OIL/FAT COMPOSITION

Abstract

The present invention addresses the problem of providing an edible oil or fat that is usable for any kinds of foods, has an improved oxidation stability and shows a good flavor. A tea extract and sorbitol are stably dispersed in an oil or fat. Thus, the oxidation stability can be improved without increasing the content of the tea extract.

Claims

1. A fat composition comprising 50 to 1000 ppm by mass tea extract, and sorbitol at 0.5 to 15 times as much as the tea extract.

2. The fat composition according to claim 1, comprising an oil-soluble emulsifier.

3. The fat composition according to claim 1, wherein an average particle size of an aqueous phase of the composition is 1000 nm or less.

4. The fat composition according to claim 1, comprising 80 to 800 ppm by mass tea extract.

5. A food comprising the fat composition of claim 1.

6. A method of producing the fat composition of claim 1, comprising mixing an oil phase and an aqueous phase, wherein the aqueous phase is an aqueous solution dissolving a tea extract and sorbitol.

7. The method of producing the fat composition of claim 6, wherein the aqueous phase comprises water at 1 to 5 times as much as the tea extract.

8. A method of improving an oxidative stability of a fat composition, comprising adding a tea extract and sorbitol into an aqueous phase which is dispersed into the fat composition in a production of the fat composition.

Description

EXAMPLES

[0049] Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in detail by way of Examples. In Examples, % and part are weight basis.

Test Examples 1-3

(Preparation Method)

[0050] An oil phase part was prepared in accordance with the formulation described in the column of the oil phase of formulation of fat composition in Tables 1-3. Similarly, an aqueous phase part was prepared in accordance with the formulation described in the column of aqueous phase of formulation of fat composition in Tables 1-3. A temperature of the oil phase part was set to be 25° C., and the aqueous phase part was blended while stirring by HOMOMIXER (TK homomixer MARKII: available from PRIMIX Corporation) at 8,000 rpm. Stirring was performed in this state for 10 minutes to obtain fat composition containing a tea extract and sorbitol.

(Raw Materials and Additives Used)

[0051] As fat, “refined rapeseed oil”, or palm olein “Palm Ace N”, these are manufactured by Fuji Oil Co., Ltd., were used.

[0052] As PGPR, a polyglycerol condensed ricinoleic acid ester “CRS-75”, manufactured by Sakamoto Yakuhin Kogyo Co., Ltd., was used.

[0053] As a tea extract, product name “Sunphenon 90S”, manufactured by Taiyo Kagaku Co., Ltd., the content of polyphenol is 80% or more, was used.

[0054] As sorbitol, “Sorbitol FP”, manufactured by B Food Science Co., Ltd., was used.

[0055] As sucrose, “Sucrose”, manufactured by FUJIFILM Wako Pure Chemical Corporation, was used.

[0056] As glycerin, “glycerin food additive”, manufactured by Kishida Chemical Co., Ltd., was used.

[0057] As erythritol, “ZEROSE,”, manufactured by Cargill Japan, Incorporated, was used.

[0058] As mannitol, “Mannitol ”, manufactured by B Food Science Co., Ltd., was used.

[0059] As lactitol, “Lactitol LC-0”, manufactured by B Food Science Co., Ltd., was used.

[0060] As maltitol, “MALTIDEX”, manufactured by Cargill Japan, Incorporated, was used.

[0061] As glucose, “Glucose”, manufactured by Wako Pure Chemical Corporation, was used.

[0062] As trehalose, “Treha”, manufactured by Hayashibara Co., Ltd., was used.

(Evaluation Method)

Average Particle Size:

[0063] An average particle size was determined by dynamic light scattering. if the particle size was exceeding 1000 nm, it was determined by laser diffraction method.

Evaluation of Oxidative Stability of Fat Composition Containing Tea Extract and Sorbitol:

[0064] A CDM value was determined and evaluated by a CDM value in accordance with “the stability test” of the CDM test of the method of the JOCS Standard Methods for the Analysis of Fats and oils (2.5.1.2-1996) (definition: a clean air is supplied while a sample is heated at 120° C. in a reactor; a volatile decomposition product generated by oxidization is collected in water; and time until the inflection point where the conductivity of water changes rapidly is the CDM value).

[0065] The rate (%) of increase of CDM value was calculated in comparison to the sorbitol-free group, which contained the same amount of tea extract and no sorbitol (for example, in the case of Example 1, the rate of increase of CDM value was calculated in comparison to Example 2, which contained the same amount of tea extract). The fat composition having an extension effect of 10% or more with respect to the CDM value of the composition containing the same amount of tea extract and no sorbitol was regarded as acceptable.

Evaluation of Astringency and Off-Taste of Fat Composition Containing Tea Extract and Sorbitol:

[0066] Taste evaluation was carried out on the fat obtained in Examples and Comparative Examples. Taste evaluation was carried out by four trained panelists. Taste evaluation point was determined by agreement by the panelists. When the point was 1 or more, astringency and off-taste were regarded as acceptable.

2 points: No astringency or off-taste was felt.
1 point: Taste was different from that of Comparative Example 1, but no clear astringency or off-taste was felt.
0 point: Astringency or off-taste was felt.

Test Example 1

[0067] Fat composition was prepared according to the formulation of Table 1 and the above (Preparation method), and evaluation was carried out according to the above (Evaluation method). Results are shown in Table 1.

TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Formulation ative ative ative ative ative ative ative ative ative of fat Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example composition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Oil Rapeseed oil 100.000 99.9791 99.9625 99.9500 99.9250 99.8500 99.7750 99.7000 99.5000 phase Palm Ace N PGPR 0.0000 0.0084 0.0150 0.0200 0.0300 0.0600 0.0900 0.1200 0.2000 Aqueous Water 0.0000 0.0075 0.0135 0.0180 0.0270 0.0540 0.0810 0.1080 0.1800 phase Tea extract 0.0000 0.0050 0.0090 0.0120 0.0180 0.0360 0.0540 0.0720 0.1200 Sorbitol 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ratio of — 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 sorbitol to tea extract Average — 308 293 294 283 304 277 290 286 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 5.6 7.4 8.4 9.3 10.4 13.9 16.7 18.3 19.4 at 120° C. Evaluation 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 of astringency and off-taste Compa- Formulation ative of fat Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example composition 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 15 Oil Rapeseed oil 99.9695 99.9452 99.9270 99.8905 99.7810 99.6715 99.5620 99.2700 phase Palm Ace N PGPR 0.0084 0.0150 0.0200 0.0300 0.0600 0.0900 0.1200 0.2000 Aqueous Water 0.0075 0.0135 0.0180 0.0270 0.0540 0.0810 0.1080 0.1800 phase Tea extract 0.0050 0.0090 0.0120 0.0180 0.0360 0.0540 0.0720 0.1200 Sorbitol 0.0096 0.0173 0.0230 0.0345 0.0690 0.1035 0.1380 0.2300 Ratio of 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 sorbitol to tea extract Average 288 284 311 299 279 281 290 278 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 8.4 10.0 12.0 13.7 21.4 27.3 33.0 43.6 at 120° C. Rate of 14 19 29 32 54 63 80 125 increase in CDM value for sorbitol-free group (%) Evaluation 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 of astringency and off-taste Formulation of fat Comparative Comparative Comparative Comparative Comparative composition Example 10 Example 11 Example 12 Example 13 Example 14 Oil Rapeseed oil phase Palm Ace N 100.000 99.8500 99.7750 99.7000 99.5000 PGPR 0.0000 0.0600 0.0900 0.1200 0.2000 Aqueous Water 0.0000 0.0540 0.0810 0.1080 0.1800 phase Tea extract 0.0000 0.0360 0.0540 0.0720 0.1200 Sorbitol 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ratio of — 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 sorbitol to tea extract Average 296 288 290 310 294 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 11.0 30.8 34.8 37.3 46.4 at 120° C. Evaluation 2 1 0 0 0 of astringency and off-taste Formulation of fat Comparative composition Example 8 Example 9 Example 10 Example 16 Oil Rapeseed oil phase Palm Ace N 99.7810 99.6715 99.5620 99.2700 PGPR 0.0600 0.0900 0.1200 0.2000 Aqueous Water 0.0540 0.0810 0.1080 0.1800 phase Tea extract 0.0360 0.0540 0.0720 0.1200 Sorbitol 0.0690 0.1035 0.1380 0.2300 Ratio of 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 sorbitol to tea extract Average 280 304 299 300 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 43.0 57.5 69.7 90.6 at 120° C. Rate of 40 65 87 95 increase in CDM value for sorbitol-free group (%) Evaluation 2 1 1 0 of astringency and off-taste

[0068] The oxidative stability of the fat composition was more improved by adding a tea extract and sorbitol in combination than the tea extract alone. The effect was more effective as the amount of the tea extract was higher.

[0069] Astringency and off-taste also tended to be reduced when sorbitol was used in combination with the tea extract. The same effect was observed with palm olein.

Test Example 2

[0070] Fat composition was prepared according to the formulation of Table 2 and the above (Preparation method), and evaluation was carried out according to the above (Evaluation method). Results are shown in Table 2.

[0071] However, for Examples 14 and 15, separate aqueous phases of tea extract and sorbitol were prepared and used. That is, for Example 14, 0.036 parts of tea extract and 0.054 parts of water were mixed, and 0.069 parts of sorbitol and 0.045 parts of water were mixed, and for Example 15, 0.036 parts of tea extract and 0.0S4 parts of water were mixed, and 0.133 parts of sorbitol and 0.09 parts of water were mixed, to prepare the each aqueous phases of the tea extract solution and the sorbitol solution.

[0072] Half of the oil phase part was set to be 25° C., and the tea extract solution was blended while stirring by HOMOMIXER (TK homomixer MARKII: available from PRIMIX Corporation) at 8,000 rpm. Stirring was performed in this state for 10 minutes to obtain intermediate A. Another half of the oil phase part was set to be 25° C., and the tea extract solution was blended while stirring in the same way. Stirring was performed in this state for 10 minutes to obtain intermediate B. Intermediates A and B were mixed to obtain a fat composition containing tea extract and sorbitol.

TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Formulation ative ative ative ative ative of fat Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example composition 1 6 17 18 11 5 12 13 19 Oil Rapeseed oil 100.000 99.8500 99.8485 99.8425 99.8275 99.7810 99.6640 99.1690 98.3740 phase PGPR 0.0600 0.0600 0.0600 0.0600 0.0600 0.1200 0.3000 0.6000 Aqueous Water 0.0000 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540 0.0540 0.1500 0.3000 phase Tea extract 0.0000 0.0360 0.0360 0.0360 0.0360 0.0360 0.0360 0.0360 0.0360 Sorbitol 0.0 0.0000 0.0015 0.0075 0.0225 0.0690 0.1260 0.3450 0.6900 Ratio of — 0.00 0.04 0.2 0.6 1.9 3.5 9.6 19.2 sorbitol to tea extract Average — 298 303 293 288 279 282 310 313 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 5.6 13.9 13.7 14.8 18.4 21.4 24.1 18.3 14.3 at 120° C. Rate of — — −1 6 32 54 73 32 3 increase in CDM value for sorbitol-free group (%) Evaluation 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 of astringency and off-taste Formulation of fat Comparative Comparative Comparative composition Example 20 Example 21 Example 22 Example 14 Example 15 Oil Rapeseed oil 99.9205 99.8410 99.6520 99.6760 99.5020 phase PGPR 0.0225 0.0450 0.1200 0.1200 0.1800 Aqueous Water 0.0225 0.0450 0.0900 0.0990 0.1440 phase Tea extract 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0360 0.0360 Sorbitol 0.0345 0.0690 0.1380 0.0690 0.1380 Ratio of 1.9 3.8 sorbitol to tea extract Average 278 288 307 303 299 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 5.2 5.1 5.5 21.8 24.1 at 120° C. Rate of −7 −9 −2 57 73 increase in CDM value for sorbitol-free group (%) Evaluation 2 2 2 2 2 of astringency and off-taste

[0073] The effect on oxidative stability varied depending on the amount of sorbitol added to the tea extract. The adding amount of sorbitol at 0.5 to 15 times as much as the tea extract was appropriate.

[0074] It was found that sorbitol alone did not improve the oxidative stability. The tea extract and sorbitol did not need to be present in the same aqueous solution.

Test Example 3

[0075] The effects of polyhydric alcohols, sugar alcohols, and sugars other than sorbitol were tested.

[0076] Fat composition was prepared according to the formulation of Table 3 and the above (Preparation method), and evaluation was carried out according to the above (Evaluation method). Results are shown in Table 3.

[0077] In the evaluation of CDM value, the percentage increase (%) of CDM value compared to the group of not adding each components, which are polyhydric alcohols, sugar alcohols, and sugars other than sorbitol, was determined and compared to the effect of sorbitol (Example 5) (Example 7).

TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Formulation ative ative ative ative ative ative ative ative of fat Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example composition 6 8 5 7 23 24 25 26 27 28 Oil Rapeseed oil 99.850 99.700 99.781 99.562 99.781 99.562 99.751 99.502 99.766 99.532 phase PGPR 0.060 0.120 0.060 0.120 0.060 0.120 0.090 0.180 0.060 0.120 Aqueous Water 0.054 0.108 0.054 0.108 0.054 0.108 0.054 0.108 0.069 0.138 phase Tea extract 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 Sorbitol 0.069 0.138 Sucrose 0.069 0.138 Glycerin 0.069 0.138 Erythritol 0.069 0.138 Ratio of each 0.0 0.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 component to tea extract Average 304 290 279 290 291 300 304 279 304 301 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 13.9 18.3 21.4 33.0 12.1 11.5 14.0 14.0 13.8 15.7 at 120° C. Rate of 54 80 −13 −37 1 −23 −1 −14 increase in CDM value for groups not containing each component (%) Evaluation 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 0 2 1 of astringency and off-taste Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Compar- Formulation ative ative ative ative ative ative ative ative ative ative of fat Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example Example composition 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Oil Rapeseed oil 99.766 99.532 99.781 99.562 99.781 99.562 99.781 99.562 99.781 99.562 phase PGPR 0.060 0.120 0.060 0.120 0.060 0.120 0.060 0.120 0.060 0.120 Aqueous Water 0.069 0.138 0.054 0.108 0.054 0.108 0.054 0.108 0.054 0.108 phase Tea extract 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 0.036 0.072 Mannitol 0.069 0.138 Lacitol 0.069 0.138 Maltitol 0.069 0.138 Glucose 0.069 0.138 Trehalose 0.069 0.138 Ratio of each 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 component to tea extract Average 286 297 279 301 292 277 311 294 293 290 particle size (nm) CDM (hr) 13.0 16.8 12.6 17.9 14.0 20.7 10.6 12.6 8.1 9.7 at 120° C. Rate of −6 −8 −9 −2 1 13 −24 −31 −42 −47 increase in CDM value for groups not containing each component (%) Evaluation 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 of astringency and off-taste

[0078] Only sorbitol showed the effect of improving oxidative ability with the tea extract, and it was specific effect.

Storage Test Result for Fat Composition (standing at 60° C.)

(Evaluation of Oxidation Stability of Fat Composition Containing Tea Extract and Sorbitol)

[0079] Astringency and off-taste of the product: Taste evaluation was carried out by four trained panelists. Taste evaluation point was determined by agreement by the panelists. When the point was 1 or more, astringency and off-taste were regarded as acceptable.

2 points: No astringency or off-taste was felt.
1 point: Taste was different from that of Comparative Example 1, but no clear astringency or off-taste was felt.
0 point: Astringency or off-taste was felt.
The rapeseed oil preparation at 80 g was put into a 100 ml glass bottle, and then the bottle was sealed.
The glass bottle was stored in dark at 60° C. for 28 days.
After storage, the peroxide value (POV) was measured and the taste evaluation was carried out. The taste evaluation regarding the degraded odor of fat as the evaluation item was carried out by four panelists on 10-point seals.
Fat with an evaluation score or 5 or higher at the 21st day of storage was regarded as good.
Sensory evaluation, degraded odor of fat: The higher the number, the weaker the degraded odor; the lower the number, the stronger the degraded odor.

TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Evaluation of Sensory Fat astringency POV (meq/kg)/storage evaluation/ compo- and days storage days sition off-taste 0 7 14 21 28 0 7 14 21 28 Compar- 2 0.9 8.3 18.9 36.2 68.0 10 6 3 1 0 ative Example 1 Compar- 1 0.9 4.0 7.9 14.6 24.0 10 8 6 4 2 ative Example 5 Compar- 1 0.9 2.8 5.8 9.8 15.0 10 9 7 5 4 ative Example 6 Compar- 0 0.9 2.0 3.9 6.8 11.8 10 9 8 6 5 ative Example 8 Example 2 0.9 3.0 5.9 9.4 15.7 10 9 7 6 5 4 Example 2 0.9 2.2 3.9 6.4 10.8 10 9 8 7 6 5 Example 1 0.9 1.5 2.4 4.3 7.9 10 9 9 8 7 7

[0080] Examples maintained good POV and taste compared to those with equivalent tea extract content. The quality of Examples were equivalent to that of the Comparative Examples with twice the amount of tea extract. It was also found that Examples were superior in terms of astringency and off-taste.

Application Evaluation (Storage Test with Spraying on Rice Cracker)

(Production Method of Rice Cracker and Evaluation Method)

[0081] Rice cracker was prepared by spraying 20 parts of each fat composition onto 80 parts of commercially available rice cracker (non-oil, no flavoring).

Taste evaluation of the rice cracker was carried out. The results are shown in table 5.

[0082] Astringency and off-taste of the product: Taste evaluation was carried out by four trained panelists. Taste evaluation point was determined by agreement by the panelists. when the point was 1 or more, astringency and off-taste were regarded as acceptable.

2 points: No astringency or off-taste was felt.
1 point: Taste was different from that of Comparative Example 1, but no clear astringency or off-taste was felt.
0 point: Astringency or off-taste was felt.

[0083] Rice cracker was placed in an aluminum vapor-deposited bag, stored at 60° C. in the dark, and the POV of the fat extracted from the rice cracker with hexane was measured over time.

[0084] The taste after storage was evaluated. The taste evaluation regarding the degraded odor of fat as the evaluation item was carried out by four panelists on 10-point scale. Fat with an evaluation score of 5 or higher at the 7th day of storage was regarded as good.

Sensory evaluation, degraded odor of fat: The higher the number, the weaker the degraded odor; the lower the number, the stronger the degraded odor.

TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Evaluation of POV Sensory astringency (meq/kg)/ evaluation/ Fat and storage days storage days composition off-taste 0 7 14 0 7 14 Comparative Comparative 2 1.1 55.3 149.1 10 2 0 Example 39 Example 1 Comparative Comparative 1 1.1 31.1 78.9 10 3 0 Example 40 Example 5 Comparative Comparative 1 1.0 21.9 44.2 10 4 1 Example 41 Example 6 Comparative Comparative 0 1.1 11.2 24.8 10 6 3 Example 42 Example 8 Example 16 Example 4 2 1.1 20.3 42.1 10 5 1 Example 17 Example 5 2 1.0 11.6 20.2 10 6 3 Example 18 Example 7 1 1.1 6.2 12.8 10 7 5

[0085] Examples maintained good POV and taste compared to those with equivalent tea extract content. The quality of Examples were equivalent to that of the Comparative Examples with twice the amount of tea extract. It was also found that Examples were superior in terms of astringency and off-taste. The same result was obtained as for fat composition only.

INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY

[0086] The present invention provides an edible fat with improved oxidative stability and good taste that may be used in all kinds of foods without increasing the amount of tea extract in the fat containing tea extract.