Asian J. Dairy & Food Res.

, 33 (1) : 37 - 43, 2014 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATION CENTRE

DOI: 10.5958/j.0976-0563.33.1.008 www.arccjournals.com

INFLUENCE OF PROCESSING ON PHYSICOCHEMICAL, NUTRITIONAL AND

PHYTOCHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF FICUS CARICA L. (FIG) PRODUCTS
Beenu Tanwar* , B. Andallu1 and Rajni Modgil
Department of Food Science and Nutrition, College of Home Science,
CSK H.P. Krishi Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur-176 062, India
Received: 06-11-2012 Accepted: 10-07-2013
ABSTRACT
The influence of processing on the physicochemical, nutritional and phytochemical composition
of Ficus carica L. (fig) products was evaluated. Mature figs were washed, cut in quarters, pulped and
then the pulp was processed into fig jam and fig nectar. The physicochemical parameters studied
were pH, total soluble solids (TSS) and titratable acidity (TA) along with iron, calcium and phosphorus
content. Nutritionally these were analyzed for their proximate composition, total carbohydrates,
vitamin C and  carotene. Different phytochemicals determined were total phenolics, total flavonoids,
total anthocyanins and tannins. The results revealed that processing of fig fruit pulp into jam and
nectar resulted in a significant (p< 0.05) increase in physicochemical properties like TSS and TA but
a significant (p< 0.05) decrease in pH, iron, calcium and phosphorus. Processing of fig pulp into fig
jam and fig nectar decreased the nutritional and phytochemical composition when compared with
the fig pulp. Moisture, ash, crude fiber, crude protein, crude fat, vitamin C,  carotene, total phenolics,
total flavonoids, total anthocyanins and tannins decreased significantly (p< 0.05) except significant
(p< 0.05) increase in the carbohydrate and thereby energy value.

Key words: Anthocyanins, Flavonoids, Ficus carica L., Fig jam, Fig, Fig nectar, Nutritional,
Phenolics, Physicochemical, Processing, Phytochemical, Tannins.

INTRODUCTION Processing is expected to affect content, activity and

Fruits and vegetables are known as protective
foods and high consumption of fruits and vegetables
has been associated with a lowered incidence of
degenerative diseases including cancer, heart
disease, inflammation, arthritis, immune system
decline, brain dysfunction and cataracts. These
protective effects are considered, in large part, to be
related to the various antioxidants contained in them.
There is overwhelming evidence to indicate that free
radicals cause oxidative damage to lipids, proteins,
and nucleic acids. Antioxidants, which can inhibit
or delay the oxidation of an oxidisable substrate in
a chain reaction, would therefore seem to be very
important in the prevention of these diseases. This
created a new perspective concerning the potential
of diet in preventing serious diseases in future.
However, the health promoting capacity of fruits and
vegetables strictly depend on their processing history.
bioavailability of nutrients and bioactive compounds.
This aspect is of great importance as only a small
amount of fruits and vegetables are consumed in
their raw state, while most of them need to be
processed for safety, quality, availability and
economic reasons (Nicoli et al. 1999).
The common Fig (Ficus carica L.) is a tree
native to southwest Asia and the eastern
Mediterranean region, belong to botanical family
Moracea. Fig is one of the first plants that was
cultivated by humans and is an important crop
worldwide for dry and fresh consumption. Its edible
part is commonly referred to as a “fruit” although it
is a synconium, that is, a fleshy, hollow receptacle
with a small opening at the apex partly closed by
small scales. Previous reports concerning the nutrient
composition of dried figs have indicated that it has
the best nutrient score among the dried fruit, being

*Corresponding author’s e-mail: beenutanwar@gmail.com

1
Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning, Anantapur- 515 001, India
38 ASIAN JOURNAL OF DAIRY & FOOD RESEARCH
an important source of minerals and vitamins
(USDA, 2002). The figs are widely consumed fresh,
either peeled or not. Fresh fruits naturally have a
short, post-harvest life of 7– 10 days, but with a
combination of cooler conditions and a CO 2-
enriched atmosphere, the fruit can be stored for up
to 2–4 weeks (Sozzi et al. 2005). Figs are also very
popular as dried fruit, since drying prolongs their
storability. Figs are an excellent source of minerals,
vitamins and dietary fibre (Vinson, 1999; Vinson
et al. 2005); they are fat and cholesterol-free and
contain a high number of amino acids (Slavin, 2006;
Solomon et al. 2006). Similarly to other fruit species,
figs contain sugars and organic acids that influence
their quality. They also contain phenolic substances,
which contribute importantly to their quality;
especially because it has been proven that their
consumption can have a positive effect on human
health. The content level of phenolics is usually
influenced not only by the cultivar, but also varies
significantly from one fruit part to the other; moreover,
it is heavily dependent on the growing technology in
the orchard (Veberic et al. 2005). The presence of
phytosterols (433 mg/100 g dry basis) has also been
reported in fig fruit (Jeong and Lachance, 2001).
Although figs are an important fresh fruit variety in
many countries, as well as a delicious dried fruit
consumed in most parts of the world, there are only
a few reports dealing with the phenolic contents of
these fruit, and there is dearth of information on the
effects of processing methods on the
physicochemical, nutritional and phytochemical
composition of fig products. On the basis of these
considerations, the evaluation of the influence of
food processing on natural occurring antioxidants
and nutritional composition of fig products is a key
factor in finding technological conditions necessary
to preserve or improve their original activity and
bioavailability. So, the aim of our research was to
investigate the influence of processing on the
physicochemical, nutritional and phytochemical
composition of fig products.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Procurement and Preparation of samples
Fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit was purchased from local
market of Anantapur, Andhra Pradesh (India). Fully
mature fruits were selected, washed thoroughly with
distilled water and non edible portion of fruits were
removed and was processed into fig pulp, fig jam
and fig nectar (Figure 1, 2 and 3).
Physicochemical analysis: Titratable
acidity, pH and total soluble solids were determined
by methods as given by Ranganna (1997). Iron in
the mineral extract was determined by Wong’s
method given by Raghuramulu et al. (2004).
Calcium was determined by the method of Hawk et
al. (1957) and phosphorus by the method of Fiske
Subba Rao as given by Raghuramulu et al. (2004).
Nutritional analysis: Moisture, ash, crude
fiber were determined using standard methods of
AOAC (1990). Crude fat was determined by method
of Huber and Newman (1975). Crude protein was
determined in the sample by following the method
given by Lowry et al. (1951), while the carbohydrate
content was estimated by anthrone method (Hedge
and Hofreiter, 1962). Vitamin C content was
analyzed by the method given by Ranganna (1997).
 carotene was extracted on alumina column and
determined spectrophotometrically (Raghuramulu
et al. 2004).
Determination of phytochemical constituents:
Tannins were estimated by Vanillin hydrochloride
method given by Price et al. (1997). Defatted sample
(500mg) was transferred to a centrifuge tube and
10 ml of acidic- methanol (1%) was added and
shaken for 20 mins on a shaker. The tubes were
centrifuged for 10 mins and supernatant transferred
to volumetric flask (25ml). To the residue in the
centrifuge tubes 5 ml of acidic-methanol (1%) was
added and extraction procedure was repeated. Final
volume was made upto 25 ml. The sample was taken
in triplicate, to this 5 ml of Vanillin- HCl reagent was
added and the intensity of the colour developed was
read at 500nm. The absorbance was plotted against
Selection of sound fruits
      
Washing of the fruits
Peeling and weighing (300gm)
Slicing of the fruits into halves
Blending of fruits in a blender
Filtering of pulp through a muslin cloth
Packing in glass bottles
Stored in refrigerator until further use
FIG 1: Flowchart for the preparation of fig pulp
 Vol. 33, No. 1, 2014
Selection of sound fruits (300gm)
           
Washing of the fruits
Peeling and weighing
Slicing of the fruits into halves
Blending of fruits in a blender
Filtering of pulp through a muslin cloth
Collection of filtrate in a beaker
Brix readin of pulp using an Abbe refractometer
Gradual addition of white sugar (1g/g of fruit) to the pulp
Cooking of mixture until 68°Brix is reached
Hot filling in jars
Hot sealing of bottles manually
Rapid cooling to ambient temperature by immersing bottles
in tray of ice
FIG 2: Flowchart for the preparation of fig jam
Selection of sound fruits (300gm)
      
Washing of the fruits
Peeling and weighing
Slicing of the fruits into halves
Blending of fruits in a blender
Filtering of pulp through a muslin cloth
Collection of filtrate in a beaker
Addition of water (dilution X3) and sugar (0.2gm/ml of
diluted juice)

Exhausting by placing the beaker of juice in water bath
maintained at 88°C for 10 mins
   
Filling of juice in sterilized glass bottles and capping
Pasteurization using a water bath maintained at 88°C for 10 mins
Hot sealing of bottles manually
Rapid cooling to ambient temperature by immersing bottles
in tray of ice
FIG 3: Flowchart for the preparation of fig nectar
39
catechin standard and the concentration of sample
was intercepted.
Sample preparation for other phytochemicals viz.
total phenols, total flavonoids and total anthocyanins
was carried out according to Counet and Collin,
2003. Sample (75 gm) was taken and ground in a
blender with 150 ml of extraction solvent consisting
of Acetone (70%), water (28%) and acetic acid
(2%). Mixture was shaken for 1 hr at 4°C and
centrifuged at 17000 X g for 15 mins. Supernatant
was removed and the pellet was extracted again,
supernatants were pooled and 70 per cent of volume
was evaporated at 30°C. Then the volume was made
up to 300 ml with water.
Total phenols in the samples were determined
following method given by Caboni et al. 1997.
Diluted extracts (3.6 ml) were mixed with Folin-
Ciocalteau reagent and after 3 mins, 0.8 ml sodium
carbonate (20%) was added. Mixture was heated
at 100C for 1 min and after cooling, absorbance
was measured at 750nm. Gallic acid was used as
standard.
Total flavonoids were determined by the method
given by Lamaison and Carnat, 1990. Diluted
extracts (1 ml) were mixed with 1 ml of reagent
(AlCl3.6H 2O, 2% in methanol), Absorbance was read
at 430nm after 10 mins. Quercetin was used as the
standard.
Anthocyanin quantification was performed by pH-
differential method given by Guisti and Wrolstad,
2001. Extract was diluted in pH 1.0 solution (0.1M
HCl, 25mMKCl) and in a pH 4.5 solution (0.4M,
CH 3COONa). Absorbance of mixture was read at
534 and 700 nm aginst distilled water.
Absorbance of anthocyanin in sample= (Abs 535-
Abs700)pH 1.0 - (Abs 535-Abs700)pH 4.5
Statistical analysis: The data obtained was analyzed
statistically for analysis of variance in a completely
randomized design (Sendecor and Cochran, 1994).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION:
Table 2 lists the physico-chemical properties
and mineral composition of fig pulp, jam and nectar.
Fig fruit pulp had 4.7+ 0.3 pH, 10.2+ 0.2 0Brix
total soluble solids (TSS) and 0.72+ 0.8 g (g citric
acid /100g fresh mass) titratable acidity (TA). The
transformation of fruit pulp into jam and nectar
naturally increased TSS because of the added sugar.
However, jam had higher TSS than nectar as
40 ASIAN JOURNAL OF DAIRY & FOOD RESEARCH
formulation of nectar took in dilution with water. TABLE 1: Ingredients used in making fig pulp, jam and nectar
pH of jam and nectar were comparatively lesser Ingredients Pulp Jam Nectar
than the fruit pulp as citric acid was added as a Fig fruit (Kg) 1 1 1
preservative in both the products which brought Sugar (Kg) - 1 0.600
down the pH in jam and nectar. TA was also found Citric acid (gm) - 2.5 2.5

TABLE 2: Influence of processing on the physicochemical and mineral composition of fig pulp, jam and nectar
Sample/Parameters Pulp Jam Nectar
pH 4.2 + 0.1 3.7 + 0.3 3.4+ 0.4
Total soluble solids (0Brix) 6.8 + 0.3 68.0 + 0.1 48.0 + 0.6
Titratable acidity(g citric acid/100g fresh mass) 0.19 + 0.9 0.20 + 0.4 0.21 + 0.4
Iron (mg %) 6.2+ 0.7 1.6+ 0.5 6.7+ 0.8
Calcium (mg %) 28.2+ 0.8 26.7+ 1.1 27.6+ 0.9
Phosphorus (mg %) 17.9+ 1.1 1.3+ 0.1 2.7+ 0.5
Values are mean ± SEM of 3 observations
to be higher in jam and nectar as compared to the from Table 2; moisture, ash, crude fiber, crude fat
fruit pulp due to the addition of citric acid as and crude protein content was lowest in fig jam as
preservative (Ordonez-Santos LE and Vazquez- compared to nectar and pulp. Addition of sugar in
Riascos A, 2010). Iron content of fig jam and nectar jam and nectar resulted in an increase in total
decreased significantly when compared with the fig carbohydrates and calorific value. Data pertaining
pulp which can be due to the addition of sugar to to these parameters of fig pulp was found coinciding
the fruit pulp in the processing of fig jam and nectar. with data given by Morton (1987). However, crude
However, the decrease in the iron content of fig nectar fiber content was found to be slightly higher than
was lesser when compared with fig nectar which the reported value which can be attributed to varietal
can be due to the fact that certain food processing differences. Crude fiber content when compared
procedures enhance the proportion of diffusible iron with fig fruit pulp decreased by 22 and 67% (p< 0.05)
as compared to the unprocessed food. The in fig jam and nectar. This decrease can be attributed
constituent organic acids in fruit juices namely citric, to the addition of sugar and in the preparation of
ascorbic and malic acids might be potentially jam whereas, the addition of sugar and dilution with
responsible for enhancing the iron availability (Hazell
TABLE 3: Influence of processing on the nutritional
and Jhonson, 2007). Calcium content was found to composition of fig pulp, jam and nectar.
decrease slightly in products viz. fig jam and nectar Sample/ Pulp Jam Nectar
as compared to fig fruit pulp. Heating (60- 700C) of Parameters
tissue causes disruption of membranes and Moisture (g %) 87.7 + 0.5 19.9 + 0.2 49 + 0.4
decompartmentation of cell constituents. Heat (77) (44)
Ash (g %) 0.5 + 0.1 0.2 + 0.6 0.4 + 0.1
induced firming is believed to start with damage to (65) (22)
cell membranes that causes increase in Crude fiber (g %) 1.6 + 0.6 1.2 + 0.6 0.5 + 0.3
impermeability. This leads to liberation of Ca2+ and (22) (67)
its diffusion to the cell formation of Ca2+ and Mg2+ Crude Protein (g %) 9.8 + 0.8 5.4 + 0.5 8.6 + 0.9
(45) (20)
ionic cross linkages between carboxyl groups of
Crude Fat (g %) 0.43 + 0.9 0.08 + 0.7 0.15 + 0.8
pectin (Haard and Chism, 2005). Compared with (81) (63)
the fig fruit pulp, tremendous decrease in phosphorus Carbohydrate (g %) 12.9 + 1.3 30.1 + 1.2 38.2 + 1.3
content of 91 and 80% (p< 0.05) was observed in (133) (196)
fig jam and nectar respectively. However, fig nectar Vitamin C 23.9+ 1.2 3.7+ 0.9 11.5+0.8
(mg/100g fresh mass) (84) (49)
had comparatively higher content of phosphorus β carotene 0.16+ 0.3 0.01+0.1 0.12+0.2
than fig jam due to uptake of minerals from water (mg/100g fresh mass) (93) (25)
used in the preparation of nectar (Rickman et al, Energy 94.9 + 1.0 142.7 + 1.1 189.6 + 1.3
2007). (Kcal) (50) (99)
Values are mean ± SEM of 3 observations
Influence of processing on the nutritional Figures in the parenthesis indicate % increase/decrease over
composition of fig is presented in Table 3. As clear the fruit pulp values
 Vol. 33, No. 1, 2014
water in case of fig nectar. Crude protein content
decreased in fig jam and nectar as during heat
treatment proteins undergo denaturation/
degradation and thus reduction in the crude protein
content (Whitaker, 1981). Crude fat content
estimated in fig pulp and its products indicated a
decrease of 65% and 39% (p< 0.05) respectively in
fig jam and nectar. Higher percent decrease in fat
content in jam as compared to nectar can be due to
thermal degradation of fats at higher temperatures
(Fennema, 1997). Carbohydrate content was found
to significantly increase in fig jam (133%) and nectar
(196%) (p< 0.05) when compared with fig fruit pulp.
This increase in carbohydrate content can be due
to addition of sugar during the formulation of
products. H owever, fig nectar had more
carbohydrate content as compared to fig jam as no
considerable heating is involved in the processing
of nectar (Whistler and Daniel, 1985). Vitamin C
was found to decrease by 84% in fig jam and 49%
in fig nectar when compared with fig fruit pulp. This
tremendous decrease in vitamin C content in jam is
due to the addition of sugar and use of heat treatment
in the processing. Comparatively lesser decrease in
vitamin C was seen in fig nectar as no considerable
heat treatment is used in the processing of nectar.
Also, these losses of vitamin C are probably due
mainly to oxidation; in particular the oxidation of
vitamin C to dehydroascorbic acid which is followed
by the hydrolysis of the latter to 2,3- diketogulconic
acid, which then undergoes polymerization to other
nutritionally inactive products (Dewanto et al, 2002).
â carotene decreased by 93 % and 25 % (p< 0.05)
in fig jam and nectar respectively. This decrease is
due to the addition of sugar during the processing of
jam and nectar. Besides, preparation of jam involves
heating above 100 0 C which causes degradation of
â carotene. Carotenoids are thus susceptible to loss
of provitamin a activity through oxidation during
processing (Salunkhe et al. 1991). Energy calculated
was comparatively higher for the fig jam and nectar
TABLE 4: Influence of processing on the phytochemical composition of fig pulp, jam and nectar
Sample/Parameters Pulp
Total phenolics (GAE mg %) 161.2+ 0.8
Total flavonoids (Quercetin mg %) 4.4 + 0.9
Total anthocyanins (mg %) 0.5+ 0.9
Tannins ( GAE mg %) 100.6 + 0.4
Values are mean ± SEM of 3 observations
Figures in the parenthesis indicate % increase/decrease over the fruit pulp values
41
as compared with the fig fruit pulp. However, energy
content of fig nectar was higher than fig jam owing
to the thermal degradation of macronutrients during
the processing of jam. When compared with each
other, jam had lesser nutritional composition than
fig nectar as processing of jam includes addition of
sugar and use of high heat treatment which leads to
degradation of nutrients whereas, in fig nectar the
reduction can be due to dilution with water and
addition of sugar (Ordonez-Santos and Vazquez-
Riascos, 2010).
Phytochemical content of fig pulp and its
products is presented in Table 4. Table 4 shows
decrease in all the phytochemical components
studied in fig jam and nectar samples when
compared with pulp. The decrease in all
phytochemical components studied can be due to
addition of sugar in the products and use of heat in
the processing which leads to the various physico
chemical changes the fruits. Total phenolics were
found to decrease by 25% and 52 % in fig jam and
fig nectar respectively, when compared with the fig
pulp. Phenolic compounds are antioxidants and are
subjected to oxidation during storage and processing
of foods (Titchenal and Dobbs, 2004). Physical and
biological factors such as temperature increase and
enzymatic activity may result in the destruction of
phenolics. Enzymes such as polyphenol oxidase are
responsible for the browning reaction of phenolics
but they are normally inactivated during jam
preparation due to high temperatures applied.
However, there could be losses of bioactive phenolics
due to the cooking process that may decrease their
functional properties (Kim and Zakour, 2004). The
decrease in the phenolic content of fig nectar can be
attributed to the oxidation of polyphenols by
endogenous polyphenol oxidase and ascorbic acid
oxidase (Giovanelli et al. 2001 a). The significant
(p< 0.05) decrease in the flavonoid content of fig
jam and nectar when compared with pulp can be
due to the addition of sugar in the processing which
Jam Nectar
133.3+ 0.2(25) 77.8+ 0.7(52)
0.4+ 1.1(98) 2.04+ 0.6(45)
0.14+ 0.7(79) 0.40+ 0.7(33)
16.6+ 1.0(83) 22.5+ 0.7(77)
42 ASIAN JOURNAL OF DAIRY & FOOD RESEARCH
does not contribute to the flavonoid content of the CONCLUSION
products. As reported by Crozier et al. 1995; Price Processing of fig fruit pulp into jam and
and Rhodes, 1997 this decrease is probably due to nectar resulted in a significant increase in physico
chemical or thermal degradation of the flavonoids chemical properties like TSS and TA but brought
during processing. However, fruit nectar processing down a significant decrease in pH and mineral
can increase the flavonoid content as extraction
composition. Also, processing of fig fruit pulp into
processes can release flavonoids from the rind (Sluis
et al. 1997) and this explains comparatively lesser jam and nectar brought down the nutritional and
decrease in the flavonoid content of fig nectar than phytochemical composition of the products except
fig jam. On the basis of anthocyanin content of fig significant increase in the carbohydrate and thereby
fruit pulp, jam had significantly (p< 0.05) lowest energy value. Although there is a decrease in the
concentration of total anthocyanins. A loss of 79 % in nutritional and phytochemical composition of fig
fig jam and 33% (p< 0.05) in fig nectar was observed products than pulp but it can be said that processing
due to processing. This decrease was more extensive of fig fruits into jam and nectar ensures the safety
as, several factors like pH, temperature, light, oxygen, and quality of the products without much loss of
metal ions and sugars are believed to affect the stability nutritional and antioxidant benefits, which is not
of anthocyanins in fruits and vegetables during
feasible with the fig fruit as such owing to its
processing and storage (Rhim, 2002). Significant loss
perishable nature.
(p< 0.05) of tannins in fig jam and fig nectar than fig
pulp was observed due to thermal degradation of ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
tannins. The considerable decrease of tannins in the The authors thank University Grants
products can be due to extraction and release of tannins Commission, New Delhi, India for the financial
from the cell matrix, due to breakage of bonds with assistance and Sri Sathya Sai Institute of higher
proteins (Rehman and Shah, 2001). learning, Anantapur, A.P., India for the facilities.
REFERENCES
AOAC (1995) Approved Methods of Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 14th edn, Washington, D.C.
Caboni E, Tonelli MG, Lauri P, Lacovacci P, Kevers C, Damiano C and Gaspar T (1997) Biochemical aspects of almond
microcuttings related to in vitro rooting ability. Biol plant, 39: 91-97.
Counet C and Collins S (2003) Effect of the number of flavonol units on the antioxidant activity of procyanidin fractions
isolated from chocolate. Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry, 51: 6816-6822.
Crozier A, Lean MEJ, Mc Donald MS and Black C (1995) Quantitative analysis of the flavonoid content of commercial
tomatoes, onions, lettuce and celery. Journal of Agricultural Food Chemistry, 42: 281-285.
Dewanto V, Wu X, Adom KK and Lui RH (2002) Thermal processing enhances the nutritional value of tomatoes by
increasing total antioxidant activity. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50: 3010-3014.
Fennema O (1997) Nutritional and metabolic aspects of protein modification during food processing. In: RE Feeny and
JR Whitaker (eds.) Modification of proteins: Food, nutritional and pharmacological aspects. American Chemical
Society, Washington DC, pp 91-124.
Guisti MM and Worlstad RE (2001) Characterization and measurement of anthocyanins by UV-visible spectroscopy. In:
Current protocols in Food analytical chemistry, Worlstad RE and Schwartz SJ (eds.). Wiley, New York, pp
F1.21- F1.2.2.13.
Haard FN and Chism WG (2005). Characteristics of edible plant tissues. In: Food Chemistry. OR Fennema (ed) Marcel
Deker, NY, 3rd edn., pp 993-994.
Hazell T and Jhonson IT (2007) Effects of processing and fruits juices on in vitro estimated iron availability from cereals,
vegetables and fruits. Journal of Science, Food and Agriculture, 38: 73-82.
Hedge J E and Hofreiter B T (1962) In: Whistler R L and Be Miller J N (eds). Carbohydrate Chemistry, Academic Press,
New York.
Huber DJ and Newman DW (1975) Relationship between lipid changes and plastic ultra structural changers in soyabean
cotyledons. Journal of Experimental Biology, 21, 490-511
Jeong WS and Lachance PA (2001) Phytosterols and fatty acids in fig (Ficus carica, var. Mission) fruit and tree components.
Food Chemistry and Toxicology 66: 278–281.
 Vol. 33, No. 1, 2014 43
Kim DO and Padilla Zakour OI (2004) Jam processing effect on phenolics and antioxidant capacity in anthocyanins-
rich fruits: Cherry, Plum and Raspberry. Journal of Food Science, 69: 395-400.
Lamaison JL and Carnat J (1990) Teneur en principaux flavonodes does fleurs et des feuiltes de crtaegus monogyna
Jacq.et.de Crataegusleavigata (Poret) DC. (Rosaceae). Acta Pharm. Acta Pharm. Acta Helv, 65, 315-320.
Lowry DH, Rosebrough NJ, Farr AL & Randa URJ (1951) Protein measurements with Folin Phenol reagent. Journal of
Biological Chemistry, 193(2): 265-275.
Morton (1987). Fig. In: Fruits of warm climates. Morton FJ and Miami FL (eds.), pp 47-50.
Nicoli MC, Anese M and Parpinel M (1999) Influence of processing on the antioxidant properties of fruits and
vegetables, Trends in Food Science and Technology, 10: 94-100.
Ordonez-Santos LE and Vazquez- Riascos A (2010) Effect of processing and storage time on the vitamin C and lycopene
contents of nectar of pink guava (Psidium guajava L.). Archivos Latino Americanos De Nutrition, 60(3), 280-284.
Price KR and Rhodes MJC (1997) Analysis of the major flavonol glycosides present in four varieties of onion and changes
in composition resulting from autolysis. Journal of Science, Food and Agriculture, 74, 331-335.
Raghuramulu N, Madhavan MN and K Sundaram (eds.), (2004) A manual of laboratory techniques, NIN, Hyderabad, p 140.
Rehman ZU and Shah WH (2001) Tannin contents and protein digestibility of black gram (Vigna mungo) after soaking
and cookin. Plant Food for Human Nutrition, 56(3): 263-73.
Rhim JW (2002). Kinetics of thermal degradation of anthocyanin pigment solutions driven from red flower cabbge. Food
Science and Biotechnology, 11: 361- 364.
Rickman JC, Bruhn CM and Barett DM (2007). Nutritional comparison of fresh, frozen and canned fruitsand vegetables.
Part 2, Vitamin A, carotenoids and vitamin E. CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, pp 275-299.
Salunkhe DK, Bolin HR and Reddy NR (1991) Freezing In: Storage processing and nutritional quality of fruits and
vegetables. Vol. 2. CRC Press, Boca Raton FL, pp 144-147.
Sendecor W and Cochran WG (1994) Statistical Methods. Sixth edn., Oxford and IBH Publication, New Delhi. p 297.
Slavin J L (2006) Figs: Past, Present and Future. Nutrition Today, 41, 180–184.
Solomon A, Golubowicz S, Yablowicz Z, Grossman S, Bergman M, Gottlieb H E et al. (2006) Antioxidant activities and
anthocyanin content of fresh fruits of common fig (Ficus carica L.). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry,
54: 7717–7723.
Sozzi GO, Abrajan-Villasenor MA, Trinchero GD and Fraschina AA (2005) Postharvest response of ‘Brown Turkey’figs
(Ficus carica L.) to the inhibition of ethylene perception. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 85:
2503–2508.
Titchenal CA and Dobbs J (2004) Nutritional value of vegetables, In: Handbook of vegetable preservation and
processing. [Hui YH, Ghazala S, Graham DM, Murell KD and Nip W (eds.)], Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 23-37.
US Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, USDA Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release
15, 2002. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page, /http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomps.
Veberic R, Trobec M, Herbinger K, Hofer M, Grill D and Stampar F (2005) Phenolic compounds in some apple (Malus
domestica Borkh) cultivars of organic and integrated production. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture,
85: 1687–1694.
Vinson JA (1999) The functional food properties of figs. Cereal Foods World 4: 82–87.
Vinson JA, Zubik L, Bose P, Samman N, Proch J (2005) Dried fruits: excellent in vitro and in vivo antioxidants. Journal
of the American College of Nutrition 4: 44–50.
Whistler RL and Daniel JR (1985) CarbohydratesIn: P Fennema (ed.) Food Chemistry. 2nd edn, Marcel Dekker, NY, pp 69-137.
Whitaker JR (1981) Naturally occurring peptide and protein inhibitors of enzymes. In: JC Ayres and JC Krishman (eds),
Impact of toxicology on food processing. AVI Publishing Co, Westport, CT, pp 57-104.