Sweetener composition with improved taste quality comprising allulose and salt and method for improving taste quality of alulose using salt

Abstract

A sweetener composition including allulose and a salt and having improved taste, and a method of improving taste of allulose are disclosed.

Claims

1. A sweetener composition comprising allulose and a salt, wherein the allulose is a crystalline allulose and the surface of the crystalline allulose is coated with the salt, the salt is sodium chloride, potassium chloride, magnesium chloride, calcium chloride, sodium glutamate, sodium succinate, or combinations thereof, the salt is present in an amount of 0.1 parts by weight to 1 part by weight relative to 100 parts by weight of the allulose, and the coating of the salt is formed by spraying a salt-containing solution onto the surface of the crystalline allulose, wherein the salt-containing solution consists of the salt(s) and water.

2. The sweetener composition according to claim 1, wherein the salt is sodium chloride.

3. The sweetener composition according to claim 1, wherein the sweetener composition has a mean aperture of 350 μm or more.

4. The sweetener composition according to claim 1, wherein the sweetener composition has a coefficient of variation in size distribution of 32% or less.

5. The sweetener composition according to claim 1, wherein the sweetener composition has a bulk density of 69 g/100 ml or more.

6. The sweetener composition according to claim 1, wherein the sweetener composition has an angle of repose of 30° or less.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

(1) FIG. 1 is an image of results of measurement of angle of repose, which is an index for evaluating flowability of allulose powder samples of Comparative Example 2 and Example 3.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

(2) Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in more detail with reference to examples. However, it should be understood that these examples are provided for illustration only and are not to be construed in any way as limiting the present invention.

EXAMPLE

Preparative Example 1

Preparation of Salt-Coated Allulose Particles

(3) 1-1. Preparation of Sample

(4) Commercially available allulose crystals (C J Cheiljedang, purity: 99% or higher) were provided. In addition, based on the weight of the allulose crystals, 0.01 wt %, 0.1 wt %, or 1 wt % of sodium chloride (Hanjusalt, purity: 95% or more) was dissolved in water, thereby preparing an aqueous sodium chloride solution.

(5) 1-2. Mixing and Spray Coating

(6) The allulose crystals were placed in a horizontal mixer (F20, Sejitech) and stirred at 40 rpm. After stirring for 1 minute, the aqueous sodium chloride solution was primarily sprayed onto the allulose crystals for 1 second through a nozzle (SU6023 spray system) of the mixer, followed by spraying the solution three times at intervals of 30 seconds to coat the allulose crystals with sodium chloride.

(7) Then, the sodium chloride-coated allulose crystals were dried by applying drying air (at 85±5° C.) to the allulose crystals for 5 minutes, followed by application of cold air (at 25±5° C.) for 3 minutes, thereby preparing salt-coated allulose particles of Examples 1 to 3(table 1).

Comparative Example 1

Allulose Crystals not Coated with Salt

(8) Commercially available allulose crystals (CJ Cheiljedang, purity: 99% or higher) were used.

Comparative Example 2

Preparation of Allulose-Salt Mixture

(9) Commercially available allulose crystals (CJ Cheiljedang, purity: 99% or higher) and 1 wt % of sodium chloride (Hanjusalt, purity: 95% or more) based on the weight of the allulose crystals were placed in a horizontal mixer, and stirred at 40 rpm for 10 minutes, thereby preparing an allulose-salt mixture of Comparative Example 2(table 1).

(10) TABLE-US-00001 TABLE 1 Example Example Example Comparative Comparative Item 1 2 3 Example 1 Example 2 Preparation Spray Spray Spray — Simple method coating coating coating mixing Allulose 99.99 99.9 99 100 99 crystal (wt % in dry solid content) Sodium 0.01 0.1 1 — 1 chloride (wt % in dry solid content

Experimental Example 1

Sensory Evaluation

(11) Each of the allulose-containing compositions of Examples 1 to 3 and Comparative Example 1 was diluted to 15 Brix using Equation 1:
Weight of sample (15 g)+Weight of purified water (85 g)=15 Brix of diluted sample  [Equation 1]

(12) Sensory evaluation was performed on each of the samples of Examples 1 to 3 and Comparative Example 1, having been diluted to 15 Brix, by examining off-taste/off-flavor intensity, bitterness intensity, acridity intensity, and overall preference of the sample in 15 trained panel members, followed by evaluation on a 5-point scale. A higher value indicates higher intensity or preference.

(13) Statistical analysis was performed using SAS 9.1 (SAS Inc., Cary, N.C., USA), significant difference analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA, and a post-test was performed by Duncan's multiple range test. All analyses were performed at a significance level of p<0.05.

(14) As a result, it was confirmed that the samples of Examples 1 to 3 were relieved in terms of off-taste/off-flavor intensity, bitterness intensity, and acridity intensity at a significance level of p<0.05, as compared with the sample of Comparative Example 1, as shown in Table 2. Therefore, it can be seen that allulose coated with sodium chloride can have improved sensory properties.

(15) TABLE-US-00002 TABLE 2 Comparative Item Example 1 Example 2 Example 3 Example 1 P Off-taste/off- 2.9 2.8 2.6 3.8 0.01 flavor intensity Bitterness 2.8 2.8 2.5 3.4 0.01 intensity Acridity 2.7 2.7 2.8 3.5 0.04 intensity Overall 3.5 3.5 3.1 2.7 0.00 preference

Experimental Example 2

Mixing Uniformity of Salt-Coated Allulose Particles

(16) Mixing uniformity of each of the sample of Example 3 and the sample of Comparative Example 2, prepared by simply mixing allulose crystals with sodium chloride in the same weight ratio as in Example 3, was verified by HPLC. Details of the verification method are as follows:

(17) 1) Instrument High performance liquid chromatograph (HPLC): Alliance, Waters, e2695 Separation Modules, USA; Waters column Heater Module; RI detector Water 2414; Empower™ Software

(18) 2) Reagent Standard allulose: Sigma P8043 (CAS No. 551-68-8) Distilled water: distilled water for HPLC

(19) 3) Preparation of Standard Solution 100 mg of the standard allulose was placed in a 10 ml volumetric flask and then made to 10 ml using distilled water (to a concentration of 10,000 mg/L), followed by dilution to a concentration of 625, 1250, 2500, 5000, or 10,000 mg/L, thereby preparing a standard solution.

(20) 4) Preparation of Test Solution About 0.5 g of each of the samples of Comparative Examples 1 to 2 and Examples 1 to 3 was collected and made to 100 ml using distilled water, followed by filtration through a 0.45 μm filter, thereby preparing a test solution (concentration: about 5,000 mg/L). In order to check mixing uniformity of salt in the test solution, 5 specimens were taken from randomly selected different portions of the test solution. Amount of salt and difference in salt amount were analyzed as follows:

(21) 5) Test Setup High performance liquid chromatography conditions A. Column: 7.8 mm×300 mm Aminex HPX87C (Bio Rad) or an exclusion type ion exchange system corresponding thereto. B. Column temperature: 80° C. C. Mobile phase: distilled water D. Flow rate: 0.6 ml/min E. Detector: Differential refractometer (RID) Preparation of calibration curve: 20 μl of the standard solution at each concentration was introduced into an HPLC and then analyzed, followed by preparation of a calibration curve, the horizontal and vertical axes of which indicate the amount of allulose (unit: mg) and the area of a chromatogram, respectively. Calculation: Area of allulose was read, followed by determination as to the content of allulose based on the calibration curve.

(22) 6) Calculation Method
Allulose content (g/100 g of sample)={(Concentration found from calibration curve (g/L)×diluted volume (mL))/(Weight of collected sample (g)×1000)}×100

(23) As a result, it was confirmed that, in Example 3, the allulose content (99.2 g/100 g) was decreased by addition of sodium chloride, whereas, in Comparative Example 3, the allulose content was as high as about 100.0 g/100 g despite addition of sodium chloride, that is, the allulose was not uniformly mixed with the sodium chloride (Table 3). Therefore, it can be seen that, when allulose crystals are coated with sodium chloride by spraying an aqueous sodium chloride solution onto the allulose crystals, uniformity in mixing of sodium chloride with allulose can be improved, as compared with when allulose crystals are simply mixed with sodium chloride. In addition, in the sample of Example 3, which was prepared by spray coating, a standard deviation between values obtained from the 5 randomly collected specimens was 0.056, much lower than the standard deviation (0.142) in the sample of Comparative Example 2, which was prepared by simple mixing. Therefore, it can be seen that, when allulose particles are prepared by salt coating, uniformity in dispersion of the salt coupled to allulose can be considerably improved.

(24) TABLE-US-00003 TABLE 3 Standard Item Specimen 1 Specimen 2 Specimen 3 Specimen 4 Specimen 5 Average deviation p-value Comparative 100.2 99.8 99.9 99.9 100.1 100.0 0.142 0.000 Example 2 Example 3 99.2 99.1 99.2 99.3 99.3 99.2 0.056

Experimental Example 3

Physical Properties (Size, Bulk Density, and Flowability) of Salt-Coated Allulose Particles

(25) Allulose crystals have a small mean aperture (M.A) and non-uniform rod-like particle shape and thus have a high coefficient of variation (Co.V) in size distribution. As a result, a large amount of fine powder can be generated during packing, causing deformation or breaking of a seal. In addition, since allulose crystals have low bulk density (B.D) and low flowability, allulose powder also has low fluidity, causing line clogging during production or making fixed-quantity packaging difficult. Thus, it was verified whether the aforementioned physical properties (mean aperture, coefficient of variation, bulk density, and flowability) could be improved by salt coating.

(26) 3-1. Measurement of Particle Size

(27) Mean aperture (M.A.) of each of the prepared samples (Comparative Examples 1 to 2 and Examples 1 to 3) was measured using a sieve shaker (Octagon D200, Endecotts, England) in the following manner: After weighing 100 g of each of the samples using a precision scale (ML 4002T, Mettler Toledo, Switzerland), sieves having different mesh sizes (30 μm, 35 μm, 40 μm, 50 μm, 60 μm, 70 μm, 80 μm, 100 μm, 120 μm, and 140 μm) were stacked one above another, followed by mounting the sieve stack on the sieve shaker. One or two rubber stoppers were inserted into each of the sieves to prevent clogging of sieve holes. 100 g of each of the weighed samples was poured into an uppermost sieve, followed by shaking for 5 minutes. After a sample residue was brushed from the uppermost sieve, the weight of the sample remaining on each sieve was measured using a precision scale. After, for each mesh size, the cumulative amount of the remaining sample was recorded and then marked on normal probability paper, a straight line graph was created by connecting normal probability values corresponding to the marked cumulative amounts, followed by calculation of mean aperture according to Equation 2:
Mean Aperture (M.A)=Mesh size (μm) of a sieve at a point of intersection of the 50% line of the normal probability paper and the straight line of graph  [Equation 2]

(28) 3-2. Measurement of Bulk Density

(29) Bulk density of each of the prepared samples was measured in accordance with international standards, DIN ISO 697 and EN ISO 60. Specifically, an empty receiving cup was weighed and then placed under a funnel, which was placed 10 cm above the ground. After the funnel was centered and secured using a level gauge, a bottom of the funnel was closed to prevent an introduced sample from leaking down. After a sufficient amount of each of the samples of Examples 3 and Comparative Examples 1 to 2 was introduced into the funnel, the bottom of the funnel was opened to allow the sample to fall freely into the receiving cup. After each of the samples was poured until the receiving cup overflowed, the bottom of the funnel was closed again and the overflow of the sample was removed such that the volume of the remaining sample could be exactly the same as that of the receiving cup. After the weight of the receiving cup filled with the sample was measured, the bulk density of the sample was calculated according to Equation 3:
Bulk density (g/100 mL)={(Weight of the sample contained in the receiving cup (g))/(Volume of the receiving cup) (mL)}×100  [Equation 3]

(30) 3-3. Measurement of Flowability

(31) Flowability of each of the prepared samples (Comparative Examples 1 to 2 and Examples 1 to 3) was measured by the Angle of Repose Method specified in US Pharmacopoeia Chapter 1174 and European Pharmacopoeia Chapter 2.9.76. Specifically, after a funnel placed 10 cm above the ground was centered and secured using a level gauge, a bottom of the funnel was closed to prevent an introduced sample from leaking down. After 100 g of each of the samples of Examples 1 to 3 and Comparative Examples 1 to 2 was introduced into the funnel, the bottom of the funnel was opened to allow the sample to fall freely and pile up on a disk (13 cm in diameter) on the ground. Then, the angle of repose of the piled sample was measured to determine flowability.

(32) 3-4. Property Evaluation

(33) It was confirmed that the salt-coated allulose powder samples of Examples 1 to 3 had increased mean aperture and low coefficient of variation in size distribution (that is, high uniformity in crystal size), as compared with the allulose powder samples of Comparative Examples 1 to 2. In addition, it was confirmed that the salt-coated allulose powder samples of Examples 1 to 3 had increased bulk density and flowability (small angle of repose, see FIG. 1) (Table 4). Particularly, it was confirmed that, for a given amount of salt, the salt-coated allulose powder sample of Example 3, prepared by salt spray coating had considerably reduced coefficient of variation in size distribution, as compared with the allulose powder sample of Comparative Example 2, prepared by simple mixing.

(34) Therefore, it can be seen that the salt-coated allulose powder according to the present invention has improved packaging performance and processability, as compared with typical allulose powder products, and thus is industrially useful.

(35) TABLE-US-00004 TABLE 4 M.A Co.V B.D Flowability Sample μm % g/100 mL (Angle of repose °) Comparative 331 34.7 67.3 31.3 Example 1 Comparative 339 38.0 68.3 30.5 Example 2 Example 1 360 30.6 69.9 27.8 Example 2 369 28.1 71.8 25.5 Example 3 378 27.3 73.3 25.0

(36) Although some embodiments have been described herein, it should be understood by those skilled in the art that these embodiments are given by way of illustration only and the present invention is not limited thereto. In addition, it should be understood that various modifications, variations, and alterations can be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Therefore, the scope of the invention should be limited only by the accompanying claims and equivalents thereof.