Fermented soy milk (control) |
Lactobacillus casei PLA5 |
6.79 - 4.13 4.1 – 3.81 |
0.01 - 0.09% - |
4.21 - 9.42 8.11 - 7.6 |
|
|
|
|
30 °C 4 °C |
0 - 48 h 4 - 14 d |
|
|
Lactobacillus casei strain Shirota |
6.80 - 4.64 4.6 – 4.12 |
0.01 - 0.07% - |
4.13 - 9.19 7.83 - 7.2 |
|
|
p < 0.05 |
(Kumari et al., 2018Kumari, A., Angmo, K., Monika, S., & Bhalla, T. (2018). Functional and technological application of probiotic L. casei PLA5 in fermented soymilk. International Food Research Journal, 25(5), 2164-2172.) |
Fermented soymilk with maltodextrin |
|
6.75 - 4.23 |
0.01 - 0.12% |
5.15 - 10.25 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk with fructooligosaccharides |
Lactobacillus casei PLA5 |
6.71 - 4.32 |
0.01 - 0.09% |
4.91 – 10.1 |
30 °C |
24 h |
|
|
Fermented soymilk + Fructooligosaccharides |
Lactobacillus acidophilus
|
4.48 - 4.1 |
N. D |
13.56 - 11.63 |
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus plantarum
|
4.49 - 4.09 |
13.64 - 12.08 |
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus rhamnosus
|
4.52 - 4.1 |
13.8 - 9.51 |
|
|
|
|
Mixed culture Lactobacillus acidophilus and |
4.42 - 4.0 |
13.21 - 11.53 |
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus plantarum
|
13.45 - 11.84 |
4 °C |
1 - 28 d |
P < 0.05 |
(Mishra & Mishra, 2013Mishra, S., & Mishra, H. (2013). Effect of synbiotic interaction of fructooligosaccharide and probiotics on the acidification profile, textural and rheological characteristics of fermented soy milk. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 6(11), 3166-3176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11947-012-1021-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11947-012-102...
) |
Mixed culture Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactobacillus rhamnosus
|
4.41 - 3.9 |
13.41 - 11.34 |
|
|
|
|
13.08 - 10.01 |
|
|
|
|
Mixed culture Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus rhamnosus
|
4.4 - 4.2 |
13.34 - 11.02 |
|
|
|
|
12.89 - 10.14 |
|
|
|
|
Mixed culture Lactobacillus acidophilus Lactobacillus plantarum and Lactobacillus rhamnosus
|
4.4 - 4.0 |
13.15 - 11.43 |
|
|
|
|
13.31 - 11.12 |
|
|
|
|
12.89 - 10.21 |
|
|
|
|
Yogurt culture Streptococcus thermophilus and Lactobacillus bulgaricus
|
4.51 - 4.23 |
12.74 - 10.76 |
|
|
|
|
12.69 - 11.23 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk drinks without any additives (control) |
|
5.11 - 4.77 |
0.43 - 0.77% |
6.32 - 5.41 6.01 - 4.68 6.44 - 5.13 6.02 - 5.01 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk drinks and 4% sucrose without the fruit pulp |
Streptococcus salivarius spp. Thermophilus
|
4.92 - 4.63 |
0.53 - 0.93% |
7.56 - 6.58 7.34 - 5.89 7.34 - 6.14 6.61 - 5.72 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk drinks with banana and 4% sucrose |
Lactobacillus delbrueckii spp. Bulgaricus
|
4.81 - 4.33 |
0.8 - 1.24% |
8.23 - 7.88 8.02 - 7.1 8.12 - 7.58 8.14 - 7.62 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk drinks with guava pulp and 4% sucrose |
Lactobacillus acidophilus LA-5 |
4.82 - 4.41 |
0.75 - 1.15% |
8.16 - 7.71 8.02 - 6.86 8.15 - 7.36 8.11 - 7.51 |
5 °C |
Fresh - 21 d |
p ≤ 0.05 |
(Ismaiel et al., 2018Ismaiel, M., El-Wahed, A., Khalifa, S., Baky, A., & Ashor, M. (2018). Growth and survival of probiotic bacteria in fermented flavoured soy milk drinks during storage. Zagazig Journal of Agricultural Research, 45(1), 281-292. http://dx.doi.org/10.21608/zjar.2018.49850. http://dx.doi.org/10.21608/zjar.2018.498...
) |
Fermented soymilk drinks with mango pulp and 4% sucrose |
Bifidobacterium BB-12
|
4.84 - 4.46 |
0.72 - 1.05% |
8.04 - 7.46 7.93 - 6.57 8.02 - 7.23 8.07 - 7.32 |
|
|
|
|
Soymilk (Control) Soymilk with okara |
Lactobacillus plantarum 70810 |
6.5 - 4.5 6.5 - 4.2 |
N. D |
8.1 - 9.2 8.02 - 9.3 |
37 °C |
0 - 8 h |
p < 0.05 |
(Xiudong et al., 2016Xiudong, X., Ying, W., Xiaoli, L., Ying, L., & Jianzhong, Z. (2016). Soymilk residue (okara) as a natural immobilization carrier for Lactobacillus plantarum cells enhances soymilk fermentation, glucosidic isoflavone bioconversion, and cell survival under simulated gastric and intestinal conditions. PeerJ, 4, e2701. http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2701. PMid:27867770. http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2701...
) |
Soymilk kefir-based functional beverage with peach-flavor |
Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophiles
|
4.5 - 4.3 |
N. D |
7.3 - 7.0 |
5 °C |
0 – 28 d |
|
|
Soymilk kefir-based functional beverages with soymilk kefir |
4.5 - 4.6 |
0.5 - 0.6% |
7.5 - 8.2 |
37 °C |
16 h |
P < 0.05 |
(Silva et al., 2018Silva, C. F. G. D., Santos, F. L., Santana, L. R. R. D., Silva, M. V. L., & Conceicao, T. D. A. (2018). Development and characterization of a soymilk Kefir-based functional beverage. Food Science and Technology, 38(3), 543-550. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-457x.10617. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-457x.1061...
) |
Fermented soymilk without kefir grains |
|
6.70 |
- |
N.D |
|
|
|
|
|
6.64 |
N.D |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk with kefir grains |
|
6.18 |
- |
5.83 |
15 °C 20 °C |
24 h |
P < 0.05 |
(Lim et al., 2019Lim, X., Koh, W., Uthumporn, U., Maizura, M. & Rosli, W. I. W. (2019). The development of legume-based yogurt by using water kefir as starter culture. International Food Research Journal, 26(4), 1219-1228.) |
Lactobacilli
|
5.97 |
5.88 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented black bean milk without kefir grains |
|
6.79 |
- |
N.D |
|
|
|
|
|
5.77 |
N.D |
|
|
|
|
Fermented black bean milk with kefir grains |
|
6.15 |
- |
5.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.68 |
5.91 |
|
|
|
|
Chocolate mousse using soy milk |
|
6.90 - 5.35 6.04 - 5.05 6.92 - 5.74 |
0.13 - 0.24% 0.18 - 0.35% 0.10 - 0.23% |
7.54 - 9.34 8.02 - 9.47 7.00 - 9.17 |
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus acidophilus Lactobacillus parabases Bifidobacterium lactis
|
|
|
|
|
Chocolate mousse using milk and soy milk |
|
6.94 - 4.48 6.67 - 3.98 6.85 - 5.07 |
0.07 - 0.89% 0.13 - 1.27% 0.08 - 0.43% |
7.17 - 9.36 8.10 - 9.62 7.62 - 8.69 |
4 °C |
1 - 21 d |
p ≤ 0.05 |
(Taghizadeh et al., 2018Taghizadeh, G., Jahadi, M., & Abbasi, H. (2018). Physicochemical properties of probiotic soy milk chocolate mousse during refrigerated storage. Applied Food Biotechnology, 5(2), 79-86.) |
|
|
5.51 5.50 5.49 5.50 |
0.27% 0.27% 0.36% 0.27% |
7.78 - 6.75 7.55 - 5.26 7.84 - 5.38 8.20 - 6.26 |
|
|
|
|
Frozen fermented desserts 100% soymilk 75% soymilk + 25% bovine milk 50% soymilk + 50% bovine milk 25% soymilk + 75% bovine milk |
Lactobacillus acidophilus (La-05) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
-20 °C |
After 90 days |
P < 0.05 |
(Aboulfazli et al., 2016aAboulfazli, F., Baba, A. S., & Misran, M. (2016a). Replacement of bovine milk with vegetable milk: effects on the survival of probiotics and rheological and physicochemical properties of frozen fermented dessert. International Journal of Dairy Technology, 69(1), 71-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.12219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0307.1221...
) |
|
|
5.51 5.50 5.49 5.50 |
0.27% 0.27% 0.27% 0.27% |
8.21 - 7.76 8.19 - 7.43 8.46 - 7.63 8.04 - 7.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
Bifidobacterium bifidum (Bb-12) |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk |
LAB strain Lactobacillus fermentum BM-325 |
6.5 - 3.9 |
N. D |
6.2 - 12.6 |
37 ºC |
20 h |
p < 0.05 |
(Myagmardorj et al., 2018Myagmardorj, B., Purev, M., & Batdorj, B. (2018). Functional properties of fermented soymilk by Lactobacillus fermentum BM-325. Mongolian Journal of Chemistry, 19(45), 32-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.5564/mjc.v19i45.1087. http://dx.doi.org/10.5564/mjc.v19i45.108...
) |
Fermented soymilk |
Lactobacillus bulgaricus
|
7.18 - 4.87 |
N.D. - 1.57% |
N.D. - 8.29 |
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus plantarum
|
7.18 - 4.73 |
N.D. - 1.64% |
N.D. - 8.33 |
37 °C |
0 - 12 h |
P < 0.05 |
(Yi et al., 2020Yi, R., Tan, F., & Zhao, X. (2020). Physicochemical and functional properties of lactobacillus fermented soybean milk. E3S Web of Conferences, 145, 01034.) |
Mixed Lactobacillus bulgaricus
|
7.18 - 4.70 |
N.D. - 1.79% |
N.D. - 8.36 |
|
|
|
|
and Lactobacillus plantarum
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Streptococcus thermophilus MD2 Lactobacillus helveticus V3 Lactobacillus rhamnosus NS6 Lactobacillus rhamnosus NS4 Lactobacillus bulgaricus NCDC 09 Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC 15 Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC 298 Lactobacillus helveticus NCDC 292 |
6.4 - 4.43 |
0.17 - 0.34% |
7.40 - 9.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.8 - 4.8 |
0.13 - 0.47% |
6.7 - 9.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.9 - 4.5 |
0.09 - 0.35% |
7 - 8.8 |
37 °C |
0 - 24 h |
P < 0.05 |
(Hati et al., 2018Hati, S., Patel, N., & Mandal, S. (2018). Comparative growth behaviour and biofunctionality of lactic acid bacteria during fermentation of soy milk and bovine milk. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins, 10(2), 277-283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-9279-5 PMid:28455690. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-927...
) |
Fermented soymilk |
6.7 - 4.43 |
0.1 - 0.33% |
7.1 - 8.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.93 - 4.6 |
0.12 - 0.36% |
7.2 - 8.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.93 - 5.2 |
0.16 - 0.33% |
6.25 - 7.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.8 - 5 |
0.09 - 0.33% |
7.1 - 8.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
6.93 - 4.9 |
0.1 - 0.28% |
6.4 - 9.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk by solid-state |
|
5.31 - 5.27 |
N. D |
6.77 |
|
|
|
|
Pediococcus pentosaceus KTU05-9 |
5.57 - 5.34 |
8.34 |
35 °C 32 °C 30 °C |
0 - 24 h |
p ≤ 0.05 |
(Slapkauskaite et al., 2019Slapkauskaite, J., Kabasinskiene, A., & Sekmokiene, D. (2019). Application of fermented soya as a bacterial starter for production of fermented milk. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 37(6), 403-408. http://dx.doi.org/10.17221/194/2018-CJFS. http://dx.doi.org/10.17221/194/2018-CJFS...
) |
Pediococcus acidilactici KTU05-7 |
5.09 - 4.93 |
8.34 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk by submerged state |
Lactobacillus sakei KTU05-6 |
6.19 - 5.10 |
N. D |
7.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.78 - 5.28 |
9.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
5.94 - 4.62 |
9.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
Streptococcus thermophilus Lactobacillus acidophilus Bifidobacterium sp.
|
|
|
8.94 - 7.9 7.3 - 4.1 7.53 - 6.5 |
N. M. |
0 - 28 d |
N. M. |
(Niamah et al., 2017Niamah, A. K., Sahi, A. A., & Al-Sharifi, A. S. (2017). Chemical and microbial composition of fermented soy milk by probiotic starter. In 1st Scientific Conference of Agricultural Sciences. Iraq: Thi Qar University/Sumer University.) |
Fermented soymilk |
4.95 - 4.6 |
0.61 - 0.81% |
Fermented soymilk |
Bifidobacterium longum
|
5.72 - 4.47 |
0.17 - 0.51% |
5.5 - 13.9 |
28 ± 2 °C 4 ± 1 °C |
0 - 3 w |
P < 0.05 |
(Ebhodaghe et al., 2012Ebhodaghe, S., Abiose, S., & Adeniran, H. (2012). Assessment of physico-chemical characteristics, viability and inhibitory effect of Bifidobacteria in soymilk. Journal of Food Research, 1(2), 159-170. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jfr.v1n2p159. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/jfr.v1n2p159...
) |
5.72 - 5.64 |
0.17 - 0.21% |
5.5 - 10.0 |
Fermented soymilk |
Bifidobacterium. bifidum
|
1.21 |
17.5 mmol H+ kg |
7.08 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk |
Bifidobacterium. animalis subsp. lactis
|
1.52 |
22.8 mmol H+ kg |
7.08 |
|
|
(Horáčková et al., 2015Horáčková, Š., Mühlhansová, A., Sluková, M., Schulzová, V., & Plocková, M. (2015). Fermentation of soymilk by yoghurt and bifidobacteria strains. Czech Journal of Food Sciences, 33(4), 313-319. http://dx.doi.org/10.17221/115/2015-CJFS. http://dx.doi.org/10.17221/115/2015-CJFS...
) |
Fermented soymilk by yogurt culture |
Streptococcus thermophilus
|
2.20 |
39.0 mmol H+ kg |
8.08 |
37 °C |
16 h |
|
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus
|
6.46 |
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk |
Streptococcus thermophilus
|
|
46.3 mmol H+ kg |
8.15 |
|
|
|
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus
|
2.27 |
6.73 |
|
|
|
Bifidobacterium. bifidum
|
|
7.00 |
|
|
|
Fermented soymilk |
Streptococcus thermophilus
|
|
46.8 mmol H+ kg |
8.15 |
|
|
|
Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus
|
2.25 |
6.38 |
|
|
|
Bifidobacterium. animalis subsp. lactis
|
|
8.11 |
|
|
|
Soymilk yogurt inoculated with a concentrations of |
|
4.47 - 4.11 4.41 - 4.07 4.42 - 3.98 4.54 - 3.91 |
|
8.49 - 7.93 7.72 - 7.23 7.74 - 7.59 7.78 - 7.92 |
|
|
|
|
2×106 cfu/mL |
Lactobacillus helveticus isolate H9 |
N. D |
4 °C |
0 - 28 d |
p < 0.05 |
(Wang et al., 2015Wang, J., Li, C., Xue, J., Yang, J., Zhang, Q., Zhang, H., & Chen, Y. (2015). Fermentation characteristics and angiotensin I-converting enzyme–inhibitory activity of Lactobacillus helveticus isolate H9 in cow milk, soy milk, and mare milk. Journal of Dairy Science, 98(6), 3655-3664. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9336. PMid:25892687. http://dx.doi.org/10.3168/jds.2015-9336...
) |
5 ×106 cfu/mL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 ×107 cfu/mL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 ×107 cfu/mL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus acidophilus
|
|
|
5.4 - 7.1 |
|
|
|
|
Soymilk yogurt |
|
1.31 - 1.32% |
10 °C |
0 - 1 w |
p < 0.05 |
(Joel et al., 2019Joel, N., Samaila, J., & Blessing, O. (2019). Development and comparative evaluation of storage changes in probiotic soy-yoghurt. Journal of Microbiology, Biotechnology and Food Sciences, 9(2), 298-301. http://dx.doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2019.9.2.298-301. http://dx.doi.org/10.15414/jmbfs.2019.9....
) |
|
Bifidobacterium lactis
|
N. D |
|
5.1 - 6.3 |
|
|
|
|
Fermented white rose flavored with soy yoghurt |
Mixed Lactobacillus rhamnosus K4E (KX950834) and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus helveticus K14 (KU644578) |
5.65 - 4.20 |
0.33 - 0.51% |
6.81 - 8.69 |
6 - 8 °C |
1 - 10 d |
p < 0.05 |
(Mishra et al., 2019Mishra, B. K., Hati, S., Das, S., & Prajapati, J. B. (2019). Biofunctional attributes and storage study of soy milk fermented by Lactobacillus rhamnosus and Lactobacillus helveticus. Food Technology and Biotechnology, 57(3), 399-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.17113/ftb.57.03.19.6103. PMid:31866753. http://dx.doi.org/10.17113/ftb.57.03.19....
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yogurt 75% cow’s milk + 25% soymilk |
|
4.49 |
0.67% |
|
|
Until pH reached a value of 4.6 |
|
|
Yogurt 50% cow’s milk + 50% soymilk |
|
4.47 |
0.58% |
N. D |
43 °C |
|
(Šertović et al., 2020Šertović, E., Sarić, Z., Božanić, R., Barać, M., Barukčić, I., & Kostić, A. (2020). Fermentation of cow’s milk and soy milk mixture with L. acidophilus probiotic bacteria with yoghurt culture. Scientific-Experts Conference of Agriculture and Food Industry, 78, 251-259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-40049-1_32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-4004...
) |
Yogurt 25% cow’s milk + 75% soymilk Yogurt 100% soymilk |
|
4.57 |
0.53% |
|
|
P < 0.05 |
|
|
|
4.59 |
0.47% |
|
|
|
|
|
Lactobacillus acidophilus (La5) |
4.62 - 4.3 |
0.81 - 0.89% |
7.64 - 6.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.7 - 4.3 |
0.55 - 0.82% |
8.41 - 7.11 |
4 °C |
0 -21 d |
|
|
|
|
4.65 - 4.39 |
0.41 - 0.7% |
8.03 - N.D |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.63 - 4.51 |
0.43 - 0.54% |
7.97 - 8.49 |
|
|
|
|
Soymilk ice cream |
Lactobacillus acidophilus (La - 05) Bifidobacterium bifidum (Bb-12) |
7.14 7.15 |
0.072% 0.072% |
7.857 - 7.847 7.858 - 7.767 |
-20 °C |
after 30 days |
P < 0.05 |
(Aboulfazli et al., 2014Aboulfazli, F., Baba, A., & Misran, M. (2014). Effects of vegetable milk on survival of probiotics and rheological and physicochemical properties of bio-ice cream. In International Conference on Biological and Medical Sciences (15-16). Bali: ICBMS.) |
Fermented ice cream 100% soy milk Fermented ice cream 75% soymilk 25%cow milk Fermented ice cream 50% soy milk 50% cow milk Fermented ice cream 25% soymilk 75%cow milk |
Lactobacillus acidophilus (La-05) |
5.51 5.50 5.49 5.50 |
0.27% 0.27% 0.36% 0.27% |
8.40 8.33 8.04 8.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
until pH reduced to 5.5 |
|
|
Bifidobacterium bifidum (Bb-12) |
5.51 5.50 5.49 5.50 |
0.27% 0.27% 0.27% 0.27% |
8.76 8.32 8.19 8.05 |
42 °C |
|
P < 0.05 |
(Aboulfazli et al., 2016bAboulfazli, F., Shori, A. B., & Baba, A. S. (2016b). Effects of the replacement of cow milk with vegetable milk on probiotics and nutritional profile of fermented ice cream. LWT, 70, 261-270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2016.02.056. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2016.02....
) |
Fermented ice cream with 100% soy milk Fermented ice cream with 75% Soy 25% cow milk Fermented ice cream with 50% Soy 50% cow milk Fermented ice cream with 25% Soy 75% cow milk |
Lactobacillus acidophilus (La-05) |
- |
- |
70% 68% 66% 63% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bifidobacterium bifidum (Bb-12) |
- |
- |
85% 78% 70% 65% |
-20 °C |
after 90 days |
p < 0.05 |
(Aboulfazli et al., 2015Aboulfazli, F., Baba, A. S., & Misran, M. (2015). The rheology and physical properties of fermented probiotic ice creams made with dairy alternatives. International Journal of Food Engineering, 11(4), 493-504. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ijfe-2014-0343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ijfe-2014-0343...
) |
Fermented soymilk ice cream |
Lactobacillus casei ssp. casei CRL-431 |
5.81 |
N. D |
6.49 - 6 |
-24C |
180 d |
p < 0.05 |
(Homayouni & Norouzi, 2016Homayouni, A., & Norouzi, S. (2016). Evaluation of physicochemical traits, sensory properties and survival of lactobacillus casei in fermented soy‐based ice cream. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 40(4), 681-687. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.12648. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.12648...
) |