Effect of thermal treatment of must on quality of ...

Acta Hortic. 1198. ISHS 2018. DOI 10.17660/ActaHortic.2018.1198.27 Proc. III International Symposium on Medicinal and Nutraceutical Plants and III Conference of National Institute of Science and Technology for Tropical Fruits Ed.: N. Narain

163

Effect of thermal treatment of must on quality of fermented beverage elaborated by using umbu (Spondias tuberosa Arruda Camara) fruit pulp

A.A.O.Santos1,a,A.K.S.Abud2,A.G.T.deAraujo1,R.C.A.Santos1,P.L.Santos1andN.Narain1

1Laboratory of Flavor & Chromatographic Analysis, PROCTA, Federal University of Sergipe, 49100‐000 SaoCristovao,SE,Brazil;2DepartmentofFoodTechnology,FederalUniversityofSergipe,49100‐000SaoCristovao,SE,Brazil.

Abstract The umbu (Spondias tuberosa Arruda Camara) is a tropical fruit native to the

Brazilian Northeast region and it possesses excellent organoleptic properties presenting great socio-economic potential. This work was aimed to initially prepare umbu must with a concentration of 250 g L-1 of pulp, 28 °Brix and pH 4.5, and later to evaluate the influence of heat treatment on pulp and mash by determining the physico-chemical, microbiological and sensory properties of final beverages. The mixtures were clear, viscous, flavored with moderate alcohol levels between 11 and 14 GL and concentration of total reducing sugars in the range of semi-dry wines. The fermented beverage was made with the use of the pulp cooked to 100°C for 5 min, a process known as umbuzada, and another made with heating of the wort at 50°C for 15 min which showed improvements in mean sensory scores, with consumer acceptable index of 67%.

Keywords:fermentation,umbu,quality,heattreatment

INTRODUCTION Theumbu(Spondias tuberosaArrudaCamara)isanativefruitofthesemi‐aridregion

ofBrazilanditpossessesgreatpotentialforcultivation(Costaetal.,2004).Thefreshfruitisusuallyconsumedandwheneverripeitisalsousedintheproductionofsoftdrinks,juices,icecream,ormixwithmilk(knownasumbuzada)(SEAGRI,2010;Ushikubo,2006;Costaetal., 2004). The industrial products are in the form of bottled juices, candy, jams, wine,vinegar,acetone,concentrateforicecream,pulpforjuice,orasdriedfruit.

Studiesperformedearlieronumbufruitrelateto:freezingatcryogenictemperatures(Ferreiraetal.,2000), theproductionofsweets (Cavalcantietal.,2000;Pintoetal.,2001;Martinsetal.,2007;Policarpoetal.,2007;Martinsetal.,2010),theproductionofjellyandjams (Folegattietal.,2003),evaluationof stabilityofumbupowder (Galdinoetal.,2003),microencapsulationoftheumbupowder(Mataetal.,2005),theproductionofwine(Melo,2005),theeffectofenzymeinthetreatmentofmicrofiltrationofumbujuice(Ushikuboetal.,2006),theproductionofdairydrink(Santosetal.,2006),theselectionofyeaststrainsforfermenting wine production (Melo et al., 2007), use of xanthan gum on the rheologicalpropertiesofumbu(Pereiraetal.,2007)andtherheologicalbehavioroftheumbu(Pereiraetal.,2008).

Theuseoffruitjuicesforthepreparationoffermentedbeveragesisanotherpromisingform to explore this fruit and to avoid large volume of waste during its harvest season(Asquierietal.,2009).Severalstudieshavebeenperformedonfermentedbeveragesusingseveral fruits such as oranges (Corazza et al., 2001; Gurak and Bortolini, 2010), cashewapple(Garrutietal.,2002;TorresNetoetal.,2006)redmombinandmangaba(Munizetal.,2002),banana(Arrudaetal.,2003,2007),caja(Diasetal.,2003),jabuticaba(Chiarellietal.,2005;Silvaetal.,2008),cactus(Lopesetal.,2005;Almeidaetal.,2006),acerola(Santoset

aE-mail: [email protected]

164

al.,2005),apple(Fertonanietal.,2006;Nogueiraetal.,2006),fig‐of‐India(LopesandSilva,2006),jackfruit(Asquierietal.,2008;Netoetal.,2010)andpineapple(Silvaetal.,2010).

Thus,thisstudywasaimedtoevaluatetheeffectofusingheattreatmentofumbupulpin fermentation process along with the evaluation of fermented products focusing on itsmicrobiological,physico‐chemicalandsensoryquality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Umbu processing TheripeumbufruitswerepurchasedfromtheCentralMarket inthecityofAracaju,

Brazil and taken to the processing unit located at the Department of Food Technology inFederal University of Sergipe. The fruitswere selected,weighed,washed and sanitized inchlorinatedwater.Aportionofthepulpwasusedwithoutanyheattreatmentwhileanotherwas heated at 100°C for 5min. The pulpwas obtained in an extraction unit of automaticrotary type, (brand Itametal)with 2.5mm sieve and stored in plastic containers at ‐18°Cuntiluse.

Preparation of fermented beverage Fermented beverages from umbu were prepared in the Laboratory of Food

Biochemistry(UFS) inaccordancewiththeflowchartshowninFigure1.Thefermentationwas carried out by using 250 g L‐1 of umbu pulp having total soluble solids contents of28°BrixandpH4.5,adjustedwithasolutionofanhydroussodiumcarbonate(Na2CO3)and0,50 g L‐1 of sodium metabisulfite (Na2S2O5) before and after pasteurization. Nutrientsamounting to 1.0 g L‐1 of monobasic ammonium phosphate (NH4H2PO4) and 0.1 g L‐1 ofmagnesiumsulfateheptahydrate(MgSO4.7H2O)wereadded.ThedetailsofothervariationsinthepreparationofmustarepresentedinTable1.

The inoculum for the fermentation was the yeast Sacchromyces cerevisiae RL‐11,offered by the courtesy of Microbiology Laboratory of the Department of Biology UFLA.Figure2illustratesthevariousstagesofdevelopmentoffermentedbeverage.Initially,aloopoftheyeastwastransferredtoYPDmedium(10gL‐1yeastextract,20gL‐1peptoneand20gL‐1 glucose). Following the growth from themeasurement of optical density a graphwaspreparedbetweenthebiomassandtimeforthecellstoenterinexponentialgrowthphase.Theinitialconcentrationofcellswasallowedtoreachtheconcentrationof0.02gL‐1or107cellsmL‐1 This procedurewas repeated once again, now in the samewort containing thefruitpulptobefermentedtothecellstoconformtothenewmedium(inoculum),inordertomonitorthefermentationkinetics.

The end of the fermentation was observed with the stabilization of soluble solids(°Brix).DailymonitoringofthepHand°Brixwasmade.Themeasurementoftotalreducingsugarswasdoneusingthemethodologyof3,5‐dinitrosalicylicacid(DNS)proposedbyMiller(1959).Aftercompletionof fermentation, the liquorwasstoredat4°C.Duringmaturationtwofiltrationswereperformedforremovaloffermentationsediment.Aftermaturationthesamplewasfilteredandbottled,whichwerekeptinawaterbathmaintainedat60°Cfor30min.Aftercoolinginanicebath,thesamplewasstoredat4°C.

165

Figure1.Schemeforthepreparationoffermentedbeverage.

166

Table1.Variationsintheuseofumbupulpinthepreparationoffermentedbeverages.

Fermented beverages codes VariationsA Fresh umbu fruit pulp without cookingB Fresh umbu fruit with cooking at 50°C for 15 minC Fresh umbu fruit with cooking at 70°C for 15 minD Heated umbu pulp without cooking of mustE Heated umbu pulp with cooking of must at 50°C for 15 minF Heated umbu pulp with cooking of must at 70°C for 15 min

Figure2.Stepsforinoculumpreparation.

The yield, productivity and yield in relation to the usage of fruit and the productformed with respect to consumption of substrate were calculated according to themethodology proposed by Cunha et al. (2007). The equations for the calculation of thequalityparametersoftheprocessaredescribedbelow:

511,0)(dimRe

0

SS

QPenton 1

t

QPod Pr 2

SS

PPY

SP

0

0 3

where: Prod: productivity (g L‐1 h‐1);QP: Thequantity of alcohol produced (w/v); S: Finalsubstrate concentration (g L‐1); S0: Initial substrate concentration (g L‐1); T: Totalfermentationtime(h);P:Finalethanolconcentration(gL‐1);P0:Initialethanolconcentration(gL‐1);YP/S:yieldoftheproductexpressedbytheamountofproductformedrelatedtotheamountofsubstrateconsumed.

Physico-chemical characterization The characterization of the pulp and fermented drink was done by analyzing total

acidity, ash, moisture, pH and soluble solids (°Brix) contents according to the methodsrecommended by the Instituto Adolfo Lutz (Instituto Adolfo Lutz, 2005). The vitamin CcontentwasdeterminedbythemethodologyofAOAC(1984).Thedeterminationofreducingsugars (RS) and total reducing sugars (TRS) was performed by the DNS method (Miller,1959)accordingtothemethodologydescribedbyFontanaetal.(2005).

Extraction of phenolic compounds Samples of fermentedbeverageswere stored in open container for 24h at 4°C and

167

filtered through Whatman # 1 filter paper. Later this was diluted using Milli‐Q water(Millipore) at a ratio of 1:5 for subsequent membrane filtration of 0.45 µm (MilliporeJBR61022andHAWP04700)andtheextractwasanalyzedinaliquidchromatograph.

Chromatographic analysis The (+) hydrated catechin and (‐) epicatechin were separated and quantified in

ShimadzuC18 column (4.6 × 250mm, 5 μm). The equipment usedwas a LC‐20AT liquidchromatograph (Shimadzu) equipped with degasser, quaternary pump (LC‐20 AT),autosampler(SIL‐20A)andadiodearraydetectorUV/VIS‐DAD(SPD‐M20A)monitoringintherange190‐800nm.

ThegradientelutionwasunderthemobilephasesolventAandsolventBacetonitrile,aqueousaceticacid,5%,respectively.Theprogramusedwas:9%ofsolventAfor10min,to25%solventAin1minandholdingfor11min,then70%solventAin1minandkeeping5min returning to initial condition in 1min for 15min at a flow rate of 1mLmin‐1 withinjectionvolumeof20μL,usingmethodsdescribedbyVinasetal.(2000).Allanalysesweremonitoredatawavelengthof280nmandperformedintriplicate.

Preparation of standard curve Thestandardcompoundsof(+)catechinhydrated(98%purity),(‐)epicatechin(98%

purity),rutintrihydrate(purity≥95%),quercetin(98%purity)wereobtainedfromSigma‐Aldrich and glacial acetic acid from Proquımios (99.8% purity). The water used wasobtained from theMilli‐Q system (Millipore). Identificationwasmade using the retentiontimesandabsorptionspectrawhilethequantificationwasachievedbypreparingstandardcurveswith10pointsstartingfromtheinitialconcentrationsof0.5mgmL‐1(catechin)and0.22mgmL‐1(epicatechin).

Microbiological evaluations of the grape Microbiological analysis was carried out on the experimental design of musts,

inoculatingbymeansofplatinumlooponthesamplesonplatescontainingYPDAmedium(10gL‐1yeastextract,20gL‐1peptone,20gL‐1glucoseand20gL‐1ofagar).Theplateswerekept at room temperature and reversed for 5 days for counting and identification ofmicroorganismsformed.Theanalysiswasperformedbyopticalmicroscopy(BIOVALbrand).

Sensory analysis Thirtyuntrainedmembersofbothsexes,randomlychosenamongdifferentagegroups

and social classes, participated in the testing of the beverages. Sensory analysis wasperformed to evaluate the appearance, aroma, consistency and flavor of fermentedbeverages. A hedonic scale anchored at 9 points was used where the maximum pointcorrespondedto“likeextremely”,themediumto“indifferent”andlowerunitto“extremelydislike”. A comprehensive assessment of the consumer acceptance of the drink was alsomade.

Statistical analysis All data are presented as the mean and standard deviation of three analyses. The

analysis of variance and Tukey test were performed to check the differences betweentreatmentsusingtheversion7.4betaprogramASSISTATat5%probability.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Physico-chemical characterization of umbu Pulpobtainedfromtheumbufruitshowedgreencolor.However,thepulpofthefresh

fruitmaintainedamoreintensegreencolorunlikethecookedfruitwhichshowedagreenishcolor. The data on the chemical composition of umbu used in the processing of thefermentedbeveragearepresentedinTable2.

168

Table2.Physico‐chemicalcharacteristicsofnaturalandheatedfreshumbufruitpulp.

Characteristics Unheated pulp Heated pulp pH 1.88 1.80Soluble Solids (°Brix) 10.4 10.0Acidity (g citric acid 100 g-1) 2.57±0.05a 1.84±0.08bMoisture (g 100 g-1) 94.13±6.42a 87.69±0.18aReducing sugars (g 100 g-1) 0.21±0.00b 2.29±0.01aTotal reducing sugars (g 100 g-1) 4.05±0.21a 4.63±0.02aAscorbic acid (mg 100 g-1) 15.39±0.00 15.40±0.00Ash (g 100 g-1) 0.47±0.05a 0.53±0.09a

Different letters differ significantly according to Tukey test (p<0.05) at 5% probability.

The fresh fruit pulp had higher acidity and, consequently, a lower pH compared tocookedpulp.However,thevaluesofpHandacidityreportedintheliterature(Narainetal.,1992;Ferreiraetal.,2000)werehigherforthepHandlowerforacidity.

Thefreshfruitpulppresentedsolublesolidscontenthigherthaninthecookedpulp.HowevertheirvalueswereveryclosetothatreportedbyFerreiraetal.(2000)of10.03andlowerthanthosereportedbyNarainetal.(1992)andGalvao(2002)of9.47formaturefruit,8.60forhalf‐ripefruitsand9.70forripefruit.Reducingsugarvaluepresentedanincreaseinthecookedpulpascomparedtofreshfruitpulp.TheseresultswerelowerthanthosecitedbyNarainetal.(1992)of4.09andFerreiraetal.(2000)of3.61.ThetotalreducingsugarsvaluesinthefreshandcookedpulpswerelowerthanthosereportedbyNarainetal.(1992)of5.38andFerreiraetal.(2000)of6.25.

Fermentation The fermentation took place at room temperature and the concentration profiles of

cells (X),pH, sugar consumption (°Brix)and total reducing sugarsare shown inFigures3and4.

Figure3. Cellconcentration(X)duringfermentationprocess forbeveragesA,BandC(A)and for beverages D, E and F (B). pH values during fermentation process forbeveragesA,BandC(C)andforbeveragesD,EandF(D).

169

Figure4. °Brix values during fermentation process for beverages A, B and C (A) and forbeverages D, E, and F (B). Total reducing sugars values during fermentationprocessforbeveragesA,BandC(C)andforbeveragesD,EandF(D).

Analyzing the results, it was noticed that the concentration cell (X) (Figure 3) formustsAandBpresentedlinearbehaviorfromthethirdandfifthday,respectively.AsforthemustsC,D,EandF,theseshowedvariationsduringthewholeperiodoffermentation.Inthefermentation process, the pH (Figure 3) tends to reduce indicating on the formation ofhydrogen ion was associated with microbial growth. The pH of fermented drinks is animportantfactorinitsstability,withvaluesaround4.00favoringthegrowthofyeast.Otheraspects of the fermentation such as growth of undesirable bacteria, the effectiveness ofsulfur dioxide, the protein solubility, activity of the bentonite and browning reactions arealsoinfluencedbythepH(Munizetal.,2002).

Regardingthevaluesoftotalreducingsugars(Figure4)itwasobservedthattherewasstability in sucrose concentration as a result of consumption of the substrate by themicroorganismsoastoreachlevelsrangingfrom20to25gL‐1.MustsB,EandFcompletedthefermentationafter8dayswhenstabilizationoftheBrixcontentoccurred(Figure4).FormustsCandD,thefermentationwascompletedafteraperiodof9days.

Comparing the data of fermented beverages prepared from umbu (Table 3), it wasfound that fermentedbeverageDobtainedahigheryield,but still thisyield is consideredrelativelylowduetolossduringthefiltrationprocess.Theproductivityofethanolwasintherange0.05‐0.06gL‐1h‐1.

Table3.Kineticparametersofvariousfermentedbeveragespreparedfromusingumbupulp.

Kinect parameters

Fermented beveragesA B C D E F

Yield (%) 34.64 33.72 34.26 43.77 32.61 35.17Productivity 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.06YP/S 0.18 0.17 0.17 0.22 0.17 0.18

Physico-chemical characterization of fermented beverage of umbu The beverages showed clear appearance, possessing mild aroma of alcohol and

greenishtingewhenthedrinkwaspreparedbyusing freshpulpwhile itscolorwasgreenwhen itwasprepared fromcookedpulp.Table4presents theresultsofphysical‐chemicalanalysisoffermentedbeveragespreparedfromumbupulp.

170

Table4.Physico‐chemicalcharacteristics(mean±standarddeviation)ofvariousfermentedbeveragespreparedfromusingumbupulp.

Characteristics Fermented beverages

A B C D E F°GL 12 12 12 14 11 11pH 3.44±0.10a 3.37±0.05a 3.53±0.10a 3.42±0.06a 3.48±0.08a 3.44±0.08a°Brix 9.80 11.40 12.40 10.40 14.60 13.40Dried extract (%) 5.22±0.11f 6.99±0.03d 7.34±0.04c 5.99±0.01e 10.11±0.00a 8.79±0.06bAsh (%) 0.59±0.02ab 0.54±0.00b 0.61±0.01a 0.38±0.01c 0.42±0.00c 0.54±0.03bTotal acidity (meq L-1) 70.91±0.69a 70.42±0.00a 71.39±0.00a 63.08±0.69c 55.75±1.38d 66.50±0.00bVolatile acidity (meq L-1) 65.53±0.00ab 64.55±1.38abc 67.48±0.00a 60.15±2.07c 51.83±1.38d 62.59±0.00bcAcidity (meq L-1) 5.38±0.69a 5.87±1.38a 3.91±0.00a 2.93±1.38a 3.91±0.00a 3.91±0.00aReducing sugars (g L-1) 3.68±1.45a 4.79±0.24a 5.13±0.45a 6.01±0.33a 7.23±1.93a 6.87±1.44aTotal reducing sugars (g L-1) 4.13±0.31d 8.90±0.39cd 10.70±1.38c 6.67±0.52cd 22.58±2.29a 16.53±2.05b

Different letters signify that the values among them differ significantly, according to the test of Tukey at 5% of probability (p<0.05).

17

0

171

Thedataonalcoholcontent(°GL)offermentedbeveragesvariedfrom4‐14%(v/v)at20°Cwhichiswithintherangeestablishedbylegislation.Itisobservedthatthefermentedbeveragespreparedwithfreshpulphadthesamealcoholcontent,asagainstthefermentedbeveragespreparedwithcookedpulpwhichhadadifferentvaluethanthedrinkpreparedbyusingjuicewithoutheating(14°GL).SamplesEandFwhichunderwentpasteurizationatdifferent temperatures, contained the alcohol content of 11 °GL. The use of yeast(Saccharomyces cerevisiae)wasadequate forobtainingalcohol levelswithin the standardsrequiredforanalcoholicfermentation.

The total soluble solids content forbeveragespreparedwithoutheatingof themustobtainedattheendoffermentationalowervalue(9.80)fordrinkpreparedwithfreshpulpthanobtainedfromusingheatingmust(10.40).

Thetotalacidityoffermentedbeverages,A,BandCdidnotdiffersignificantly,unlikethefermentedbeveragesD,EandFwhichvariedfrom55.75to66.50mEqL‐1.ThepHofthebeverageswasbetween3.37and3.53.ThepHofabout3.5inthefermentedbeverageresultsin greater resistance to contamination by microorganisms (Torres Neto et al., 2006). Inrelation to the contents of drymatter and ash, all drinks possessed significant difference(p<0.05)betweeneachother.

It is observed that the reducing sugar contentwasgreatly influencedby the typeofpulp with which the drink was prepared. Fermented drinks prepared with fresh pulppresentedvaluesrangingfrom3.68to5.13gL‐1whilethosepreparedfromtheheatedpulpranged from 6.01 to 7.23. These results on reducing sugars showed that the fermenteddrinkswereclassifiedassemi‐dried(residualsugarcontentvaryingfrom5‐20gL‐1),exceptforthefermenteddrinkEwhichwasclassifiedassuave(reducingsugarscontentabove20gL‐1),accordingtotheBrazilianlegislation(BRASIL,1998).

The results obtained for fermented umbu beverage were quantified using theequations y = 2E +07 x ‐ 19966 (R2 = 0.9989) and y = 5E +06 1125.3 + x (R2 = 0.9957)obtainedby thecalibrationcurvesofstandards(+)catechinhydrate(Sigma‐Aldrich,98%)and (‐) epicatechin (Sigma‐Aldrich, 98%), monitored at 280 nm, respectively. Thechromatographic profile for the fermented umbu beverage revealed the presence of55.2±0.12mg100g‐1ofcatechinand21.9±0.21mg100g‐1ofepicatechin.ThecontentsofcatechinandepicatechininMerlotwinereportedbyAbeetal.(2007)rangedfrom3.8±0.1and61±2mg100g‐1,respectively. InthewinespreparedfromCabernetSauvignongrapesflavanolswerenotdetectedintheberriesanalyzedafterseedremovalwhileintheberriesanalyzedwiththeseeds,flavonolscontentwasabout33mg100g‐1.However,therearenoreports in the literature for determination of phenolic compounds fermented umbubeverage.

The phenolic compounds get modified during storage and processing, resulting inpolymerization and reduction of some phenolic compounds during storage. However, thehigh content of catechin present in fermentedumbubeveragemaybe related to the craftprocess and the absence of substances used by the wine industry such aspolyvinylpolypyrrolidone which acts on catechin and epicatechin, inhibiting them. Thisoccurs primarily in white wines (Benassi and Cecchi, 2000). Certain flavonoids, such asepicatechin, havenot only adirect antioxidant effect, but also are capable of saving otherantioxidantslikevitaminsCandE.AccordingtoAugeretal.(2004),smallamountsof1mMepicatechinareenoughfortheprotectionofvitaminsCandEoxidation.Moreover,bybeingrich inhydroxyl groups, catechin, is a compound capable of donating hydrogenmoleculeswhichassistinthestabilizationoffreeradicals(Keen,2001).

Microbiological analysis Inthemicrobiologicalanalysis(Figure5),themustsinwhichthepulpwasnotheated

(A and D) presented the considerable growth of microorganisms, indicating that thesulfitationandsanitationarenotenough toensureasepticprocessafteradditionofothercomponents in the process, allowing possibly cross‐contamination. However, Bmust alsoshowedthegrowthofundesirablemicroorganisms.

172

Figure5.PetridishesofdifferentmustsdevelopedinfermentedbeveragesAtoF.

TheplateAexaminedunderamicroscopeshowed thepresenceof yeasts, cocci androds;theplateBtheappearanceoffungusandtheplateDtheemergenceofyeasts,diatomsand rods in greater quantity. Thus, itwas concluded that the heating step of the pulp formust is of paramount importance for the sterilization of the medium’s development andfermentation, combined with the sanitation practices of the fruit and sulfitation, thusavoidingproblemsofcrosscontamination.

Assessment of sensory quality After the physical and chemical analyses, fermented beverages were subjected to

sensoryanalysistoverifytheiracceptancewiththeconsumers.Thepanelwascomposedofuntrained panelists, chosen randomly. Table 5 presents the mean values of sensoryparametersforthebeverages.

Table5. Meanvaluesofsensorialattributesforvariousfermentedbeveragespreparedfromusingumbupulp.

Sensorial attributes Fermented beverages

A B C D E F WhiteAppearance 4.57b 4.70b 4.80b 3.90b 4.70b 4.07b 7.78a

Aroma 5.63b 5.70b 5.80b 5.30b 6.20ab 5.70b 7.01a

Consistency 4.63c 5.27bc 5.40bc 4.77bc 6.13ab 4.93bc 6.62a

Flavor 3.40b 4.17ab 4.77ab 3.73b 5.43a 4.67ab 5.12a

General evaluation 4.43c 4.83bc 5.33abc 4.03c 6.00ab 4.63c 6.13a

Different letters signify that the values among them differ significantly, according to the test of Tukey at 5% of probability (p<0.05).

It is observed that fermented drinks differ significantly in all attributes. Theappearance in fermented beverages varied from3.90 to 4.70 points, as against to controlwhich obtained 7.78; this aspect can be explained by the translucent appearance of thebeverages.Fortheflavorattribute,beveragesAandCobtainedlowermeanvalues,whilethebeverageE obtained the highest (5.43) pointwhich classifies that this beveragewas verywellacceptedbythesensorypanel.

Table5showsthesensoryevaluationoffermentedbeveragesaccordingtoahedonicscaleofpoints.Inthearomaattribute,thefermentedbeveragespointsvariedfrom5.30to5.70fordrinksA,B,C,DandF,withtheexceptionofEbeveragewhichobtained6.20pointsand thisbeveragewasstatisticallycloser to thecontrol (7.01).Forconsistency, adifferent

173

behaviorforallbeverageswasnotedandthisvariedfromthescaleof“dislikedslightly”tobeing“indifferent”.

As for an overall evaluation by panelists, the beverages were classified as “dislikedslightly”,withtheexceptionofbeveragesCandEwhichwereclassifiedas“indifferent”and“likedslightly”,respectively,beingclosetothenotegiventocommercialwhitewine.

The acceptability index of commercial winewas superior (68.1%) to all fermentedbeveragespreparedbyusingumbudeveloped,includingthebestfermentedumbubeverageE, which had 66.7% acceptability. The acceptability was lower (44.8%) in the fermentedbeverage D. Similar to data obtained in microbiological analysis, fermented beveragespreparedbyusingpulpwithoutpasteurization(beveragesAandD)hadloweracceptability.

CONCLUSIONS The fermented umbu beverage presented the physico‐chemical characteristics in

accordancewithstandardsestablishedbyBrazilianlegislation,withtheexceptionofvolatileacidity.Thefermentedbeveragemadewiththermallytreatedpulphavingaconcentrationof250gL‐1,28°Brix,pH4.5combinedwiththepasteurizationofthemustat50°Cwasofbestquality as it obtained thebest scores of sensory attributes. Furthermore, the experimentsshowed that to ensure analytical, sensory and microbiological quality of the productmanufactured,pasteurizationofgrapemustisanimportantstep.Finally,itisconcludedthattheproductionof fermentedbeverage canbea viable alternative for theusageof surplusfruitcrops.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The authors thank theFederalUniversity of Lavras (MicrobiologyLaboratoryof the

BiologyDepartment)forprovidingtheyeastandCNPqforfinancialsupport.

Literature cited

Abe,L.T.,Mota,R.V., Lajolo,F.M., andGenovese,M.I. (2007).Compostos fenolicose capacidadeantioxidantedecultivares de uvas Vitis labrusca L. e Vitis vinifera L. Food Sci. Technol. (Campinas) 27 (2), 394–400https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101‐20612007000200032.

Almeida, M.M., Tavares, D.P.S.A., Rocha, A.S., Oliveira, L.S.C., Silva, F.L.H., and Mota, J.C. (2006). Cinetica daproduçao do fermentado do fruto do mandacaru. Rev. Bras. Prod. Agroind. 8 (1), 35–42 https://doi.org/10.15871/1517‐8595/rbpa.v8n1p35‐42.

AOAC. (1984). Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists (Washington:AssociationofOfficialAnalyticalChemistis),p.844–845.

Arruda, A.R., Casimiro, A.R.S., Garruti, D.S., and Abreu, F.A.P. (2003). Processamento de bebida fermentada debanana.CienciaAgronomica34(2),161–167.

Arruda, A.R., Casimiro, A.R.S., Garruti, D.S., and Abreu, F.A.P. (2007). Caracterizaçao fısico‐quımica e avaliaçaosensorialdebebidafermentadaalcoolicadebanana.CienciaAgronomica38(4),377–384.

Asquieri, E.R., Rabelo, A.M.S., and Silva, A.G.M. (2008). Fermentado de jaca: estudo das caracterısticas fısico‐quımicasesensoriais.FoodSci.Technol.(Campinas)28(4),881–887https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101‐20612008000400018.

Asquieri, E.R., Silva, A.G.M., and Candido, M.A. (2009). Aguardente de jabuticaba obtida da casca e borra dafabricaçaodefermentadodejabuticaba.FoodSci.Technol.(Campinas)29(4),896–904https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101‐20612009000400030.

Auger,C.,Al‐Awwadi,N.,Bornet,A.,Rouanet, J.‐M.,Gasc,F.,Cros,G., andTeissedre,P.‐L. (2004).CatechinsandprocyanidinsinMediterraneandiets.FoodResearchInternational37(3),233–245.

Benassi, T.M., and Cecchi, M.H. (2000). Caracterizaçao de vinhos Riesling Italico nacionais quanto aos acidoscarboxılicoseaalgunscompostosfenolicos.AlimentoseNutriçao11,23–33.

BRASIL.(1998).Leinº7.678,de08denovembrode1988:dispoesobreaproduçao,circulaçaoecomercializaçaodovinhoederivadosdauvaedovinho,edaoutrasprovidencias(Brasılia,DF:MinisteriodaAgricultura,Pecuariae Abastecimento). http://extranet.agricultura.gov.br/sislegis‐consulta/consultarLegislacao.do?operacao=visualizar&id=189(accessedJan.3,2011).

Cavalcanti,N.B.,Resende,G.M.,andBrito,L.T.L.(2000).Processamentodofrutodoimbuzeiro(Spondias tuberosa

174

Arr.Cam.).Cienc.Agrotec.24(1),252–259.

Chiarelli, R.H.C., Nogueira, A.M.P., and Filho, W.G.V. (2005). Fermentados de jabuticaba (Myrciaria Berg):processosdeproduçao,caracterısticasfısico‐quımicaserendimento.Braz.J.Food.Technol.8(4),277–282.

Corazza,M.L.,Rodrigues,D.G.,andNozaki,J.(2001).Preparaçaoecaracterizaçaodovinhodelaranja.Quim.Nova24(4),449–452http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0100‐40422001000400004.

Costa, N.P., Luz, T.L.B., Golçalves, E.P., and Bruno, R.L.A. (2004). Caracterizaçao fısico‐quımica de frutos deUmbuzeiro(Spondias tuberosaArr.Cam.),colhidosemquatroestadiosdematuraçao.Biosci.J.20(2),65–71.

Cunha,A.L.,Melo,F.L.,Santos,J.S.S.,Sousa,J.S.,Figueiredo,M.F.,andSantos,S.F.M.(2007).FermentaçaodeAbacaxi(Ananas comosusL.Mer):DeterminaçaodosParametrosCineticos.Paperpresentedat:XVISimposioNacionaldeBioprocesso(SINAFERM)(Curitiba).

Dias,D.R.,Schwan,R.S.,andLima,L.C.O. (2003).Metodologiaparaelaboraçaode fermentadodecaja (Spondias mombin L.). Food Sci. Technol. (Campinas) 23 (3), 342–350 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101‐20612003000300008.

Ferreira, J.C., Mata, M.E.R.M.C., and Braga, M.E.D. (2000). Analise sensorial da polpa de umbu submetida acongelamento inicial em temperaturas criogenicas e armazenadas em camaras frigorıficas. Rev. Bras. Prod.Agroind.2(1),7–17https://doi.org/10.15871/1517‐8595/rbpa.v2n1p7‐17.

Fertonani,H.C.R., Simoes,D.R.S.,Nogueira,A., andWosiacki,G. (2006).Potencialdavariedade Joaquinaparaoprocessamento de suco clarificado e vinho seco de maça. Food Sci. Technol. (Campinas) 26 (2), 434–440https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101‐20612006000200029.

Folegatti, M.I.S., Matsuura, F.C.A.U., Cardoso, R.L., Machado, S.S., Rocha, A.S., and Lima, R.R. (2003).Aproveitamento industrial do umbu: processamento de geleia e compota. Cienc. Agrotec. 27 (6), 1308–1314https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413‐70542003000600015.

Fontana, R.C., Salvador, S., and Silveira, M.M. (2005). Efeito das concentraçoes de pectina e glicose sobre aformaçaodepoligalacturonaseporAspergillus nigeremmeiosolido.Paperpresentedat:XVSimposioNacionaldeBioprocessos(SINAFERM)(Recife,Pernambuco).

Galdino, P.O., Queiroz, A.J.M., Figueiredo, R.M.F., and Silva, R.G. (2003). Avaliaçao da estabilidade da polpa deumbuempo.Rev.Bras.Prod.Agroind.5(1),73–80https://doi.org/10.15871/1517‐8595/rbpa.v5n1p73‐80.

Galvao,M.S.(2002).Estudosobreapos‐colheitadeumbu(Spondias tuberosa)eumbu‐caja(Spondiassp.),comenfase em compostos volateis. Dissertaçao apresentada comoparte dos requisitos para obtençao do tıtulo demestreemCienciadeAlimentos(JoaoPessoa,PB).

Garruti,D.S., Franco,M.R.B., Casimiro,A.R.S., andAbreu, F.A.P. (2002). Efeitoda suplementaçaodomosto edalinhagemdeleveduranacomposiçaodevolateisenosabordofermentadodecaju.CienciaAgronomica33(2),85–92.

Gurak, P.D., and Bortolini, F. (2010). Produçao e aceitabilidade de fermentado de laranja no Alto UruguaiCatarinense. Revista Brasileira de Tecnologia Agroindustrial 4 (2), 132–140 https://doi.org/10.3895/S1981‐36862010000200002.

InstitutoAdolfoLutz.(2005).NormasAnalıticasdoInst.AdolfoLutz(SaoPaulo:InstitutoAdolfoLutz).

Keen,C.L.(2001).Chocolate:foodasmedicine/medicineasfood.JAmCollNutr20(sup5),436S–439S,discussion440S–442Shttps://doi.org/10.1080/07315724.2001.10719181.PubMed

Lopes,R.V.V.,andSilva,F.L.H.(2006).Elaboraçaodefermentadosapartirdofigo‐da‐india.RevistadeBiologiaeCienciasdaTerra6(2),307–315.

Lopes, R.V.V., Rocha, A.S., Silva, F.L.H., and Gouveia, J.P.G. (2005). Aplicaçao do planejamento fatorial paraotimizaçaodoestudodaproduçaodefermentadodofrutodapalmaforrageira.Rev.Bras.Prod.Agroind.7 (1),25–32https://doi.org/10.15871/1517‐8595/rbpa.v7n1p25‐32.

Martins,M.L.A.,Borges,S.V.,Deliza,R.,Castro,F.T.,andCavalcante,N.B.(2007).Caracterısticasdedoceemmassade umbu verde e maduro e aceitaçao pelos consumidores. Pesqui. Agropecu. Bras. 42 (9), 1329–1333https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100‐204X2007000900015.

Martins,M.L.A., Borges, S.V., Cunha, A.C., Oliveira, F.P., Augusta, I.M., and Amorim, E. (2010). Alteraçoes fısico‐quımicasemicrobiologicasduranteoarmazenamentodedocesdeumbu(Spondias tuberosaArr.Camara)verdeemaduro.FoodSci.Technol.(Campinas)30(1),60–67https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101‐20612010005000004.

Mata, M.E.R.M.C., Medeiros, S.S.A., and Duarte, M.E.M. (2005). Microencapsulamento do umbu em po comdiferentes formulaçoes de maltodextrina: estudo do tamanho das partıculas por microscopia eletronica. Rev.Bras.Prod.Agroind.7(1),59–70https://doi.org/10.15871/1517‐8595/rbpa.v7n1p59‐70.

Melo, D.L.F.M. (2005). Potencial biotecnologico do umbu: perspectivas para o semi‐arido. Dissertaçao

175

apresentadacomopartedosrequisitosparaobtençaodotıtulodemestreemDesenvolvimentoeMeioAmbiente(Sao‐Cristovao,SE).

Melo, D.L.F.M., Santos, F.C., Barbosa Junior, A.M., Santos, P.O., Carnelossi, M.A.G., and Trindade, R.C. (2007).Identificationof yeasts isolated from thepulp innature and theproductionofhomemade “umbu”wine.Braz.Arch.Biol.Technol.50(5),887–892https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516‐89132007000500017.

Miller,G.L.(1959).UseofdinitrosalicylicacidreagentfordeterminationofreducingsugarBebidasfermentadasapartirdefrutostropicais.Anal.Chem.31(3),426–428https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60147a030.

Muniz, C.R., Borges,M.F., Abreu, F.A.P., Nassu, R.T., and Freitas, C.A.S. (2002). Bebidas fermentadas a partir defrutostropicais.BoletimCentrodePesquisa–ProcessAlimentare20(2),309–322.

Narain, N., Bora, P.S., Holschuh, H.J., and Vasconcelos, M.A.S. (1992). Variation in physical and chemicalcompositionduringmaturationofumbu(Spondias tuberosa)fruits.FoodChem.44(4),255–259https://doi.org/10.1016/0308‐8146(92)90047‐6.

Neto,E.F.A.,Cruz,J.M.P.,Braga,A.C.C.,andSouza,J.H.P.(2010).Elaboraçaodebebidaalcoolicafermentadadejaca(Artocarpus heterophyllusLam.).RevistaBrasileiradeTecnologiaAgroindustrial4(2),186–197.

Nogueira,A.,Swiech,B.P.,Denardi,F.,andWosiacki,G.(2006).Caracterısticasfısico‐quımicasesensoriaisdesucodemaçaclarificadoefermentado.CienciasExatasedaTerra,AgrariaseEngenharias12(3),15–23.

Pereira, E.A., Brandao, E.M., Borges, S.V., and Maia, M.C.A. (2007). Effect of xanthan gum addition on therheologicalpropertiesofumbufruitpulp.BoletimCentrodePesquisa–ProcessAlimentare25(2),285–294.

Pereira,E.A.,Brandao,E.M.,Borges,S.V.,andMaia,M.C.A. (2008). Influenceofconcentrationon thesteadyandoscillatory shear behavior of umbu pulp. Rev. Bras. Eng. Agric. Ambient. 12 (1), 87–90 https://doi.org/10.1590/S1415‐43662008000100013.

Pinto,P.R.,Borges,S.V.,Cavalcanti,N.B.,Oliveira,V.M.,andDeliza,R.(2001).Efeitodoprocessamentodedoceemmassadeumbuverdeemadurosobresuacomposiçaoeaceitaçao.Aliment.Nutr.12,45–53.

Policarpo,V.M.N.,Borges,S.V.,Endo,E.,Castro,F.T.,Damico,A.A.,andCavalcanti,N.B.(2007).Estabilidadedacorde doces em massa de polpa de umbu (Spondias tuberosa Arr. Cam.) no estadio de maturaçao verde. Cienc.Agrotec.31(4),1102–1107https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413‐70542007000400024.

Santos,S.C.,Almeida,S.S.,Toledo,A.L.,Santana, J.C.C.,andSouza,R.R.(2005).Elaboraçaoeanalisesensorialdofermentadodeacerola(MalpighiapunicifoliaL.).BrazilianJournalofFoodTechnology10,47–50.

Santos,C.T.,Marques,G.M.R.,Fontan,G.C.R.,Fontan,R.C.I.,Bonomo,R.C.F.,andBonomo,P.(2006).Elaboraçaoecaracterizaçao de umabebida lactea fermentada compolpade umbu (Spondias tuberosa sp.). Rev. Bras. Prod.Agroind.8(2),111–116https://doi.org/10.15871/1517‐8595/rbpa.v8n2p111‐116.

SEAGRI. (2010). Secretaria da Agricultura, Irrigaçao e Reforma Agraria. http://www.seagri.ba.gov.br/umbuzeiro.htm(accessedMarch26,2010).

Silva, P.H.A., Faria, F.C., Tonon, B., Mota, S.J.D., and Pinto, V.T. (2008). Avaliaçao da composiçao quımica defermentados alcoolicos de jabuticaba (Myrciaria jabuticaba). Quim. Nova 31 (3), 595–600 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100‐40422008000300025.

Silva, J.L.A., Dantas, D.L.L., Gaspareto, O.C.P., and Filho, R.S.F. (2010). Utilizaçao de abacaxi para elaboraçao devinhos:avaliaçaofısicoquımicaeaceitabilidade.Holos3,108–118https://doi.org/10.15628/holos.2010.401.

TorresNeto,A.B.,Silva,M.E.,Silva,W.B.,Swarnakar,R.,andSilva,F.L.H.(2006).Cineticaecaracterizaçao fısico‐quımica do fermentado do pseudofruto do caju (Anacardium occidentale L.). Quim. Nova 29 (3), 489–492https://doi.org/10.1590/S0100‐40422006000300015.

Ushikubo,F.Y.(2006).Efeitodotratamentoenzimatico,davelocidadetangencialedapressaotransmembrananamicrofiltraçaodaplopadiluıdadeumbu(Spondias tuberosaArr.Cam.).DissertaçaoapresentadacomopartedosrequisitosparaobtençaodotıtulodemestreemEngenhariadeAlimentos(Campinas,SP).

Ushikubo,F.Y.,Watanabe,A.P.,andViotto,L.A.(2006).Effectsofoperatingconditionsandenzymetreatmentonfouling and polarized layer formation during umbu (Spondias tuberosa Arr. Cam.) juice microfiltration.Desalination200(1-3),546–548https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.03.430.

Vinas,P.,Lopez‐Erroz,C.,Marın‐Hernandez,J.J.,andHernandez‐Cordoba,M.(2000).Determinationofphenolsinwinesbyliquidchromatographywithphotodiodearrayandfluorescencedetection.JournalofChromatographyA871(1-2),85–93https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021‐9673(99)01087‐0.

176