Dataset Information

Edible coating with probiotic as a quality factor for minimally processed carrots.

ABSTRACT: The objectives of this study were to elaborate an edible coating based on sodium alginate with probiotic potential and to evaluate the coating's performance with respect to microbial viability and the characteristics of safety and freshness of minimally processed carrots stored at 8?±?2 °C. Carrot slices were submerged in a sodium alginate solution with and without the addition of Lactobacillus acidophilus La-14 (7.36 log CFU/g), and gelling was activated by subsequent immersion in a calcium chloride solution. Physical, chemical and microbiological analyses of coated and non-coated samples were performed over a period of 19 days. At the end of this period, the viable cell count of the probiotic remained at 7.11 log CFU/g. Thus, the alginate coating was an efficient support for L. acidophilus. In addition, comparing the acidity increase between the treatments, samples with probiotic coating presented the lowest statistically significant variation, suggesting that the probiotics had reduced the metabolism of the minimally processed carrot slices. The barrier created by the coatings also contributed to the quality of the minimally processed carrots by conserving their moisture and minimizing color changes during storage. These factors are important determinants of the successful commercialization of these products.

SUBMITTER: Shigematsu E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6098787 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Edible coating with probiotic as a quality factor for minimally processed carrots.

Shigematsu Elke E Dorta Claudia C Rodrigues Fábio J FJ Cedran Marina F MF Giannoni Juliana A JA Oshiiwa Marie M Mauro Maria A MA

Journal of food science and technology 20180623 9

The objectives of this study were to elaborate an edible coating based on sodium alginate with probiotic potential and to evaluate the coating's performance with respect to microbial viability and the characteristics of safety and freshness of minimally processed carrots stored at 8 ± 2 °C. Carrot slices were submerged in a sodium alginate solution with and without the addition of <i>Lactobacillus acidophilus</i> La-14 (7.36 log CFU/g), and gelling was activated by subsequent immersion in a calc ...[more]

PMID: 30150831

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConsumption of ultra-processed foods has been linked with higher energy intakes. Food texture is known to influence eating rate (ER) and energy intake to satiation, yet it remains unclear whether food texture influences energy intakes from minimally processed and ultra-processed meals.ObjectivesWe examined the independent and combined effects of food texture and degree of processing on ad libitum food intake. We also investigated whether differences in energy intake during lunch influenced postmeal feelings of satiety and later food intake.MethodsIn this crossover study, 50 healthy-weight participants [n = 50 (24 men); mean ± SD age: 24.4 ± 3.1 y; BMI: 21.3 ± 1.9 kg/m2] consumed 4 ad libitum lunch meals consisting of "soft minimally processed," "hard minimally processed," "soft ultra-processed," and "hard ultra-processed" components. Meals were matched for total energy served, with some variation in meal energy density (±0.20 kcal/g). Ad libitum food intake (kcal and g) was measured and ER derived using behavioral coding of videos. Subsequent food intake was self-reported by food diary.ResultsThere was a main effect of food texture on intake, whereby "hard minimally processed" and "hard ultra-processed" meals were consumed slower overall, produced a 21% and 26% reduction in food weight (g) and energy (kcal) consumed, respectively. Intakes were higher for "soft ultra-processed" and "soft minimally processed" meals (P < 0.001), after correcting for meal pleasantness. The effect of texture on food weight consumed was not influenced by processing levels (weight of food: texture*processing-effect, P = 0.376), but the effect of food texture on energy intake was (energy consumed: texture*processing-effect, P = 0.015). The least energy was consumed from the "hard minimally processed" meal (482.9 kcal; 95% CI: 431.9, 531.0 kcal) and the most from the "soft ultra-processed" meal (789.4 kcal; 95% CI: 725.9, 852.8 kcal; Δ=↓∼300 kcal). Energy intake was lowest when harder texture was combined with the "minimally processed" meals. Total energy intake across the day varied directly with energy intakes of the test meals (Δ15%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsFindings suggest that food texture-based differences in ER and meal energy density contribute to observed differences in energy intake between minimally processed and ultra-processed meals.This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT04589221.

Dataset Information

Edible coating with probiotic as a quality factor for minimally processed carrots.

Publications

Edible coating with probiotic as a quality factor for minimally processed carrots.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets