Chemical Properties, Antioxidant Activities and Sensory Evaluation of Berry Vinegar

Authors

  • Wilawan BOONSUPA Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, Rajabhat Maha Sarakham University, Mahasarakham 44000

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.48048/wjst.2019.4562

Keywords:

Antioxidant activity, fermentation, fruit vinegar, berry, sensory evaluation

Abstract

This study was carried out to examine the chemical properties, antioxidant activities and sensory scores of berry vinegar produced from 4 berry species, namely Morus alba L. (Mulberry), Vaccinium macrocarpon L. (Cranberry), Rubus idaeus L. (Rasberry), and Rubus laciniatus L. (Blackberry). Berry vinegars were produced via a 2-stage (alcoholic and acetous) fermentation process. The initial soluble solid contents in the berry juice were adjusted to 22 ºBrix before the fermentation. Alcoholic fermentation was conducted using Saccharomyces cerevisiae as the inoculant while Acetobacter pasteurianus was used for acetous fermentation. As observed for all samples during the alcoholic fermentation the levels of soluble solids decreased continuously and the levels of alcohol were found to increase at the end of fermentation process. Notably, the wine produced from ‘Blackberry’ species exhibited the highest levels of alcohol (11.73 %) while those produced from ‘Mulberry’ exhibited the highest levels of antioxidant activity (60.85 %). Similar results were observed for all samples during the acetous fermentation, in which the levels of alcohol dropped continuously and the levels of acetic acid were noted to elevate at the end of the fermentation process. The highest levels of acetic acid (5.01 %) was detected in the vinegars produced from ‘Cranberry’ species while those produced form ‘Raspberry’ species exhibited the highest levels of antioxidant activity (74.43 %). Sensory evaluation based on the 9-point hedonic scales showed that the vinegars produced from ‘Mulberry’ species displayed the highest overall acceptability with an average score of 7.27, equivalent to the hedonic scale of 9, which indicated the moderately pleasant levels of the vinegar preference of the consumers.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

D Jo, GR Kim, SH Yeo, YJ Jeong, BS Noh and JH Kwon. Analysis of aroma compounds of commercial cider vinegars with different acidities using SPME/GC-MS, electronic nose, and sensory evaluation. Food Sci. Biotech. 2013; 22, 1559-65.

CW Ho, AM Lazim, S Fazry, UKHH Zaki and S Lim. Varieties, production, composition and health benefits of vinegars: A review. Food Chem. 2017; 221, 1621-30.

CS Johnston and CA Gaas. Vinegar: Medicinal uses and antiglycemic effect. Medsc. Gen. Med. 2006; 8, 61-1.

L Solieri and P Giudici. Vinegars of the World. In: L Solieri and P Giudici (Eds.). Vinegars of the World. Springer Milan, Milano, Italia, 2009, p. 1-16.

NH Budak, E Aykin, AC Seydim, AK Greene and ZB Guzel-Seydim. Functional properties of vinegar. J. Food Sci. 2014; 79, 757-64.

PR Ghosh, D Fawcett, SB Sharma and GE Poinern. Progress towards sustainable utilisation and management of food wastes in the global economy. Int. J. Food Sci. 2016; 2016, 3563478.

F Shahidi, J McDonald, A Chandrasekara and Y Zhong. Phytochemicals of foods, beverages and fruit vinegars: Chemistry and health effects. Asia Pac. J. Clin. Nutr. 2008; 17, 380-2.

RM Callejon, ML Morales, AC Ferreira and AM Troncoso. Defining the typical aroma of sherry vinegar: Sensory and chemical approach. J. Agr. Food Chem. 2008; 56, 8086-95.

J Liang, J Xie, L Hou, M Zhao, J Zhao, J Cheng, S Wang and BG Sun. Aroma constituents in Shanxi aged vinegar before and after aging. J. Agr. Food Chem. 2016; 64, 7597-605.

ML Morales, W Tesfaye, MC Garcia-Parrilla, JA Casas and AM Troncoso. Evolution of the aroma profile of sherry wine vinegars during an experimental aging in wood. J. Agr. Food Chem. 2002; 50, 3173-8.

C Ubeda, RM Callejón, AM Troncoso, JM Moreno-Rojas, F Peña and ML Morales. Characterization of odour active compounds in strawberry vinegars. Flavour Fragrance J. 2012; 27, 313-21.

Y Chen, Y Huang, Y Bai, C Fu, M Zhou, B Gao, C Wang, D Li, Y Hu and N Xu. Effects of mixed cultures of Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Lactobacillus plantarum in alcoholic fermentation on the physicochemical and sensory properties of citrus vinegar. LWT Food Sci. Tech. 2017; 84, 753-63.

Y Kim, AJ Lounds-Singleton and ST Talcott. Antioxidant phytochemical and quality changes associated with hot water immersion treatment of berries (Mangifera indica L.). Food Chem. 2009; 115, 989-93.

VL Singleton, R Orthofer and RM Lamuela-Raventós. Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent. Meth. Enzymol. 1999; 299, 152-78.

W Brand-Williams, ME Cuvelier and C Berset. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. LWT Food Sci. Tech. 1995; 28, 25-30.

L Wang, X Sun, F Li, D Yu, X Liu, W Huang and J Zhan. Dynamic changes in phenolic compounds, colour and antioxidant activity of mulberry wine during alcoholic fermentation. J. Funct. Food 2015; 18, 254-65.

F Taniasuri, PR Lee and SQ Liu. Induction of simultaneous and sequential malolactic fermentation in durian wine. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2016; 230, 1-9.

J Dynesen, H Smits, L Olsson and J Nielsen. Carbon catabolite repression of invertase during batch cultivations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: The role of glucose, fructose, and mannose. Appl. Microbiol. Biotech. 1998; 50, 579-82.

T Li, YM Lo and B Moon. Feasibility of using Hericium erinaceus as the substrate for vinegar fermentation. LWT Food Sci. Tech. 2014; 55, 323-8.

C Hidalgo, MJ Torija, A Mas and E Mateo. Effect of inoculation on strawberry fermentation and acetification processes using native strains of yeast and acetic acid bacteria. Food Microbiol. 2013; 34, 88-94.

W Tesfaye, MC García‐Parrilla and AM Troncoso. Set up and optimization of a laboratory scale fermentor for the production of wine vinegar. J. Inst. Brew. 2000; 106, 215-9.

JE Chun, MY Baik and BY Kim. Manufacture and quality evaluation of purple sweet potato Makgeolli vinegar using a 2-stage fermentation. Food Sci. Biotech. 2014; 23, 1145-9.

UB Jagtap and VA Bapat. Wines from fruits other than grapes: Current status and future prospectus. Foodbioscience 2015; 9, 80-96.

C Ubeda, RM Callejón, C Hidalgo, MJ Torija, AM Troncoso and ML Morales. Employment of different processes for the production of strawberry vinegars: Effects on antioxidant activity, total phenols and monomeric anthocyanins. LWT Food Sci. Tech. 2013; 52, 139-45.

CK Wang, HY Fu and M Chiang. Cardiovascular disease preventation of cranberry vinegar. Nutr. Sci. J. 2007; 32, 129-32

C Ubeda, RM Callejón, AM Troncoso and ML Morales. Consumer acceptance of new strawberry vinegars by preference mapping. Int. J. Food Prop. 2017; 20, 2760-71.

AV Cardello. Hedonic scaling: Assumptions, contexts and frames of reference. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2017; 15, 14-21.

A Marrufo-Curtido, MJ Cejudo-Bastante, MC Rodríguez-Dodero, R Natera-Marín, R Castro-Mejías, C García-Barroso and E Durán-Guerrero. Novel vinegar-derived product enriched with dietary fiber: Effect on polyphenolic profile, volatile composition and sensory analysis. J. Food Sci. Tech. 2015; 52, 7608-24.

Downloads

Published

2018-06-20

How to Cite

BOONSUPA, W. (2018). Chemical Properties, Antioxidant Activities and Sensory Evaluation of Berry Vinegar. Walailak Journal of Science and Technology (WJST), 16(11), 887–896. https://doi.org/10.48048/wjst.2019.4562

Issue

Section

Research Article