Characterization and comparison of cold brew and cold drip coffee extraction methods
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Each region of the world has its own methods, protocols, instruments and procedures regarding how to brew coffee. The final result in the cup is strongly affected by the extraction method, and many studies have focused on this subject. However, few studies have investigated slow, cold extraction methods, despite their popularity among baristas. Therefore, the present study aimed to characterize and compare two cold extraction methods: cold brew and cold drip. RESULTS: Physical and chemical analyses were used to describe coffee beverages in terms of pH, total solids, refractive index, density and viscosity. Caffeine and cinnamic acids were quantified using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)/diode array detector and HPLC/mass spectrometry. A sensory evaluation included aroma, flavor and textural attributes. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences were found in the chemical and physical parameters, both between and within the two methods, as a function of the extraction temperature and contact time. Similarly, the sensory evaluation found differences in flavor profiles, as measured in terms of bitterness, sweetness, sourness and global intensity. © 2018 Society of Chemical Industry.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The difference in caffeine content between the CB and CM samples was considered to be due to the extraction temperature.
“this difference in caffeine content between the CB and CM samples was considered to be due to the extraction temperature.”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 26 · Cited by 107
- Authors
- Angeloni, G., Guerrini, L., Masella, P., Innocenti, M., Bellumori, M., & Parenti, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Florence (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Angeloni, Giulia
- ORCID
- Venue
- Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-08-06
- Volume
- 99
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 391-399
- ISSN
- 0022-5142 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0010
- OpenAlex
- W2808646378
- Cited by
- 107
- References
- 26
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 6.45
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Florence Research (University of Florence) (submittedVersion)
- Padua Research Archive (University of Padova) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Coffee research and impacts
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Fermentation and Sensory Analysis
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food Chemistry and Fat Analysis
- Keywords
- cold brew coffee, caffeine content, cinnamic acid, sensory evaluation, bitterness, extraction temperature, contact time, coffee flavor
- MeSH terms
- Chromatography, High Pressure Liquid, Coffee, Cooking, Flavoring Agents, Humans, Seeds, Mass Spectrometry, Taste, Coffea
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review