Sugar-pickled vegetable foods, sugar-pickling liquid used therefor, and method for producing said foods

Abstract

To provide sugar preserved vegetable foods containing sugar alcohol characterized in displaying a quality similar to that of conventional candied foods while being sugar free or with low sugar (reduced sugar). Sugar preserved vegetable foods, immersion syrup used therefor and method for manufacturing said vegetable foods, wherein 50% or more of the saccharides contained in the sugar preserved vegetable foods consists of sugar alcohol, this sugar alcohol comprising 50% to less than 99.5% maltitol, 0.5% to less than 50% sorbitol, and 5% or less of sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

Claims

1. Sugar preserved vegetable foods that include sugar alcohol as saccharide contained therein, said sugar alcohol comprising 50% to less than 99.5% maltitol, 0.5% to less than 50% sorbitol, and 5% or less of sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

2. The sugar preserved vegetable foods according to claim 1, wherein 50% or more of the saccharides contained in the sugar preserved vegetable foods is sugar alcohol.

3. Immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetable foods that includes sugar alcohol as saccharide contained therein, said sugar alcohol comprising 50% to less than 99.5% maltitol, 0.5% to less than 50% sorbitol, and 5% or less of sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

4. The immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetables foods according to claim 3, wherein 50% or more of the saccharides contained in the immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetables foods is sugar alcohol.

5. Method for manufacturing sugar preserved vegetable foods, wherein drying is conducted after a process of immersing a raw material of sugar preserved vegetable foods into the immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetable foods according to claim 3.

6. The method for manufacturing sugar preserved vegetable foods according to claim 5, wherein said immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetable foods has a sugar concentration of between 30 degrees Brix and 85 degrees Brix.

7. The method for manufacturing sugar preserved vegetable foods according to claim 5, wherein a process of sprinkling a powdered saccharide is conducted after said immersion process.

8. The method for manufacturing sugar preserved vegetable foods according to claim 5, wherein said immersion process is characterized in comprising: (a) a process of immersing the raw material of sugar preserved vegetable foods into the immersion syrup of claim 3, followed by (b) a process of immersing into an immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetable foods having a sugar concentration higher than that of the immersion syrup for sugar preserved vegetable foods used in process (a).

9. The method for manufacturing sugar preserved vegetable foods according to claim 8, wherein said process (b) is conducted at least twice.

Description

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 1

(1) Three types of immersion syrup for sugar preserved foods made solely from sucrose were prepared with a sugar concentration of 55 Brix, 75 Brix and 80 Brix respectively. The prepared pineapple underwent an immersion process where it was immersed in the syrups in the ascending order of sugar concentration, was then pulled out from syrup, and was dried in a 60 C. drier after undergoing a process of sprinkling pulverized sucrose on the pineapple, to produce sugar preserved pineapple.

(2) The immersion time was 3 hours each for the first and second syrups, and 16 hours for the third syrup. The sprinkled sucrose was set to 4% of the pineapple weight after syrup immersion, liquid being drained to an extent that syrup does not drip. The processing conditions are summarized in Table 2.

(3) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(4) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had the sweetness of sucrose and had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth. In addition, the surface was dry without having a powder-like feel, and there were no instances of particles of the sprinkled sucrose or of sticky syrup adhering to the hands. Furthermore, the appearance was that of a small amount of sucrose particles adhering to the surface.

(5) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Sugar concen- Seed Number of tration amount immersion of syrup Presence (% by Syrup processes ( Brix) of seed weight) Ref. Ex. 1 Sucrose 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-1 A 1 80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-2 A 2 60.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-3 A 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-4 A 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 No Ex. 1-5 B 3 40.fwdarw.70.fwdarw.75 Yes 8% Ex. 1-6 C 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-7 D 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-8 D 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 2% Ex. 1-9 D 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 No Ex. 1-10 H 1 80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-11 I 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Ex. 1-12 J 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Comp. Ex. 1-1 E 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4% Comp. Ex. 1-2 E 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 No Comp. Ex. 1-3 F 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 2% Comp. Ex. 1-4 F 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 No Comp. Ex. 1-5 G 3 55.fwdarw.75.fwdarw.80 Yes 4%

(6) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Maltitol Xylitol degree ization Sugar Sorbitol in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol in sugar sugar sugar sugar cose tose crose bitol titol Xylitol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol alcohol Ref. Ex. 1 6.9 6.2 85.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 0.0 Ex. 1-1 2.6 0.8 7.8 16.4 70.7 0.0 0.3 1.4 87.4 18.8 80.9 0.0 0.3 Ex. 1-2 0.8 0.7 2.7 18.2 76.6 0.0 0.3 0.7 95.1 19.1 80.6 0.0 0.3 Ex. 1-3 1.2 0.8 3.6 23.3 70.4 0.0 0.3 0.4 93.9 24.8 74.9 0.0 0.3 Ex. 1-4 0.8 0.8 3.0 23.5 71.2 0.0 0.3 0.4 95.0 24.7 75.0 0.0 0.3 Ex. 1-5 1.2 1.0 5.7 8.7 82.6 0.0 0.3 0.5 91.7 9.5 90.1 0.0 0.4 Ex. 1-6 1.5 0.8 5.9 0.6 85.3 0.0 4.5 1.4 90.4 0.7 94.4 0.0 5.0 Ex. 1-7 1.8 0.7 3.3 35.3 58.0 0.0 0.2 0.7 93.6 37.7 62.1 0.0 0.2 Ex. 1-8 1.2 0.8 2.5 36.4 58.1 0.0 0.2 0.8 94.8 38.4 61.4 0.0 0.2 Ex. 1-9 1.2 0.7 3.2 36.9 57.0 0.0 0.2 0.8 94.1 39.2 60.6 0.0 0.2 Ex. 1-10 2.7 0.8 2.1 4.6 75.4 13.7 0.3 0.4 94.0 4.9 80.2 14.6 0.3 Ex. 1-11 5.7 5.2 15.0 7.5 65.9 0.0 0.3 0.4 73.7 10.1 89.5 0.0 0.4 Ex. 1-12 11.4 9.1 26.4 4.6 47.8 0.0 0.2 0.5 52.6 8.7 90.9 0.0 0.4 Comp. Ex. 1-1 1.1 0.9 3.1 0.0 94.3 0.0 0.4 0.2 94.8 0.0 99.6 0.0 0.4 Comp. Ex. 1-2 0.5 0.7 2.7 0.0 94.9 0.0 0.4 0.8 95.3 0.0 99.6 0.0 0.4 Comp. Ex. 1-3 0.3 0.8 10.2 1.1 72.6 0.0 11.9 3.1 85.6 1.3 84.8 0.0 13.9 Comp. Ex. 1-4 1.0 0.7 9.4 1.2 72.6 0.0 11.9 3.2 85.6 1.4 84.7 0.0 13.9 Comp. Ex. 1-5 1.6 0.9 3.3 60.0 33.3 0.0 0.1 0.8 93.5 64.2 35.7 0.0 0.1

EXAMPLE 1-1

(7) A syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup A in Table 1 was prepared with a sugar concentration of 80 Brix. The prepared pineapple underwent an immersion process where immersion was carried out, then the pineapple that was pulled out from the syrup was dried in a 60 C. drier after undergoing a process where it was sprinkled with maltitol (Lesys made by Mitsubishi Shoji Foodtech Co., Ltd.), to produce sugar preserved pineapple.

(8) The immersion time was 22 hours. During this course, the syrup was heated at the 3rd hour and 6th hour to be boiled down by the amount the sugar concentration had thinned only. The sprinkled maltitol was set to 4% of the pineapple weight after syrup immersion. The processing conditions are summarized in Table 2.

(9) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(10) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have particles of saccharide or sticky syrup adhering to the hands. The appearance, while being slightly more contracted than the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference, was that of a small amount of saccharide particles adhering to the surface like the reference product. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-2

(11) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Example 1-1 except that two types of syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup A in Table 1 were prepared with a sugar concentration of 60 Brix and 80 Brix respectively and that the immersion process was carried out so that the prepared pineapple was immersed in the ascending order of sugar concentration of the syrups. The immersion time was 6 hours for the first syrup and 16 hours for the second syrup. During this course, the first syrup was heated midway at the 3rd hour to be boiled down by the amount the sugar concentration had thinned only. The outline of the other processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(12) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(13) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have sticky syrup adhering to the hands. The appearance, while being barely more contracted than the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference, was that of a small amount of saccharide particles adhering to the surface like the reference product. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-3

(14) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Example 1-1 except that three types of syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup A in Table 1 were prepared with a sugar concentration of 55 Brix, 75 Brix and 80 Brix respectively and that the immersion process was carried out so that the prepared pineapple was immersed in the ascending order of sugar concentration of the syrups. The immersion time was 3 hours each for the first and second syrups, and 16 hours for the third syrup. The outline of the other processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(15) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(16) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have particles of saccharide or sticky syrup adhering to the hands. The appearance, like the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference, was that of a small amount of saccharide particles adhering to the surface. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-4

(17) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Example 1-3, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(18) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(19) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have particles of saccharide or sticky syrup adhering to the hands. The appearance, like the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference, was that of a small amount of saccharide particles adhering to the surface. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-5

(20) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-3 except that three types of syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup B in Table 1 were prepared with a sugar concentration of 40 Brix, 70 Brix and 75 Brix respectively and that the sprinkled maltitol was set to 8% of the pineapple weight after syrup immersion. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(21) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(22) Although one could slightly feel grains of crystals inside, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have sticky syrup adhering to the hands. While it was slightly covered with a thin white powder layer due to the crystal precipitation of maltitol, the appearance resembled that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-6

(23) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-3 except that a syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup C in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(24) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(25) Although the inside was soft and had a somewhat viscous food texture, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had almost no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had shiny portions looking as if glaze had thinly hardened, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-7

(26) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-3 except that a syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup D in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(27) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(28) Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-8

(29) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in method in Example 1-7 except that the sprinkled maltitol was set to 2% of the pineapple weight after syrup immersion. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(30) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(31) Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-9

(32) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Example 1-7 except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(33) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(34) Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had almost no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-10

(35) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-1 except that a syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup H in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(36) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(37) Although one could slightly feel grains of crystals inside, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have sticky syrup adhering to the hands. While it was slightly covered with a thin white powder layer due to the crystal precipitation of maltitol and xylitol, the appearance resembled that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-11

(38) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a syrup with the mixed composition of sucrose and sugar alcohol of syrup I in Table 1, the immersion process was similar to that of Example 1-3 and, after the immersion process where immersion is performed, the pineapple that was pulled out from syrup was subjected to a process of sprinkling a mixed powder of maltitol and pulverized sucrose, then dried in a 60 C. drier. The sprinkled powder was set to 2% maltitol and 2% sucrose with a total of 4% with respect to the pineapple weight after syrup immersion, liquid being drained to an extent that syrup does not drip. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(39) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(40) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface did not have particles of saccharide or sticky syrup adhering to the hands. The appearance, similarly to the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference, was that of a small amount of saccharide particles adhering to the surface. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

EXAMPLE 1-12

(41) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Example 1-11 except that a syrup with the mixed composition of sucrose and sugar alcohol of syrup J in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(42) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(43) Although the inside was soft and had a somewhat viscous food texture, the obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a moist and soft internal food texture resembling that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had almost no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had shiny portions looking as if glaze had thinly hardened, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 1-1

(44) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-3 except that a syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup E in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(45) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(46) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a food texture different from that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose, as maltitol crystals precipitated on the circumference of the sugar preserved food giving a crunchy feel to the food texture of the surface layer, and the internal food texture was that of the vegetable food itself while at the same time the grainy feel of the crystals could be slightly sensed. Furthermore, the inside had a different non-stickiness to the teeth from that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose, with crystals coming into contact with the teeth when chewing. The appearance looked white due to the precipitation of maltitol crystals and had a surface different from that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 1-2

(47) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Comparative Example 1-1 except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(48) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(49) The obtained sugar preserved pineapple had a food texture different from that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose, as maltitol crystals precipitated on the circumference of the sugar preserved food giving a crunchy feel to the food texture of the surface layer, and the internal food texture was that of the vegetable food itself while at the same time the grainy feel of the crystals could be slightly sensed. Furthermore, the inside had a different non-stickiness to the teeth from that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose, with crystals coming into contact with the teeth when chewing. The appearance looked white due to the precipitation of maltitol crystals and had a surface different from that of the sugar preserved pineapple using sucrose. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 1-3

(50) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Example 1-8 except that a syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup F in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(51) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(52) The surface layer as well as the inside of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple were soft, and the surface layer had the food texture of crystal grains while the internal food texture was viscous, sticking to the teeth. The surface was still slightly sticky after drying and the appearance had portions looking as if having a deposit of glaze, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 1-4

(53) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained in the same manner as in Comparative Example 1-3 except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(54) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(55) The surface layer as well as the inside of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple were soft and had the food texture of crystal grains while the internal food texture was viscous, sticking to the teeth. The surface was still extremely sticky after drying and the appearance had portions looking as if having a deposit of glaze, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 1-5

(56) The sugar preserved pineapple was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-3 except that a syrup with the sugar alcohol composition of syrup G in Table 1 was employed. The outline of the processing conditions is summarized in Table 2.

(57) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple are shown in Table 3.

(58) The surface layer as well as the inside of the obtained sugar preserved pineapple were soft and the internal food texture was viscous, sticking to the teeth. The surface was still extremely sticky after drying and the appearance had a luster looking as if having a deposit of glaze, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 4.

(59) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Pineapple 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 1-6 1-7 1-8 1-9 Over-all 11 11 12 12 10 9 10 10 9 judgement Moist 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 feeling Non- 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 stickiness to the teeth Non- 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 2 stickiness Appearance 2 2 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 Comp. Comp. Comp. Comp. Comp. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Ex. Pineapple 1-10 1-11 1-12 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 Over-all 10 12 10 5 5 5 4 4 judgement Moist 2 3 3 0 0 3 3 3 feeling Non- 3 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 stickiness to the teeth Non- 3 3 2 3 3 1 0 0 stickiness Appearance 2 3 3 0 0 1 1 1
[2. Orange]

(60) The sugar preserved food raw material was prepared by cutting an orange in round slices with the skin on.

(61) Here, the results of a preliminary analysis show that the orange used as raw material did not contain sorbitol, maltitol or sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 2

(62) A commercially available sucrose preserved orange was used as reference. This sucrose preserved orange had the sweetness of sucrose and the food texture of the skin as well as of the pulp part was soft. In addition, the appearance was that of a small amount of dried sucrose particles on the surface, without sticky syrup adhering to the hands.

EXAMPLE 2-1

(63) The sugar preserved orange was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-8.

(64) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved orange are shown in Table 5.

(65) The obtained sugar preserved orange had a soft skin and pulp part and had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved orange using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 6.

EXAMPLE 2-2

(66) The sugar preserved orange was obtained in the same manner as in Example 2-1, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(67) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved orange are shown in Table 5.

(68) The obtained sugar preserved orange had a food texture and appearance that were almost the same as in Example 2-1, with a soft skin and pulp part, and had a soft internal food texture resembling that of the sugar preserved orange using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 6.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 2-1

(69) The sugar preserved orange was obtained using a production method similar to that of Comparative Example 1-3.

(70) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved orange are shown in Table 5.

(71) While the obtained sugar preserved orange had a soft skin and pulp part, it had a viscous food texture, sticking to the teeth. Also, the surface was still slightly sticky after drying and the appearance had portions looking as if glaze had thinly hardened, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 6.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 2-2

(72) The sugar preserved orange was obtained in the same manner as in Comparative Example 2-1, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(73) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved orange are shown in Table 5.

(74) While the obtained sugar preserved orange had a soft skin and pulp part, it had a viscous food texture, sticking to the teeth. Also, the surface was still extremely sticky after drying and the appearance had portions looking as if glaze had thinly hardened, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 6.

(75) TABLE-US-00005 TABLE 5 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Sorbitol Maltitol degree ization Sugar in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol sugar sugar sugar cose tose crose bitol titol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol Ex. 2-1 1.5 0.7 1.8 35.8 58.2 0.2 1.8 94.3 38.0 61.8 0.2 Ex. 2-2 1.1 0.7 0.6 37.8 58.0 0.2 1.6 96.1 39.4 60.4 0.2 Comp. Ex. 2-1 1.0 0.8 7.3 1.2 73.0 12.0 4.7 86.2 1.3 84.8 13.9 Comp. Ex. 2-2 1.1 0.8 7.4 1.2 73.0 12.0 4.5 86.2 1.4 84.7 13.9

(76) TABLE-US-00006 TABLE 6 Comp. Comp. Orange Ex. 2-1 Ex. 2-2 Ex. 2-1 Ex. 2-2 Over-all judgement 10 10 5 4 Moist feeling 3 3 3 3 Non-stickiness to the 2 2 0 0 teeth Non-stickiness 3 3 1 0 Appearance 2 2 1 1
[3. Lemon]

(77) The sugar preserved food raw material was prepared by cutting a lemon in round slices with the skin on.

(78) Here, the results of a preliminary analysis show that the lemon used as raw material did not contain sorbitol, maltitol or sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 3

(79) A commercially available sucrose preserved lemon was used as reference. This sucrose preserved lemon had the acid taste of lemon and sweetness of sucrose, and the food texture of the skin as well as of the pulp part was soft, without sticking to the teeth. In addition, the appearance was that of a small amount of dried sucrose particles on the surface, without sticky syrup adhering to the hands.

EXAMPLE 3-1

(80) The sugar preserved lemon was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-8.

(81) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved lemon are shown in Table 7.

(82) The obtained sugar preserved lemon had a soft skin and pulp part and had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved lemon using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 8.

EXAMPLE 3-2

(83) The sugar preserved lemon was obtained in the same manner as in Example 3-1, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(84) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved lemon are shown in Table 7.

(85) The obtained sugar preserved lemon had a food texture and appearance that were almost the same as in Example 3-1, with a soft skin and pulp part, and had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved lemon using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 8.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 3-1

(86) The sugar preserved lemon was obtained using a production method similar to that of Comparative Example 1-3.

(87) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved lemon are shown in Table 7.

(88) While the obtained sugar preserved lemon had a soft skin and pulp part, it had a viscous food texture, sticking to the teeth. Also, the surface was still slightly sticky after drying and the appearance had portions looking as if glaze had thinly hardened, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 8.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 3-2

(89) The sugar preserved lemon was obtained in the same manner as in Comparative Example 3-1, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(90) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved lemon are shown in Table 7.

(91) While the obtained sugar preserved lemon had a soft skin and pulp part, it had a viscous food texture, sticking to the teeth. Also, the surface was still extremely sticky after drying and the appearance had portions looking as if glaze had thinly hardened, differing from when sucrose is used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 8.

(92) TABLE-US-00007 TABLE 7 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Sorbitol Maltitol degree ization Sugar in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol sugar sugar sugar cose tose crose bitol titol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol Ex. 3-1 0.6 0.2 0.0 37.3 58.8 0.2 2.9 96.3 38.7 61.1 0.2 Ex. 3-2 0.6 0.2 0.0 37.9 57.0 0.2 4.1 95.1 39.8 60.0 0.2 Comp. Ex. 3-1 0.0 0.2 6.1 1.5 74.6 12.1 5.5 88.2 1.7 84.6 13.7 Comp. Ex. 3-2 0.4 0.2 6.3 1.5 73.8 12.1 5.7 87.4 1.7 84.4 13.9

(93) TABLE-US-00008 TABLE 8 Comp. Comp. Lemon Ex. 3-1 Ex. 3-2 Ex. 3-1 Ex. 3-2 Over-all judgement 10 10 5 4 Moist feeling 3 3 3 3 Non-stickiness to the 2 2 0 0 teeth Non-stickiness 3 3 1 0 Appearance 2 2 1 1
[4. Mango]

(94) The sugar preserved food raw material was prepared by peeling and pitting a fresh mango, then cutting it into chunks of approximately 50308 mm.

(95) Here, the results of a preliminary analysis show that the mango used as raw material did not contain sorbitol, maltitol or sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 4

(96) A commercially available sucrose preserved mango was used as reference. This sucrose preserved mango had the sweetness of sucrose and had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth. The surface was dry without having a powder-like feel. In addition, there were no instances of sticky syrup adhering to the hands. Furthermore, the appearance was that of a small amount of sucrose particles adhering to the surface.

EXAMPLE 4-1

(97) The sugar preserved mango was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-3.

(98) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved mango are shown in Table 9.

(99) The obtained sugar preserved mango had a moist and soft internal food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved mango using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no saccharide particles or sticky syrup adhering to the hands. The appearance, like the reference sugar preserved mango using sucrose established as reference, was that of a small amount of saccharide particles adhering to the surface. The evaluation results are shown in Table 10.

COMPARATIVE EXAMPLE 4-1

(100) The sugar preserved mango was obtained using a production method similar to that of Comparative Example 1-1.

(101) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved mango are shown in Table 9.

(102) The surface layer of the obtained sugar preserved mango had a crunchy-feel food texture as maltitol crystals precipitated on the circumference of the sugar preserved food, the internal food texture was that of the vegetable food itself while at the same time the grainy feel of the crystals could be slightly sensed. Furthermore, the inside had a different non-stickiness to the teeth from that of the sucrose preserved mango, with crystals coming into contact with the teeth when chewing. The appearance looked white due to the precipitation of maltitol crystals and had a surface different from that of the sugar preserved mango using sucrose. The evaluation results are shown in Table 10.

(103) TABLE-US-00009 TABLE 9 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Sorbitol Maltitol degree ization Sugar in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol sugar sugar sugar cose tose Grose bitol titol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol Ex. 4-1 1.2 1.0 2.5 18.1 76.1 0.3 0.8 94.5 19.2 80.5 0.3 Comp. Ex. 4-1 0.4 1.0 2.8 0.0 94.6 0.4 0.8 95.0 0.1 99.5 0.4

(104) TABLE-US-00010 TABLE 10 Comp. Mango Ex. 4-1 Ex. 4-1 Over-all judgement 11 5 Moist feeling 3 0 Non-stickiness to the 3 2 teeth Non-stickiness 3 3 Appearance 2 0
[5. Strawberry]

(105) The sugar preserved food raw material was prepared by providing a fresh strawberry and a frozen strawberry and respectively cutting them in the lengthwise direction.

(106) Here, the results of a preliminary analysis show that the strawberries used as raw material, fresh as well as frozen, did not contain sorbitol, maltitol or sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 5

(107) A commercially available sucrose preserved strawberry was used as reference. This sucrose preserved strawberry had the acid taste of strawberry and sweetness of sucrose, and the internal food texture was soft, without sticking to the teeth. In addition, the appearance was that of a small amount of dried sucrose particles on the surface, without sticky syrup adhering to the hands.

EXAMPLE 5-1

(108) A sugar preserved strawberry was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-8 with the fresh strawberry as sugar preserved food raw material.

(109) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry are shown in Table 11.

(110) Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved strawberry had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved strawberry using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 12.

EXAMPLE 5-2

(111) The sugar preserved strawberry was obtained in the same manner as in Example 5-1 except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(112) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry are shown in Table 11.

(113) The food texture and appearance of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry were almost the same as in Example 5-1. Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved strawberry had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved strawberry using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 12.

EXAMPLE 5-3

(114) A sugar preserved strawberry was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 5-1, with the frozen strawberry as sugar preserved food raw material.

(115) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry are shown in Table 11.

(116) The food texture and appearance of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry were almost the same as in Example 5-1. Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved strawberry had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved strawberry using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 12.

EXAMPLE 5-4

(117) The sugar preserved strawberry was obtained in the same manner as in Example 5-1 except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed, with the frozen strawberry as sugar preserved food raw material.

(118) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry are shown in Table 11.

(119) The food texture and appearance of the obtained sugar preserved strawberry were almost the same as in Example 5-1. Although the inside was soft and had a food texture like jelly beans, the obtained sugar preserved strawberry had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved strawberry using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying. While it had slightly shiny portions, the appearance was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 12.

(120) TABLE-US-00011 TABLE 11 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Sorbitol Maltitol degree ization Sugar in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol sugar sugar sugar cose tose crose bitol titol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol Ex. 5-1 1.6 0.5 0.5 37.0 58.9 0.2 1.3 96.1 38.5 61.3 0.2 Ex. 5-2 0.7 0.5 0.3 37.5 59.4 0.2 1.4 97.2 38.6 61.2 0.2 Ex. 5-3 0.9 0.5 0.6 38.2 59.1 0.2 0.5 97.6 39.1 60.7 0.2 Ex. 5-4 0.1 0.5 0.5 38.9 59.4 0.2 0.4 98.5 39.5 60.3 0.2

(121) TABLE-US-00012 TABLE 12 Strawberry Ex. 5-1 Ex. 5-2 Ex. 5-3 Ex. 5-4 Over-all judgement 9 9 9 9 Moist feeling 3 3 3 3 Non-stickiness to the 2 2 2 2 teeth Non-stickiness 2 2 2 2 Appearance 2 2 2 2
[6. Burdock]

(122) The sugar preserved food raw material was prepared by chopping a burdock into approximately 50 mm long chunks which were cut into four lengthwise direction then parboiled for 10 minutes.

(123) Here, the results of a preliminary analysis show that the burdock used as raw material did not contain sorbitol, maltitol or sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 6

(124) A commercially available sucrose preserved burdock was used as reference. This sucrose preserved burdock had the particular taste of burdock and sweetness of sucrose, and the internal food texture was soft, without sticking to the teeth. In addition, the appearance was that of a small amount of dried sucrose particles on the surface, without sticky syrup adhering to the hands.

EXAMPLE 6-1

(125) The sugar preserved burdock was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-7.

(126) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved burdock are shown in Table 13.

(127) While one could feel fibers, the obtained sugar preserved burdock had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth very much alike that of the sugar preserved burdock using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying and the appearance, while there were less particles than the sugar preserved burdock using sucrose, was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 14.

EXAMPLE 6-2

(128) The sugar preserved burdock was obtained in the same manner as in Example 6-1, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(129) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved burdock are shown in Table 13.

(130) The food texture and appearance of the obtained sugar preserved burdock were almost the same as in Example 6-1. While one could feel fibers, the obtained sugar preserved burdock had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth very much alike that of the sugar preserved burdock using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying and the appearance, while there were less particles than the sugar preserved burdock using sucrose, was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 14.

(131) TABLE-US-00013 TABLE 13 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Sorbitol Maltitol degree ization Sugar in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol sugar sugar sugar cose tose crose bitol titol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol Ex. 6-1 0.1 0.6 0.3 36.4 57.2 0.2 5.2 93.9 38.8 61.0 0.2 Ex. 6-2 0.1 0.6 0.2 37.7 56.4 0.2 4.8 94.3 40.0 59.8 0.2

(132) TABLE-US-00014 TABLE 14 Burdock Ex. 6-1 Ex. 6-2 Over-all judgement 11 11 Moist feeling 3 3 Non-stickiness to the 3 3 teeth Non-stickiness 3 3 Appearance 2 2
[7. Lotus Root]

(133) The sugar preserved food raw material was prepared by cutting a lotus root into approximately 7 mm thick round slices which were cut into semicircular shapes then parboiled for 10 minutes.

(134) Here, the results of a preliminary analysis show that the lotus root used as raw material did not contain sorbitol, maltitol or sugar alcohol with a degree of polymerization of 3.

REFERENCE EXAMPLE 7

(135) A commercially available sucrose preserved lotus root was used as reference. This sucrose preserved lotus root had the particular taste of lotus root and sweetness of sucrose, and the internal food texture was soft, without sticking to the teeth. In addition, the appearance was that of a small amount of dried sucrose particles on the surface, without sticky syrup adhering to the hands.

EXAMPLE 7-1

(136) The sugar preserved lotus root was obtained using a production method similar to that of Example 1-7.

(137) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved lotus root are shown in Table 15.

(138) While it had a moderate chewy consistence, the obtained sugar preserved lotus root had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved lotus root using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying and the appearance, while there were less particles than the sugar preserved lotus root using sucrose, was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 16.

EXAMPLE 7-2

(139) The sugar preserved lotus root was obtained in the same manner as in Example 7-1, except that the process of sprinkling maltitol after the process of immersion in syrup was not performed.

(140) The results of the sugar content analysis of the obtained sugar preserved lotus root are shown in Table 15.

(141) The food texture and appearance of the obtained sugar preserved lotus root were almost the same as in Example 7-1. While it had a moderate chewy consistence, the obtained sugar preserved lotus root had a moist and soft food texture that did not stick to the teeth resembling that of the sugar preserved lotus root using sucrose established as reference. In addition, the surface had no sticky syrup adhering to the hands after drying and the appearance, while there were less particles than the sugar preserved lotus root using sucrose, was similar to when sucrose was used. The evaluation results are shown in Table 16.

(142) TABLE-US-00015 TABLE 15 Sugar alcohol Sugar with alcohol polymer- with ization polymer- Sorbitol Maltitol degree ization Sugar in in of 3 in Glu- Fruc- Su- Sor- Mal- degree alcohol sugar sugar sugar cose tose crose bitol titol of 3 Others ratio alcohol alcohol alcohol Ex. 7-1 0.1 0.3 0.4 38.4 58.3 0.2 2.3 96.9 39.7 60.1 0.2 Ex. 7-2 0.2 0.3 0.6 38.9 56.8 0.2 3.0 95.9 40.6 59.2 0.2

(143) TABLE-US-00016 TABLE 16 Lotus root Ex. 7-1 Ex. 7-2 Over-all judgement 11 11 Moist feeling 3 3 Non-stickiness to the 3 3 teeth Non-stickiness 3 3 Appearance 2 2

PRIOR ART DOCUMENTS

Patent Documents

(144) Patent document 1: Japanese Patent Publication Before Examination No. S62(1987)-244 Patent document 2: Japanese Patent Publication Before Examination No. H10(1998)-33119