To install StudyMoose App tap and then “Add to Home Screen”
Save to my list
Remove from my list
This lab report will detail the aims, results, and discussions of four different experiments conducted during the semester. After outlining these experiments, recommendations and conclusions will follow. The first experiment aimed to assess the structural properties of sugar in ice cream. The second experiment focused on the physical and sensory properties of wheat flour in pasta extrusion. The third experiment examined the effect of gluten on bread characteristics. The fourth experiment explored vegetarian alternatives to gelatine, assessing their physical and sensory properties.
Please refer to the lab manual for detailed experimental procedures.
The aim of the experiment, "Sugar as a Structural Agent," was to assess the structural properties of different types and quantities of sugar in ice cream.
The results of the experiment are summarized in the table below:
| Variation | Churning Time | Melting Time | Sensory Evaluation (Flavour) | Sensory Evaluation (Texture) | Sensory Evaluation (Iciness) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1: ¼ cup of sugar | 31.49 | 44.55 | Sweet, soft, vanilla tone | Creamy, soft serve ice cream | Creamy and soft |
| Group 2: ½ cup of sugar | 37.00 | 25.00 | Very sweet, taste like store-bought ice cream | Smooth, soft serve consistency | Smooth and creamy |
| Group 3: 1 cup of sugar | 48.09 | 14.02 (lost more energy faster) | Sweet, vanilla aftertaste | Thick consistency soft serve-like | Not very icy-creamy, runny/melting quickly |
| Group 4: Stevia | 32.42 | 33.16 | Strong stevia aftertaste, watery | Soft creamy, mushy blond | Some parts were icy, some were not |
| Group 5: ½ cup of honey | 40.00 | 23.04 | Extremely sweet, nutty and honey taste | Extremely soft | Not icy |
The results indicate that the addition of sugar in ice cream leads to a soft-serve-like texture, contributing to a smooth and creamy consistency (British Sugar, 2018) (Koivistoinen & Hyvonen, 1985).
However, the use of stevia as a sugar substitute resulted in a less favorable product with an altered taste and texture.
Verified writer
Proficient in: Chemistry
4.7 (657)
“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”
Manufacturers may consider using stevia as a low-calorie option to cater to health-conscious consumers (Allied Market Research, 2019; Clemons, 2013).
The aim of the "Extrusion of Grain Products" experiment was to discover the physical and sensory properties of different wheat flours used to make pasta via extrusion.
The results of the experiment are summarized in the table below:
| Variation | Sensory Evaluation (Appearance, Uncooked) | Sensory Evaluation (Appearance, Cooked) | Sensory Evaluation (Texture) | Sensory Evaluation (Flavour) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1: Plain flour | Soft, maintained shape | Smooth, soft, chewy, elastic | Firm in the middle, mushy on the outside | Plain, starchy |
| Group 2: Fine semolina flour | Dry, yellow in appearance | Mushy, soft and soggy | Hard inside, soft outside, spongy | Taste like normal pasta, bland, lack of salt |
| Group 3: Coarse semolina flour | Maintains shape, dry and firm, pale yellow | Firm golden color | Firm throughout, bouncy a bit hard to cut | Bland flavor |
| Group 4: '00' flour | Dry, crumbly | Soft, swollen, mushy yet firm | Gooey more than store-bought | Plain, bland |
| Group 5: Wholemeal flour | Grainy, dry and clumped | Grainy and wet, shiny and soft | Chewy, grainy and tough | Floury and bland |
The experiment results are influenced by functional properties such as swelling capacity, water absorption capacity, and bulk density of the flours (Chandra et al., 2014; Chandra & Samsher, 2013). The observed differences in appearance, texture, and flavor among the groups can be attributed to these properties. Group 2, with fine semolina flour, had lower water absorption capacity, resulting in a mushy texture. On the other hand, group 3, with coarse semolina flour, showed a firm texture due to its higher water absorption capacity.
The aim of the "Roles of Gluten in Bread" experiment was to assess the effect of gluten formation on bread characteristics.
The results of the experiment are summarized in the table below:
| Variation | Sensory Evaluation (Appearance) | Sensory Evaluation (Texture) | Bite Strength (Peak Force in KG) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1: Low protein flour | 2nd best risen, bouncy, crisp on top | Soft, moist, slightly chewy crust | 0.0258 |
| Group 2: Mid protein flour | Very golden brown, risen, solid crust, fluffy | Very soft, tender, crunch crust, dense base, doughy in mouth | 0.0051 |
| Group 3: High protein flour | High risen, golden, bouncy, smooth crust on top | Very soft, slightly chewy exterior, tender | 0.0209 |
| Group 4: Mid protein flour no kneading | Pale, least golden, uneven shape, fluffy inside, wet | Moist, crumbly, sticky, chewy | 0.015 |
| Group 5: Commercial gluten-free flour mix | Dense, low risen, uneven coloring | Very dense, hard, crunch, crisp | 0.4704 |
The experiment results can be attributed to functional properties of flour, such as water absorption capacity, stability, and moisture content (Suresh Chandra, ResearchGate, 2014). The low protein flour (Group 1) had a higher moisture content, resulting in a soft and slightly chewy texture. In contrast, the commercial gluten-free flour mix (Group 5) had the highest stability, leading to a dense and hard texture. The observed differences in bread characteristics are linked to the functional properties of the flours used.
The aim of the "Vegetarian Alternatives to Gelatine" experiment was to assess the physical and sensory properties of gelatine compared to plant-based gelling agents in the formation of solid gels.
The results of the experiment are summarized in the table below:
| Variation | Sag % | Sensory Evaluation (Appearance) | Sensory Evaluation (Texture) | Sensory Evaluation (Flavour) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1: Gelatine | 4.08% | Wobbly, clear, bubbly | Wobbly, bouncy | Very sweet |
| Group 2: Pectin | 91% | Pale and orange | Thick liquid-like running jam | Sour lemon taste |
| Group 3: Agar | 48.39% | Light gray color | Thick liquid, runny | Sour and bitter flavor |
| Group 4: Carrageenan | 0.49% | Pale (white) | Squishy, wobbly | Sweet but almost flavorless |
| Group 5: Jel-It-In | 47.5% | Cloudy, wobbly, flattened | Running but holding shape | Sweet but acidic, stewed apple |
Sag% = (Measurement 1 - Measurement 2) x 100 / Measurement 1
The results of the experiment are influenced by the functional properties of the gelling agents (Gelita, 2019) (Porto, 2003). Gelatine formed a wobbly and bouncy gel, consistent with its functional properties. Carrageenan, with its low sag percentage, resulted in a squishy and wobbly texture. Agar, while having some gelling properties, produced a thick liquid rather than a solid gel, indicating it may not be an ideal gelling agent for certain applications.
This recommendation is related to the experiment 3.1, sugar as a structural agent. The recommendation that is being made to manufacturers and businesses is to use stevia in ice-cream, as a low calorie, low carb option for individuals and consumers who may be watching their weight or trying to lose weight. The allied market research website (7) states that manufacturers have to increase their product range due to various and everchanging consumer demands such as “health-conscious customers prefer a low calorie and low fat ice cream”, and therefore if they are struggling to produce these products and meet the demands that the customers are asking for, their business will only find it harder to compete in the market. This is when stevia could help to supply manufacturers and businesses with that option to help to grow and develop their business to a wider range of customers. Rachel Clemons wrote on the Choice website (8) that “Stevia is a plant based natural zero kilojoule sweetener”, with low carb, low calories, it is perfect for a sugar alternative because it is also “300 times sweeter than sucrose” meaning when used in ice cream, the ice cream won’t lose its sweetness.
In all the four experiments conducted, the aims were all met to some degree. Although some experiments met the aims more successfully than others. The first experiments aim was successfully met as we discovered that stevia and sugars structural properties are very similar and therefore, they both work in ice cream, although honey does not work so well.
Ingredient Properties and their Impact on Product Quality. (2024, Jan 04). Retrieved from https://studymoose.com/document/ngredient-properties-and-their-impact-on-product-quality
👋 Hi! I’m your smart assistant Amy!
Don’t know where to start? Type your requirements and I’ll connect you to an academic expert within 3 minutes.
get help with your assignment
