�ݺ�ߣ

Development of Semolina based Probiotic Yogurt

• The food industry has experienced significant innovation due to the
growing demand for functional foods, especially those enriched with
probiotics.
• Yogurt is renowned for its probiotic content and nutritional value. It is
a well-balanced diet that has nearly all the nutrients found in milk, but
in a more easily digested form.
INTRODUCTION
2

INTRODUCTION (Cont.)
3
• Semolina, made from durum wheat, is rich in protein, fiber,
carbohydrate, vitamins and minerals that provides energy and helps in
weight loss, blood cell production and support brain functions.
• The combination of the probiotic-rich environment of yoghurt with the
nutritional richness of semolina have the potential to provide a
wholesome dietary with enhanced functional and nutritional qualities.
Literature reveals no such research work has been conducted so far.

4
 Development of semolina based yogurt and determination of its qualitative
analysis viz. pH, titratable acidity, syneresis and water holding capacity.
 Evaluation of physicochemical properties viz. moisture, ash, protein and fat
content of semolina based and plain yogurt.
 Determination of antibacterial activity of semolina based and plain yogurt.
OBJECTIVES

Manufacturing Process of Semolina based Yogurt
6
Procurement of milk
Milk boiled (above 100°C) for 5 minutes
8% sugar was added and boiled (above 100°C) again for 5 minutes
Added Semolina to the milk at different proportions (0%, 2%, 4% and 6%)
Continuous stirring
Heating above 100°C for 5 minutes followed by cooling at 40°C
Inoculation with 2% starter culture
Incubation at 37°C for 8 hours
Storage at 4°C
Figure 1: Semolina based probiotic Yogurt

Proportion of various treatments of Yogurt
Treatments Percentage (%) of Semolina
T0 0
T1 2
T2 4
T3 6
7

Semolina
Based
Yogurt
Qualitative
Analysis
Physicochemical
Analysis
Antibacterial
Activity
Analysis
METHODS
8
Disk Diffusion
Method
Protein, Fat,
Ash & Moisture
Determination
pH, Titratable
Acidity, Syneresis
& Water Holding
Capacity

Changes in pH value of different treatment groups of semolina based yogurt on
day 1, 7, 14 & 21
• * = Significance ( P<0.05)
• As the concentrations of semolina increased (T1< T2< T3), the pH of the treatment groups
decreased gradually compared to plain yoghurt (T0).
• T3 is considered the best medium for LAB growth in yogurt.
1 7 14 21
4.05
4.1
4.15
4.2
4.25
4.3
4.35
4.4
4.45
4.5
4.55
4.5 4.48 4.39 4.35
4.46 4.38 4.35 4.31
4.39 4.34 4.24 4.22
4.38 4.32 4.22 4.2
Storage Day
T0
T1
T2
T3
pH
*
*
*
*
*
*

Changes in Titratable Acidity of different treatment groups of semolina based
yogurt on day 1, 7, 14 & 21
• T0, T1, T2 & T3 refers control , 2% , 4% & 6% semolina enriched yogurt respectively.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
0.66 0.69
0.74
0.79
0.73
0.77 0.8
0.86
0.77
0.82
0.88 0.91
0.81
0.86
0.92 0.94
Storage Day
T0
T1
T2
T3
Titratable
Acidity
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

12
Moisture content (%) of different categories of semolina based yoghurt on day 1, 7, 14 & 21
1 7 14 21
70
72
74
76
78
80
82
84
86
T0 T1 T2 T3
Storage day
%
Moisture
• The moisture content of all the treatments of yogurt gradually decreased over time during
storage.
• T3 had the lowest moisture content (82.41%) on the first day, decreased less in amount
compared to other treatments and reached at (80.49%) , which became the highest rate of
moisture content among the treatment groups during storage day 21.

1 7 14 21
0.78 0.81 0.83 0.84
0.9 0.92 0.93 0.93
0.98
1.03 1.07 1.09
1.05 1.09 1.09 1.12
% Ash
T0 T1 T2 T3
Storage day
*
*
13
• the ash content of T3 from day 7 to day 14 remains relatively stable over time, as minerals might not degrade or
volatilize during storage period.
• The results are similar to findings of both Matter et al., 2016 and Al-Bedrani, 2017, indicating that the ash content
of yogurt changes in very less amount during storage.
Ash content (%) of different categories of semolina based yoghurt on day 1, 7, 14 & 21

1 7 14 21
4.1 4.09 4.07 4.04
4.42 4.39 4.36 4.34
4.51 4.49 4.47 4.46
5.25 5.22 5.18 5.15
% Protein
T0 T1 T2 T3
Storage day
14
• The T3 sample contained more protein content compared to other three treatments (T0, T1 & T2), as its initial protein content was
5.25% on day 1, decreased over time and reached 5.15% on day 21.
• A similar study by (Rashid et al., 2019) stated that, the protein reduction in yogurt over time might be due to the presence of proteases
enzymes in yogurt that spontaneously broke down proteins into smaller peptides or amino acids.
Protein content (%) of different categories of semolina based yogurt on day 1, 7, 14 & 21
* = Significance ( P<0.05)

1 7 14 21
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
5
5.1
4.91
4.94 4.96
5.01
4.87 4.89
4.92 4.94
4.66 4.67 4.69 4.71
4.63 4.65 4.66 4.68
T0 T1 T2 T3
%
Fat
Storage day
15
• Fats do not usually degrade during fermentation.
• The fat content might appeared high in the remaining solid portion of the sample,
• Similar study by Hattem and Jerro, 2020 has explained that, the slight changes in fat percentage might
be caused because of the whey separation from the solid part of the yogurt during storage.
Fat content (%) of different categories of semolina based yogurt on day 1, 7, 14 & 21

16
• Syneresis in the yogurt increased over storage time, particularly in treatments with lower semolina
content.
• The high quality of the yogurt during storage can be measured by the less percentage of syneresis it
contained, which was mentioned by Dönmez et al., 2017.
Syneresis (%) of different categories of semolina based yoghurt on day 1, 7, 14 & 21
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
26.99
30.21
31.82
36.05
14.25
15.03
17.74
19.35
6.33
8.04
9.67 10.36
4.52
6.2
6.59
7.67
T0
T1
T2
T3
Storage day
%
Syneresis
* = Significance ( P<0.05)

17
• T2 and T3 showed higher WHC than the other two treatments (T0, T1).
• High WHC in food helps to maintain the texture, consistency, and overall quality of food products. Various
macromolecules such as starch, pectin, protein retain the moisture in food and decrease syneresis (Dimitrellou et
al., 2020).
Water Holding Capacity (%) of different categories of semolina based yoghurt on day
1, 7, 14 & 21
1 7 14 21
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
70.3 67.28 65.32
62.21
85.59 84.43 83.97
79.75
92.65 92.04 91.77
87.96
95.63 95.34 94.82 93.42
T0
T1
T2
T3
Storage days

18
Anti-bacterial Activity
Antibacterial activity analysis of
yogurt with different treatments
was assessed by disk diffusion
method.
Figure 1: Anti-bacterial activity of semolina based yogurt against Pseudomonas aeruginosa,
Vibrio cholerae, Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus

19
Zone of inhibition of different yoghurt samples against P. aeruginosa,V. cholera, E. coli
and S. aureus
P.aeruginos
a
V. cholerae E. coli S. aureus
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
6.67 7.66 7.21
6.33
11
9
12.35 13
14.52 14.45
18.33 17.28
19.68
22.37
23.87
25.24
26 26.29
28.67 29.12 Treatment
0
Treatment
1
Treatment
2
Treatment
3
Azithromyc
in
Zone
of
inhibition
(mm)
Pathogenic Bacteria
It was observed that yoghurt without the
addition of semolina showed very less
antibacterial activity towards the four
types of pathogenic bacteria. Yogurt
with 2%, 4% & 6% concentration of
semolina had significant effect (p<0.05)
on the antibacterial activity. No
pathogenic bacteria showed resistance
towards the yogurt treatments with
semolina. Highest zone of inhibition
(29.12 mm) was found with
azithromycin against Staphylococcus
aureus. Treatment 3 exhibited best
antibacterial activity among the four
treatments and showed significant
activity (p<0.05) as compared to
treatment 1(control).

• The findings of all the analysis revealed that, the 3 & 6% concentrated
semolina enriched yogurt showed higher nutritional value compared to other
treatment groups.
• The water holding capacity of semolina based yogurts were much higher even
in storage, the syneresis rate was very low which helped to maintain its
texture, consistency and overall quality for a long time during storage.
• semolina added extra protein value into yogurt and the pH, TTA, moisture
content were changed significantly during the study period.
• In addition, semolina based yogurt showed higher antibacterial resistance
compared to the plain yogurt.
20
Conclusion

Possible limitations of the present study:
 A few people suffer from gluten intolerance, as semolina is high in gluten,
semolina yogurt should be avoided by them.
 Due to short period of time, the carbohydrate determination of semolina
enriched yogurt was not conducted.
21
LIMITATIONS

• This study can initiate the trend of manufacturing functional dairy
foods with grains.
• Commercialization of semolina based probiotic yogurt.
22
Recommendations

Nutritional Enhancement
Commercialization of semolina based yogurt.
Functional Food Applications
23
FUTURE PROSPECTS

References
• Abby K Thompson & Paul Moughan (2008). Innovation in the foods industry: Functional foods.
Innovation: Management, Policy & Practice, 10(1), 61-73.
• Abebe Bereda, Mitiku Eshetu and Zelalem Yilma. 2014. Microbial properties of Ethiopian
dairyproducts: A review. African Journal of Microbiology Research 8 (23):264–2271.
doi:10.5897/AJMR2014.6733.
• Fisberg, M., & Machado, R. (2015, july 14). History of yogurt and current patterns of consumption.
Nutrition Reviews, 73, 4-7.
• Kunal M. Gawai, S. P. (2017). Chapter 3 - Stabilizers, Colorants, and Exopolysaccharides in Yogurt.
Yogurt in Health and Disease Prevention, 49-68.
• Tridip K. Das, Shrabani Pradhan, Sudipta Chakrabarti, Keshab Chandra Mondal, Kuntal Ghosh.
(2022). Current status of probiotic and related health benefits. Applied Food Research, 2(2),
100185.
• Varzakas, T. (2016). Quality and Safety Aspects of Cereals (Wheat) and Their Products. Critical
Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 56(15), 2495–2510.
• Dimitrellou, D., Solomakou, N., Kokkinomagoulos, E., & Kandylis, P. (2020). Yogurts
supplemented with juices from grapes and berries. Foods, 9(9), 1158.
24

�ݺ�ߣ

Development of Semolina based Probiotic Yogurt.pptx

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Development of Semolina based Probiotic Yogurt.pptx (20)

More from ssuser13a3c4 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Development of Semolina based Probiotic Yogurt.pptx