...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Current Journal of Applied Science and Technology >Physico-chemical Characterization of Granulated Sugar from Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) Inflorescence Sap Cultivars and Sugar Cane in C?te d'Ivoire
【24h】

Physico-chemical Characterization of Granulated Sugar from Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) Inflorescence Sap Cultivars and Sugar Cane in C?te d'Ivoire

机译：科特迪瓦椰子（Cocos nucifera L.）花序树液品种和甘蔗砂糖的理化特性

获取原文
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Aims: To evaluate and compare some physico-chemical characteristics of powdered sugar from theinflorescences of three of the most widespread coconut cultivars in C?te d'Ivoire compared to sugarfrom cane sugar to diversifying coconut exploitation in C?te d'Ivoire.Experimental Design was Used: The sap was extracted from inflorescences of row 8 of PB113+,PB121+ hybrid and GOA cultivar. Three different treatments that varied time and temperature wereset. The physico-chemical characterization concerned the sugar samples from each pair. Samplesof white and brown sugar from sugar cane, sold commercially in C?te d'Ivoire, were used ascontrols.Place and Duration of Studies: Marc Delorme Station for Coconut Research at the NationalCentre for Agricultural Research, C?te d'Ivoire between January 2017 and March 2018.Methodology: The sap from the freshly collected coconut tree inflorescences was directlytransformed into granulated sugar by thermal spraying (Okoma et al, 2019), without preservatives.Three treatments varying the time/temperature pair were tested. Thus, the processing consisted of:T1: boil 1 liter of sap for 45 minutes at a temperature varying from 60-120°C.T2: boil 1 liter of sap for 40 minutes at a temperature varying from 60-140°C.T3: boil 1 liter of sap for 35 minutes at a temperature varying from 60-160°C.The physico-chemical characterization concerned the coconut sugar samples from each treatmentand covered the dry matter content (DMS), moisture (HUM), ashes content (ASH), hydrogenpotential (pH), titratable acidity content (TAT), total and reducing sugar contents, fat content andcrude fibers. We considered the white and brown sugar from sugar cane sold in the sample ascontrol samples.Results: All the physico-chemical characteristics of the crystalline coconut and sugar cane sugarsanalyzed generated significant differences (p<0.5) between them and the controls. Regardless ofthe treatment, the controls white and brown cane sugar provide statistically identical DMS, greaterthan 99.45 g/100 g respectively. These levels are higher than those provided by the sugar ofcoconut cultivars. In addition, white (0.27 to 0.29) and brown (0.42 to 0.50) cane sugar contains lesswater than all coconut cultivars (0.76 to 1.70). Regardless of the treatments applied, crystallinecoconut sugar contains ashes contents (ASH) that range from 1.45 to 2.85 and are statisticallyhigher than the proportions found in brown sugar cane sugar (0.11 to 0.28). White sugar cane sugardoes not contain ashes. The pH of white sugar and brown sugar (6.09 and 6.44) is significantlyhigher than that of coconut sugar (4.82 and 6.19). The titratable acid content of coconut sugarranged from 1.25 to 2.19 compared to 0.94 to 1.99 in cane sugar. Total sugar contents (TST)represent 81.15 to 87.54% of the dry matter in coconut cultivars. This is lower than the TSTs forwhite sugar (99.01 to 99.04%) and brown sugar (95.6 to 95.73%) sugar cane. Crystal sugar incoconut cultivars contains statistically fewer reducing sugars (6.75 to 7.89%) than white sugar canesugar (8.11 to 8.12%). Its red counterpart, with 6.14%, contains smaller amounts of reducingsugars.Conclusion: Sugars are the main constituents of the dry matter of the coconut and cane sugarcrystals studied. However, the different heat treatments applied to the sap of coconut inflorescencessignificantly affected all the physico-chemical parameters of each sugar. The physico-chemicalcharacteristics have statistically differentiated coconut sugar from sugar cane sugar. However, for abetter valorization of crystalline coconut sugar in C?te d'Ivoire, additional studies to determine itscarbohydrate, mineral, vitamin and energy content should be considered.
机译：目的：为了评估和比较科特迪瓦三个最普遍的椰子品种的花序中糖粉的某些理化特性，与从甘蔗糖中提取糖以使科特迪瓦多样化的椰子开发相比。使用：汁液是从PB113 +，PB121 +杂种和GOA品种的第8行的花序中提取的。设置了三种随时间和温度变化的不同处理方法。理化特性涉及每对糖样品。将在科特迪瓦商业出售的甘蔗中的白糖和红糖样品作为对照。研究地点和持续时间：1月至1月间，在科特迪瓦国家农业研究中心的马克·德罗姆椰子研究站2017年和2018年3月。方法：将新鲜收集的椰子树花序的汁液通过热喷涂直接转化为砂糖（Okoma等人，2019），不添加防腐剂，测试了三种处理方法，它们随时间/温度的变化而变化。因此，该处理包括：T1：在60-120°C的温度下将1升的汁液煮沸45分钟.T2：在60-140°C的温度下将1升的汁液煮沸40分钟.T3 ：在60-160°C的温度下煮1升汁液35分钟。理化特性涉及每次处理的椰子糖样品，并涵盖了干物质含量（DMS），水分（HUM），灰分含量（ ASH），氢势（pH），可滴定酸度（TAT），总糖和还原糖含量，脂肪含量和粗纤维。我们将样品中出售的甘蔗中的白糖和黑糖视为对照样品。结果：分析的结晶椰子和甘蔗糖的所有理化特征在它们和对照之间产生了显着差异（p <0.5）。无论采用何种处理方法，对照组白糖和棕糖均提供统计学上相同的DMS，分别大于99.45 g / 100 g。这些水平高于椰子品种的糖提供的水平。此外，白色（0.27至0.29）和棕色（0.42至0.50）的蔗糖比所有椰子品种（0.76至1.70）所含水少。无论采用何种处理方法，结晶椰子糖的灰分含量（ASH）都在1.45至2.85之间，并且统计学上高于黑糖蔗糖中的灰分含量（0.11至0.28）。白甘蔗糖不包含骨灰。白糖和红糖的pH值（6.09和6.44）显着高于椰子糖（4.82和6.19）。椰子糖的可滴定酸含量为1.25至2.19，而蔗糖为0.94至1.99。总糖含量（TST）占椰子品种干物质的81.15％至87.54％。这低于白糖（99.01至99.04％）和黑糖（95.6至95.73％）甘蔗的TST。从统计上讲，冰糖incoconut品种中的还原糖（6.75％至7.89％）比白糖蔗糖（8.11％至8.12％）少。它的红色对应物为6.14％，其还原糖含量较小。结论：糖是椰子和甘蔗糖晶体干物质的主要成分。然而，对椰子花序汁液进行的不同热处理显着影响了每种糖的所有理化参数。物理化学特性从统计学上将椰子糖与甘蔗糖区分开。但是，为了更好地估价科特迪瓦的结晶椰子糖，应考虑进行其他研究以确定其碳水化合物，矿物质，维生素和能量含量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号