File Download
There are no files associated with this item.
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1016/j.foodres.2012.10.023
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-84868651134
- WOS: WOS:000315613900031
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Stability of microencapsulated Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris during storage at room temperature at low a w
Title | Stability of microencapsulated Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris during storage at room temperature at low a w |
---|---|
Authors | |
Keywords | Β-Galactosidase Acid And Bile Tolerance Drying Method Surface Hydrophobicity Survival |
Issue Date | 2013 |
Publisher | Pergamon. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodres |
Citation | Food Research International, 2013, v. 50 n. 1, p. 259-265 How to Cite? |
Abstract | The effect of freeze drying or spray drying, the use of desiccants to maintain the low a w and the period of storage (at 25°C) of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris on survival, acid tolerance, bile tolerance, retention of surface hydrophobicity and retention of β-galactosidase was studied; an estimation of the maximum storage period was also carried out. Sodium caseinate, vegetable oil, glucose, mannitol and fructooligosaccharides were used as protectant of L. acidophilus and L. cremoris during freeze drying or spray drying and during subsequent storage. NaOH, LiCl and silica gel were used as desiccants during 10weeks of storage of microencapsulated L. acidophilus and L. cremoris kept in an aluminum foil pouch. The results showed that mainly freeze dried L. acidophilus and L. cremoris kept in foil pouch containing NaOH (a w 0.07) or LiCl (a w 0.1) showed higher survival (89-94%) than spray dried bacteria kept under the same conditions (86-90%) after 10weeks of storage (P=0.0005). Similar results were also showed by acid tolerance, bile tolerance and surface hydrophobicity of freeze-dried or spray-dried L. acidophilus and L. cremoris. Silica gel was less effective in protecting the functional properties of microencapsulated L. acidophilus or L. cremoris with percentage of survival between 81 and 87% at week 10 of the storage. However, retention of β-galactosidase was only influenced by a w adjusted by desiccators (P<0.05). Based on forecasting using linear regression, the predicted storage period for freeze dried L. acidophilus, spray dried L. acidophilus and freeze dried L. cremoris kept in foil pouch containing NaOH would be 46, 42 and 42weeks, respectively; while spray dried L. cremoris under LiCl desiccant would require 39weeks to achieve minimum required bacterial population of 10 7CFU/g. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/179336 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 7.0 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.495 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Dianawati, D | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Mishra, V | en_US |
dc.contributor.author | Shah, NP | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2012-12-19T09:54:18Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2012-12-19T09:54:18Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Food Research International, 2013, v. 50 n. 1, p. 259-265 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 0963-9969 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/179336 | - |
dc.description.abstract | The effect of freeze drying or spray drying, the use of desiccants to maintain the low a w and the period of storage (at 25°C) of Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris on survival, acid tolerance, bile tolerance, retention of surface hydrophobicity and retention of β-galactosidase was studied; an estimation of the maximum storage period was also carried out. Sodium caseinate, vegetable oil, glucose, mannitol and fructooligosaccharides were used as protectant of L. acidophilus and L. cremoris during freeze drying or spray drying and during subsequent storage. NaOH, LiCl and silica gel were used as desiccants during 10weeks of storage of microencapsulated L. acidophilus and L. cremoris kept in an aluminum foil pouch. The results showed that mainly freeze dried L. acidophilus and L. cremoris kept in foil pouch containing NaOH (a w 0.07) or LiCl (a w 0.1) showed higher survival (89-94%) than spray dried bacteria kept under the same conditions (86-90%) after 10weeks of storage (P=0.0005). Similar results were also showed by acid tolerance, bile tolerance and surface hydrophobicity of freeze-dried or spray-dried L. acidophilus and L. cremoris. Silica gel was less effective in protecting the functional properties of microencapsulated L. acidophilus or L. cremoris with percentage of survival between 81 and 87% at week 10 of the storage. However, retention of β-galactosidase was only influenced by a w adjusted by desiccators (P<0.05). Based on forecasting using linear regression, the predicted storage period for freeze dried L. acidophilus, spray dried L. acidophilus and freeze dried L. cremoris kept in foil pouch containing NaOH would be 46, 42 and 42weeks, respectively; while spray dried L. cremoris under LiCl desiccant would require 39weeks to achieve minimum required bacterial population of 10 7CFU/g. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. | en_US |
dc.language | eng | en_US |
dc.publisher | Pergamon. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/foodres | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | Food Research International | en_US |
dc.subject | Β-Galactosidase | en_US |
dc.subject | Acid And Bile Tolerance | en_US |
dc.subject | Drying Method | en_US |
dc.subject | Surface Hydrophobicity | en_US |
dc.subject | Survival | en_US |
dc.title | Stability of microencapsulated Lactobacillus acidophilus and Lactococcus lactis ssp. cremoris during storage at room temperature at low a w | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.email | Shah, NP: npshah@hku.hk | en_US |
dc.identifier.authority | Shah, NP=rp01571 | en_US |
dc.description.nature | link_to_subscribed_fulltext | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.foodres.2012.10.023 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-84868651134 | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 50 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | 1 | en_US |
dc.identifier.spage | 259 | en_US |
dc.identifier.epage | 265 | en_US |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000315613900031 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United Kingdom | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Dianawati, D=40761270000 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Mishra, V=35897885300 | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusauthorid | Shah, NP=7401823907 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citeulike | 11816476 | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 0963-9969 | - |