangle test with two blank samples and ascending concentrations for each compound. For each concentration, panellists must identify the solution that exhibits bitterness or astringency among the three samples. The DT is obtained by calculating the geometric mean of the last missed concentration and the next higher concentration detected [40,50–54]. Third, panellists must evaluate the bitter or astringent intensity of different concentrations of the studied compound. Dose-response curves are constructed by plotting the bitter or astringent intensity as a function of the molecule concentration. The human EC₅₀ corresponds to the concentration of molecule required to achieve 50% bitter or astringent intensity [40,52,53].

Many studies have focused on the overall bitterness and/or astringency of legumes and legume-based products. Sometimes, the sensory properties are correlated to chemical analysis to predict the molecules responsible for the perceptions of interest [15,55–57]. For example, the correlation of phytochemical compositions and sensory attributes of pea protein fractions has predicted the bitterness and astringency of 29 compounds [15]. Then, these results can be validated using sensory and/or cellular approaches to pure compounds; however, these are rarely carried out for economic reasons or are not permitted for food applications.

## 2.3. Activation of the Human Bitter Taste Receptors TAS2Rs (In Vitro)

In vitro cell-based assays allow for the measuring of the activation of bitter taste receptors under physiological conditions similar to their environment using sapid compounds [28,58]. This approach has the advantage of studying synthetic or toxic molecules that are not part of the human diet, unlike sensory analysis [52].

The in vitro assay is usually performed with HEK293 cells stably expressing a chimeric Gα-protein (Gα16Gust44), as presented in Figure 1. The cells were seeded in a microplate and transfected with a plasmid encoding for the studied TAS2R. The cells produce a func-
tional TAS2R embedded in the plasma membrane. The studied molecule is injected into the wells at different concentrations, and TAS2R activation causes a signalling cascade resulting in the release of calcium from the endoplasmic reticulum into the intracellular medium. Then, cytoplasmic calcium binds a fluorescent indicator (Fluo-4 or Fura-2) [51] or a genetically encoded calcium biosensor (GCaMP) [59,60]. More recently, a bioluminescence-based assay was developed for TAS2R to measure calcium mobilization using mt-clytin II, a calcium-sensitive photoprotein, and the luminophore coelenterazine [61]. The calcium signal is measured through fluorescence or luminescence using a fluorometric imaging microplate reader (FlexStation or FLIPR). The response of TAS2R depends on the concentration of bitter compounds and leads to different signal amplitudes [28,58,61]. Then, the AT (activation threshold) is determined, corresponding to the lowest concentration for which fluorescence is observed. Dose-response curves are constructed by plotting the signal amplitude as a function of the molecule concentration. The EC₅₀, which corresponds to the concentration of agonist required to achieve 50% of the maximum amplitude of receptor activation, is also determined and can be compared to relative bitterness in vivo [28]. The use of cellular-based assays with functional expression of TAS2Rs in human HEK293 cells showed that some bitter taste receptors have a large broad detection spectrum (TAS2R14), while others were intermediate (TAS2R4, TAS2R7, TAS2R30, TAS2R39 and TAS2R43) or were activated by a few molecules (TAS2R5). Some molecules activate several TAS2Rs, such as (-)-epicatechin with TAS2R4, TAS2R5, TAS2R14 and TAS2R39 [20,62–64]. However, no agonist has yet been identified for TAS2R19, TAS2R42, TAS2R45 and TAS2R60 [58,65].

## 2.4. Correlation between Sensorial and In Vitro Analyses of Bitterness

Some studies have correlated in vivo and in vitro results to bitterness (Table 1) [40,51–53]. However, the link between cellular data and human analyses is not always effective. Indeed, the DT and human EC₅₀ are often greater than the AT and the in vitro EC₅₀, respectively. For example, the ratio of DT/AT was 11 times greater for vitamin B1 [51] and 566.7 times greater for cohumulone [52]. These observations can be explained as based on different phenomena. In vitro cellular-based assays are performed in buffer media with a composition that differs from that of human saliva. This can decrease the availability of compounds for the receptors due to their complexation with hydrophobic proline-rich proteins in the saliva and/or be adsorbed by the oral epithelium [52,66]. Hydrophobic bitter compounds are also more sequestered by oral proteins and/or mucosa than polar compounds, which can increase the difference between human and cellular results [52]. Delompré et al. (2022) [51] proposed that sample dilution via saliva can also be responsible for an increase in the human bitter taste DT [51]. Moreover, flavour perception is a cerebral construction resulting from the integration of chemosensory signals in the brain arising from the ingestion of an ingredient. There are several steps in brain information treatment provided by neural signals, including external signals that can interact with taste perception [49,51]. Although the in vitro method enables the rapid identification of bitter compounds and activated TAS2Rs, it is not suitable for all compounds. For example, fluorescence related to calcium release was detected in non-transfected cells (absence of TAS2Rs) upon the addition of high concentrations of vitamins B2 and B3, whereas sensory analyses revealed the bitterness of these compounds [51]. The in vitro cellular results should thus always be verified through sensory analyses on pure compounds when possible.

<table><caption>**Table 1.** Comparison between human (in vitro) and cellular (in vivo) bitter characteristics for different compounds.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Bitter Compounds</th><th colspan="2">Human Bitter Characteristics</th><th colspan="3">Cellular Bitter Characteristics</th><th colspan="2">Ratio (Human/Cellular)</th><th rowspan="2">References</th></tr><tr><th>DT (µM)</th><th>EC<sub>50</sub> (µM)</th><th>TAS2R</th><th>AT (µM)</th><th>EC<sub>50</sub> (µM)</th><th>Threshold</th><th>EC<sub>50</sub></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>phenyl-β-D-glucopyranose</td><td>100</td><td>700</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>70</td><td>1100</td><td>1.4</td><td>0.6</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>salicilin</td><td>200</td><td>1100</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>70</td><td>1400</td><td>2.9</td><td>0.8</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>helicin</td><td>400</td><td>2200</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>300</td><td>2300</td><td>1.3</td><td>1.0</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>arbutin</td><td>900</td><td>5400</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>500</td><td>5800</td><td>1.8</td><td>0.9</td><td>[53]</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>Table 1. *Cont.*</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Bitter Compounds</th><th colspan="2">Human Bitter Characteristics</th><th colspan="3">Cellular Bitter Characteristics</th><th colspan="2">Ratio (Human/Cellular)</th><th rowspan="2">References</th></tr><tr><th>DT (µM)</th><th>EC<sub>50</sub> (µM)</th><th>TAS2R</th><th>AT (µM)</th><th>EC<sub>50</sub> (µM)</th><th>Threshold</th><th>EC<sub>50</sub></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>2-nitrophenyl-β-D-glucopyranose</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>1500</td><td>ND</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>naphthyl-β-D-glucopyranose</td><td>200</td><td>1400</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>400</td><td>1000</td><td>0.5</td><td>1.4</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>methyl-β-D-glucopyranose</td><td>32,000</td><td>320,000</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>15,000</td><td>ND</td><td>2.1</td><td>NC</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>amygdalin</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>2300</td><td>20,000</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>esculin</td><td>4000</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>4000</td><td>ND</td><td>1</td><td>NC</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>phenyl-β-D-galactopyranose</td><td>40,000</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>phenyl-α-D-glucopyranose</td><td>9000</td><td>50,000</td><td>TAS2R16</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[53]</td></tr><tr><td>phenylthiocarbamide</td><td>PAV: 3.28</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R38-PAV</td><td>0.02</td><td>1.1</td><td>NC-164</td><td>NC</td><td>[40]</td></tr><tr><td>AVI: 1360</td><td>AVI: 1360</td><td>-</td><td>TASR238-AVI</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>[40]</td></tr><tr><td>propylthiouracil</td><td>PAV: 10.7</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R38-PAV</td><td>0.06</td><td>2.1</td><td>NC-178.3</td><td>NC</td><td>[40]</td></tr><tr><td>AVI: 413</td><td>AVI: 413</td><td>-</td><td>TASR238-AVI</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>[40]</td></tr><tr><td>trans-isocohumulone</td><td>19</td><td>300</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>1</td><td>10.6</td><td>19</td><td>20.7-28.3</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>trans-isohumulone</td><td>20</td><td>200</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>1</td><td>14.5</td><td>20-66.7</td><td>17.8-22.2</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>trans-isoadhumulone</td><td>13</td><td>130</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>1</td><td>9.0</td><td>13-43.3</td><td>14.4-19.4</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>cis-isocohumulone</td><td>7</td><td>180</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>1</td><td>7.4</td><td>7</td><td>19.1-24.3</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>cis-isohumulone</td><td>10</td><td>110</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>1</td><td>9.4</td><td>33.3</td><td>33.3-42.3</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>cis-isoadhumulone</td><td>8</td><td>100</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>1</td><td>2.6</td><td>8-26.7</td><td>35.7-40</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>cohumulone</td><td>17</td><td>>500</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.2</td><td>566.7-5667.7</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>humulone</td><td>21</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R40</td><td>0.003</td><td>0.04</td><td>210</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>adhumulone</td><td>21</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R40</td><td>0.1</td><td>1.4</td><td>210</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>colupulone</td><td>39</td><td>>500</td><td>TAS2R40</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.7</td><td>210-700</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>lupulone</td><td>35</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>0.03</td><td>0.2</td><td>390-1300</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>adlupulone</td><td>37</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>0.1</td><td>3.0</td><td>11.7-350</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>isoxanthohumol</td><td>16</td><td>>500</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>3</td><td>1.3</td><td>12.3-37</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>xanthohumol</td><td>10</td><td>140</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>3</td><td>2.2</td><td>1.6-5.3</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>8-prenylnaringenin</td><td>8</td><td>ND</td><td>TAS2R40</td><td>10</td><td>ND</td><td>3.3-10</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>vitamin B1</td><td>1100</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R1</td><td>100</td><td>-</td><td>26.7</td><td>NC</td><td>[25]</td></tr><tr><td>vitamin B2</td><td>650</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>1000</td><td>25,520</td><td>5.2</td><td>NC</td><td>[51]</td></tr><tr><td>vitamin B3</td><td>5500</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>50</td><td>10,520</td><td>290</td><td>NC</td><td>[51]</td></tr><tr><td>vitamin B6</td><td>5200</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>50</td><td>250</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[51]</td></tr><tr><td>vitamin A</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R38</td><td>50</td><td>-</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[51]</td></tr><tr><td>vitamin D</td><td>ND</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R10</td><td>50</td><td>-</td><td>NC</td><td>NC</td><td>[51]</td></tr><tr><td>resveratrol</td><td>206</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>16</td><td>30.3</td><td>3.3-12.9</td><td>NC</td><td>[20,67]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-catechin</td><td>1000</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R39</td><td>63</td><td>109</td><td>2-4</td><td>NC</td><td>[20,50]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-catechin</td><td>1000</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R39</td><td>250</td><td>ND</td><td>2-4</td><td>NC</td><td>[20,50]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-catechin</td><td>930</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R4</td><td>2000</td><td>>30,151</td><td>0.5-3.7</td><td>NC</td><td>[20,50,62-64]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-epicatechin</td><td>930</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R5</td><td>1000</td><td>3210</td><td>0.5-3.7</td><td>NC</td><td>[20,50,62-64]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-epicatechin</td><td>930</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>500</td><td>500</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>[20,50,62-64]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-epicatechin</td><td>930</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R39</td><td>250-1000</td><td>418-3800</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>[20,50,62-64]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-epigallocatechin gallate</td><td>380</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R14</td><td>250</td><td>-</td><td>1.5-11.9</td><td>-</td><td>[20,63,64,66]</td></tr><tr><td>(+)-epigallocatechin gallate</td><td>380</td><td>-</td><td>TAS2R39</td><td>32-100</td><td>-</td><td>1.5-11.9</td><td>-</td><td>[20,63,64,66]</td></tr></tbody></table>

The first part presents the in vivo and in vitro results from the same study, while the second part (separated by a double line) is from several references. DT: detection threshold; AT: activation threshold; EC<sub>50</sub>: half-maximum effective concentration corresponding to the concentration of compound required to achieve 50% of the bitter intensity (in vivo)/to achieve 50% of the maximum amplitude of receptor activation (in vitro); PAV: proline-alanine-valine; AVI: alanine-valine-isoleucine; ND: not determined; NC: not calculable.

### 3. Non-Volatile Compounds Involved in Bitterness and Astringency of Pulses

This section is devoted to non-volatile compounds (including saponins, phenolic compounds and alkaloids), which have been both detected in pulses and identified as bitter and/or astringent through sensorial and/or in vitro analysis. Sensory analyses are
not limited to pulses but extend to all food products. This approach makes it possible to summarise the compounds identified as bitter and/or astringent in legumes and to propose non-volatile compounds that could be involved in these off-flavours.

Soybeans are less studied in this review due to their high oil concentration compared to other pulses, including adzuki beans, beans, chickpeas, faba beans, lentils, peas and lupins. However, some soybean examples have been addressed when the literature was sparse concerning other pulses, especially for saponins and isoflavones.

### 3.1. Saponins

Saponins are amphiphile molecules. They consist of a steroidal or triterpene hydrophobic aglycone and one to three sugars (hydrophilic part) attached by ester or ether linkage [68]. In legumes, triterpenoid saponins were the main saponins identified, although some steroidal saponins were also detected [69–71]. In soybeans, saponins were found in cotyledons and derived from soyasapogenols A, B, and E (Figure 2) [68]. The amount of saponins in legume seeds was very different according to their type. Chickpeas contained 2.6 to 60 g/kg (dry matter) of saponins against 0.1 to 3.7 g/kg (dry matter) for broad beans and 1.8 to 11 g/kg (dry matter) for green peas [72].

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Chemical structures of soyasapogenol A, B and E (adapted from [73]).</figcaption></figure>

In peas, an extract of isolated soyasaponin βb (soyasaponin I) is described as bitter and astringent. Moreover, the protein fraction obtained through air-classification should contain sufficient saponins to detect these off-flavours [74]. Indeed, saponins interact with proteins and are found more easily in the protein fraction than in the starch fraction [75,76]. Concerning another pea study, soyasaponin βb and DDMP soyasaponin (also called soyasaponin βg, soyasaponin VI or chromosaponin I) were extracted and sensorially evaluated by thirteen trained panellists. The bitterness DT of soyasaponin βb is approximately 8 mg/L in water, and a mixture of soyasaponin βb and DDMP soyasaponin in a ratio of 1:4 is less than 2 mg/L in water [17]. Indeed, DDMP soyasaponin is degraded into soyasaponin βb + maltol at temperatures greater than 30 °C, which makes it difficult to extract and purify [17,77–79]. Maltol has a caramel-like odour and a sweet taste that can modify the flavour. Moreover, DDMP soyasaponin is also degraded by lipoxygenase during grinding due to an important amount of dioxygen. The peroxidation of DDMP soyasaponin leads to soyasaponin βb, whereas dehydrogenation leads to dehydrosoyasaponin I [17,78]. The degradation process is presented in Figure 3. The effect of soyasaponin βb on the bitterness and astringency of pea protein isolate has been reported by calculating dose-over-threshold factors (the ratio of compound concentration over bitter/astringency threshold for each compound). The factor for astringency is 1.8 and 0.7 for bitterness, suggesting that soyasaponin I is more involved in astringency than in bitter taste [9]. However, DDMP soyasaponin has not been detected and has probably been degraded due to high-temperature extraction, which can reduce the bitter intensity. In another study, the areas of the main phytochemical compounds identified through ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography-diode array detector-mass spectrometry (UHPLC-DAD-MS) of pea-based samples were correlated with sensory attributes to model bitterness and astringency (prediction). According to the modelling, saponin B, saponin derivates, and soyasapogenol B are not involved in bitterness, whereas they contribute to astringency [15]. However, the DDMP soyasaponin has a priori not been detected in these samples (absence of a peak
with a mass of approximatively 1067 g/mol [70,71]), probably due to the high-temperature extraction used (40 °C) that degrades it into soyasaponin βb and/or soyasaponin E [78]. In soybeans, different saponin fractions have been extracted and sensorially characterised. Soyasaponins A, B, and E have bitter characteristics and exhibit 10⁻⁵, 5.10⁻⁴ and 10⁻³ mM taste threshold values, respectively. Aglycones A and E are slightly bitter and present a lower threshold value. An astringent perception has been identified in soyasaponin A and soyasapogenol B [80]. Soybean extracts with different soyasaponin βb concentrations exhibit the same off-flavour intensities. The DDMP saponin (and malonyl-β-glucoside isoflavones) should contribute more to bitterness and astringency than the other saponins and isoflavones identified in these extracts [81]. Although the sensory contribution of saponins has only been studied in soybeans and peas, it is important to note that DDMP soyasaponin and soyasaponin βb have been identified in other pulses including adzuki beans, common beans, lentils, chickpeas, lupins and broad beans [70,71,82]. However, the level of saponins in lupin seeds is very low, suggesting no significant contribution to bitterness and astringency [16].

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** Degradation of DDMP soyasaponin into soyasaponin βb and dehydrosoyasaponin I through heat treatment and enzymatic reactions (adapted from [78]). LOX: lipoxygenase; R: glucuronic acid-galactose-rhamnose.</figcaption></figure>

Researchers have produced saponin-free pea varieties (the study was focused on DDMP and βb soyasaponins) [77]; however, it would have been interesting to compare the bitter and astringent intensities between wild and mutant cultivars to verify the effect of saponin content on sensory properties. A possible drawback of such an approach is that both saponins and volatile compounds interact with proteins; consequently, the decrease in saponin content may increase protein-volatile compound interactions and impact the odour/aroma of pulses [83]. The 10-day germination of broad beans increases the saponin content [71] and may intensify bitter and astringent perceptions. Finally, the heating of pulses appears to be a simple and efficient strategy to reduce these off-flavours in pulses due to the degradation of the DDMP soyasaponin [78,84,85].

## 3.2. Phenolic Compounds

Phenolic compounds are a large class of plant secondary metabolites exhibiting a diversity of structures. They have one or more hydroxyl groups attached directly to the aromatic ring and vary from simple molecules to highly complex polymers [86]. In pulses,
many groups have been identified, including phenolic acids (and their derivates), stilbenes, flavonoids, and condensed tannins [87]. Their content in legumes depends on the cultivar, location (including abiotic and biotic stress conditions), and transformation [87–91]. They protect plant tissues against UV (ultraviolet) irradiation and participate in plant defence against herbivores, fungi, and viruses [87]. White-flowered faba beans are associated with low tannin due to breeding. These low-tannin genotypes have been reported to be more susceptible to soil-borne diseases [89]. Moreover, phenolic compounds are distributed differently in the parts of the seed (Table 2). The hulls of chickpeas, faba beans, and lentils contain higher amounts of tannins, whereas the cotyledons are richer in other phenolic compounds, including flavonoids [90,91]. During food processing and storage, plant phenolic compounds are converted to a variety of reaction products that modify the product flavour [87].

<table><caption>**Table 2.** Concentration (mg/g DM) of phenolic compounds, flavonoids and tannins in different seed parts of pulses (chickpeas, faba beans and lentils).</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="3">Pulses</th><th colspan="12">Concentration (mg/g DM)</th><th rowspan="3">Reference</th></tr><tr><th colspan="3">Whole Seed</th><th colspan="3">Cotyledon</th><th colspan="3">Hull</th><th colspan="3">Embryonic Axe</th></tr><tr><th>PC</th><th>F</th><th>T</th><th>PC</th><th>F</th><th>T</th><th>PC</th><th>F</th><th>T</th><th>PC</th><th>F</th><th>T</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Chickpeas</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>15.2</td><td>7.5</td><td>5.2</td><td>75.9</td><td>12.6</td><td>32.4</td><td>46.1</td><td>9.3</td><td>11.4</td><td>[90]</td></tr><tr><td>Faba beans</td><td>39.69</td><td>-</td><td>6.85</td><td>39.17</td><td>-</td><td>7.22</td><td>22.30</td><td>-</td><td>16.23</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>[91]</td></tr><tr><td>Lentils</td><td>6.30</td><td>-</td><td>1.27</td><td>4.27</td><td>-</td><td>0.40</td><td>57.19</td><td>-</td><td>46.27</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>[91]</td></tr></tbody></table>

DM: dry matter; PC: phenolic compounds; F: flavonoids; T: tannins.

Phenolic compounds are mostly studied for their beneficial effects on human health rather than their sensorial characteristics. However, they are responsible for bitterness and astringency in legumes [4]. The astringent intensity of phenolic compound extracts of different pulses has been evaluated by a trained panel that classified them in the following order: red beans > adzuki beans > lentils > peas > broad beans > faba beans [7]. Moreover, studies on the activation of human bitter taste receptors by many phenolic compounds suggest that they are involved in pulse off-flavours [20,21,62,66]. The concentration and bitter/astringent characteristics of phenolic compounds identified in pulses are presented in Table 3. It is important to note that extraction methods are different and comparisons are complex.

### 3.2.1. Phenolic Acids and Derivates

Many phenolic acids and their derivates have been identified in pulses (Table 3). Phenolic acids contribute to bitterness but more significantly to astringency in wine or corn germ protein flour [50,92,93]. Beans, lentils, and peas exhibit a low concentration of p-hydroxybenzoic acid (0.32–1.0 µg/g), whereas peas are richer in protocatechuic acid (2.06–221 µg/g) and lentils in p-coumaric acid (3.22–3.42 µg/g) [94]. m-Coumaric acid has been detected in faba beans and peas [71,95]. Chickpeas and lentils contain a high amount of gallic acid, and chickpeas are richer in caffeic acid than other pulses [90,96,97]. These six phenolic acids identified in pulses are well-known to be responsible for astringency in wine. Protocatechuic, p-coumaric, m-coumaric, gallic, and caffeic acids exhibit moderate bitterness at a concentration of 2 g/L in water, whereas p-hydroxybenzoic acid is described as being slightly more bitter [92]. These phenolic acids could contribute to pulse bitterness.

According to the correlation model, caffeic acid contributes to both bitterness and astringency in peas, with an estimated concentration of 90.7 ng/g [15].

### 3.2.2. Stilbenes

Two stilbenes have been identified in faba beans, resveratrol and polydatin [98]. Resveratrol is often produced by plants as a defence against microbial infections, upon exposure to UV and other stresses [99,100]. Bitterness and astringency have only been studied for resveratrol, which is known to contribute to the bitterness and astringency
of wine [101]. This molecule is described as bitter at a concentration of 47 mg/L in water [67]. Moreover, cellular tests have shown that resveratrol activates the bitter receptors TAS2R14 and TAS2R39. TAS2R14 is more sensitive to this compound than TAS2R39 [20]. It would have been interesting to quantify resveratrol in faba beans [98] and to compare this concentration with the cellular test results [20] to determine its involvement in bitterness.

### 3.2.3. Flavonoids

Flavonoids are the largest group of phenolic compounds. Some flavonols, flavanols, flavones, flavanones, and isoflavones are identified as astringent and/or bitter (sensory and in vitro tests), which may imply their potential impact on pulse off-flavours. The structures of these flavonoids are presented in Figure 4.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** Chemical structures of the flavonoids (adapted from [87]).</figcaption></figure>

* Flavonols

Flavonols have a 3-hydroxyflavone backbone according to the place and number of OH groups. Kaempferol, quercetin and myricetin activate TAS2R14 and TAS2R39. Kaempferol exhibits lower AT (8 µM for TAS2R14 and 0.5 µM for TAS2R39) than myricetin (250 µM for TAS2R14 and 0.5 µM for TAS2R39), while quercetin leads to ambiguous activation at 500 µM [20]. Chickpeas contain a high content of these three flavonols (5.5–97.5 µg of kaempferol/g dry matter (DM)), but the variation in concentration depends on genotype, location, and seed sample (whole, dehulled, seed coat, and embryonic axe) [90,96]. Adzuki beans are also rich in quercetin (36.2 µg/g) [102]. In addition, many derivates from these three flavonols have also been identified in legumes [15,86,103–105]. In particular, quercetin-3-O-glucoside, quantified in pea flour at a concentration of 14.8 ng/g, was found to contribute to pea flour astringency according to the correlation model [15].

* Flavanols

Flavanols are isomers of (+)-catechin and/or (+)-gallocatechin, and participate in the formation of condensed tannins. Several flavanols have been detected in pulses, some of which have been characterised as bitter and astringent, such as (+)-catechin, (-)-epicatechin, (-)-epigallocatechin, (-)-epicatechin gallate, (-)-epigallocatechin gallate and theaflavin [66,92,106,107]. Beans and chickpeas exhibit higher concentrations of (+)-catechin, whereas faba beans have high concentrations of (-)-epicatechin gallate and (-)-epigallocatechin gallate [96,97,108–110] (Table 3).

These six flavanols identified in pulses are described as astringent but exhibit different DTs between 16 and 930 µmol/L. Theaflavin, only detected in faba beans, has a very low DT (16 µmol/L) compared to (+)-catechin (410 µmol/L) and (-)-epicatechin (930 µmol/L) [107]. Their sensory description suggests their involvement in the astringent characteristics of pulses.
The activation of bitter receptors by these flavanols has been studied (Table 4). The receptor TAS2R39 is activated by all the flavanols identified in pulses. According to different studies, the AT and EC₅₀ are different for (-)-epicatechin, (-)-epicatechin gallate, and (-)-epigallocatechin gallate [20,62–64,66]. Theaflavin exhibits a very low EC₅₀ (2.79 µM) compared to (-)-epicatechin gallate (21.3 µM) and (-)-epigallocatechin gallate (112 µM) [64]. The same ranking was observed in another study but with a higher EC₅₀, 88.2 µM for (-)-epicatechin gallate and 181.6 µM for (-)-epigallocatechin gallate [63]. Moreover, (-)-epigallocatechin and (-)-epicatechin exhibit higher EC₅₀ values for TAS2R39 [62,63]. Concerning TAS2R14, (-)-epicatechin and theaflavin have not activated this receptor, in contrast to TAS2R39 [64]. Flavonoids are made of two to three OH groups, which should be involved in hydrogen bonds with TAS2R39. Moreover, the receptor binding pocket of TAS2R39 exhibits an additional acceptor site compared to TAS2R14, which could explain its high affinity [20]. (-)-Epigallocatechin gallate exhibits a higher TAS2R4 and TAS2R5 AT than (-)-epicatechin [62,66]. Finally, (-)-epigallocatechin gallate activates both TAS2R30 and TAS2R43 [66]. This flavanol should be more involved in pulse off-flavours due to the activation of many receptors and low AT compared to the other compounds. Further studies on a wider range of flavanols should allow a better overview of bitter taste receptor activation by these compounds.
<table><caption>**Table 3.** Phenolic compounds identified in pulses and their bitter and astringent characteristics.</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Phenolic<br>Compounds</th><th rowspan="2">CAS *</th><th rowspan="2">M *<br>(g/mol)</th><th colspan="5">Pulses</th><th colspan="2">Bitterness</th><th rowspan="2">Astringency</th></tr><tr><th>Adzuki Beans</th><th>Beans **</th><th>Chickpeas</th><th>Faba Beans</th><th>Lentils</th><th>Peas</th><th>Sensory<br>Evaluation</th><th>TAS2R Evaluation</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="11"><strong>PHENOLIC ACIDS</strong></td></tr><tr><td>p-Hydroxybenzoic<br>acid</td><td>99-96-7</td><td>138.1</td><td></td><td>0.32-0.36 µg/g<br>[94]<br>5.05 µg/g DM<br>[103]<br>10.33 µg/g DM<br>[104]<br>4.03-12.20 µg/g<br>[108]<br>0.33-0.41 µg/g<br>[94]</td><td>2.1-44.4 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>1.6-56.6 µg/g<br>DM [96]</td><td>4.7 µg/g [111]<br>0.44-1.11 µg/g<br>[88]</td><td></td><td>0.94-1.00 µg/g<br>DM [94]<br>3.75 µg/g DM<br>[103]<br>73.46 µg/g [112]<br>3.25 µg/g DM<br>[113]</td><td>2.0 µg/g [15]<br>0.46-0.50 µg/g<br>[94]<br>4.69-16.62 µg/g<br>DM [114]</td><td>Slightly strong<br>(2 g/L-water)<br>[92]</td><td>DT: 665 µmol/L<br>(wine) [50]</td></tr><tr><td>Protocatechuic acid</td><td>99-50-3</td><td>154.1</td><td>67.6 µg/g [102]</td><td>8.28 µg/g DM<br>[103]<br>0.00-2.40 µg/g<br>[108]</td><td>28.3-48.0 µg/g<br>DM [90]</td><td>D [71]<br>18.3 µg/g [111]<br>1.29-2.93 µg/g<br>[88]</td><td></td><td>0.49-0.52 µg/g<br>DM [94]<br>4.27 µg/g DM<br>[103]<br>1.45 µg/g DM<br>[113]<br>D [95]</td><td>D [15]<br>2.06-2.21 µg/g<br>[94]<br>2.77-19.82 µg/g<br>DM [114]</td><td>Moderate<br>(2 g/L-water)<br>[92]</td><td>DT: 206 µmol/L<br>(wine) [50]</td></tr><tr><td>p-Coumaric acid</td><td>7400-08-0</td><td>164.2</td><td>D [95]<br>31.3 µg/g [102]<br>0-180 µg/g DM<br>[109]</td><td>D [95]<br>0.22 µg/g DM<br>[103]</td><td>17.6-99.4 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>0-4.1 µg/g DM<br>[96]</td><td>D [95,115]<br>25.8 µg/g [111]<br>0.95-1.86 µg/g<br>[88]</td><td></td><td>3.22-3.42 µg/g<br>DM [94]<br>38.84 µg/g [112]<br>6.47 µg/g DM<br>[113]<br>37.3 µg/g DM<br>[116]</td><td>D [15,95]<br>0.38-0.41 µg/g<br>[94]<br>0.54-1.10 µg/g<br>DM [114]</td><td>Moderate<br>(2 g/L-water)<br>[92]</td><td>Sensory<br>detection [92]<br>DT: 139 µmol/L<br>(wine) [50]</td></tr><tr><td>m-Coumaric acid</td><td>588-30-7</td><td>164.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [71]</td><td></td><td></td><td>D [95]</td><td>Moderate (2<br>g/L-water)<br>[92]</td><td>DT: 292 µmol/L<br>(wine)</td></tr><tr><td>Gallic acid</td><td>149-91-7</td><td>170.1</td><td>0-520 µg/g DM<br>[109]</td><td>0.0-213.0 µg/g<br>DM [97]</td><td>5 µg/g DM [13]<br>4.1-22.0 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>37.5-225.7 µg/g<br>DM [96]<br>0.0-106.0 µg/g<br>DM [97]</td><td>D [71]<br>26.9 µg/g [111]</td><td></td><td>2.54 µg/g DM<br>[103]<br>100.0 µg/g DM<br>[97]</td><td>0.016 µg/g [15]</td><td>Moderate<br>(2 g/L-water)<br>[92]</td><td>Sensory<br>detection [92]</td></tr><tr><td>Caffeic acid</td><td>331-39-5</td><td>180.2</td><td></td><td>10.0-22.0 µg/g<br>DM [13]</td><td>17.7-103.3 µg/g<br>DM [90]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [95]<br>20 µg/g DM<br>[13]<br>0.091 µg/g [15]</td><td>Moderate (2<br>g/L-water)<br>[92]<br>DT: 0.11 mM<br>[117]<br>Based on a<br>model *** [15]</td><td>Sensory<br>detection [92]<br>Based on a<br>model *** [15]</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11"><strong>STILBENES</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Resveratrol</td><td>501-36-0</td><td>228.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td></td><td>Bitter (wine)<br>[101]<br>DT: 47 mg/L<br>(water) [67]</td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 16 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 30.3 µM [20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 63 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 109 µM [20]</td><td>Astringent<br>(wine) [101]</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>Table 3. *Cont.*</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Phenolic<br>Compounds</th><th rowspan="2">CAS *</th><th rowspan="2">M *<br>(g/mol)</th><th colspan="7">Pulses</th><th colspan="2">Bitterness</th><th rowspan="2">Astringency</th></tr><tr><th>Adzuki Beans</th><th>Beans **</th><th>Chickpeas</th><th>Faba Beans</th><th>Lentils</th><th>Peas</th><th>Sensory<br>Evaluation</th><th>TAS2R Evaluation</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td colspan="12"><strong>FLAVONOLS</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Kaempferol</td><td>520-18-3</td><td>286.2</td><td>D [95]<br>0-90 µg/g DM<br>[109]</td><td>D [95]</td><td>5.5-97.9 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>0-5.50 µg/g DM<br>[96]</td><td>D [95]</td><td>D [95]</td><td>D [95]</td><td></td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 8 µM [20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 0.5 µM<br>[20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Quercetin</td><td>117-39-5</td><td>302.2</td><td>D [95]<br>36.2 µg/g [102]</td><td>D [95]<br>1.91 µg/g [108]</td><td>7.0-104.9 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>0-14.5 µg/g DM<br>[96]</td><td>D [95,98]</td><td>D [95]</td><td>D [95]<br>0-3 µg/g DM<br>[97]</td><td></td><td>TAS2R14 (500 µM) [20]<br>TAS2R39 (500 µM) [20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Myricetin</td><td>529-44-2</td><td>318.2</td><td></td><td></td><td>4.4-28.3 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>0-18.9 µg/g DM<br>[96]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 250 µM<br>[20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 1 µM [20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Quercetin-3-O-<br>glucoside</td><td>482-35-9</td><td>464.4</td><td>D [105]</td><td>0.79 µg/g DM<br>[104]</td><td></td><td></td><td>1.0 µg/g DM<br>[103]</td><td>0.015 µg/g [15]</td><td></td><td></td><td>Based on a<br>model *** [15]</td></tr><tr><td colspan="12"><strong>FLAVANOLS</strong></td></tr><tr><td>(+)-Catechin</td><td>154-23-4</td><td>290.3</td><td>D [105]<br>0-160 µg/g DM<br>[109]</td><td>32.15 µg/g DM<br>[104]<br>142.58 µg/g<br>[108]<br>0.0-23.0 µg/g<br>DM [97]<br>132.38 µg/g<br>[110]</td><td>4.7-92.4 µg/g<br>DM [96]<br>0.0-26.0 µg/g<br>DM [97]</td><td>D [98]<br>9.4 µg/g [111]<br>191-297 µg/g<br>[88]<br>36.02 µg/g [112]</td><td>D [118]<br>0.1-0.3 µg/100 g<br>DM [94]<br>0.53 µg/g DM<br>[103]<br>0.77 µg/g DM<br>[113]</td><td>D [15]</td><td>DT: 1000<br>µmol/L (water)<br>[50]<br>Weak (2<br>g/L-water)<br>[92]<br>Bitter (0.9<br>g/L-aqueous<br>ethanol (1%<br>v/v)) [106]<br>DT: 930 µmol/L<br>(water) [50]<br>Moderate (2<br>g/L-water)<br>[92]<br>Bitter (0.9<br>g/L-aqueous<br>ethanol (1% v/v))<br>[106]</td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 500 µM<br>[20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 250 µM<br>[20]</td><td>DT: 410 µmol/L<br>(water) [50,107]<br>Astringent<br>(0.9 g/L-<br>aqueous ethanol<br>(1% v/v)) [106]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-Epicatechin</td><td>490-46-0</td><td>290.3</td><td>25.7 µg/g [102]<br>0-90 µg/g DM<br>[109]</td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98]<br>98.25 µg/g [112]</td><td>70-97 µg/g DM<br>[13]<br>4.17 µg/g DM<br>[113]</td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R4: AT = 2000 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> > 30151 µM [62]<br>TAS2R5: AT = 1000 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 3210 µM [62]<br>TAS2R14: AT = 500 µM<br>[20]<br>TAS2R39:<br>AT = 250-1000 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 417.7-3800 µM<br>[20,63,64]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 500 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 395.5 µM [20,63]<br>TAS2R14: AT = 125 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 70 µM [20,64]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 32 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 21.3-151 µM<br>[20,63,64]</td><td>DT: 930 µmol/L<br>(water) [50,107]<br>Astringent<br>(0.9 g/L-<br>aqueous ethanol<br>(1% v/v)) [106]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-Epigallocatechin</td><td>970-74-1</td><td>306.3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td>0.00-1.61 µg/g<br>DM [114]</td><td></td><td></td><td>DT: 520 µmol/L<br>(water) [107]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-Epicatechin<br>gallate</td><td>1257-08-5</td><td>442.4</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>363 µg/g [111]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>DT: 260 µmol/L<br>(water) [107]</td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>Table 3. *Cont.*</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Phenolic<br>Compounds</th><th rowspan="2">CAS *</th><th rowspan="2">M *<br>(g/mol)</th><th colspan="6">Pulses</th><th colspan="2">Bitterness</th><th rowspan="2">Astringency</th></tr><tr><th>Adzuki Beans</th><th>Beans **</th><th>Chickpeas</th><th>Faba Beans</th><th>Lentils</th><th>Peas</th><th>Sensory<br>Evaluation</th><th>TAS2R Evaluation</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>(-)-Epigallocatechin<br>gallate</td><td>989-51-5</td><td>458.4</td><td>0.1 µg/g [102]</td><td></td><td></td><td>18.3 µg/g [111]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R4 [66]<br>TAS2R5: EC<sub>50</sub> = 12.30 [66]<br>TAS2R14: AT = 250 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 34 µM [20,64]<br>TAS2R30 [66]<br>TAS2R39:<br>AT = 32–100 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 8.50–181.6 µM<br>[20,63,64,66,119]<br>TAS2R43: EC<sub>50</sub> = 16.72<br>[66]</td><td>DT: 190 µmol/L<br>(water) [107]</td></tr><tr><td>Theaflavin</td><td>4670-05-7</td><td>564.5</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R39: EC<sub>50</sub> = 2.79 µM<br>[64]</td><td>DT: 16 µmol/L<br>(water) [107]</td></tr><tr><td colspan="12"><strong>FLAVONES</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Chrysin</td><td>480-40-0</td><td>254.2</td><td>0–90 µg/g DM<br>[109]</td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98,115]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 63 µM<br>[20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 16 µM<br>[20]<br>TAS2R14: AT = 16 µM<br>[20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>7,4'-<br>Dihydroxyflavone</td><td>2196-14-7</td><td>254.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [115]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R39: AT = 125 µM<br>[20]<br>TAS2R14: AT = 2 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 6.0 µM [20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Luteolin</td><td>491-70-3</td><td>286.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [118]<br>0.33 µg/g DM<br>[113]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R39: AT = 0.5 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 7.3 µM [20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="12"><strong>FLAVANONES</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Pinocembrin</td><td>480-39-7</td><td>256.2</td><td></td><td>1.26 µg/g [108]</td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 8 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 39.1 µM [20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 4 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 48.9 µM [20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Naringenin</td><td>480-41-1</td><td>272.2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [118]</td><td></td><td>0.082 µg/g [15]</td><td></td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 16 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 36.2 µM [20]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 8 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 32.9 µM [20]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="12"><strong>ISOFLAVONES</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Daidzein</td><td>486-66-8</td><td>254.2</td><td></td><td>0.209 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.0–40.3 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>0.475 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.59 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.84 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.41 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>Slightly (1 µM)<br>[80]</td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 500 µM<br>[21]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 500 µM<br>[21]<br>TAS2R14: AT = 500 µM<br>[21]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 500 µM<br>[21]</td><td>Astringent<br>(0.1–1 µM) [80]</td></tr><tr><td>Formomonetin</td><td>485-72-3</td><td>268.3</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>
<table><caption>Table 3. *Cont.*</caption><thead><tr><th rowspan="2">Phenolic<br>Compounds</th><th rowspan="2">CAS *</th><th rowspan="2">M *<br>(g/mol)</th><th colspan="6">Pulses</th><th colspan="2">Bitterness</th><th rowspan="2">Astringency</th></tr><tr><th>Adzuki Beans</th><th>Beans **</th><th>Chickpeas</th><th>Faba Beans</th><th>Lentils</th><th>Peas</th><th>Sensory<br>Evaluation</th><th>TAS2R Evaluation</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Genistein</td><td>446-72-0</td><td>270.2</td><td>0.191 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.7-33.8 µg/g<br>DM [90]<br>0.766 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>D [98]<br>0.74 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.139 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>0.144 µg/g DM<br>[120]</td><td>Slightly (1.5 µM)<br>[80]</td><td>TAS2R14: AT = 4 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 28.9 µM [21]<br>TAS2R39: AT = 8 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 49.4 µM [21]</td><td>Weakly (10 µM)<br>[80]<br>Astringent<br>(1.5 µM) [80]</td></tr><tr><td colspan="11"><strong>PROCYANIDINS</strong></td></tr><tr><td>Procyanidin B1</td><td>20315-25-7</td><td>578.5</td><td>213.0 µg/g [108]</td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td>D [118]</td><td></td><td>DT: 400 µM [50]</td><td>TAS2R5:<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 119.34 µM [66]<br>TAS2R7:<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 123.95 µM [66]<br>TAS2R5: EC<sub>50</sub> = 6.29 µM<br>[66]</td><td>DT: 240 µM [50]</td></tr><tr><td>Procyanidin B2g<br>(3-O-gallate)</td><td>29106-49-8</td><td>578.5</td><td></td><td></td><td>D [98,111]</td><td>0.49 µg/g DM<br>[103]</td><td></td><td></td><td>TAS2R39: EC<sub>50</sub> = 9.11 µM<br>[66]</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Procyanidin B4</td><td>29106-51-2</td><td>578.5</td><td>16.0 µg/g [108]</td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td></td><td>Bitter (0.9<br>g/L—aqueous<br>ethanol (1% v/v))<br>[106]</td><td>TAS2R5 [66]</td><td>Astringent (0.9<br>g/L—aqueous<br>ethanol<br>(1% v/v)) [106]</td></tr><tr><td>Procyanidin C2</td><td>-</td><td>866.8</td><td>42.4 µg/g [108]</td><td></td><td>D [98]</td><td></td><td></td><td>Bitter (0.9<br>g/L—aqueous<br>ethanol (1% v/v))<br>[106]</td><td>TAS2R5: AT = 30.0 µM;<br>EC<sub>50</sub> = 35.6 µM [62]</td><td>Astringent (0.9<br>g/L—aqueous<br>ethanol<br>(1% v/v)) [106]</td></tr></tbody></table>

D: detected; DM: dry matter; EC₅₀: half-maximum effective concentration of agonist required to achieve 50% of the maximum amplitude of receptor activation; DT: detection threshold; AT: activation threshold; TAS2R: human type 2 taste receptor. * CAS and molar mass (M) from the literature (NIST, 2022 and PubChem, 2022). ** Common beans include pulses from the specie *Phaseolus vulgaris*. *** Model based on the correlations of phytochemical compounds area determined by UHPLC-DAD-MS (ultrahigh-performance liquid chromatography–diode array detector–mass spectrometry) and sensory profiling [15].
<table><caption>**Table 4.** TAS2Rs activated by some flavanols identified in pulses (adzuki beans, beans *, chickpeas, faba beans, lentils and peas).</caption><thead><tr><th>Flavanols</th><th>TAS2R4</th><th>TAS2R5</th><th>TAS2R14</th><th>TAS2R30</th><th>TAS2R39</th><th>TAS2R43</th><th>Reference</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>(+)-catechin</td><td></td><td></td><td>+ (500; ND)</td><td></td><td>+ (250; ND)<br/>+ (250; ND)</td><td></td><td>[20]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-epicatechin</td><td>+ (2000;<br/>≥30,151)</td><td>+ (1000; 3210)</td><td>+ (500; ND)<br/>- (≤100)</td><td>- (≤100)</td><td>+ (1000; 3800)<br/>+ (ND; 417.7)<br/>+ (500; ND)</td><td>- (≤100)</td><td>[20]<br/>[62]<br/>[63]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-epigallocatechin</td><td></td><td></td><td>- (≤500)</td><td></td><td>+ (ND; 395.5)<br/>+ (32; 151)</td><td></td><td>[20]<br/>[63]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-epicatechin gallate</td><td></td><td></td><td>+ (125; ND)<br/>+ (ND; 70)</td><td></td><td>+ (ND; 21.3)<br/>+ (ND; 88.2)</td><td></td><td>[20]<br/>[64]<br/>[63]</td></tr><tr><td>(-)-epigallocatechin gallate</td><td>+ (≤100; ND)</td><td>+ (≤100; 12.30)</td><td>+ (250; ND)<br/>- (≤100)<br/>+ (ND; 34)</td><td>+ (≤100; ND)</td><td>+ (≤100; 8.50)<br/>+ (ND; 112)<br/>+ (ND; 181.6)</td><td>+ (≤100; 16.72)</td><td>[66]<br/>[64]<br/>[63]</td></tr><tr><td>Theaflavin</td><td></td><td></td><td>- (ND)</td><td></td><td>+ (ND; 2.79)</td><td></td><td>[64]</td></tr></tbody></table>

ND: not determined. “+” indicated receptor activation followed by activation threshold (µM) and EC₅₀ (half-maximum Effective Concentration) (µM): “-” indicated a lack of activation followed by the higher concentration tested (µM). * Beans include pulses from the specie *Phaseolus vulgaris*.

### • Flavones

Only three flavones have been detected in pulses, for which the activation of TAS2Rs has been studied. Chrysin has been identified in adzuki beans (0.00–0.09 g/kg) and faba beans [98,109,115], and activates TAS2R14 and TAS2R39 at concentrations of 63 µM and 16 µM, respectively [20]. 7,4'-Dihydroxyflavone, detected in faba beans, activates TAS2R14 at a lower threshold (16 µM) than chrysin, whereas it is higher for TAS2R39 (125 µM) [20,115]. Finally, luteolin exhibits very low AT for these two receptors in comparison with the previous flavones: 2 µM for TAS2R14 and 0.5 µM for TAS2R39 [20]. Pea flour contains 81.7 ng/g luteolin, but this compound does not contribute to bitterness and astringency according to the correlation model [15]. The concentrations of luteolin and caffeic acid are similar in pea flour, although only caffeic acid contributes to its bitterness and astringency [15]. One explanation is that the bitter receptor threshold activation of caffeic acid was lower than that of luteolin. However, this remains to be demonstrated.

### • Flavanones

Roland et al. (2013) [20] have shown the activation of TAS2R14 and TAS2R39 by two flavanones, pinocembrin and naringenin. The TA and EC₅₀ are similar for both molecules and bitter receptors [20]. Pinocembrin has been identified in common beans and faba beans, whereas lentils contain naringenin [98,108,118].

### • Isoflavones

Three isoflavones, daidzein, formononetin, and genistein, have been identified in beans, chickpeas, faba beans, lentils, and peas. The extracts of daidzein and genistein from soybeans are described as slightly bitter and astringent by a trained panel [80]. These isoflavones are involved in the bitter taste and astringency of soybeans due to their very high content compared to other legumes (Table 5) [18,19]. Genistein (extracted from soybeans) has AT for TAS2R14 and TAS2R39 at concentrations of 4 and 8 µM, respectively [21], and these ATs are similar to naringenin (flavanone) [20]. These low threshold values could explain the important role of genistein in the perception of soybean bitterness. However, the relationship between the AT (receptor level) and DT (sensory level) has never been demonstrated for this compound. Moreover, daidzein and formononetin (also extracted from soybeans) also activate these two receptors at a higher concentration (500 µM) [21]. The number and positions of hydroxyl groups should be an important parameter for TAS2R activation [20,66]. Indeed, genistein exhibits three OH groups whereas formononetin and daidzein have one and two hydroxyl groups. However, chickpeas, soybeans, and peas are more concentrated in daidzein than in genistein. These two isoflavones could be equally involved in the bitter sensation of these pulses (balance between concentration and AT). In
addition, malonyl-β-glucosides such as malonyl daidzein, malonyl glycitin and malonyl genistein have been identified in soybean flakes [81]. These are derived from the malonylation of β-glucosides [121]. These malonyl-β-glucosides should contribute as much to soybean bitterness and astringency as DDMP saponin and more than the other saponins and isoflavones [81]. Currently, none of these malonyl-β-glucosides have been identified in beans, chickpeas, faba beans, lentils and peas. Finally, heat treatment reduces the isoflavone content, whereas germination increases it [120,122].

<table><caption>**Table 5.** Concentration (µg/kg DM) of genistein and daidzein in different legumes [120].</caption><thead><tr><th>Legumes</th><th>Genistein (µg/kg DM)</th><th>Daidzein (µg/kg DM)</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>broad beans (raw)</td><td>74</td><td>59</td></tr><tr><td>chickpeas (dried, raw)</td><td>475</td><td>766</td></tr><tr><td>lentils (dried, raw)</td><td>139</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>red kidney beans (raw)</td><td>191</td><td>209</td></tr><tr><td>soybeans (dried, raw)</td><td>583.10<sup>3</sup></td><td>838.10<sup>3</sup></td></tr><tr><td>peas (dried, raw)</td><td>41</td><td>144</td></tr></tbody></table>

DM: dry matter.

### 3.2.4. Condensed Tannins

Condensed tannins are oligomers or polymers composed of derivates from (+)-catechin and its isomers. Unlike hydrolysable tannins, they are resistant to hydrolysis and are degraded using chemical treatments [123]. Prodelphinidins and procyanidins have been identified in pulses. Hulls contain higher concentrations of these condensed tannins than cotyledons [90,91,124]. These compounds may be responsible for bitterness and astringency in grapes and wines [125]. In lupin, condensed tannins may be more involved in bitterness than flavanols and alkaloids [16]. Moreover, the evaluation of the bitter and astringent intensities of low- and high-tannin faba beans would have made it possible to verify their involvement [89].

Procyanidins B4 and C2 are described as astringent and bitter at a concentration of 0.9 g/L in aqueous ethanol [106]. Dimers and trimers of procyanidins are more astringent than monomers ((+)-catechin and (-)-epicatechin) [106]. The astringent DT of (-)-epicatechin is five times higher than that of procyanidin B2 [50]. Hufnagel and Hofmann (2008) suggested that the more polymerised the molecules are, the more bitter they are, as shown by the ranking obtained according to the intensity of bitterness perceived in wines: procyanidin B1 and C1 > procyanidin B2 > procyanidin B3 > (-)-epicatechin > (+)-catechin [50]. Indeed, a similar ranking of TAS2R5 receptor DTs has been established [62]. Conversely, Peleg et al. (1999) demonstrated using sensory analysis that the more polymerised the molecules are, the less bitter they are. In wine, (-)-epicatechin is more bitter than (+)-catechin, which is more bitter than procyanidin trimers [106]. These contradictory results can be explained by the presence of ethanol in the wines, which increases the intensity of the bitter perception in the mouth. Indeed, Fischer and Noble (1994) have shown that an increase of 3% (v/v) ethanol in wine is equivalent to an increase in bitterness (+50%) caused by the addition of 1400 mg/L catechin [126]. However, it is not possible to verify these results with bitter receptors in vitro in the presence of ethanol, as this molecule is 1% toxic to cells. Some sensorial results are therefore consistent with those obtained via cell tests: the degree of polymerisation of these phenolic compounds should increase the intensity of bitterness. (+)-Epicatechin activates TAS2R4, TAS2R5 and TAS2R39 from a concentration above 1000 µM, while procyanidin C2 (trimer) activates TAS2R5 from 30 µM [62]. Roland et al. (2011) suggest that a molecule with many hydroxyl groups could have a better affinity for TAS2R5 [21]. Indeed, dimers (procyanidins B) and trimers (procyanidins C) have more OH groups than monomers. The ability of seven procyanidins (five dimers and two trimers also identified in pulses) to activate the 25 TAS2Rs has been tested (Table 6) [62,66]. Only TAS2R5, TAS2R7 and TAS2R39 are activated by at least one procyanidin. Procyanidins B2, B3, and C1 did not activate the 25 TAS2Rs at the tested concentrations.
TAS2R7 is only activated by procyanidin B1, and TAS2R39 is activated by procyanidin B2g. In addition, TAS2R5 is activated by procyanidins B1, B2g, B4 and C2. Procyanidin B2g exhibits the lowest EC₅₀ followed by procyanidins C2 and then B1. However, the EC₅₀ of dimer B4 has not been determined due to the observation of unspecific responses in the control condition (mock) [62,66]. These results suggest a role for condensed tannins, especially procyanidins, in the bitterness and astringency of pulses. However, it would be interesting to investigate the potential bitter taste and astringency of prodelphinidins.

<table><caption>**Table 6.** hTAS2Rs activated by dimer and trimer condensed tannins identified in pulses (beans *, faba beans and lentils).</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>Procyanidins</th><th>TAS2R5</th><th>TAS2R7</th><th>TAS2R39</th><th>Reference</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="5">dimers</td><td>B1</td><td>+ (≤67; 119.34)</td><td>+ (≤67; 123.95)</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>[66]</td></tr><tr><td>B2</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>[66]</td></tr><tr><td>B2g (3-O-gallate)</td><td>+ (≤100; 6.29)</td><td>− (≤100)</td><td>+ (≤100; 9.11)</td><td>[66]</td></tr><tr><td>B3</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>− (≤67)</td><td>[66]</td></tr><tr><td>B4</td><td>+ (≤133; ND)</td><td>− (≤133)</td><td>− (≤133)</td><td>[66]</td></tr><tr><td rowspan="2">trimers</td><td>C1</td><td>− (≤150)</td><td>− (≤150)</td><td>− (≤150)</td><td>[66]</td></tr><tr><td>C2</td><td>+ (30.0; 35.6)</td><td>− (≤300)</td><td>− (≤300)</td><td>[62]</td></tr></tbody></table>

ND: not determined. “+” indicated receptor activation followed by activation threshold (µM) and EC₅₀ (half-maximum effective concentration to achieve 50% of the maximum amplitude of receptor activation) (µM); “−” indicated a lack of activation followed by the higher concentration tested (µM). * Beans include pulses from the specie *Phaseolus vulgaris*.

### 3.3. Alkaloids

Some alkaloids contribute to the bitterness of food products such as caffeine [6]. Approximately sixteen alkaloids have been detected in different lupin varieties and could be partially responsible for their bitterness. They are distributed in the quinolizidine, indole, and piperidine classes [16,127,128]. For example, lupanine is the most abundant alkaloid in white and narrow-leafed lupins and sparteine in yellow lupins [128]. However, quinolizidine alkaloids are considered human antinutritional factors due to neurological, cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal disturbances [128,129]. Lupins are classified into two varieties: the “bitter” and the “sweet” which differ in their alkaloid content [16,130]. DuPont et al. established the relationship between the bitter intensity of milled lupins and their alkaloid content [16]. The bitter mean scores of the “bitter” varieties are higher than those of the “sweet” ones (7.8 and 2.0 over 10, respectively). The “sweet” varieties exhibited 0.1 mg/g DM of mean alkaloids compared to 15.0 mg/g DM for the “bitter” varieties. Concerning the “bitter” varieties, the lupin evaluated as the least bitter contains 4.8 mg/g (dry matter) of alkaloids, including lupinine and gramine, whereas the one with the highest bitter intensity contains 26.9 mg/g (dry matter) composed of sparteine, lupanine and 13-hydroxylupanine. This study has highlighted the role of alkaloids in lupin bitterness; however, the authors suggest that intense bitterness in “bitter” varieties could also be attributed to the presence of tannins [16]. Moreover, treatments to eliminate alkaloids in lupin are called “debittering treatments” [127].

Faba bean is another pulse containing two alkaloids, vicine and convicine [131,132]. These molecules are pyrimidine glucosides and cause favism in people who express a genetically inherited glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase (G6PD) deficiency; they are considered antinutritional factors [89,133,134]. Such as lupins, there are new cultivars of faba bean breeding lines with a significantly lower amount of alkaloids; the reduced level of vicine and convicine can considerably vary among cultivars [89,133]. However, the sensorial aspect of these molecules has never been studied. It would be interesting to compare the bitter intensity of the high- and low-vicine/convicine cultivars. A study correlated the flavour-related components and the sensorial attributes of faba bean flour, concentrate and isolate using partial least squares (PLS) regression. Bitterness is related to vicine and convicine, although other compounds, including free phenolic compounds and amino acids (phenylalanine, tryptophan, and histidine), also contribute [57].
Thus, the main disadvantages of alkaloids are their antinutritional effect and their potential contribution to bitterness of lupins and faba beans. However, the main advantage of these secondary metabolites is their involvement in the plant mechanism, which limits herbivory attacks and ensures harvest yields [12,135]. For example, the low vicine and convicine faba bean genotypes are more sensitive to bruchid attack [89]. These compounds are beneficial for the plant in the field and can be eliminated after harvesting by many strategies including cooking, soaking, germination, and fermentation [127,134,136,137]

**4. Conclusions**

Consumers and food industries generate constant demand for plant-based products, but there remains a strong need to improve their flavour. The volatile compounds of many pulses and their impact on off-notes have been relatively well-studied. However, this review concludes that there is a gap in the knowledge regarding non-volatile compounds causing bitterness and astringency in pulses. It is therefore important to identify the molecules involved in plant-based off-flavours to increase consumer acceptability.

This review compiles the different non-volatile compounds that contribute to the bitterness and astringency of pulses and potential compounds identified in pulses that are described as bitter and astringent in other food products. All the molecules listed in this review originate from a secondary metabolism and contribute to pulse defence. They are more cultivar- and pulse-dependent, and their content varies owing to differences in environmental, storage and transformation conditions. Saponins may be the main compounds responsible for bitterness and astringency in peas and soybeans. Due to the high saponin content in chickpeas, this family of compounds could also be responsible for off-flavours. However, lupins and faba beans have lower saponin contents and differ from other legumes in the presence of alkaloids which may also contribute to bitterness. According to phenolic compounds, isoflavones are responsible for bitterness and astringency in soybeans but are probably not involved in other pulse off-flavours due to their very low content. Moreover, the number of phenolic compounds identified in pulses that exhibit bitter and/or astringent characteristics is very large; however, their role in pulse off-flavours needs to be highlighted, although some predictions suggest the possibility. It would be interesting to continue the study of these compounds through both sensory analysis and in vitro tests. Cellular in vitro tests provide information on activated TAS2R and make it possible to target the most impactful compounds on off-flavours. Moreover, the activation of the same TAS2R by different molecules and the activation of multiple TAS2Rs by a single molecule may lead to an increase in perceived bitterness. It is also interesting to compare the molecule content of pulses and their TAS2R AT to verify their involvement in off-flavours.

This review is probably not exhaustive and might be completed in the coming years. Other compounds, particularly many phenolic compounds, have been identified in legumes; however, their sensory impact (bitterness and astringency) on food products has never been studied, which could suggest new potential compounds. Indeed, studies often focus on the identification of molecules alone or the overall bitterness and/or astringency of plant-based products without linking to their content. Moreover, recent studies have suggested the role of other compounds, including lipids, lipid oxidation products, peptides and free amino acids, in the negative perception of pulses [9,22,138,139].

Finally, precise identification of bitter and astringent compounds in pulses could allow the determination of their main origins and the proposal of strategies to reduce their perception. Some approaches have been identified for improving the flavour of pulses, such as limiting the production of these unwanted compounds, removing them or masking their perception. One approach consists of selecting cultivars with low saponin content (peas) or with low alkaloid and tannin content (faba beans and lupins). However, this strategy decreases plant resistance and may raise other problems such as low production yields. The content of these compounds may vary during seed transformation, showing that a compromise must be considered. For example, germination reduces the alkaloid seed
content while enriching it with isoflavones and saponins. The fermentation of plant-based products decreases the content of these unwanted compounds but promotes the formation of new bitter compounds such as peptides and free amino acids [140]. Another approach consists of using perceptual interactions to limit intensity of bitterness and astringency, in particular using odour-taste interactions [141,142].

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, A.K. and C.S.; investigation, A.K.; writing—original draft preparation, A.K.; writing—review and editing, A.K., C.B., L.B. and C.S.; supervision, L.B. and C.S.; funding acquisition, L.B. and C.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** The Ph.D. of A.K. was funded by Groupe Soufflet (France), Groupe Avril (France) and ANRT (National Agency for Research and Technology, France) (ANRT-CIFRE 2019/1744).

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The sponsors had no role in the design, execution, interpretation, or writing of the study.

## References

1. Guinet, M.; Nicolardot, B.; Voisin, A.-S. Provision of Contrasted Nitrogen-Related Ecosystem Services among Grain Legumes. *Agron. Sustain. Dev.* **2020**, *40*, 33. [CrossRef]

2. Voisin, A.-S.; Guéguen, J.; Huyghe, C.; Jeuffroy, M.-H.; Magrini, M.-B.; Meynard, J.-M.; Mougel, C.; Pellerin, S.; Pelzer, E. Legumes for Feed, Food, Biomaterials and Bioenergy in Europe: A Review. *Agron. Sustain. Dev.* **2014**, *34*, 361–380. [CrossRef]

3. Lecerf, J.-M. Viande et santé humaine: Excès et défauts. *Bull. Acad. Nat. Med. Paris* **2011**, *195*, 1801–1812. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

4. Roland, W.S.U.; Pouvreau, L.; Curran, J.; van de Velde, F.; de Kok, P.M.T. Flavor Aspects of Pulse Ingredients. *Cereal Chem.* **2017**, *94*, 58–65. [CrossRef]

5. Karolkowski, A.; Guichard, E.; Briand, L.; Salles, C. Volatile Compounds in Pulses: A Review. *Foods* **2021**, *10*, 3140. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

6. Briand, L.; Salles, C. Taste Perception and Integration. In *Flavor from Food to Behaviors, Wellbeing and Health*; Elsevier Ltd.: Duxford, UK, 2016; pp. 101–119. ISBN 978-0-08-100295-7.

7. Amarowicz, R.; Troszyńska, A.; Baryłko-Pikielna, N.; Shahidi, F. Polyphenolics Extracts from Legume Seeds: Correlations Between Total Antioxidant Activity, Total Phenolics Content, Tannins Content and Astringency. *J. Food Lipids* **2004**, *11*, 278–286. [CrossRef]

8. Karolkowski, A.; Martin, C.; Bouzidi, E.; Albouy, J.-F.; Levavasseur, L.; Briand, L.; Salles, C. Heat Treatment, Cultivar and Formulation Modify the Sensory Properties and Consumer Acceptability of Gels Containing Faba Bean (Vicia faba L. Minor) Protein Concentrates. *Foods* **2022**, *11*, 3018. [CrossRef]

9. Gläser, P.; Dawid, C.; Meister, S.; Bader-Mittermaier, S.; Schott, M.; Eisner, P.; Hofmann, T. Molecularization of Bitter Off-Taste Compounds in Pea-Protein Isolates (*Pisum sativum* L.). *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2020**, *68*, 10374–10387. [CrossRef]

10. Szakiel, A.; Pączkowski, C.; Henry, M. Influence of Environmental Biotic Factors on the Content of Saponins in Plants. *Phytochem. Rev.* **2011**, *10*, 493–502. [CrossRef]

11. Oliete, B.; Lubbers, S.; Fournier, C.; Jeandroz, S.; Saurel, R. Effect of Biotic Stress on the Presence of Secondary Metabolites in Field Pea Grains. *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **2022**, *102*, 4942–4948. [CrossRef]

12. Ulyanych, O.; Poltoretskyi, S.; Liubych, V.; Yatsenko, A.; Yatsenko, V.; Lazariev, O.; Kravchenko, V. Effect of Surface Drip Irrigation and Cultivars on Physiological State and Productivity of Faba Bean Crop. *J. Agric. Sci.* **2021**, *32*, 139–149. [CrossRef]

13. Giusti, F.; Caprioli, G.; Ricciutelli, M.; Torregiani, E.; Vittori, S.; Sagratini, G. Analysis of 17 Polyphenolic Compounds in Organic and Conventional Legumes by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography-Diode Array Detection (HPLC-DAD) and Evaluation of Their Antioxidant Activity. *Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr.* **2018**, *69*, 557–565. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

14. Wink, M. Plant Breeding: Importance of Plant Secondary Metabolites for Protection against Pathogens and Herbivores. *Theor. Appl. Genet.* **1988**, *75*, 225–233. [CrossRef]

15. Cosson, A.; Meudec, E.; Ginies, C.; Danel, A.; Lieben, P.; Descamps, N.; Cheynier, V.; Saint-Eve, A.; Souchon, I. Identification and Quantification of Key Phytochemicals in Peas—Linking Compounds with Sensory Attributes. *Food Chem.* **2022**, *385*, 132615. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

16. Dupont, M.S.; Muzquiz, M.; Estrella, I.; Fenwick, G.R.; Price, K.R. Relationship between the Sensory Properties of Lupin Seed with Alkaloid and Tannin Content. *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **1994**, *65*, 95–100. [CrossRef]

17. Heng, L.; Vincken, J.-P.; van Koningsveld, G.; Legger, A.; Gruppen, H.; van Boekel, T.; Roozen, J.; Voragen, F. Bitterness of Saponins and Their Content in Dry Peas. *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **2006**, *86*, 1225–1231. [CrossRef]

18. Belitz, H.; Wieser, H. Bitter Compounds: Occurrence and Structure-activity Relationships. *Food Rev. Int.* **1985**, *1*, 271–354. [CrossRef]

19. Huang, A.-S.; Hsieh, O.A.-L.; Chang, S.S. Characterization of the Nonvolatile Minor Constituents Responsible for the Objectionable Taste of Defatted Soybean Flour. *J. Food Sci.* **1982**, *47*, 19–23. [CrossRef]
20. Roland, W.S.U.; van Buren, L.; Gruppen, H.; Driesse, M.; Gouka, R.J.; Smit, G.; Vincken, J.-P. Bitter Taste Receptor Activation by Flavonoids and Isoflavonoids: Modeled Structural Requirements for Activation of HTAS2R14 and HTAS2R39. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2013**, *61*, 10454–10466. [CrossRef]

21. Roland, W.S.U.; Vincken, J.-P.; Gouka, R.J.; van Buren, L.; Gruppen, H.; Smit, G. Soy Isoflavones and Other Isoflavonoids Activate the Human Bitter Taste Receptors HTAS2R14 and HTAS2R39. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2011**, *59*, 11764–11771. [CrossRef]

22. Humiski, L.M.; Aluko, R.E. Physicochemical and Bitterness Properties of Enzymatic Pea Protein Hydrolysates. *J. Food Sci.* **2007**, *72*, S605–S611. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23. Cosson, A.; Oliveira Correia, L.; Descamps, N.; Saint-Eve, A.; Souchon, I. Identification and Characterization of the Main Peptides in Pea Protein Isolates Using Ultra High-Performance Liquid Chromatography Coupled with Mass Spectrometry and Bioinformatics Tools. *Food Chem.* **2022**, *367*, 130747. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

24. Delompré, T.; Guichard, E.; Briand, L.; Salles, C. Taste Perception of Nutrients Found in Nutritional Supplements: A Review. *Nutrients* **2019**, *11*, 2050. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25. Drewnowski, A.; Gomez-Carneros, C. Bitter Taste, Phytonutrients, and the Consumer: A Review. *Am. J. Clin. Nutr.* **2000**, *72*, 1424–1435. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26. Meyerhof, W. Elucidation of Mammalian Bitter Taste. In *Reviews of Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology*; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2005; pp. 37–72. ISBN 978-3-540-32431-7.

27. Behrens, M.; Meyerhof, W. The Vertebrate Gustatory System. In *Flavour: From Food to Perception*; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 2016; pp. 57–78. ISBN 978-1-118-92938-4.

28. Delompré, T.; Salles, C.; Briand, L. Saveur amère: De la molécule au comportement. *Acad. Agric. Fr.* **2020**, 1–22.

29. Jalševac, F.; Terra, X.; Rodríguez-Gallego, E.; Beltran-Debón, R.; Blay, M.T.; Pinent, M.; Ardévol, A. The Hidden One: What We Know About Bitter Taste Receptor 39. *Front. Endocrinol.* **2022**, *13*, 854718. [CrossRef]

30. Dsamou, M. Protéome Salivaire et Sensibilité à l'amertume Chez l'Homme. Ph.D. Thesis, Université de Bourgogne, Dijon, France, 2012.

31. Schwartz, M.; Brignot, H.; Feron, G.; Hummel, T.; Zhu, Y.; von Koskull, D.; Heydel, J.-M.; Lirussi, F.; Canon, F.; Neiers, F. Role of Human Salivary Enzymes in Bitter Taste Perception. *Food Chem.* **2022**, *386*, 132798. [CrossRef]

32. Matsunami, H.; Montmayeur, J.-P.; Buck, L.B. A Family of Candidate Taste Receptors in Human and Mouse. *Nature* **2000**, *404*, 601–604. [CrossRef]

33. Chamoun, E.; Liu, A.S.; Duizer, L.M.; Feng, Z.; Darlington, G.; Duncan, A.M.; Haines, J.; Ma, D.W.L. Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms in Sweet, Fat, Umami, Salt, Bitter and Sour Taste Receptor Genes Are Associated with Gustatory Function and Taste Preferences in Young Adults. *Nutr. Res.* **2021**, *85*, 40–46. [CrossRef]

34. Kim, U.; Wooding, S.; Ricci, D.; Jorde, L.B.; Drayna, D. Worldwide Haplotype Diversity and Coding Sequence Variation at Human Bitter Taste Receptor Loci. *Hum. Mutat.* **2005**, *26*, 199–204. [CrossRef]

35. Kim, U.-K.; Breslin, P.A.S.; Reed, D.; Drayna, D. Genetics of Human Taste Perception. *J. Dent. Res.* **2004**, *83*, 448–453. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

36. Behrens, M.; Meyerhof, W. Signaling in the Chemosensory Systems. *Cell. Mol. Life Sci.* **2006**, *63*, 1501–1509. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

37. Pronin, A.N.; Xu, H.; Tang, H.; Zhang, L.; Li, Q.; Li, X. Specific Alleles of Bitter Receptor Genes Influence Human Sensitivity to the Bitterness of Aloin and Saccharin. *Curr. Biol.* **2007**, *17*, 1403–1408. [CrossRef]

38. Roudnitzky, N.; Behrens, M.; Engel, A.; Kohl, S.; Thalmann, S.; Hübner, S.; Lossow, K.; Wooding, S.P.; Meyerhof, W. Receptor Polymorphism and Genomic Structure Interact to Shape Bitter Taste Perception. *PLOS Genet.* **2015**, *11*, e1005530. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

39. Wooding, S.P.; Ramirez, V.A. Global Population Genetics and Diversity in the TAS2R Bitter Taste Receptor Family. *Front. Genet.* **2022**, *13*, 952299. [CrossRef]

40. Bufe, B.; Breslin, P.A.S.; Kuhn, C.; Reed, D.R.; Tharp, C.D.; Slack, J.P.; Kim, U.-K.; Drayna, D.; Meyerhof, W. The Molecular Basis of Individual Differences in Phenylthiocarbamide and Propylthiouracil Bitterness Perception. *Curr. Biol.* **2005**, *15*, 322–327. [CrossRef]

41. Kim, U.; Jorgenson, E.; Coon, H.; Leppert, M.; Risch, N.; Drayna, D. Positional Cloning of the Human Quantitative Trait Locus Underlying Taste Sensitivity to Phenylthiocarbamide. *Science* **2003**, *299*, 1221–1225. [CrossRef]

42. Mennella, J.A.; Pepino, M.Y.; Duke, F.F.; Reed, D.R. Age Modifies the Genotype-Phenotype Relationship for the Bitter Receptor TAS2R38. *BMC Genet.* **2010**, *11*, 60. [CrossRef]

43. Soares, S.; Brandão, E.; Guerreiro, C.; Soares, S.; Mateus, N.; de Freitas, V. Tannins in Food: Insights into the Molecular Perception of Astringency and Bitter Taste. *Molecules* **2020**, *25*, 2590. [CrossRef]

44. Ployon, S.; Morzel, M.; Belloir, C.; Bonnotte, A.; Bourillot, E.; Briand, L.; Lesniewska, E.; Lherminier, J.; Aybeke, E.; Canon, F. Mechanisms of Astringency: Structural Alteration of the Oral Mucosal Pellicle by Dietary Tannins and Protective Effect of BPRPs. *Food Chem.* **2018**, *253*, 79–87. [CrossRef]

45. Canon, F.; Belloir, C.; Bourillot, E.; Brignot, H.; Briand, L.; Feron, G.; Lesniewska, E.; Nivet, C.; Septier, C.; Schwartz, M.; et al. Perspectives on Astringency Sensation: An Alternative Hypothesis on the Molecular Origin of Astringency. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2021**, *69*, 3822–3826. [CrossRef]

46. Schöbel, N.; Radtke, D.; Kyereme, J.; Wollmann, N.; Cichy, A.; Obst, K.; Kallweit, K.; Kletke, O.; Minovi, A.; Dazert, S.; et al. Astringency Is a Trigeminal Sensation That Involves the Activation of G Protein-Coupled Signaling by Phenolic Compounds. *Chem. Senses* **2014**, *39*, 471–487. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47. Huang, R.; Xu, C. An Overview of the Perception and Mitigation of Astringency Associated with Phenolic Compounds. *Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.* **2021**, *20*, 1036–1074. [CrossRef]

48. Guerreiro, C.; Brandão, E.; de Jesus, M.; Gonçalves, L.; Pérez-Gregório, R.; Mateus, N.; de Freitas, V.; Soares, S. New Insights into the Oral Interactions of Different Families of Phenolic Compounds: Deepening the Astringency Mouthfeels. *Food Chem.* **2022**, *375*, 131642. [CrossRef]

49. Rolls, E.T. Taste, Olfactory, and Food Texture Processing in the Brain, and the Control of Food Intake. *Physiol. Behav.* **2005**, *85*, 45–56. [CrossRef]

50. Hufnagel, J.C.; Hofmann, T. Quantitative Reconstruction of the Nonvolatile Sensometabolome of a Red Wine. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2008**, *56*, 9190–9199. [CrossRef]

51. Delompré, T.; Belloir, C.; Martin, C.; Salles, C.; Briand, L. Detection of Bitterness in Vitamins Is Mediated by the Activation of Bitter Taste Receptors. *Nutrients* **2022**, *14*, 4141. [CrossRef]

52. Intelmann, D.; Batram, C.; Kuhn, C.; Haseleu, G.; Meyerhof, W.; Hofmann, T. Three TAS2R Bitter Taste Receptors Mediate the Psychophysical Responses to Bitter Compounds of Hops (*Humulus Lupulus* L.) and Beer. *Chem. Percept.* **2009**, *2*, 118–132. [CrossRef]

53. Bufe, B.; Hofmann, T.; Krautwurst, D.; Raguse, J.-D.; Meyerhof, W. The Human TAS2R16 Receptor Mediates Bitter Taste in Response to β-Glucopyranosides. *Nat. Genet.* **2002**, *32*, 397–401. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

54. Frank, O.; Ottinger, H.; Hofmann, T. Characterization of an Intense Bitter-Tasting 1H,4H-Quinolizinium-7-Olate by Application of the Taste Dilution Analysis, a Novel Bioassay for the Screening and Identification of Taste-Active Compounds in Foods. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2001**, *49*, 231–238. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

55. Aisala, H.; Manninen, H.; Laaksonen, T.; Linderborg, K.M.; Myoda, T.; Hopia, A.; Sandell, M. Linking Volatile and Non-Volatile Compounds to Sensory Profiles and Consumer Liking of Wild Edible Nordic Mushrooms. *Food Chem.* **2020**, *304*, 125403. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

56. Troszyńska, A.; Estrella, I.; Lamparski, G.; Hernández, T.; Amarowicz, R.; Pegg, R.B. Relationship between the Sensory Quality of Lentil (Lens Culinaris) Sprouts and Their Phenolic Constituents. *Food Res. Int.* **2011**, *44*, 3195–3201. [CrossRef]

57. Tuccillo, F.; Kantanen, K.; Wang, Y.; Martin Ramos Diaz, J.; Pulkkinen, M.; Edelmann, M.; Knaapila, A.; Jouppila, K.; Piironen, V.; Lampi, A.-M.; et al. The Flavor of Faba Bean Ingredients and Extrudates: Chemical and Sensory Properties. *Food Res. Int.* **2022**, *162*, 112036. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

58. Meyerhof, W.; Batram, C.; Kuhn, C.; Brockhoff, A.; Chudoba, E.; Bufe, B.; Appendino, G.; Behrens, M. The Molecular Receptive Ranges of Human TAS2R Bitter Taste Receptors. *Chem. Senses* **2010**, *35*, 157–170. [CrossRef]

59. Akerboom, J.; Chen, T.-W.; Wardill, T.J.; Tian, L.; Marvin, J.S.; Mutlu, S.; Calderón, N.C.; Esposti, F.; Borghuis, B.G.; Sun, X.R.; et al. Optimization of a GCAMP Calcium Indicator for Neural Activity Imaging. *J. Neurosci.* **2012**, *32*, 13819–13840. [CrossRef]

60. Chen, T.-W.; Wardill, T.J.; Sun, Y.; Pulver, S.R.; Renninger, S.L.; Baohan, A.; Schreiter, E.R.; Kerr, R.A.; Orger, M.B.; Jayaraman, V.; et al. Ultrasensitive Fluorescent Proteins for Imaging Neuronal Activity. *Nature* **2013**, *499*, 295–300. [CrossRef]

61. Tan, S.M.; Seetoh, W.-G. Construction of a Bioluminescence-Based Assay for Bitter Taste Receptors (TAS2Rs). *Sci. Rep.* **2022**, *12*, 17658. [CrossRef]

62. Soares, S.; Kohl, S.; Thalmann, S.; Mateus, N.; Meyerhof, W.; De Freitas, V. Different Phenolic Compounds Activate Distinct Human Bitter Taste Receptors. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2013**, *61*, 1525–1533. [CrossRef]

63. Narukawa, M.; Noga, C.; Ueno, Y.; Sato, T.; Misaka, T.; Watanabe, T. Evaluation of the Bitterness of Green Tea Catechins by a Cell-Based Assay with the Human Bitter Taste Receptor HTAS2R39. *Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.* **2011**, *405*, 620–625. [CrossRef]

64. Yamazaki, T.; Sagisaka, M.; Ikeda, R.; Nakamura, T.; Matsuda, N.; Ishii, T.; Nakayama, T.; Watanabe, T. The Human Bitter Taste Receptor HTAS2R39 Is the Primary Receptor for the Bitterness of Theaflavins. *Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem.* **2014**, *78*, 1753–1756. [CrossRef]

65. Behrens, M.; Meyerhof, W. Bitter Taste Receptor Research Comes of Age: From Characterization to Modulation of TAS2Rs. *Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.* **2013**, *24*, 215–221. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

66. Soares, S.; Silva, M.S.; García-Estevez, I.; Großmann, P.; Brás, N.; Brandão, E.; Mateus, N.; de Freitas, V.; Behrens, M.; Meyerhof, W. Human Bitter Taste Receptors Are Activated by Different Classes of Polyphenols. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2018**, *66*, 8814–8823. [CrossRef]

67. Koga, C.C.; Becraft, A.R.; Lee, Y.; Lee, S.-Y. Taste Detection Thresholds of Resveratrol. *J. Food Sci.* **2015**, *80*, S2064–S2070. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

68. Oleszek, M.; Oleszek, W. Saponins in Food. In *Handbook of Dietary Phytochemicals*; Xiao, J., Sarker, S.D., Asakawa, Y., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 1–40. ISBN 9789811317453.

69. Sparg, S.G.; Light, M.E.; van Staden, J. Biological Activities and Distribution of Plant Saponins. *J. Ethnopharmacol.* **2004**, *94*, 219–243. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

70. Ha, T.J.; Lee, B.W.; Park, K.H.; Jeong, S.H.; Kim, H.-T.; Ko, J.-M.; Baek, I.-Y.; Lee, J.H. Rapid Characterisation and Comparison of Saponin Profiles in the Seeds of Korean Leguminous Species Using Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography with Photodiode Array Detector and Electrospray Ionisation/Mass Spectrometry (UPLC-PDA-ESI/MS) Analysis. *Food Chem.* **2014**, *146*, 270–277. [CrossRef]
71. Mekky, R.H.; Thabet, M.M.; Rodríguez-Pérez, C.; Elnaggar, D.M.Y.; Mahrous, E.A.; Segura-Carretero, A.; Abdel-Sattar, E. Comparative Metabolite Profiling and Antioxidant Potentials of Seeds and Sprouts of Three Egyptian Cultivars of *Vicia Faba* L. *Food Res. Int.* **2020**, *136*, 109537. [CrossRef]

72. Oomah, B.D.; Patras, A.; Rawson, A.; Singh, N.; Compos-Vega, R. 2-Chemistry of Pulses. In *Pulse Foods*; Tiwari, B.K., Gowen, A., McKenna, B., Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, USA, 2011; pp. 9–55. ISBN 978-0-12-382018-1.

73. Krishnamurthy, P.; Tsukamoto, C.; Singh, R.J.; Lee, J.-D.; Kim, H.-S.; Yang, S.-H.; Chung, G. The Sg-6 Saponins, New Components in Wild Soybean (Glycine Soja Sieb. and Zucc.): Polymorphism, Geographical Distribution and Inheritance. *Euphytica* **2014**, *198*, 413–424. [CrossRef]

74. Price, K.R.; Griffiths, N.M.; Curl, C.L.; Fenwick, G.R. Undesirable Sensory Properties of the Dried Pea (*Pisum sativum*). The Rôle of Saponins. *Food Chem.* **1985**, *17*, 105–115. [CrossRef]

75. Ikedo, S.; Shimoyamada, M.; Watanabe, K. Interaction between Bovine Serum Albumin and Saponin As Studied by Heat Stability and Protease Digestion. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **1996**, *44*, 792–795. [CrossRef]

76. Fenwick, D.E.; Oakenfull, D. Saponin Content of Food Plants and Some Prepared Foods. *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **1983**, *34*, 186–191. [CrossRef]

77. Vernoud, V.; Lebeigle, L.; Munier, J.; Marais, J.; Sanchez, M.; Pertuit, D.; Rossin, N.; Darchy, B.; Aubert, G.; Le Signor, C.; et al. β-Amyrin Synthase1 Controls the Accumulation of the Major Saponins Present in Pea (*Pisum Sativum*). *Plant Cell Physiol.* **2021**, *62*, 784–797. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

78. Chitisankul, W.T.; Shimada, K.; Omizu, Y.; Uemoto, Y.; Varanyanond, W.; Tsukamoto, C. Mechanism of DDMP-Saponin Degradation and Maltol Production in Soymilk Preparation. *LWT* **2015**, *64*, 197–204. [CrossRef]

79. Daveby, Y.D.; Åman, P.; Betz, J.M.; Musser, S.M. Effect of Storage and Extraction on Ratio of Soyasaponin I to 2,3-Dihydro-2,5-Dihydroxy-6-Methyl-4-Pyrone-Conjugated Soyasaponin I in Dehulled Peas (*Pisum sativum* L). *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **1998**, *78*, 141–146. [CrossRef]

80. Okubo, K.; Iijima, M.; Kobayashi, Y.; Yoshikoshi, M.; Uchida, T.; Kudou, S. Components Responsible for the Undesirable Taste of Soybean Seeds. *Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem.* **1992**, *56*, 99–103. [CrossRef]

81. Aldin, E.; Reitmeier, H.A.; Murphy, P. Bitterness of Soy Extracts Containing Isoflavones and Saponins. *J. Food Sci.* **2006**, *71*, S211–S215. [CrossRef]

82. Donat, P.V.; Caprioli, G.; Conti, P.; Maggi, F.; Ricciutelli, M.; Torregiani, E.; Vittori, S.; Sagratini, G. Rapid Quantification of Soyasaponins I and Bg in Italian Lentils by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)–Tandem Mass Spectrometry (MS/MS). *Food Anal. Methods* **2014**, *7*, 1024–1031. [CrossRef]

83. Heng, L. Flavour Aspects of Pea and Its Protein Preparations in Relation to Novel Protein Foods. Ph.D. Thesis, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2005.

84. Heng, L.; Vincken, J.-P.; Hoppe, K.; van Koningsveld, G.A.; Decroos, K.; Gruppen, H.; van Boekel, M.A.J.S.; Voragen, A.G.J. Stability of Pea DDMP Saponin and the Mechanism of Its Decomposition. *Food Chem.* **2006**, *99*, 326–334. [CrossRef]

85. Martínez Noguera, P.; Lantoine, J.; Roux, E.L.; Yang, S.; Jakobi, R.; Krause, S.; Saint-Eve, A.; Bonazzi, C.; Rega, B. Saponins from Pea Ingredients to Innovative Sponge Cakes and Their Association with Perceived Bitterness. *Foods* **2022**, *11*, 2919. [CrossRef]

86. Singh, B.; Singh, J.P.; Kaur, A.; Singh, N. Phenolic Composition and Antioxidant Potential of Grain Legume Seeds: A Review. *Food Res. Int.* **2017**, *101*, 1–16. [CrossRef]

87. Cheynier, V. Phenolic Compounds: From Plants to Foods. *Phytochem. Rev.* **2012**, *11*, 153–177. [CrossRef]

88. Johnson, J.B.; Skylas, D.J.; Mani, J.S.; Xiang, J.; Walsh, K.B.; Naiker, M. Phenolic Profiles of Ten Australian Faba Bean Varieties. *Molecules* **2021**, *26*, 4642. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

89. Duc, G. Faba Bean (*Vicia Faba* L.). *Field Crops Res.* **1997**, *53*, 99–109. [CrossRef]

90. Sreerama, Y.N.; Sashikala, V.B.; Pratape, V.M. Variability in the Distribution of Phenolic Compounds in Milled Fractions of Chickpea and Horse Gram: Evaluation of Their Antioxidant Properties. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2010**, *58*, 8322–8330. [CrossRef]

91. Boudjou, S.; Oomah, B.D.; Zaidi, F.; Hosseinian, F. Phenolics Content and Antioxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Activities of Legume Fractions. *Food Chem.* **2013**, *138*, 1543–1550. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

92. Ferrer-Gallego, R.; Hernández-Hierro, J.M.; Rivas-Gonzalo, J.C.; Escribano-Bailón, M.T. Sensory Evaluation of Bitterness and Astringency Sub-Qualities of Wine Phenolic Compounds: Synergistic Effect and Modulation by Aromas. *Food Res. Int.* **2014**, *62*, 1100–1107. [CrossRef]

93. Huang, C.J.; Zayas, J.F. Phenolic Acid Contributions to Taste Characteristics of Corn Germ Protein Flour Products. *J. Food Sci.* **1991**, *56*, 1308–1310. [CrossRef]

94. López-Amorós, M.L.; Hernández, T.; Estrella, I. Effect of Germination on Legume Phenolic Compounds and Their Antioxidant Activity. *J. Food Compos. Anal.* **2006**, *19*, 277–283. [CrossRef]

95. Troszyńska, A.; Amarowicz, R.; Lamparski, G.; Wołejszo, A.; Baryłko-Pikielna, N. Investigation of Astringency of Extracts Obtained from Selected Tannins-Rich Legume Seeds. *Food Qual. Prefer.* **2006**, *17*, 31–35. [CrossRef]

96. Quintero-Soto, M.F.; Saracho-Peña, A.G.; Chavez-Ontiveros, J.; Garzon-Tiznado, J.A.; Pineda-Hidalgo, K.V.; Delgado-Vargas, F.; Lopez-Valenzuela, J.A. Phenolic Profiles and Their Contribution to the Antioxidant Activity of Selected Chickpea Genotypes from Mexico and ICRISAT Collections. *Plant Foods Hum. Nutr.* **2018**, *73*, 122–129. [CrossRef]

97. Giusti, F.; Capuano, E.; Sagratini, G.; Pellegrini, N. A Comprehensive Investigation of the Behaviour of Phenolic Compounds in Legumes during Domestic Cooking and in Vitro Digestion. *Food Chem.* **2019**, *285*, 458–467. [CrossRef]
98. Abu-Reidah, I.; Contreras, M.d.M.; Arráez-Román, D.; Fernández-Gutiérrez, A.; Segura Carretero, A. UHPLC-ESI-QTOF-MS Based Metabolic Profiling of Vicia Faba L. *Fabaceae*) Seeds as a Key Strategy for Characterization in Foodomics. *Electrophoresis* **2014**, *35*, 1571–1581. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

99. Pandey, R.P.; Parajuli, P.; Shin, J.Y.; Lee, J.; Lee, S.; Hong, Y.-S.; Park, Y.I.; Kim, J.S.; Sohng, J.K. Enzymatic Biosynthesis of Novel Resveratrol Glucoside and Glycoside Derivatives. *Appl. Environ. Microbiol.* **2014**, *80*, 7235–7243. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

100. Poklar Ulrih, N.; Opara, R.; Skrt, M.; Košmerl, T.; Wondra, M.; Abram, V. Part I. Polyphenols Composition and Antioxidant Potential during 'Blaufränkisch' Grape Maceration and Red Wine Maturation, and the Effects of Trans-Resveratrol Addition. *Food Chem. Toxicol.* **2020**, *137*, 111122. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

101. Sahar, A.; ur Rahman, U.; Ishaq, A.; Munir, M.S.; Aadil, R.M. 12-Health-Promoting Perspectives of Fruit-Based Functional Energy Beverages. In *Sports and Energy Drinks*; Grumezescu, A.M., Holban, A.M., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2019; pp. 399–439. ISBN 978-0-12-815851-7.

102. Amarowicz, R.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T.; Troszyńska, A. Antioxidant Activity of Extract of Adzuki Bean and Its Fractions. *J. Food Lipids* **2008**, *15*, 119–136. [CrossRef]

103. Dueñas, M.; Sarmento, T.; Aguilera, Y.; Benitez, V.; Mollá, E.; Esteban, R.M.; Martín-Cabrejas, M.A. Impact of Cooking and Germination on Phenolic Composition and Dietary Fibre Fractions in Dark Beans (*Phaseolus vulgaris* L.) and Lentils (*Lens culinaris* L.). *LWT* **2016**, *66*, 72–78. [CrossRef]

104. Dueñas, M.; Martínez-Villaluenga, C.; Limón, R.I.; Peñas, E.; Frias, J. Effect of Germination and Elicitation on Phenolic Composition and Bioactivity of Kidney Beans. *Food Res. Int.* **2015**, *70*, 55–63. [CrossRef]

105. Liu, R.; Cai, Z.; Xu, B. Characterization and Quantification of Flavonoids and Saponins in Adzuki Bean (*Vigna angularis* L.) by HPLC-DAD-ESI-MSn Analysis. *Chem. Cent. J.* **2017**, *11*, 93. [CrossRef]

106. Peleg, H.; Gacon, K.; Schlich, P.; Noble, A.C. Bitterness and Astringency of Flavan-3-ol Monomers, Dimers and Trimers. *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **1999**, *79*, 1123–1128. [CrossRef]

107. Scharbert, S.; Holzmann, N.; Hofmann, T. Identification of the Astringent Taste Compounds in Black Tea Infusions by Combining Instrumental Analysis and Human Bioresponse. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2004**, *52*, 3498–3508. [CrossRef]

108. Aguilera, Y.; Estrella, I.; Benitez, V.; Esteban, R.M.; Martín-Cabrejas, M.A. Bioactive Phenolic Compounds and Functional Properties of Dehydrated Bean Flours. *Food Res. Int.* **2011**, *44*, 774–780. [CrossRef]

109. Sangsukiam, T.; Duangmal, K. Changes in Bioactive Compounds and Health-Promoting Activities in Adzuki Bean: Effect of Cooking Conditions and in Vitro Simulated Gastrointestinal Digestion. *Food Res. Int.* **2022**, *157*, 111371. [CrossRef]

110. García-Lafuente, A.; Moro, C.; Manchón, N.; Gonzalo-Ruiz, A.; Villares, A.; Guillamón, E.; Rostagno, M.; Mateo-Vivaracho, L. In Vitro Anti-Inflammatory Activity of Phenolic Rich Extracts from White and Red Common Beans. *Food Chem.* **2014**, *161*, 216–223. [CrossRef]

111. Amarowicz, R.; Shahidi, F. Antioxidant Activity of Faba Bean Extract and Fractions Thereof. *JFB* **2018**, *2*, 112–118. [CrossRef]

112. Amarowicz, R.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T.; Dueñas, M.; Troszyńska, A.; Kosińska, A.; Pegg, R.B. Antioxidant Activity of a Red Lentil Extract and Its Fractions. *Int. J. Mol. Sci.* **2009**, *10*, 5513–5527. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

113. Dueñas, M.; Hernández, T.; Estrella, I. Changes in the Content of Bioactive Polyphenolic Compounds of Lentils by the Action of Exogenous Enzymes. Effect on Their Antioxidant Activity. *Food Chem.* **2007**, *101*, 90–97. [CrossRef]

114. Dueñas, M.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T. Occurrence of Phenolic Compounds in the Seed Coat and the Cotyledon of Peas (*Pisum sativum* L.). *Eur. Food Res. Technol.* **2004**, *219*, 116–123. [CrossRef]

115. Valente, I.M.; Cabrita, A.R.J.; Malushi, N.; Oliveira, H.M.; Papa, L.; Rodrigues, J.A.; Fonseca, A.J.M.; Maia, M.R.G. Unravelling the Phytonutrients and Antioxidant Properties of European *Vicia Faba* L. Seeds. *Food Res. Int.* **2019**, *116*, 888–896. [CrossRef]

116. Amarowicz, R.; Estrella, I.; Hernández, T.; Robredo, S.; Troszyńska, A.; Kosińska, A.; Pegg, R.B. Free Radical-Scavenging Capacity, Antioxidant Activity, and Phenolic Composition of Green Lentil (*Lens Culinaris*). *Food Chem.* **2010**, *121*, 705–711. [CrossRef]

117. Glendinning, J.I. Is the Bitter Rejection Response Always Adaptive? *Physiol. Behav.* **1994**, *56*, 1217–1227. [CrossRef]

118. Mirali, M.; Ambrose, S.J.; Wood, S.A.; Vandenberg, A.; Purves, R.W. Development of a Fast Extraction Method and Optimization of Liquid Chromatography–Mass Spectrometry for the Analysis of Phenolic Compounds in Lentil Seed Coats. *J. Chromatogr. B* **2014**, *969*, 149–161. [CrossRef]

119. Bohin, M.C.; Roland, W.S.U.; Gruppen, H.; Gouka, R.J.; van der Hijden, H.T.W.M.; Dekker, P.; Smit, G.; Vincken, J.-P. Evaluation of the Bitter-Masking Potential of Food Proteins for EGCG by a Cell-Based Human Bitter Taste Receptor Assay and Binding Studies. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2013**, *61*, 10010–10017. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

120. Liggins, J.; Bluck, L.J.C.; Runswick, S.; Atkinson, C.; Coward, W.A.; Bingham, S.A. Daidzein and Genistein Contents of Vegetables. *Br. J. Nutr.* **2000**, *84*, 717–725. [CrossRef]

121. Yang, S.-E.; Lien, J.-C.; Tsai, C.-W.; Wu, C.-R. Therapeutic Potential and Mechanisms of Novel Simple O-Substituted Isoflavones against Cerebral Ischemia Reperfusion. *Int. J. Mol. Sci.* **2022**, *23*, 10394. [CrossRef]

122. Guajardo-Flores, D.; García-Patiño, M.; Serna-Guerrero, D.; Gutiérrez-Uribe, J.A.; Serna-Saldívar, S.O. Characterization and Quantification of Saponins and Flavonoids in Sprouts, Seed Coats and Cotyledons of Germinated Black Beans. *Food Chem.* **2012**, *134*, 1312–1319. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

123. Sarni-Manchado, P.; Cheynier, V. *Les Polyphénols en Agroalimentaire*; Éditions Tec & Doc: Paris, France, 2006; ISBN 978-2-7430-0805-5.

124. Mattila, P.H.; Pihlava, J.-M.; Hellström, J.; Nurmi, M.; Eurola, M.; Mäkinen, S.; Jalava, T.; Pihlanto, A. Contents of Phytochemicals and Antinutritional Factors in Commercial Protein-Rich Plant Products. *Food Qual. Prefer* **2018**, *2*, 213–219. [CrossRef]
125. Brossaud, F.; Cheynier, V.; Noble, A.C. Bitterness and Astringency of Grape and Wine Polyphenols. *Aust. J. Grape Wine Res.* **2001**, *7*, 33–39. [CrossRef]

126. Fischer, U.; Noble, A. The Effect of Ethanol, Catechin Concentration, and PH on Sourness and Bitterness of Wine. *Am. J. Enol. Vitic.* **1994**, *45*, 6–10. [CrossRef]

127. Cristian, J.-M.; Rosalva, M.-E.; Anaberta, C.M.; Mercedes, M.; Mercedes, M.P.; Gloria, D.-O. Effect of Aqueous, Acid, and Alkaline Thermal Treatments on Antinutritional Factors Content and Protein Quality in Lupinus Campestris Seed Flour. *J. Agric. Food Chem.* **2010**, *58*, 1741–1745. [CrossRef]

128. Magalhães, S.C.Q.; Fernandes, F.; Cabrita, A.R.J.; Fonseca, A.J.M.; Valentão, P.; Andrade, P.B. Alkaloids in the Valorization of European *Lupinus* Spp. Seeds Crop. *Ind. Crops Prod.* **2017**, *95*, 286–295. [CrossRef]

129. Frick, K.M.; Foley, R.C.; Kamphuis, L.G.; Siddique, K.H.M.; Garg, G.; Singh, K.B. Characterization of the Genetic Factors Affecting Quinolizidine Alkaloid Biosynthesis and Its Response to Abiotic Stress in Narrow-Leafed Lupin (*Lupinus angustifolius* L.). *Plant Cell Environ.* **2018**, *41*, 2155–2168. [CrossRef]

130. Sbihi, H.M.; Nehdi, I.A.; Tan, C.P.; Al-Resayes, S.I. Bitter and Sweet Lupin (*Lupinus albus* L.) Seeds and Seed Oils: A Comparison Study of Their Compositions and Physicochemical Properties. *Ind. Crops Prod.* **2013**, *49*, 573–579. [CrossRef]

131. Pulkkinen, M.; Gautam, M.; Lampi, A.-M.; Ollilainen, V.; Stoddard, F.; Sontag-Strohm, T.; Salovaara, H.; Piironen, V. Determination of Vicine and Convicine from Faba Bean with an Optimized High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method. *Food Res. Int.* **2015**, *76*, 168–177. [CrossRef]

132. Duc, G.; Marget, P.; Esnault, R.; Guen, J.L.; Bastianelli, D. Genetic Variability for Feeding Value of Faba Bean Seeds (*Vicia faba*): Comparative Chemical Composition of Isogenics Involving Zero-Tannin and Zero-Vicine Genes. *J. Agric. Sci.* **1999**, *133*, 185–196. [CrossRef]

133. Purves, R.W.; Khazaei, H.; Vandenberg, A. Quantification of Vicine and Convicine in Faba Bean Seeds Using Hydrophilic Interaction Liquid Chromatography. *Food Chem.* **2018**, *240*, 1137–1145. [CrossRef]

134. Multari, S.; Stewart, D.; Russell, W.R. Potential of Fava Bean as Future Protein Supply to Partially Replace Meat Intake in the Human Diet. *Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.* **2015**, *14*, 511–522. [CrossRef]

135. Wink, M. Chemical Defense of Lupins. Mollusc-Repellent Properties of Quinolizidine Alkaloids. *Z. Naturforsch. C J. Biosci.* **1984**, *39*, 553–558. [CrossRef]

136. Jiménez-Martínez, C.; Hernández-Sánchez, H.; Dávila-Ortiz, G. Diminution of Quinolizidine Alkaloids, Oligosaccharides and Phenolic Compounds from Two Species of *Lupinus* and Soybean Seeds by the Effect of Rhizopus Oligosporus. *J. Sci. Food Agric.* **2007**, *87*, 1315–1322. [CrossRef]

137. Abd Allah, M.A.; Foda, Y.H.; Abu Salem, F.M.; Abd Allah, Z.S. Treatments for Reducing Total Vicine in Egyptian Faba Bean (Giza 2 Variety). *Plant Food Hum. Nutr.* **1988**, *38*, 201–210. [CrossRef]

138. Wang, Y.; Tuccillo, F.; Lampi, A.-M.; Knaapila, A.; Pulkkinen, M.; Kariluoto, S.; Coda, R.; Edelmann, M.; Jouppila, K.; Sandell, M.; et al. Flavor Challenges in Extruded Plant-Based Meat Alternatives: A Review. *Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf.* **2022**, *21*, 2898–2929. [CrossRef]

139. Kim, I.M.-R.; Kawamura, Y.; Lee, C.-H. Isolation and Identification of Bitter Peptides of Tryptic Hydrolysate of Soybean 11S Glycinin by Reverse-Phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography. *J. Food Sci.* **2003**, *68*, 2416–2422. [CrossRef]

140. Meinlschmidt, P.; Schweiggert-Weisz, U.; Eisner, P. Soy Protein Hydrolysates Fermentation: Effect of Debittering and Degradation of Major Soy Allergens. *LWT* **2016**, *71*, 202–212. [CrossRef]

141. Thomas-Danguin, T.; Barba, C.; Salles, C.; Guichard, E. Perception of Mixtures of Odorants and Tastants: Sensory and Analytical Points of View. In *Flavour*; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, West Sussex, UK, 2016; pp. 319–340. ISBN 978-1-118-92938-4.

142. Thomas-Danguin, T.; Sinding, C.; Tournier, C.; Saint-Eve, A. 5-Multimodal Interactions. In *Flavor From Food to Behaviors, Wellbeing and Health*; Etiévant, P., Guichard, E., Salles, C., Voilley, A., Eds.; Woodhead Publishing Series in Food Science, Technology and Nutrition; Woodhead Publishing; Elsevier Ltd.: Duxford, UK, 2016; pp. 121–141. ISBN 978-0-08-100295-7.

**Disclaimer/Publisher's Note:** The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.