| Literature DB >> 27433115 |
Hyung-Seok Yu1, Na-Kyoung Lee1, Hye-Lin Jeon1, Su Jin Eom1, Mi-Young Yoo2, Sang-Dong Lim2, Hyun-Dong Paik1.
Abstract
Benzoic acid is occasionally used as a raw material supplement in food products and is sometimes generated during the fermentation process. In this study, the production of naturally occurring yogurt preservatives was investigated for various starter cultures and incubation temperatures, and considered food regulations. Streptococcus thermophilus, Lactobacillus acidophilus, Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, Lactobacillus rhamnosus, Lactobacillus casei, Lactobacillus paracasei, Lactobacillus reuteri, Lactobacillus plantarum, Bifidobacterium longum, Bifidobacterium lactis, Bifidobacterium bifidum, Bifidobacterium infantis, and Bifidobacterium breve were used as yogurt starter cultures in commercial starters. Among these strains, L. rhamnosus and L. paracasei showed the highest production of benzoic acid. Therefore, the use of L. rhamnosus, L. paracasei, S. thermophilus, and different incubation temperatures were examined to optimize benzoic acid production. Response surface methodology (RSM) based on a central composite design was performed for various incubation temperatures (35-44℃) and starter culture inoculum ratios (0-0.04%) in a commercial range of dairy fermentation processes. The optimum conditions were 0.04% L. rhamnosus, 0.01% L. paracasei, 0.02% S. thermophilus, and 38.12℃, and the predicted and estimated concentrations of benzoic acid were 13.31 and 13.94 mg/kg, respectively. These conditions maximized naturally occurring benzoic acid production during the yogurt fermentation process, and the observed production levels satisfied regulatory guidelines for benzoic acid in dairy products.Entities:
Keywords: benzoic acid; food regulation; natural preservative; response surface method; yogurt starter
Year: 2016 PMID: 27433115 PMCID: PMC4942559 DOI: 10.5851/kosfa.2016.36.3.427
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Food Sci Anim Resour ISSN: 1225-8563 Impact factor: 2.622
Variables, codes, and experimental values used in the central composite design
| Variables | Coded levels | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| −2 | −1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | |
| Temperature (a, ℃) | 35 | 37 | 40 | 42 | 44 |
| 0 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | |
| 0 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | |
| 0 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | |
Experimental design and benzoic acid production results
| Run no. | a (℃) | b (%) | c (%) | d (%) | Max. benzoic acid (mg/kg) | Cell no. (Log CFU/mL) | pH | Incubation time (h) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0 | −2 | 0 | 0 | 12.12 ± 0.02 | 9.37 ± 0.00 | 5.03 | 3 |
| 2 | +2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.95 ± 0.03 | 9.41 ± 0.03 | 4.59 | 6 |
| 3 | 0 | 0 | −2 | 0 | 11.39 ± 0.01 | 9.35 ± 0.02 | 4.53 | 5 |
| 4 | +1 | −1 | +1 | −1 | 11.55 ± 0.03 | 9.31 ± 0.01 | 4.50 | 6 |
| 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | −2 | 11.23 ± 0.02 | 9.53 ± 0.08 | 5.07 | 13 |
| 6 | +1 | −1 | −1 | +1 | 11.23 ± 0.04 | 9.36 ± 0.02 | 5.12 | 3 |
| 7 | +1 | +1 | −1 | −1 | 11.86 ± 0.03 | 9.17 ± 0.05 | 4.86 | 4 |
| 8 | −1 | +1 | +1 | −1 | 11.64 ± 0.04 | 9.55 ± 0.01 | 5.05 | 5 |
| 9 | −1 | −1 | +1 | −1 | 10.82 ± 0.03 | 9.45 ± 0.01 | 4.70 | 6 |
| 10 | −1 | +1 | +1 | +1 | 12.26 ± 0.02 | 9.57 ± 0.02 | 4.74 | 5 |
| 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.51 ± 0.01 | 9.34 ± 0.03 | 4.73 | 4 |
| 12 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.72 ± 0.03 | 9.38 ± 0.02 | 4.77 | 4 |
| 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.71 ± 0.02 | 9.45 ± 0.02 | 4.74 | 4 |
| 14 | −1 | +1 | −1 | +1 | 12.73 ± 0.06 | 9.39 ± 0.01 | 4.70 | 5 |
| 15 | +1 | +1 | −1 | +1 | 11.94 ± 0.04 | 9.17 ± 0.03 | 5.01 | 3 |
| 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10.59 ± 0.04 | 9.11 ± 0.03 | 5.02 | 3 |
| 17 | +1 | +1 | +1 | +1 | 11.99 ± 0.04 | 9.45 ± 0.02 | 4.95 | 3 |
| 18 | −2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11.73 ± 0.06 | 9.60 ± 0.02 | 4.58 | 7 |
| 19 | 0 | 0 | +2 | 0 | 11.38 ± 0.03 | 9.55 ± 0.02 | 4.88 | 4 |
| 20 | 0 | +2 | 0 | 0 | 12.86 ± 0.01 | 9.47 ± 0.02 | 4.56 | 4 |
| 21 | −1 | +1 | −1 | −1 | 12.71 ± 0.01 | 9.44 ± 0.01 | 4.72 | 6 |
| 22 | +1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 12.70 ± 0.03 | 9.40 ± 0.03 | 4.98 | 3 |
| 23 | 0 | 0 | 0 | +2 | 11.88 ± 0.03 | 9.21 ± 0.02 | 4.73 | 4 |
| 24 | +1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 11.07 ± 0.02 | 9.31 ± 0.01 | 5.13 | 3 |
| 25 | +1 | +1 | +1 | −1 | 11.29 ± 0.02 | 9.38 ± 0.01 | 5.13 | 3 |
| 26 | −1 | −1 | −1 | +1 | 12.33 ± 0.05 | 9.37 ± 0.01 | 4.94 | 4 |
| 27 | −1 | −1 | +1 | +1 | 12.19 ± 0.01 | 9.52 ± 0.05 | 4.55 | 6 |
| 28 | −1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 11.28 ± 0.03 | 9.53 ± 0.03 | 4.62 | 6 |
a, temperature; b, L. rhamnosus; c, L. paracasei; d, S. thermophilus.
Benzoic acid production with respect to yogurt starter
| Strains | Benzoic acid (mg/kg) | |
|---|---|---|
| Single strainA | Mixed culture with | |
| 1.30 ± 0.24c | 3.68 ± 0.48b | |
| 0.79 ± 0.00b | 0.85 ± 0.11a | |
| 2.45 ± 0.18cd | 2.15 ± 0.18b | |
| 13.89 ± 0.63f | 10.12 ± 0.49c | |
| 4.04 ± 0.87d | 0.76 ± 0.04a | |
| 17.46 ± 0.54g | 11.36 ± 1.09e | |
| 1.36 ± 0.16c | 0.82 ± 0.17a | |
| 13.99 ± 0.24f | 8.90 ± 0.16c | |
| 0.77 ± 0.22b | 0.78 ± 0.13a | |
| 4.97 ± 0.25e | 0.84 ± 0.14a | |
| 1.43 ± 0.23c | 0.86 ± 0.15a | |
| N.D. | 0.82 ± 0.10a | |
| 4.87 ± 0.13e | 0.83 ± 0.03a | |
AYogurt incubated for 24 h. BYogurt incubated for 6 h.
These values represented as mean±SD.
a-fThe letters are different significantly.
N.D. means not detected.
Fig. 1.Effect of benzoic acid production with respect to incubation temperature. (a) Yogurt produced by a mixed culture of Lactobacillus rhamnosus with Streptococcus thermophilus, (b) yogurt produced by a mixed culture of Lactobacillus paracasei with Streptococcus thermophiles. ○ , bacterial cell number of incubated yogurt at 37℃ (Log CFU/mL); ● , bacterial cell number of incubated yogurt at 42℃ (Log CFU/mL); □ , benzoic acid (mg/kg) of incubated yogurt at 37℃; ■ , benzoic acid (mg/kg) of incubated yogurt at 42℃.
Results of the central composite design response surface regression analysis for benzoic acid production
| Parameter | DF | Estimate | Standard error | T value | Significant level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1 | 74.411029 | 5.621842 | 13.24 | < 0.0001 |
| a | 1 | −3.043319 | 0.278768 | −10.92 | < 0.0001 |
| b | 1 | 116.262240 | 36.399545 | 3.19 | < 0.0001 |
| c | 1 | −428.248725 | 36.399545 | −11.77 | < 0.0001 |
| a × a | 1 | 0.037506 | 0.003514 | 10.67 | < 0.0001 |
| b × a | 1 | −5.486842 | 0.884150 | −6.21 | < 0.0001 |
| b × b | 1 | 4816.854099 | 180.319220 | 26.71 | < 0.0001 |
| c × a | 1 | 8.936404 | 0.884150 | 10.11 | < 0.0001 |
| c × b | 1 | −214.750000 | 222.506215 | −9.63 | < 0.0001 |
| c × c | 1 | 2050.187433 | 180.319220 | 11.37 | < 0.0001 |
| d × a | 1 | −2.807018 | 0.884150 | −3.17 | < 0.005 |
| d × b | 1 | −1443.750000 | 222.506215 | −6.49 | < 0.0001 |
| d × c | 1 | 1585.416667 | 222.506215 | 7.13 | < 0.0001 |
| d × d | 1 | 2471.020766 | 180.319220 | 13.70 | < 0.0001 |
a, temperature; b, L. rhamnosus; c, L. paracasei; d, S. thermophilus.
ANOVA results for the central composite design
| Regression | DF | Type 1 sum of squares | R-square | F value | Significant level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Linear | 4 | 10.440892 | 0.2680 | 109.84 | < 0.0001 |
| Quadratic | 4 | 18.879068 | 0.4846 | 198.61 | < 0.0001 |
| Crossproduct | 6 | 7.995400 | 0.2052 | 56.07 | < 0.0001 |
| Total model | 14 | 37.315360 | 0.9579 | 112.16 | < 0.0001 |
Fig. 2.Contour plots for benzoic acid production for the combination of (a) incubation temperature and L. rhamnosus, (b) incubation temperature and L. paracasei, (c) incubation temperature and S. thermophilus, (d) L. rhamnosus and L. paracasei, (e) L. paracasei and S. thermophilus.
Fig. 3.Production of benzoic acid at optimized conditions (38.12℃, 0.04% --, bacterial cell number (Log CFU/mL); ■, benzoic acid (mg/kg).