4.5 Article

The evaluation of chemical, antioxidant, antimicrobial and sensory properties of kombucha tea beverage

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-MYSORE
卷 57, 期 5, 页码 1840-1846

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s13197-019-04217-3

关键词

Mineral composition; Black tea; Organic acids; Antioxidant activity; Polyphenols

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim of the present study was to determine the chemical composition (organic acids-acetic, tartaric, citric; sugars-sucrose, glucose, fructose; total acidity, alcohol content, pH-with FTIR instrument; content of selected mineral compounds-AAS instrument), antioxidant activity, antimicrobial activity and sensory profiles of prepared kombucha tea beverage. Black tea with white sugar as a substrate for kombucha beverage was used as a control sample. The dominant organic acid in kombucha tea beverage was acetic acid (1.55 g/L), followed by tartaric and citric acids. The sucrose (17.81 g/L) was the dominant sugar from detected sugars. Antioxidant activity of beverage tested by reducing power method (1318.56 mg TEAC/L) was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in comparison with black tea (345.59 mg TEAC/L). The same tendency was observed for total polyphenol content which was significantly higher (p < 0.05) in kombucha beverage (412.25 mg GAE/L) than in black tea (180.17 mg GAE/L). Among mineral compounds, the amount of manganese (1.57 mg/L) and zinc (0.53 mg/L) was the highest in kombucha tea beverage. Results of antimicrobial activity of kombucha tea beverage showed strong inhibition of Candida krusei CCM 8271 (15.81 mm), C. glabrata CCM 8270 (16 mm), C. albicans CCM 8186 (12 mm), C. tropicalis CCM 8223 (14 mm), Haemophilus influenzae CCM 4454 (10 mm) and Escherichia coli CCM 3954 (4 mm). Sensory properties of prepared beverage were evaluated overall as good with the best score in a taste (pleasant fruity-sour taste). The consumption of kombucha tea beverage as a part of drinking mode of consumers due to health benefits is recommended.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据