guava chemical organoleptic leathersINTRODUCTIONMATERIAL AND METHODSPawpaw Carica papaya is popularly grown in theRawmaterials Fresh fruits of Guava Alhabad variety World J Agric Sci ID: 98817
Download Pdf The PPT/PDF document "World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 1..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
World Journal of Agricultural Sciences 1 (1): 50-51, 2005ISSN 1817-3047© IDOSI Publications, 2005Corresponding Auhtor:Dr. O.A. Ashaye, Institute of Agriculture Research and Training, Obafemi Awolowo University, P.M.B. 5029, Ibadan, NigeriaChemical and Organoleptic Characterization of Pawpaw and Guava LeathersO.A. Ashaye, S.O. Babalola, A.O. Babalola, J.O. Aina and S.B. Fasoyiro12232Institute of Agriculture Research and Training, guava chemical organoleptic leathersINTRODUCTIONMATERIAL AND METHODSPawpaw (Carica papaya) is popularly grown in theRawmaterials: Fresh fruits of Guava (Al-habad) variety World J. Agric. Sci., 1 (1): 50-51, 2005Table 1: Chemical composition of fresh pawpaw and guava fruits and leathersMoistureCrude proteinFatCarbohydrateCrude fibreAshVitamin C(mg/100 g)Fresh fruitPawpaw87.67a0.63d0.20c9.6d0.80c0.73b83.33cGuava82.00b1.37c0.57b14.23c1.37b260.00aLeatherPawpaw18.47c2.10b0.49b76.80a2.40a2.67a74.70dGuava16.40c2.67a1.37a74.50b2.67a237.00bTable 2: Organoleptic properties for guava and pawpaw leathersOverallSampleSweetnessFruitinessSmellChewinessToughnessColouracceptabilityGuava5.26.46.86.46.4baaaaaaPawpaw5.05.05.45.45.2abbaabbMeans in the same column followed by the same letter are not significantly different from each other at p 0.05RESULT AND DISCUSSIONREFERENCESChemical composition of fresh pawpaw and guava1.Pantastico, E.B., 1975. Post-harvest physiology.fruitsand leathers: It was observed that the moistureHandling and utilization of Tropical and sub tropicalcontent of fresh pawpaw fruits was significantlyfruits and vegetables. Av 1 Pub Co., Inc, wesorthigher than other samples (Table 1). The moistureconnecticut, pp: 103-127.content of pawpaw and guava leather were not2.Raab, C., and N. Oehler, 1976. Making dried fruitsignificantlydifferent from each other. This differenceleather fact sheet 232. 0 regon state University Extcould be due to drying during processing to leather.Service.Crude protein and fat content of guava leather was3.Cruess W.V., 1969. Commercial Fruit and Vegetablealso significantly higher than other samples. There wasProducts (4th Edn.), New York: Mc Graw-Hill.no significant difference in the crude fibre and ash4.Lodge, N., 1981. Kiwi fruit: Two novel processedcontents of pawpaw and guava leathers although the ashproducts food Technology In New Zealand,contents of these leathers are higher than their freshpp: 35-43counterpartsthis may be due to reduction in moisture5.Collins, J.L. and L.W. Hutsell, 1987. Physical,content as a result of processing and varietal influence.Chemical, Sensory and Microbiology attributesAlso, pawpaw leather was significantly higher inof sweet potato leather. J. Food Sci., 52:carbohydrate as compared with other samples. Vitamin C646-648.contents of both leathers were significantly lower than6.CheMan, Y.B. and S. Raya, 1983. Satu Kajian awalfresh fruits due to processing. Vitamin C is known to bememperoses Keledek Keping (A preliminary Studyunstable as temperature increases.on processing of sweet potato leather, Pertanika,Organoleptic properties of guava and Pawpaw7.AOAC., 1970. Official Methods of Analysis, 11thleathers:Table 2 shows the organoleptic characterizationEdn., Association of Official Analysis Chemistsofguava and pawpaw leathers. Guava leather wasWashington, DC.significantly higher than pawpaw leather in fruitiness,8.Larmond, E., 1977. Laboratory methods for sensorysmell, colour and overall acceptability there was noevaluation of food. Pubication 1284. Canadiansignificant difference between the samples in chewinessDepartment of Agriculture, Hawa.and Toughness. However, Pawpaw leather was higher9.Duncan, D.B., 1955, Mutiple range and MultipleFin sweetness.tests Biometrics, 11: 1-5.61: 17-21.