Browsing by Author "Sharon, C L"

Now showing 1 - 14 of 14

Nutritional and organoleptic qualities of value added products from breadfruit [Artocarpus altilis (Park) Fosberg]
(Department of Home Science, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, 2003) Sharon, C L; Usha, V
Process optimisation and quality evaluation of fruit incorporated synbiotic ice creams.
(Department of Community Science, College of Agriculture, Vellanikkara, 2024-12-06) Rajeesha, C R.; Sharon, C L
Probiotics are live microorganisms that benefit human or animal health by maintaining or enhancing intestinal microbial balance. Prebiotics are non-digestible food ingredients that promote host health by selectively stimulating the growth or activity of beneficial bacteria in the colon. Synbiotics is the combination of probiotics and prebiotics to improve the survival and function of beneficial gut microorganisms. The utilisation of locally available fruits, such as banana, mango and jackfruit, attracts consumers by diversifying the sensory attributes of products while enhancing nutritional value. Hence, the study was proposed to standardise fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams with Lactobacillus acidophilus, develop synbiotic ice creams with suitable prebiotics and evaluate the acceptability, nutritional and shelflife qualities of the developed ice creams. In this study, fruit incorporated ice creams were standardised, where the plain ice cream was the control. The treatments (T1 -T36) included the addition of fruits (mango, jackfruit and banana) in the form of pulp and osmodehydrated bits in ice cream. The addition of the fruits varied from 5 to 30 per cent by weight. A panel of fifteen judges evaluated all the prepared ice creams for their organoleptic quality using a nine-point hedonic scale to assess the sensory attributes viz appearance, colour, flavour, texture, taste and overall acceptability. Using Kendall's coefficient of concordance, the mean scores for the organoleptic parameters of each treatment were analysed statistically. As per the organoleptic score, the overall acceptability for sensory attributes was highest for treatment T2 with 10 per cent mango pulp based ice cream (overall acceptability score-8.46). Among the mango pulp incorporated ice creams, it was noted that, with an increase in the addition of mango pulp the colour, taste and flavour became intense which adversely affected the overall acceptability of the ice cream. The treatments T7 - T12 were the addition of mango bits (MB) incorporated ice creams among which T8 with 10 per cent MB scored highest overall acceptability score of 8.57. The treatment T14 (10% jackfruit pulp incorporated ice cream) and treatment T20 (10% jackfruit bits incorporated ice cream) had an overall acceptability score of 8.81 and 8.45 respectively. The treatment T25 (5% banana pulp incorporated ice cream) and treatment T31 (5% banana bits incorporated ice cream) received the highest acceptance with overall acceptability scores of 8.61 and 8.51 respectively in organoleptic evaluation. The selected best treatments were taken for further studies. The probiotic, Lactobacillus acidophilus (DVS culture) was utilised for the development of fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams. The rate of inoculation of probiotic culture into ice cream was evaluated by varying the concentrations of L. acidophilus at 1g (T1), 2g (T2) and 3g (T3). All treatments had optimum viability, and the rate of inoculation was highest for T3 with viable counts of 10.25 log CFU/ml for mango pulp and bits based ice cream, 10.26 log CFU/ml for jackfruit pulp and bits based ice cream and 10.26 and 10.25 log CFU/ml for banana pulp and bits based ice cream respectively. The organoleptic evaluation of all the fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams was done on a nine-point hedonic scale and the highest scores for organoleptic parameters were obtained for T1 (1g addition of L. acidophilus). The stage of addition of L. acidophilus to ice cream (before and after ageing) and time of incubation (15 min, 25 min and 30 min) were also assessed. An increase in the viable count of L. acidophilus was observed after ageing and with an increase in the incubation time. Irrespective of the form in which the fruit is being added, an overall acceptance score exceeding 8 on a nine-point hedonic scale was achieved when the probiotic culture was added after ageing (24 h at 4ºC) and the incubation time was 15 min. Hence, the optimised conditions for the development of fruit incorporated ice creams was the addition of one gram of L. acidophilus added after ageing, incubated at 15 min for all the fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams. The probiotic culture, L. acidophilus was inoculated to fruit incorporated ice creams in the optimised conditions (1g, after ageing and 15 min incubation) and the organoleptic evaluation was done and compared with its non probiotic controls. The results show that all treatments, including controls and probiotic ice creams, received scores above 8 on the nine-point hedonic scale, indicating high acceptability among judges. All the developed fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams along with their controls were kept in food grade polypropylene containers maintained in frozen conditions for three months and quality analyses were conducted. The physico-chemical qualities of the fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams were analysed using standard procedures. The initial moisture content in fruit pulp incorporated probiotic ice creams ranged from 60.41-64.04 per cent and 57.10-60.87 per cent respectively which decreased to 59.22-60.75 per cent and 53.25-57.97 per cent by the end of storage. A similar significant decrease was also observed in fruit bits incorporated ice creams. A significant increase in meltdown time, weight per litre, viscosity and TSS and a decrease in reducing sugar was observed during three months of storage among all the fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams. The water activity, pH, acidity, carbohydrate, protein, fat, fibre, energy, minerals, in vitro digestibility of proteins and in vitro availability of minerals were also analysed. The mean score for overall acceptability in the organoleptic evaluation of prepared ice creams remained 8.70 and above even after a decline by the end of the storage period. The viability of L. acidophilus in all the fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams decreased to 9.43-9.56 log CFU/ml in the third month of storage period but maintained the optimum viable count as per FSSAI standards (above 8 log CFU/ml). The total bacterial count of fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams ranged from 7.08 to 7.13 log CFU/ml, with fruit pulp variants showing higher bacterial count than fruit bits based ice cream. E. coli and total coliforms were undetected in all developed ice creams. Fungal colonies and yeast growth were also absent for up to three months of storage. The prepared fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams, was enhanced with the addition of prebiotics viz inulin and honey, to develop fruit based synbiotic ice creams. The prebiotic ingredients were incorporated at varying concentrations (1, 2 and 3g) into the selected probiotic ice creams. The optimum level of addition was determined by sensory evaluation. The addition of 1g of inulin and honey were selected for further studies as it received highest overall acceptability scores (8.76-8.83 on nine point hedonic scale). The optimisation of growth conditions of L. acidophilus was evaluated for synbiotic ice creams incorporated with both inulin and honey. The rate of inoculation (1, 2 and 3g of L .acidophilus), stage of addition (before and after ageing) and time of incubation (15 minutes, 25 minutes and 30 minutes) were assessed. It was concluded that the addition of 1 gram of L. acidophilus, inoculated after the ageing (24 h, 4ºC) of ice cream and incubated for 15 minutes was the best condition for the development of fruit incorporated synbiotic ice creams (both inulin and honey) with an optimum viable count 10 log CFU/ml and above. The prepared synbiotic ice creams had a high sensory score 8.28 and above for all the treatments compared to the control. The moisture and weight per litre in honey based ice creams (57.10-65.01%) were higher than that of inulin based ice creams (56.78-64.93%). By the end of storage, a decrease in moisture and an increase in the weight per litre was observed. The viscosity tends to increase over time and the highest initial viscosity was observed for banana bits incorporated synbiotic inulin based ice creams (428.93cP). TSS was higher for inulin than honey based ice creams and was increased during storage while reducing sugar and total sugar was higher for honey based ice creams and decreased during storage. The mean score for overall acceptability in organoleptic evaluation during storage decreased and the least observed value was 8.70. The viability of L. acidophilusdeclined but maintained a viable count at 9.47 log CFU/ml and above during storage. The total bacterial count of fruit incorporated synbiotic ice creams was within the range of 7.08 to 7.13 log CFU/ml. Fungal colonies, yeast, E. coli or coliforms were not detected in the synbiotic ice creams during storage. The cost of production of the developed ice creams ranged from Rs.45 to Rs. 64/- of which the cost of synbiotic ice creams was the highest. The study revealed that fruit based ice creams can be developed with the addition of 10 per cent mango pulp, mango bits, jackfruit pulp, jackfruit bits and 5 per cent banana pulp and banana bits. Fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams can be successfully developed with addition of 1g L. acidophilus incorporated after ageing and incubated for 15 minutes. The fruit incorporated synbiotic ice creams can also be developed with the incorporation of prebiotics like inulin (1g) and honey (1g), with the inoculation of L. acidophilus (1g), after ageing (24h, 4ºC) and incubated at 15 min. The developed probiotic and synbiotic ice creams had higher organoleptic scores, and good nutritive value, which maintained an optimum probiotic viability. The development of a successful formulation for fruit incorporated synbiotic ice creams is desirable, as such products would meet commercial quality standards and can be considered as functional foods.
Process optimisation and quality evaluation of jackfruit ( Koozha type )based vermicelli
(Department of community science, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, 2017) Ajisha, K H; Sharon, C L
Process optimisation and quality evaluation of Jackfruit based probiotic food products
(Department of Community Science, College of Horticulture,Vellanikkara, 2020) Remya, P R; Sharon, C L
Process optimisation and quality evaluation of passion fruit based probiotic drinks
(Department of Comunity Science, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, 2020) Meera, P M; Sharon, C L
The functions of food has extended from satisfying hunger and providing nutrients to body, to health maintenance, wellness and prevention of diseases. Probiotics are such functional foods which when incorporated to foods helps to improve its nutritional profile and therapeutic value. Hence, the study entitled “Process optimisation and quality evaluation of passion fruit based probiotic drink” was undertaken with the objective of standardising probiotic fruit drinks with different combinations of fruits with passion fruit and also to evaluate the nutritional, organoleptic and shelf life qualities of these developed passion fruit based probiotic drinks. Passion fruit probiotic drinks were developed in combination with mango, pineapple and tomato. The proportion of ingredients were standardised with three sets of treatments, and from each set, one fruit drink combination with maximum organoleptic scores were selected. The fruit drink containing 50 per cent passion fruit juice (PFJ) and 50 per cent mango juice (MJ) (T5) was selected from set 1, whereas fruit drink containing 70 per cent passion fruit juice and 30 per cent pineapple juice (PJ) and tomato juice (TJ) (T3) was selected from set 2 and 3 respectively. Total scores for the selected combinations were 50.06, 51.16 and 49.01 respectively for T5 (PFJ+MJ) and T3 of PFJ+ PJ and PFJ+ TJ. For all the selected fruit drinks, the conditions were optimised for attaining the maximum viable count of L. acidophilus. The fruit drink (25 ml) fermented with 4 μl of inoculum for 1 hour at 370 C gave the maximum viable count of L. acidophilus ranging from 13.27 to 13.38 log cfu/g. The selected fruit drinks from each set along with their respective control (non probiotic samples) were analysed for their nutritional and organoleptic qualities. Titratable acidity ranged from 1.60 to 3.02 per cent in non probiotic drinks, where as in probiotic drinks it ranged between 1.98 to 3.18 per cent. Protein content ranging between 0.36 to 0.61 g/100 g was observed in non probiotic drinks and increased protein content was observed in probiotic drinks (0.62 to1.37 g/100g). Significant decrease in TSS was observed in probiotic drinks (12.3 to 12.80 brix) compared to non probiotic drinks (13.10 to 140 brix). Total sugar and reducing sugar of probiotic drinks were in the range of 14 to 16.66 g/ 100g and 3.08 to 4.08 g/ 100g respectively and a significant increase was observed in non probiotic drink, 15.20 to 17.10 g/ 100g and 3.57 to 4.53 g/ 100g respectively. With respect to mineral content, maximum phosphorus content was observed in PFJ+PJ probiotic and non probiotic drinks, whereas the highest potassium content was for PFJ in both probiotic and non probiotic. Iron and calcium of probiotic drinks ranged from 0.22 to 0.29 mg/ 100g and 2.04 to 2.65 mg/ 100g respectively and that of non probiotic drinks were 0.20 to 0.28 mg/ 100g and 2.02 to 2.64 mg/ 100 g respectively. The probiotic fruit drinks were packed in food grade plastic bottles and kept for storage studies under refrigerated condition for a period of 15 days and a decrease in the sensory attributes were observed. Initially, the overall acceptability of probiotic and non probiotic PFJ drinks were 8.16 and 8.15 respectively which reduced to 8.14 and 8.13 respectively after storage. Similar reduction was observed in every set of samples. The total score of probiotic PFJ, PFJ+MJ, PFJ+PJ and PFJ+TJ were 48.76, 50.14, 50.97 and 49.32 and that of non probiotic drinks were 48.71, 49.95, 50.94 and 49.27 respectively. The viable count of L. acidophilus decreased on storage from 13.27 to 13.39 log cfu/ ml to 13.26 to 13.37 log cfu/ ml. The cost of production of probiotic fruit drinks were in the range of Rs. 25.5 to Rs. 33.5 per 200 ml. The study revealed that passion fruit can be a suitable substrate for probiotic fermentation and probiotic drinks can be successfully developed. Further research can be done for the development of innovative probiotic products from passion fruit.
Process optimisation and utilisation of resistant starch from sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench)
(Department of Community Science, College of Agriculture ,Vellanikkara, 2023-04-18) Reshma Suresh; Sharon, C L
Sorghum, commonly named as great millet are gluten free grains with good nutritional profile. Sorghum grains contain higher amount of resistant starch than other cereals and seems to be more slowly digestible. Resistant starch (RS) is the sum of starch and products of starch degradation which is not absorbed in the small intestine of healthy individuals. In this context, the present study, entitled "Process optimisation and utilisation of resistant starch from sorghum (Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench), was undertaken with the objectives of optimising the conditions for resistant starch formation in sorghum, its quality evaluation and product development In the present study, the sorghum starch samples were autoclaved at 120°C and 140°C with 10 per cent moisture for 15, 30, 60 minutes consecutively (T2-T7). The above mentioned procedure was repeated by the replacing the moisture with 20 per cent (T8-T13) and 30 per cent (T14-T19). Sample autoclaved at 120⁰C for 15 minutes with 20 per cent moisture was found to have maximum amount of resistant starch (38.19%). The selected starch sample (T8) was subjected to repeated autoclaving and cooling cycles for 2, 3, 4 times. Treatment T8 after 3 repeated autoclaving and cooling cycles, showed maximum RS content (39.22%). As the number of cooling cycles increased the amount of resistant starch in the sample increased. The selected sorghum resistant starch along with sorghum starch were evaluated for its quality aspects. Sorghum resistant starch had a higher pH value of 6.02 whereas native starch had a pH of 5.70. The moisture content of sorghum resistant starch (9.93%) was observed to be lower than that of sorghum starch (12%). The water holding capacity of resistant starch was estimated and found to be 2.03 g water/g flour which was statistically different from the water holding capacity of sorghum starch which was estimated to be 1.09 g water /g flour. The bulk density of sorghum resistant starch was 0.83g/mm3 whereas that of sorghum starch was estimated to be 0.88 g/ mm3. The retrogradation property of resistant starch (60%) was lower than that of sorghum starch (65 %). The gelatinisation temperature of resistant starch (74.50ºC) was estimated to be slightly higher than that of sorghum starch (72ºC). The carbohydrate content of resistant starch was found to be 95.33g/100 g and that of sorghum starch was found to be 95.43g/100 g. The starch content of resistant starch (87g/100 g) and sorghum starch (87.32g/100 g) showed no significant difference. The amylose content of resistant starch was found to be 27.20 per cent and in the sorghum starch it was 23.10 per cent. The amylopectin content of resistant starch was 59.80 per cent whereas that of sorghum starch was 67.22 per cent. The total sugar content of resistant starch was 3.53 per cent whereas sorghum starch had a total sugar content of 3.61 per cent. The in vitro digestibility of resistant starch was 10.31 per cent which was significantly lower than that of sorghum starch (62%). The prepared starch was packed in laminated pouches and stored for a period of three months. The pH of the flour gradually increased from 6.02 to 6.99 after the third month of storage. The bulk density was initially 0.83 g/mm3 which increased to 0.97 g/mm3 after the third month of storage. The water holding capacity of the flour was found to be 2.03 g water/ g flour initially which decreased to 1.96 g water/g flour after third month of storage. The reterogradation property was found to be 60.67 per cent initially which increased to 62.33 per cent, 63.58 per cent and 64.21 per cent after the first, second and third months respectively. The effect of storage on nutrient composition of the sorghum resistant starch was also studied. The carbohydrate content was found to be 95.33 g/100 g initially, which decreased after third month of storage (92.41g/100g). The starch content of sorghum resistant starch had a statistically significant difference on storage. It was initially found to be 87g/100g which decreased to 84.72 g/100g after three month of storage. The total sugars also decreased from 3.523 per cent to 2.99 per cent on storage. The in vitro digestibility of the starch decreased with increasing storage. It was initially 10.31 per cent which decreased to 10.30, 10.06 and 10.02 per cent after first, second and third month respectively. The glycemic index of the resistant starch and sorghum
Process optimization and utilization of resistant starch from banana.
(Department of Community Science ,College of Agriculture,Vellanikkara, 2025-09-11) Sruthy,P M; Sharon, C L
Banana (Musa spp.), often hailed as the common man’s fruit, holds a special place in the scenario of agriculture and nutrition, besides having immense economic significance in India and across the globe. Banana, known for its year round availability, affordability, and rich nutrient profile, has transitioned from a commonly consumed fruit to a functional ingredient of growing interest in modern health and food industry. Resistant starch (RS) found in unripe green banana is a promising bioactive compound with potential health benefits. India is leading the global banana production, hence there lies untapped potential in harnessing banana starch, especially its resistant form, for the development of value added food products. However, native banana starch faces limitations in its functional properties, which can be effectively addressed through modification techniques such as Heat Moisture Treatment (HMT). This approach not only enhances the nutritional and functional quality of banana starch but also paves the way for its incorporation into a wide range of health oriented food formulations. Hence, the current study “Process optimisation and utilisation of resistant starch from banana”, was carried out with the objective of optimising the conditions for resistant starch formation in banana and its quality evaluation. The study also aimed to develop value added products incorporating various proportions of banana resistant starch. The popular GI (Geographical indication) granted Kerala banana variety Chengalikodannendran banana and the worldwide popular Cavendish variety Grand Nainebanana were selected for this study. Starch extracted from their flours yielded 26.89% (Chengalikodan) and 27.40% (Grand Naine), with purity of 88.62% and 89.73%, respectively. Resistant starch content was 20.02% in Chengalikodan and 20.62% in Grand Naine. Starch samples of Chengalikodan and Grand Naine banana were modified by autoclaving at 110℃ and 121℃ with different moisture content (10, 20, and 30 %) at three different time periods (15, 30 and 60 minutes). Resistant starch (RS) content in Chengalikodan banana starch was significantly affected by autoclaving conditions. Maximum RS (25.84%) was observed at 121°C for 30 minutes with 10% moisture. In Grand Naine starch, autoclaving enhanced RS from a control value of 20.62% to a peak of 30.52% (at 121°C for 30 minutes with 10% moisture). Repeated autoclaving and cooling cycles further increased RS in Chengalikodan, which reached 54.56% after four cycles, while Grand Naine peaked to 59.63%. Repeated autoclaving and cooling cycles were applied to the isolated banana starch. As a result of this treatment, RS3 was formed. The presence of RS3 confirms that the modification process was effective. The samples with maximum RS content from Chengalikodan and Grand Naine were selected for further analysis and product development. Two treated banana starch (RS3) samples (Chengalikodan and Grand Naine), along with corresponding flour and isolated starch, were initially analysed for colour index and granular morphology. Morphological analysis showed that flour and isolated starch granules varied in shape, size, and surface texture based on processing. Chengalikodan and Grand Naine flours had irregular, oval, and elongated particles with smooth to rough surfaces, while isolated starch granules were smooth and more uniform. Autoclaving altered native starch structure, forming compact, aggregated granules due to retrogradation, with resistant starch showing larger, fused clusters and rougher surfaces. Chengalikodan flour had higher lightness and whiteness, which decreased isolated starch and treated starch. In contrast, Grand Naine showed consistently lower lightness across all forms, reflecting the impact of processing and variety on visual traits. The physicochemical properties of flour, isolated starch, and autoclaved starch samples from Chengalikodan and Grand Naine banana were evaluated over three months. Autoclaved starch samples of both Chengalikodan and Grand Naine showed higher pH (5.36 and 5.34), moisture (7.08 and 7.02%), water holding capacity (4.91 and 5.00%), and gelatinisation temperature (77.02 and 75.67℃), but lower bulk density (0.48 and 0.51g/ml), swelling power (8.86 and 8.88%), solubility (3.65 and 3.58%), syneresis (27.41 and 28.22%), dispersibility(75.14 and 76.31%), and peak viscosity (487cp and 571cp), which are important properties for the formulation of functional, shelf stable and healthy food products. This study assessed the nutritional, functional, and glycemic characteristics of flour, isolated starch, and treated starch (RS) samples of Chengalikodan and Grand Naine banana. Treated starch had the lowest total soluble solids (2.56 and 2.41ºBrix), with lower total and reducing sugars. Treated starch showed the highest carbohydrate content (87.72 g and 87.33 g/100 g), highest slowly digestible starch (18.88% and 18.59%) and lowest rapidly digestible starch (24.56% and 22.53%) for Chengalikodan and Grand Naine, respectively. It also contained high amylose of 35.42% (Chengalikodan) and 38.92% (Grand Naine) and lower amylopectin. Treated starch showed the lowest in vitro starch digestibility of 44.56% and 40.65% and the lowest glycemic index of 37.56 and 36.65, slightly increasing after three months, for Chengalikodan and Grand Naine, respectively. Instant custard mixes were developed using 10-35% banana resistant starch, 5-35% corn flour, and other ingredients. Both Chengalikodan (T4) and Grand Naine (T10) banana based custard mix with 20% RS had the highest overall acceptability of 8.55 and 8.22 respectively. Control custard mix (T0) had the highest brightness (L* = 83.93) and whiteness (WI = 79.66), while T4 and T10 showed reduced lightness (81.90 and 77.74) and whiteness (77.32 and 74.12). Banana resistant starch mixes had lower initial swelling power, solubility, water absorption capacity, and dispersibility, which declined further during storage. Bulk density and moisture were higher and increased over time. Carbohydrate, protein, and fat contents were initially lower and gradually decreased. Starch content was lower in T4 and T10 (56.21% and 54.95%) than in the control (62.91%). Rapidly and slowly digestible starch were also lower in T4 (57.62% and 10.23%) and T10 (58.23% and 10.25%), while resistant starch was higher (32.15% in T4 and 31.52% in T10) compared to the control. In vitro starch digestibility was lower in T4 and T10 (41.28% and 42.40%) than in the control (62.70%). Vermicelli was formulated using 25-45% resistant starch from Chengalikodan and Grand Naine banana, combined with banana flour and whole wheat flour (30-70%). Vermicelli with 100% refined wheat flour served as control. Sensory evaluation showed that T3 (35% Chengalikodan resistant starch + 15% banana flour + 50% whole wheat flour) scored highest overall acceptability (8.28). Correspondingly, uppuma made from T3 vermicelli also received superior sensory scores, with overall acceptability of 8.42. Products with Grand Naine resistant starch (35% Grand Naine resistant starch + 15% banana flour + 50% whole wheat flour) had slightly lower scores (8.24 for vermicelli and 8.15 for uppuma than Chengalikodan based products, though both were well accepted. The study compared physicochemical, nutritional, and starch digestibility properties of vermicelli made with RS from Chengalikodan and Grand Naine banana to a refined wheat flour control. Banana RS vermicelli had lower lightness and whiteness, with higher moisture content (6.89% in Chengalikodan, 6.95% in Grand Naine) than the control (6.33%). It also had higher carbohydrate and energy content, while protein and fat decreased over storage. Rapidly digestible starch was lower in banana RS vermicelli (41.45% and 43.09%) than the control (84.42%), while slowly digestible starch and RS were higher. Glycemic index was also lower (46.23 in Chengalikodan, 45.55 in Grand Naine) compared to the control (76.23). Instant uppuma mixes were made using Chengalikodan and Grand Naine banana resistant starch vermicelli (35% RS + 15% banana flour + 50% whole wheat flour). Among treatments with varying water volumes, T3 (100g vermicelli with 300 ml water) received the highest sensory scores for both banana varieties. The mixes showed better stability over three months of storage. The production cost of banana flour was ₹ 33/100g (Chengalikodan) and ₹ 19/100g (Grand Naine), while isolated banana starch cost ₹ 34/100g and ₹ 20/100g, respectively. Treated starch production cost was ₹ 23/100g (Grand Naine) and ₹ 37/100g (Chengalikodan). Custard mixes made with banana RS cost ₹ 40/100g (Chengalikodan) and ₹ 36/100g (Grand Naine), while vermicelli and instant uppumamixes with Chengalikodan RS cost ₹ 42/100g and ₹ 54/100g, compared to ₹ 33/100g and ₹ 45/100g for Grand Naine. Banana starch is a promising functional ingredient that can contribute to the development of health enhancing food products. Heat moisture treatment enhances its functional and physicochemical properties, opening new opportunities for health focused applications. This research highlights banana starch as a sustainable, cost effective ingredient with transformative benefits, poised to meet the growing demand for nutritious, innovative food solutions and shape the future of the food industry.
Process standardisation and quality evaluation of encapsulated synbiotic chocolates
(Department of Community Science, College of Agriculture, Vellanikkara, 2024-02-19) Ajisha, K H.; Sharon, C L
Quality evaluation and value addition of canistel fruit (Pouteria Campechiana)
(Department of Community Science, College of Agriculture, Vellanikkara, 2025-05-17) Vishalakshi, G Hanamanal.; Sharon, C L
Canistel fruit (Pouteria campechiana), commonly referred to as eggfruit, is a tropical fruit known for its distinctive flavour and significant nutritional benefits. Despite these qualities, it remains largely underexploited. The study entitled "Quality evaluation and value addition to canistel fruit (Pouteria campechiana)" focused on quality evaluation of the fruit and exploring the potential of canistel fruit for developing value added products, canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice creams with Lactobacillus acidophilus and the formulation of canistel fruit incorporated custard powder. The physico-chemical characteristics, shelf stability and sensory attributes of the developed products, were thoroughly analysed. The quality evaluation of canistel fruit per 100g revealed important insights into its composition. The fruit exhibited acidity with a pH of 5.06 ± 0.04, acidity of 2.78 ± 0.36N and 0.78 ± 0.14mg/100g of titratable acidity. The fruit contained 16.00 ± 1.00°Brix of total soluble solids, 19.50 ± 0.25g/100g of reducing sugars, 21.03 ± 0.51 g/100g of total sugars, contributing to a carbohydrate content of 41.44 ± 0.97g/100g, protein content of 1.02 ± 0.05g/100g, fat content of 4.00 ± 0.20g/100g, energy of 205.68 ± 9.82 Kcal, dietary fibre of 2.07 ± 0.12g/100g and Vitamin C of 5.60 ± 0.20mg/100g. The development of canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream and custard powder was done by incorporating canistel fruit pulp and flour. The preparation of canistel fruit pulp involved washing, slicing and pulping. Canistel fruit flour was prepared by washing, peeling, and slicing the fruit thinly (1mm), soaking in a 7.5% NaCl solution for 30 minutes and after draining, the slices were dried in a hot air oven at 55ºC for 6 hours. For the standardisation of the canistel fruit incorporated ice cream, twelve formulations were prepared with various combinations of canistel fruit pulp (T1-T6) and canistel fruit flour (T7-T12) varying from 5% to 30%. The control group (T0) consisted of plain ice cream without addition of canistel fruit. Sensory evaluation was carried out by a panel of twenty judges using a nine point hedonic scale to assess appearance, colour, flavour, texture, taste, and overall acceptability. Among the formulations, T2 (90% Ice cream and 10% Canistel pulp) was the most accepted, based on the sensory evaluation results with an overall acceptability of 8.71 and total mean score of 8.70. The best treatment (T2) was used for the development of probiotic ice cream. The probiotic, Lactobacillus acidophilus (DVS culture) was utilised for the development of canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream. The rate of inoculation of probiotic culture into ice cream was evaluated by varying the concentrations of L. acidophilus at 1g (T1), 2g (T2) and 3g (T3). All treatments had optimum viability, and the rate of inoculation was highest for T3 with viable counts of 10.20 log CFU/ml, followed by T2 with viable counts 10.09 log CFU/ml and T1 with viable counts of 9.67 log CFU/ml. The organoleptic evaluation of canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream was done on a nine point hedonic scale and the highest scores for organoleptic parameters were obtained for T1 (1g of L. acidophilus) which had a total mean score of 8.34. The stage of addition of L. acidophilus to canistel fruit incorporated ice cream (before and after ageing) and time of incubation (15 min, 25 min and 30 min) were also assessed. An increase in the viable count of L. acidophilus was observed after ageing. An overall acceptance score exceeding 8 on a nine point hedonic scale was achieved when the probiotic culture was added after ageing (24 h at -18ºC) and the incubation time was 15 min. Hence, the optimised conditions for the development of canistel fruit incorporated ice cream was the addition of one gram of L. acidophilus after ageing at 38ºC, incubated for 15 min. The probiotic culture, L. acidophilus was inoculated to canistel fruit incorporated ice cream in the optimised conditions and the organoleptic evaluation was done and compared with its non probiotic control. The results show that the control and canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream, received total mean scores of 8.72 and 8.73 on the nine point hedonic scale, indicating high acceptability among judges. Canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream along with the control were kept in food grade polypropylene containers and maintained under frozen conditions for three months and quality analyses were conducted. The physico-chemical qualities of the canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream were analysed using standard procedures. The initial moisture content in canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream (T1) and control (T0) were 54.42 per cent and 56.92 per cent respectively, which decreased to 51.85 per cent and 50.97 per cent by the end of storage. An increase in meltdown time, weight per litre, viscosity, in vitro digestibility of proteins and in vitro availability of minerals, and decrease in TSS, reducing sugar, water activity, pH, acidity, carbohydrate, protein, fat, fibre, energy were observed during three months of storage of the canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream. The mean score for overall acceptability of prepared ice creams remained 8.70 and above even after three months of the storage period. The viability of L. acidophilus in canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream decreased from 9.95 to 9.25 log CFU/ml by the third month of storage period but maintained the optimum viable count as per FSSAI standards (above 8 log CFU/ml). The total bacterial count in canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream ranged from 7.10 to 7.25 log CFU/ml, while the control ice cream ranged from 1.05 to 1.38 log CFU/ml in the 3 months of storage period. Fungal colonies were absent initially and it was 0.94 log CFU/ml and 1.05 log CFU/ml by the end of three months of storage period in the canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream and control ice cream respectively. No yeast growth was observed in either ice cream variant throughout the three months of storage. The canistel fruit incorporated custard powder was prepared using corn flour (5% to 25%) and canistel fruit flour (10% to 35%) in various proportions. The remaining 65% of the formulation consisted of other ingredients. After conducting sensory evaluations, the most accepted formulation was T6, which contained 10% canistel fruit flour, 25% corn flour and 65% of the other ingredients, which had a total mean score of 8.60. The physico-chemical properties of the custard powder was evaluated initially and at the end of the storage period. The initial moisture content in the canistel fruit incorporated custard powder (T6) and control (T0) was 7.42 and 7.74 per cent respectively, which increased to 10.07 and 10.25 per cent by the end of storage. An increase in acidity and water absorption index, a decrease in bulk density, TSS, total sugar, reducing sugar, non--carotene, fibre carbohydrate, protein, fat, energy, starch, iron, calcium, phosphorus and vitamin C were observed on storage. The mean score for overall acceptability in the organoleptic evaluation of prepared custard powders remained 8 and above even at end of the storage period. The total bacterial count in canistel fruit incorporated custard powder was 0.10 log CFU/ml, while for control custard powder it was 0.38 log CFU/ml by the end of storage period. Both fungal and yeast growth were absent in both treatments throughout the three month storage period. No insect infestation was observed in both the custard powders during the entire storage period. The cost of production of the control ice cream and canistel fruit incorporated probiotic ice cream were Rs. 55 and Rs. 65 respectively, and the cost of the control custard powder and canistel fruit incorporated custard powder were Rs. 60 and Rs. 70 respectively. The findings of this study suggest that canistel fruit is an excellent source for developing functional food products such as probiotic ice cream and custard powder. Both products demonstrated high acceptability, nutritional content, and stability during storage. Incorporating Lactobacillus acidophilus into the canistel fruit incorporated ice cream effectively preserved its probiotic viability. This research highlights the potential of canistel fruit as a valuable ingredient in the food industry, offering nutritional benefits and meeting the growing demand for functional foods.
Space nutrition
(Department of Community Science, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, 2020) Meera, P M; Sharon, C L
Standardisation and qualilty evaluation of millet based designer vermicelli
(Department of communityscience, college of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, 2017) Chandraprabha, S; Sharon, C L
Standardisation and quality evaluation of banana based probiotic fermented food mixtures
(Department of Home Science, College of Horticulture, Vellanikkara, 2010) Sharon, C L; Usha, V
Standardisation and quality evaluation of millet based probiotic yoghurts
(Department of Community Science, College of Agriculture,Vellanikkara, 2023-03-02) Amrutha, U A; Sharon, C L
Standardisation and quality evaluation of millet based probiotic yoghurts
(Department of Community Science, College of Agriculture , Vellanikkara, 2023-03-02) Amrutha ,U A; Sharon, C L
Probiotics are live microorganisms that when administered in adequate amounts confer a health benefit on the host. Prebiotics are non-digestible ingredients that enhance the activity of colon bacteria and the viability of probiotics. Synbiotics involve the combination of probiotics and prebiotics. Hence, the present study entitled “Standardisation and quality evaluation of millet based probiotic yoghurts” was undertaken to develop probiotic and synbiotic yoghurts incorporating barnyard millet and finger millet and to evaluate its acceptability, nutritional, health and shelf life qualities. Millet based yoghurts were prepared with different combinations of millet slurry and milk using both barnyard and finger millet. Among these yoghurts prepared, 50 per cent milk and 50 per cent millet slurry (from both barnyard and finger millet) were found to be the best with the total score of 51.94 for barnyard millet based yoghurt and 51.39 for finger millet based yoghurt. The addition of L. acidophilus made this yoghurt a probiotic after optimising the growth conditions for L. acidophilus, with regard to substrate concentration, temperature, time and inoculum concentration. The maximum growth was seen with 25 g of yoghurt sample fermented for 6 h with 1 ml of probiotic culture (L. acidophilus) with 2 ml of yoghurt culture at 38º C. The viability of L. acidophilus in barnyard millet based probiotic yoghurt was 9.02 log cfu / ml and in finger millet based probiotic yoghurt was 8.98 log cfu / ml. The prepared probiotic yoghurt of both millet based were stored for 15 days and its qualities were analysed and compared with non-probiotic yoghurt of each millet, at 5 days interval. The physico-chemical composition, health studies, organoleptic evaluation, population of L. acidophilus and enumeration of total micro flora were analysed and found that moisture, acidity, water holding capacity, viscosity, cohesiveness, gumminess, resilience, protein, fat, total ash, minerals, in vitro mineral availability of minerals (calcium, iron, potassium, phosphorus, zinc and magnesium) and antioxidant activity were higher in probiotic yoghurt of both millets than in non-probiotic control. The other parameters such as pH, syneresis, carbohydrate, TSS, reducing sugar, total sugar and crude fibre were higher in non-probiotic yoghurt than probiotic yoghurt in both millets. On storage each parameters decreased except moisture, acidity and syneresis which was shown to increase. The acidity of probiotic and non-probiotic yoghurt of barnyard millet based yoghurt was found to be 0.81 and 0.72 per cent respectively and for finger millet based it was 0.72 and 0.78 per cent for non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurt respectively. For probiotic and non-probiotic yoghurt of barnyard millet was found to be 8.58 g/100 g and 8.76 g/100 g for carbohydrate and 3.52 and 3.49 g/100 g for protein. In the case of finger millet based non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurt, carbohydrate found to be 8.91 and 8.32 g/100 g. The protein content of finger millet based probiotic and non-probiotic yoghurt 3.89, 3.91 g/100 g respectively. Fat was high in probiotic yoghurt of both millets (0.63 g/100 g for barnyard millet and 0.39 g/100 g for finger millet based yoghurt). In the case of non-probiotic yoghurt the fat content of barnyard millet based yoghurt was 0.59 g/100 g and 0.28 g/100 g for finger millet based yoghurt. The crude fibre of barnyard millet based probiotic and non-probiotic yoghurt and finger millet based probiotic and non-probiotic was 0.50, 0.60, 0.90, 1 g/100 g respectively. The water holding capacity was less in probiotic yoghurt (79.75 per cent for barnyard and 78.30 for finger millet based yoghurt) than non-probiotic yoghurt (88.30 per cent for barnyard millet based yoghurt and 85.80 per cent for finger millet based yoghurt). The syneresis of barnyard millet based probiotic and non-probiotic yoghurt was 5.20 and 4.33 per cent respectively. For finger millet based yoghurt the syneresis of non-probiotic yoghurt was 4.33 per cent and 5.10 per cent for probiotic yoghurt. The viscosity was high in probiotic than non-probiotic yoghurt, for barnyard millet yoghurt the viscosity was 21104 cP for non-probiotic and 23204 cP for probiotic yoghurt. In the case of finger millet based yoghurt the viscosity was 20900 cP for non-probiotic and 22800 cP for probiotic yoghurt. The calcium content of barnyard millet based non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurt and finger millet based non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurt was 58.43 mg/100 g, 59.36 mg/100 g, 72.06 mg/100 g and 73.18 mg/100 g respectively. The iron content of barnyard millet based non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurt and finger millet based non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurt was 0.24 mg/100 g, 0.25 mg/100 g, 0.23 mg/100 g and 0.24 mg/100 g respectively. The bioavailability of minerals in probiotic yoghurt of both millet based yoghurts was higher than non-probiotic yoghurt. On Storage bioavailable calcium was decreased to 77.13 per cent for non-probiotic and 78.07 per cent for probiotic yoghurt of barnyard millet based yoghurts and in the case of finger millet based yoghurt it was 77.13 per cent for non-probiotic yoghurt and 72.54 per cent for probiotic yoghurt. The bioavailability of iron for barnyard millet based probiotic yoghurt was 70.02 per cent and non-probiotic yoghurt was 69.82 per cent initially. For non-probiotic yoghurt and probiotic yoghurt of finger millet based was 775.96 per cent and 76.98 per cent of in vitro iron respectively. On storage, the viability of L. acidophilus decreased and on the 15th day it was 11.11 and 11.07 log cfu/ml for barnyard and finger millet based yoghurts respectively. On microbial enumeration, the bacterial count was 6.54 and 7.18 log cfu/ml for barnyard millet based non-probiotic and probiotic yoghurts. The bacterial count for finger millet based probiotic and non-probiotic yoghurts was found to be 6.48 and 7.16 log cfu/ml. There was no fungal and yeast growth initially and on the 15th day, fungi growth was found to be 1 cfu/ml for both barnyard and finger millet based yoghurts, but it was within the permissible limit. Synbiotic yoghurts were standardised with the addition of inulin and polydextrose with varying percentages. The addition of 3 per cent of these prebiotics to the yoghurt with 50 per cent milk, 50 per cent millet slurry were found to be the best. Compared to synbiotic yoghurt made with inulin and polydextrose, probiotic yoghurt had a lower carbohydrate, higher protein and fat. In case of synbiotic yoghurt carbohydrate content varied from the range of 8.14 - 8.47 g/100 g, protein between 3.61 - 3.99 g/100 g and fat ranged from 0.42 - 0.69 g/100 g. The textural properties such as water holding capacity, syneresis and viscosity of synbiotic yoghurt was in the range of 79.32 - 80.73 per cent, 5.04 - 5.15 per cent and 23310 - 25203 cP respectively. The calcium content of barnyard millet and finger millet based probiotic yoghurt was 59.36 mg/100 g and 73.18 mg/100 g, respectively. In case of synbiotic yoghurt it varies from 60.02 - 74.26 mg/100 g. The bioavailability of calcium was found to be 78.91 and 78.84 per cent for inulin added polydextrose added barnyard millet based synbiotic yoghurts and 73.15 and 73.64 per cent for polydextrose added of finger millet based yoghurt respectively. The in vitro iron content was 71.10 and 72.31 per cent for inulin added barnyard and finger millet based yoghurts and 78.01 and 78.61 per cent for polydextrose added barnyard and finger millet based yoghurts respectively. The viability of L. acidophilus of inulin added barnyard and finger millet based yoghurts was 11.16 and 11.15 log cfu / ml and for polydextrose added barnyard and finger millet based yoghurts was 11.17 and 11.18 log cfu / ml. The cost of production of the selected barnyard millet based probiotic yoghurt was Rs. 21.65 / 100 g and for finger millet based probiotic yoghurt it was Rs. 23.74 / 100 g. The cost for inulin and polydextrose added barnyard millet based synbiotic yoghurt was Rs. 25.76 / 100 g and Rs. 26.66 / 100 g and for inulin and polydextrose added finger millet based yoghurt was Rs. 26.88 / 100 g and Rs. 27.88 / 100 g. Probiotic yoghurt is a popular functional food product around the world. Delivering an appropriate number of viable probiotic bacteria is critical in determining the health improving properties of yoghurt. Prebiotics and probiotics both support the body in building and maintaining a healthy colony of bacteria and other microorganisms, which supports the gut and aids digestion. So the fermentation of millet with probiotics can enhance the availability of nutrients and aid better health.