4.6 Article

Technological and Functional Assessment of Riboflavin Enriched Probiotic SoyCurd

期刊

FERMENTATION-BASEL
卷 7, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/fermentation7020047

关键词

probiotic; riboflavin; soycurd; Lactobacillus plantarum

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology, India [DST/INT/South Africa/P-15/2016]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to develop riboflavin enriched fermented soy curds with different probiotic strains and compare their technological and functional properties. The results showed that the product developed with a combination of probiotic strains had higher hardness, cohesiveness, and riboflavin content. Additionally, the probiotic count in the final product was also significantly higher, meeting the requirements for functional foods.
Preparation of soymilk-based product with probiotics is reasonably a novel approach in the field of fermented functional foods. The aim of this study was to develop riboflavin enriched fermented soy curds with either or combination of the two riboflavin producing probiotic strains of Lactobacillus plantarum i.e., MTCC 25432 (BBC32B) and MTCC 25433 (BBC33), and to compare the technological and functional properties of its developed products. Acidification rate and lactic acid production were enhanced with L. plantarum and its combination in a shorter time to reach pH 4.7. Hardness and cohesiveness were significantly (p < 0.05) higher for fermented soymilk by co-culture of L. plantarum followed by individual strains. Similarly, higher G ' (6.25 x 10(2) Pa), G (2.30 x 10(3) Pa) and G* (8.00 x 10(2) Pa) values observed for the combination of both L. plantarum strains showed that the gel formed was firmer and had solid character. The riboflavin content of product developed with a combination of test cultures was significantly higher (342.11 mu g/L) than individual cultures and control. The final product had a higher probiotic count (more than 9 log cfu/mL), which is also required for functional food containing probiotics.

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

4.6
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