Instant value added products from dehydrated peach, plum and apricot fruits

12 Pages·2012·0.08 MB·English

Indian Journal of Natural Products and Resources
Vol. 2(4), Dec. 2011, pp. 409-420

Instant value added products from dehydrated peach, plum and apricot fruits
K D Sharma*, R Sharma and S Attri
Department of Food Science & Technology, Dr YSP University of Horticulture & Forestry, Solan-173 230, Himachal Pradesh, India
Received 30 December 2010; Accepted 20 July 2011
The peach, plum and apricot fruits were harvested at optimum stage of maturity and characterized for physical and
chemical parameters and dehydrated in mechanical dehydrator at 60+2°C until 10-12% moisture. The fruit powder was
prepared by further drying the fruit halves up to 3-4% moisture at 70+2°C and then grinding. Different proportions of fruit
powder were mixed with the other ingredients for the manufacture of chutney mix and ready-to-serve drink mix. Pickle was
prepared by reconstituting the halves and mixing the other powdered ingredients like spices, salt and jaggery. All the
products were packed in laminated pouches and stored at ambient temperature (13-28°C) for 6 month. On the basis of
sensory data the products viz., powder, ready-to-serve drink mix and chutney mix prepared from apricot were rated as the
best products followed by plum and peach fruits while dried pickle from the plum halves was rated excellent followed by
apricot and peach. All physico-chemical and sensory parameters of different products exhibited changes during storage of
these products. There was increase in moisture, reducing sugars, non-enzymatic browning and decrease in total sugars,
titratable acidity, ascorbic acid and sulphur dioxide however, changes were minimum and products remained acceptable
during storage period of 6 months.
Keywords: Peach, Plum, Apricot, Dehydration, Instant, Value added products.

IPC code; Int. cl. (2011.01)— A23N 4/04

Introduction source of energy besides, having good amount of
Peach, plum and apricot are the major stone fruits minerals and nutrients. Large quantities of these fruit
of the temperate regions of the world and are mainly are dried in open sun by the people in growing areas
grown in countries like United States of America, leading to contaminated, unhygienic, discoloured and
China, Turkey, France, Italy, Iran, Germany, Greece poor in taste end product therefore, emphasizing the
and Spain. In India, these fruits are mainly grown in need for scientific intervention for the manufacture of
hilly regions of the North-Western states comprising good quality dried products. Due to changing life
of Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and style of the people and desire for more leisure time,
Uttarakhand. Stone fruits are attractive, delicious and there is considerable change in the eating habits of the
highly nutritious and have long been appreciated for urban populations. Hand in hand with a strong
their gustatory and aesthetic qualities. These fruits are demand for fast and take away foods among the
considered to be a good source of bioactive defense personnel, caters, tourists, campers and
ingredients like carotenoids, anthocyanins and other travelers, there has been a marked upturn in
antioxidant polyphenolics1-3. Due to seasonal gluts popularity of convenience foods in India.
and highly perishable nature, considerable post- Consequently, dried products are normally preferred
harvest losses occur at ambient temperatures. Even at because of reduced mass, shelf-stability and lesser
low temperature (0-4°C) they can only be stored for packaging as well as transportation expenses.
2-4 weeks4. Processing of fruits into value added Therefore, peach, plum and apricot fruits can best be
products is the best option to control the huge losses. utilized for the manufacture of dehydrated fruit based
Fresh fruit are utilized for the preparation of jam and products as there is a great demand for instant
squash on a limited scale though they could be products like powder, drink, chutney and pickle.
canned, frozen, dried and made into juice, sauce and Keeping above points in view and possibly meeting
confectionery. Dried fruit are more concentrated out the recent trend of the consumers, efforts have
been made to characterize the suitability of peach,
___________
plum and apricot fruits for the manufacture of
*Correspondent author, E-mail: [email protected];
Phone: [phone]; Fax: [phone] dehydrated fruit based instant products.
410 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, DECEMBER 2011

Materials and Methods Physical analysis
The present investigations were conducted in the Fruit length and width were recorded with vernier
department of Food Science and Technology, caliper while weight of the fruit was recorded by
Dr YS Parmar University of Horticulture & Forestry, weighing the individual fruit in top pan balance.
Solan. Commercial variety of peach ‘July Elberta’, Firmness of fresh fruit was recorded by measuring
plum ‘Santa Rosa’ and apricot ‘New Castle’ harvested pressure applied with the penetrometer and expressed as
at optimum stage of maturity from the University lbs/in2. Dehydration ratio was calculated by recording
orchard were used for dehydration and development the loss in weight at an interval of 1 h till the desired
of dehydrated fruit based instant processed products. moisture level is reached and per cent yield of the dried
halves was calculated by dividing the weight of the dried
Preparation of fruits for dehydration fruit by the weight of fresh fruit and multiplied by 100.
Fruit (120 Kg each of peach, plum and apricot) were
sorted, washed and lye peeled by dipping in 1.0% Chemical analysis
boiling sodium hydroxide solution in water for 30-50 sec Total soluble solids (%) were recorded with hand
followed by washing in running cold water. Halving and refractometer and titratable acidity (as % malic acid)
pitting was done in lye peeled peach and apricot while by titrating known amount of fruit juice with 0.1 N
plum fruit were dipped as such in 0.5% potassium NaOH solution using phenolphthalein as an indicator.
metabisulphite solution in water for 30 min. Pre-treated Moisture by oven drying method (%), specific gravity
by water displacement method, rehydration ratio by
fruit were loaded in aluminum trays (76×56 cm, 3 Kg
water soaking and boiling method, sugars by Lane
fruit per tray), placed inside the air dehydrator
and Eynon method (%), ascorbic acid by 2,6-
maintained at 60+2°C. Halving and pitting in plum fruits
Dichlorophenol-Indophenol dye titration method
kept in the dehydrator was done when they attained
(mg/100 g), non-enzymatic browning (optical density
about 40% moisture content. All the fruit were dried to a
at 440 nm) and sulphur dioxide by titration method
final moisture content ranging from 10-12 per cent.
(ppm) were determined as per standard procedures5.

Preparation of fruit powder and instant products
Statistical analysis
Powder was made from 8 Kg each of further dried
The experiment was replicated thrice and the data
peach, plum and apricot dried halves at 70+2°C to a
for physical and chemical parameters for fresh and
moisture content of 3-4% by grinding in the grinder.
dried fruits were analysed for standard error of mean
Different formulations of ingredients for the
and sensory data by following randomized block
development of drink mix and chutney from 3 Kg
design according to standard procedures.
powder per product each of peach, plum and apricot

and pickle from 5 Kg each of the fruit dried halves Results and Discussion
were tried and best combination were selected by Physicochemical characteristics of fresh peach
sensory evaluation by a panel of 7 semi-trained The observations on physical characteristics of
experts on a hedonic scale (0-9). fresh peach fruit (Table 1) revealed that average fruit
Table 1 ⎯ Physicochemical characteristics* of fresh fruit
Parameter Peach Plum Apricot
Fruit length, mm 54.78+0.012 42.75+0.023 27.57+0.006
Fruit width, mm 56.70+0.029 42.25+0.995 27.23+0.164
Weight, g 125.00+0.464 46.28+0.016 11.28+0.023
Colour Greenish yellow Reddish purple Light orange
Specific gravity 1.05+0.012 1.02+0.029 1.07+0.040
Firmness, lbs/in2 10.50+0.006 5.15+0.012 7.08+0.006
Edible portion, % 91.60+0.017 92.50+0.006 86.23+0.012
Moisture, % 89.20+0.006 85.30+0.011 85.10+0.017
Total soluble solids, % 8.10+0.058 13.60+0.046 12.50+0.035
Titratable acidity, % 0.71+0.023 1.81+0.006 1.51+0.007
Reducing sugars, % 1.65+0.006 7.81+0.057 3.61+0.017
Total sugars, % 6.31+0.023 9.61+0.035 10.45+0.029
Ascorbic acid, mg/100 g 3.57+0.017 6.59+0.006 7.19+0.015
*Mean (n = 6) + Standard error
SHARMA et al.: VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS FROM DEHYDRATED PEACH, PLUM AND APRICOT FRUIT 411

weight was 125 g and fruit length and fruit width respectively were observed. Total sugars, reducing
were 54.78 mm and 56.70 mm, respectively. The sugars and ascorbic acid content were recorded as
value for specific gravity of fruit was found to be 10.45, 3.61% and 7.19 mg/100 g, respectively. The
1.05 thus showing that the fruit were at optimum above values were in accordance with those reported
maturity. The fruit were greenish yellow in colour by earlier workers13,14. Therefore, the data for
with a firmness of 10.50 lbs/in2 and edible portion of physico-chemical parameters for peach, plum and
91.60%. Almost similar values for various above apricot in Table 1 suggests that all the fruits were
mentioned parameters have been recorded6. Slight harvested at optimum stage of maturity and had
variation from the earlier reported values could be desirable characteristics for meeting out the
attributed to the influence of different agro-climatic requirement of dehydration process and dehydrated
conditions prevailing in the growing season. The products.
moisture content as observed in the fruit was 89.20%.
Dehydration of peach, plum and apricot
Total soluble solids and titratable acidity (as malic
Dehydration of peach, plum and apricot to 10-12%
acid) was recorded 8.10% and 0.71 %, respectively.
moisture at 60+2°C in mechanical dehydrator took
Total sugars (6.31%) and reducing sugars (1.65%)
about 20 h, 25 h and 14 h, respectively. The
were recorded whereas, ascorbic acid was estimated
significant differences in the rate of water loss among
to be 3.57 mg/100 g. The said results were in close
different fruits might be due to variation in size of the
agreement with those reported earlier7.
fruit halves, cell structure and composition of cell

Physicochemical characteristics of fresh plum wall. The rate of dehydration was very fast during
The data in Table 1 revealed that the average fruit initial period of drying as about 50% of the moisture
weight was 46.28 g and fruit length and width were was lost within initial 7, 10 and 5 h for peach, plum
42.75 mm and 42.25 mm, respectively. The specific and apricot fruits, respectively. The rate of moisture
gravity was recorded to be 1.02 and the fruit firmness removal is slowest during falling rate period of
was recorded to be 5.15 lbs/in2. The fruit were reddish drying15. The dehydration ratio for peach, plum and
purple in colour and had 92.50% of edible portion. apricot calculated on the basis of the yield of the dried
The results were with in the range as reported by fruits revealed that it ranged from 8.3:1, 6:1 and
earlier workers8,9. Further, the moisture content of the 5.94:1, respectively.
fruit was recorded as 85.30 per cent. Total soluble
Physicochemical characteristics of dehydrated peach, plum
solids content was 13.60% and titratable acidity
and apricot
(as malic acid) was recorded to be 1.81%. Total
The moisture content of 10.17% was recorded in
sugars and reducing sugars were 9.61 and 7.81%,
dehydrated peach fruits with a titratable acidity of
respectively. Ascorbic acid content of the fruits was
4.67% (Table 2). Total sugars of 51.21% and reducing
6.59 mg/100 g which indicates its nutritional
sugars of 14.54% were observed. The ascorbic acid
significance. These results were in agreement with
content was 10.39 mg/100 g and the rehydration ratio
earlier results10,11.
was recorded as 1:3.2. The value for non-enzymatic

Physicochemical characteristics of fresh apricot browning (optical density at 440 nm) and sulphur
Light orange coloured fruits at optimum harvest dioxide were 0.040 and 411 ppm, respectively. The
(Table 1) showed that average fruit weight was fruits showed sugar: acid ratio of 10.96. Dehydrated
11.28 g and fruit length and width was 27.57 mm and plum fruits contained moisture content of 11.73% and
27.23 mm, respectively. The specific gravity of fruits titratable acidity of 10.74%. Total sugars and reducing
was recorded to be 1.07 whereas, fruit firmness and sugars were recorded as 56.35 and 48.76%,
edible portion was 7.08 lbs/in2 and 86.23%, respectively. Dried plums contained 12.25 mg/100 g
respectively. The results were in close agreement with ascorbic acid. The values for rehydration ratio and
those reported earlier12,13. Slight variation for different non-enzymatic browning were 1:1.8 and 0.082.
parameters observed from the earlier studies may be Sulphur dioxide content as 323 ppm was estimated
attributed to the influence of different agro-climatic and the sugar: acid ratio was 5.24. Further, the
conditions prevailing in the growing season. Among dehydrated apricot showed moisture content of
the chemical characteristics, the moisture content was 11.42% and titratable acidity of 7.35%. The values for
recorded to be 85.10%. Total soluble solids and total sugars and reducing sugars were 60.85 and
titratable acidity (as malic acid) as 12.50 and 1.51%, 22.98%, respectively. Fairly good amount of ascorbic
412 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, DECEMBER 2011

Table 2 ⎯ Physicochemical characteristics* of dehydrated fruit

Parameter Peach Plum Apricot
Moisture, % 10.17+0.012 11.73+0.006 11.42+0.017
Titratable acidity, % 4.67+0.042 10.74+0.017 7.35+0.017
Reducing sugars, % 14.54+0.031 48.76+0.017 22.98+0.006
Total sugars, % 51.21+0.027 56.35+0.016 60.85+0.015
Ascorbic acid, mg/100 g 10.39+0.010 12.25+0.017 14.76+0.012
Sugar/Acid ratio 10.96+0.015 5.24+0.009 8.27+0.020
Dehydration ratio 8.30+0.21 6.00+0.15 5.94+0.17
Rehydration ratio 3.20+0.002 1.80+0.058 2.80+173
Non-enzymatic browning, Optical 0.040+0.002 0.082+0.001 0.058+0.001
density at 440 nm
Sulphur dioxide, ppm 411.00+2.00 323.00+0.577 387.00+1.732
*Mean (n = 3) + Standard error
acid (14.76 mg/100 g) was recorded in the dehydrated decreased upon storage and the average mean values
apricot. Dehydrated fruits showed a rehydration ratio for three fruits and powders were statistically
of 1:2.8 and non-enzymatic browning (optical density significant. In the present study, the loss of acids
at 440 nm) as 0.058. Sulphur dioxide retention in might be due to the utilization of acids for conversion
dehydrated apricot was estimated to be 387 ppm and of non-reducing sugars to reducing sugars and in
the sugar-acid ratio as 8.27 was recorded. non-enzymatic browning reactions during storage.
After dehydration of the fruits (peach, plum and The maximum initial reducing sugars content of
apricot), the percentage of various chemical 53.38% was noticed in plum powder followed by
constituents increased in the dried fruits as compared 25.12% for apricot while minimum (15.80%) for
to the fresh fruits. However, this increase was not peach has been determined which showed slight
exactly proportionate which could be due to the loss increase upon storage with significant values. An
of some of the constituents during drying process. The increase in reducing sugars in mango powder stored
loss of ascorbic acid has been reported during lye in different packaging materials has been reported and
peeling and drying16. Sulphur dioxide reduces the this increase has been attributed to the hydrolysis of
browning during dehydration of apricot17. Acid polysaccharides and their subsequent inversion into
hydrolysis of sucrose occurs during dehydration of reducing sugars20. The highest value for total sugars
plum fruits which rapidly decrease the amount of was found in apricot powder followed by plum and
sucrose18. peach at 0 day of analysis. The average total sugars
for different powders decreased significantly during
Dehydrated fruit powder storage with the maximum value of 64.36% for
The data on change in physico-chemical apricot powder, 60.03% for plum powder and 54.06%
characteristics of fruit powder upon storage of for peach powder. Slight loss in total sugars during
6 month is presented in Table 3. The initial moisture storage could be attributed to the utilization of sugars
content varied from 4.23 to 5.18% with a maximum in in non-enzymatic reactions. Acid hydrolysis of
plum powder followed by apricot powder while sucrose occurs during storage which rapidly decreases
minimum value in peach powder. Slight increase in the amount of sucrose18. The initial value of ascorbic
moisture on storage after 2, 4 and 6 month was acid in fruit powders ranged from 10.43 to
observed in all fruits powders and the average 14.84 mg/100 g with the highest value for apricot and
moisture content differed significantly. The maximum lowest for peach powder. During storage interval of
increase in moisture content upon storage in plum 2, 4 and 6 month, these values decreased to 12.36,
powder may be attributed to the presence of 10.37, 8.88 mg/100 g, respectively for apricot
comparatively more reducing sugars which increased powder, 10.17, 8.47 and 6.76 mg/100 g, respectively
its hygroscopicity. Increase in moisture content in for plum powder and 9.47, 8.21 and 6.94 mg/100 g,
apple powder upon storage has been noticed19. The respectively for peach powder. Significant losses were
initial titratable acidity of different powders ranged in observed for ascorbic acid loss on storage among
between 4.91 to 11.48% with a maximum value for different powders. Loss of ascorbic acid during
plum. The titratable acidity of all the powders storage of processed food products is due to their
SHARMA et al.: VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS FROM DEHYDRATED PEACH, PLUM AND APRICOT FRUIT 413

Table 3 ⎯ Physicochemical characteristics of dehydrated fruit powder during storage
Parameter Fruit 0, M 2, M 4, M 6, M Mean
Moisture, % Peach 4.23 4.34 4.39 4.42 4.35
Plum 5.18 5.33 5.41 5.47 5.35
Apricot 5.02 5.13 5.20 5.26 5.15
Mean 4.81 4.93 5.00 5.05
CD Powder (P) = 0.038 Storage (S) = 0.043 P × S = NS
0.05
Titratable acidity, % Peach 4.91 4.78 4.65 4.58 4.73
Plum 11.48 11.18 10.93 10.75 11.08
Apricot 7.75 7.55 7.38 7.25 7.48
Mean 8.05 7.84 7.65 7.53
CD Powder (P) = 0.019 Storage (S) = 0.022 P × S = 0.037
0.05
Reducing sugars, % Peach 15.80 16.00 16.21 16.43 16.11
Plum 53.38 53.73 54.01 54.27 53.84
Apricot 25.12 25.44 25.77 26.11 25.61
Mean 31.43 31.71 32.00 32.27
CD Powder (P) = 0.040 Storage (S) = 0.046 P × S = 0.078
0.05
Total sugars, % Peach 54.37 54.25 53.90 53.71 54.06
Plum 60.42 60.08 59.88 59.72 60.03
Apricot 64.80 64.46 64.26 63.91 64.36
Mean 59.86 59.60 59.35 59.11
CD Powder (P) = 0.020 Storage (S) = 0.023 P × S = 0.039
0.05
Ascorbic acid, mg/100 g Peach 10.43 9.47 8.21 6.94 8.76
Plum 12.31 10.17 8.47 6.76 9.43
Apricot 14.84 12.36 10.37 8.88 11.61
Mean 12.53 10.67 9.02 7.53
CD Powder (P) = 0.008 Storage (S) = 0.010 P × S = 0.017
0.05
Rehydration ratio Peach 4.16 4.10 4.04 3.99 4.07
Plum 2.63 2.59 2.55 2.52 2.57
Apricot 3.62 3.55 3.50 3.47 3.54
Mean 3.47 3.41 3.36 3.33
CD Powder (P) = 0.025 Storage (S) = 0.029 P × S = NS
0.05
Non-enzymatic browning, Peach 0.052 0.062 0.074 0.100 0.072
Optical density at 440 nm Plum 0.116 0.188 0.304 0.454 0.266
Apricot 0.078 0.094 0.150 0.230 0.138
Mean 0.082 0.115 0.176 0.262
CD Powder (P) = 0.0014 Storage (S) = 0.0018 P × S = 0.0028
0.05
Sulphur dioxide, ppm Peach 285 278 272 266 275
Plum 232 225 219 216 223
Apricot 273 266 258 252 262
Mean 263 256 250 245
CD Powder (P) = 2.203 Storage (S) = 2.543 P × S = NS
0.05
M = Month
oxidation and direct effect of ambient storage with the mean value of 0.266 for plum followed by
temperature21. Significant variation in the rehydration 0.138 for apricot and 0.072 for peach. The
ratio of different powders at 0 day analysis and after non-enzymatic browning was comparatively higher in
6 month was observed. During storage rehydration plum powder during storage intervals which may be
ratio of each powder decreased with mean value of attributed to comparatively higher moisture content,
4.07, 3.54 and 2.57 for peach, apricot and plum less sulphur dioxide retention and more of reducing
powder, respectively. Slight reduction in rehydration sugars. Several factors such as temperature, pH,
ratio in our study could be attributed to the reduction moisture, organic acid, water activity, oxygen and
in water binding sites due to chemical and structural sugars affect the non-enzymatic browning in foods22.
changes in major components of fruit powders. The Similar trend of increase in non-enzymatic browning
initial optical density at 440 nm for fruit powders has been reported in papaya powder23, guava
varied from 0.052 to 0.116 with the maximum and powder16 and mango powder20. The initial (0 day)
minimum for plum and peach, respectively and the sulphur dioxide content of powders ranged from
increase upon storage also corresponded initial pattern 232 to 285 ppm in different powders. These values for
414 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, DECEMBER 2011

different powders decreased significantly upon sealing. Titratable acidity of the mix ranged from
storage of 6 month and the mean value was 275, 262 1.70 to 3.09% with the highest in plum and lowest in
and 223 for peach, apricot and plum powder, peach at 0 day of analysis. A significant decrease in
respectively however, the interaction among the acidity was observed during storage of 6 month with
powder and storage was non-significant. The sulphur the average mean value of 2.99% for plum followed
dioxide content reported in our study was low as by apricot (2.11%) and peach (1.64%). The initial
compared to FPO specifications24 where the reducing sugars content of chutney mix for peach,
maximum limit of sulphur dioxide in dried fruits is plum and apricot ranged from 4.25 to 12.53% with the
2000 ppm. Wide variations in the values of sulphur minimum for peach and maximum for plum. The
dioxide (2010-5910 ppm) in dehydrated peach and average value on 6 month storage increased and was
apricot have been reported25. Continuous reduction of 12.65% for plum followed by 5.93% for apricot and
sulphur dioxide during storage has been observed in minimum of 4.34% for peach mix. Highest value of
mango powder26. The difference in sulphur dioxide total sugars was recorded in apricot mix (41.39%)
retention in our study was due to the different cell followed by peach (39.09%) and lowest in plum
structure and composition of the fruits. (38.08%). Total sugars decreased during storage of
6 month with the maximum average value of 40.98%
Dehydrated fruit chutney mix in apricot and minimum of 37.79% in plum chutney
Out of the several proportions (Details not given) mix. Significant decrease was observed for ascorbic
containing different ingredients added to the powder acid among different mixes. Apricot mix showed
of peach, plum and apricot tried, the most appropriate maximum amount of ascorbic acid (3.26 mg/100 g)
proportion of peach chutney powder mix selected by followed by plum chutney (2.80 mg/100 g) whereas,
the sensory evaluation revealed that the best quality it was minimum (2.60 mg/100 g) in peach. The initial
was found when peach powder (25 g) was mixed with mean ascorbic acid content of 2.89 mg/100g decreased
sugar (25 g), salt (8 g), onion (15 g), garlic (4 g), significantly to 2.75, 2.63 and 2.53 mg/100 g. The
ginger (2 g), black pepper (1 g), cumin (4 g), values for non-enzymatic browning (measured as
cinnamon (1 g), chilli (2 g), clove (1 g), cardamom optical density at 440 nm) varied from 0.032 to 0.046
(3 g) and mint (5 g). Whereas, plum chutney powder with the maximum in plum and minimum in peach.
mix containing plum powder (25 g), sugar (25 g), salt The average values increased significantly after
(12 g), onion (18 g), garlic (4 g), ginger (2 g), black 2, 4 and 6 month of storage with corresponding values
pepper (2 g), cumin (4 g), cinnamon (1 g), chilli (2 g), of 0.054, 0.082 and 0.122, respectively. The highest
clove (1 g), cardamom (3 g) and mint (4 g) though, sulphur dioxide content was recorded in peach mix
apricot chutney powder mix containing apricot (78 ppm) followed by apricot (67 ppm) while lowest
powder (25 g), sugar (28 g), salt (10 g), onion (20 g), in plum (58 ppm). The sulphur dioxide concentration
garlic (5 g), ginger (2 g), black pepper (1 g), cumin decreased significantly during storage. It was
(4 g), cinnamon (2 g), chilli (2 g), clove (1 g), observed that the mean value after 2, 4 and 6 month
cardamom (3 g) and mint (5 g) were found as the best. decreased to 66, 64 and 63 from the initial mean value
The best reconstitution ratio with water and time of 68. The overall acceptability score of reconstituted
before serving the fruit chutney powder mix were dehydrated fruit chutney ranged from 7.19 to 7.47,
1:3 and 10 min, respectively. The data pertaining to with the highest value for apricot chutney (7.47)
the changes in the physico-chemical characteristics of followed by plum (7.35) and lowest in peach (7.19).
fruit chutney mix is presented in Table 4 which During storage interval of 2, 4 and 6 month, these
revealed that the initial moisture content varied from value decreased to 7.10, 6.69 and 6.49, respectively
3.91 to 4.82% with the maximum for plum, followed for apricot chutney, 6.89, 6.49 and 6.15, respectively
by apricot and peach. During storage of 6 month for plum chutney and 6.80, 6.40 and 6.15,
moisture change in all samples was noticed which respectively for peach chutney. On the basis of
was statistically significant. The maximum increase in average score, the decrease was statistically
plum during storage may be due to the presence of significant after 2 month (6.93), 4 month (6.53) and
comparatively more reducing sugars which increased 6 month (6.26) of storage with an initial value of 7.34.
the hygroscopicity and the air which might Significant differences were also found in the
have remained in the pouches at the time of manual mean score among different fruits chutney, with the
SHARMA et al.: VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS FROM DEHYDRATED PEACH, PLUM AND APRICOT FRUIT 415

Table 4 ⎯ Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of dehydrated fruit chutney mix during storage
Parameter Fruit 0, M 2, M 4, M 6, M Mean
Moisture, % Peach 3.91 4.04 4.07 4.11 4.03
Plum 4.82 4.96 5.04 5.11 4.98
Apricot 4.81 4.98 5.02 5.09 4.97
Mean 4.51 4.66 4.71 4.77
CD Chutney (C) = 0.009 Storage (S) = 0.011 C × S = NS
0.05
Titratable acidity, % Peach 1.70 1.66 1.62 1.59 1.64
Plum 3.09 3.02 2.96 2.90 2.99
Apricot 2.18 2.13 2.09 2.05 2.11
Mean 2.32 2.27 2.22 2.18
CD Chutney (C) = 0.012 Storage (S) = 0.014 C × S = 025
0.05
Reducing sugars, % Peach 4.25 4.30 4.37 4.43 4.34
Plum 12.53 12.61 12.68 12.76 12.65
Apricot 5.81 5.91 5.98 6.01 5.93
Mean 7.53 7.61 7.68 7.73
CD Chutney (C) = 0.024 Storage (S) = 0.028 C × S = NS
0.05
Total sugars, % Peach 39.09 38.88 38.64 38.57 38.79
Plum 38.08 37.86 37.69 37.53 37.79
Apricot 41.39 41.06 40.86 40.63 40.98
Mean 39.52 39.27 39.06 38.91
CD Chutney (C) = 0.037 Storage (S) = 0.041 C × S = 0.071
0.05
Ascorbic acid, mg/100 g Peach 2.60 2.51 2.41 2.31 2.46
Plum 2.80 2.66 2.54 2.48 2.62
Apricot 3.26 3.08 2.94 2.79 3.02
Mean 2.89 2.75 2.63 2.53
CD Chutney (C) = 0.012 Storage (S) = 0.013 C × S = 0.023
0.05
Non-enzymatic browning, Peach 0.032 0.036 0.046 0.062 0.044
Optical density at 440 nm Plum 0.046 0.076 0.122 0.180 0.106
Apricot 0.042 0.052 0.080 0.124 0.074
Mean 0.040 0.054 0.082 0.122
CD Chutney (C) = 0.0116 Storage (S) = 0.0018 C × S = 0.0028
0.05
Sulphur dioxide, ppm Peach 78 76 74 73 75
Plum 58 56 55 54 56
Apricot 67 65 63 62 64
Mean 68 66 64 63
CD Chutney (C) = 1.743 Storage (S) = 2.012 C × S = NS
0.05
Overall acceptability Peach 7.19 6.80 6.40 6.15 6.64
score,
On 9 point Hedonic scale Plum 7.35 6.89 6.49 6.15 6.72
Apricot 7.47 7.10 6.69 6.49 6.94
Mean 7.34 6.93 6.53 6.26
CD Chutney (C) = 0.011 Storage (S) = 0.012 C × S = 0.021
0.05
M = Month
maximum score in apricot (6.94) followed by plum for dehydrated pickle from peach contained halves
(6.72) while minimum in peach (6.64). This decrease (100 g) with jaggery (30 g), salt (7 g), chilli (1 g),
in score could be attributed to the non-enzymatic clove (1 g), cinnamon (1 g), cardamom (2 g), cumin
browning to some extent and also due to loss of (1.5 g), ginger (2 g), garlic (2 g) and black pepper
colour and flavour due to chemical compositional (1.5 g) was rated as the best. At the same time
changes during 6 month of storage. dehydrated plum pickle containing plum halves
(100 g) with jaggery (40 g), salt (4 g), chilli (1.25 g),
Dehydrated fruit pickle clove (1 g), cinnamon (0.75 g), cardamom (1.5 g),
Out of the several recipes each for peach, plum and cumin (1.5 g), ginger (2 g), garlic (1.5 g) and black
apricot (Details not given) containing different pepper (1.5 g) was found best. Similarly, apricot
quantities of reconstituted dehydrated fruit halves pickle containing apricot halves (100 g), jaggery
moisture (50%) was mixed with the powdered (40 g), salt (6 g), chilli (1.5 g), clove (1.5 g),
ingredients. The recipe selected by sensory evaluation cinnamon (1.25 g), cardamom (2 g), cumin (2 g),
416 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, DECEMBER 2011

ginger (1.25 g), garlic (2 g) and black pepper (1.5 g) decrease titratable acidity was noticed in all pickles
was rated as the best by the panelists. The chemical with the average mean value of 3.69% in plum, 2.15%
and overall acceptability score for best recipe is in apricot and 1.33% in peach pickle. The values for
presented in Table 5. Initial moisture content of pickle reducing sugars ranged between 4.41 and 17.32%
varied from 46.44 to 56.09 per cent with the with the maximum in plum and minimum in peach
maximum in peach pickle followed by apricot while pickle. Reducing sugars increased during storage and
minimum in plum pickle. No change in the moisture the average mean value was 17.49%, 6.99% and
content was observed on storage at 2, 4 and 6 month 4.49% in plum, apricot and peach, respectively. The
however, the variation in the moisture content of in variation in the per cent reducing sugars in peach,
different fruits pickle could be due to their different plum and apricot may be due to their different
rehydration ratios. Titratable acidity of dehydrated composition. Total sugars at 0 day of analysis were
fruit pickle varied from 1.37 to 3.80% with maximum found maximum in plum pickle (32.82%) followed by
in plum pickle (3.80%) followed by apricot (2.22%) apricot pickle (28.35%) and lowest in peach pickle
and minimum in peach (1.37%). During storage the (23.35%). During storage of 6 month these values
Table 5 ⎯ Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of dehydrated fruit pickle during storage
Parameter Fruit 0, M 2, M 4, M 6, M Mean
Moisture, % Peach 56.09 56.09 56.09 56.09 56.09
Plum 46.44 46.44 46.44 46.44 46.44
Apricot 54.18 54.18 54.18 54.18 54.18
Mean 52.23 52.23 52.23 52.23
CD Pickle (P) = 0.017 Storage (S) = NS P × S = NS
0.05
Titratable acidity, % Peach 1.37 1.34 1.31 1.29 1.33
Plum 3.80 3.73 3.65 3.59 3.69
Apricot 2.22 2.17 2.12 2.09 2.15
Mean 2.46 2.41 2.36 2.32
CD Pickle (P) = 0.011 Storage (S) = 0.013 P × S = 0.022
0.05
Reducing sugars, % Peach 4.41 4.47 4.53 4.55 4.49
Plum 17.32 17.45 17.55 17.66 17.49
Apricot 6.85 6.99 7.04 7.08 6.99
Mean 9.53 9.64 9.71 9.76
CD Pickle (P) = 0.036 Storage (S) = 0.042 P × S = 0.072
0.05
Total sugars, % Peach 23.35 23.17 23.07 22.97 23.14
Plum 32.82 32.69 32.58 32.48 32.64
Apricot 28.35 28.14 28.02 27.89 28.10
Mean 28.17 28.00 27.89 27.78
CD Pickle (P) = 0.029 Storage (S) = 0.034 P× S = 0.058
0.05
Ascorbic acid, mg/100 g Peach 3.06 2.93 2.81 2.68 2.87
Plum 4.31 4.11 3.92 3.85 4.05
Apricot 4.28 4.02 3.82 3.62 3.93
Mean 3.88 3.69 3.52 3.38
CD Pickle (P) = 0.020 Storage (S) = 0.023 P × S = 0.041
0.05
Non-enzymatic browning, Peach 0.013 0.018 0.024 0.036 0.026
Optical density at 440 nm Plum 0.018 0.026 0.042 0.062 0.037
Apricot 0.015 0.024 0.034 0.052 0.031
Mean 0.015 0.026 0.032 0.050
CD Pickle (P) = 0.0014 Storage (S) = 0.0016 P × S = 0.0028
0.05
Sulphur dioxide, ppm Peach 98 96 94 92 95
Plum 89 87 84 81 85
Apricot 93 90 88 86 89
Mean 93 91 89 86
CD Pickle (P) = 1.889 Storage (S) = 2.182 P × S = NS
0.05
Overall acceptability score, Peach 6.75 6.54 6.35 6.18 6.45
On 9 point Hedonic scale Plum 7.34 7.10 6.89 6.68 7.00
Apricot 7.17 6.97 6.76 6.62 6.88
Mean 7.09 6.86 6.67 6.49
CD Pickle (P) = 0.015 Storage (S) = 0.017 P × S = 0.029
0.05
M = Month
SHARMA et al.: VALUE ADDED PRODUCTS FROM DEHYDRATED PEACH, PLUM AND APRICOT FRUIT 417

decreased and average mean value for plum, apricot (3 g), sugar powder (10 g) and CMC (200 mg) per
and peach pickle were 32.64, 28.10 and 23.14%, 100 mL water was rated as the best by the sensory
respectively. The ascorbic acid content varied from panel while for plum and apricot RTS drink mix, 3 g
3.06 to 4.31 mg/100 g with the maximum in plum powder mixed with 11 g sugar powder and 200 mg
pickle and minimum in peach pickle. The average CMC dissolved in 100 mL water worked out to be
ascorbic acid content decreased significantly with the best by a sensory panel. Data in Table 6 on the
maximum of 4.05 mg/100 g for plum followed by physico-chemical and sensory composition of RTS
apricot pickle (3.93 mg/100 g) and minimum in peach drink mix revealed that the moisture content of drink
(2.87 mg/100 g). Reduction may be due to oxidation mix varied from 2.47 to 2.57%. The change in values
process during storage. Optical density at 440 nm as a after 2, 4 and 6 month of storage in peach mix were
measure of non-enzymatic browning (NEB) varied 2.50, 2.52 and 2.54%, respectively. However, for
from 0.013 to 0.018 with the maximum in plum pickle plum mix, the values were 2.60, 2.62 and 2.64%,
and minimum in peach. During storage the increase in respectively while for apricot mix, the values were
NEB was noticed in all the dehydrated fruit pickles 2.56, 2.58 and 2.59%, respectively. The effect of
with the average mean value of 0.037 in plum, 0.031 storage on moisture increase was minor as the average
in apricot and 0.026 in peach pickle. Comparatively values for 2, 4 and 6 month of storage were 2.55, 2.57
higher NEB in plum pickle may be due to higher and 2.59%, respectively. Slight variation in moisture
moisture and more of reducing sugars which are one during storage could be attributed to the air which
of the readily available substrate for Maillard might have been entrapped during sealing of pouches.
reactions. Peach pickle had 98 ppm of sulphur dioxide The titratable acidity of mix varied from
followed by apricot (93 ppm) and minimum in plum 1.08 to 2.35% with highest in plum mix. During
pickle (89 ppm). Sulphur dioxide content decreased storage a decrease in titratable acidity was noticed
proportionately in all the pickle and values for storage with the values of 1.05, 1.03 and 1.01% in peach mix,
and pickle interaction were non-significant during 2.30, 2.26 and 2.23% in plum mix and 1.55, 1.52 and
storage of 6 month. The initial sensory score for 1.50% in apricot mix after 2, 4 and 6 month of
overall acceptability was 7.34 in plum followed by storage, respectively. The average acidity of all fruit
7.17 in apricot and it was 6.75 in peach pickle. This drink mix decreased significantly during 2, 4 and
score after 2 month of storage reduced to 7.10 in plum 6 month of storage with the values of 1.63, 1.60 and
pickle, 6.97 in apricot pickle and 6.54 in peach pickle 1.58%, respectively. Among different mix, the
which reduced to 6.89, 6.76 and 6.35, respectively maximum average mean value of acidity was
after 4 month of storage and further reduced to 6.68, observed in plum mix (2.28%) followed by apricot
6.62 and 6.18, respectively after 6 month of storage. mix (1.54%) and minimum in peach mix (1.04%).
The initial average mean score was 7.09 which The initial value for reducing sugars ranged from
decreased significantly to 6.86, 6.67 and 6.49 after 3.49 to 10.98% in different fruit RTS mix. The
2, 4 and 6 month of storage intervals, respectively. maximum value was noticed in plum mix (10.98%)
Among dehydrated fruit pickles, maximum mean followed by apricot mix (5.16%) while minimum in
score for overall acceptability was recorded in plum peach mix (3.49%) which increased to 11.06 (plum),
pickle (7.00) followed by 6.88 in apricot and 5.26 (apricot) and 3.53% (peach), respectively after
minimum score (6.45) was recorded in peach pickle. 2 month of storage. Further, increase in reducing
The decrease in sensory score may be due to the loss sugars after 4 and 6 month were observed with the
of colour and flavour with the passage of time. corresponding values of 11.13 and 11.20 per cent,
respectively in plum mix, 5.32 and 5.36%,
Dehydrated fruit ready-to-serve (RTS) drink mix respectively in apricot mix and 3.58 and 3.62%,
Six proportions of ingredients for each fruit respectively in peach mix. Statistically significant
containing different quantities of fruit powder increase was observed in average reducing sugars in
(peach, plum and apricot), sugar powder and stabilizer fruits RTS mix after 2 month (6.62%), 4 month
carboxy methyl cellulose (CMC) per 100 mL of water (6.68%) and 6 month (6.73%) of storage with an
were standardized by a sensory panel consisting of 7 initial value of 6.54%. The average mean value of
semi-trained judges (Details not given). Out of the reducing sugars for fruit mix differed significantly,
6 proportions, combination containing peach powder with the highest value for plum RTS mix (11.09%)
418 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, DECEMBER 2011

Table 6 ⎯ Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of dehydrated RTS drink mix during storage
Parameter Fruit 0, M 2, M 4, M 6, M Mean
Moisture, % Peach 2.47 2.50 2.52 2.54 2.51
Plum 2.57 2.60 2.62 2.64 2.61
Apricot 2.53 2.56 2.58 2.59 2.57
Mean 2.52 2.55 2.57 2.59
CD Drink (D) = 0.047 Storage (S) = 0.055 D × S = NS
0.05
Titratable acidity, % Peach 1.08 1.05 1.03 1.01 1.04
Plum 2.35 2.30 2.26 2.23 2.28
Apricot 1.58 1.55 1.52 1.50 1.54
Mean 1.67 1.63 1.60 1.58
CD Drink (D) = 0.009 Storage (S) = 0.010 D × S = 0.017
0.05
Reducing sugars, % Peach 3.49 3.53 3.58 3.62 3.55
Plum 10.98 11.06 11.13 11.20 11.09
Apricot 5.16 5.26 5.32 5.36 5.28
Mean 6.54 6.62 6.68 6.73
CD Drink (D) = 0.022 Storage (S) = 0.025 D × S = NS
0.05
Total sugars, % Peach 85.30 84.67 84.32 83.96 84.56
Plum 87.87 87.48 87.16 86.83 87.33
Apricot 88.82 88.18 87.77 87.37 88.03
Mean 87.33 86.78 86.42 86.05
CD Drink (D) = 0.030 Storage (S) = 0.035 D × S = 0.060
0.05
Ascorbic acid, mg/100 g Peach 2.30 2.22 2.13 2.04 2.17
Plum 2.52 2.39 2.28 2.23 2.36
Apricot 3.05 2.89 2.75 2.62 2.83
Mean 2.62 2.50 2.39 2.30
CD Drink (D) = 0.017 Storage (S) = 0.020 D × S = 0.035
0.05
Non-enzymatic browning, Peach 0.024 0.030 0.046 0.060 0.040
Optical density at 440 nm Plum 0.036 0.060 0.096 0.138 0.083
Apricot 0.030 0.036 0.052 0.070 0.047
Mean 0.030 0.042 0.065 0.089
CD Drink (D) = 0.0012 Storage (S) = 0.0014 D × S = 0.0024
0.05
Sulphur dioxide, ppm Peach 64 63 61 60 62
Plum 54 53 51 50 52
Apricot 61 60 58 57 59
Mean 60 59 57 56
CD Drink (D) = 1.673 Storage (S) = 1.932 D × S = NS
0.05
Overall acceptability score, Peach 7.07 6.81 6.31 6.07 6.56
On 9 point Hedonic scale Plum 6.79 6.33 5.94 5.47 6.13
Apricot 7.18 6.81 6.40 6.20 6.65
Mean 7.01 6.65 6.22 5.91
CD Drink (D) = 0.016 Storage (S) = 0.019 D × S = 0.033
0.05
RTS = Ready-to-Serve, M = Month
followed by apricot mix (5.28%) and lowest in peach average value for total sugars was found highest in
RTS mix 3.55%). The increase in total sugars upon apricot mix (88.03%) followed by plum mix (87.33%)
storage could be due to the hydrolysis of non- while lowest in peach mix (84.56%). Loss in total
reducing sugars. Total sugars in RTS mix varied from sugars upon storage may be due to the utilization of
85.30 to 88.82% with the maximum in apricot and sugars in non-enzymatic browning18. The ascorbic
minimum in peach. After 2, 4 and 6 month of storage acid content of RTS mix ranged in between 3.05 and
these values decreased to 88.18, 87.77 and 87.37%, 2.52 mg/100 g. The maximum content was found in
respectively in apricot RTS mix, 87.48, 87.16 and apricot mix (3.05 mg/100 g) which decreased to 2.89,
86.83%, respectively in plum mix and 84.67, 84.32 2.75 and 2.62 mg/100 g after 2, 4 and 6 month of
and 83.96%, respectively in peach RTS mix. A storage whereas, minimum ascorbic acid was in peach
significant decrease in average total sugars was found mix (2.30 mg/100 g) which decreased to 2.22, 2.13
after 2, 4 and 6 month of storage with the values of and 2.04 mg/100 g after 2, 4 and 6 month of storage,
86.78, 86.42 and 86.05%, respectively. Among fruits, respectively. However, in plum RTS mix, the initial