DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF CARROT
POWDER AS A FOOD INGREDIENT
by
SHANKARALINGAM PITCHIAH, B.S., M.B.A
A THESIS
IN
RESTAURANT, HOTEL, AND INSTITUTIONAL MANAGEMENT
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Texas Tech University in Partial FulfiUment of the Requirements for the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
Approved
Chairperson øí" the Committee
zT''-
Accepted
T^.Dea n of the Graduate School
August, 2004 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I am gratefiil to my to my thesis advisor, Dr. Janice B. Boyce for her excellent care and guidance through out my graduate studies and in the preparation of my master's thesis. Through her guidance and encouragement, I felt confídent and self-assured throughout this important endeavor. I would Hke to express my sincere gratitude to my
• committee member Dr. Leslie A. Thompson for her time, effort and guidance throughout
my research. I would like to acknowledge my other conmiittee member Dr. Helen C.
Brittin. Her assistance and support with this project are greatly appreciated.
I would Hke to extend my genuine appreciation to the Graduate School, Texas
Tech University for providing me a Summer Thesis Award. I am also grateful to
Department of Education, Nutrition, Restaurant, Hotel and Institutional Management,
Texas Tech University, which presented with this wonderful opportunity to pursue
graduate studies and for their fínancial support for my research.
Recognifíon is also extended to Dr. Judy Driskell, Department of Human
Nutrition and Health Sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln. Nebraska, helped in
nutritional analysis for this project
I would hke to thank management and staff of Breedlove Dehydrators, Lubbock,
Texas for their total cooperation and help for this research.
Thanks to Ms. Anamarie Luna for her laboratory expertise and Ms. Ambika
Sridhara for her helps in Food Analytical Lab. I also express my gratitude to Department of Animal and Food Sciences, Texas Tech University to use their lab faciHty for this research project.
Finally I would Uke to express my boundless gratitude to my parents Mr. S.
Pitchiah and Mrs. VaUi Pitchiah and my family members, all my fiiends, fellow students of Texas Tech University, and relatives who have always inspired me and helped me in building my academic career.
Thank you to each one of you. AU of you hold a special place.
ni ABSTRACT
Consumers demand convenience and iimovative products. Consimiers expect the food producers to deUver high quaUty products for a reasonable price. Health is considered important but not at the expense of flavor. The focus of this research project was to develop a product from carrots in a powdered form, which wiU enable the consumer to produce a juice, or a soup very easily. The objective of this study was to identify and evaluate a product, which was cubed dried and powdered dried. Blanched
carrots, which were dried, and ground (Cubed Dried) and carrots were cryogenicaUy
ground and then dried (Powder Dried). These carrot powders evaluated for composition,
sensory, and microbial quaUty. The cubed dried carrot powder sample scored better in both physiochemical and sensory characteristics than the powdered dried sample.
Carotene levels were found to be higher in the cubed dried product. The microbial quaUty
was better for powdered dried than cubed dried, anyhow cubed dried microbial quaUty
fits in the acceptable level.
IV TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii
ABSTRACT iv
LISTOFTABLES vU
LIST OF FIGURES viU
CHAPTER
L INTRODUCTION 1
Need of Convenience Foods 1
Defming New Products 1
Ethnic Food Diversity 3
Dehydrated Foods 3
Applications of Convenience Foods 4
Purpose of Study 5
Objectives of the Study 5
Hypotheses of the Study 6
IL REVIEW OF LITERATURE 8
The Convenience Oriented Market 8
Processing of Raw Ingredients 8 Blanching 8 Cryogenic Grinding 10 Food Drying 11 Dehydrating Carrots 11
Nutritional and other fianctional components of Fresh-cut vegetables and fhiits as affected by storage and handling 13 Water Loss 17
Sensory valuation 1 g
Nutritive Value of Vegetables 19
Carotene Retention during Storage 21
Product surface Area with respect to Drying 21 m. MATERL\LS AND METHODS
Processing of raw Ingredients 23 Blanching 23 Cubed Dried (CD) 24 Powder Dried (PD) 24 Shelf Life Sfiidy 25
Proximate Analysis 25
Physiochemical Analysis 26
Nutritional Analysis 26
Proximate Analysis Methodology 27
Sensory Evaluation 29
Microbial Analysis 31
IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 32
Results of Proximate Analysis 32
Results of Physiochemical Analysis 37
Results of Nutritional Analysis 43
Results of Sensory Analysis 47
Results of Microbial Analysis 55
V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ?7
VI Summary 57
Recommendations 59
Conclusions 59
REFERNCES 61
APPENDICES A. SENSORY PANEL SCORE SHEET 69
B. SENSORY PANELINVITATION 71
vn LIST OF TABLES
1. Mean physiochemical and composition of two-carrot powders (Cubed dried-CD; Powder Dried -PD;) stored for 1, 15and 30 days at 25° C 34
2. Pearson's correlation between water activity and moisture content for carrot powders during storage for 1, 15 and 30 days at 25° C 35
3. Chroma and hue angle of the two carrot powders (Cubed dried CD; PowderDriedPD;)storedforl, I5and30 days at 25°C 39
4. Comparison of mean values for carotene levels in the carrot powder during the shelf Ufe expressed in |ag/g 40
5. Comparison of sensory attributes of mean ratings for two treatments (Cubed Dried, Powdered Dried) of carrot soup during storage from trained sensory panelists 41
6. ANOVA summary table for sensory attributes for Cubed Dried carrot soup during sorage 50
7. ANOVA summary table for sensory attributes for powdered dried carrot soup during storage 51
8. ANOVA comparison table for sensory attributes for both treatments (Cubed Dried, Powdered Dried) carrot soup during storage 52
9. ResuUs of Microbial Tests for Carrot powders (Cubed Dried, Powdered Dried) on day 1,15, and 30 stored at 25° C which is expressed in cfii/gm 56
vni LIST OF FIGURES
1. Water activity of two carrot powders (Cube dried-CD; Powdered Dried -PD;) stored at 25° C under fluorescent days lightingfor 1, I5and30 36
2. Mean values of color for the Cubed Dried carrot powder storedforday 1, 15 and30 at25°C 40
3. Mean values of the color of the Powder Dried carrot powder storedforday 1, 15 and30 at 25° C 41
4. Mean pH of both the carrot powders (Cubed Dried, and PowderedDried)storedforday 1, 15 and30at25°C 42
5. Graphical comparison of carotene levels for both treatments (Cubed Dried, and Powdered Dried) on day one of the storage 45
6. Graphical comparison of carotene Levels for both treatments (Cubed dried and Powdered Dried) on day 30 of storage at 25° C 46
IX CHAPTERI
INTRODUCTION
Need of Convenience Foods
Today consumers demand convenience, quality, and iimovative food products.
Consumers expect the food producers to deliver high quality products for a reasonable price. In addition, consumer's tastes and preferences are also cUanging. Health is considered important, but not at the expense of flavor. Consumers want variety, information and new eating experiences. Consumers want to experience novel and interesting foods, which are fresh, convenient and tasty. Increased attention to health along with the unavailability of unique foods plus a strong consumer demands for convenience creates the need for convenience foods. Consumers demand for information about preparation, serving, and nutrition. Technology is also a challenge to the food industry. The advance in technology helps to develop a new food product in the market
(FuUer, 1994).
Defíning New Food Products
There are many defmitions for new food product. A simple defmition for a new product might be a product not previously marketed or manufactured by a company; however, this breaks dovm if one includes new packaging (shape or size) or if one enters a product into a new market niche. The defínition of new food product development can then be broadened to both the development and introduction of a product not previously manufactured by a company into a market place or the presentation of an old product into new market not previously explored by a company.
Some examples for classifícations of new food products would include:
• Line extensions,
• Repositioned existing products,
• New form of existing products,
• Reformulation of existing products,
• New packaging of existing products,
• Innovative or added-value products,
• Creative products.
Companies are continually developing new food products. The need for this continual development includes:
1. AU products Uave life cycles. Products enter the marketplace and flourish
and die, so they must be replaced;
2. To satisfy the long-range business goals;
3. The marketplace may change, requiring new products more suited to
respond to changes;
4. New technology may make new food products available and new
knowledge may tailor the new food products;
5. Changes in govemment legislation, health programs, agricultural policy,
or agricultural support may dictate to develop a new food product; and 6. Ethnic diversity - Globalization made people to move from one part of the
worid to another but people wants to feel back home if when comes to
food(Fuller, 1994).
Ethnic Food Diversitv
In addition to changes in consumer behavior affecting product development, changes based on ethnic make-up of the consiuner also are occurring. In 1980, racial breakdown in America was Caucasian, 80%; Afiican-American, 11%, Hispanic, 7%; and
Native American, 2%. Population projections to the year 2010 forecast major increases in
Hispanic (to 14% of total population) and Asian (to 15% of total population) peoples who have been termed as New Americans. Social scientists predict by the year 2050 that
47% of total population in the U.S. wiU have people from other racial background. These changing demographics wiU Uave implications for the food industry as well. Consumers are increasingly demanding different spices, seasonings, flavors, blends, vegetables, meats, breads, and other foods (Brody and Lord, 2000).
Dehydrated Foods
Dehydration is defíned as "the application of Ueat under controlled conditions to remove tUe majority of water normally present in the food by evaporation". This defmition excludes other imit operations, which remove water from foods. The main purpose of dehydration is to extend the shelf life of foods by reduction in water activity
(Aw). Reduced water activity inUibits the microbial growth and enzyme activity, but dehydration is usually insuffícient to inactivate enzymes. TUe reduction m weight and bulk of food reduces transport and storage costs and, for some types of foods, provides greater variety and convenience for the consumer. Despite advantages of dehydration, drying causes deterioration in both the eating quality and nutritive value of the food.
There are many examples of commercially dried foods: sugar, coffee, milk, potato, flour, beans, pulses, nuts, breakfast cereals, tea, and spices (Fellows, 1996).
Applications of Convenience Foods
Two areas in the food industry are sufficiently different to deserve separate treatments with respect to new product development - the food service indusfry and the food ingredient industry. Both present unique challenges at each stage of product development. There are many reasons for the food sector to go for convenience foods:
1. Lack of space
2. Labor cost
3. Time
4. To maintain price, quality, and safety
5. To maintain consistency in taste
Nutrition as a quality featiu-e is two-faced. Customers especially in health care need unique products for special requirements. So developers need to provide the nutritional information to customers. Developers could also create added value to the product with establisUed nutrient content for health-care establishments, or semi prepared food service establisUments (Fellows, 1996). Purposeof Sfiidv
The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate carrot powder as a instant and convenient food ingredient. The newly developed product was analyzed for proximate tests, physiochemical analysis, nutritional, sensory, and microbial properties, throughout the shelf-life period in tUe polyethylene food storage bag (Ziploc® with freeze guard).
Objectives of the Study
The objectives of this study were to:
(a). Develop a carrot powder as a convenience product.
(b). Identify an acceptable process for dehydration and grinding from raw ingredient to fínished product.
(c). Evaluating the product during storage.
(d). To compare the efficacy of dehydration of cubed dried carrots and powdered dried carrots.
Hypotheses of the Study
The hypotheses that were addressed in this study are:
1. There are no statistically differences in tUe sensory characteristics for color of
cubed dried (CD) during the shelf life study.
2. TUere is no statistically significant difference in sensory characterisfics for aroma
of cubed dried (CD) during the shelf Ufe study. 3. TUere is no statistically signifícant difference in sensory cUaracteristics for flavor
of cubed dried (CD) during the shelf Ufe study.
4. There is no statístically signifícant difference in sensory characteristics for off-
flavor of cubed dried (CD) during the shelf life sfiidy.
5. There is no statistically signifícant difference in sensory characteristícs for overall
acceptability of cubed dried (CD) during tUe shelf life stíidy.
6. TUere is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristics for color
of powder dried (PD) during the shelf life study.
7. TUere is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristics for aroma
of powder dried (PD) during the shelf Ufe study.
8. There is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristics for flavor
of powder dried (PD) during the shelf life study.
9. There is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristics for off-
flavor of powder dried (PD) during the shelf life study.
10. There is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristics for overall
acceptability of powder dried (PD) during the shelf life study.
11. There is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristícs for color
between cubed dried (CD) and powder dried (PD) during the shelf life study.
12. There is no statístícally significant difference in sensory characteristics for aroma
between cubed dried (CD) and powdered dried (PD) during the shelf life study.
13. TUere is no statistically signifícant difference in sensory characteristics for llaxor
between cubed dried (CD) and powder dried (PD) during the shelf life study. 14. There is no statistically significant difference in sensory characteristics for off-
flavor between cubed dried (CD) and powder dried (PD) during the shelf life
study.
15. TUere is no statistically significant difference in sensory cUaracteristícs for overall
acceptability between cubed dried (CD) and powder dried (PD) during the shelf
life study. CHAPTER n
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
TUe Convenience- oriented Market
Increasing affluence and leisure are among the most pervasive frends in
contemporary society. Affluence, a functíon of accelerating technology, and leisure, the
by-product of emerging economic abundance, increasingly characterize the social
environment within which the society's life style is given expression (Kelley and Lazer,
1958). TUis increased interest in convenience is due to tUe increase in productíve capacity
through innovative technology has resulted in a shift of consumer-value attitudes. The
signifícance of explorations in convenience food and convenience-goods consumption
behavior may be underscored through the estimation of the size and projected rate of
growth of the convenience-oriented market. Clausi (1968) said that food to be consumed
away from home, although presently a smaller market is forecast to increase at a rate in
excess of tUat anticipated for food consumed at home. There are so many reasons to shift
to convenience food such as socioeconomic status, family stage cycle, and annual family
income.
Processing of Raw Ingredients
Blanching
Blanching is generally used to process vegetables to inactivate enzymes. This is not a method of preservatíon but it is considered as pre-treatment for raw vegetables pnor to other processing. It is also combined with peeling and/or cleaning of vegetables.
BlancUing brigUtens the color by removing air and dust on the surface in some raw
vegetables and thus aUering the wavelength of reflected light. Trnie and temperaUire of
blanching influence on food pigments (Giese, 2000).
One research study indicated that blanching and freezing conditíons affect on
fírmness retentíon and ultra structural changes in the cell wall and middle lamella of
carrot tíssues. HigU temperatíire sUort time blancUing (HTST) (100° C, 0.58 minutes; 2.12
minutes) maintains firmer carrot texture tUan tUe low temperature long time blanching
(LTLT) (80° C 11.64 min; 70 V, 71.1 minutes) method (Roy et al, 2001). The other
research study indicates that microwave-blanching method leads to a heterogenic cell
structure of carrot. This method of blanching confírms higher content of dry-matter,
carotene, and sucrose in carrots. (Kidmose, and Martens, 1999). The research, which was
done with Austrian carrots, indicated that the enzymes show greater thermal stability of
all varieties studied. Pectin esterase in Australian variety of carrots is considered to be tUe
most stable in eacU of varieties studied. In this experiment, effectíve inactivatíon is
achieved within 2 minutes at 85C. It demonstrates that pectin esterase should be the
indicator enzyme in the assessment of blanching suffíciency for processing of carrots
(Vora et al, 1999). The blanching of carrots has also been analyzed for flavor volatiles
identifíed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry and the sensory attributes evaluated by trained panel to determine correlation between quaUty changes and blanching time.
Most volatiles are decreased by at least 50% within 60 sec of blanching. The results indicate that quality attributes such as color, texture, raw carrot aroma, sweetness, flavor and overall impression decrease with blanching time, while cooked carrot aroma increases. There is a significant (p<0.05) difference between blanching time, flavor volatiles, and sensory attributes (Shamella M et al, 1996). Low temperature long time blanching (70 C for 20 minutes) together with calcium freatment can be used to improve the texture of dehydrated dried carrots, in comparison to HTST blanching (100 °C for 3 minutes). This analysis confírms that 0.1% sodium meta bi sulphite is the most effective in preserving the carotenoids content of dried carrots (Mohammed and Hussein, 1994).
Texture and rehydration of dehydrated carrots are affected by low temperature blanching.
The 60 and 65*^ C blanched samples had significantly firmer texture than the carrots blanched for 8 minutes at 100 ''C.
Cryogenic Grinding
The use of cryogenic fluids presents an altemative freezing method for foods whose freeze preservatíon was previously impractícal. Reports of tomato slice cryogenic freezing are indicative of interest in tUe subject (Anon 1964, Webster and Benson 1966,
Saray and Zackel 1971) but scant information regarding techniques or methodology exists. A study conducted on the effect of freezing method on the quality of frozen fmits showed that liquid nifrogen freezing contributed to better preservation of ascorbic acid in some cultivators. Strawberries frozen in liquid nitrogen always Uad a UigUer weight those frozen by other methods. The results obtained in this study indicate that liquid nitrogen had a distinct positive influence (Edited by the organizing and scientífíc committee,
Intemational congress for refrigeration, 1980).
10 Grinding of spices is a age-old technique like grinding of otUer food materials.
TUe main aim of spice grinding is to obtain smaller particle size witU good product quality in terms of flavor and color. In tUe normal grinding process, heat generated when energy is used to fracture a particle into a smaller size. TUis generated Ueat is usually affects tUe flavor and quality. During grinding, tUe temperature of the product rises
(Pmthi and Misra 1963). The temperature rise of the product can be minimized to some extent by circulating cold air around the grinder. But this technique is not suffícient to significantly reduce the temperature rise of the product. Cryogenic grinding technique
(liquid nitrogen) provides tUe refrigeration needed to precool the product and maintain the desired low temperature by absorbing the heat generated during the grinding operation. The extremely low temperature in the grinder solidifies tUe tissue cells of vegetables so tUat vegetables become embrittled; tUey cmmble easily permitting grinding to a finer particle size. TUus considerably smaller particle size can be obtained under cryogenic conditions. TUe fmely ground vegetable powder avoids larger specks appearing in tUe food products. TUe temperature to be used is determined by parameters like the
final product size and color required of the product.
Food Drying
Dehydratíon and drying of foods bring about a concentratíon of the proteins, fats,
and carbohydrates, and a reductíon in the vitamin potency of the food. The extent of vitamin destmction will depend on the care exercised in storing and preparing the material before dehydration, the dehydration process used, and the conditions of storage
11 of the dehydrated product. That vitamin potency of different commercially dehydrated foods is not been established (Von Loesecke, 1955).
Dehydrating Carrots
Prescott and Sweet (1919) have defmed dehydration when applied to foods as
"tUe process of removal of surplus water without destmctíon of cellular tíssues or impairment of tUe energy value."
TUe preservatíon of foods by drying is tUe one of tUe oldest methods used by man.
Longer shelf-life, product diversity and substantíal volume reduction are the reasons for the popularity of dried fmits and vegetables, and this could be expanded further with
improvements which could increase the degree of acceptance of dehydrated foods in the market. There are so many techniques available for drying process like impingement
drying, spouted bed drying, electro acoustic drying, microwave drying, and air drying
(Kudra 1992). DeUydration is a preservation technique, in which the moisture content is reduced to a level at which the product is relatively chemically stable. Blanching is carried out prior to dehydratíon to inactivate the enzyme peroxidase, which may otherwise lead to formulation of unacceptable colors and flavors (Baloch et al, 1977).
In fropical countries dehydration of fruits and vegetables by sun drying is a popular practíce due to its low cost. Sun drying of carrots has been reported by Sagar and others (1997) and Jayaraman and others (1991). The carrots are spread in open yards and solar energy is used for their dehydration. Carrots dehydrated by this method are susceptible to contamination during drying and poor quality products may result.
12 especially from the organoleptíc changes due the direct light of sun. Covering the carrots with glass covers and concentrating the solar radiatíon on the surface can overcome the disadvantage.
A study by Prakash and others (2004) sttidied the evaluated the performance of blanched carrots dried by 3 different driers, solar cabinet, fluidized bed drying and microwave oven. Carrots dried by fluidized bed drying showed better color, rehydration properties, greater beta carotene retention and better overall sensory acceptability than those dried in microwave oven and solar cabinet methods.
Nutrients and other Functíonal Components of Fresh-Cut Vegetables and Fmits as
Affected by Storage and Handling
FresU and processed vegetables and fhaits are important dietary sources of vitamin
A (retinol) and vitamin C (ascorbic acid) in the human diet. It has been estimated that
50% of the vitamin A and 90% of the vitamin C in the U.S. diet is supplied by vegetables
and fruits (Goddard and Matthews, 1979). Growing evidence suggests that increasing
dietary consumption of vegetables and fmits has long-term health benefits, and may prevent or reduce the risk of some chronic diseases. Carotenoids, which are in addition to being responsible for yellow, orange, and red colors in vegetables and fmits, are converted to vitamin A after ingestion. Vitamin A is essential for normal growth, reproductíon, and resistance to infectíon and severe deficiency may lead to irreversible blindness (Tee, 1992). Carotenoids from vegetables and fi^its may have a role in cancer preventíon by actíng as free radical scavengers or antioxidants (Tee, 1992) and also may have a role in preventing cardiovascular disease (Gaziano and Hennekens, 1993).
13 Vitamin C Uas antí-scorbutic properties and enUances tUe absorption of non-Ueme iron; it is also a powerfiil antioxidant. It may protect against oxidative stress-related disease and degeneration associated witU aging, such as coronary heart disease, cataract formation, and cancer (Gershoff, 1993; SauberUcU, 1994). Certain natíirally occurring polyphenols
(or flavonoids) from vegetables and fiiiits seem to fiinction via one or more biochemical mechanisms to also interfere with, or prevent, carcinogenesis. For example, flavonoids scavenge free radicals, e.g. superoxide ions (Robak and Gryglewski, 1988), singlet oxygen and lipid peroxyl radicals (Sorat et al., 1982), inhibit lipoxygenase and cyclo- oxygenase (Laughton et al., 1991) as well as lipid peroxidation (Kappus et al., 1979), and also Uave diverse effects on immune and inflammatory cell functions (Dechameux et al.,
1992). Flavonoids also display anti-hemolytic activity (Nain et al., 1976), inhibit oxidatíon of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) by macrophages (De Whalley et al., 1990), and prevent cytotoxicity of oxidized LDL on lymphoid cell lines (Negre-Salvayre and
Salvayre, 1992). In addition, flavonoids Uave been reported to affect capillary permeability, cellular secretory processes, cell membrane receptors, and carriers (Negre-
Salvayre and Salvayre, 1992). Mutagenic, antiviral, antibacterial, and antifungal properties of flavonoids have also been demonsfrated (Sichel et al., 1991). Flavonoids in regularly consumed foods may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease in the elderly
(Hertog et al., 1993). In a comparison of the antíoxidant properties of carotenoids and phenolics in peacUes, tUe pUenolic compounds cUlorogenic acid, procyanidin bl, and mtín were found to be more effective in preventíng human low-density lipoprotein and liposome oxidation (Barrett and Garcia, 1996; CUang et al., 1999). All these findings
14 Uave spurred research interest in recent years on phytochemicals in fresh vegetables and fhiits, and their products.
Little is known about the effects of fresh-cut preparation, handling, and freatments such as MAP on the nutritional quality of fresU-cutvegetable s and firuits. Ui reviews on the subject, it has been conjecttired that nutritional levels, especially of vitamin C, would be lower in fresU-cut tUan in intact vegetables and fiiiits (Klein, 1987; McCartUy and
MattUews, 1994). In tUeir role as antioxidants and free radical scavengers, vitamins A and C and pUenolic compounds could be inactivated as a result of wounding via exposure of interior tissues to light and air, enzymatic or chemical (low pH) degradation in dismpted tíssue, reactíon with the products of lipid oxidatíon, wound ethylene, or exposure to chlorine used for sanitatíon (Park and Lee, 1995; Wright and Kader, 1997a, b). Loss of vitamin C is also accelerated by water loss (Barth et al., 1990; Nunes et al.,
1998) and its relative stability or degradation is highly dependent on temperature and commodity type (Klein, 1987).
Some treatments have been shown to help maintain higher vitamin A and C levels in a few fresh-cut vegetables and fmits. Modified atmospheres (reduced O2 +/- elevated
CO2) helped to maintain higher levels of vitamins A and C in fresh-cut broccoli (Barth, et al., 1993; Barth and Zhuang, 1996; Paradis et al., 1996) and jalapeno pepper (Howard and Hemandez-Brenes, 1998), but had little effect on vitamin A in peach and persimmon slices (WrigUt and Kader, 1997a) or vitamin C in persimmon and strawberry slices
(WrigUt and Kader, 1997b). Exfreme CO2 concentrations (>20%) may actually cause greater vitamin C degradatíon (Agar et al., 1997; Wang, 1983) while certain CO2 levels
15 may induce vitamin A increases (Weichmann, 1986). Elevated CO2 caused levels of the phenolic pigment anthocyanin to decrease in strawberries (Gil et al., 1997). There was no effect of MAP on flavonoids in Swiss chard but vitamin C degradation was increased
(Gil et al., 1998b) while MAP caused decreases in flavonoids in 'Lollo Rosso' lettuce
(Gil et al., I998a). Fresh-cut carrots with cellulose-based edible coatings retained greater vitamin A levels during storage in one study (Li and Barth, 1998) but another coating had no effect (Howard and Dewi, 1996).
Levels of vitamins A and C in fresh-cut vegetables and fmit after preparatíon and during handling and storage in comparison to intact tissues are knovra for only a few fresh-cut products. Some phenolic compounds in vegetables and fiiiits have been identified, but most of the data is very limited eitUer to a single commodity of fmits or vegetables or to certain specific foods. Also, tUere have been limited reports on antioxidant activity of fresh vegetables and fioiits. With recent increasing demand for fresh and fresU-cut vegetables and fmits, tUere is a need for information related to biologically active components in fresU and fresU-cut vegetable and fruit products.
Pbysiologv of Fresh-cut Vegetables and Fmits in response to Processing and duríng Storage and Handling
TUe pUysiology of fresh-cut vegetables and fhiits is essentíally the physiology of wounded tíssue. This type of processing, involving abrasion, peeling, slicing, chopping, or shredding, differs from traditional processing in that the tissue remains viable (or
"fresh") during subsequent handling. Thus, the behavior of the tissue is generally typical
16 of that observed in plant tissues that have been wounded or exposed to sfress conditions
(Brecht, 1995). This includes increased respiration and ethylene production, and, in some cases, induction of wound-healing processes. Other consequences of wounding are chemical or physical in natíire, such as oxidative browning reactíons and lipid oxidation, or enUanced water loss. Appearance of new RNA and protein species in wounded tissues provides evidence for genomic control of tUe response. Reviews of pUysiological aspects of fresU-cut products include HuxsoU et al. (1989), King and Bolin (1989), Rolle and
CUism (1987), Watada et al. (1990), BrecUt (1995), and Saltveit (1997).
Many factors may affect tUe intensity of the wound response in fresh-cut tissues.
Among these are species and variety, stage of physiological maturity, extent of wounding, temperature, oxygen and carbon dioxide concenfrations, water vapor pressure, and various inhibitors. Wounded tissues undergo accelerated deterioration and senescence. Minimizing the negatíve consequences of wounding in fresh-cut vegetables and fhiits wiU result in increased sUelf life and greater maintenance of nutritíonal, appearance, and taste quality in these products.
Water Loss
Plant tissues are in equilibrium with an atmosphere at the same temperature with an RH of 99-99.5% (Burton, 1982). Any reductíon of water vapor pressure in the atmosphere below that in the tissue results in water loss. In whole organs, the water in the intercellular spaces is not directly exposed to tUe outside atmosphere. However, cutting or peeling tUe fhiit or vegetable exposes the interior tissues and drastically
17 increases the rate of evaporation of water. TUe difference in rate of water loss between intact and wounded plant surfaces varies from about 5 to 10 fold for organs witU lightly suberized surfaces (e.g. carrot and parsnip), 10 to 100 fold for organs with cuticularized surfaces (e.g. spinach leaf, bean pod, and cucumber fmit), to as much as 500 fold for heavily suberized potato tubers (Burton, 1982).
Avoiding desiccation at the cut surface of some fresh-cut products is critical for
maintaining acceptable visual appearance. For example, the development of'white blush'
on the surface of abraded 'baby' carrots, caused by desiccation of cellular remnants on the
carrot surface, is the limiting factor in marketing tUe product despite tUe use of polymeric
film packages. However, for most lightly processed items, centrifiagation or other
procedures are reconunended for complete water removal or even slight desiccation of
the surface (Cantwell, 1992). This is done primarily to reduce microbial growth.
Desiccation can also induce stress ethylene production in detached vegetables and fruits
(Yang, 1985).
Sensorv Evaluation
Instítute of Food Technologists (1975) define sensory evaluation as "the scientific
discipline used to evoke, measure, analyze and interpret tUose reactions to characteristics
of food and materials as they are perceived through the senses of sight, smell, taste,
touch, and hearing." This defmitíon makes it clear that sensory evaluation encompasses
of all senses.
18 AU five senses are used in evaluation and appreciation of food. AltUough the sensory aspects of food that directly impact on the oral cavity -food flavor, and mouth feel are probably proponent, other sensory characteristics of food also contribute significantly to our responses to foods.. The major sensory attributes include appearance odor, taste, flavor, texture and noise (Meilgaard et al., 1999).
Measurement is critical to quantifying responses to sensory stimuli for the purpose of utilizing descriptive and inferential statistics. SucU statistics provide a rational basis for decisions about the products that are evaluated. The value of measurement and the requirement for valid scales of measurement are not, however, unique to sensory evaluation. Sensory evaluation remains one of the most important aspects of food testing used by food processing industry. The use of sensory evaluation provides usefiil data in the development of new products and assessment of whether current manufacturing process results in consistent production (CUambers, 1990)
Product quality is very important. It brings the consumers to purchase the product.
With increase in consumer's interest in product quality consumer tests re used more and more eacU year (stone et al, 1991; Meilgaard et al, 1994). Well-stmctured and well- organized consumer tests can sUow the target consumers and generate valid results.
Affectíve tests are required at several points to develop a new product (Meilgaard et al.,
1999). Monitoring product quality requires specific sensory test resources and availability of qualified professionals. For most evaluations, discrimination and descriptive test will be used, however their use wiU be modified to reflect tUe nature of the problem and limited number of subjects (Nakayama and Wessman, 1979)
19 Trained sensory panel testing is objective and quantitative; on tUe otUer Uand, consumer testíng is subjective and qualitative. Trained sensory panel results, consimier test results, and pUysical and cUemical analysis results of a product should be incorporated together to determine quality of a product and to develop a product with optimimi quality (HolUngswortU, 1996). Organization of sensory evaluation activities within a company is essential for the long-term viability of tUe resource. TUe ability to anticipate problems, to evaluate and adopt new techniques, and to develop additional
skiUs can be best accomplished as an organized effort. Sensory evaluation serves
different groups within a company (Sidel et al, 1975).
Nutritive Value of Vegetables
Vitamin A deficiency is a problem of public UealtU significance in over 70
countries (CUakravarthy 2000), including ones southeast Asia (Combs et al, 1998). In
1995, U was estímated that 3 million children woridwide annually exhibited
xerophthalmia, that is, they were clinically vitamin A- deficient and at risk of blindness.
An additíonal of 250 milUon children under 5 years of age were estímated to be
subclinically vitamin A-deficient and at risk of severe morbidity and premature birtU
(Howsonetal. 1998).
Simon (1990) stated tUat world vitamin A deficiency is the most common dietary
deficiency is the most common dietary defíciency. The daily pro-vitamin A intake
recommended by the FAO is 250 to 400 retionol equivalents (RE) for children, 575 to
725 RE for adolescents, and 750 RE for adults. Beta cartone theoretically possess 100 %
20 vitamin A actívity, while alpha carotene possesses between 53% and 50%. Beta-carotene provides 80% of vitamin A value measured as retinol equivalents where:
1 retinol equivalent
= 1 |a,g of retinol
= 6 )j,g of P-carotene
= 12 mg of other pro-vitamin A carotenoids.
Recently, the demand for P-carotene has increased due to its reported antí caner
activity (Halter, 1989). Supposedly, it has activity as a free radical quencher and
antíoxidant (Bendich, and Olson, 1989) Garewal (1992) observed that a P-carotene intake
of 30 mg daily for 3 or 6 months resulted in a 70% anticaricogenic effect without
toxicity. Carrots are the major source of pro-vitamin A, with 14% of the total vitamin A
consumption (Senti, and Rizek, 1975).
Carotene is found mostly in vegetables and fhiits, but it is also found at a lower
level in meat and animal products (Simpson, 1983). Simon (1990) compared carotene
content of several raw fmits and vegetables, which indicated that carrots have the highest
content of carotene. Except for maize and sweet potato, no crops that serve as a major
source of calories and protein contain signifícant levels of carotene.
Carotene Retention in Carrots during Storage
During storage of carrots, spoilage occurs due to a high relative humidity, which
ultímately resuUs in enzymatíc degratíon of tUe stmcture allowing carotenoid to oxidaze.
CUou and Breene (1972) sUowed that in vegetables or fiiiits, carotene losses result either
21 from (1) cell injury, or death, hence, contact of enzymes with the oxidizable substrate or
(2) reversal of a " respiratory protection effect" whereby water stimulates respiration of living plant tissue tUus removing oxygen from tUe reaction and producing an inert atmospUere of CO2. Goldman and otUers (1983) described mecUarUsms and tUe kinetic principle of tUis oxidation. TUe decoloration reaction appears to be an apparent first orderwUen O2 is not limiting factor.
Product Surface Area with respect to Drying
The term quality comprises of a number of parameters of the drying material. These
parameters are important to prediction of the quality of dried product. They are also very
essential for the development of new industrial products with desired products with
desired properties or for quality improvement of already existing ones. TUe quality
related properties could be grouped as
• Stmctural properties (density, porosity, pore size, specific volume)
• Optical properties (color, appearance)
• Textural properties (compression test, stress relaxation test, tensile test)
• TUermal properties (state of product: glassy, crystalline, mbbery)
• Sensory properties (aroma, taste, flavor)
• Nutritional characteristics (vitamins, proteins)
• Rehydration properties (rehydration rate, rehydration capacity)
Drying method and physiochemical changes that occur during drying seem to affect
the quality properties of tUe deUydrated product. More specifícally, drying method and
22 drying conditions affect significantly color, texture, density and porosity of the materials.
The raw material may end up as a completely different product, depending on the type of drying method and conditions applied (Krokida and Maroulis, 2000). May and Perre
(2002) discussed tUe importance of surface area reduction to exUibit a constant drying flux period in foodstuffs. Elustondo and others (1996) constmcted a model for dehydrating onions to remove water through surfaces of different characteristics.
23 CHAPTER ni
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate the process of producing carrot powder from fresh carrots. There are two methods adopted to develop the carrot powder from raw carrots. Both the process was evaluated for proximate analysis, physiochemical analysis, nutritional analysis, sensory analysis and microbial analysis.
The shelf life study was conducted at 0 day, 15 day and 30 day to evaluate tUe product.
BotU the treatments were cubed and blanched. After blanching, one set of freatment were directly dehydrated and then ground, which termed as cubed dríed (CD), whereas the other treatment was cryogenically ground and dried in tUe powdered form, wUicU termed as powder dried (PD).
Processing of Raw Ingredients
Blanching
Carrots purchased from a local retail market, were trimmed, scraped washed, cut in to I cm cubes and thoroughly mixed. Carrots were blanched (3 replications for each method) in a water bath (Precision Stainless Steel, Model 184) 70 °C for 20 minutes, in a solution of 2% glycerol, 1% calcium chloride, and 0.1% sodium meta bisulphate which is dissolved in distíUed water. Immediately after blanching, the carrots were soaked in distiUed water, wUicU contained ice cubes(0 °C for 15 minutes) to stop further cookmg. Mohammed and Hussein (1994) used the above temperattire, time and additíves and they concluded that this treatment is best preserving the carotenoids contents of carrots.
Cubed Dried (CD^
The blanched carrots were given directly to Breedlove Dehydrators*, a dehydrated food company located at in Lubbock, Texas, to dehydrate the product. The dehydrated product was ground using blender/food processor (Cuisinart, Smart Power Duet®, BFP -
703 series) for 15 minutes in food processor mode. Three replications were made for cubed dried (CD) treatment.
Powder Dried (PD)
The blanched carrots were treated and placed in a stainless pan. Liquid nitrogen is poured just to cover the carrots cubes. The carrot cubes were left in the pan for 15 minutes until brittle. Then carrots cubes were removed and ground for 15 minutes in food processor mode using blender/food processor (Cuisinart, Smart Power Duet®, BFP -703 series). Then the powder was dried in Breedlove Dehydrators , dehydrating Food
Company at Lubbock, Texas. Both the treatments were heated to 70 ° C. U was dríed until water actívity below 0.34 is achieved in both treatments.
Breed love Dehydrators
The dehydrator used for this experiment is a vertical dehydrator. The equipment was built for Breedlove to their specifications. It is not a commercial one. The foUowing is a description of tUis piece of equipment. TUe heating element and fan are located on the
25 side. It has vertical airflow. U has a capacity to dry 100 Ib of wet product. It has a double wall constmction of UigU-grade plastic. Enclosed is tUe Ueating element. It Uas an
enclosed tUermostat tUat goes from 85-160 F, a blower/fan, and 10 washable trays.
Shelflifesttidv
Carrot powder developed by both treatments, where packed m commercially
available Ziploc® with freeze guard (17.7 Cm x 20.3 Cm). They were stored in Food
Product Development lab, which is located at CoUege of Human Sciences, Texas Tech
University. U was stored at room temperattare (25° C) under continuous fluorescent
ligUting was given tUroughout the storage period.
Proximate Analysis
Moisture
The moisture content was measured by oven drying at 105C ovemight as outlined by AOAC (1995). TUis was evaluated by using Natíonal Appliances Co. (Model 5850)
drying oven. One gm of carrot powder for both the treatment was weighed and subjected to moisture test.
Ash
Final ash was content measured using muffle fiimace, which is kept at 550° C for
24 hours. The ash content of the carrot powder was evaluated after drying the sample.
AOAC (1995) procedure was followed for ash evaluation.
26 Fat
Initial content of fat was measured by Soxhlet ether extraction process method.
Six replications were made to determine the fat content of carrot powder. This analysis was carried out by AOAC (1995) outíined procedures.
Protein
Protein was determined by using Kjeltec Auto 1030 Analyzer (Tecator). Kjeldhal method was adopted to analyze the protein content in the carrot powder and procedures were foUowed as outlined in Official MetUods of Analysis of AOAC Intemational
(1995).
PUysiochemical Analysis
Water Activity
Water activity was measured using Sprint Novasina TH- 500 meter.
Measurements were made in triplicates. Approximately 5-8 gms was measured to
determine water activity for the sample.
pH
pH of the product was measured by IQ scientífíc Instmments(Model IQ 150) pH
meter. One gm of sample were diluted in 49 gm of distílled water and stirred for a minute
with the stirrer.
27 Color
Color of the product was evaluated by Konica Minolta (Model CR-400/4I0) colorimeter, whicU gives L(ligUtness), a, and b values. TUe sample was placed in
Ziploc® witU freeze guard food storage bag and 3 replicatíons were taken from botU the treatments. Chroma and Hue angle was calculated by the foUowing formula
CUroma = ^J-^ + b^
Hue Angle = tan"^ (b/a)
Nutritional Analysis
Carotene Analysis
Initial and final day alpUa and beta-carotene level was analyzed in the Department of Human Nutrition and Health sciences, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, guided by Dr.
Judy Driskell. The HPLC method was foUowed to fínd tUe carotene level.
Proximate analysis MetUodology
Moisture determination
Oven drying method was foUowed. The sample is heated under specified conditíons, and loss of weight is used to calculate the moisture content of the sample. The time took required dry was 24 hours.
Weight of wet sample - weight of wet sample Percent of moisture(wt/w1;) = X 100.
Weight of wet sample
Ash analysis
The general procedure includes the foUowing steps:
28 a. Weigh a 5-10 g sample into a tared cmcible. Predry if the sample is very moist.
b. Place cmcibles in cool muffle fumace. Use tongs, gloves, and protective eyeware
if the muffle fumace is warm.
c. Ignite 12-18 hr (or ovemight) at about 550 ° C.
d. Tum off muffle fumace and wait to open it until the temperature has dropped to at
least 250 ° C, preferably lower. Open door carefiilly to avoid losing ash that may
be fluffy.
e. Using safety tongs, quickly transfer cmcibles to a desicator with a porcelain plate
desicant. Cover cmcibles, close desiccator, and allow cmcibles to cool prior to
weighing.
The ash content is calculated as foUows:
Weight after ashing - tare weight of cmcible Percent of ash (dry basis) = X 100. Dry sample weight - tared cmcible weight
Fat Assessment
Fat was analyzed for the day one of the shelf life period, by Soxhlet method the procedure foUowed is listed below:
1. Weigh, to the nearest mg, about 2 g of predried sample in to predried thimble,
with porosity permitting a rapid flow of ethyl ether. Sample covered with thimble
with glass wool.
2. Weigh perdried boiling flask.
3. Put anUydrous etUer in boiling flask.
29 4. Assemble boiling flask, SoxUlet flask, and condenser.
5. Extract in a Soxhlet extractor at a rate of 5 or 6 drops per second condensation for
about 4 hr, or for 16 hr at rate of 2 or 3 drops per second by heating solvent in
boiling flask.
6. Dry boiling flask with extracted fat in an air oven at 100 ° C for 30 min, cool in
desicator, and weigh.
Calculation:
% Fat on dry weight basis = (g of fat in sample/ g of dried sample) x 100
Protein Analysis
Kjeldhal procedure was used to analyze the cmde protein in the carrot powder sample. In the Kjeldahl procedure, proteins and other organic food components in a sample are digested with sulfuric acid in the presence of catalysts. The total organic nitrogen is converted to ammounium sulfate. The digest is neutralized witU alkali and distiUed into as boric acid solution. TUe borate anions formed are titrated with standardized acid, which is converted to nitrogen in the sample. The resuU of the analysis represents the cmde protein content of food since nitrogen also comes from non-protein components.
Calculations worked as foUows:
Moles of HCl = moles NH3
= moles of N in tUe sample.
An average of two-reagent blank Uad mn to subtract reagent nitrogen from the sample nitrogen.
30 Corrected acid volume 14 gN Percent Nitrogen = N HCL X X X 100
gofsample mole
Where N HCl = Normality of HCl, in moles/1000 ml.
Corrected acid volume = (ml std. acid for sample) - (ml std. acid for blank).
14 = atomic weigUt of nitrogen.
A factor is used to convert percent N to percent cmde protein. Conversion factor used is
6.25, so percent protein is calculated
% N X 6.25
Carbohydrate by Difference
Total carbohydrate was calculated by subtracting the moisture, ash, protein and
fat content from 100. i.e., 100 - (Moisture +ash + protein + fat). Carbohydrates are
important in foods as a major source of energy to human physiological processes.
Sensory Evaluation
Nine trained sensory evaluation panelists evaluated the carrot soup for color, flavor, aroma, off-flavor and over-all acceptability. Carrot powder was served in the form of soup with low sodium chicken broth, on a rating scale of 1-8 (l=extremely low; 8= extremely intense). The low sodium chicken broth was procured from local grocery store.
Carrot soup was prepared using carrot powder, distilled water (rolling boil), and Chicken broth (rollingboil) in tUe ratio of 1:1:2, by weigUt using microwave o\en.
31 A sensory evaluation sttidy was designed to determine the acceptability of the two carrot powder products. A two by three randomized block design was used for the product and position permutations of the product. A fraining session was conducted twice before the actual session for panelists to be familiar with the scale. The sensory panelists were asked to judge the samples for sensory attributes. Appendix A illustrates the sensory attributes panelists were asked to evaluate.
Sensory bootUs at CoUege of Human Sciences, Texas TecU University were used for tUe evaluations. Panelist was notíced via email (Appendix B) regarding tUe carrot powder evaluations. Panelists were asked to participate for tUe three sessions of testing throughout the shelf-life study. Graduate students from Texas Tech University were used for this study. Phone calls were made and email had been sent to remind the participants of the taste test sessions.
On the day one, day fifteen, and on day thirty samples of carrot powder, which was processed by different methods, was used to prepare soup with above-mentioned recipe. The soups were served in the 2 ounce plastic cups, which had previously numbered according to the sample codes, which was taken from the random number sheets. The sensory evaluation instmment was previously assembled in the sensory booths. The sampling process was designed to assure tUat fair and unbiased testing was completed for eacU sample and to provide for the opportunity for each sample to be evaluated an equal number of times.
32 Statistical Analysis
Data were analyzed by descriptive statistícs and analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SPSS statístícal software program. A 3 X 2 factorial design with three replicates was employed, with storage time (1,15, and 30 day), with sensory attributes (color, aroma, flavor, off-flavor, and overall acceptability) as main effects. TUe mteraction between two treatments with respect to storage time was tested.
Microbial Analysis
Recommended procedures were carried out to perform the Aerobic plate count,
Coliforms and yeasts and molds. The microbial analysis for carrot powder was done on first day, fifteenth day and thirtieth day of the shelf life sttady. Dilutions were prepared tiU
10"^. Petrifilm dish were used for this study.
Eleven gms of sample were diluted in 99 ml of peptone water. Then it is thoroughly mixed in stomacher. Samples were then diluted from 10"' to 10"^. Appropriate
Petrifílm (3M Petrifílm dishes) dishes were used for aerobic plate count, coliforms count and for yeast and molds counts. Aerobic fílms were incubated at 35 °C for 48 ±
3Uours in the incubator. Coliforms fílms were incubated for 24 ± 3 hours at 35 ° C.
Yeasts and molds films were incubated for 3 to 5 days at 21° to 25 ° C (room temperature).
33 CHAPTERIV
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Results of Proximate Analysis
Moisture
Moisture content of carrot powder for cubed dried treatínent was higher than the powder dried treatment (Table 1). Litvin et al (1998) sttidied the dehydration of carrots by a combination of freeze -drying, microwave heating and air or vacuum drying. Total drying time, and quality parameters including color, dimensions of slices, and reUydration ratio were determined. TUe color, dimensions and reUydration ratio of the partially freeze- dried, microwave treated and air dried products were similar to the same quality parameters of tUe product freeze dried to tUe final moisture content. Final drying in a vacuum oven Uad some beneficial effect on color. A considerable saving in freeze-drying time was acUieved by combining freeze-drying witU microwave treatment foUowed by air-drying. Chakkaravarthi et al (1993) studied the grinding characteristics of carrots and concluded that the moisture content of the dried grits had a significant effect on the grinding energy, which increased as moisture content increased from 10 to 15% and decreased as moisture content rose to 18% and, again, increased as moisture content rose to higher values. The moisture content of 18%, therefore, was recommended for grinding operations, as it requires the least grinding energy. The correlation between water activity and moisture content in this research was studied. They have sfrong positive correlation between water actívity and moisture content, which is tabulated in Table 2 throughout the shelf life study. Cubed dried (CD) carrot powder has low positive correlation, whereas
34 powder dried (PD) carrot powder has very high positive correlation between water activity and moisture.
Ash Content
Total ash determines the mineral content in foods. The given ash content of fresh fioiits and vegetables are 0.3 to 1.6 g, in the USDA Nutrient database for standard reference. The mean the ash content of the carrot powder are listed in Table 1.
Fat Content
TUe mean values for fat content in tUe carrot powder have been listed in Table 1.
TUe fat content of raw carrots are listed as 0.092, 0.027, and 0.262 for total saturated, total unsaturated, total polyunsaturated fatty acids respectively.(USDA Nutrient data base, 2001). TUe mean value of fat content in cubed dried carrot powder was 1.15 g
where as the mean value of fat in powder dried carrot powder is 1.79 g.
Protein Content
The mean values of cmde protein for the carrot powder have been listed in Table
1. USDA lists the cmde protein value for raw carrot value as 0.84 in 100 gm of portion (USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 15 , 2002). The mean
value of protein for cubed dried carrot powder was higher (6.27 g) than the powder
dried a carrot powder (5.92 g). Protein quality determination helps to predict the nutritional quality of food proteins.
35 Table I. Mean pUysiocUemical and compositíon of two-carrot powders (Cubed dried-CD- Powdered Dried -PD;) stored for I, 15and 30 days at 25° C.
Analysis Treatment Dayl Dayl5 Day30
Moisture (%) CD 7.61 7.46 8.33 PD 2.12 3.16 5.64
AsU (%) CD 6.68 6.20 6.28 PD 6.46 6.68 6.62
Fat (%) CD 1.51 — PD 1.79 ._
Protein (%) CD 6.27 ~ ~ PD 5.92
CarboUydrate by CD 77.93 — — difference (%) PD 83.71
Water Activity CD 0.34 0.34 0.35 PD 0.09 0.15 0.61 pH CD 5.15 5.08 5.30 PD 5.01 4.95 5.13
= Data not coUected
36 Table 2. Pearson's correlation between water activity and moisttare content for carrot powders during storage for 1, 15 and 30 days at 25° C
Treatment Sizeof Correlation
Cubed Dried 0.324
Powdered Dried 0.985
37 0.7
0.6 0.606
0.5 >. •â 0.4 u 0.3 « 0.3 0.2 0.145 0.1 %m^ Day1 Day15 Day30 Shelf Life Period 0 Cubed Dried Powdered Dried Figure I. Water activity of two carrot powders (Cube dried-CD; Powdered Dried -PD;) stored at 25° C under fluorescent lighting for 1, 15 and 30 days. 38 ResuUs of Physinr.hemical Analvsis Water Activity The water activity of the cubed dried carrot powder was higher than the powder dried treatment. Replicatíons from botU treatments resuUs indicate tUere are no signifícant differences. TUe water activity was calculated three times during the shelf-life sttidy. The mean values of water activity results are listed in tUe Table 1. Desobry et al (1998) studied tUe preservation of beta-carotene from carrots and tUey suggested that drying or freezing gives better retention during storage than reducing the water activity, if the process is well controUed. They also explained that by encapsulatíon methods, the half-life can be increased by 6 months. Chantranuluck et al (1998) predicted the chilUng times of in situations wUere evaporatíve cooling is signifícant, and given the guidance for three water activity values - one representing maximum wetted starting condition, one representing the mean value during the active values -one representing the maximally wetted equilibrium state. pH Value TUe pH means values of the carrot powder are stated in Table 1. The mean values were calculated for day 1, day 15 and day 30. The Figure 4 shows the value of pH respective to time. Colorimeter Values Cubed dried and powdered dried were checked for color three times during the shelf life study. TUe cubed dried showed the darkest color throughout the shelf life study (Figure 1). TUe L values were 69.63, 69.53, and 72.09, for day 1, day 15 and day 30 39 wUere as tUe color of tUe powder dried treatment Uad L* values as 77.51, 80.31, and 85.03 respectively (Figure 3). TUe hue angle is more to carrot powder, which had been ground after drying (Cubed Dried). The pigment of carrot is known as beta-carotene, which is responsible for orange color in the carrots. Freezing and drying might have reduced color. Studies by Silva and Chamul (I97I) indicated a loss of beta-carotene and color when freezing and thawing of frozen cantaloupe. The intensity of color was determined by a* and b* values which is knovra as chroma and the hue angle was also establisUed. The resuUs were tabulated in Table 3.Chroma measures the intensity, saturation, or vividness of the color. Lightness measures the brightness of the color. Hue angle actually measures the actual color of an object such as red, blue and green. L is measured on scale of 0=black to 100=white, a measures red to green with +a being red, and -a being green, and b measures yellow to blue with +b being yellow and -b being blue. 40 Table 3. Chroma and Hue Angle of the two carrot powders (Cubed dried CD; Powder Dried PD;) stored for 1,15and 30 days at 25° C. Treatment Day 1 Dayl5 Day30 Chroma CD 43.1 30.4 35.9 PD 39.0 28.6 22.9 Hue CD 58.6 41.0 56.2 PD 71.9 74.5 81.7 41 80 69.63 69.56 72.09 ,••••••• 70 •••••••• ••••••• •••••••• •••••••< ••••••• >•••••••• •••••••* ••••••• •••••••• ••••••••• ••••••• •••••••••• •••••••< ••••••• 60 •••••••• •••••••< •••••••• ••••••• •••••••• •••••••< ••••••• •••••••• •••••••< •••••••• •••••••« ••••••••• •••••••< ••••••• S 50 •••••••• •••••••< •••••••• •••••••• •••••••< ••••••• CQ •••••••• ••••••••< ••••••• •••••••• •••••••< ••••••• •••••••• _36.78_ •••••••« ••••••• > 40 •••••••• •••••••• •••••••• •••••••< c •••••••• •••••••• •••••••• •••••••• ro ^^ . •••••••• _•••••••• •••••••• •••••••• « 30 •••••••• •••••••• •••••••• 22.42 ••••••••:22.9 4 •••••••• •••••••- ••••••••I •••••••< 19.96 .••••••• - •••••••• 20 •••••••. ••••••• •••••••• •••••••• ••••••• ••••••••• ••••••• •••••••• •••••••• •••••••• '•••••••• -•••••••• 10 •••••••• ••••••• ••••••• ••••••• , ••••••• ••••••• •••••••• ••••••• ••••••• ••••••• •••••••• ••••••• 0 ••••••• ••••••• ••••••• Dayl Day 15 Day30 Shelf life Perlod :: L DD a n b Figure 2. Mean values of color for the Cubed Dried Carrot Powder stored for Day 1,15 and30at25°C 42 90 85.03 77.51 80.31 80 ••••••• ••••••4 ••••••• ••••••• ••••••^ ••••••• •••••••• ••••••4 ••••••• ••••••• ••••••< ••••••• 70 •••••••• • •••••^ " ••••••• '••••••• ••••••< »•••••• •••••••• ••••••1 ••••••• ••••••• ••••••^ ••••••• ••••••- • •••••^ . ••••••• ® 60 ••••••• ••••••< ••••••• ••••••• ••••••< ••••••• ••••••• ••••••< ••••••• ••••••• ••••••< ••••••• •« 50 ••••••• ••••••4- •••••• •••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••• ••••••4 ••••• ••••••• 37.02 ••••••^ ••••• _„ £ 40 •••••••• ••••••< ••••••• co •••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••• ••••••4 27.57 ••••••• •••••• ••••••< •••••••— I 30 •••••• ••••••< ••••••• -22:7" •••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••• ••••••^ ••••••• •••••••• ••••••• ••••••• ••••••• ••••••• ••••••• 20 •••••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••••• ••••••< ••••••• •••••• ••••••< 7.66 ••••••• • •••••• • •••••• •••••• •••••• 3;32 10 •••••• ••••••< ••••••• ••••••4 ••••••• ••••••< 0 »••••• aiiiiiiiijjiiii Dayl Day15 Day30 Shelf life period !EL [Diia nb Figure 3. Mean values of the color of the Powder Dried (PD)carrot powder stored for day 1, 15and30at25°C 43 5.4 : 5.3 ^* 5.29 « 5.2 o> •-5.14 Í 5.1 ..-•5.13 . -" * > --•^5.08 A-Rni n 5 4.78 ú Day 1 Day 15 DaySO Shelf life period -•— Cubed Dried ---•-• Powder Dried Figure 4. Mean pH of both the carrot powders (Cubed Dried, and Powder Dried) stored forDayl, 15 and 30 at 25° C. 44 Results of Nutritional Analvsis Carotene Analysis The resuUs of beta-carotene and alpUa carotene were performed on day I and day 30. On day I and day 30 botU alpUa carotene and beta-carotene was Uigher for the carrot powder, for cubed dried treatment (Figure 5 and Figure 6). The percent loss of alpha and beta-carotene was listed in Table 4. TUe beta -carotene loss was more tUan 80.67% in the powdered dried treatment during storage, whereas alpha carotene loss was 79.10 % more than the cubed dried treatment (Table 4). Prakash et al (2004) studied the performance of blanched carrots dried by three different metUods and concluded that fluidized bed drier was much accepted for sensory quality, reUydration property, and beta-carotene than microwave oven drier, and solar cabinet drier. For this study, dehydrator was used; hence there would be much loss in carotene. Results of Sensorv Evaluation Trained Panel Analysis Descriptive statístícs were used to compute the mean values from the panelist's evaluations of tUe attribute ratings for color, aroma, flavor, off-flavor, and overall acceptability of the carrot soup. Panelists were asked to rate tUe attributes for both the carrot soup formulatíons by 8-point scale with 1 being extremely weak and 8 being extremely strong. 45 Table 4. Comparison of mean values for carotene levels in the carrot powder during the shelfUfe expressed in |xg/g Day Treatment a - Carotene P - Carotene 1 CD 552.19 1415.44 PD 336.38 1154.20 30 CD 250.76 578.06 PD 70.28 223.10 Total loss CD 54.59 59.16 (Percent) PD 79.10 80.67 46 alpha-carotene beta-carotene Vitamins Cubed Dried D Powder Dried | Figure 5. GrapUical comparison of carotene levels for both treatments (Cubed Dried, Powder Dried) on day one of the storage. 47 700 600 578.æ 9 Í 500 D> ^ 400 D> 300 - 5'^n 7ft o 223.1 .2 200 S 70.28 100 « 0 aiplia-carotene beta-carotene Vitamins I Cubed Dried n Powder Dried Figure 6. Graphical comparison of carotene levels for both treatments (Cubed Dried, Powder Dried) on day 30 of stored at 25° C. 48 Day 1 Data The color of the soup, which is prepared by cubed dried treatment, scored high value than powder dried freatment. The values for flavor, aroma, off-flavor, and overall acceptability were also scored high in the soup, which was prepared using cubed dried treatment. Panelists evaluated botU tUe samples, tUe mean value from week 1 for cubed dried treatment rated 5.29 (sd. 0.95) and for powder dried treatment rated 5.04 (sd. 1.12). TUe aroma mean value for cubed dried carrot powder rated 4.46 (sd. 1.64) wUereas the powdered dried treatment rated 3.83 (sd. 1.37). The flavor attribute was rated high as 5.08 (sd. 1.18) for cubed dried carrot powder whereas the other one rated 4.13 (sd.1.15). The off-flavor was not rated low for both the products. Overall acceptability of the carrot soup rated high as 5.62 (sd. 1.01) in cubed dried product compared to powder dried treatment 4.50 (sd. 1.02). The Table 5 details the mean values of the sensory panelists. Day 15Data TUe color, aroma, flavor, off-flavor and overall acceptability of the carrot soup which is prepared by cubed dried carrot powder rated 5.78 (sd.l .12), 4.74 (sd. 1.23), 4.8I(sd. 1.33), 1.1 l(sd.0.42),and 5.22 (sd. 1.19) respectively where as thepowder dried treatment scored lower ratings for all tUe parameters analyzed. Their mean values for color, aroma, flavor, off-flavor, and overall acceptability were 4.04(sd. 1.45) ,4.18 (sd.1.21), 4.29 (sd. 1.49), 1.79(1.17) and 4.14(sd.l.50). Ui botU the cases the overall acceptability of tUe product was decreased from day one to day fífteen of shelf life study. 49 Day 30 Data The quality parameter ratings were decreased for botU of tUe carrot soup, prepared using cubed dried and powder-dried freatment. TUe color mean value for tUe freattnent 2 sample is 2.29 (sd. I.IO), and overall acceptabiUty mean value is 3.33(sd.I.29), wUere as tUe cubed dried treatment carrot powder rated color mean value as 5.20 (sd.1.47) and overall acceptability is rated as 5.40(1.05). TUe overall sensory attributes rated bigh for cubed dried carrot powder sample than cryogenically ground sample. TUe mean value of all sensory attributes tUrougUout tUe sUelf-Ufe study is listed on table 5. HypotUeses Testing The ANOVA Table 6 and 7 was constructed to the indicate differences between the sensory attributes of storage time of cubed dried treatment and powder dried treatment. Other ANOVA Table 8 was constructed to show the differences between cubed dried and powder dried during the storage. The resuUs of ANOVA Table 6 revealed that there is a signifícant difference in flavor attribute of cubed dried carrot powder (F=0.101, p=0.992). The other results of the sensory attributes under cubed dried, for color was F=l .661, p=0.154, aroma F=l .615, p= 0.155, off-flavor F=0.746, p=0.477 and overall acceptabiUty F=1.669, p=0.141, which is listed in tUe same table. TUe ANOVA Table 7 reveals the results for the powdered dried treatment sensory characteristics during the shelf life period. The ANOVA Table 8 compares the signifícant differences between the cubed dried and powder dried during the storage. 50 Table 5. Comparison of sensory attributes of mean ratings for two freatments (Cubed Dned, Powder Dried) of carrot soup during storage from trained sensory panelists. Attribute Treatment Dayl Dayl5 Day30 Color CD 5.29' (sdO.95) 5.78" (sd 1.12) 5.20'(sd 1.47) PD 5.04'(sd 1.12) 4.04" (sdl.45) 2.29" (sd 1.11) Aroma CD 4.46' (sd 1.64) 4.74" (sdl.23) 4.47' (sd 0.99) PD 3.83' (sdl.37) 4.18' (sdl.21) 3.45" (sdO.74) Flavor CD 5.08' (sdI.18) 4.81' (sdl.33) 4.60' (sd 1.05) PD 4.13' (sdl.l5) 4.29' (sdl.49) 3.33" (sd 1.05) Off-flavor CD 1.00' (sdO.OO) 1.11" (sdO.42) 1.00' (sdO.OO) PD 1.13' (sdO.34) 1.79' (sdl.l7) 2.33" (sd 1.91) Overall acceptability CD 5.62*' (sdl.Ol) 5.22' (sd 1.19) 5.40' (sdl.05) PD 4.50' (sdl.02) 4.14' (sd 1.50) 3.33" (sd 1.29) '' Means witUin column witU different superscripts are signifícantly different (P<0.05) Scale: 8- Extremely low intense; 1- Extremely low intense 51 Table 6. ANOVA summary table for sensory attributes for cubed dried carrot soup during storage. Color Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 5.384 5 1.077 1.661 0.154 WitUin Groups 48.616 75 0.648 Aroma Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 6.253 6 1.042 1.615 0.155 WitUin Groups 47.747 74 0.645 Flavor Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 0.363 5 0.73 0.101 0.992 WitUin Groups 53.637 75 0.715 Off-flavor Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 1.014 2 0.507 0.746 0.477 WitUin Groups 52.986 78 0.679 Overall Acceptability Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 6.437 6 1.073 1.669 0.141 WitUin Groups 47.563 74 0.643 52 Table 7. ANOVA Summary Table for Sensory Attributes for Powder Dried carrot soup during Storage. Color Source SS df MS Between Groups 4.013 6 0.669 0.99 0.438 Within Groups 49.987 74 0.675 Aroma Source SS df MS Between Groups 2.355 5 0.471 0.684 0.637 WithinGroups 51.645 75 0.689 Flavor Source SS df MS Between Groups 9.426 5 1.885 3.172 0.12 Within Groups 44.574 75 0.594 Off-Flavor Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 3.993 4 0.998 1.517 0.206 Within Groups 50.007 76 0.658 Overall Acceptability Source SS df MS F P Between Groups 3.75 5 1.077 1.661 0.154 WithinGroups 48.616 75 0.648 53 Table 8. ANOVA comparison Table for Sensory Attributes for botU tteatments (Cubed Dned, Powder Dned) carrot soup during Storage. Color Source SS df MS F P Treatment I Between Groups 32.617 2 16.309 9.944 0.000 WitUin Groups 127.926 78 1.640 Treatment 2 Between Groups 8.074 2 4.037 4.909 0.010 WitUin Groups 64.148 78 0.822 Aroma Source SS df MS F p Treatment 1 Between Groups 4.765 2 2.382 1.702 0.189 WitUin Groups 109.185 78 1.399 Treatment 2 Between Groups 20.914 2 10.456 7.321 0.001 WitUin Groups 111.407 78 1.428 Flavor Source SS df MS F P Treatment I Between Groups 3.550 2 1.777 1.155 0.320 WitUin Groups 120.000 78 1.538 Treatment 2 Between Groups 6.740 2 3.370 2.430 0.095 WitUin Groups 108.150 78 1.387 Contd. 54 Table 8 (Continued) Off-FIavor Source SS df MS F P Treatment I Between Groups 0.469 2 0.234 1.657 0.197 WitUin Groups 11.037 78 0.142 Treatment 2 Between Groups 4.518 2 2.259 3.322 0.041 WitUin Groups 53.037 78 0.679 Overall Acceptability Source SS df MS F P Treatment 1 Between Groups 4.518 2 2.259 1.324 0.272 WitUin Groups 133.037 78 1.705 Treatment 2 Between Groups 13.728 2 6.864 3.754 0.027 WitUin Groups 142.592 78 1.828 55 ResuUs of Microbial Analvsis Microbial tests were conducted for botU the cubed dried and powder dried that were stored for one month for shelf life sttidy. TUree sets of microbial tests were performed on tUe samples, on day one, fífteen, and thirty. These microbial analyses were performed which included Aerobic plate counts, Coliforms, and Yeast and Mold. Table 9 reveals tUe microbial load of tUe carrot powder for both the tteatments during shelf Ufe period. This table shows the microbial load of aerobic plate counts for both the treatments, which is also in the accepted level. 56 Table 9. Results of microbial tests for carrot powders (Cubed Dried, Powder Dried) on day 1, 15, and 30 stored at 25°C wUicU is expressed in cfii/gm Day One Day fífteen Day Tbirty Microbial type CD PD CD PD CD PD Aerobic Plate Count 2.70x10^ l.lOxlO^ 3.20x10^ 1.40x10' 4.30x10^ 1.40xl0' Coliforms I.OOxlO' <1.00xI0' l.OOxlO' <1.00xI0' l.OOxlO' <1.00xl0' Yeast 0.05X10' Molds <1.00xl0' <1.00xlO' <1.00xl0' <1.00xlO' <1.00xl0' <1.00xlO' 57 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Results of proximate analysis indicated tUat moisttire level for cubed dried decreased and tUen increased during storage time period, wUere as tUe moisture level for powder dried treatment Uas increased from day one to day 30. Powder dried Uas low moisture content tUan cubed dried. Microbial growtU, aerobic plate count was higher in cubed dried treatment than in powder-dried treatment, which is evident from the Table 9. The water actívity for the cubed dried treatment decreased and then increased during storage; whereas the powder dried treatment remained the same. The pH for the both the treatments have the same pattem, which decreased on day 15 and then increased on day 30. Ash content for both the treatments was approximately equal. The fat content was in powder-dried treatment as 1.79g where as the cubed dried treatment scored 1.51gm. The protein content of carrot powder, for cubed dried treatment and powder-dried treatment, was 6.27g and 5.92g respectively. Carbohydrate content was higher in powder dried than in cubed dried. According the color measurements, cubed dried were darker (Hunter L*), more red (a*) and less orange (b*) than the powder dried treatment carrot powder. The color of the carrot powder under both the treatments deteriorated during the storage. Both alpha and beta-carotene was higher in cubed dried treatment when compared to powder dried treatment. Initíal and fínal carotene levels day storage levels were also higher in the cubed dried. Panelists experienced a better color, aroma, and flavor under cubed dried. Powder dried treatment on day 30, lost its color, and flavor so tUat it scored less for o\ erall 58 acceptability for tUe carrot soup prepared by tUe carrot powder from powder dried. It is not known that the untrained consumer would be able to detect the color, flavor and aroma sensations of both the treatments. The microbial load seems to be high in cubed dried than powdered dried, but under the accepted level. The Coliforms were not present wUich indicates the good hygiene practices during processing. The water activity was less and therefore there is no growtU for yeasts and molds was found. • HypotUesis I and 2 were rejected. TUere were signifícant differences in sensory attributes color, aroma for the cubed dried treatment during storage. • Hypothesis 3 was accepted. There were no signifícant differences among flavor, for the cubed dried treatment during storage. • Hypothesis 4 and 5 were rejected. There were signifícant differences in both off-flavor and overall acceptability for the cubed dried treatment during storage. • Hypothesis 6 and 7 was rejected. There were signifícant differences in both the sensory attributes color, and aroma for the powder dried treatment diuing storage. • Hypothesis 8 and 9 were rejected. There were signifícant differences in both flavor and off-flavor for the powder dried dunng storage. • Hypothesis 10 was rejected. There were signifícant differences in overall acceptability for tUe powder-dried treatment during storage. 59 • HypotUeses 11-15 were rej ected. There were signifícant differences in sensory attributes, for color, aroma, flavor, off-flavor and overall acceptability of botU tUe treatments during tUe storage. Recommendations Recommendatíons for future researcU based on the fíndings of the development and evaluation of the carrot powder of the study include: • Include the value analysis studies for developed carrot powder. • Developing a product with value added ingredients, which may give some organoleptic changes. • Formulation and evaluation of products based on HACCP procedures. • Determining the shelf life period using food analysis and various types of packaging techniques. • Developing the marketing plan for new product in to food service system. Conclusions Based on the fíndings of this study, powdered dried ground carrot powder has low sensory rating, and low carotene retention. Cubed dried treatment had better sensory ratings and better carotene retentions. The proximate analysis also reveals that the cubed dried freattnent had better value than the powdered dried treatment. Preserving the nutrients level for the dehydrated product is a diffícult task, so the appropriate method should be developed. New type of vegetables grinding at sub zero temperatures should be closely monitored in order to preserve nutrients in the 60 product. Preserving nutrient levels for the dehydrated product is a difficult task, so appropriate metUod should be developed. The surface area for powder dried treatment was higher than cubed dried treatment. Hence, in the drying stage, all tUe particles may Uave exposed to Ueat resulting in loss of nutritíonal characteristícs in powdered dried treatment than cubed dried treatment. 61 REFERENCES AOAC. 1995. Offícial Methods of Analysis of the Associatíon of Offícial Chemists, lô"" ed., AOAC, Washington, D.C. AGAR, I.T., STREIF, J. and BANGERTH, F. (1997). Effect of high CO2 and controUed atmospUere (CA) on the ascorbic and de-hydro ascorbic acid content of some berry fruits. Post harvest Biological Tech 11, 47-55. ANONYMOUS. 1964. Breakthrough: Free sliced tomatoes. Food Engineering 36(1):56 BALOCH, A.K., BUCKLE, K.A. and EDWARDS, R.A. 1977. Effect of processing variables on tUe quality of deUydrated carrot I. LeacUing losses and carotenoid content. J. of Food TecU 12, 285-293. BARRETT, D.M. and GARCIA, E.L. 1996. Antíoxidant activity of fresUan d canned peacU carotenoids and pUenolic compounds in Uuman low-density lipoprotein and liposome oxidation. Rept. to tUe Califomia Canning Peach Association. BARTH, M.M., KERBEL, E.L., PERRY, A.K. and SCHMIDT, S.J. 1993. Modifíed atmosphere packaging affects ascorbic acid, enzyme activity and market quality of broccoli.J. Food Science 58, 140-143. BARTH, M.M., A.K. PERRY, S.J. SCHMIDT. and KLEIN,B.P. 1990. Mistíng effects on ascorbic acid retention in broccoli during cabinet display. J. Food Science 55. 1187-1188. BARTH, M.M. and ZHUANG, H. 1996. Packaging design affects antioxidant vitamin retention and quality of broccoli florets during postharvest storage. Postharvest Biol. Tech. 9, 141-150. BENDICH, A. and OLSON, J.A. 1989. Biological actions of carotenoids. FASEEJ 3, 1927-1932. BRECHT, J.K. 1995. Physiology of UgUtly processed fi^Us and vegetables. Horticultural Science 30, 18-22. BRODY, L.A. and LORD, B.J. 2000. The United States food industry and its imperative for new products. In Developing New Food Productsfor a Changing market Place. pp. 1-18. Technomic PublisUing Co, Lancester. BURTON, W.G. 1982. Post-harvest physiology offood crops. pp. 41-53. Longman, London. 62 CANTWELL, M. 1992. Post-harvest handling systems. Ui Minimally processedfruits and vegetables, ( A.A. Kader ed.). Postharvest TecUnology of Horticulttiral Crops. 2nd Ed. Umv. of Calif, Division of Agriculttire and Nattiral Resources. Oakland, Califomia. CHAMBERS, E. 1990. Sensory analysis- Dynamic researcU for today's products. Food TecU. 44(1), 92 CHANG, S., TAN, C, FRANKEL, E. N. and BARRETT, D.M. 1999. Low density lipoprotein antioxidant actívity of pUenolic compounds and polypUenol oxidase activity in clingstone peacU cuUivars. UnpublisUed observations. CHAKKARAVARTHI, A.G., MATH, R.G., WALDE, S.G., and RAO, D.G. 1993. J. Food Engineering 20(4), 381-389. CHAKRAVARTHY, I. 2000. Food-based strategies to control vitamin A defíciency. Food Nutritíon BuUetin. 21, 135-143. CHUNTRANULUCK, S., WELLS, C.M., and CLELAND, A.C 1998. Predictíon of cUilUng times of foods in situatíons wUere evaporatíve cooling is signifícant 3 applicatíons. J. Food Engineering 37(2), 143-157. CHOU, H.E. and BREENE, W.M. 1972. Oxidatíve decoloration of B-carotene in low moisture model systems, J. Food Science 37, 66-68. CLAUSI, A.S. 1968. Convenience Foods and Our CUanging Social Pattems. In Marketíng InsigUts. pp.l4, Focused communications: New York. COX, H.E., and DAVID PEARSON. 1962. General MetUods. Ui Chemical analysis of food. pp.30-31, CUemical publisUing company: New York. COMBS, G.F. 1998. The Vitamins: Fundamental Aspects in Nutrition and Health, pp 108-109, 138, Academic press; New York. DE WHALLEY, C V.,RANKIN, S.M., HOULT, J.R.S., JESSUP, W., and LEAKE., D.S. 1990. Flavonoids inUibit the oxidatíve modification of low density lipoproteins by macropUages. BiocUemistry PUarmacology 39:1743-1750. DECHARNEUX, T., DUBOIS, F., BEAULOYE, C, WARRIAUX-DE CONINCK, S. and WATTIAUX, R. 1992. Effect of various flavonoids on lysosomes subjected to an oxidatíve or an osmotíc stress. BiocUemistry PUarmacology. 44:1243-1248. DESOBRY, S.A., NETTO, M.F., AND LABUZA, P.T.1998. Preservatíon of B-carotene from carrots. Critical reviews in food science and nutrition 38(5): 381-396. 63 ELUSTONDO, M.P., PELEGRINA, A.H., and URBICIAN, M.J. 1996. A model for the dehydratíon rate of onions. J. of food engineering 29: 375-386. FELLOWS, F.J. 1996. Blanching, and Dehydratíon.Ui Food Processing Technology Principles and Practices. pp. 201-208, 281.Woodhead PubUsUing Limited. Cambridge London. FULLER, W.G. 1994. New Food Product Development from Concept to Market place. pp.I-13. CRC Press. Boca Rotan. GAREWAL, H.S. 1992. TUe role of vitamins and nuttients in oral leukoplakia. In Vitamins and Cancerprevention. pp.I61-I72. GAZIANO, J.M. and HENNEKENS, C.H. 1993. TUe role of beta-carotene in tUe preventíon of cardiovascular disease. In Carotenoids in human health. (L.M. Canfíeld, N.I. Krinsky, and J.A. Olso eds.) pp. 148-155, New York Acad. Sci., New York. GERSHOFF, S.N. 1993. Vitamin C (ascorbic acid): New roles, new requirements? Nutritíon Review 51:313-326. GIESE, J. 2000. Color measurement in foods as a quality parameter. Food TecU 54(2): 62-65. GIL, M.I., CASTANER, M., FERRERES, F., ARTES, F., and TOMAS-BARBERAN, F.A.1998a., Modifíed-atmospUere packaging of minimally processed "Lollo Rosso" (Lactuca sativa) - PUenolic metabolites and quality cUanges. Z. Lebensm. Unters. ForscU. A-Foo. 206:350-354. GIL, M.I., FERRERES, F., and TOMAS-BARBERAN, F.A. 1998b. Effect of modifíed atmospUere packaging on the flavonoids and vitamin C content of minimally processed Swiss chard {Beta vulgaris subspecies cycla). J. ofAgri. Food Chemistry 46:2007-2012. GIL, M.I., HOLCROFT, D.M., and KADER, A.A., 1997. Changes in strawberry anthocyanins and other polyphenols in response to carbon dioxide treatments. J. Agri. Food Chemistry 45:1662-1667. GODDARD, M.S., and MATTHEWS. R.H. 1979. Contributíon of fiaiits and vegetables to human nutritíon. Horticulture Science 14:245-247. GOLDMAN, M., HOREV, B., and SAGUY, 1.1983. Decoloratíon of B-carotene in model 64 systems simulating deUydrated foods. MecUanism and Kinetic principles. J. of food science 48: 751- 754. HALTER, S.I989. Vitamin A: its role and chemopreventíon and chemotherapy of cancer, Human Pathology 20: 205-209. HERTOG, M. G. L., FESKENS, E., HOLLMAN, P.C H., KATAN, M.B., and KROMHOUT, D.1993. Dietary antioxidant flavonoids and risk of coronary heart disease. The Zutphen elderiy sttidy. Lancet 342:1007-1011. HOLLINGSWORTH, P. 1996. Sensory testing and the language of the consumer. Food Tech 50: 65-69. HOWARD, L.R., and DEWI, T. 1996. Minimal processing and edible coating effects on the compositíon and sensory quality of mini-peeled carrots. J. Food Science 61:643- 645; 651. HOWARD, L.R. and HERNANDEZ-BRENES, C 1998. Antioxidant content and market quality of jalapeno pepper rings as affected by minimal processing and modified atmospUere packaging. J. Food Quality 21:317-327. HUXSOLL, C.C, BOLIN, H.R., and KING JR., A.D. 1989. Physiological changes and treatments for ligUtly processed fiiiits and vegetables.( J.J. Jen ed.). CUemistry and TecUnology" ACS Symposium Series 405:203-215. HOWSTON, C.P., KENNEDY, E.T., and HORWITZ, A.1998. Preventíon of micronutrient defíciencies, tools for policy makers and public Uealth workers. pp 14, Natíonal Academy Press, Washington, D.C. INSTITUTE OF FOOD TECHNOLOGISTS, 1975, Minutes of Sensory Evaluatíon Division Business Meeting at 35'" Annual Meeting, Institute of Food Technologists, Chicago, Jime 10. JAYARAMAN, K.S., GUPTA, D.K.D., and BABURAO, N.1991. Quality characteristícs of some vegetables dried by direct and indirect sun drying. Indian food Packer:/6- 23. KAPPUS, H., KOSTER-ALBRECHT, D., and REMMER, H. 1979. 2-Hydroxyoestradiol and (+)- cyanidanol-3 prevent lipid peroxidation of isolated rat Uepatocytes. Arch. Toxicology 2:321-326. KELLEY, E.J., and LAZER, W. 1958. Life Style Concepts and Marketíng. In Managerial marketing: perspectives andview points. pp.33-41. Homewood: Irwin. 65 KIDMOSE, V., and MARTENS, H.J. 1999. Changes in texttire, microstmcttire and nutntíonal quality of carrot slices during blanching and freezing. J. of Food Agriculture 79(12): 1747-1753. KING, A.D., and BOLIN, H.R.I989. PUysiological and microbiological storage stability of minimally processed fiiiits and vegetables. Food TecU 43:132-135, 139. KLEIN, B.P. 1987. Nutritíonal consequences of minimal processing of fiiiUs and vegetables. J. Food Quality 10:179-193. KROKIDA, M., and MAROULIS, Z.2000. Drying technology in agriculttu-e and food sciences. (S.A. Mujumdar ed.) pp.6I-98. Science PubUsUers, Uic: New HamspUire. KUDRA, T., 1992. Novel drying tecUnologies for particulates, slurries and pastes. In Drying. pp. 224-239. Elsevier, New York. LAUGHTON, M. J., EVANS, P.E., MORONEY, M.A., HOULT, J.R.S., and HALLIWELL., B. 1991. InUibitíon of mammaUan 5-lipoxygenase and cyclo- oxygenase by flavonoids and phenolic dietary additives. Biochemistry Pharmacology 42:1673-1681. LITVIN, S., MANNHEUVl, C.H., and MILTZ, J. 1998. Dehydration of carrots by freeze drying, microwave heating and air vaccum drying. J. of food engineering 36(1): 103 -111. LI, P. and BARTH, M.M. 1998. Impact of edible coatings on nutritional and pUysiological cUanges in lightly processed carrots. Postharvest Biological Technology7^.-57-60. MAY, B.K. and PERRE, P. 2002. The importance of considering exchange surface area reductíon to exhibit drying flux period in foodstuffs. Joumal of food engineering 54: 271-282. MCCARTHY, M.A. and MATTHEWS, R.H. 1994. Nutritional quality of ftnits and vegetables subject to minimal processes. In Minimally processed refrigeratedfruits and vegetables. (R.C Wiley ed). pp. 313-326. Chapman and Hall, New York. MEILGAARD, M., CIVILLE, GV., and CARR, T.1999. Factors influencing sensory verdicts, Basic statístícal metUods. Ui Sensory Evaluation Techniques. pp. 37-39, 265-324. CRC Press: New York. MOHAMMED, S., and HUSSEIN, R.1994. Effect of low temperature blancUing, cysteine- HCL, N-acetyl-L-Cysteine, Na metasulphite and drying temperature on the fírmness and nutrient content of dried carrots. Joumal of Food Preservation 66 18(4): 343-348. NAIN, M., B. GESTETNER, and BONDI, Y. 1976. Antíoxidatíve and antihemolytic activitíes of soybean isoflavones. Joumal of Agriculture Food Chemistty 24:1174- NAYAKAMA, M., and WESSMAN, C 1979. Applicatíon of sensory evaluatíon to tUe routine maintenance of product quaUty. Food Technology 33(9): 38-39. NETTO, F.M., and LABUZA, T.P.I998. Critícal reviews in food science and nuttitíon, 38(5): 381-396. NEGRE-SALVAYRE, A. and SALVAYRE, R. 1992. Quercetin prevents the cytotoxicity of oxidized LDL on lymphoid ceU lines. Free Radical Biological Medicine 12:101- 106. NUNES, M. C M.,BRECHT, J.K., MORAIS, A. M. M. B., and SARGENT, S.A.1998. Controlling temperature and water loss to maintain ascorbic acid levels in strawberries during postUarvest handling. J. Food Science. 63:1033-1036. Organizing and Scientífíc Committee of the XVth Intematíonal Congress of Refiigeratíon, 1980 PARADIS, C, CASTAIGNE, F., DESROSIERS, T., FORTIN, J., RODRIGUE, N., and WILLEMOT, C.1996.Sensory, nutrient and chlorophyll changes in broccoli florets during controUed atmosphere storage. Joumal Food Quality 9:303-316. PARK, W.P. and LEE, D.S.1995. Effect of chlorine treatment on cut water cress and onion. Joumal Food Quality 18:415-424. PRAKASH, S., JHA, S.K., and DATTA, N. 2004. Performance evaluation of blanched carrots dried by three different dries. Joumal of Food Engineering 62: 305-313. PRESCOTT and SWEET. 1919. A factor in solution of Uitemational food problem. In Commerical dehydration. Aimual American Academics of Politícal and Social ScienceNo. 1294. PRUTHL, J.S., and MISRA., B.D. 1980. Spices and condiments-cUemistry, microbiology and tecUnology. Academic press. New York. ROBAK, J., and GRYGLEWSKI., R.J.1988. Flavonoids are scavengers of superoxide anions. BiocUemisfry PUarmacology 37:837-841. ROLLE, R.S. and CHISM, G.W., III. 1987. Physiological consequences of minimally 67 processed finiits and vegetables. Joumal Food QuaUty/O.-757-/77 ROY, SS., TAYLOR, TA., and KRAMER, H.L. 2001. Texttiral and ultta sfructtu-al changes m carrot tissue as affected by blanching and freezing. Joumal of Food Science 66: 176-180. SAGAR, V.R., MAINI, S.B., KUMAR, R., and PAL, N. 1997. Sttidies on sun drying of carrots. Vegetable science 24(l):61-66. SALTVEIT, M.E.I997. Physical and physiological changes in minimally processed fiiiits and vegetables. Ui Phytochemistry offruits and vegetables..{F.A. Tomás-Barberán and R.J. Robins eds.) pp. 205- 220.Oxford University Press. London. SARAY., T., and ZACKEL., E. 1971. Experiment freezing tomato slices in liquid nitrogen. Hutolpar 18(2): 45. Food Science TecU Absfract 4: 3J392, 1972 SAUBERLICH., H.E. 1994. PUarmacology of vitamin C Aimual Review Nutrition 14:371- 391. SENTI, F.R., and RIZEK, R.L. 1975. Nutrient levels in Uorticultural crops. Horticultural science 10: 243 - 246. SHAMELLA., M., DURANCE , T., and GIRARD., D. 1996. Water blanching effects on headspace volatíles and sensory attributes of carrots. Joumal of food science 61:1191-1195 SICHEL, G., CORSARO, C, SCALL\, M., DIBILLIO, A.J., and BONOMO, R.P.1991. In vitro scavenger activity of some flavonoids and melanins against O2*. Free Radical Biological Medicine 11:1-8. SIDEL., J.L., WOODLSEY., A.L., and STONE, H. 1975. Sensory analysis: Theory methodology and evaluation.In Fabricatedfoods (G.E. Ingettett Eds.). pp 109-110. Avi Publication company : West port, Connectícut. SILVA, J.L., and CHAMUL, R.S. 1991. Yield, color, and sensory attributes of pasteurized watermelon juice. Joumal of food systems 6: 141-146. SIMON, P.W.1990. Carrots and other horticultural crops as a source of provitamin A carotenes, Horticultural Science 25: 1495-1499. SIMPSON, K.L.I983. Relatíve value of carotenoids as precursors of vitamin A. Proc. Nutrition Society 42: 4-17. SORAT, Y., TAKAHAMA., U., and KEVÍURA., M.1982. Protectíve effect of quercetin 68 and mtín on pUotosensitízed lysis of Uuman erytUrocytes in the presence of hematoporphyrin. Biochemistry and Biophysics Academy 799:313-317. Statístical package for social sciences (SPSS). 2003. SPSS for Windows Step by Step A Simple Guide and Reference 11.0 STONE, H., McDERMOTT, B.J., and SIDE, J.L.1991. The importance of Sensory Analysis for the Evaluatíon of quality. Food Tech 45: 88-95 TEE, E.-S.I992. Carotenoids and retinoids in human nuttitíon. Critícal Review Food Science and Nutritíon 31:103-163. THOMAS ANDERSON JR. W. 1971.The Convenience Oriented Consumer. Ui Studies in marketing. pp. 1-4. Texas Tech University. U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Agriculttiral ResearcU Service. 1997. USDA Nutrient Database for Standard References, Release 11-1. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page: Uttp://vyvm.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp VON LOESCKE, H.W.1955. DeUydratíon of vegetables. Ui Drying andDehydration of foods. pp. 88. ReinUold PublisUing corporation: New York. VORA, H.M., KYLE., W.S.A., and SMALL, D.M.1999. Actívity, localizatíon and tUermal inactivating of deteriorative enzymes in Australian carrot (Daucas carota L) varieties. Joumal of Science for Food and Agriculture 79(8): 1129-1135. WANG, C.Y.1983. Post Uarvest responses of CUinese cabbage to high CO2 treatment or low O2 storage. Joumal American Society Horticultural Science 108:125-129 WATADA, A.E., ABE, K., and YAMAUCHI, N. 1990. Physiological actívitíes of partially processed fhiits and vegetables. Food Technology. XX: 116, 118, 120-122. WEICHMANN, J. 1986. The effect of controlled-atmosphere storage on the sensory and nutritional quality of fioiits and vegetables. Horticulture Review 8:101-127. WEBSTER., R.C, and BENSON., E. 1966. Preservatíon of tomatoes by freezing. U.S. Patent 3, 250, 630 WRIGHT, K.P. and KADER, A.A.I997a. Effect of controUed-atmosphere storage on the quality and carotenoid content of sUced persimmons and peacUes. Post Uarvest Biological TecUnology 10:89-97. WRIGHT, K.P. and KADER., A.A. 1997b. Effect of slicing and controlled-atmosphere storage on the ascorbate content and quality of strawberries and persimmons. 69 Post harvest Biological Technology 10:39-48. YANG, S. F. 1985. Biosynthesis and action of ethylene. Horticultural Science 20:41- 45. 70 APPENDDC A SENSORY PANEL SCORE SHEET 71 CARROT SOUP EVALUATION BY TRAINED PANELTISTS Name: Date: Set No: Evaluate the Carrot Soup samples and check the box for your response in the score sheet provided to you. 1. Take a bite of cracker and a sip of a water to rinse your mouth after each sample. 2. Taste your sample one at the time. Sample Code Color Aroma Flavor Off-flavor Overall acceptability Rating chart for trained panel: Color Aroma Sweetness 8 Extremely intense orange color 8 Extremely carrot odor 8 Extremely sweet 7 Very intense orange coior 7 Very strong carrot odor 7 Very sweet 6 IVioderately intense orange color 6 Moderately strong carrot odor 6 Moderately sweet 5 Slightly intense orange color 5 Slightly strong carrot odor 5 Slightly sweet 4 Sligthly pale orange color 4 Mild carrot odor 4 Mild sweet 3 Moderately pale orange color 3 Very mild carrot odor 3 Very mild sweet 2 Very pale orange color 2 Just detectable carrot odor 2 Just detectable sweet 1 Extremely pale orange color 1 No typical carrot odor 1 No sweet Off-flavor Overall Oualitv 8 Extremely strong off-flavor 8 Extremely high 7 Very strong off-flavor 7 Very high 6 Moderately strong off-flavor 6 Moderately high 5 Slightly strong off-flavor 5 Slightly high 4 Mild off-flavor 4 Slightly low 3 Very mild off-flavor 3 Moderately low 2 Just detectable off-flavor 2 Very low 1 No off-flavor 1 Extremely low 72 APPENDDC B SENSORY TESTING INVITATION 73 April3'2004. Dear Prospectíve Taste Panelist: I am currently conducting researcU for a Masters degree and I would appreciate your assistance witU tUis study. TUis study involves development and evaluation of carrot powder as a food ingredient. TUis wiU be evaluated during sUelf life of the product. Participants in this test wiU be asked to evaluate two samples of carrot powder and complete tUe accompanying score sUeet. TUe taste testing wiU start witU fraining on 13'" and 14'" April. The dates for the test wiU be 15* or 16'" April, 29'" or 30'" and May 14'" or 15'". These dates wiU be according to your scUedule and you wiU be notifíed when the next taste session wiU be held. Please email me back. I appreciate your wiIUngness to participate in tUis study. Tasting session wiU be at 3.30PM on 13'" and 14' . Sincerely, SUankaralingam Pitchiah. B.Sc, M.B.A. 74 PERMISSION TO COPY In presenting this thesis m partial fulfiIUnent of tiie requfrements for a master's degree at Texas Tech University or Texas TecU University Health Sciences Center, I agree that the Library and my major department shall make it freely avaUable for researcU purposes. Permission to copy this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Director of the Library or my major professor. It is imderstood that any copying or publication of this thesis for f nancial gain shall not be allowed witUout my furtUer written permission and that any user may be liable for copyright infringement. Agree (Permission is granted.) Student Signature Date Disagree (Permission is not granted.) Student Signature Date