`
A study conducted by the UC Davis Olive Oil Chemistry Laboratory and the Australian Oils Research Laboratory found that a high percentage of imported and California olive oils failed to meet the extra virgin grade, causing concern among olive oil merchants. The study highlighted the importance of conducting sensory and chemical tests to ensure the quality and authenticity of olive oil, with specific recommendations for choosing tests based on the purpose and source of the oil. Additionally, the study emphasized the significance of monitoring values such as free fatty acids, peroxide value, and UV absorbance to determine the quality and shelf life of olive oil.
On July 15th 2010, the UC Davis Olive Oil Chemistry Laboratory in collaboration with the Australian Oils Research Laboratory published a study of extra virgin olive oil sold in retail stores in California. Many people were surprised to learn that 69% of imported oils and 10% of California oils analyzed in the study failed to meet the extra virgin grade. Quite a few olive oil merchants became anxious about their olive oil inventories.
Our laboratory analyzes domestic and imported olive oil samples to determine oil grade. We routinely perform the standard International Olive Council’s (IOC) chemical grading tests (free acidity, peroxides and UV absorption) used in the UC Davis study. Our experience allows us to see the analytical profile of quite a few olive oils, from the very fresh to pretty old.
We received inquiries from merchants concerned about ensuring quality for their customers and managing the risk of mislabeled olive oil. Our goal in this paper is to provide a practical perspective, drawn from the study results, that may be useful for retailers and buyers interested in minimizing their risk at an affordable cost.
First, an overview of the availability and costs of the tests performed in the Davis study:
Summarizing the study results: 52 oils were tested, only 5 brands from California; 30 were found defective by sensory evaluation; 11 of those 30 oils also failed USDA/IOC chemical tests. The German DAGs test failed 23 of those 30 oils and the PPP test failed 15 of them. For clarity, grading works like this: if a single criterion of the sensory or chemical criteria is not met, the oil will fail to meet the stated grade and would be assigned a lower one.
The UC Davis report provides evidence as to:
The sensorial panel provided a very stringent detection of non-extra virgin oil
Oils that passed all chemical tests (IOC/USDA standards, plus DAGs and PPP) failed to meet theextra virgin olive oil standards by an IOC-recognized tasting panel. Trained tasters can find defects that go undetected by chemical means, such as ‘musty’, or ‘rancidity’ in old oils .
German/Australian method appear more stringent than current standards
Though neither endorsed by IOC nor adopted by USDA, the German DAGs test appear to be very adept at discriminating virgin grade among the oils tested. Let’s stay tuned to its adoption in the US.
Among USDA/IOC quality tests, UV Absorption was the most discriminatory
UV absorption at 232 nanometers (K232) was the most discriminatory (10 out of 30) of non-extra virgin oils in this study. UV absorption is an inexpensive test that is most informative and cost effective to evaluate older oils, especially when age, storage or provenance is in question.
Among USDA/IOC quality tests, most oils passed Free Fatty Acids(FFA) and Peroxide Value (PV)
FFA and PV are essential to evaluate fresh oils because those showing high values will deteriorate more quickly in storage. But for oils of unknown age and origin, these values are dicer, and refining can also remove high acidity and peroxides.
Going beyond the study: if you decide to have olive oils tested, how could you choose what tests to select? What should you test for?