-
If you need help identifying a pepper, disease, or plant issue, please post in Identification.
scovilles How, Who and/or What Tests Actual Scoville Units?
- Thread starter Helltaco
- Start date
I found this @ WWW...
Capsaicin is present in large quantities in the placental tissue (which holds the seeds), the internal membranes and, to a lesser extent, the other fleshy parts of the frutsof plants in the genus Capsicum . The seeds themselves do not produce any capsaicin, although the highest concentration of capsaicin can be found in the white pith of the inner wall, where the seeds are attached
Yhea, and the test is very expensive. That's why in my opinon there are well.... so many differant opinons about differant peppers. The process is not standardized and it takes alot of capital. So let the debates rage..........-high pressure liquid chromatography aka HPLC
-laboratories
-a machine
Wiki is your friend~
edit- typo
Tests arent that expensice. 50$ from what I´ve heard and that makes sense.
If the laboratory has an already established method, its really not all that complex.
Here is a short, decent description:
http://www.chilepepperinstitute.org/content/files/MeasuringHeat.pdf
That said, you dont really messure SHU on a HPLC system, you determine the amount of the different [background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]Capsaicinoids in mg/kg and caculate the total SHU from it.[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]I´ve never seen something like that published, it would be interesting and alot more insightful to see what peppers have which different [/background][background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]Capsaicinoids in which quantities.[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]Could explain the different types of "burns", like immediate vs building heat and such.[/background]
If the laboratory has an already established method, its really not all that complex.
Here is a short, decent description:
http://www.chilepepperinstitute.org/content/files/MeasuringHeat.pdf
That said, you dont really messure SHU on a HPLC system, you determine the amount of the different [background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]Capsaicinoids in mg/kg and caculate the total SHU from it.[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]I´ve never seen something like that published, it would be interesting and alot more insightful to see what peppers have which different [/background][background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]Capsaicinoids in which quantities.[/background]
[background=rgb(255, 244, 228)]Could explain the different types of "burns", like immediate vs building heat and such.[/background]
Here is a list of the different capcaisinoids and some info from Wikipedia. I am a PhD biochemist with 6 years of post-doctoral training and spent 15 years in Academia, so ask me questions and I`ll try to find it out and explain it as best I can. One thing I can`t find is how each different member of the vanilloid (capsaicin) family acts to give different sensations when you eat them.
Capsaicin is the main capsaicinoid in chili peppers, followed by dihydrocapsaicin. These two compounds are also about twice as potent to the taste and nerves as the minor capsaicinoids nordihydrocapsaicin, homodihydrocapsaicin, and homocapsaicin. Dilute solutions of pure capsaicinoids produced different types of pungency; however, these differences were not noted using more concentrated solutions.
Capsaicin is believed to be synthesized in the interlocular septum of chili peppers by addition of a branched-chain fatty acid to vanillylamine; specifically, capsaicin is made from vanillylamine and 8-methyl-6-nonenoyl CoA.[sup][16][/sup][sup][17][/sup] Biosynthesis depends on the gene AT3, which resides at the pun1 locus, and which encodes a putative acyltransferase.[sup][18][/sup]
Besides the six natural capsaicinoids, one synthetic member of the capsaicinoid family exists. Vanillylamide of n-nonanoic acid (VNA, also PAVA) is used as a reference substance for determining the relative pungency of capsaicinoids.
I`ve put the 3 references indicated as 16, 17 and 18 below the table.
Capsaicinoid name Abbrev. Typical
relative
amount Scoville
heat units Chemical structure Capsaicin C 69% 16,000,000
Dihydrocapsaicin DHC 22% 15,000,000 
Nordihydrocapsaicin NDHC 7% 9,100,000 
Homodihydrocapsaicin HDHC 1% 8,600,000 
Homocapsaicin HC 1% 8,600,000 
Nonivamide PAVA 9,200,000 
The burning and painful sensations associated with capsaicin result from its chemical interaction with sensory neurons. Capsaicin, as a member of the vanilloid family, binds to a receptorcalled the vanilloid receptor subtype 1 (VR1).[sup][46][/sup] First cloned in 1997, VR1 is an ion channel-type receptor. VR1, which can also be stimulated with heat and physical abrasion, permits cationsto pass through the cell membrane and into the cell when activated. The resulting depolarization of the neuron stimulates it to signal the brain. By binding to the VR1 receptor, the capsaicin molecule produces similar sensations to those of excessive heat or abrasive damage, explaining why the spiciness of capsaicin is described as a burning sensation.
Early research showed capsaicin to evoke a strikingly long-onset current in comparison to other chemical agonists, suggesting the involvement of a significant rate-limiting factor.[sup][47][/sup]Subsequently, the VR1 ion channel has been shown to be a member of the superfamily of TRP ion channels, and as such is now referred to as TRPV1. There are a number of differentTRP ion channels that have been shown to be sensitive to different ranges of temperature and probably are responsible for our range of temperature sensation. Thus, capsaicin does not actually cause a chemical burn, or indeed any direct tissue damage at all, when chili peppers are the source of exposure. The inflammation resulting from exposure to capsaicin is believed to be the result of the body's reaction to nerve excitement. For example, the mode of action of capsaicin in inducing bronchoconstriction is thought to involve stimulation of C fibres [sup][48][/sup]culminating in the release of neuropeptides. Essentially, the body inflames tissues as if it has undergone a burn or abrasion and the resulting inflammation can cause tissue damage in cases of extreme exposure, as is the case for many substances that cause the body to trigger an inflammatory response.
Capsaicin is the main capsaicinoid in chili peppers, followed by dihydrocapsaicin. These two compounds are also about twice as potent to the taste and nerves as the minor capsaicinoids nordihydrocapsaicin, homodihydrocapsaicin, and homocapsaicin. Dilute solutions of pure capsaicinoids produced different types of pungency; however, these differences were not noted using more concentrated solutions.
Capsaicin is believed to be synthesized in the interlocular septum of chili peppers by addition of a branched-chain fatty acid to vanillylamine; specifically, capsaicin is made from vanillylamine and 8-methyl-6-nonenoyl CoA.[sup][16][/sup][sup][17][/sup] Biosynthesis depends on the gene AT3, which resides at the pun1 locus, and which encodes a putative acyltransferase.[sup][18][/sup]
Besides the six natural capsaicinoids, one synthetic member of the capsaicinoid family exists. Vanillylamide of n-nonanoic acid (VNA, also PAVA) is used as a reference substance for determining the relative pungency of capsaicinoids.
I`ve put the 3 references indicated as 16, 17 and 18 below the table.
Capsaicinoid name Abbrev. Typical
relative
amount Scoville
heat units Chemical structure Capsaicin C 69% 16,000,000
Dihydrocapsaicin DHC 22% 15,000,000 
Nordihydrocapsaicin NDHC 7% 9,100,000 
Homodihydrocapsaicin HDHC 1% 8,600,000 
Homocapsaicin HC 1% 8,600,000 
Nonivamide PAVA 9,200,000 
The burning and painful sensations associated with capsaicin result from its chemical interaction with sensory neurons. Capsaicin, as a member of the vanilloid family, binds to a receptorcalled the vanilloid receptor subtype 1 (VR1).[sup][46][/sup] First cloned in 1997, VR1 is an ion channel-type receptor. VR1, which can also be stimulated with heat and physical abrasion, permits cationsto pass through the cell membrane and into the cell when activated. The resulting depolarization of the neuron stimulates it to signal the brain. By binding to the VR1 receptor, the capsaicin molecule produces similar sensations to those of excessive heat or abrasive damage, explaining why the spiciness of capsaicin is described as a burning sensation.
Early research showed capsaicin to evoke a strikingly long-onset current in comparison to other chemical agonists, suggesting the involvement of a significant rate-limiting factor.[sup][47][/sup]Subsequently, the VR1 ion channel has been shown to be a member of the superfamily of TRP ion channels, and as such is now referred to as TRPV1. There are a number of differentTRP ion channels that have been shown to be sensitive to different ranges of temperature and probably are responsible for our range of temperature sensation. Thus, capsaicin does not actually cause a chemical burn, or indeed any direct tissue damage at all, when chili peppers are the source of exposure. The inflammation resulting from exposure to capsaicin is believed to be the result of the body's reaction to nerve excitement. For example, the mode of action of capsaicin in inducing bronchoconstriction is thought to involve stimulation of C fibres [sup][48][/sup]culminating in the release of neuropeptides. Essentially, the body inflames tissues as if it has undergone a burn or abrasion and the resulting inflammation can cause tissue damage in cases of extreme exposure, as is the case for many substances that cause the body to trigger an inflammatory response.
- 16.^ Fujiwake H., Suzuki T., Oka S., Iwai K. (1980). "Enzymatic formation of capsaicinoid from vanillylamine and iso-type fatty acids by cell-free extracts of Capsicum annuum var. annuum cv. Karayatsubusa". Agricultural and Biological Chemistry 44: 2907–2912.
- 17.^ I. Guzman, P.W. Bosland, and M.A. O'Connell, "Chapter 8: Heat, Color, and Flavor Compounds in Capsicum Fruit" in David R. Gang, ed., Recent Advances in Phytochemistry 41: The Biological Activity of Phytochemicals (New York, New York: Springer, 2011), pages 117-118.
- 18.^ Stewart C, Kang BC, Liu K, et al. (June 2005). "The Pun1 gene for pungency in pepper encodes a putative acyltransferase". Plant J. 42 (5): 675–88. doi:10.1111/j.1365-313X.2005.02410.x. PMID 15918882.
- 46.^ Story GM, Crus-Orengo L (July–August 2007). "Feel the burn". American Scientist 95 (4): 326–333. doi:10.1511/2007.66.326.
- 47.^ Geppetti, Pierangelo & Holzer, Peter (1996). Neurogenic Inflammation. CRC Press, 1996.
- 48.^ Fuller, R. W., Dixon, C. M. S. & Barnes, P. J. (1985). Bronchoconstrictor response to inhaled capsaicin in humans. J. Appl. Physiol., 58, 1080–1084. PubMed, CAS, Web of Science® Times Cited: 174
So what your saying is, the affect on humans is due to a multiple of varibles depending on the pepper. Thats why it hard for peppers to replicate test results over and over. Varibles make your test limited to the growing enviorment and or conditions.
Terravexti - Exactly! As far as I can tell there are at least 6 capsaicin compounds in peppers. Nobody really knows which levels of each one are in all the various peppers and nobody knows how the relative ratios change, depending on specific growing conditions. In addition to that, no-one knows how the effects of the different capsaicins can be modulated by other things in the peppers that we don`t know about. Finally, there are many different types of TRP ion channels and nobody has a clue which ones the capsaicins act on and what this causes in a humans. Other than "HOT"
Given that the drug industry is slowly waking up to the use of capsaicin and its analogues in treating various diseases, I have no doubt that the effects of the different compounds found in hot peppers on the different TRP ion channels will be a hot area of research - what a Science Nerd almost-joke that was!
Helltaco - you probably saw more sense and less bulls**t in Grade School. So-called smart people are some of the biggest a**holes you could possibly wish to meet. Or not meet, if you are lucky.
To the original question - peppers are mashed up and the non-water soluble stuff is extracted (capsaicins plus a ton of other stuff). This extract is then run on the HPLC and separated in its main constituents. Depending on who is doing the analysis they will just look for capsaicin © and dihydrocapsaicin (DHC) or all 6 of the naturally occuring ones. But usually just the first 2, as they are the most abundant. The masses of each capsaicin compound per unit of extract can be calculated and then related back to the original pepper. They then use the C=16 million SHU and DHC=15 million SHU and work out a Scoville rating. My personal opinion is that the Scoville scale breaks down above a few hundred thousand, at most, in terms of the human response. Similarly, I don`t think the Scoville Scale is the linear it is presented to be. However, I have no data on this whatsoever and it`s just a thought.
Given that the drug industry is slowly waking up to the use of capsaicin and its analogues in treating various diseases, I have no doubt that the effects of the different compounds found in hot peppers on the different TRP ion channels will be a hot area of research - what a Science Nerd almost-joke that was!
Helltaco - you probably saw more sense and less bulls**t in Grade School. So-called smart people are some of the biggest a**holes you could possibly wish to meet. Or not meet, if you are lucky.
To the original question - peppers are mashed up and the non-water soluble stuff is extracted (capsaicins plus a ton of other stuff). This extract is then run on the HPLC and separated in its main constituents. Depending on who is doing the analysis they will just look for capsaicin © and dihydrocapsaicin (DHC) or all 6 of the naturally occuring ones. But usually just the first 2, as they are the most abundant. The masses of each capsaicin compound per unit of extract can be calculated and then related back to the original pepper. They then use the C=16 million SHU and DHC=15 million SHU and work out a Scoville rating. My personal opinion is that the Scoville scale breaks down above a few hundred thousand, at most, in terms of the human response. Similarly, I don`t think the Scoville Scale is the linear it is presented to be. However, I have no data on this whatsoever and it`s just a thought.
salsalady
Business Member
Nigel, thanks for sharing all the scientific stuff I can never find.
justmyhumbletakeonthings-
There are several "capsaicinoid compounds" of which "CAPSAICIN" is usually the most prominent. Which might be why capsaicinoid compounds get generically referred to as "capsaicin".
I was just at the Fiery Foods Show in NM and I was amazed at how many people asked me "what's capsaicin?"
Chileheads have known for a long time that different chiles burn differently. I don't think there is a"definitive guide to capsiaicinoid breakdowns by chile". That's probably still in the "editing" phase. But chileheads know that different chiles burn differently.
justmyhumbletakeonthings-
There are several "capsaicinoid compounds" of which "CAPSAICIN" is usually the most prominent. Which might be why capsaicinoid compounds get generically referred to as "capsaicin".
I was just at the Fiery Foods Show in NM and I was amazed at how many people asked me "what's capsaicin?"
Chileheads have known for a long time that different chiles burn differently. I don't think there is a"definitive guide to capsiaicinoid breakdowns by chile". That's probably still in the "editing" phase. But chileheads know that different chiles burn differently.
A little off topic but important to know ...
I am not saying that what you’ve read in Wiki is correct or incorrect but I’m not sure how much weight I’d put on using Wiki as the end all source. There are many incorrect definitions/explanations there. You can sign up and put your two cents in there and it stays there till someone challenges it. Back in the early days I had an account there but in the end I retracted what I was writing/working on. For example look at the picture they use for Scotch Bonnet Pepper, it’s not a bonnet, not even per their description of Tam O'Shanter shape, that's some type of Caribbean Habanero. This is only one of hundreds if not thousands of other incorrect posts there and most universities today will not allow you to use Wiki as a source … That said, I do use them frequently but always double check their information if it is something important to me.
I am not saying that what you’ve read in Wiki is correct or incorrect but I’m not sure how much weight I’d put on using Wiki as the end all source. There are many incorrect definitions/explanations there. You can sign up and put your two cents in there and it stays there till someone challenges it. Back in the early days I had an account there but in the end I retracted what I was writing/working on. For example look at the picture they use for Scotch Bonnet Pepper, it’s not a bonnet, not even per their description of Tam O'Shanter shape, that's some type of Caribbean Habanero. This is only one of hundreds if not thousands of other incorrect posts there and most universities today will not allow you to use Wiki as a source … That said, I do use them frequently but always double check their information if it is something important to me.
WalkGood - agreed about the Scotch bonnet, but then the entire web is full of "wrong" pictures, including MOST seed suppliers. As I`m sure you know well, it`s not straightforward to get true Scotch bonnets. Mine are from Jim Duffy, but I also bought some to try from an ebay seller (they were cheap and I figured what the hell). I have 5 seedlings from Jim`s seeds and 12 from the unknown "jamaican heirloom scotch bonnets" so I`ll probably know what they look like by July. At that point I`ll decide to either keep seed or ditch them and try other sources. Maybe a Scotch Bonnet Glog would be fun.
Not neccesarily. Not only can anyone post stuff, but anyone can bring attention to any crap they find. And that happens a lot. More than a lot, actually.
The most respected Scientific Journal in the world, Nature, compared Wikipedia and the Encyclopedia Brittanica back in 2005. The conclusion was that Wikipedia is about as good a source of accurate information as The Encyclopedia Britannica, the venerable standard-bearer of facts about the world around us.
Here is the reference, although you`ll have to pay to see it. Things have improved considerably since 2005-6.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v438/n7070/full/438900a.html
While The Encyclopedia Brittanica disputed claims in the article, here is the rebuttal by Nature on 2006 (below). Bear in mind that all Nature`s news staff are ex-professional scientists with doctorates, post-doctoral training and in some cases, college professors.
Encyclopaedia Britannica and Nature: a response 23 March 2006
In our issue of 15 December 2005 we published a news article that compared the Internet offerings of Encyclopaedia Britannica and Wikipedia on scientific topics (“Internet encyclopaedias go head to head”, Nature 438 (7070) p900-901; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/438900a). Encyclopaedia Britannica has now posted a lengthy response to this article on its website, accusing Nature of misrepresentation, sloppiness and indifference to scholarly standards, and calling on us to retract our article. We reject those accusations, and are confident our comparison was fair.
Our original article made clear the basis of our comparison. Conducted by our news staff, it consisted of asking independent scholars to review 50 pairs of articles from the Wikipedia and Encyclopaedia Britannica websites. The reviewers were not informed which of their pair of articles came from which source; the subjects of the articles were chosen in advance to represent a wide range of scientific disciplines. Our staff compiled lists of factual errors, omissions and misleading statements that the reviewers pointed to (we had 42 usable responses) and tallied up the total number for each encyclopaedia: 123 for Britannica, 162 for Wikipedia. Turning the reviewers’ comments into numerical scores did require a modicum of judgement, which was applied diligently and fairly.
Britannica’s general objections to this article were first made to us in private some months ago, at which point we willingly sent them every comment by a reviewer that served as the basis for our assessing something as an inaccuracy. While we were quite willing to discuss the issues, the company failed to provide specific details of its complaints when we asked for them in order to be able to assess its allegations. We did not receive any further correspondence until the publication of its open letter on 22 March 2006. It is regrettable that Britannica chose to make its objections public without first informing us of them and giving us a chance to respond.
The company claims that our article gave a misleading impression of Encyclopaedia Britannica’s accuracy. Specifically, the company objects to our headline, which says that Wikipedia “comes close” to Encyclopaedia Britannica in its coverage of scientific topics. We feel this was a reasonable characterization, and the full figures featured prominently in the text of the article. The company also objects to the fact that in some cases we took material from Britannica’s Book of the Year and its Student Encyclopedia. This was done in a few cases when the Britannica website provided articles from these sources when queried on the pre-determined topics; as we said, the survey compared the content of the websites. In a small number of cases, to ensure comparable lengths, we provided reviewers with chosen excerpts, not full articles; this was done with entries from both Encyclopaedia Britannica and Wikipedia.
In one instance Britannica alleges that we provided a reviewer with material that was not from the Britannica website. We have checked and are confident that this was not the case.Britannica objects that Nature did not check the assertions of its reviewers. This is true; nor did we claim to. We realised that in some cases our reviewers’ criticisms would be open to debate, and in some cases might be wrong. But this applied as much to criticisms of Wikipedia as of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Because the reviewers were blind to the source of the material they were evaluating, and material from both sources was treated the same way, there is absolutely no reason to think that any errors they made would have systematically altered the results of our inquiry.
We note that Britannica has taken issue with less than half the points our reviewers raised. Both encyclopaedias have made corrections to some of the relevant entries since our article was published.
We do not intend to retract our article.
nordihydrocapsaicin - least irritating, burning at front of mouth an palate, a mellow warming effect, develops immediately and recedes rapidly
capsaicin, dihydrocapsaicin - more irritating, 'typical' heat sensation in mid-mouth and mid-palate as well as throat and back of tongue
homodihydrocapsaicin - very irritating, harsh and very sharp, heat does not develop immediately, affects throat, back of tongue and palate for a prolonged period
Excerpted from :
Peppers: Vegetable and Spice Capsicums by P.W. Bosland and E.J. Votava
Their source is:
Krajewska, A.M. and Powers, J.J. (1988) Sensory properties of naturally occurring capsaicinoids. Journal of Food Science 53, 902-905
capsaicin, dihydrocapsaicin - more irritating, 'typical' heat sensation in mid-mouth and mid-palate as well as throat and back of tongue
homodihydrocapsaicin - very irritating, harsh and very sharp, heat does not develop immediately, affects throat, back of tongue and palate for a prolonged period
Excerpted from :
Peppers: Vegetable and Spice Capsicums by P.W. Bosland and E.J. Votava
Their source is:
Krajewska, A.M. and Powers, J.J. (1988) Sensory properties of naturally occurring capsaicinoids. Journal of Food Science 53, 902-905
From personal experience, I can say that different peppers display all three of the heat profiles described. Some bite you on the tongue and then just disappear. Some give a mid mouth burn that lasts a little bit, and some build very slowly but once they get going you better prepare for a long haul.
How those map to the different capsaicinoids? The only data I could find is that one paper, obviously it's not a burning question in the food science world.
How those map to the different capsaicinoids? The only data I could find is that one paper, obviously it's not a burning question in the food science world.