| Literature DB >> 22669042 |
Sri Puvanesvari Gannasin1, Yogeshini Ramakrishnan, Noranizan Mohd Adzahan, Kharidah Muhammad.
Abstract
Hydrocolloid from tamarillo (Solanum betaceum Cav.) puree was extracted using water and characterised for the first time. Proximate compositions of the extracted hydrocolloid were also determined. Functional characteristics such as water-holding capacity, oil-holding capacity, emulsifying activity, emulsion stability, foaming capacity and stability of the hydrocolloid were evaluated in comparison to that of commercial hydrocolloids. Its functional groups and degree of esterification were determined using Fourier Transform Infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy. Monosaccharide profiling was done using reverse-phase high pressure liquid chromatography (RP-HPLC). Screening of various fruits for high hydrocolloid yield after water extraction resulted in tamarillo giving the highest yield. The yield on dry weight basis was 8.30%. The hydrocolloid constituted of 0.83% starch, 21.18% protein and 66.48% dietary fibre with 49.47% degree of esterification and the monosaccharides identified were mannose, ribose, rhamnose, galacturonic acid, glucose, galactose, xylose and arabinose. Higher oil-holding capacity, emulsifying activity and emulsion stability compared to commercial hydrocolloids propose its possible application as a food emulsifier and bile acid binder. Foaming capacity of 32.19% and good foam stabilisation (79.36% of initial foam volume after 2 h of foam formation) suggest its promising application in frothy beverages and other foam based food products. These findings suggest that water-extracted tamarillo hydrocolloid can be utilised as an alternative to low methoxyl pectin.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22669042 PMCID: PMC6268224 DOI: 10.3390/molecules17066869
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Hydrocolloid yield (% fresh and dry weight) of various tropical and sub-tropical fruits.
| Common name | Botanical name | Fraction | Moisture content (%) | Yield, Yf (% fresh weight) | Yield, Y (% dry weight) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tamarillo (buah cinta) | Pulp | 85.82 a ± 0.13 | 1.19 a ± 0.02 | 8.39 a ± 0.03 | |
| Seed mucilage | 88.70 b ± 0.30 | 0.40 bf ± 0.08 | 3.54 b ± 0.16 | ||
| Puree | 85.78 a ± 0.09 | 1.18 ac ± 0.10 | 8.30 c ± 0.07 | ||
| Papaya |
| Pulp | 84.64 c ± 0.04 | 1.11 acd ± 0.06 | 7.23 d ± 0.15 |
| Sapodilla (ciku) |
| Pulp | 80.92 d ± 0.06 | 1.08 cd ± 0.11 | 5.66 e ± 0.23 |
| Mango |
| Pulp | 84.28 ce ± 0.03 | 1.04 d ± 0.13 | 6.62 f ± 0.07 |
| Kiwifruit |
| Pulp | 87.01 f ± 0.04 | 0.90 e ± 0.04 | 6.93 g ± 0.15 |
| Mandarin orange |
| Peel | 75.20 g ± 0.27 | 0.47 b ± 0.02 | 1.90 h ± 0.10 |
| Garden tomato |
| Whole without seeds | 91.24 h ± 0.15 | 0.42 bf ± 0.08 | 4.79 i ± 0.08 |
| Pineapple |
| Pulp | 89.95 i ± 0.03 | 0.40 bf ± 0.03 | 3.98 j ± 0.11 |
| Marian plum (kundang) |
| Pulp | 84.13 e ± 0.15 | 0.34 f ± 0.10 | 2.14 k ± 0.03 |
| Red dragon fruit |
| Pulp | 87.69 j ± 0.08 | 0.33 f ± 0.11 | 2.68 l ± 0.07 |
| Guava |
| Whole without seeds | 91.29 h ± 0.08 | 0.20 g ± 0.02 | 2.30 m ± 0.06 |
| Water apple (jambu air) |
| Whole | 92.50 k ± 0.03 | 0.20 g ± 0.03 | 2.67 l ± 0.06 |
| Jackfruit |
| Pulp | 77.92 l ± 0.33 | 0.2 0g ± 0.05 | 0.91 n ± 0.09 |
| Honeydew |
| Whole without seeds | 94.36 m ± 0.03 | 0.20 g ± 0.02 | 3.55 b ± 0.23 |
| Red apple |
| Whole without seeds | 83.56 n ± 0.23 | 0.16 g ± 0.06 | 0.97 o ± 0.04 |
| Cupuassu |
| Pulp | NA | NA | 7.00 g ± NA [16] * |
| Longan |
| Pulp | NA | NA | 4.46 i ± 0.09 [17] * |
| Gold kiwifruit |
| Whole | 80.99 d ± 0.14 | NA | 6.69 f ± NA [18] * |
Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3) of triplicate analysis. a–o Means followed by different superscripts indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within column by Tukey’s test. * Published data.
Figure 1Visual presence of globular and continuous fibrilar network hydrocolloids (after precipitation in chilled aqueous ethanol) from tamarillo fruit fractions.
Proximate compositions of tamarillo hydrocolloid extracted using water (THwater).
| Component | Composition |
|---|---|
| Moisture (%) | 10.65 ± 0.32 |
| Dry matter (%) | 89.35 ± 0.32 |
| Ash (% dry weight) | 0.80 ± 0.09 |
| Protein (% dry weight) | 21.18 ± 0.06 |
| Starch (% dry weight) | 0.83 ± 0.06 |
| Dietary fibre by difference a (% dry weight) | 66.48 ± 0.52 |
Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3) of triplicate analysis; a Dietary fibre by difference = 100% − (Moisture + Ash + Protein + Starch)%.
Water holding capacity (WHC) and oil holding capacity (OHC) of Tamarillo and commercial hydrocolloids.
| Type of hydrocolloid | WHC (g water/g dry sample) | OHC (g oil/g dry sample) |
|---|---|---|
| THwater | 5.82 a ± 0.75 | 2.00 ab ± 0.07 |
| Agar-agar | 7.99 b ± 0.80 | 2.25 b ± 0.07 |
| Apple pectin | 6.71 ab ± 0.52 | 2.11 ab ± 0.17 |
| Bovine gelatine | 0.00 c ± 0.00 | 1.06 cfg ± 0.03 |
| Carrageenan | 28.21 d ± 0.92 | 1.31 dh ± 0.05 |
| Citrus pectin | 1.38 c ± 0.06 | 1.55 de ± 0.09 |
| CMC | 0.00 c ± 0.00 | 1.58 e ± 0.03 |
| Gum arabic | 0.28 c ± 0.15 | 1.00 cf ± 0.10 |
| Karaya gum | 24.39 e ± 0.17 | 1.12 cfgh ± 0.02 |
| Sodium alginate | 0.00 c ± 0.00 | 1.22 fgh ± 0.02 |
| Wheat starch | 0.74 c ± 0.02 | 0.92 c ± 0.03 |
| Xanthan gum | 62.63 f ± 0.91 | 1.28 gh ± 0.03 |
Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3) of triplicate analysis; a–h Means followed by different superscripts indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within column by Tukey’s HSD test.
Figure 2Emulsifying activity (EA) and emulsion stability (ES) of tamarillo and commercial hydrocolloids.
Figure 3Foaming capacity (FC) of tamarillo and commercial hydrocolloids at time, t = 0.
Foaming stability (%) of tamarillo and commercial hydrocolloids.
| Hydrocolloids | Foaming stability (%) at time, t (min) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| t = 1 | t = 10 | t = 30 | t = 60 | t = 90 | t = 120 | |
| THwater | 97.59 aA | 91.96 aB | 84.99 aC | 81.51 aD | 79.36 aE | 79.36 aE |
| Agar-agar | 100 bA | 0 bB | 0 bB | 0 bB | 0 bB | 0 bB |
| Apple pectin | 100 bA | 100 cA | 100 cA | 50 cB | 50 cB | 50 cB |
| Bovine gelatine | 90.36 cA | 51.80 dB | 31.57 dC | 23.87 dD | 19.77 dE | 11.01 dF |
| Carrageenan | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| Citrus pectin | 66.67dA | 66.67 eA | 66.67 eA | 66.67 eA | 66.67 eA | 66.67 eA |
| CMC | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| Gum arabic | 90.46 cA | 82.37 fB | 66.77 eC | 46.40 fD | 28.69 fE | 22.25 fF |
| Karaya gum | 97.62 aA | 85.79 gB | 75.87 fC | 75.87 gC | 63.1 gD | 48.73 gE |
| Sodium alginate | 100 bA | 100 cA | 100 cA | 50 cB | 25 hC | 12.5 hD |
| Wheat starch | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
| Xanthan gum | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. | n.d. |
Each value is expressed as mean (n = 3) of triplicate analysis with standard deviation < 1. n.d.: Not determined since foaming capacity of the hydrocolloid is 0. a–h Means followed by different superscript lowercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within column by Tukey’s test. A–F Means followed by different superscript uppercase letters indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) within row by Tukey’s test.
Figure 4FT-IR spectra of tamarillo hydrocolloid (THwater), citrus and apple pectins.
Degree of esterification (DE) of tamarillo hydrocolloid (THwater), apple and citrus pectins measured using FT-IR spectroscopy.
| Hydrocolloid | Degree of esterification (%) |
|---|---|
| THwater | 49.47 a ± 0.23 |
| Citrus pectin | 68.00 b ± 0.19 |
| Apple pectin | 69.64 c ± 0.26 |
Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3) of triplicate analysis; a–c Means followed by different superscripts indicate significant differences (p < 0.05) by Tukey’s test.
Figure 5Chromatogram of PMP derivatives of monosaccharide standard and tamarillo hydrocolloid (THwater).
Monosaccharide composition (mol %) of hydrocolloid extracted from tamarillo puree (THwater).
| Monosaccharide | Composition (mol%) a |
|---|---|
| Mannose | Tr b |
| Ribose | tr |
| Rhamnose | tr |
| Glucuronic acid | 0 |
| Galacturonic acid | 0.98 ± 0.28 |
| Glucose | 7.05 ± 0.21 |
| Galactose | 51.63 ± 0.97 |
| Xylose | tr |
| Arabinose | 38.80 ± 0.69 |
| Fucose | 0 |
Each value is expressed as mean ± standard deviation (n = 3) of triplicate analysis. a mol% = (amount of individual monosaccharide/total amount of monosaccharide present in the sample) × 100; b tr: Traces < 0.01 mol%.
Figure 6Preparation of pulp, seed mucilage and puree fractions from fresh Tamarillo fruits.