## 2 Results and Discussion  
### Sensory Analysis  
Sensory analyses were carried out to evaluate the ability of the respondents to differentiate between the authentic and unauthentic Harumanis mangoes. In these analyses, only the Tong Dam mango was used as a representative of the unauthentic Harumanis mangoes, because according to Perlis Department of Agriculture, the Tong Dam mango is the unauthentic Harumanis that most resembles the authentic Harumanis mango. In addition, at the time the sensory analyses were carried out, Susu mangoes were not available in the market yet; thus, the sensory analyses were only done between the Tong Dam and Harumanis mangoes. The first sensory analysis done was a simple difference test called 'Duo-Trio Test': this was performed on 30 respondents whereby two mangoes (Harumanis and Tong Dam) were given to be evaluated along with a reference sample (Tong Dam). Both Harumanis and Tong Dam mangoes were labeled with different codings, and the respondents were asked to choose which sample was identical to the reference sample. The result obtained in Table 1 showed that 17 out of 30 respondents managed to choose the correct sample that matched the reference sample (which was the Tong Dam samples), whereas 43% of the respondents got the wrong answer by choosing the Harumanis mango. This test gave an insignificant value, suggesting the Harumanis and Tong Dam mangoes were difficult to be differentiated physically by a lay person.  
In addition, the acceptance tests that evaluated the preferences of the respondents towards the authentic and unauthentic Harumanis were also carried out using a 9-point hedonic sensory evaluation. Two tests were done using whole and slices of Harumanis and Tong Dam mangoes. In this test, the respondents were given a 9-point hedonic sensory evaluation that comprised a few questions to assess their preferences towards these mangoes. Five parameters were evaluated using whole mango samples which were colour, aroma, physical appearance, texture and overall acceptability. On the other hand, taste, colour, aroma, texture and overall acceptability were the parameters evaluating the respondents' preferences of the slices of mangoes samples.  
As shown in Figure 2a, only aroma recorded a significant difference between the authentic Harumanis and Tong Dam samples, while the rest of the parameters showed an insignificant difference. The significant differences of the two samples were denoted by the difference of the alphabets used [12]. This result once again suggested that the Tong Dam and Harumanis mangoes were almost identical and can only be differentiated using an aroma parameter. Apparently, this was in line with the suggestion from the Department of Agriculture in Perlis, which asked consumers to buy only ripe Harumanis, given that the aroma is the most significant parameter to differentiate between the authentic and unauthentic Harumanis mangoes. On the other hand, when slices of both mangoes were sampled in the preference test, the outcome had different findings, as shown in Figure 2b. The four parameters of colour, taste, texture, and the overall acceptability of the product were significantly different, suggesting that the slices of Harumanis mangoes were tastier to the consumers than the Tong Dam mangoes. The three sensory analysis results showed quite clearly that the tendency of the consumers to be misled by irresponsible sellers is high, because the unauthentic and authentic Harumanis mangoes are almost identical, with only the aroma as a significant parameter that can differentiate the two varieties. Thus, a more efficient technique is required.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Reference** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Number of Agree Judgments**} \\ \hline Tong Dam & Tong Dam & Harumanis \\
30 & 17 & 13 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 1: Number of agree judgment of respondents (n = 30) on a Duo Trio test.