| Literature DB >> 35161419 |
Ignasius Radix A P Jati1, Laurensia M Y D Darmoatmodjo1, Thomas I P Suseno1, Susana Ristiarini1, Condro Wibowo2.
Abstract
Orange sweet potato (OSP) and red rice (RR) are rich sources of health benefit-associated substances and can be conventionally cooked or developed into food products. This research approach was to closely monitor the changes of bioactive compounds and their ability as antioxidants from the native form to the food products which are ready to be consumed. Moreover, this research explored the individual carotenoids and tocopherols of raw and cooked OSP and RR and their developed flake products, and also investigated their antioxidant activity, physicochemical properties, and sensory properties. Simultaneous identification using the liquid chromatographic method showed that OSP, RR, and their flake products have significant amounts (µg/g) of β-carotene (278.58-48.83), α-carotene (19.57-15.66), β-cryptoxanthin (4.83-2.97), α-tocopherol (57.65-18.31), and also γ-tocopherol (40.11-12.15). Different responses were observed on the bioactive compound and antioxidant activity affected by heating process. Meanwhile, OSP and RR can be combined to form promising flake products, as shown from the physicochemical analysis such as moisture (5.71-4.25%) and dietary fiber (13.86-9.47%) contents, water absorption index (1.69-1.06), fracturability (8.48-2.27), crispness (3.9-1.5), and color. Those quality parameters were affected by the proportions of OSP and RR in the flake products. Moreover, the preference scores (n = 120 panelists) for the flakes ranged from slightly liked to indifferent. It can be concluded that OSP and RR are potential sources of bioactive compounds which could act as antioxidants and could be developed into flake products that meet the dietary and sensory needs of consumers.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant activity; bioactive compound; flakes; orange sweet potato; physicochemical; red rice; sensory properties
Year: 2022 PMID: 35161419 PMCID: PMC8838036 DOI: 10.3390/plants11030440
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plants (Basel) ISSN: 2223-7747
Bioactive compounds of orange sweet potato (OSP), red rice (RR) and the flake products.
| OSP | RR | Proportions of OSP and RR in Flakes | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Raw | Cooked | Raw | Cooked | 100:0 | 80:20 | 60:40 | 40:60 | 20:80 | 0:100 | |
| Phenolic (mg GAE/100 g DW) | 110.68 ± 18.3 a | 65.21± 7.3 b | 301.89 ± 24.86 a | 152.91 ± 28.92 b | 77.46 ± 8,28 a | 97.34 ± 8.79 b | 102.03 ± 11.65 c | 131.79 ± 10.93 d | 146.09 ± 15.64 e | 162.40 ± 21.54 f |
| Anthocyanin (mg/100 g DW) | nd | nd | 8,81± 0.05 a | 8.64± 0.08 a | nd | nd | 1.74 ± 0.06 c | 2.09 ± 0.05 d | 3.73 ± 0.07 e | 5.81 ± 0.04 f |
| β-carotene (µg/g) | 278.58 ± 31.5 a | 134.17± 17.2 b | 13.17 ± 2.62 a | 7.37 ± 0.5 b | 48,83 ± 3,31 a | 36.27 ± 3.01 b | 25.77 ± 3.45 c | 27.23 ± 2.72 d | 15.69 ± 2.21 e | 3.12 ± 0.66 f |
| α-carotene (µg/g) | 19.57 ± 1.8 a | 23.83 ± 1.6 b | 5.53 ± 1.4 a | 11.66 ± 1.5 b | 15.61 ± 1.44 a | 11.82 ± 3.11 b | 5.31 ± 1.59 c | 2.53 ± 0.87 d | nd | nd |
| β-cryptoxanthin (µg/g) | 4.83 ± 0.2 a | 4.48± 0.8 a | 3.67 ± 2.15 a | 3.96 ± 1.9 a | 2.64 ± 0,05 a | 2.81 ± 0.13 b | 2.97 ± 0.08 | 2.78 ± 0.12 c | 2.77 ± 0.25 c | 2.81 ± 0.16 b,c |
| Lutein (µg/g) | 3.77 ± 0.8 a | 3.81 ± 0.7 a | 2.16 ± 0.8 a | 1.82 ± 0.5 b | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd | nd |
| α-tocopherol (µg/g) | 13,23 ± 1.1 a | 15.11 ± 0,5 b | 34.08 ± 2.2 a | 57.65 ± 2.1 b | 4.58 ± 0.73 a | 7.34 ± 1.49 b | 10.51 ± 1.27 c | 12.45 ± 1.21 c | 16.82 ± 0.52 e | 18.31 ± 0.77 f |
| γ-tocopherol (µg/g) | 2.40 ± 0,2 a | 5.38± 0.05 b | 29.27 ± 2.4 a | 40,11 ± 1.8 b | nd | nd | 3.38 ± 1.22 c | 6.71 ± 1.19 d | 8.06 ± 0.98 e | 12.15 ± 0.73 f |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Different superscript letters (a–f) denote significantly different values according to Duncan’s test (p < 0.05). Comparison was made within each category (OSP, RR, and Flakes).
Figure 1Antioxidant activity of extract determined by (a) DPPH, (b) FRAP, and (c) Superoxide radical assays. Different superscript letters (a–e) denote significantly different values according to Duncan’s test (p < 0.05). Comparison was made within each category (OSP: orange sweet potato, RR: red rice, and flakes).
The physicochemical properties of flakes produced from different ratios of Orange Sweet Potato (OSP), Red Rice (RR).
| Proportions of OSP and RR in Flakes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100:0 | 80:20 | 60:40 | 40:60 | 20:80 | 0:100 | |
| Moisture content (%) | 5.71 ± 0,07 a | 5.31 ± 0.10 b | 5.09 ± 0.06 c | 4.87 ± 0.01 d | 4.43 ± 0.03 e | 4.25 ± 0.03 f |
| Dietary fiber (%) | 9.47 ± 0,01 a | 9.9 ± 0.02 b | 10.9 ± 0.05 c | 11.63 ± 0.34 d | 12.73 ± 0.26 e | 13.86 ± 0.73 f |
| Water absorption index | 1.69 ± 0,03 a | 1.14 ± 0.02 b | 1.06 ± 0.03 c | 0.96 ± 0.03 d | 1.09 ± 0.03 b,c | 1.12 ± 0.02 b,c |
| Fracturability | 8.48 ± 0,09 a | 5.35 ± 0.85 b | 3.34 ± 0.34 c | 2.27 ± 0.04 d | 3.17 ± 0.09 e | 4.64 ± 0.12 f |
| Crispness | 3.9 ± 0,03 a | 2.4 ± 0.02 b | 1.5 ± 0.02 c | 1.9 ± 0.03 d | 3.21 ± 0.05 e | 3.7 ± 0.03 f |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Different superscript letters (a–f) denote significantly different values according to Duncan’s test (p < 0.05). Comparison was made within each row.
Color profiles of flakes produced from different ratios of orange sweet potato (OSP), red rice (RR).
| Proportions of OSP and RR in Flakes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100:0 | 80:20 | 60:40 | 40:60 | 20:80 | 0:100 | |
| L* | 44.0 ± 0.1 | 47.3 ± 0.2 | 51.5 ± 0.1 | 52.7 ± 0.4 | 51.8 ± 0.2 | 51.8 ± 0.7 |
| a* | 8.2 ± 0.3 | 8,5 ± 0.3 | 8.9 ± 0.4 | 9.4 ± 0.4 | 10.2 ± 0.6 | 10.8 ± 0.4 |
| b* | 16.5 ± 0.3 | 14.7 ± 0.2 | 13.4 ± 0.2 | 10.3 ± 0.2 | 9.0 ± 0.4 | 5.9 ± 0.4 |
| oh | 63.574 | 59.9622 | 56.4087 | 47.6158 | 41.4237 | 28.6476 |
| C | 18.47 | 16.9685 | 16.0703 | 13.898 | 13.56 | 12.3145 |
L*: Lightness; a*: redness; b*: yellowness; oh: ohue; C: Chroma.
Preference test of flakes produced from different ratios of orange sweet potato (OSP), red rice (RR).
| Proportions of OSP and RR in Flakes | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 100:0 | 80:20 | 60:40 | 40:60 | 20:80 | 0:100 | |
| Color | 3.35 ± 1.42 a | 4.40 ± 1.22 b | 5.14 ± 1.12 c | 4.93 ± 1.21 c | 4.89 ± 1.30 c | 4.30 ± 1.12 b |
| Taste | 4.43 ± 1.34 a | 4.69 ± 1.28 ab | 5.08 ± 1.18 c | 5.09 ± 1.20 c | 5.05 ± 1.26 bc | 4.72 ± 1.29 abc |
| Crispness | 4.76 ± 1.16 b | 4.85 ± 1.04 b | 4.76 ± 1.40 b | 4.08 ± 1.17 a | 4.96 ± 1.07 b | 5.00 ± 1.04 b |
| Mouthfeel | 5.41 ± 0.91 d | 5.04 ± 1.18 c | 4.84 ± 1.31 bc | 3.91 ± 1.59 a | 4.66 ± 1.32 b | 5.05 ± 1.03 c |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation. Different superscript letters (a–d) denote significantly different values according to Duncan’s test (p < 0.05). Comparison was made within each row.