vi

Contents

Approval letter……………………………………………………………………………iii

Acknowledgement………………………………………………………………………...iv

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………….v

List of tables and figures………………………………………………………..……….viii

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................... 1-3

1.1 General introduction .................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Objectives of the study................................................................................................ 2

1.3. Significance of the study ............................................................................................. 2

1.4. Limitations of study .................................................................................................... 3

2 Literature review ......................................................................................................... 4-29

2.1 Ginger .......................................................................................................................... 4

2.1.1 Composition .......................................................................................................... 5

2.1.2 Medicinal value ..................................................................................................... 9

2.1.3 Toxicity and contraindication .............................................................................. 11

2.2 Honey ......................................................................................................................... 11

2.2.1 Composition ........................................................................................................ 12

2.3 Preliminary treatments ............................................................................................... 16

2.3.1 Washing, peeling and cutting .............................................................................. 16

2.4 Cooking ...................................................................................................................... 17

2.5. Drying ....................................................................................................................... 17

2.5.1 Drying kinetics .................................................................................................... 18

2.6 Osmosis ...................................................................................................................... 20

2.6.1 Osmotic Dehydration .......................................................................................... 20

2.6.2 Factors affecting osmosis .................................................................................... 25

3 Materials and methods .............................................................................................. 30-34

3.1 Materials .................................................................................................................... 30

3.2 Methods...................................................................................................................... 30

3.2.1 Collection of raw materials ................................................................................. 30

3.2.2 Trimming, washing and sorting .......................................................................... 30

3.2.3 Soaking, peeling and cutting ............................................................................... 30

3.2.1 Peeling loss .......................................................................................................... 31

3.2.2 Moisture content .................................................................................................. 32

3.2.4 Essential oil ......................................................................................................... 32

vii

3.2.5 Oleoresin ............................................................................................................. 32

3.2.6 Crude fiber ........................................................................................................... 32

3.2.8 Acidity ................................................................................................................. 32

3.2.9 Total soluble solids .............................................................................................. 32

3.2.10 Total sugar ......................................................................................................... 32

3.3 Statistical data analysis .............................................................................................. 32

4 Results and discussion ............................................................................................... 35-43

4.1 Proximate analysis of raw materials .......................................................................... 35

4.1.1 Ginger .................................................................................................................. 35

4.1.2 Honey .................................................................................................................. 36

4.2 Moisture studies of ginger during processing ............................................................ 37

4.3 Total soluble solids studies in ginger and honey during processing .......................... 38

4.4 Drying Characteristics ............................................................................................... 39

4.5 cost calculation........................................................................................................... 40

4.6 Sensory evaluation ..................................................................................................... 40

5 Conclusions and Recommendations.............................................................................. 44

5.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 44

5.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 44

6 Summary ......................................................................................................................... 45

References ........................................................................................................................... 46

Appendices ......................................................................................................................... 59

Appendix A ...................................................................................................................... 59

Appendix B ...................................................................................................................... 60

Appendix C ...................................................................................................................... 60

viii

List of tables and figures

List of tables

List of tables Title Page no.

Table 2.1 Nutritional composition of dry ginger……………………….... 5

Table 2.2 Cleanliness and commercial specification for whole dry ginger

imported to some European countries………………………… 6

Table 2.3 HMG (N) Standard of dried ginger…………………………… 6

Table 2.4 Compounds in essential oil……………………………………. 7

Table 2.5 Composition of honey (gm/ 100gm)………………………….. 13

Table 3.1 Formulation of candied ginger from ginger and honey………. 32

Table 4.1 Analysis of ginger…………………………………………….. 36

Table 4.2 Composition of honey………………………………………… 37

Table 4.3 Cost calculation of samples………………………………. 41

Table 4.4 Composition of selected product…………………………….. 43

Table B.1 Average Sensory Score………………………………………... 62

Table C.1 Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for appearance…………….. 62

Table C.2 LSD testing for appearance of all samples……………………. 62

Table C.3 Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for color…………………… 63

Table C.4 LSD testing for color of all samples………………………….. 63

Table C.5 Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for flavor…………………. 63

Table C.6 LSD testing for flavor of all samples…………………………. 64

Table C.7 Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for texture…………………. 64

Table C.8 LSD testing for texture of all samples………………………… 65

Table C.9 Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for taste…………………… 65

Table C.10 LSD testing for taste of all samples………………………….. 65

Table C.11 Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for overall acceptance…….. 66

Table C.12 LSD testing for overall acceptance of all samples……………. 66

ix

List of figures

Fig no. Title Page no.

Fig. 2.1 Zingiber officinale with its rhizome…………………………… 4

Fig. 2.2 Conversion of gingerol to shogaol and zingerone……………... 8

Fig. 2.3 Structure of Gingerol, Shogaol and Zingerone………………... 9

Fig. 2.4 Drying Curve, Showing Moisture Content as a Function of

Drying Time…………………………………………………… 19

Fig. 2.5 Drying Rate as a Function of Moisture Content………………. 19

Fig. 2.6 Path in long term osmotic dehydration process……………….. 21

Fig. 4.1 Moisture studies of ginger……………………………………... 37

Fig. 4.2 TSS studies of Ginger…………………………………………. 38

Fig. 4.3 0Brix of Honey vs days………………………………………… 38

Fig. 4.4 Moisture content of samples with respect to time……………... 39

Fig 4.5 Effect of honey concentration on mean sensory score of ginger

candy…………………………………………………............... 40

1

Part 1

Introduction

1.1 General introduction

Candies are the confectionaries made from mainly sugar with other minor ingredients like

flavors, nuts, fruits, extracts etc. Candy may be either crystalline or amorphous. Crystalline

candies contain fine crystals of sugar providing soft texture and aids on cutting with knife

e.g.: fudge, fondant. Whereas amorphous candies are disorganized crystals of sugar resulting

hard, brittle or chewy texture. Caramel, toffees are the example of amorphous candy.

Commercially candies are often divided into three groups, according to the amount of

sugar content (McWilliams, Margaret, 2007).

100% sugar (or nearly so), like hard candies

95% sugar or more, with about 5% of other ingredients, such as marshmallow

75 to 95% sugar, with 5 to 25% other ingredients like fudge, caramels, candied fruits.

Candied fruit has been around since 14th

century. It is a sweet food made by impregnating

fruits and vegetable in sugar syrup followed by drying to non-stickiness. Whole fruit, pieces

of fruit or peel are cooked with sugar syrup, which absorbs the moisture from within fruit and

preserves it. Fruit and vegetable like apples, ginger, mangoes, guava, carrots, citrus peels

have been used to prepare candies (Mehta and Bajaj, 1984; Sharma et al., 1998; Ribeiro and

Sabba-srur, 1999; Chandu and Prasad, 2006). Such candies have 70% of Total Soluble Sugar

(TSS) and rest of other component ingredients (Giridhari lal et al., 1986). Due to its high

concentration of sugar, it can be concluded to be safe from microbiological point of view.

Only some of osmophilic yeast and xerophilic yeast are able to grow over high sugar content

product (Richter, 1912; Anand & Brown, 1968; Brown, 1976) such as Saccharomyces,

Bacillus, Leuconostoc. However, it is highly moisture sensitive, thus need to protect from

moisture and temperature.

Instead of sugar, attempts are made to use honey as sugar source in candy making. Honey

is high sugar content product made by bees by feeding the nectar of flowers. About 95% of

the honey dry matter is composed of carbohydrates, mainly fructose and glucose. 5-10 % of

the total carbohydrates are oligosaccharides, in total about 25 different di- and tri-saccharides

(Bogdanov et al., 2008)

2

Candied fruit is based in principle that, when ginger is impregnated into sugar, they

readily get absorbed by the ginger via osmosis. The sugar content in syrup is reduced and

simultaneously, there‘s increase in sugar content in fruit and vice-versa for water content.

The syrup is concentrated by heating to increase 0Bx by 5% every time, leave it overnight.

The process is repeated till sugar content in fruit reaches to 70% followed by drying to non-

stickiness. According to Yadav & Singh (2012), optimum osmosis in fruits and vegetables

was found at 400

c, 400Bx of osmotic agent and in near about 132 minutes and dehydration

takes place.

Osmotic dehydration is viable process for the partial removal of water from cellular

materials such as fruits and vegetables and is often applied as a pretreatment process which

improves nutritional, sensorial and functional properties of food without changing its

integrity (Torreggiani, 1993). It has been successfully used in conjunctive with air drying

(Islam and Flink 1982); dehydro-freezing, vaccum drying, fluidized bed drying (Kim and

Toledo, 1987); convective air dry (Hawkes and Flink, 1978) on laboratory and pilot scale.

1.2. Objectives of the study

The general objective is to prepare honey based ginger candy and to evaluate the quality of

candy via sensory evaluation and proximate composition.

Specific objectives of the study are: -

Determination of suitable composition of honey and ginger for best quality of ginger

candy.

Study of Osmotic behavior of honey in ginger.

Study of drying characteristics of candy.

1.3. Significance of the study

Generally, white sugar is taken as sweetener for preparation of candy. Such sugar contains

99.7% sucrose, excess consumption of this leads to variety of health problems viz. heart

problems coronary thrombosis (Alam 1999). Thus, attempts are made to use natural

sweetener (honey) in candy making. Honey is rich in carbohydrates especially reducing

sugars i.e. fructose, glucose and maltose (Bogdanov et. al, 2008). Thus it is a good source of

energy. It is also suitable for diabetic patients and regarded as novel anti-diabetic agent

(Omotayo et al., 2012) and other lots of advantages.

3

Ginger has also different beneficial effects and used as medicinal herbs from centuries.

Chinese have used ginger for at least 2500 years as digestive aid and anti-nausea remedy and

to treat bleeding disorders and rheumatism; it was also used to treat baldness, toothache,

snake bite and respiratory conditions (Kemper, 1999). Ginger lowers Intraocular Pressure

(IOP) in rabbits‘ eyes and may be a useful agent in reducing IOP in humans as it is cheap,

commonly available, relatively free from adverse effects and beneficial to all the major

tissues of the body (Akpalaba et al., (2008). Ginger is used as flavoring for cookies, crackers

and cakes as well as flavor in gingerale-a sweet, carbonated, non-alcoholic beverage, ginger

bread, ginger snaps, ginger cake and ginger biscuits (Saha, 2012). The ginger is an excellent

gift for women who are pregnant to help relieve the effects of morning sickness, nausea,

motion sickness (Kemper, 1999).

Due to these above benefits with the use of ginger and honey, the combination of these

two components will result best candy with high beneficial effects and medicinal values with

no barrier for diabetic people to consume and also with no side effects compared to white

sugar. Similarly, addition of honey can improve quality of variety of food products like honey

cakes, cookies, cakes, biscuits with pleasant flavor and more nutritious than sugar based

product (Singh et al. 1988).

1.4. Limitations of study

Storage stability couldn‘t be studied due to the limitation in time.

Changes in nutritional value during storage couldn‘t be studied due to facility and

time constraints.

4

Part II

Literature review

2.1 Ginger

Ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.), a monocotyledon belonging to family Zingiberaceae, is

an important spice and medicinal plant originated in South-East Asia and introduced to many

parts of the globe (Park and Pizutto, 2002; Burkill, 1996).Ginger or ginger root is the rhizome

of plant. Z. oficinale is perennial plant found in subtropical areas. The English botanist

William Roscoe (1753-1831) gave the plant name Zingiber officinale in an 1807 publication.

The ginger family is a tropical group especially abundant in Indo-Malaysia, consisting of

more 1200 plant species in 53 genera (Ghosh, 2011). According to USDA, the scientific

classification of this plant is done

below:-

Kingdom: Plantae

Phylum: Magnoliophyta

Class: Liliopsida

Order: Zingiberales

Family: Zingiberaceae

Genus: Zingiber

Species: officinale

Fig 2.1: Zingiber officinale with its rhizome

Ginger plant produces clusters of white and pink flower buds that bloom into yellow

flowers. Because of its aesthetic appeal and the adaptation of the plant to warm climates, it is

often used as landscaping around subtropical homes. It is perennial plant with annual leafy

stems, about a meter (3 to 4 feet) tall. The characteristic aroma of ginger is due to a volatile

oil that is present in 1-3% quantities. Its pungency is attributed to ginger oleoresin (Tyler,

1993).

5

Rhizome of ginger has been used as a medicine in Chinese, Indian and Arabic herbal

traditions since ancient times as carminative or anti-flatulent, diaphoretic, antispasmodic,

expectorant, peripheral circulatory stimulant, astringent, appetite stimulant, anti-

inflammatory agent, diuretic and digestive aid, etc. (Kizhakkayil and Sasikumar, 2012).

Moreover it also imparts flavor and pungency to food and beverages and is mainly consumed

as fresh paste, dried powder, slices preserved in syrup, candy (crystallized ginger) or

flavoring tea. About 50 cultivars in addition to seven improved varieties have been reported

in India (Sasikumar et al., 1999). Essential oil and pungent principles are the deciding factors

for the qualities of ginger cultivars.

2.1.1 Composition

Fresh ginger contains 80.9% moisture, 2.3% protein, 0.9% fat, 1.2% minerals, 2.4% fiber and

12.3% Carbohydrates. The minerals present in ginger are iron, calcium and phosphorous. It

also contains vitamins such as thiamine, riboflavin, niacin and vitamin C. The composition

varies with the type, variety, agronomic conditions, curing methods, drying and storage

conditions (Govindarajan, 1982).

The nutritional composition of ginger (dry basis) is showed in table below. Among its

nutritional parameters, both soluble and insoluble fiber is appreciably high i.e. suitable for

constipation patients. In fact, it is also found to be good source of Vitamin-c, carotenoids,

minerals especially calcium, phosphorus, chromium and iron.

Table 2.1: Nutritional composition of dry ginger (per 100g)

Constituents Value Constituents Value

Moisture 15.02± 0.04 Ash (g) 3.85± 0.61 (4.53)

Protein (g) 5.087 ± 0.09(5.98) Calcium (mg) 88.4 ± 0.97 (104.02)

Fat (g) 3.72 ± 0.03 (4.37) Phosphorous (mg) 174±1.2 (204.75)

Insoluble fibre (%) 3.5 ± 0.06 (27.65) Iron (mg) 8.0 ± 0.2 (9.41)

Soluble fibre (%) 25.5 ± 0.04 (30.0) Zinc (mg) 0.92 ± 0 (1.08)

Carbohydrate (g) 38.35 ± 0.1 Copper (mg) 0.545 ± 0.002 (0.641)

Vitamin C (mg) 9.33 ± 0.08 (10.97) Manganese (mg) 9.13 ± 001 (10.74)

Total carotenoids (mg) 79 ± 0.2 (9296) Chromium (µg) 70 ± 0 (83.37)

(Shirin Adel P. R. 2010)

6

All values in this table represent the mean± SD (n=4). Figures in parenthesis represent the dry

weight values.

Table 2.2: Cleanliness and commercial specifications for whole dry ginger imported to some

European countries

SN. No. Factors Germany the Netherlands UK USA

1 Extraneous matter (% wt) – – 1.0 1.0

2 Moisture (% wt) 12.5 10.0 12.0 12.0

3 Total ash (% wt) 7.0 8.0 6.0 8.0

4 Acid insoluble ash (% wt) 1.0 3.0 1.0 2.0

5 Volatile oil (% wt) (min.) 2.0 1.5 1.5 –

(Source: Kalyanaraman, 1998)

Table 2.3: HMG (N) standard of dried ginger

Parameters Values

Moisture 13.0 % by wt (max)

Total ash 8 %

Acid insoluble ash in dil HCL 1.0 % by wt. (max)

Cold water-soluble extracts 10.0 % by wt.(max)

Alcohol (90% v/w) soluble extracts 4.5%by wt. (min)

Volatile oil 1.0 % (v/w)(min)

Calcium (as CaO) 4.0 % db (max)

Colourings Nil

(Source: GRP/NARC, Salyan, 2002)

Beside its composition, Ginger is valued throughout the world as a spice or flavoring

agent (Tyler et al., 1988). The characteristic aroma of ginger is due to a volatile oil that is

present in 1-3% quantities. Its pungency is attributed to ginger oleoresin (Tyler, 1993).

An Indian scientist B. Sasikumar 2012 has identified total 60 compounds in essential

oil using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrophotometry (GC/MS) in sun dried ginger. Those

compounds are listed below:-

7

Table 2.4: - Compounds in essential oil

S. No. Compounds S. No. Compounds

1 2- Heptanol 31 Epibicyclo sesquiphellandrene

2 Alpha pinene 32 Farnesene

3 Camphene 33 Torreyol

4 2-Beta pinene 34 Calarene

5 6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one 35 b--sesquiphellandrene

6 Beta-myrcene 36 Alpha bergamotene

7 Alpha phellandrene 37 Elemol

8 Beta phellandrene 38 Ledol

9 1,8-ceneole 39 Germacrene B

10 Cis-ocimene 40 Nerolidol

11 Alpha terpinolene 41 (-) epiglobulol

12 2-nonanone 42 Geranyl acetate

13 Verbenone 43 Beta elemene

14 Linalool 44 Gama elemene

15 Camphor 45 Beta farnasene

16 Citronella 46 Allo aroma dendrene

17 Endo borneol 47 Alpha guaen

18 Terpinene-4-ol 48 Beta cubebene

19 Alpha terpineol 49 Alpha curcumene

20 Myrtenal 50 Beta selinene

21 Beta citronellol 51 Gama cadinene

22 Z-citral (Neral) 52 Zingiberene

23 trans-2-caren-4-ol 53 Alpha muurolene

24 Nerol 54 Beta besabolene

25 Trans -geraniol 55 Viridiflorol

26 1-decanol 56 Juniper camphor

27 Citral (Geranial) 57 (-) Farnesol

28 Endo bornyl acetate 58 Betaeudesmo

29 2-Undecanone 59 Cyclosativen

30 Citronellyl acetate 60 Alpha copaene

Source: - Sasikumar (2012)

The oil of ginger is a mixture of constituents, consisting of monoterpenes (phellandrene,

camphene, cineole, citral, and borneol) and sesquiterpenes (zingiberene, zingiberol,

zingiberenol, ß.bisabolene, sesquiphellandrene, and others). Aldehydes and alcohols are also

present (Tang and Eisenbrand, 1992; Suekawa M et al 1984). According to Singh et al. 2008

and Lawrence 1997 and 2008, ginger essential oil is mainly composed of zingibe-rene, α-

curcumene, β-sesquiphellandrene, citral and camphene, etc; and these compounds are

characteristic for geographical and varietal properties of ginger.

8

Dehydration, heat

Ph: 2.5 – 7.0

Pyrolysis at 2000c

The essential oil composition is indispensable in determining the various grades and prices

of the produce. Mono and sesqui terpenoids are present in the volatiles, but sesqui-terpenoids

are quantitatively the major constituents (Tonnessen and Karlsen, 1983).

And the pungent principles of ginger are due to zingerone, gingerol and shogaol. Fresh

oleoresin has gingerol as the main constituents whereas with prolong storage oleoresin

contains mainly shogaol. It has been suggested that Shogaol and zingerone do not occur

naturally in fresh rhizome (Harvey, 1981; Chen et al., 1986). Gingerols and shogaols are

pungency stimulating non-volatile compounds found in ginger (Zachariah et al., 1993).

Shogaol

Gingerol

Zingerone + Alkanal

Fig 2.2: - Conversion of gingerol to shogaol and zingerone

Oleoresins (pungent principle compounds) are used in the meat processing and canning

industries in the same way as ground spice is used. All spice oleoresin is prepared in very

small quantities and has not become a substitute for ground spice in the food industry.

However, it has an advantage over ground spice in that it avoids the risk of bacterial

contamination and its strength and quality are more consistent.

Fig 2.3: Structure of Gingerol, Shogaol and Zingerone

Pungent principle was also analyzed through High performance Liquid Chromatography

(HPLC) in 46 accessions of ginger (Sasikumar, 2012). A percentage of gingerol and shogaol

was studied and found that 6-gingerol is the predominant in most of the ginger except the

exotic ginger, ‗Oman‘, in which 8-shogaol was the predominant. Out of 46 accessions,

9

highest level of 6-gingerol was recorded in the cultivar, ‗Angamali‘ (3.11%) and the least in

the exotic ginger, ‗Oman‘ (0.36%). Even though 6-shogaol was present in all the accessions,

its concentration was relatively low when compared with 6-gingerol. 8-gingerol, 10-gingerol,

10-shogaol were also present in many of the ginger accessions.

Among zingerone, gingerol and shoagol, Gingerol is regarded as major pungent

component and is a mixture of homologues having 10, 20 and 14 carbon atoms in the side

chain (Shadmani et al 2004). They are designated as Gingerols also found in small quantities

are Zingerone and Shogaol (Tyler et al., 1988 and Govindarajan, 1982).

Chemically, Gingerol is 1-(3‘ –methoxy –4‘-hydroxypheny1)-5-hydroxyalkan- 3-ones,

also known as [3-6]-, [8]-, [10], and [12]-gingerols (Bruneton and Jean, 1995).

2.1.2 Medicinal value

Chinese have used ginger for at least 2500 years as a digestive aid and antinausea remedy and

to treat bleeding disorders and rheumatism; it was also used to treat baldness, toothache,

snakebite and respiratory conditions (Duke, 1985). In Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM),

ginger is considered a pungent, dry, warming herb to be used for ailments triggered by cold,

damp weather. Ginger is used extensively in Ayurveda, the traditional medicine of India, to

block excessive clotting (i.e. heart disease), reduce cholesterol and fight arthritis. In Malaysia

and Indonesia, ginger soup is given to new mother for 30 days after their delivery to help

warm them and to help them sweat out impurities. In Arabian medicine, ginger is considered

an aphrodisiac (Qureshi 1989). Some Africans believe that eating ginger regularly will help

repel mosquitos (Duke, 1985).

Ginger migrated westward to Europe by Greek and Roman times. The Greeks wrapped

ginger in bread and ate it after meals as a digestive aid. Subsequently, ginger was

incorporated directly into bread and confections such as gingerbread. Ginger was so valued

by the Spanish that they established ginger plantations in Jamaica in the 1600‘s. The Eclectic

physicians of the 19th century relied on ginger to induce sweating, improve the appetite and

curb nausea, and as a topical counterirritant. Nowadays, ginger is extensively cultivated from

Asia to Africa and the Caribbean and is used worldwide as a nausea remedy, as an anti-

spasmodic and to promote warming in case of chills (Kapil et al., 1990 and Johri et al.,

1992). Ginger is also extensively consumed as a flavoring agent; it is estimated that in South

Asia, the average daily consumption is 8 -10 grams of fresh ginger root (Murray, 1995). The

10

German Commission E approves the use of ginger root as a treatment for dyspepsia and

prophylactic against motion sickness (Blumenthal, 1998).

In vitro data: Ginger extracts was found to interfere cholesterol biosynthesis in

homogenated liver from mice and rats (Tanabe, 1993).similarly, these extracts was also

observed to blocks the formation of inflammation compounds such as thromboxane,

leukotrienes and prostaglandins (Kiuchi et al., 1982 and Flynn et al., 1986). The most of the

ginger‘s sesquiterpenes has displayed antirhinoviral effects (Denyer, 1994). Ginger extraxts

has also property of antibacterial effects against both gram positive and gram negative

bacteria such as Clostridium, Listeria, Enterococcus, and Staphylococcus species, but some

of this effect is destroyed by heating (Mascolo et al., 1989, Chen et al 1985). Some of

chemical constituents (diarylheptenones, gingerenones A, B and C and isogingerenone B)

have also displayed anti-fungal activity in vitro (Endo et al., 1990). Furthermore, Ginger was

found to inhibit Epstein-Barr virus activation (Vimala et al., 1999 and Murakami et al.,

1998). Ginger compounds (6-gingerol and 6-paradol) had inhibitory effects on the viability

and DNA synthesis of human promyelocytic leukemia cells (Lee and Surh, 1998). Ginger‘s

essential oil significantly suppressed formation of DNA adducts by aflatoxin B1 in a

microsomal enzyme-mediated reaction (Hashim et al., 1994). In human aortic endothelial

cells, zingerone demonstrated significant antioxidant effects on low density lipoproteins

(Pearson et al., 1997). In human erythrocyte membranes,ginger extracts inhibited lipid

peroxidation by 72% (Sujatha and Srinivas, 1995). In human chondrocytes, ginger‘s volatile

oil effectively prevented the production of hydrogen peroxide usually induced by fulvic acid

(Guo et al., 1997).

In Human data: Both during fasting and after standard test meal, ginger extracts significantly

enhanced gastroduodenal motility in 12 normal volunteers was performed by Micklefield et

al., 1997. Several randomized, controlled trials support ginger‘s use as an antiemetic for

nausea secondary to several conditions: morning sickness, chemotherapy-associated nausea,

post-operative nausea and motion sickness. Ginger also proved useful in treating

chemotherapy-induced nausea in a small pilot study of 11 adult patients; their nausea scores

fell from an average of 2 maximum of 4) to 0.7 after taking 1.5 grams of powdered ginger

(Meyer et al., 1995). Another case series also supported ginger‘s use as an antiemetic in

patients undergoing chemotherapy (Pecoraro et al., 1998). Data on ginger‘s effectiveness in

preventing post-operative nausea have been conflicting. In two randomized, double blind

studies of women undergoing gynecologic surgery, those treated with ginger had

11

significantly less post-operative nausea and vomiting than those treated with placebo; ginger

was as effective as metoclopramide in preventing post-operative gastrointestinal symptoms

(Bone et al 1990 and Phillips et al 1993). Several studies have evaluated ginger‘s

effectiveness in preventing motion sickness or sea sickness and the potential mechanisms for

this effect (European Scientific Cooperative on phytotherapy, 1997). In an open study of

1741 tourists traveling by sea, ginger supplements (250 milligrams every two hours) were as

effective as both non-prescription and prescription medications in preventing sea sickness

(Schmid et al., 1994). In an early trial involving 36 college students prone to motion sickness,

ginger was as effective as dimenhydrinate in preventing nausea (Mowrey., 1982).

Similarly ginger was also found to modulate immune system. A 42-year-old woman with

a 16-year history of migraines experienced enormous relief after supplementing her diet with

1.5 –2 grams of dried ginger daily (Mustafa et al., 1990). Adult volunteers who ate 5 grams

of raw ginger daily had a 25% reduction in platelet thromboxane concentrations (Srivastava

et al., 1989). A case series of seven patients with rheumatoid arthritis reported improved

symptoms following supplemental ginger65. In another case series of 56 patients (28 with

rheumatoid arthritis, 18 with osteoarthritis and 10 with muscular discomfort) who were given

powdered ginger supplements, more than three-quarters of the arthritis patients reported

varying degrees of relief in pain and swelling; all the patients with muscular discomfort

experienced relief. None of the patients reported adverse effects during the period of ginger

consumption which ranged from three months to 2.5 years (Srivastava and Mustafa, 1992).

There are no randomized controlled trials evaluating the effectiveness of ginger against

migraines or arthritis.

2.1.3 Toxicity and contraindication

Ginger has been reported to cause allergic reaction, but only as contact dermatitis for

occupational exposures to spices (Kanerva et al., 1996). The other scientist Desai HG and his

co-worker have reported that very large dose of ginger may lead to gastric irritation and loss

of protective gastric mucosa in 1990. Some herbalists recommend avoiding use by patients

taking anticoagulant medications; no adverse interactions have been reported. Some

herbalists also recommend avoiding ginger during pregnancy (Newall et al., 1996).

2.2 Honey

Honey is natural sweetener obtained from bees used in variety of products like biscuits,

candy, cake and other including its medicinal values. They take nectar from flowers and store

12

it in this honey comb cells. Honey is often classified as blossom and honeydew honey.

Blossom honey is slightly light in color whereas darker in honeydew (Escuredo et al., 2012).

At present the annual world honey production is about 1.2 million tons, which is less than

1% of the total sugar production. The consumption of honey differs strongly from country to

country. The major honey exporting countries China and Argentina have small annual

consumption rates of 0.1 to 0.2 kg per capita. Honey consumption is higher in developed

countries, where the home production does not always cover the market demand. In the

European Union, which is both a major honey importer and producer, the annual

consumption per capita varies from medium (0.3-0.4 kg) in Italy, France, Great Britain,

Denmark and Portugal to high (1-1.8 kg) in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Portugal,

Hungary and Greece, while in countries such as USA, Canada and Australia the average per

capita consumption is 0.6 to 0.8 kg/year (Bogdanov et. al, 2008)

2.2.1 Composition

The carbohydrates are the main constituents, comprising about 95% of the honey dry weight.

Beyond carbohydrates, honey contains numerous compounds such as organic acids, proteins,

amino acids, minerals, polyphenols, vitamins and aroma compounds. Summarizing the data

shown in Table 2.5, it can be concluded that the contribution of honey to the recommended

daily intake is small. However, its importance with respect to nutrition lies in the manifold

physiological effects (Heitkamp, 1986). It should be noted that the composition of honey

depends grenatly on the botanical origin (Persano and Piro, 2004), a fact that has been seldom

considered in the nutritional and physiological studies.

13

Table 2.5: - Composition of Honey (gm/ 100 gm)

Components Blossom (average) Honeydew (average)

Water 17.2 16.3

Monosaccharides:-

Fructose

Glucose

38.2

31.3

31.8

26.1

Disaccharides:-

Sucrose

Other

0.7

5.0

0.5

4.0

Trisaccharides 4.5 18.1

Total sugar 79.7 80.5

Minerals 0.2 0.9

Amino acid/ protein 0.3 0.6

Acids 0.5 1.1

PH value 3.9 5.2

(White J.W., 1975)

2.2.1.1 Carbohydrates

The main sugars are the monosaccharides i.e fructose and glucose. Additionally, about 25

different oligosacharides have been found in honey (Doner, 1977; Siddiqui 1970). The

principal oligosaccharides in blossom honey are the disaccharides sucrose, maltose, trehalose

and turanose, as well as some nutritionally relevant ones such as panose, 1-kestose, 6-kestose

and palatinose. In the process of digestion after honey intake the principal carbohydrates

fructose and glucose are quickly transported into the blood and can be utilized for energy

requirements by the human body.

2.2.1.2 Proteins

Honey contains roughly 0.5% proteins, mainly enzymes and free amino acids. The three main

honey enzymes are diastase (amylase), decomposing starch or glycogen into smaller sugar

units, invertase (sucrase, α-glucosidase), decomposing sucrose into fructose and glucose, as

well as glucose oxidase, producing hydrogen peroxide and gluconic acid from glucose.

2.2.1.3 Vitamins, minerals and trace compounds

The amount of vitamin and minerals in honey is small and the contribution to recommended

daily intake (RDI) of different trace element is marginal. It has been found that different uni-

14

floral honey has varying amount of minerals and trace elements (Bengsch, 1992). From

nutritional point of view; chromium, selenium, manganese, sulphur, boron, cobalt, fluoride,

silicon, iodide are important. Honey contains 0.3-25 mg/kg choline and 0.06-5 mg/kg

acetylcholine (Heitcamp, 1986). Choline is essential for cardiovascular and brain function as

well as cell membrane composition, while Acetylcholine acts as neurotransmitter (Zeisel and

Blusztajn, 1994).

2.2.1.4 Aroma, taste building compound and polyphenols

Sugar is prime taste building compound in honey. Honey aroma depends upon type and

quantity of acids and amino acids present. In the past, several research on aromatic compound

has been carried out and more than 500 different volatile compound has been identified in

different types of honey. The aroma building compound in honey depends upon its botnical

origin (Bogdanov, 2007). Polyphenols are another important group of compounds with

respect to the appearance and the functional properties of honey. 56 to 500 mg/kg total

polyphenols were found in different honey types (Gheldof et al., 2002). Polyphenols in honey

are mainly flavonoids (e.g. quercetin, luteolin, kaempferol, apigenin, chrysin, galangin),

phenolic acids and phenolic acid derivatives (Tomás-Barberán et al., 2001). These are

compounds known to have antioxidant properties. The main polyphenols are the flavonoids,

their content can vary between 60 and 460 µg/100 g of honey and was higher in samples

produced during a dry season with high temperatures (Kenjeric et al., 2007).

2.2.1.5 Contaminant and toxic compounds

As other foods, honey can also be contaminated by the environment, e.g. heavy metal,

pesticides, antibiotics etc. (Bogdanov, 2006). The pesticides used in flower, antibiotics used

in bees are extracted in honey conminating it. The main problem in recent year was

contamination with antibiotics, used against bee brood diseases. A few plant used by bees are

known to produce toxic substances. Diterpenoids and pyrrazolidine alkaloids are two main

toxin groups relevant in nectar. Some plants of the Ericaceae family belonging to the sub-

family Rhododendron, e.g. Rhododendron ponticum contain toxic polyhydroxylated cyclic

hydrocarbons or diterpenoids (de Bodt, 1996). The substances of the other toxin group, the

pyrrazolidine alkaloids, found in different honey types and the potential intoxication by these

substances is reviewed (Edgar et al., 2002). Cases of honey poisoning have been reported

rarely in the literature and have concerned individuals from the following regions: Caucasus,

Turkey, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, South Africa, and also some countries in North and

15

South America including Nepal. Observed symptoms of such honey poisoning are vomiting,

headache, stomach ache, unconsciousness, delirium, nausea and sight weakness.

2.2.1.6 Physiological effects

Honey inhibits growth of several micro-organism and fungi. The anti-microbial effect of

honey, mostly against gram positive bacteria (Molen, 1992; Bogdanov, 1997). Both

bacteriostatic and bactericidal effects are reported for many strains. Furthermore, Honey is

also found to inhibit Rubella virus in vitro (Zeina et al., 1996), three species of Leishmania

parasite(Zeina et al., 1996) and Echinococcus (Kilicoglu et al., 2006). The low water activity

of honey is responsible to inhibit bacteria. Honey glucose oxidase produces anti-bacterial

agent hydrogen peroxide (White et al., 1963), but peroxide production capacity depends upon

catalase activity (Dustmann, 1971). There are also other non-peroxide antibacterial

substances with different chemical origin, e.g. aromatic acids (Russell et al., 1988), unknown

compounds with different chemical properties (Bogdanov, 1997) and phenolics and

flavonoids (Cushnie et al., 2005, Weston et al., 1999). The low honey pH can also be

responsible for the antibacterial activity (Yatsunami, 1984).

Honey has been found to contain significant antioxidant activity including glucose

oxidase, catalase, ascorbic acid, flavonoids, phenolic acids, carotenoid derivatives, organic

acids, Maillard reaction products, amino acids and proteins (Al-Mamary et al., 2002, Beretta

G et al. 2005, D'Arcy BR 2005, Gheldof et al., 2002, Perez et al., 2007).

Similarly, during roasting and frying of food, heterocyclic compound are found. For

example; Trp-p-1 (3-Amino-1,4-dimethyl-5H-pyridol [4,3-b] indole). The antimutagenic

activity of honeys from seven different floral sources (acacia, buckwheat, fireweed, soybean,

tupelo and Christmas berry) against Trp-p-1 was tested and compared with sugar analog as

well as individually tested simple sugar (Wang et al., 2002). All honeys exhibited a

significant inhibition of Trp-p-1 mutagenicity. Glucose and fructose were found to have a

similar antimutagenic activity as honey. Nigerose, another sugar, present in honey has an

immunoprotective activity (Murosaki et al., 2002). The anti-metastatic effect of honey and its

possible mode of anti-tumor action was studied by the application of honey in spontaneous

mammary carcinoma in methylcholanthrene-induced fibrosarcoma of CBA mice and in

anaplastic colon adenocarcinoma of Y59 rats (Orsolic, 2004), In another study the anti-

tumour effect of honey against bladder cancer was examined in vitro and in vivo in mice

(Swellam, 2003).

16

In other hand, Honey also exhibits anti-inflamatory effect was studied by waili and Boni

in 2003. In was found that the mean plasma concentration of thromboxane B, prostaglandin

E and prostaglandin E was reduced significantly with the ingestion of honey.

The effects of ingestion of 75 g of natural honey compared to the same amount of artificial

honey (fructose plus glucose) or glucose on plasma glucose, plasma insulin, cholesterol,

triglycerides (TG), blood lipids, C-reactive proteins and homocysteine, most of them being

risk factors for cardiovascular diseases, were studied in humans. Elevation of insulin and C-

reactive protein was significantly higher after glucose intake than after honey consumption.

In diabetic patients, honey compared with dextrose caused a significantly lower rise of

plasma glucose (Al-Waili, 2004).

The diet of honey in infants showed better blood formation and weight gain that diet

without honey (Frauenfelder, 1921). In addition, honey is better tolerated than succrose

(Müller, 1956). When infants were fed on honey rather than on sucrose an increase of

haemoglobin content, a better skin colour and no digestion problems were encountered.

(Takuma, 1955)

However, there is a health concern for infants regarding the presence of Clostridium

botulinum in honey. Since the presence of this bacterium in natural foods is ubiquitous and

honey is a non-sterilized packaged food from natural origin the risk of a low contamination

level cannot be excluded. Spores of this bacterium can survive in honey, but they cannot

build toxin. Thus, in the stomach of infants younger than one year the bacteria spores from

honey can survive and theoretically build the toxin, while children older than 12 months can

ingest honey without any risk. The physiological action of gel and powdered form of honey

as carbohydrate source was also found to improve the athletic performance (Kreider, 2002).

Honey allergy seems relatively uncommon; allergies reported can involve reactions

varying from cough to anaphylaxis (Sirnik et al., 1978). In this study it was reported that

patients allergic to pollen are rarely allergic to honey, although there is one reported case of

combined honey pollen allergy (Bousquet et al., 1984).

2.3 Preliminary treatments

2.3.1 Washing, peeling and cutting

Washing, peeling and cutting are the preliminary treatments used for almost all fruits and

vegetable processing including candy making. Washing is done to remove dust and soil from

17

ginger's surface. Furthermore, peeling is done to remove pericarp from the ginger surface.

The essential oil and oleoresin is present in outer layer of ginger, thus excess removal of

pericarp may lead to loss of oil and pungent characteristics. Finally, ginger pieces will be cut

into finger shape with its thickness of 1.5-2.5mm. Larger size of slices may lead to slow

down osmotic behavior of ginger and honey solution, whereas smaller slices may lead to

dissolute in viscous honey while cooking.

2.4 Cooking

Ginger slices are cooked to about 1 hour with addition of citric acid. According to

preservation of food and vegetable (Giridhari lal, 1986), addition of citric acid leads to

improve color of candy. Cooking of slices causes tenderization, softening effect and aids on

osmotic behavior of slices.

2.5. Drying

Among the many postharvest operations of agricultural products, drying is the most

widespread throughout the world. Besides preserving seasonal commodities, drying also

saves storage space and reduces transportation costs. For example, upon drying and

compressing, most products weigh one twentieth as much as the raw material, and occupy

about one fortieth of the storage space (Greensmith, 1998).

Several types of dryers and drying methods, each better suited for a particular situation,

are commercially used to remove moisture from wide variety of fruits and vegetables.

Conventional drying process ranges from natural sun drying to industrial drying (Leon et al.,

2002). Pruthi et al., (1984) found that paddy straw mushroom dried best at 70, 65 and 60 to

55⁰C for a period of 2 hr, 2 hr and 4 hr respectively. Dehydration ratio and rehydration ratio

of the dried samples varied from 10.0 to 11.1 and 3.2 to 7.5, respectively. Singh et al., (2007)

performed tray drying of button mushroom. Slices of 0.5, 0.7 and 0.9 cm thickness of button

mushrooms were dehydrated in tray dryer at 40, 45, 50 and 55⁰C and their drying

characteristics such as rate of diffusion and rehydration ratio were studied. The qualities of

dehydrated slices were evaluated on the basis of colour, veil opening and amino acid content.

The samples dehydrated at 50⁰C showed better quality. According to Thapa (1995)

mushroom can be dried by solar or mechanical dryer. The temperature is maintained at 60-

70ºC during drying in mechanical dryer. Lal and Sharma (1995) recommended a finishing

temperature of not more than 65.5⁰C. Pruthi et al., (1984) demonstrated dehydration of paddy

straw mushroom in a phased manner at 70⁰C, 65⁰C and 60⁰C. The loss of moisture was

18

significant during first two hr and dehydration was almost completed within 7 hr. Drying in

phased manner was reported to give better results with respect to color.

2.5.1 Drying kinetics

Drying kinetics is the description of the changes of moisture content of material during

drying. It can be expressed as a drying curve or drying rate curve which is shown in Figure

2.2 and 2.3 respectively.

Drying curve (Fig: 2.5) can be obtained experimentally by plotting the free moisture

content versus drying time. This plot can be converted into a drying rate curve (Figure 2.3) by

calculating the derivative of the curve over time. From these two types of curve it is seen that

drying is divided into two distinct portions. The first is the constant rate period, in which

unbound water is removed (line BC). Water evaporates as if there is no solid present, and its

rate of evaporation is not dependent on the material being dried. In this stage of drying the

rate-controlling step is the diffusion of the water vapor across the air-moisture interface. This

period continues until water from the interior is no longer available at the surface of food

material. Point C distinguishes the constant rate period from the subsequent falling rate

period and is called the critical moisture content. The surface of the solid is no longer wet.

The falling rate period has two sections as is seen in the figure. From C to D, the wet areas on

the surface of the drying material become completely dry. When the surface is dry (point D),

the evaporation front continues moving toward the center of the solid. This is shown by the

curve from D to E. The water that is being removed from the center of the solid moves to the

surfaces as a vapor. Although the amount of water removed in the falling rate period is

relatively small, it can take considerably longer time than in the constant rate period. The

heat transmission now consists of heat transfer to the surface and heat conduction in the

product (Rizvi, 1995).

The drying rate in the falling rate period is controlled by diffusion of moisture from the

inside to the surface and then mass transfer from the surface. During this stage some of the

moisture bound by sorption is being removed (Rizvi, 1995).

As the moisture concentration is lowered by drying, the rate of internal movement of

moisture decreases. The rate of drying falls even more rapidly than before and continues to

drop until the moisture content falls down to the equilibrium value for the prevailing air

humidity and then drying stops.

19

Fig. 2.4: Drying curve, showing moisture content as a function of drying time

(Source: Rizvi 1995)

Fig. 2.5:- Drying rate as a function of moisture content

(Source: Rizvi, 1995)

20

An Indian food scientist Loha and his coworker (2012) has used forced convective cabinet

dryer to study the hot air drying characteristics of sliced ginger placed in a single layer.

Ginger slices were dried from initial moisture content of 87-88% (w.b.) to the final moisture

content of 6-7% (w.b.). Experiments are carried out with four different drying air

temperatures of 45, 50, 55 and 60°C by keeping the air velocity fixed at 1.3 m/s. The

moisture removal rate is found to increase with increase in temperature and drying process

occurred at falling rate period for all the temperatures studied. With the increase in sugar

concentration, the drying rate with be slower.

2.6 Osmosis

The spontaneous passage or diffusion of water or other solvents through a semi-permeable

membrane is important in biology. That was first thoroughly studied in 1877 by a Germen

plant physiologist, Wilhem Pfeiffer. The more general term osmose (now osmosis) was

introduced in 1854 by a British Chemist, Thomas Graham (Somogyi et al., 1975). The

movement of water or solvent from its higher chemical potential to its lower chemical

potential without allowing the diffusion of solute is called ‗osmosis.‘ It is the movement of

water or solvent from a dilute solution to a strong solution when separated by a semi-

permeable membrane (Lapedes, 1977).

2.6.1 Osmotic Dehydration

Osmotic dehydration of foods has potential advantages in fruits and vegetables processing

industries. Osmotic dehydration is a useful technique for the concentration of fruit and

vegetables, by placing the solid food, whole or in pieces, in sugars or salts aqueous solutions

of water from cellular material, such as fruits and vegetables, without a phase change and is

often applied as a pre-treatment process. This process reduces the physical, chemical and

biological changes during drying at high temperature (Kowalska and Lenart, 2001). Osmotic

dehydration is an intermediate process in air or vacuum drying of fruits and vegetables (Kim

and Taledo, 1987). Kinetics of dewatering and mass transfer properties during the osmotic

process has been investigated for apple (Ponting et al, 1966; Hawker and Flink, 1978;

Conway et al., 1983). Lenart and Flink (1984) suggested that osmosis comes to equilibrium

(i.e. net transfer stops) when the water activities of the sample and the osmotic solution are

equal.

21

2.6.1.1 Basic theory of osmotic dehydration

Osmotic dehydration involves immersing high moisture food material in the material in the

osmotic solution. Since the solution used for osmotic dehydration has higher osmotic

pressure and hence, lower water activity then the food, which is to be osmotically dehydrated,

a driving force for water removal arises between solution and food (Lerici et al., 1985). The

driving force for water removal is the concentration gradient between the solution and the

intracellular fluid. If the membrane is perfectly semi-permeable, solute is unable to diffuse

through the membrane into the cells. However, it is difficult to obtain a prefect semi-

permeable membrane in food systems due to their complex internal structure, and there is

always some solid diffusion from the solution into the food and from the food into the

solution. Direct osmosis dehydration is therefore a simultaneous water and solute diffusion

process (Rahman, 1992). Mass transfer during osmotic treatment occurs through semi-

permeable membrane present in biological materials, which offers the dominant resistance to

the process. The static of the cell membrane can change from being partially to totally

permeable and this can lead to significant changes in tissue architecture (Rastogi and Knorr,

2000).

Fig. 2.6:- Pathway in long term osmotic dehydration process

(Source: Fito and Chiralt, 1998).

The chemical potential of water is higher in the biological material and that of sugar is

higher in osmotic solution. As a result, water flows out the biological material and sugar may

flow into the material, depending on the time of contact and membrane size. Therefore, two

simultaneous counter current flows take place. Hence, osmotic dehydration has also been

22

described as water removal and solute impregnation soaking process. The removal of water

from a fruit through the membrane is also considered as a function of water activity across

the cell membrane. A lower water activity is maintained in the osmotic solution to remove

water from higher water activity across the cell membrane. A semi-permeable cell membrane

allows water to pass through more easily than solute (Azoubel and Murr, 2004).

The solute penetration is directly related to the solute concentration and is inversely

related to the size of sugar molecules. This process is carried out at a constant low

temperature and therefore, is considered isothermal and does not involve any phase change

(Rizvi et al., 2000).

During osmotic dehydration, water flows from the inside of the food to the osmotic

solution, and osmotic solution solutes also flow to the food. Because of the differential

permeability of cellular membranes usually much more water than solute is transferred

(Mauro and Menegalli, 1995). Simultaneously, food solutes viz. sugars, organic acids,

minerals, vitamins, etc. flow to the osmotic solutions, since the cell membranes are not

completely selective. This nutrient loss depends strongly on food type and can be considered

quantitatively negligible. However, it can affect the sensory characteristics of the food. The

highest dehydration rates are observed at the beginning of the osmotic dehydration process,

and after reaching the compositional and chemical equilibrium, mass and volume increase

again and impregnation takes place (Fig. 2.4).

The information from Fig 2.4 is very useful in osmotic dehydration process design,

because it helps in time adjustment for different processes i.e. candying, salting or

dehydration.

On cell scale, the water output or solute uptake during osmotic dehydration takes place via

capillary channels, which constitute most of the extracellular space. This space can be filled

with water or solutes, which make up the main pathway for mass transfer. This type of

transport is called apoplast. In another mass transfer path, called symplast, the water and

solutes flow through intercellular channels due to differences in cell pressure. Water is also

directly transported from the tissue surface to the solution, but is minor compared to apoplast

or symplast (Shi and Le Manguer, 2003). During osmotic dehydration, the inside of the tissue

remains intact and the transport follows one of the described modes. Meanwhile, the outside

forms a penetration zone, where some of the cells are damaged or shrink because of the

osmotic stress, and most of the osmotic solutes can be found only in the penetration zone

23

even after long-term immersion (Shi and Le Maguer, 2003). The scheme of mass transfer in

osmotic dehydration treated tissue is presented in Fig. 2.1.

Detailed studies about mass transfer throughout the osmo-dehydration revealed it to be a

complex process, during which a variety of phenomena take place: convection and diffusion

in the osmotic solutions and in the intercellular spaces filled with liquid, liquid movement

through the pores due to capillary forces and symplastic transport between cells. Mavroudis,

Gekas, Sjoholm I., (2004) attempted to clarify solute uptake in the osmotic dehydration

process by evaluating the accessibility of intercellular space (pore) in the inner and outer

cortex of the apple. Results showed that porosity decreased by about 50-60 % and that bulk

density increased by about 10 % between the skin and the apple. The authors noticed also that

pore penetration of the apple cannot explain the extent or the speed of the uptake of solids.

Mass exchange may sometimes have an effect on the organoleptic and nutritional quality of

dehydrated food (Sablani et al., 2002; Prothon and Ahrne, 2004).

Osmotic dehydration incorporates a two-fold transformation of the product in its drying

process. There is a decrease in water content as well as the incorporation of a solute, and this

can result in overall weight loss by the product. Moreover, it is a useful technique for

lowering water activity of fruit and vegetables. During osmotic removal of water from foods,

the dehydration front moves from the surface that is in contact with the osmotic solution to

the center. The associated osmotic stress results in cell disintegration. The most likely cause

of cell damage can be attributed to the reduction in size caused by water loss during osmotic

treatment, resulting in the loss of contact between the outer cell membrane and the cell wall.

Introducing a solute into the food material can alter the nutritional and functional properties

of the food. Therefore a specific formulation could be achieved by using a specific solution.

The direct altering of the formulation and the partial dehydration of the food product is what

makes osmotic dehydration different to other dehydration techniques (Rastogi et al., 2000).

2.6.1.2 Combined processes

Osmotic dehydration has been seen as a preliminary stage before further processing, as the

process is only capable of reducing a sample‘s moisture content to about 50%. It is used as a

pre-treatment in many processes used to improve nutritional, sensorial and functional

properties of food without changing its integrity, and acknowledged to be an energy efficient

method of partial dehydration, since there is no need for a phase change. It can reduce the

water activity of many food materials so that microbial growth will be inhibited. Since most

24

foods contain large amounts of water, they are cost intensive to ship, pack and store. It

generally precedes process such as freezing, freeze drying, vacuum drying, or air drying. It is

effective around ambient temperatures, so heat damage to texture; color and flavor can be

minimized (Torreggiani, 1993).

Compared to traditional drying processes, osmotic dehydration has reduced energy costs.

The greatest energy consumption is in reconstituting the diluted osmotic solution and this

could be achieved by concentration using multiple effect evaporators or by sugar addition. If

evaporators are used the energy required for water removal is only approximately 25% of the

energy required for conventional hot air drying (Torreggiani and Bertolo, 2001). They also

reported that the differentiating feature of osmotic dehydration, compared to other

dehydration processes is the penetration of solutes into the food material. So it is possible, to

a certain extent, to change the food system formulation, making it more suitable for further

processing.

The commercial feasibility of using osmotic dehydration followed by vacuum drying for

the processing of bananas was studied using semi-pilot plant scale operations and this process

can be seen in Figure 3. The osmotically dried bananas retained more puffiness and crispness

than samples which had only been treated by vacuum drying. The flavor also lasted for one

year at ambient conditions compared to only two months for vacuum-dried samples. The

natural banana flavor is better retained than even freeze-dried samples and the color remains

vibrant with the reduced need for sulphur dioxide treatment (Torreggiani, 1993).

Osmotic dehydration as processing step prior to freezing has been proven as a useful tool

for gentle processing of fruits. Talens et al. (2001) aimed to analyze changes in optical and

mechanical properties of kiwi slices due to osmotic dehydration and subsequent to freezing

thawing. The osmo-dehydrofreezing process improved color and mechanical parameters and

resulted in reduced drip loss as compared to samples without pretreatment.

Maeslrelli et al. (2001) studied partial removal of water from muskmelon spheres before

freezing by Dewatering–Impregnation-Soaking in concentrated solution (DIS) for 1h, air

dehydration and combined DIS-air dehydration to a final 50% weight reduction. All the pre-

treatments caused the loss of desirable aroma compounds, while the undesirable aroma

compounds increased in air dehydrated fruits and remained stable in the DIS-treated ones.

Moreover, the sensory acceptability of the DIS-treated fruit was higher when compared with

air dehydrated ones.

25

It has been observed that products which have first been treated by osmotic dehydration

have reduced drying rates for the further drying processes, and these processes have included

solar drying, convective-air drying and vacuum drying (Torreggiani, 1993).

2.6.2 Factors affecting osmosis

2.6.2.1 Osmotic solution

2.6.2.1.1 Type of osmotic agent

The specific effect of the osmotic solution is of great importance when choosing the solution.

The solute cost, organoleptic compatibility with the end product and additional preservation

action by the solute are factors considered in selecting osmotic agents (Torreggiani, 1995).

Several solutes, alone or in combinations, have been used in hypertonic solutions for osmotic

dehydration (Le Maguer, 1988).

Ternary sucrose and NaCl solution, multi-components salt–sugar aqueous solutions have

been studied to increase the driving force of the process. Mixture of salt and sucrose in

different proportion can be used for materials of plant and animal origin to obtain higher

weight loss to solid gain ratios (WL: SL) than with individual solutes in binary solution; this

also reduces impregnation (Sacchetti et al., 2001; Ade-Omowaye et al., 2002).

Lerici et al. (1985) have found that the addition of a small amount of NaCl (2% max. w/w)

to different sucrose solutions during apple dehydration led to higher rates of water loss

without increasing solids gain significantly.

Qi et al. (1988) have pointed out the effectiveness in combining NaCl and sucrose solutes

to obtain a maximum water loss with low solids gain by the product, without significantly

affecting product taste, for carrots dehydrated using 44% sucrose and 7% NaCl solutions

(w/w).

Osmotic dehydration of apples cut into a cylinder shape were carried out in binary

aqueous solution of sucrose (40-50%) and NaCl (15-26.5%) with different concentrations and

temperatures, as well as in ternary solutions of 30/10, 40/10, 50/10, 20/15, 30/15, 40/15 % of

sucrose and NaCl, respectively. The ratio of water loss to solids gain (WL/SG) for each

osmotic treatment was particularly high in the case of salt solutions, due to a low solids gain.

In the case of ternary mixed solutions, intermediate values for WL/SG are obtained (Sereno

et al., 2001).

26

Osmotic dehydration of red paprika was studied using a combined sucrose and NaCl

solution. It was found that the optimum conditions for sucrose concentration and NaCl

concentration are 21.86g/10g and 2.02 g/100g, respectively for the appropriate criteria are

achieved (Ade-Omowaye et al., 2002).

Sucrose and NaCl solutions proved to be the best choices based on effectiveness,

convenience and flavor. For apple sticks dehydrated using ternary sucrose and NaCl

solutions, the addition of NaCl may help to attenuate the excessive sweetness of product

processed with high sucrose concentration. It was also found that addition of NaCl at levels

up to 1% did not have a detrimental effect on product acceptability when added to sucrose

solutions having concentrations lower than 55% (Sacchetti et al., 2001).

2.6.2.1.2 Concentration of the osmotic solution

Increase in osmotic solution concentration resulted in corresponding increases in water loss to

equilibrium level and drying rate (Conway et al., 1983; Hawkes and Flink, 1978; Lenart,

1992). Therefore, increased osmotic solution concentrations lead to increased weight

reductions. This was attributed to the water activity of the osmotic solution which decreases

with the increase in solute concentration in the osmotic solution (Biswal and Le Maguer,

1989; Rahman and Lamb, 1990). A report states that, an increase in 10°Brix corresponds to

an increase of 5% of the final water loss percentage (Ravindran, 1987).

Lazarides (1994) studied on the osmotic dehydration of apples using 45 and 65 ° Brix of

sucrose solution. It was found that a higher sucrose concentration (65° Brix) a faster water

loss (ca.30% increase). However, there was a much greater solid uptake (ca. 80% increase).

He concluded that under increased osmotic solution concentration favored solid uptake and

resulted in lower water loss to solids gain ratio. On the contrary, low concentration sucrose

solution can cause minimal water loss which resulted in lower water loss to solid gain ratio

(Karathanos et al., 1995).

2.6.2.1.3 Physicochemical properties of osmotic solution

A number of authors have observed that the molecular weight, ionic state and solubility of the

solute in water cause differences in the behavior of the osmotic solute (Hawkes and Flink,

1978; Lenart and Lewicki, 1987; Lenart, 1992; Lerici et al., 1985). Furthermore, molecular

size of the osmotic solute has a significant effect on the water loss to solids gain ratio. The

smaller the solute, the higher and the extent of solute penetration. For example, high dextrose

equivalent (D.E.) corn syrup solids favoured sugar uptake and resulted in lower water loss to

27

sugar gain ratio (Lazarides, 1994). Lower dextrose equivalent (large size) corn syrup solids

gave negative solid gain values, indicating that solute uptake was lower than the leaching of

natural tissue solid.

Osmotic dehydration is also affected by the pH of the osmotic solution. Moy et al. (1978)

observed that acidification of osmotic solution increases the rate of water removal by

changing in the tissue‘s properties and subsequently the texture of fruits and vegetables.

Tanafranca et al. (1986) noted that the texture and color of the osmosed jackfruit were

improved by adding citric acid 0.2% of the original fruit weight in the osmotic solution. At

this condition the firmness of jackfruit pieces was maintained and the enzymatic browning

can be avoided by the use of citric acid as anti-browning agent.

Effect of preservatives is also important to extend the shelf life of the osmosed products.

Tanafranca et al. (1986) studied the effect of sodium metabisulfite on flavor and taste of the

finished product. Sodium metabisulfite proved to be effective for preventing discoloration of

dehydrated jackfruit. The ideal concentration seemed to be 0.1% by weight of the original

fruit.

2.6.2.1.4 Osmotic solution and food mass ratio

Ponting et al. (1966) and Flink (1979) reported that an increase of osmotic solution to sample

mass ratio resulted in an increase in both the solid gain and water loss in osmotic

dehydration. To avoid significant dilution of the medium and subsequent decrease in the

(osmotic) driving force during the process, a high ratio (at least 30:1) was used by most

workers whereas some investigators used a much lower solution to product ratio (4:1 or 3:1)

in order to monitor mass transfer by following the changes of the sugar solution concentration

(Conway et al., 1983).

2.6.2.2 Food material

2.6.2.2.1 Physico-chemical properties of food material

The chemical composition (protein, carbohydrate, fat and salt), physical structure (porosity,

arrangement of cells, fiber orientation and skin) and pre-treatments may affect the kinetics of

osmosis of food (Islam and Flink, 1982). In their studies the authors observed that steam

blanching of the fresh potatoes slice for four minutes before osmosis gave lower water loss

and higher solid gain. They concluded that the loss of membrane integrity due to heating was

the cause of the poor mass transfer during osmotic dehydration.

28

Different species, different varieties of the same species, even different maturity levels of

the same variety have been found to give substantially different responses to osmotic

dehydration (Hartel, 1967). Species, variety and maturity level all have a significant effect on

the natural tissue structure in terms of cell membrane structure, protopectin to soluble pectin

ratio, amount of insoluble solids, intercellular spaces, tissue compactness and entrapped air.

These structural differences substantially affect diffusion mass exchange between the product

and osmotic medium.

2.6.2.2.2 Geometry of food material

The geometry of sample pieces affects the behavior of the osmotic concentration due to the

variation of the surface area per unit mass and diffusion length of water and solutes involved

in mass transfer (Lerici et al., 1985). He further states that higher surface area sample shape

(such as rings) gave higher water loss and sugar gain value compared to lower surface area

samples (such as slices and stick). However, the small thickness associated with high surface

area resulted in high sugar gain but low water loss. A reduction in water diffusion was due to

the short diffusion length.

2.6.2.3 Operation

2.6.2.3.1 Immersion time

The immersion time is significant factor affecting the osmotic dehydration. In general,

rapidly rate of mass transfer in the early stages of the osmotic process after which the

gradually slow down with time towards equilibrium end point has been reported (Conway et

al, 1983; Lazarides, 1994). The condition defining the equilibrium state between product and

osmotic solution was approached in long period immersion time. Lenart and Flink (1984)

found that mass transport data were not significantly changed in the period between 4 and 20

hrs. It has been observed that the initial period of osmotic process is the most important one,

since the mass transfer phenomena are fast and they have a dramatic impact on further

evolution of the osmotic process. Lazarides (1994) reported that there was a considerably

changed in mass transfer parameters during the early period of osmotic dehydration of apple

slices. It was found that within the first hour the rate of water loss was about 50% and within

3 hours it more than doubled its initial total solids. Thus an efficient way to limit mass

transfer value such as minimized solute uptake and obtained high water loss is early

interruption of osmotic process.

29

2.6.2.3.2 Operating temperature

Temperature is also a very important factor because it affects the drying rate and the quality

of the osmosed product. According to Conway et al. (1983) it can be concluded that every

10° C increase in temperature correspond to 5% increase in final water loss percentage.

Beristain et al. (1990) stated that increase in temperature of osmotic solution results in

increases in water lose, whereas solid gain is less affected by temperature. Rahman and Lamb

(1990) observed that at high temperature solute does not diffuse as easily as water through

the cell membrance and thus the approach to osmotic equilibrium is achieved primarily by

flow of water from the cell resulting in a lower solute gain by the food material. Higher

process temperatures seem to promote faster water loss through swelling and plasticizing of

the cell membranes, faster water diffusion within the product, and better mass transfer

characteristics at the product surface due to lower viscosity of the osmotic medium. At the

same time solids diffusion within the product is also promoted by higher temperatures, only

at different rates, mainly dictated by the size of the solute and concentration of the osmotic

solution. However, Lazarides (1994) reported substantial higher sugar gains (up to ca.55%)

compared to room temperature conditions during osmotic dehydration of apples at process

temperature between 30 and 50° C.

2.6.2.3.3 Operating agitation

Agitation prevents the formation of a low concentration area around the fruit due to migration

of water from the fruit to the medium (Pointing, 1973). Without agitation, the water loss is

decreased and the sugar gain is increased (Wack and Guilbert, 1990). Lenart and Flink (1984)

reported that osmotic dehydration is enhanced by agitation or circulation of the osmotic

solution around the sample. Agitation insures a continuous contact of the sample surface with

concentrated osmotic solution, securing a large gradient at the product/solution interface.

Therefore agitation has a tremendous impact on weight loss, whenever water removal is

characterized by large external mass transfer resistance.

30

Part III

Materials and methods

3.1 Materials

a) Ginger

b) knife

c) Weigh balance

d) Electric grinder

e) Dean and stark apparatus

f) Soxhlet apparatus

g) Heating arrangement

h) Muffle furnace

i) Suction pump

j) Chemicals such as acetone, NaOH, citric acid, H2SO4

k) Ginger and honey samples

l) Refractrometer

3.2 Methods

3.2.1 Collection of raw materials

Fresh, young, low fiber Ginger and Honey were collected from Fruits and vegetable market

Sankhamul, Kathmandu in August- November.

3.2.2 Trimming, washing and sorting

The fibrous roots, sheaths and remaining stems were trimmed out, the rotten, shriveled and

fingers unfit for processing were sorted out. Lastly the whole samples were washed with tap

water and rinsed several times as per Oli (1999).

3.2.3 Soaking, peeling and cutting

The trimmed, washed and sorted samples were soaked in water for 10 hours and they were

peeled with split bamboo knives and were further washed with tap water repeatedly. The

soaked samples were drained and then wiped with muslin cloth to remove surface moisture.

Then, the peeled samples were further cut into the finger like shapes with size

4cm×0.5cm×0.5cm. The thickness of ginger is directly related to its osmotic behavior and

sensory characteristics. Samples were taken for its proximate analysis.

31

3.2.4 Cooking

The cut ginger is cooked in pressure cooker for 45 minutes with 0.5% citric acid solution as

per Fruits and Vegetable (Girdhari lal, 1986).The cooked pieces of ginger was separated from

solution and placed in muslin cloth, hanged for two hours to cool down and remove residual

water.

3.2.5 Formulation

Different formulations of ginger and honey were prepared as shown in table below: -

Table 3.1: - Formulation of candied ginger from Ginger and Honey

Code Processed Ginger Honey

A 1000 gm 750 gm

B 1000 gm 1000 gm

C 1000 gm 1250 gm

3.2.6 Preparation of product

The three mixtures was covered and placed in room temperature for 24 hrs. Next day, the

ginger pieces were separated from syrup and the syrup was concentrated in a low flame to

increase the soluble solids by 10%. The separated ginger pieces were again immersed into the

viscous, concentrated and cooled honey syrup and was left for another 24 hrs. In 3rd

day

process was repeated but ginger pieces were immersed in hot condition of syrup. The 5th

day,

the mixture was cooked until total soluble solids reaches to 75%. The residual syrup was

separated and water sprinkled in cooked ginger pieces to remove residual sugar from its

surface.

3.3.7. Drying and packing

The samples was dried using solar drier until it become non sticky and further packed in

suitable packing materials and glass jar.

3.2 Physico- chemical analysis

3.2.1 Peeling loss

The soaked samples were taken outside, drained and removed surface water wiping with

muslin cloth and weighed on weighing balance and initial weight was noted and then were

peeled using bamboo knife and peeled ginger was again weighed, finally Peel loss was

calculated as follows.

Peel loss weight of peeled sampleweight of unpeeled sample

x100 %

32

3.2.2 Moisture content

The moisture content of the whole ginger was determined by immiscible solvent distillation

method as suggested by Ranganna, (2007).

3.2.4 Essential oil

The essential oil content of the samples was determined as per Ranganna, 2007.

3.2.5 Oleoresin

Oleoresin was extracted and determined as per Ranganna, 2007.

3.2.6 Crude fiber

Crude fiber content of the samples was determined as per Ranganna, 2007.

3.2.8 Acidity

Acidity of samples was determined as per Rangana (2007).

3.2.9 Total soluble solids

The total soluble solids are determined using calibrated Refractrometer

3.2.10 Total sugar

The total sugar is determined by Lane and Enyon method as per Rangana (2007).

3.3 Statistical data analysis

The prepared candied gingers were rated according to Hedonic rating scale and the results

obtained were analyzed by using two way ANOVA for comparison of its properties using

Genstate ver. 11. 0. 3888.

33

Fresh, tender and fibreless Ginger

Preliminary treatments

Washing

Peeling

Cutting (4cm×0.5cm×0.5cm)

Boiling in water for an hour with 0.5% citric

Keeping in dry clothes for soaking of excess

Mixing of ginger and honey in 3 different composition i.e.

- T1 (750gm honey+ 1000gm ginger)

- T2 (1000 gm honey+ 1000gm ginger)

- T3 (1250 gm hone+ 1000gm ginger)

at room temperature and leave it overnight.

Next day, ginger slices is separated out from its syrup and boiled to concentrate the syrup

cooled, and mixing ginger pieces finally. Third day, process is repeated as second.

Fourth day, same process repeated as above but ginger pieces are added to hot syrup and leave

for a night. Fifth day, process is repeated.

Finally, the mixture is cooked together till 0Bx reaches to 75

0Bx.

Excess syrup be drained and dried till non-sticky.

Rating

Proximate analysis of selected one

Fig 3.2: Flowchart for candied ginger processing using honey

Proximate analysis

Pure Honey

Proximate analysis

34

Fresh, tender and fibreless ginger

Preliminary treatments

Washing

Peeling

Cutting (4cm×0.5cm×0.5cm)

Boiling in water for an hour with 0.5% citric

Keeping in dry clothes for soaking of excess

Steeping the ginger pieces in sucrose syrup of 40 degree brix concentration

Next day, ginger is separated out from its syrup and boiled to concentrate the syrup followed

by cooling and steeping of ginger pieces overnight.

Third day, same process repeated as above but ginger pieces are added to hot syrup and leave

for a night. Fourth day, process is repeated.

Finally, the mixture is cooked together till candies reaches to 750 Brix.

Excess syrup will be drained and dried till non-sticky.

Fig 3.2: Flowchart for candied ginger processing using sugar

Proximate analysis

35

Part IV

Results and discussion

4.1 Proximate analysis of raw materials

4.1.1 Ginger

The proximate composition of ginger was found to be 80.21% moisture, 3.73% protein,

2.36% fat. The essential oil and oleoresin in ginger are the main parameter for ginger candy.

Oleoresin content was found to be 5.34% on dry basis. Flavor and pungency of ginger are

accumulated in the oleoresin. Genotypes, harvesting age, cultivation practices, choice of

solvents and method of extraction etc. are known to affect the oleoresin content in ginger

(Connell, 1969). In the present all factors except the rhizome type common, the variability

observed for oleoresin may be attributed to the effect of the climatic condition, due to the soil

type and other climatic conditions.

Table 4.1: Analysis of Ginger

S. no. Parameters Composition

1 Moisture, % (wb) 80.21(1.67)

2. Protein, % (db) 3.73(0.29)

3. Fat, % (db) 2.36(0.25)

4. Crude fiber, % (db) 2.11(0.17)

5. Essential oil, % (db) 2.27(0.11)

6. Oleoresin, % (db) 5.34(0.67)

7. Peeling loss, % (db) 10.42 (0.51)

8. Ash, % (db) 5.57 (0.62)

9. Acid insoluble ash, % (db) 2.17 (0.77)

10. Total soluble solids, % 7.06 (0.10)

Note: - Values are the mean of 3 replicates± SD

The essential oil in ginger was found to be 2.27%. According to handbook of spices,

seasoning and flavoring (Philips et. Al., 1993), essential oil in ginger ranges between 1-4%.

A report has found moisture 80.9% in fresh ginger (Govindarajan, 1982). John and Ferrira

(1997), Swaminathan (1985) has found 87% and 80.9% respectively in edible portion of

36

ginger. Devkota santosh (2010) has analysed to sample from NARC i.e. ZI 8502 and ZI 9721

was found that the moisture was 85.83, 84.87 respectively.

Raw ginger has analyzed and found to be water (80.8%), protein (2.3%), fat (2%),

carbohydrate (12.3%), fiber (2.4%), ash (1.2%) and volatile oil (1.3%) (Purseglove, 1992).

Shirin et al., 2010 found that protein and fat to be 5.98 and 4.37 g /100 g dry weight. Our

results are very close to these researches.

The crude fiber is other main parameter for attraction of mind for such candied fruit.

Young ginger rhizome is requirement for candied fruit which directly affect texture of final

product. The crude fiber in ginger sample was found to be 2.11 on dry basis. Preparation of

candy with ginger of 1-4% crude fiber results good quality of candy (Mehta, 1984).

Some reported that, values for composition of ginger by various authors are in the

following range; for protein, 7.2 to 8.7, fat, 5.5 to 7.3 and ash, 2.5 to 5.7 g/100 g dry weight

(Nwinuka et al., 2005; Hussain et al., 2009; Odebunmi et al., 2010). But according to Sharma

(1997), the ginger of similar seed and of same climatic condition gave the similar result. The

results obtained might have been affected by the condition of ginger at the time of analysis,

on the maturity stage, climatic condition of the cultivated area and on the pH of the soil.

4.1.2 Honey

The composition of honey was also analyzed and found that the total sugar, moisture, total

soluble solids, protein, pH, acidity was found to be 81.42%, 20.27%, 80.17%, 0.50%, 3.16,

0.57% respectively.

Table 4.2: Composition of Honey

S. no. Parameters Composition

1 Total sugar, % 81.42(1.58)

2. Moisture, % 20.27(1.22)

3. Total soluble solids, 0Bx 80.17(0.29)

4. Protein, % (db) 0.50(0.22)

5. pH 3.16 (0.17)

6. Acidity, % as citric acid 0.57 (0.21)

Note: - Values are the mean of 3 replicates± SD

37

The main component of Honey for candy making is its total soluble solid, which was

found to 80.170Bx TSS and total sugar of honey sample being used was found to be 81.42%.

A report has showed that the total sugar 79.70Bx, water 17.2%, protein 0.3%, acids 0.5% and

pH 3.9% in blossom honey (Bogdanov et. al, 2008). The result obtained is some-what close

to Bogdanov, 2008.

4.2 Moisture studies of ginger during processing

The Moisture of fresh ginger was found to be 80.21% on wet basis and found to decreased to

44.44%, 38.55%, 38.60% in A, B and C composition of honey and ginger via osmotic

dehydration and gradual concentration of honey syrup in 6 days respectively. In the Fig. 4.1,

the increase in curve from 1-2 represents, increase in moisture d ue to the cooking effect of

ginger pieces. Curve 2-7 represents, decrease in moisture due to osmotic dehydration and

finally, removal of moisture due to cooking ginger pieces along with syrup to its final sugar

concentration.

From the Fig: 4.1, we can conclude that honey was not sufficient to show the maximum

osmotic behavior in sample A where as in B and C, the honey was found enough for

maximum dehydration.

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

% M

ois

ture

Days

A B C

Fig. 4.1: Moisture studies of ginger in honey

38

4.3 Total soluble solids studies in ginger and honey during processing

The Total soluble solids of ginger was measured with refractrometer and found to be

7.070Bx. The TSS refers to mainly sugar and acids. Krishnapillai (2005) has found TSS

5.05% in ginger grown in Jaffna, Srilanka.

Fig. 4.2: TSS studies of ginger

In the shown line chart, the sugar uptake is high in initial days (1-2). And the uptake

was found slower from curve 2-6. After cooking the TSS of ginger was found to increase the

sugar content to 75.20, 74.47, 75.270Bx respectively in sample A,B and C respectively,

represented 6-7 in given chart.

In the chart 4.3, increase in Total soluble solids of honey syrup in every three sample

A, B and C was determined in every 24 hrs. As shown in Curve (1-2) represents first day, in

which pretreated ginger pieces was immersed in honey for the first time. Due to osmosis, the

TSS of Honey was decreased from 800Bx to 32.3

0Bx, 41.6

0Bx, 44.2

0Bx in A, B and C

sample. After then, the syrup concentration was increased by 100Bx every day. The final

result at 6th

day was 57.470Bx, 66.20

0Bx, 68.13

0Bx in A, B and C sample respectively.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

0B

x

Days

A B C

39

24.3

24.5

24.7

24.9

25.1

25.3

25.5

25.7

25.9

1 2 3 4

% M

ois

ture

Days

A B C

Fig. 4.3: 0Bx of honey vs. days

In all samples, Honey concentration is limited, which means sugar concentration in every

sample is fixed. For example, Sample A has least honey composition, thus maximum sugar is

utilized in osmosis remaining least sugar concentration in honey with final 57.470Bx.

Similarly, sample C has maximum concentration resulting high total soluble solid in final

syrup.

4.4 Drying Characteristics

Fig. 4.4: Moisture content of samples with respect to time

The above chart shows drying characteristics of three samples. The moisture after cooking

found to be 25.78%, 25.58%, 24.97% and decreased to 25.11%, 25.01%, 24.61% in A, B and

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

initial 1 2 3 4 5

0B

x

Days

A B C

40

C samples respectively due to drying in 3 days. The ellevation from 1 to 3 days indicates,

falling rate period and further 3-4 days refer to stationary periods. With the observation, it

was found that the candied ginger was found to highly hygroscopic and became sticky in

little period of time when exposed to surrounding. The reason for this is lack of enough

crystallization of sugar within surface of candy.

4.5 Cost calculation

The cost is calculated according the quantity of material used in candy making. Sample A, B

and C content equal quantity of ginger i.e. 1000gm but has different quantity of honey;

750gm, 1000gm and 1250gm respectively in sample A, B and C. Thus, with higher use of

honey, cost has increased from A to C. Similarly, Control sample D contents 1000gm ginger

and 1000gm 40% sucrose syrup.

Table 4.3: Cost calculation of samples

Samples Price (per Kg)

A Rs. 500

B Rs. 640

C Rs. 780

D Rs. 92

The cost of sample A, B, C and D was found to be Rs. 500, Rs. 640, Rs. 780 and Rs. 92

per kg respectively. Among all, Sample D is found to be highly cheap and C, the costly one.

The cost of honey and sucrose has played vital role in cost of the product.

4.6 Sensory evaluation

Sensory evaluation was carried out using 9 point Hedonic rating scale described by Rangana

(1997). Semi trained and untrained panelist carried out the sensory evaluation on the quality

attributes viz appearance, color, taste, texture, flavor and overall acceptability. The statistical

analysis (two way ANOVA-no blocking) was done. ANOVA is carried out using LSD at 5%

level of significance.

4.4.1 Optimization of honey concentration

Three different ginger candy samples were prepared by taking honey and ginger in ratio

as C and sucrose based ginger candy was subjected for sensory 1׃as B 1.25 1׃as A, 1 1׃0.75

evaluation. The result of sensory evaluation is shown in Fig 4.4.

41

Fig 4.5: Effect of honey concentration on mean sensory score of ginger candy

The mean sensory score for appearance of the 3 samples A, B and C and control D were

found to be 5.8, 7.3, 7.1 and 7.3 respectively. Mean sensory score of appearance of sample A

was significantly differed (P<0.05) with samples B, C and D whereas the scores of samples B

was not significantly different with sample C and D and . Based on appearance, sample B

having highest value of means sensory score can be chosen as best.

The mean sensory score for color of the 3 samples A, B and C and control D were found

to be 6.1, 7.6, 6.5and 7 respectively. Mean sensory score of color of sample B was

significantly differed (P<0.05) with samples A, C and D whereas the scores of samples B was

not significant different with A and D. Based on color, sample B having highest value of

means sensory score can be chosen as best.

The mean sensory score for flavor of the 3 samples A, B and C and control D were found

to be 6.4, 6.5, 6.4 and 6 respectively. Mean sensory score of flavor of sample B was

significantly differed (P> 0.05) with sample D whereas the score of B was not significant

different with A and C .Based on flavor, sample B having higher value of mean sensory score

can be chosen as best.

The mean sensory score for texture of the three samples A, B, C and control D were

found to be 5.6, 7.4, 7.1 and 7.1 respectively. Mean sensory score of texture of sample A was

significantly differed (P<0.05) with samples B, C and D whereas the scores of samples B and

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Appearance color Smell Texture Taste Overall

Acceptance

A B C D

42

C, B and D, C and D were not significantly different. Based on the texture, sample B having

highest value of means score can be chosen as best.

The mean sensory score for taste of the three samples A, B, C and control D were found

to be 6.4, 7.7, 6.8 and 7.1 respectively. Mean sensory score of taste of sample B was

significantly differed (P<0.05) with samples A, C and D whereas the scores of samples A and

C and C and D were not significantly different. Based on the taste, sample B having highest

value of means sensory score can be chosen as best.

The mean sensory score for overall acceptance of the three samples A, B, C and control

D were found to be 6.5, 7.9, 6.6 and 7.2 respectively. Mean sensory score of overall

acceptability of sample B was significantly differed (P<0.05) with samples A, C and D and

sample A is significant different sample D whereas the scores of samples A and C were not

significantly different. Based on overall acceptability, sample B having highest value of

means sensory score can be chosen as best.

Based on the statistical analysis of the sensory data, sample B with the ratio of honey and

ginger 11׃ is chosen as best optimized honey concentration for the preparation of ginger

candy.

The products A, B and C represent ratio of ginger and honey i.e. 750gm: 1000gm,

1000gm: 1000gm, 1250gm: 1000gm respectively. And D represents Control made from

1000gm Sucrose syrup (40%) and 1000gm Ginger. Since, B Product is found best among A,

B, C and D; 1000gm Ginger and 1000gm Honey is the best product on the basis of

Appearance, color, taste, texture and over all acceptance. Hence, further analysis is done for

the best product. The table below is the proximate composition of the selected sample.

43

Table 4.4: composition of selected product (1:1; ginger: honey)

S. no. Parameters Composition

1 Moisture, % (wb) 25.01 (0.64)

2 Total soluble sugar, % 74.47 (0.94)

3 Essential oils, % (db) 1.33 (0.09)

4 Protein, % (db) 3.05 (0.31)

5 Fat, % (db) 1.91 (0.9)

6 Total sugar,% 79.95(0.52)

7 Reducing sugar, % 33.96 (0.59)

8 Oleoresin, % (db) 3.47 (0.55)

9 Crude fiber, % (db) 1.90 (0.33)

Note: - Values are the mean of 3 replicates± SD

As shown in table 4.4, the moisture of candy was found to be 25.01% on wet basis.

Durrani (2011) has found to be moisture 28% in honey based carrot candy. This was because

the total soluble solid level was increased to 720Bx only.

It was also found that losses has occurred in essential oil, protein, fat and crude fiber

during its processing from 2.27%, 3.73%, 2.36%, and 5.34% to 1.33%, 3.05%, 1.91% and

1.90% respectively.

44

Part V

Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Conclusions

1. Moisture, protein, fat, crude fiber, essential oil, oleoresin of ginger found to be

80.21% (wb), 3.73% (db), 2.36% (db), 2.11% (db), 2.27% (db), 5.34% (db)

respectively.

2. The total sugar, moisture, total soluble solids, protein, pH, acidity of honey was found

to be 81.42%, 20.27%, 80.17%, 0.50%, 3.16, 0.57% respectively.

3. Honey when used in equal proportion with ginger (i.e. 1:1) was best according to

taste, color, texture, smell and overall acceptance.

4. Proximate composition of selected sample was done. The moisture, total soluble solid,

essential oil, protein, fat, total sugar, reducing sugar, oleoresin and crude fiber was

found 25.01% (wb), 74.470Bx, 1.33%, 3.05%( db), 1.91%( db), 79.95%, 33.96%,

3.47% (db), 1.90% (db) respectively.

5. The cost of sample A, B, C and D was found to be Rs. 500, Rs. 640, Rs. 780 and Rs.

92 per kg respectively. Among all, Sample D is found to be highly cheap (Rs. 92) and

C, the costly one (Rs. 780). The cost of honey and sucrose has played vital role in cost

of the product.

6. The moisture of sample after cooking was 25.78%, 25.58%, 24.97% and was dried;

the moisture was reduced to 25.11%, 25.01%, 24.61% in A, B and C samples

respectively.

5.2 Recommendations

1. Candy processing requires heating, and has tendency to form HMF which is

carcinogenic in nature. So, increase in HMF level due to its processing can be studied.

2. Drying characteristic can be studied.

3. For more crystallization and to make non-sticky candy, seed crystal can be used at the

surface.

45

Part VI

Summary

Ginger is well known medicinal herbs, commonly used in spices and flavorings. Ginger

rhizome has been used as a medicine in Chinese, Indian and Arabic herbal traditions since

ancient times. Similarly, honey is a natural sweetener with several beneficial effects and no

barrier to diabetics and children for its use.

The proximate composition of ginger was studied. The moisture, protein, fat, crude fiber,

essential oil, oleoresin of ginger was found to be 80.21% (wb), 3.73% (db), 2.36% (db),

2.11% (db), 2.27% (db) and 5.34% (db) respectively. Similarly, peeling loss, ash content,

acid insoluble ash, total soluble solid was found to be 10.42% (db), 5.57% (db) and 2.17%

(db) respectively.

The composition of honey was also analyzed and found that the total sugar, moisture, total

soluble solids, protein, pH and acidity was found to be 81.42%, 20.27%, 80.17%, 0.50%,

3.16 and 0.57% respectively.

Hence, these two materials are varied in 3 different composition for determining best

quality honey based ginger candy i.e. 750gm honey and 1000gm ginger, 1000 honey and

1000gm ginger, 1250gm honey and 1000gm ginger. And for the control, 40% 1000gm

sucrose syrup was used to impregnate 1000gm ginger slices.

With the initial moisture of ginger i.e. 80.21% on wet basis, was decreased to 44.44%,

38.55%, 38.60% in A, B and C composition of honey and ginger via osmotic dehydration and

gradual concentration of honey syrup in 6 days respectively. Simultaneously, the TSS of

ginger was also increased from 7.070Bx (initial) to 43.27

0Bx, 50.79

0Bx, 52.20

0Bx by osmosis

and further cooked to reach 75.200Bx, 74.47

0Bx, 75.27

0Bx respectively in sample A, B and C

respectively.

On the basis of all sensory parameters, 1000gm ginger and 1000gm honey was found best

among all the variation including control made up of 1000gm (40% sucrose syrup) and

1000gm ginger. The moisture, total soluble solid, essential oil, protein, fat, total sugar,

reducing sugar, oleoresin and crude fiber was found 25.01% (wb), 74.470Bx, 1.33%, 3.05%(

db), 1.91%( db), 79.95%, 33.96%, 3.47% (db), 1.90% (db) respectively.

46

References

Ade-Omowaye, B.I.O, Rastogi, N.K., Angersbach, A. and Knorr, D. (2002). Osmotic

dehydration of bell peppers: Influence of high intensity electric field pulses and elevated

temperature treatment. J. Food Eng. 54: 35-43.

Akpalaba, R. U. E., Agu, G. C., Adeleke, O. O. and Asonye, C. C. ( 2008), Effect of Orally

Administered Zingiber Officinale on the Intra Ocular Pressure of Experimental Rabbits.

Int. J. health Res. 2(3): 273-278

Alam, A. (1999). Industrial and policy issues including export potential of jaggery and

khandsari industry in India. Indian Institute of Sugarcane Research, Lucknow

Al-Mamary, M., Al-Meeri, A. and Al-Habori, M. (2002). Antioxidant activities and total

phenolics of different types of honey. Nutr Res 22:1041-1047.

Al-Waili, N.S. and Boni, N. S. (2003). Natural honey lowers plasma prostaglandin

concentrations in normal individuals. J Med Food 6:129-133.

Anand J. K., and Brown S. (1968). Osmophilic and Xerophilic yeasts in honey. J Food Sci

Technol 86:215 –227

AOAC. (1987). Official Methods of Analysis. (15th ed). Association of Official Analytical

chemists, Arlington, VA, USA.

Azoubel, P. M. and Murr, M. (2004). Mass transfer kinetics of osmotic dehydration of cherry

tomato. J. Food, Eng., 61:291-295

Bengsch, E. (1992). Connaissance du miel. Des oligo-éléments pour la santé. Rev franç apicult

569:383-386.

Bertolo G., Torreggiani, D., Maestrelli, A., Scalzo, R. L. and Lupi, D. (2001). Partial removal

of water before freezing: cultivar and pre-treatments as quality factors of frozen

muskmelon Cucumis melo, cv reticulatus Naud.). J. of Food Eng. 49: 255-260.

Beretta, G., Granata, P., Ferrero, M., Orioli, M. and Facino, R. M. (2005). Standardization of

antioxidant properties of honey by a combination of spectrophotometric/fluorimetric assays

and chemometrics. Anal Chim Acta 533:185-191.

Beristain, C. I., Azaura, E., Cortes, R. and Garcia H. S. (1990). Mass transfer during osmotic

dehydration of pineapples rings. Int. J. Food Sci. and Tech. 25:576-582

Biswal, R. N. and Maguer, M. Le. (1989). Mass transfer in plant material in contact with

aqueous solutions of ethanol and sodium chloride: equilibrium data. J. Food Process Eng.

11: 159-176.

47

Blumenthal, M. (1998). The complete German Commission E monographs: therapeutic guide to

herbal medicines. Austin: American Botanical Council.

Bogdanov, S. (2006). Contaminants of bee products. Apidologie 38:1-18.

Bogdanov, S., Ruoff. K. and Persano, Oddo. L. (2007). Physico-chemical methods for the

characterisation of unifloral honeys: a review. Apidologie 35:S4-S17.

Bogdanov, S. (1997). Nature and origin of the antibacterial substances in honey. Lebensm.-Wiss

-Technol 30:748-753.

Bogdanov, S., Jurendic, T., Sieber, R. and Gallmann, P. (2008). Honey for Nutrition and

Health: a Review. American Journal of the College of Nutrition, 27: 677-689

Bousquet, J., Campos, J. and Michel, F. B. (1994). Food intolerance to honey. Allergy 39:73-75.

Bruneton, J. (1995). Ginger. Pharmacognosy, Phytochemistry, Medicinal plants, Lavoisier

publishing Co.Inc. 258-261.

Burkill, I. H. (1996). A Dictionary of the Economic Products of the Malay Peninsula, Kuala

Lumpur, Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives. p. 2444.

Bone, M. E., Wilkinson, D. J., Young, J. R., McNeil, J. and Charlton, S., (1990). Ginger root--a

new antiemetic. The effect of ginger root on postoperative nausea and vomiting after major

gynaecological surgery. Anaesthesia; 45:669-71.

Chandu, N., Prasad, M. (2006) Development of guava candies. J Food Sci Technol 43:210 –212

Chaudhary, A., Sharma, D., (2008). Pesticide residue in honey sample from Himanchal

Pradesh, India, springer science business media. LLC 2008

Chen, H. C., Chang, M. D. and Chang, T. J. (1985). Antibacterial properties of some spice

plants before and after heat treatment. Chung Hua Min Kuo Wei Sheng Wu Chi Mien I

Hsueh Tsa Chih; 18: 190-5.

Chen, C. C., Rosen, R. T. and Ho, C. T. (1986). Chromatographic analysis of gingerol

compounds in ginger (Zingiber officinale) extracted by liquid carbon dioxide. J.

Chromatogr. 360: 163-174.

Connel, D.W. and Mclauchan, R.L. (1969) .Natural pungent compounds in examination of the

gingerol, shogaols , paradols and related compounds by thin layer chromatography and gas

chromatography. J chromatn, 67(1), P 29

Conway, J., F. Castaigne, G. Picard and X. Voxan (1983). Mass transfer considerations in the

osmotic dehydration of apples. Can. Inst. Food Sci. Tech. 16 (1): 25-29.

Cushnie, T. and Lamb, A. (2005). Antimicrobial activity of flavonoids. Int J Antimicrob Agents

26:343-356.

48

D'Arcy, B.R. (2005). Antioxidants in Australian floral honeys -Identification of health-

enhancing nutrient components. RIRDC Publication No 05/040, 1.

de Bodt, G. (2006). Les miels de rhododendrons. Les Carnets de CARI 10-12.

Denyer, C. V., Jackson, P., Loakes, D. M., Ellis, M. R. and Young, D. A. (1994). Isolation of

antirhinoviral sesquiterpenes from ginger (Zingiber officinale). 57:658-62.

Devkota S. (2010). Physicochemical comparison of gingers cultivated in some parts of Nepal.

A dissertation submitted to Central Campus of Technology, Dharan; T.U Nepal.

Doner, L. W. (1977). The sugars of honey - a review. J Sci Food Agric 28:443-456.

Duke, J. A. and Ayensu, E. S. (1985). Medicinal Plants of China. Medicinal Plants of the

World. Algonac, MI: Reference Publications, Inc. 1; 362.

Durrani, M. A., Srivastava, P. K. and Verma S. (2011). Development and quality evaluation of

honey based carrot candy. J Food Sci Technol. 48(4):502–505

Dustmann, J. H. (1971). Über die Katalaseaktivität in Bienenhonig aus der Tracht der

Heidekrautgewächse (Ericacea). Z Lebensm Unters Forsch 145:292-295.

Edgar, J. A., Roeder, E. L. and Molyneux, R. J. (2002). Honey from plants containing

pyrrolizidine alkaloids: A potential threat to health. J Agric Food Chem 50:2719-2730.

Endo, K., Kanno, E. and Oshima, Y. (1990). Structures of antifungal diarylheptenones,

gingerenones A, B, C and isogingerenone B, isolated from the rhizomes of Zingiber

officinale. Phytochemistry; 29:797-9.

Escuredo, O., Fernández, G. M. and Seijo, M. C. (2012). Differentiation of Blossom Honey and

Honeydew Honey from Northwest Spain. Agriculture, 2, 25-37; doi:10.3390/

agriculture2010025m, ISSN 2077-0472

Chiralt, A., Fito, P. (1998). Equilibrium in cellular food osmotic solution systems as related to

structure. J. Food Sci. 63: 836-840.

Flink, J. M. (1979). Dehydrated carrot slices; influence of osmotic concentration on air drying

behavior and product quality. Food Process Engg. 1, 412-418

Flynn, D., Rafferty, M. and Boctor, A. (1986). Inhibition of human neutrophil 5-liopxygenase

activity by gingerdione, shogaol, capsaicin and related pungent compounds.

Prostaglandins Leukotrienes Med; 24:195-8.

Frauenfelder, R. A. (1921). Der Honig als Genuss-, Nähr- und Kräftigungsmittel.

Buchdruckerei A. Umiker, Biel-Madretsch, pp.3-32.

Giridhari, L., siddapa, G. S., Tandon, G. L. (1986). Preservation of fruits and vegetables. Indian

Council of Agricultural Research. New Delhi.

49

Ghosh, A. K., Banerjee, S., Mullick, H. I. and Banerjee, J. (2011), Zingiber officinale, A natural

gold. International Journal of Pharma and Bio Sciences. Vol 2/ issue 1, ISSN: - 0975-6299

Gheldof, N., Engeseth, N. J. (2002). Antioxidant capacity of honeys from various floral sources

based on the determination of oxygen radical absorbance capacity and inhibition of in vitro

lipoprotein oxidation in human serum samples. J Agric Food Chem 50:3050-3055.

Govindarajan, V. S. (1982). Ginger: Chemistry, technology and quality evaluation. Crit Rev

Food Sci Nutr, 17(1)

GRP/NARC, Salyan, Sharma, B.P (2002), Production, trade and quality of ginger (A text in

Nepali), PP.1, 2.

Greensmith, M. (1998). Practical dehydration 2 . CRC Press. Florida. 274 pp.

Guo, P., Xu, J., Xu, S. and Wang, K. (1997). Inhibition of hydrogen peroxide production in

chondrocytes induced by fulvic acid by ginger volatile oil. China J Chinese Materia

Medica; 22:559-61.

Johri, R. K., Zutshi, U.(1992). An Ayurvedic formulation 'Trikatu' and its constituents. J

Ethnopharmacol;37 :85-91.

Harlet, D. (1967). Osmotic dehydration with sodium chloride and other agents. Ph. D. Thesis,

Univ. of Illinios., USA

Hussain, J., Bahader, A., Ullah, F., Rehman, N., Khan, A., Ullah, W. and Shinwari Z (2009).

Proximate and Nutrient Analysis of the Locally Manufactured Herbal Medicines and its

Raw Material. J. Am. Sci., 5(6): 1-5.

Hawkes, J. and Flink, J. M., (1978). Osmotic concentration of fruit slices prior to freeze

dehydration. J. Food Proc. Preserve. 2: 65-284.

Heitkamp, K. (1986), Busch-Stockfisch M: Pro und Kontra Honig - Sind Aussagen zur

Wirkung des Honigs "wissenschaftlich hinreichend gesichert"? Z Lebensm Unters Forsch

182:279-286.

Hashim, S., Aboobaker, V., Madhubala, R., Bhattacharya, R., Rao, A. (1994). Modulatory

effects of essential oils from spices on the formation of DNA adduct by an aflatoxin B1 in

vitro. Nutr Cancer; 21:169-75.

Harvey, D. J. (1981). Gas chromatographic and mass spectrophotometric studies of ginger

constituents. Identification of gingerdions and new hexahydrocurcumin analogous. J.

Chromatogr. 212: 75-84

Islam, M. N., Flink, J. N. (1982). Dehydration of Potato. 11. Osmotic Concentration and its

Effects on Air Drying Behavior. Solar Dryer. J. Food Technol. v. 17 (3). 387-403.

50

John, R. P., Ferreira, D. I., (1997). Yield and quality evaluation of five ginger (Zingiber

officinale Roscoe) selection in the Northern Province of South Africa. J. of Southern

African Society for Horticultural Sciences 7(1), 26–29.

Kalyanarman, K. (1998).Quality specifications for spices and spice products in Europe. Quality

requirements of Spices for Export. (Eds Sivadasan, C.R. and Madhusudana Kurup, P.),

Spices Board, India, Cochin.

Kemper, M. D. and,Kathi, J. (1999) Ginger (Zingiber officinale). The Center for Holistic

Pediatric Education and Research Longwood Herbal Task Force: http://

www.mcp.edu/herbal/default.htm

Kapil, U., Sood, A. K., Gaur, D. R. (1990). Maternal beliefs regarding diet during common

childhood illnesses. Indian Pediatr., 27:595-9.

Kanerva, L., Estlander, T. and Jolanki, R. (1996). Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from

spices. Contact Derm; 35:157-62.

Karathanos, V. T., Kostarropoulos, A.E. and Saravacos, G.D. (1995). Air drying kinetics of

osmotically dehydrated fruits. Drying Tech. 13: 1503-1512.

Kenjeric, D., Mandic, M. L., Primorac, L., Bubalo, D. and Perl, A. (2007). Flavonoid profile of

Robinia honeys produced in Croatia. Food Chem. 102:683-690.

Kilicoglu, B., Kismet, K., Koru, O., Tanyuksel, M., Oruc, M. T., Sorkun, K. and Akkus, M. A.

(2006). The scolicidal effects of honey. Adv Ther 23:1077-1083.

Kiuchi, F., Shibuya, M., Sankawa, U. (1982). Inhibitors of prostaglandin biosynthesis from

ginger. Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo); 30:754-7.

Kim, M. H. and Toledo, R. T. (1987). Effect of Osmotic Dehydration and High Temperature

Fluidized Bed Drying on Properties of Dehydrated Rabbiteye Bluebemes. I. Food Sci. V.

52 (4). 980- 984.

Kowalska, H. and Lenart, A. (2001). Mass exchange during osmotic pre-treatment of

vegetables. J. Food Eng. 49:137-140.

Kreider, R. B., Rasmussen, C. J., Lancaster, S. L., Kerksick, C. and Greenwood, M. (2002).

Honey: An alternative sports gel. Strength Conditioning J. 24, 50-51.

Krishnapillai, N. (2005). Medicinal Value of Ginger (Zingiber officinale) in Jaffna, Proc.

WOCMAP III, Vol.6: Traditional Medicine & Nutraceuticals Eds. U.R. Palaniswamy, L.E.

Craker and Z.E. Gardner Acta Hort. 680, ISHS 2005

Lal , K. and Sharma, K. D. (1995). Post harvest technology of mushroom. In ―Advances in

Horticulture‖, pp. 553-565

51

Lawrence, B. M. (1997). Progress in essential oils. Perfum. Flavor. , 22: 71-83.

Lawrence BM (2000). Progress in essential oils. Perfum. Flavor. , 25: 46-57.

Lazarides, H. N. (1994). Osmotic pre-concentration: development and prospects. In R. P. Singh

and F. A. R. Oliveira, eds. Minimal Processing of Foods and Process Optimization; an

Interface. CRC Press, London, UK.

Loha, C., Das, R., Choudhury, B. and Chatterjee, P. K. (2012). Evaluation of Air Drying

Characteristics of Sliced Ginger (Zingiber officinale ) in a Forced Convective Cabinet

Dryer and Thermal Conductivity Measurement. J Food Process Technol 3:130.

doi:10.4172/2157-7110.1000160

Lee, E. and Surh, Y. (1998). Induction of apoptosis in HL-60 cells by pungent vanilloids, 6-

gingerol and 6-paradol.Cancer Letters; 134:163-8.

Leon, M. A., Kumar, S. and Bhattacharya S.C. (2002). A Comprehensive procedure for

performance evaluation of solar food dryers. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews

6:367-393.

Le Maguer, M. (1988). Osmotic dehydration: Review and future directions. In: ―Proceedings of

Symposium on Progress in Food Preservation Processes‖. P. 283-309. Cena, Brussels.

Lenart, A. (1992). Mathematical modelling of osmotic dehydration of apple and carrot. Polish

J. Food Nutrition Sci. 1: 1-33.

Lenart, A. and Flink, J. M. (1984a). Osmotic concentration of potato. I. Criteria for the end-

point of osmosis process. J Food Technology. 19:45-60.

Lenart, A. and Lewicki, P.P. (1987). Kinetics of osmotic dehydration of the plant tissue, In

―Drying‖ (S. Arun Mujumdar, ed.). Hemisph Publ.

Lerici, C.L., Pinnavaia, G., Rosa, M. D. and L. Bartolucci (1985). Osmotic dehydration of

fruit: influence of osmoic agents on drying behavior and product quality. J. Food Sci. 50:

1217-1219.

Mascolo, N., Jain, R., Jain, S. C., Capasso, F. (1989). Ethnopharmacologic investigation of

ginger (Zingiber officinale). J Ethnopharmacol; 27: 129-40.

Mauro, M. A. and Menegalli, F. C. (1995). Evaluation of diffusion coefficient in osmotic

concentration of bananas. J. of Food Sci. and Tech. 30:2, 199-213

Mavrouris, N. E., Dejmek, P. and Sjoholm, I. (2004). Osmotic-treatment induced cell death and

osmotic processing kinetics of apples with characterized raw material properties. J. Food

Engg. 63: 47-56

52

McWilliams and Margaret (2007). Nutrition and Dietetics' 2007 Edition. Rex Bookstore, Inc..

pp. 177–184. ISBN 978-971-23-4738-2.

Mehta, U. and Bajaj, S. (1984). Changes in the chemical composition and organoleptic quality

of citrus peel candy during preparation and storage. J Food Sci Technol. 21:422 –424

Meyer, K., Schwartz, J., Crater, D. and Keyes B (1995). Zingiber officinale (ginger) used to

prevent 8-Mop associated nausea. Dermatol Nur; 7:242-4.

Molen, P. C. (1992). The antibacterial activity of honey. 1. The nature of antibacterial activity.

Bee World 73:5–28

Mowrey, D. B. (1982). Motion sickness, ginger and psychophysics. The Lancet, March 20, 656.

Moy, J. H., Lau N. B. M., and A.M. Dollar (1978). Effects of sucrose and acids on osmotic-

dehydration of tropical fruits. J. Food Proc. and Preserve. 2:131.

Müller, L. (1956). Der Bienenhonig in der Säuglingsernährung bei Berücksichtigung einer

neuen Fertignahrung. Med Monatsschrift 10:729-732.

Murosaki, S., Muroyama, K., Yamamoto, Y., Liu, T. and Yoshikai Y. (2002).

Nigerooligosacharides augments natural killer activity of hepatic mononuclear cells in

mice. Int Immunopharmacol 2:151-159.

Murray, M. T. (1995). The healing power of herbs: the enlightened person's guide to the

wonders of medicinal plants. Rocklin, CA: Prima Pub. xiv, 410.

Mustafa, T. and Srivastava K.T. (1990). Ginger (Zingiber Officinale) in Migraine Headache.

Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 29: 267-273.

Murakami, A., Morita, H., Safitri, R., Ramlan, A., Koshimizu, K. and Ohigashi H (1998).

Screening for in vitro anti-tumor-promoting activities of edible plants from Indonesia.

Cancer Detect Prev; 22:516-25.

Micklefield, G. H., Redeker, Y., Meister, V., Jung, O., Greving I and May B (1997). Effects of

ginger on gastroduodenal motility. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther; 37:341-6.

Newall, C. A., Anderson, L. A. and Phillipson, J.D. (1996). Herbal medicines: a guide for

health-care professionals. London: Pharmaceutical Press. Ix: 296.

Nwinuka, N., Ibeh, G., Ekeke, G. (2005). Proximate composition and levels of some toxicants

in four commonly consumed spices. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Mgt., 9(1): 150-155.

Odebunmi, E., Oluwaniyi, O., Bashiru, M. (2010). Comparative Proximate Analysis of Some

Food Condiments. J. App. Sci. Res., 6(3): 272-274.

53

Oli, P. (1999). Study on temperature optimization for multi-Stage and bleaching effect in the

production of dried ginger, dissertation submitted to Central Campus of Technology,

Dharan; T.U Nepal.

Omotayo, O., Siti, E., Sulaiman, A., Wahab, Mohb. (2012). Honey - A novel antidiabetic

agent. International journal of Biological sciences; 8(6):913-934. doi: 10.7150/ijbs.3697

Orsolic, N. and Basic, I. (2004). Honey as a cancer-preventive agent. Periodicum Biolog

106:397-401.

Park, E. J., Pizzuto, J. M. (2002). Botanicals in cancer chemoprevention. Cancer Metast. Rev.

21: 231–-255.

Pearson, D., Frankel, E., Aeschbach, R. and JB G (1997). Inhibition of endothelial cell-

mediated oxidation of low-density lipoprotein by rosemary and plant phenolics. J Agric

Food Chem; 45:578-82.

Pecoraro, A., Patel, J., Guthrie, T. and Ndubisi, B. (1998). Efficacy of ginger as an adjunctive

anti-emetic in acute chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. ASHP Midyear Clinical

Meeting ; 33: P-429E.

Perez, R. A., Iglesias, M.T., Pueyo, E., Gonzalez, M. and de Lorenzo, C. (2007). Amino acid

composition and antioxidant capacity of Spanish honeys. J Agric Food Chem 55:360-365.

Persano Oddo, L. and Piro, R. (2004). Main European unifloral honeys: descriptive sheets.

Apidologie 35:S38-S81.

Phillips, S., Hutchinson, S. and Ruggier, R. (1993). Zingiber officinale does not affect gastric

emptying rate. A randomised, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. Anaesthesia; 48:393-5.

Ponting, J. D., Warrers G. G., Forrey R. R., Jackon R. and Stanley W. L. (1966). Osmotic

dehydration of fruits. Food Tech. 20: 1365-1368.

Pruthi, J. S., Gopalkrishan, M. and Bhat, A.V. (1984).Studies on the dehydration of tropical

paddy straw mushroom (Volvariella volvacea).Indian Food Packer, 32:2, pp. 7–15.

Prothon, F., Ahrne, L. M. (2004). Application of the Guggenheim, Anderson and De Boer

Model to correlate water activity and moisture content during osmotic dehydration of

apples. J. of Food Engg, 61, 467-470

Purseglove, J. W., Brown, E. G., Green, C.L. and Robbins, S.R.J. (1981). Spices, Volume 2.

Longman, New York.

Pursglove, J. W. (1992). Tropical Crops Monocotyledons. Longman, London. p.533-539.

54

Qi, H., Le Maguer and Sharma, S. K. (1988). Design and selection of processing conditions of a

pilot scale contactor for continuous osmotic dehydration of carrots. J. Food Process Eng.

21: 75-88.

Qureshi, S., Shah, A. H., Tariq, M. and Ageel, A. M. (1989). Studies on herbal aphrodisiacs

used in Arab system of medicine. Am J Chin Med; 17:57-63.

Ranganna, S. (1986). Handbook of analysis and quality control for fruit and vegetable products,

2nd edn. Tata Mc Graw-Hill Publ. Co. Ltd, New Delhi

Ribeiro, M. S., Sabaa-Srur, A.U.O. (1999). Mango (Mangifera indicaL.) cv.‗Rosa Saturation‘

with sugars. Cien Technol Aliment. 19:118 – 122

Rahman, M. (1992). Osmotic dehydration kinetics of foods. Indian Food Industry. 15: 20-24.

Rahman, M. and Lamb, J. (1990). Osmotic dehydration of pineapple. J. Food Sci. and Tech. 27:

150-152.

Ranganna, S. (1997). Handbook of analysis and quality control for fruit and vegetable

products. IIndEd. Tata McGraw Hill Pub. Co. Ltd., New Delhi, pp. 81-82.

Rastogi, N. K., Angersbach, A. and Knorr, D. (2000). Evaluation of mass transfer mechanisms

during osmotic treatment of plant materials. J. Food Sci. 65: 1016-1020.

Ravindran, G. (1987). Osmotic Dehydration of Pineapples. Trends in Food Sci. Conference

Proc. Singapore Inst. of Food Sci. and Tech.

Russell, K. M., Molan, P. C., Wilkins, A. L., Holland, P. T. (1988). Identification of some

antibacterial constituents of New Zealand Manuka honey. J Agric Food Chem 38:10-13.

Richter, V. (1912). Study of Micro-organism resistant to high sugar product. Journal of Indian

J. Agric. Sci., 66: 168-170

Rizvi, S. S. H. (1995). Thermodynamic properties of foods in dehydration. In Engineering

Properties of Foods, 223–309. New York, N.Y.: Marcel Dekker.

Rizvi, S., Sharma, S. K. and Mulvaney (2000). Food Process Engineering theory and

Laboratory Experiments.

Sablani, S.S., Rahman, M. S. and Al-sadiri, D. S. (2002). Equilibrium distribution data for

osmotic drying of apples cubes in sugar-water solution. J. Food Engg. 52, 193-199

Saha, R., kuldep, B., Chandakar, A., Upmanyul, N. (2012). Spices as antimicrobial agents. A

review. International research journal of pharmacy. 3(2) ISSN: - 2230- 8407

Sasikumar, B., Saji, K. V., Ravindran, P. N., Peter, K. V. (1999). Genetic resources of ginger

(Zingiber officinalle Rosc.) and its conservation in India. In ―Biodiversity conservation and

55

utilisation of spices, medicinal and aromatic plants‖ (Sasikumar, B., Krishnamurthy, B.,

Rema, J., Ravindren, P. N. and Peter, K. V. eds.), IISR, Kozhikode, pp. 96-100.

Sasikumar, B. and Kizhakkayil, J. (2012). Characterization of ginger (Zingiber officinale Rosc.)

germplasm based on volatile and non-volatile components, Afr. J. Biotechnology Vol.

11(4), pp. 777-786.

Sacchetti, G., Gianotti, A. and Rosa, M. D. (2001). Sucrose-salt combined effect on mass

transfer kinetics and product acceptability: Study on apple osmotic treatments. J. Food

Eng. 49: 163-173.

Schmid, R., Schick, T., Steffen, R., Tschopp, A. and Wilk, T. (1994). Comparison of Seven

Commonly Used Agents for Prophylaxis of Seasickness. J Travel Med; 1:203-206.

Schmidt, M. (1978). Honey waffle. German Federal Republic Patent Application 2701765

Shamala, T. R., Jyothi, Y. S. (1999). Honey—It is more than just sweet. Indian Food Ind

18:349 – 357

Shi J., Le Maguer, M. (2003). Mass transfer flux at solid – liquid contacting interface. Food Sci.

and Tech. int., 9:3, 193-199

Sereno, A. M., Moreira, R. and Martinez, E. (2001). Mass transfer coefficients during osmotic

dehydration of apple in single and combined aqueous solutions of sugar and salt. J. Food

Eng. 47: 43-49.

Shadmani, A., Azhar, I., Mazhar, F., Hasan, M., Ahmed, S., Ahmad, I., Khan, U. and Shamim,

S. (2004). Kinetics study of Zingiber Officinale, Pakistan Journal of Pharmaceutical

Sciences. 17, pp.47-54

Sharma, S., Dhaliwal, Y. S. and Kalia, M. (1998) Canied apple: a new perspective. J Food Sci

Technol. 35:79 –82

Sharma, B. P. (1997). Ginger processing technology (A text in Nepali), GRP/NARC, Salyan,

Nepal.

Shirin Adel, P. R. and Prakash, J. (2010). Chemical composition and antioxidant properties of

ginger root (Zingiber officinale). Journal of Medicinal Plants Research. 4(24), pp. 2674-

2679

Siddiqui, I. R. (1970). The sugars of honey. Adv Carbohyd Chem 25:285-309, 1970

Singh, G., Kapoor, I. P., Singh, P., de Heluani, C. S., de Lampasona, M. P. and Catalan, C. A.

(2008). Chemistry, antioxidant and antimicrobial investigations on essential oil and

oleoresins of Zingiber officinale. Food. Chem. Toxicol. 46: 3295-302.

56

Singh, P. and Kulshrestha, K. (2008). Nutritional quality of food supplements based on carrot

powder and grits. J Food Sci Technol. 45:99– 101

Singh, N., Singh, S. J., Bava, A. S., Sekhon, K. S. (1988). Honey —Its food uses. Indian Food

Pack. 42(6):15–16

Sirnik, V., Koch, V., Golob, T. (1978). L'influence du miel sur la digestibilité des substances

nutritives chez le rat albinos. III International Apitherapy, Symposium 11-15, Portoroz,

Yougoslava. Bukarest: Apimondia, pp 286-290.

Srivastava, K. C. (1989). Effect of onion and ginger consumption on platelet thromboxane

production in humans.Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids. 35:183-5.

Srivastava, K. C., Mustafa, T. (1992). Ginger (Zingiber officinale) in rheumatism and

musculoskeletal disorders. Med Hypotheses.39:342-8.

Sujatha, R. and Srinivas, L. (1995). Modulation of lipid peroxidation by dietary componenets.

Toxicology in vitro; 9:231-36.

Swellam, T., Miyanaga, N., Onozawa, M., Hattori, K., Kawai, K., Shimazui, T. and Akaza, H.

(2003). Antineoplastic activity of honey in an experimental bladder cancer implantation

model: in vivo and in vitro studies. Int J Urol 10:213-219, 2003.

Sharma, S. S., Sharma, R. K., Yamdagni, R. (1989). Studies on the yield and quality of fruit of

aonla cultivars (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) under rain fed condition of Haryana. Res.

Dev. Dept., 6(1): 41-43.

Singh, U., Jain, S.K., Doshi, A and Verma, R.C (2007). Tray drying of button mushroom (A.

bisporus). In: ―Beverage and food world‖, pp. 6-10, n.a.

Somogy, L. P., Luh, B. S. (1975). Dehydration of fruits. ―Commercial Fruits Processing‖ The

AVI Publi. Co. Inc., Westport, Connecticut pp 374-428. In Non-thermal For preservation

of fruits and vegetables; A critical appraisal. Khurdiya, D. S. J. Food. Sci. Technol, 32(6):

441-452

Suekawa, M., Ishige, A., Yuasa, K., Sudo, K., Aburada, M. and Hosoya, E. (1984).

Pharmacological studies on ginger. Pharmacological actions of pungent constituents,

[6].gingerol and [6].shogaol. J Pharmacobiodyn, (7): 836– 48.

Swaminathan, M. (1985), Essentials of food and nutrition, vol. II, Banglore printing and

publication Ltd. PP.503, 504.

Talens, P., Martinez-Navarrete, N., Fito, p. and Chiralt, A., (2001). Changes in optical and

mechanical properties during osmo dehydrofreezing of kiwi fruit. Innovative Food Sci. and

Emerging Tech. 3: 191-199.

57

Tanabe, M., Chen, Y. D., Saito, K., Kano, Y. (1993). Cholesterol biosynthesis inhibitory

component from Zingiber officinale Roscoe. Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo); 41:710-3.

Tanafranca, D. E., Farre, L. B., Angeles, L.C. and Soriano, M.R. (1986). Dehydration

technologies of some Philippine fruits. Proceeding of Workshop on Food Tech. Res. and

Development. Bangkok, Thailand.

Tang, W. and Eisenbrand, G. (1992). Chinese drugs of plant origin. Chemistry, pharmacology

and use in traditional and modern medicine, 1st Edn, Springer

Takuma, D. T. (1955). Honig bei der Aufzucht von Säuglingen. Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde

103:160-161.

Thapa, M. J. (1995). Project on evaluation of mushroom quality in Nepal. In: ―Annual report of

NARC‖, Kathmandu.

Tomás-Barberán, F.A., Martos, I., Ferreres, F., Radovic, B. S. and Anklam, E. (2001). HPLC

flavonoid profiles as markers for the botanical origin of European unifloral honeys. J Sci

Food Agric 81:485-496.

Tonnessen, H. H, Karlsen, J. (1983). High performance liquid chromatography of curcumin and

related compounds. J. Chromatogr. 259: 367-371.

Torreggiani, D. (1993). Osmotic dehydration in fruit and vegetable processing. Fundamentals

and Application. ISOPOW PRACTICUM II, Lancaster, U.S.A. Food Res. Int. 26: 59-68.

Torreggiani, D. (1995). Technological aspects of osmotic dehydration in foods. pp. 621-630.

In G.V. Barbosa-Canovas and J. Welti-Chanes, eds. Food Preservation by Moisture

Control: Fundamentals and Application. ISOPOW PRACTICUM II, Lancaster, U.S.A.

Torreggiani, D. and G. Bertolo (2001). Osmotic pre-treatments in fruit processing: chemical,

physical and structural effects. J. Food Eng. 49: 247-253.

Tyler, V. E., Brady, L.R. and Robbers, J.E. (1988). Phrmacognosy 9th ed. Lea and Febiger,

Philadelphia, p.150.

Tyler, V. E. (1993). The Honest Herbal 3rd ed. Pharmaceutical Product Press, New York,

London, Norwood, pp.147-148.

Verma, S.K. et al. (1993) Effect of Ginger on Platelet Aggregation in Man. Indian Journal of

Med Res, 98: 240-242

Verma, S., Srivastava, P. K., Durrani, A. (2006). Organoleptic characteristics of honey based

amla murabba. 40th ISAE Annual Convention, Tamilnadu Agricultural University,

Coimbatore ,19– 21 Jan

58

Vimala, S., Norhanom, A. W. and Yadav, M. (1999). Anti-tumour promoter activity in

Malaysian ginger rhizobia used in traditional medicine. Br J Cancer; 80:110-6.

Wack, A. L. and Guilbert, S. (1990). La dehydration osmotique. Les cahiers de 1 ‗ENS. BANA.

7, 171-192

Wang, X. H., Andrae, L., Engeseth, N. J (2002). Antimutagenic effect of various honeys and

sugars against Trp-p-1. J Agric Food Chem 50:6923-6928.

Weston, R. J, Mitchell, K. R, Allen, K. L. (1999). Antibacterial phenolic components of New

Zealand manuka honey. Food Chem 64:295-30.

White, J. W., Subers, M. H., Schepartz, A. J. (1963). The identification of inhibine, the

antibacterial factor in honey, as hydrogen peroxide and its origin in a honey glucose-

oxidase system. Biochim Biophys Acta 73:57-70.

White, J. W. (1975). Composition of honey. In Crane E (ed): ―Honey. A comprehensive

survey.‖ London. Heinemann Edition, pp. 157-206.

Yadav A. K. and Singh S. V. (2012). Osmotic dehydration of Fruits and Vegetables. J Food Sci

Technol, DOI 10.1007/s13197-012-0659-2

Yatsunami, K., Echigo, T. (1984). Antibacterial action of honey and royal jelly

(japanese).Honeybee Sci 5:125-130.

Zachariah TJ, Sasikumar B, Ravindran PN (1993). Variability in gingerol and shogaol content

of ginger accession. Indian Perfumer. 37: 87-90.

Zeina, B., Othman, O. and Al-Assad, S. (1996). Effect of honey versus thyme on Rubella virus

survival in vitro. J Altern Complement Med 2:345-348.

Zeisel, H. S. and Blusztajn, J. K. (1994). Cholin and human nutrition. Ann. Rev. Nutr. 14:269—

9.

59

Appendices

Appendix A

SPECIMEN CARDS FOR SENSORY EVALUATION BY HEDONIC RATING

Name:………

Product : Honey based ginger candy

Please taste the sample and check out how much you like or dislike. Use the

appropriate scale to show your attitude by giving the point that best describes your feeling

about the sample.

An honest expression of your personal feeling will help me.

Give points as follows:

Like extremely 9

Like very much 8

Like moderately 7

Like slightly 6

Neither Like nor dislike 5

Parameters

Texture

Flavor

Color

Smell

Overall acceptance

Comments if any:

-------------------------

Sujeet Kumar Shah

Dislike slightly 4

Dislike moderately 3

Dislike very much 2

Dislike extremely 1

Samples

Sample A= 750 gm Honey and 1000 gm ginger

Sample B=1000 gm Honey and 1000 gm ginger

Sample C=1250 gm Honey and 1000 gm ginger

Sample D= 1000 gm succrose soln (40%) and 1000gm

Ginger

60

Appendix B

Table B.1: - Average Sensory Score

Sample Appearance Color Smell Texture Taste

Overall

Acceptance

A 5.8±1.69 6.1±0.74 6.4±0.97 5.6±0.7 6.4±1.07 6.2±0.92

B 7.3±0.95 7.6±0.52 6.5±0.97 7.4±0.84 7.7±0.95 7.9±0.32

C 7.1±1.29 6.5±0.97 6.4±0.97 7.1±1.1 6.8±1.03 7.2±0.63

D 7.3±1.06 7±0.82 6±0.82 7.1±0.99 7.1±0.87 7.2±0.63

Note: - Values are the mean of 3 replicates± SD

Appendix C

Anova results

Table C.1: Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for appearance

Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr.

Formulation 3 15.68 5.22 13.34 <0.001

Panelist 9 48.12 5.35 13.64 <0.001

Residual 27 10.57 0.39

Total 39 74.37

Since F pr < 0.05, there is significantly different between the samples so, LSD testing is

necessary.

Table C.2: LSD testing for appearance of all samples

Sample code Mean score LSD at 0.05 Mean difference Remarks

A 5.8 0.5743 B-A=1.5 >LSD*

B 7.3 B-C=0.2 <LSD

C 7.1 C-A=1.3 >LSD*

61

D 7.3 A-D=1.5 >LSD*

B-D=0 <LSD

D-C=0.2 <LSD

(*=Significantly different)

Table C.3: Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for color

Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr.

Formulation 3 12.6 4.2 10.4 <0.001

Panelist 9 10.9 1.21 3 0.013

Residual 27 10.9 0.4037

Total 39 34.4

Since F pr < 0.05, there is significantly different between the samples so, LSD testing is

necessary.

Table C.4: LSD testing for color of all samples

Sample code Mean score LSD at 0.05 Mean difference Remarks

A 6.1 0.583 B-A= 1.5 >LSD*

B 7.6 B-C=1.1 >LSD*

C 6.5 C-A=0.4 <LSD

D 7.0 D-A=0.9 >LSD*

B-D=0.6 >LSD*

D-C=0.5 <LSD

(*=Significantly different)

62

Table C.5: Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for flavor

Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr.

Formulation 3 1.475 0.4917 4.05 0.017

Panelist 9 28.02 3.1139 25.67 < 0.001

Residual 27 3.2750 0.1213

Total 39 32.775

Since F pr < 0.05, there is no significant different between the samples so, LSD testing is not

necessary.

Table C.6: LSD testing for flavor of all samples

Sample code Mean score LSD at 0.05 Mean difference Remarks

A 6.4 0.3196 B-A= 0.1 <LSD

B 6.5 B-C=0.1 <LSD

C 6.4 C-A=0 <LSD

D 6.0 B-D=0.5 >LSD*

A-D=0.4 >LSD*

C-D=0.4 >LSD*

(*=Significantly different)

Table C.7: Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for texture

Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr.

Formulation 3 19.8 6.6 26.6 <0.001

Panelist 9 23.9 2.6556 10.70 <0.001

Residual 27 6.7 0.2481

Total 39 50.4

63

Since F pr < 0.05, there is significantly different between the samples so, LSD testing is

necessary.

Table C.8: LSD testing for texture of all samples

Sample code Mean score LSD at 0.05 Mean difference Remarks

A 5.6 0.4571 B-A=1.8 >LSD*

B 7.4 B-C=0.3 <LSD

C 7.1 C-A=1.5 >LSD*

D 7.1 D-A=1.5 >LSD*

B-D=0.3 <LSD

C-D=0 <LSD

(*=Significantly different)

Table C.9: Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for taste

Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr.

Formulation 3 9 3 6 0.003

Panelist 9 21 2.38 4.78 <0.001

Residual 27 13.5 0.5

Total 39 44

Since F pr < 0.05, there is significantly different between the samples so, LSD testing is

necessary.

Table C.10: LSD testing for taste of all samples

Sample code Mean score LSD at 0.05 Mean difference Remarks

A 6.4 0.649 B-A=1.1 >LSD*

B 7.7 B-C=0.9 >LSD*

C 6.8 C-A=0.4 <LSD

64

D 7.1 B-D=0.6 >LSD*

D-A=0.7 >LSD*

C-D=0.3 <LSD

(*=Significantly different)

Table C.11: Two way ANOVA (no blocking) for overall acceptance

Source of variation d.f. s.s. m.s. v.r. F pr.

Formulation 3 12.5 4.1667 16.07 <0.001

Panelist 9 6.4 0.711 2.74 0.020

Residual 27 7 0.2593

Total 39 25.9

Since F pr < 0.05, there is significantly different between the samples so, LSD testing is

necessary.

Table C.12: LSD testing for overall acceptance of all samples

Sample code Mean score LSD at 0.05 Mean difference Remarks

A 6.5 0.4672 B-A=1.4 >LSD*

B 7.9 B-C=1.3 >LSD*

C 6.6 C-A=0.1 <LSD

D 7.2 D-A =0.7 >LSD*

B-D=0.5 >LSD*

C-D=0.6 > LSD*

(*=Significantly different)