Development and characterization of light yoghurt elaborated with Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis Bb-12 and fructooligosaccharides

Witschinski, Fabiele; Demartini, Débora; Kilian, Josiane; Dallago, Rogério Marcos; Rosa, Clarissa Dalla; Cansian, Rogério Luis; Valduga, Eunice; Steffens, Juliana

doi:10.1590/0103-8478cr20170560

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil
SciELO.org - Rede SciELO
Blog SciELO em Perspectiva

Abrir menu

Brasil

Español English

Ciência Rural

Submissão de manuscritos
Sobre o periódico
Corpo Editorial
Instruções aos autores
Contato

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Resumo (Inglês)
Resumo (Português)

Texto (Inglês)

Download PDF (Inglês)

Compartilhe

Compartilhe
E-mail
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
LinkedIn
Reddit
StambleUpon
CiteULike
Mendeley

Sumário

Compartilhe
E-mail
Facebook
Twitter
Google+
LinkedIn
Reddit
StambleUpon
CiteULike
Mendeley

Resumo (Inglês)
Resumo (Português)

Texto (Inglês)

Download PDF (Inglês)

Food technology • Cienc. Rural 48 (03) • 2018 • https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20170560 copy

Development and characterization of light yoghurt elaborated with Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis Bb-12 and fructooligosaccharides

Desenvolvimento e caracterização de iogurte light elaborado com Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis Bb-12 e fruto-oligossacarídeos

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT:

This study aimed to evaluate the effects of adding probiotic culture (Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis Bb-12) and prebiotics (fructooligosaccharide - FOS) to yoghurt formulations stored at 4°C for 28 days, using an experimental design (independent variables: (0-3% of FOS and probiotic starter cultures 0-3%). The pH, acidity, fat, syneresis, protein, ºBrix, sugars, FOS and probiotic bacteria count were analyzed. The probiotic- and prebiotic-added yoghurt formulations showed lower acidity, syneresis and glucose than the control yoghurt and compared to formulations containing probiotic and prebiotic separately. The 3% probiotic and prebiotic formulation showed a lower loss of concentration of FOS, and after 28 days presented 1.5g of FOS per 100g (0.3% kestose, 0.7% nystose, 0.5% fructosyl-nystose). Furthermore, the addition of prebiotics exerted a protective effect on probiotic bacteria, enhancing their survival.

Key words:
yoghurt; probiotic; Bifidobacterium; prebiotics; fructooligosaccharides

Authorship

Fabiele Witschinski

Universidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões (URI), 99709-910, Erechim, RS, Brasil. Universidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das MissõesBrazilErechim, RS, BrazilUniversidade Regional Integrada do Alto Uruguai e das Missões (URI), 99709-910, Erechim, RS, Brasil.

Débora Demartini

Josiane Kilian

Rogério Marcos Dallago

Clarissa Dalla Rosa

Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul (UFFS), Erechim, RS, Brasil.Universidade Federal da Fronteira SulBrazilErechim, RS, BrazilUniversidade Federal da Fronteira Sul (UFFS), Erechim, RS, Brasil.

Rogério Luis Cansian

Eunice Valduga

Juliana Steffens ^*E-mail: julisteffens@uricer.edu.br. *Corresponding author

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6607-2283

E-mail: julisteffens@uricer.edu.br. ^*Corresponding author

SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Universidade Federal da Fronteira Sul (UFFS), Erechim, RS, Brasil.Universidade Federal da Fronteira SulBrazilErechim, RS, BrazilUniversidade Federal da Fronteira Sul (UFFS), Erechim, RS, Brasil.

Figures | Tables

Figures (3)
Tables (3)

Thumbnail

Figure 1
Pareto chart for pH values on the 7th (a) and 28th (b) day of storage and acidity on the 1st (c) and 21st (d) day of storage, respectively.

Thumbnail

Figure 2
Behaviour of lactose (a), sucrose (b) and glucose (c) consumption of yoghurt by bacteria during storage.

Thumbnail

Figure 3
Content of kestose, nystose fructosyl-nystose in yoghurt for run 2 (a), run 4 (b) and run 5 (c) as a function of storage time.

Thumbnail

Table 1
Matrix of factorial design 2² (real and coded values) for the responses pH and acidity of the yoghurt formulations during the days of storage.

Thumbnail

Table 2
Matrix of factorial design 2² (real and coded values) for the response syneresis of the yoghurt formulations during the days of storage.

Thumbnail

Table 3
Matrix of 2² factorial design (real and coded values) for the response count of probiotic bacteria (log10 CFU/mL) on the 1^st, 7^th, 14^th, 21^st and 28^th day of storage.

Figure 1 Pareto chart for pH values on the 7th (a) and 28th (b) day of storage and acidity on the 1st (c) and 21st (d) day of storage, respectively.

Figure 2 Behaviour of lactose (a), sucrose (b) and glucose (c) consumption of yoghurt by bacteria during storage.

Figure 3 Content of kestose, nystose fructosyl-nystose in yoghurt for run 2 (a), run 4 (b) and run 5 (c) as a function of storage time.

Table 1 Matrix of factorial design 2² (real and coded values) for the responses pH and acidity of the yoghurt formulations during the days of storage.

Run

----Variables^*----

--------------------------------pH--------------------------------

-------------------Acidity (% of lactic acid)-------------------

X₁

X₂

1^st

7^th

14^th

21^st

28^th

1^st

7^th

14^th

21^st

28 ^th

-1(0)

-1 (0)

4.50^a (0.01)

4.52^a (0.01)

4.45^a (0.01)

4.18^b (0.08)

4.12^b (0.12)

0.95^c (0.01)

0.98^cb (0.05)

1.05^b (0.01)

1.23^a (0.02)

1.22^a (0.02)

1(3.0)

-1 (0)

4.84^a (0.01)

4.50^b (0.01)

4.37^c (0.01)

4.25^d (0,01)

4.09^e (0.02)

0.85^b (0.02)

0.90^b (0.03)

0.94^b (0.02)

1.15^b (0.07)

1.24^a (0.03)

-1(0)

1(3.0)

4.97^a (0.02)

4.70^b (0.01)

4.39^c (0.01)

4.32^c (0.05)

4.20^d (0.03)

0.82^c (0.01)

0.94^b (0.02)

1.00^b (0.02)

1.14^a (0.05)

1.17^a (0.07)

1(3.0)

4.77^a (0.01)

4.50^b (0.01)

4.45^c (0.01)

4.35^d (0.01)

4.20^e (0.01)

0.86^c (0.06)

0.95^bc (0.06)

0.99^b (0.04)

0.98^bc (0.04)

1.21^a (0.03)

0(1.5)

4.82^a (0.01)

4.46^b (0.01)

4.50^b (0.01)

4.34^c (0.04)

4.23^d (0.01)

0.80^c (0.01)

1.00^b (0.02)

1.00^b (0.05)

0.98^b (0.02)

1.20^a (0.01)

^*X₁= fructooligosaccharides (%), ^*X₂ = Probiotic starter cultures (%); ^**Average (standard deviation) followed by the same letters in rows indicate no significant difference between days of storage at 5% level (Tukey test).

Table 2 Matrix of factorial design 2² (real and coded values) for the response syneresis of the yoghurt formulations during the days of storage.

Run	---------------Variables---------------		---------------------------------------------------Syneresis^**(%)---------------------------------------------------
	X₁	X₂	1^st	7^th	14 ^th	21^st	28 ^th
1	-1(0)	-1(0)	28.43^ab (1.00)	26.04^b (1.25)	25.43^b (0.99)	32.17 (2.12)	32.81^a (0.26)
2	1(3.0)	-1 (0)	33.39^a (0.00)	29.19^a (1.43)	29.20^a (0.33)	33.80^a (1.07)	35.49^a (0.00)
3	-1(0)	1(3.0)	25.65^b (1.00)	27.08^b (1.53)	24.97^b (1.36)	24.69^b (0.44)	33.71^a (1.15)
4	1(3.0)	1(3.0)	28.25^b (1.00)	28.29^b (1.00)	26.62^b (0.54)	26.24^b(1.00)	34.14^a (0.20)
5	0(1.5)	0(1.5)	31.44^b (0.48)	31.67^b (1.42)	31.18^b (0.44)	34.82^a (0.56)	34.99^a (0.34)

^*X₁= fructooligosaccharides (%), ^*X₂ = Probiotic starter cultures (%); ^**Average (standard deviation) followed by the same letters in rows indicate no significant difference between days of storage at 5% level (Tukey test).

Table 3 Matrix of 2² factorial design (real and coded values) for the response count of probiotic bacteria (log10 CFU/mL) on the 1^st, 7^th, 14^th, 21^st and 28^th day of storage.

Run	Independent variable^*		----------------------------------------^**Probiotic bacteria (log₁₀ CFU/mL)----------------------------------------
	X₁	X₂	1^st day	7^th day	14^th day	21^st day	28^th day
1	-1 (0)	-1 (0)	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
2	1 (3.0)	-1 (0)	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
3	-1 (0)	1 (3.0)	12.151^a (±0.28)	11.55^b (±0.07)	9.55^b (±0.16)	8.26^c (±0.07)	7.42^c (±0.22)
4	1 (3.0)	1 (3.0)	13.34^a (±0.00)	12.88^a (±0.05)	10.59^b (±0.00)	10.39^b (±0.04)	10.04^b (±0.10)
5	0 (1.5)	0 (1.5)	10.97^a (±0.15)	10.65^a (±0.01)	9.26^b (±0.05)	8.68^b (±0.03)	7.04^c (±0.03)

^*X₁= fructooligosaccharides (%), ^*X₂ = Probiotic starter cultures (%); ^**Average (standard deviation) followed by the same letters in rows indicate no significant difference between days of storage at 5% level (Tukey test).

How to cite

copy

Universidade Federal de Santa Maria Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Centro de Ciências Rurais , 97105-900 Santa Maria RS Brazil , Tel.: +55 55 3220-8698 , Fax: +55 55 3220-8695 - Santa Maria - RS - Brazil
E-mail: cienciarural@mail.ufsm.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

Versão para download de PDF

PDF

Inglês

Versões e tradução automática

Versão original do texto

English

Tradução automática

Google Translator
Microsoft Translator

Como citar

RIS

BIBTEX

Outros formatos de citação e exportação:

SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online
Rua Dr. Diogo de Faria, 1087 – 9º andar – Vila Clementino 04037-003 São Paulo/SP - Brasil
E-mail: scielo@scielo.org

Leia a Declaração de Acesso Aberto

Métricas

Development and characterization of light yoghurt elaborated with Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. Lactis Bb-12 and fructooligosaccharides

PlumX

Mensagem

[1] E-mail: julisteffens@uricer.edu.br. ^*Corresponding author