Method for determining combination scheme of sugar substitutes for yoghourt

Abstract

The invention provides a method for determining a combination scheme of sugar substitutes for yoghourt. The method comprises the following steps: establishing a sweet curve of a sugar substitute substance to be selected; selecting sugar substitute substances for combination to obtain different sugar substitute substance combinations; carrying out sensory tasting, determining a sugar substitute substance combination close to cane sugar, and establishing a relational expression between theoretically measured sweetness of sugar substitutes in the sugar substitute substance combination close to cane sugar and the somatosensory equivalent of cane sugar; preparing samples of sugar substitute substance combinations with different masses, performing a tasting experiment, and determining the sugar substitute substance combination closest to the somatosensory equivalent of sucrose as the optimal dosage; establishing a prediction equation according to different sucrose somatosensory equivalents and corresponding optimal dosages; and measuring and calculating the sugar substitute substance combination of the preset sucrose somatosensory equivalent through the prediction equation. By means of the method, the sugar substitute combination scheme closer to the actual taste expression in cane sugar can be obtained, the number of test combinations can be reduced, the screening progress can be shortened, and the screening efficiency of the sugar substitute scheme can be greatly improved.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to a method for determining a combination scheme of sugar substitutes for yogurt, belonging to the field of dairy product preparation technology. Background Technology

[0002] Fermented milk refers to a product with a lower pH value made from raw cow (sheep) milk or milk powder through sterilization and fermentation.

[0003] With increasing consumer demand for health products, sugar-free products are gaining popularity. However, the absence of added sugar significantly impacts the product's taste and consumer purchasing decisions. Therefore, sweeteners are needed to achieve a taste as close as possible to that of sucrose. Currently, there are many types of sweeteners available, each with a distinct taste profile compared to sucrose. Consequently, combinations of different sweeteners are necessary to compensate for their respective shortcomings and achieve a taste as close to sucrose as possible. Therefore, selecting a suitable combination of sugar substitutes is crucial for realizing the goal of sugar-free yogurt products. Summary of the Invention

[0004] To address the aforementioned technical problems, the present invention aims to provide a method for determining a sugar substitute combination scheme for making sugar-free yogurt. This method can improve the efficiency of sugar substitute scheme screening, and the obtained sugar substitute scheme is closer to the taste of sucrose.

[0005] To achieve the above objectives, the present invention first provides a method for determining a combination scheme of sweeteners for yogurt, wherein the method includes the following steps:

[0006] (1) Establish the sweetness curve of the candidate sugar substitutes;

[0007] (2) Select sugar substitutes from the candidate sugar substitutes and combine them to obtain different combinations of sugar substitutes;

[0008] (3) Conduct sensory tasting of the combination of sugar substitutes to identify the combination of sugar substitutes that are close to sucrose, and establish the theoretical calculation relationship between the sweetness of the sugar substitutes in the combination of sugar substitutes that are close to sucrose and the perceived sucrose equivalent.

[0009] (4) Based on the above relationship, determine the combination of different masses of sugar substitutes corresponding to different sucrose perceived equivalents. Then, using yogurt as the base, prepare samples using the different masses of sugar substitutes, conduct tasting experiments, and determine the combination of sugar substitutes that is closest to the sucrose perceived equivalent as the optimal dosage.

[0010] (5) Establish prediction equations based on different sucrose equivalences and corresponding optimal dosages;

[0011] (6) Calculate the combination of sugar substitutes with a predetermined sucrose equivalent using the prediction equation.

[0012] In the above determination method, preferably, the horizontal axis of the sweet curve is the sweetness release time in seconds, and the vertical axis is the sweetness intensity.

[0013] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (2), the sweetness curve is established by: establishing the sweetness curve based on the sensory evaluators' perception of the sweetness release rate and sensation of different sweet substances in the oral cavity. Typically, five sensory evaluators can be selected. The sweetness release rate (sweetness release time) refers to the overall sensory evaluator's perception time from the moment they taste the sweet product in their mouth, from the initial sensation of sweetness, to the peak of the sweetness, and then to the gradual disappearance of the sweetness.

[0014] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (2), when selecting and combining sugar substitutes, sugar substitutes that do not meet food safety requirements are excluded. Food safety requirements refer to current laws and regulations in the food sector. Additionally, sugar substitutes that have been reported in consumer food safety incidents or academic risk reports are also excluded.

[0015] In the above determination method, it can be seen from the sweetness curve of a single sugar substitute that a single non-sugar sweetener (sugar substitute) or sugar alcohol sweetener has a different sweetness curve than sucrose and cannot achieve the same sensory experience as sucrose. Non-sugar sweeteners mainly include high-intensity sweeteners such as sucralose and acesulfame potassium. These sweeteners have high sweetness and no physical sensation, and their sweetness develops faster than sucrose and has a lingering effect. Sugar alcohol sweeteners mainly include xylitol and maltitol. These sweeteners have little difference in sweetness compared to sucrose, and they provide energy and a physical sensation. Their sweetness develops after sucrose. Therefore, by combining non-sugar sweeteners and sugar alcohol sweeteners in a coordinated and fitted manner, the same taste as sucrose in the product can be achieved to the greatest extent. Preferably, the sugar substitute combination includes non-sugar sweeteners and sugar alcohol sweeteners.

[0016] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (3), the combination of sugar substitutes close to sucrose refers to a combination of sugar substitutes whose perceived sweetness is comparable to that of sucrose. Perceived sweetness refers to the sweetness actually felt by the sensory evaluator after tasting the sugar substitute. During the above tasting process, the sweetness of sucrose is used as the benchmark for determination. That is, the sensory evaluator tastes different sugar substitutes or combinations of sugar substitutes respectively, compares their perceived sweetness with that of sucrose, and selects the sugar substitutes or combinations of sugar substitutes that are comparable to the perceived sweetness of sucrose. For example, the theoretical sweetness of sucralose is 600 times that of sucrose (theoretical sweetness is the inherent sweetness of the sweetener, which can be determined by consulting data). Therefore, the theoretical sweetness of a solution made from 0.1g of sucralose and 60g of sucrose should be the same. However, if the combination of sucralose and other sugar alcohols has a synergistic effect, it will enhance the sweetness, producing a 1+1>2 effect, resulting in the perceived sweetness obtained by actual tasting being greater than the theoretically calculated sweetness.

[0017] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (3), the sensory tasting is performed in the following manner:

[0018] For different combinations of artificial sweeteners, five sensory evaluators conducted sensory evaluations, and the average score of the five sensory evaluators was taken as the score of the combination of artificial sweeteners. The scoring was based on the standard that the perceived sweetness was the same as or equivalent to that of sucrose. The scoring range was 1-10 points. A score of 10 points was considered to meet the above standard, that is, the perceived sweetness was the same as that of sucrose. A score of 8 points or above indicated that the perceived sweetness was acceptable, that is, the perceived sweetness was equivalent to that of sucrose. A score below 8 points was considered that the perceived sweetness was not equivalent to that of sucrose.

[0019] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (3), the relationship between the theoretically calculated sweetness of the sugar substitutes in the sugar substitute combination that is close to sucrose and the perceived sweetness of sucrose is established by performing a binary regression fitting between the sweetness curves of the two sugar substitutes included in the sugar substitute combination and the perceived sweetness of sucrose. The perceived sweetness of sucrose refers to the sweetness presented by the sensory evaluator after tasting the sugar substitute or combination of sugar substitutes, compared with the perceived sweetness of a sucrose standard solution, to determine the sucrose standard solution with the corresponding sweetness, and the concentration value of the sucrose standard solution is used as the perceived sweetness of the sugar substitute or combination of sugar substitutes.

[0020] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (4), the optimal dosage refers to the dosage of the combination of sugar substitutes with different masses whose perceived sweetness is closest to that of the sucrose to be simulated.

[0021] In the above determination method, preferably, in step (5), the prediction equation is established by performing a binary regression fitting between different sucrose perceived equivalents and the corresponding optimal dosage.

[0022] In the above determination method, preferably, step (6) further includes a process of conducting a taste test on the calculated combination of sugar substitutes and excluding combinations of sugar substitutes that do not meet the taste test requirements.

[0023] In the above determination method, step (3) is to determine which sugar substitutes are suitable for combination to replace sucrose through sensory evaluation. This does not involve the selection or confirmation of specific dosage. After determining the combination of sugar substitutes, a binary regression fitting is performed based on the sweetness curve of the sugar substitutes contained in the combination and the perceived sweetness of sucrose, thereby establishing the relationship between the perceived sweetness of sucrose and the sugar substitutes. For example: perceived sweetness of sucrose = (theoretical sweetness of the first sugar substitute) × A + (theoretical sweetness of the second sugar substitute) × B ± c, where A is the amount of the first sugar substitute added, B is the amount of the second sugar substitute added, and c is the compensation or loss of the synergistic effect of the sugar substitutes. Through the sensory evaluation results of the taste and synergistic evaluation, this value will eventually be fed back to the different combinations of the quality of the two compositions.

[0024] Step (4) involves calculating the relationship between sweetness and perceived sucrose equivalent based on the theoretical formula established in step (3) for the sugar substitutes in the sugar substitute combination that approximates sucrose. This determines the mass combination of various sugar substitutes in the corresponding sugar substitute combination. For example, when the sugar substitute combination contains first-generation and second-generation sugar substitutes, the mass of each is determined according to the above formula. In this process, for the same sugar substitute combination, several different mass combinations can be selected, and different yogurt samples can be prepared for tasting experiments to determine the sugar substitute combination that is closest to the perceived sucrose equivalent, which is then used as the optimal dosage.

[0025] In step (4), the optimal dosage can be determined for several sucrose equivalents. Step (5) is to perform regression fitting based on these sucrose equivalents and optimal dosages to determine the relationship between the sweetness of ...

[0026] After determining the above prediction equation, when it is necessary to determine the sugar substitute that can be replaced for a certain sweetness of sucrose (i.e. a certain sucrose equivalent), the sucrose equivalent can be directly substituted into the above prediction equation to obtain the specific combination of sugar substitutes (including specific sugar substitutes and their dosage).

[0027] Based on the above prediction equation, multiple combinations of artificial sweeteners can be identified (including specific artificial sweeteners and the content of each artificial sweetener). In order to better substitute, taste tests can be conducted on these combinations of artificial sweeteners, and the combination of artificial sweeteners with an overall product preference greater than or equal to that of full-sugar products (i.e., all added sucrose, without the use of artificial sweeteners) can be selected as the final solution for use in the product.

[0028] The method provided by this invention first establishes the sweetness curve of a single raw material by having sensory evaluators taste different sugar substitutes. Then, suitable combinations of sugar substitutes are screened for sensory tasting, and a sugar substitute scheme that is close to the desired sweetness of sucrose is selected. The theoretically calculated sweetness of the sugar substitute is established as a correlation between the actual sensory perception of sucrose. A binary regression fitting is used to establish a sugar substitute data formula. Finally, the optimal combination of sugar substitutes with other sweetness levels is calculated using this sugar substitute data formula.

[0029] This invention provides a method for determining sugar substitute combinations, applicable to the production of fermented products such as fermented milk, fermented milk beverages, and fermented fruit juices. This method can obtain sugar substitute combinations that more closely resemble the actual taste of sucrose, and can reduce the number of experimental combinations and shorten the screening process, significantly improving the efficiency of sugar substitute selection, and the obtained sugar substitutes more closely resemble the taste of sucrose. Attached Figure Description

[0030] Figure 1 The sugar presentation curves are for some of the sugar substitutes in Example 1.

[0031] Figure 2 This is the sugar presentation curve of another portion of the sugar substitutes in Example 1. Detailed Implementation

[0032] In order to provide a clearer understanding of the technical features, objectives and beneficial effects of the present invention, the technical solution of the present invention will now be described in detail below, but it should not be construed as limiting the scope of implementation of the present invention.

[0033] Example 1

[0034] This embodiment provides a method for determining the combination scheme of sweeteners for yogurt, which includes the following steps:

[0035] 1. Establish a sweetness curve for the candidate sweeteners in yogurt:

[0036] Five sensory evaluators established a sweetness curve by evaluating the rate of sweetness release and sensation of different candidate sugar substitutes in the oral cavity;

[0037] The candidate sugar substitutes include aspartame, sucralose (pure), neotame, sucralose (finished product, with a different purity than the previously mentioned sucralose), acesulfame potassium, white sugar (sucrose), maltitol powder M19-3% (here, 3% refers to preparing a 3wt% aqueous solution for tasting, the same applies below), erythritol C33-3%, SW2051028 (lactitol)-3%, xylitol M47-3%, crystalline fructose YL-G76-3%, and Suc (sucrose)-3;

[0038] The sweet curves are respectively as follows Figure 1 and Figure 2 As shown, the horizontal axis represents the sweetness release time (i.e., the rate of sweetness release), measured in seconds. Specifically, it refers to the time from the start of sweetness release to the end of sweetness release after the artificial sweetener enters the mouth. The vertical axis represents the sweetness intensity, which represents how closely the sweetness of the artificial sweetener is similar to that of sucrose. This intensity is determined by sensory evaluators through a scoring system, with a score range of 1-10. The final score is the average of the scores from 5 sensory evaluators. A score of 10 is considered to be the same as the sweetness of sucrose, and a score of 8 or above indicates that the sweetness is acceptable.

[0039] 2. Choose a suitable combination of sugar substitutes:

[0040] Based on the development needs of the target product, in order to obtain a yogurt product with a conventional sweetness of 70-75%, an evaluation of suitable raw materials was conducted based on factors such as raw material safety, cost requirements, sweetness characteristics, and consumer market feedback. Suitable sugar substitutes were selected, including sucralose (pure), acesulfame potassium, aspartame, xylitol, erythritol, and maltitol. According to the comparison of sweetness curves, it was found that no single sugar substitute (non-sugar sweeteners and sugar alcohol sweeteners) can achieve the same perceived sweetness as sucrose. It is necessary to combine non-sugar sweeteners and sugar alcohol sweeteners in a coordinated manner to achieve the same taste as sucrose in the product as much as possible.

[0041] The selected sweeteners were combined and evaluated by five sensory evaluators. The evaluation criteria were "70% sweetness, similar to sucrose," with scores ranging from 1 to 10. The final score was the average of the five evaluators' scores, where 10 was considered to meet the standard, and a score of 8 or higher indicated acceptable sweetness. The specific results are shown in Table 1.

[0042] Table 1

[0043]

[0044]

[0045] Based on the evaluation results of the combinations in Table 1, the combinations of sucralose with xylitol, sucralose with erythritol, and aspartame with xylitol can all meet the sweetness requirements (i.e., the perceived sweetness close to that of sucrose). However, according to food safety information, there are negative reports of diarrhea associated with erythritol, and the safety of aspartame is controversial. Therefore, considering all factors, the combination of sucralose and xylitol was chosen.

[0046] 3. Establish a theoretical formula for the relationship between the sweetness of sugar substitutes in a combination of sugar substitutes that closely resemble sucrose and the perceived sweetness equivalent of sucrose:

[0047] Based on the theoretical calculations of sweetness of xylitol and sucralose, a binary regression model was established to fit the relationship between the perceived sweetness and sucrose equivalent, i.e., the basic sweetness conversion model:

[0048] The perceived sucrose equivalent Z = x + 600y ± c, where:

[0049] x represents the amount of xylitol added;

[0050] y represents the amount of sucralose added;

[0051] c represents the compensation or loss of the synergistic effect of the sweetener ingredients, which is determined by a sensory evaluator based on the results of sensory tasting. This value will ultimately be fed back to different combinations of the quality of the two compositions. In this embodiment, the value of c is 2.134.

[0052] Based on the above basic sweetness conversion model, calculations were performed according to the theoretical sweetness combination, and the results are shown in Table 2 below. The correction values ​​were provided by sensory evaluators after tasting the samples.

[0053] Table 2

[0054]

[0055]

[0056] Using yogurt products with the same formula as the base material and the amount of added sucrose as a reference, different yogurt samples were prepared. Five professional sensory evaluators tasted the sweetener schemes (i.e., combinations of xylitol and sucralose with different added amounts corresponding to sucrose perceived equivalents Z of 10, 30, 50, 70, and 90) and the corresponding yogurt samples. The sweetener scheme closest to the perceived sucrose equivalent was used as the evaluation criterion to determine the sweetener scheme closest to sucrose, and the optimal data combination was extracted. The results are shown in Table 3 below. The raw material formula for the yogurt product is: 90% raw milk, 7% sucrose or sweetener combination (xylitol + sucralose), 0.5% starch, 0.5% agar, and 0.02% bacterial strains (Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus and Streptococcus salivarius subsp. thermophilus, in a ratio of 1:1000). The preparation process includes:

[0057] 1) Standardize the processing of raw milk;

[0058] 2) Add sweeteners, stabilizers, etc. to the raw milk, bring to a final volume, and circulate and stir for 20-30 minutes;

[0059] 3) Deaerate, homogenize, and sterilize the mixture obtained in step 2);

[0060] 4) Cool to 40℃-43℃, then add the starter culture;

[0061] 5) Ferment for 4-8 hours to obtain fermented milk.

[0062] Furthermore, in the above method, the homogenization pressure is 30-40 / 160-180 bar during homogenization; and the sterilization temperature is 95±5℃ / 300s during sterilization.

[0063] Table 3 Optimal Sugar Substitute Combinations for Perceived Sucrose Equivalence

[0064] Sucrose perceived equivalent Z 10 30 50 70 90 Xylitol (x) + Sucralose (y) (3,0.02) (5,0.050) (9,0.08) (14,0.11) (18,0.13)

[0065] A prediction equation was established by performing a binary regression fitting using the optimal combination of sugar substitutes:

[0066] Sweetness = -4.40 + 1.57 × sweetness of xylitol + 514 × sweetness of sucralose

[0067] The mass of xylitol = 1.323 + 55.95 × the mass of sucralose + 583.5 × the square of the mass of sucralose.

[0068] 4. Based on the above prediction equation, the combination of sugar substitutes corresponding to the required sucrose perceived equivalent can be determined, that is, the optimal combination scheme corresponding to different sweetness levels can be calculated through the prediction equation:

[0069] The predictive equations were used to predict the combinations of sugar substitutes with sucrose perceived equivalents of 65, 70 and 75, respectively. The results were 65: (10, 0.093), 70: (14, 0.107) and 75: (15.23, 0.1084).

[0070] Although the results obtained from the predictive equation are not complete, but are closer to the actual taste performance in sucrose, they can reduce the number of experimental combinations and shorten the screening process. The predicted sugar substitute combination schemes need to be modified and adjusted for practical application to finally obtain the optimal scheme.

[0071] The above describes the specific prediction method used in this embodiment. To verify the effectiveness of the prediction in practice, a taste test was conducted on the product using the model-predicted sweetness gradient scheme (tested and scored by 5 sensory evaluators). The overall product preference score was greater than or equal to that of the full-sugar product (i.e., all added sucrose, no artificial sweeteners). The test results are shown in Table 4 below:

[0072] Table 4

[0073] Test product Success criteria Indicator Performance Indicator compliance status M (Sweetness 65) Overall preference ≥ Full sugar products >(62VS.52) √ B (Sweetness 70) Overall preference ≥ Full sugar products =(53VS.52) √ P (sweetness 75) Overall preference ≥ Full sugar products >(65VS.52) √

[0074] The tests show that the prediction scheme with a sweetness level of 70 (14, 0.107) is the same as the evaluation result of the whole sucrose product, while the test results with a sweetness level of 65 (10, 0.093) and 75 (15.23, 0.1084) are both greater than those of the whole sucrose product, indicating that the prediction results are valid.

Claims

1. A method for determining a combination of sugar substitute materials for a yogurt, wherein, The determination method comprises the following steps: (1) establishing a sweetness release curve of the candidate sugar substitute; (2) selecting sugar substitutes for combination to obtain different sugar substitute combinations in the candidate sugar substitutes; (3) performing sensory tasting on the sugar substitute combinations to determine a sugar substitute combination close to sucrose, and establishing a relationship between the theoretically calculated sweetness of the sugar substitute in the sugar substitute combination close to sucrose and the sucrose sensory equivalent; (4) determining different masses of the sugar substitute combination corresponding to different sucrose sensory equivalents according to the above relationship, then preparing samples using the different masses of the sugar substitute combination as the base material of yogurt, and performing a tasting experiment to determine a sugar substitute combination closest to the sucrose sensory equivalent as the optimal dosage; (5) establishing a prediction equation with different sucrose sensory equivalents and the corresponding optimal dosages; (6) measuring the sugar substitute combination of a predetermined sucrose sensory equivalent by using the prediction equation.

2. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein The horizontal coordinate of the sweetness release curve is the sweetness release time, and the vertical coordinate is the sweetness intensity.

3. The determination method according to claim 1 or 2, wherein, The sweetness release curve is established by the following method: According to the sweetness release speed and feeling of different sugar substitutes in the mouth of sensory evaluators, a sweetness release curve is established.

4. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein In the step (2), the sugar substitutes that do not meet the requirements of food safety are excluded when the sugar substitutes are combined.

5. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein In the step (3), the sugar substitute combination close to sucrose refers to a sugar substitute combination with a sensory sweetness equivalent to that of sucrose.

6. The determination method according to claim 5, wherein In the step (3), the sensory tasting is performed in the following manner: For different sugar substitute combinations, 5 sensory evaluators perform sensory scoring, and the average score of the 5 sensory evaluators is taken as the score of the sugar substitute combination, wherein the scoring is performed according to the standard that the sensory sweetness is the same as or equivalent to that of sucrose, and the scoring range is 1-10 points. 10 points are regarded as meeting the above standard, i.e. the sensory sweetness is the same as that of sucrose. A score of 8 or more indicates that the sensory sweetness can be accepted, i.e. the sensory sweetness is equivalent to that of sucrose. A score of less than 8 indicates that the sensory sweetness is not equivalent to that of sucrose.

7. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein In the step (3), the relationship between the theoretically calculated sweetness of the sugar substitute in the sugar substitute combination close to sucrose and the sucrose sensory equivalent is established by binary regression fitting of the sweetness release curve of the sugar substitute contained in the sugar substitute combination and the sucrose sensory equivalent.

8. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein In the step (4), the optimal dosage refers to the dosage of the sugar substitute combination with the closest sensory sweetness to that of sucrose among different masses of the sugar substitute combination.

9. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein, In the step (5), the prediction equation is established by binary regression fitting of different sucrose sensory equivalents and the corresponding optimal dosages.

10. The determination method according to claim 1, wherein, The step (6) further comprises a process of excluding the sugar substitute combination that does not meet the taste test requirements.

Images