## 3 Results and Discussion
### Sensory Quality  
The Quantitative Descriptive Analysis method was used to conduct a sensory evaluation of the experimental sausage samples after 14 days, and the results are presented in Figure 2. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline  & **Treatment** & & **Storage Time (Days)** & & **Treatment** & **Time** & **Treatment** \(\times\) **Time** \\ \cline{2-8}  & & **0** & **7** & **14** & \(p\) & \(p\) & \(p\) \\ \hline L* & C & 52.78 \(\pm\) 0.64 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 52.29 \(\pm\) 1.34 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 54.42 \(\pm\) 1.27 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & *** & *** & **\\  & V1 & 53.94 \(\pm\) 2.07 \({}^{\text{bE}}\) & 51.78 \(\pm\) 2.27 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 53.97 \(\pm\) 2.11 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & & & \\  & V3 & 53.60 \(\pm\) 1.62 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & 52.27 \(\pm\) 1.73 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 55.49 \(\pm\) 1.42 \({}^{\text{bC}}\) & & & \\  & V5 & 54.67 \(\pm\) 1.96 \({}^{\text{CB}}\) & 52.47 \(\pm\) 1.72 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 55.34 \(\pm\) 1.33 \({}^{\text{BB}}\) & & & \\ \hline a* & C & 18.58 \(\pm\) 0.44 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & 18.91 \(\pm\) 0.94 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & 16.93 \(\pm\) 1.10 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & *** & *** & *** \\  & V1 & 18.90 \(\pm\) 0.91 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & 18.75 \(\pm\) 1.09 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & 18.88 \(\pm\) 0.98 \({}^{\text{BA}}\) & & & \\  & V3 & 19.21 \(\pm\) 0.74 \({}^{\text{bA}}\) & 19.63 \(\pm\) 0.84 \({}^{\text{BA}}\) & 19.23 \(\pm\) 0.77 \({}^{\text{bA}}\) & & & \\  & V5 & 19.57 \(\pm\) 1.37 \({}^{\text{cA}}\) & 19.70 \(\pm\) 0.82 \({}^{\text{BA}}\) & 19.52 \(\pm\) 0.76 \({}^{\text{cA}}\) & & & \\ \hline b* & C & 1.82 \(\pm\) 0.44 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 2.77 \(\pm\) 0.94 \({}^{\text{BB}}\) & 2.52 \(\pm\) 1.10 \({}^{\text{BB}}\) & *** & *** & * \\  & V1 & 1.83 \(\pm\) 0.47 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & 2.40 \(\pm\) 0.72 \({}^{\text{AB}}\) & 1.91 \(\pm\) 0.58 \({}^{\text{AA}}\) & & & \\  & V3 & 2.47 \(\pm\) 0.54 \({}^{\text{BA}}\) & 3.38 \(\pm\) 0.46 \({}^{\text{CB}}\) & 2.68 \(\pm\) 0.55 \({}^{\text{BA}}\) & & & \\  & V5 & 3.01 \(\pm\) 0.57 \({}^{\text{cA}}\) & 3.56 \(\pm\) 0.59 \({}^{\text{CB}}\) & 3.18 \(\pm\) 0.64 \({}^{\text{CA}}\) & & & \\ \hline \end{tabular}  
* \({}^{\text{cA}}\) Means in the same columns with different superscript small letters differ significantly (\(p<0.05\)); A-C Means in the same row with different superscript capital letters differ significantly (\(p<0.05\)); C—control sausage without apple vinegar; V1, V3, V5—sausage with apple vinegar 1, 3, and 5%, respectively. \(p\): significance of effects; treatment; time; treatment-time interaction;
* \(p<0.05\); *
* \(p<0.01\); *  
\end{table} 
Table 6: Color parameters of sausage (means \(\pm\) standard deviation error). Sensory characteristics such as taste, appearance, texture, color, and smell are essential motivating factors that drive consumers toward the shopping and consumption of food products [49; 57]. The products exhibited a pronounced smoked meat flavor profile, with a comparatively lower intensity of cured meat notes. The sensory analysis further revealed the presence of fatty, acidic, and pungent odors, amongst others, albeit at a lesser intensity. A slice of sausage showed the pink color of the meat and the bright white color of the fat. The V1 treatment showed the highest compactness of sausage slice, while significantly lower values were found in the V3 treatment. The juiciiness and intensity of the smoked meat flavor were highly evaluated in all treatments, with around 5.7 c.u. and 7.2 c.u., respectively. However, no significant differences were found between the particular samples (\(p>0.05\)). The addition of apple vinegar to the sausage lowered the intensity of the cured meat flavor. The flavor of food is a manifestation of the complex interactions between aroma, taste, and oral sensations. Aroma, in particular, is associated with volatile compounds, while taste is linked with non-volatile, high-molecular-weight components [58]. Lipids, which are present in most food items, play a crucial role in determining the taste and aroma of food.