LWT - Food Science and Technology 141 (2021) 110894

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

LWT
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lwt

Development and characterization of two gelatin candies with alternative

sweeteners and fruit bioactive compounds
Roy Rivero a, d, Diego Archaina a, d, Natalia Sosa a, d, Carolina Schebor b, c, d, *
a
Laboratorio de Investigación y Servicios de Productos Apícolas, Facultad de Bromatología, Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos, Gualeguaychú, Entre Ríos, Argentina
b
CONICET – Universidad de Buenos Aires, Instituto de Tecnología de Alimentos y Procesos Químicos (ITAPROQ), Buenos Aires, Argentina
c
Universidad de Buenos Aires, Facultad de Ciencias Exactas y Naturales, Departamento de Industrias, Buenos Aires, Argentina
d
CONICET, Buenos Aires, Argentina

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The objective of this work was to develop sensory acceptable fruit-based alternative gelatin candies without the
Gelatin candies addition of free sugars, and with an improved nutritional profile. Two gelatin candies were developed containing
Sugar replacement orange (OC) and raspberry (RC) juices as a source of color, flavor and bioactive compounds. A propolis extract
Fruits
was added as a source of polyphenols and as natural preservative. The developed candies presented textural
Propolis
Sensory analysis
characteristics typical of commercial products. Sensory studies indicated that both formulations could be
outstanding alternatives for people looking for new options of lower calories candies. Children preferred RC
(82%) compared to OC (56%); while adults liked both formulations without significant differences. Candies
presented potential functional properties: total phenolic content of 491.9 ± 33.8, and 550.8 ± 84.7 mg GAE/100
g for OC and RC, respectively. Additionally, antioxidant capacity values were 1.60 ± 0.06, and 1.82 ± 0.08 mmol
Trolox/100 g for OC and RC, respectively. Candies were microbiologically stable during 90 days at 25 ◦ C.
Moreover, they showed a decrease in water content (4–5 g H2O/100 g), which caused slight textural changes
along storage. These variations, together with color changes (ΔE00 above 2) suggested the need of an opaque
hermetical packaging to protect the candies.

1. Introduction physicochemical stability to candies, and allows masking the bitter

Nowadays, the incidence of obesity has increased, mainly due to the
intake of sugary foods (Naughton, McCarthy, & McCarthy, 2017). Ac­
cording to the World Health Organization (WHO, 2015) sugar con­
sumption should not be higher than 10% of the daily caloric intake.
Consequently, the addition of low-calorie sweeteners is a good option to
replace traditional sugars (Jiamjariyatam, 2018; Spanemberg, Korze­
nowski, & Sellitto, 2019). The combined use of high intensity sweeteners
and polyols is one of the most used strategies to reduce the sugar content
in foods (Buttriss, 2017; Di Monaco, Miele, Cabisidan, & Cavella, 2018).
Stevia is a natural sweetener widely used due to its high intensity
(Putnik et al., 2020), high stability (Harismah, Mirzaei, & Fuadi, 2018),
and for its synergism with other sweeteners (Mahato et al., 2020). On
the other hand, polyols act both as sweeteners and bulking agents
(Grembecka, 2015). In this context, the properties of maltitol are very
similar to those of sucrose, being an excellent option for its replacement
(Kearsley & Deis, 2012). Additionally, isomalt provides high
aftertaste of other sweeteners (Sentko & Willibald-Ettle, 2012). The
mentioned sweeteners were used in the development of jelly candies
(Aranda Gonzales et al., 2015), and chewy candies (Bataglia da Silva
et al., 2016).
According to Hastaoğlu, Can, and Vural (2018), children tend to
consume a large amount of sweets containing artificial colorants, which
can lead to health disorders. Consequently, the incorporation of fruits
into candies formulations could be an advantage, by providing both
natural colorants (Schweiggert, 2018), and beneficial bioactive com­
pounds, compared to traditional sweets that generally offer poor or no
nutritional input (Archaina, Sosa, Rivero, & Schebor, 2019; Vergara
et al., 2020).
Recently, many researchers focused their work on the addition of
diverse alternative ingredients to soft and jelly candies: Soares Miranda
et al. (2020) developed jelly candies with fruits and probiotics; Otálora,
de Jesús Barbosa, Perilla, Osorio, and Nazareno (2019) produced
gummy candies colored with Opuntia ficus-indica betalains; Kia,

* Corresponding author. CONICET – Universidad de Buenos Aires, Instituto de Tecnología de Alimentos y Procesos Químicos (ITAPROQ), Buenos Aires. Argentina.
E-mail address: cschebor@di.fcen.uba.ar (C. Schebor).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2021.110894
Received 31 August 2020; Received in revised form 1 January 2021; Accepted 5 January 2021
Available online 12 January 2021
0023-6438/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
R. Rivero et al.
Langroodi, Ghasempour, and Ehsani (2020), developed gummy candies
colored with a red beet extract; and Vergara et al. (2020), added guava
pulp in chewy candies.
Propolis is a GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) natural product
made by bees, which has many beneficial properties (Salas, Zampini,
Maldonado, & Isla, 2018). Propolis is a source of antioxidant com­
pounds, whose activity is due to their free-radical scavenging capacity
(Yan, Zhong, Duan, Chen, & Li, 2020). Additionally, propolis antimi­
crobial effect is connected with a direct action, by altering the perme­
ability of the cellular membrane, disrupting the membrane potential,
reducing the production of ATP, and decreasing the bacterial mobility
(Przybyłek & Karpiński, 2019).
Contemplating all this, the present work sought to develop two types
of gelatin candies, applying combinations of different low-calorie
alternative sweeteners, flavored and colored with fruit juices, and pre­
served without the addition of artificial preservatives. This study also
assessed the consumers’ sensory acceptance, and analyzed candies sta­
bility during storage.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
Propolis was provided by the Cooperativa Apícola of Gualeguaychú.
The ingredients for the gelatin candies (all food grade) were: plain
yogurt without sweeteners (La Serenisima, Buenos Aires, Argentina),
raspberries (Rubus idaeus, var. Atumn Bliss), orange juice without added
sugar (Cepita, Buenos Aires, Argentina), citric acid (RZBC, Anhui,
China), maltodextrin DE 12 (Givaudan, Buenos Aires, Argentina), stevia
(Dulsevia, Misiones, Argentina), isomalt (Beneo, Mannheim, Germany),
ethylmaltol (Perfumers Apprentice; Scotts Valley, US-CA), maltitol 65%
syrup (Ferromet, Buenos Aires, Argentina), synthetic essences (identical
to natural): orange essence 186 (Sensory, Buenos Aires, Argentina) and
raspberry essence 082 (Sensory, Buenos Aires, Argentina), unflavored
gelatin (Royal, San Luis, Argentina). Commercial gelatin candy (CGC,
Mogul, Buenos Aires, Argentina). All the used reagents were of recog­
nized analytical grade.
2.2. Propolis ethanol extract (EEP)
The propolis extract (EEP) was obtained by mixing crude propolis
water:ethanol (30:70) with stirring for 30 min at 30 ◦ C, following
Archaina, Rivero, Sosa, and Baldi Coronel (2015) procedure.
2.3. Yogurt powder
The yogurt was frozen at − 24 C and lyophilized for 48 h in a Lab­
◦
conco lyophilizer (Freezone 1, Kansas City, MO), operating at − 50 ◦ C
and 0.040 mbar. Lyophilized yogurt was manually grinded with a
mortar to obtain a powder.
2.4. Raspberry powder
Raspberries were thawed, processed with a commercial slow juicer
PE-HSJO2 (Hurom, Shanghai, China), the juice was collected, and the
obtained residues were processed 3 more times. The raspberry juice was
added with 25% w/w maltodextrin, and spray-dried using a Mini Spray
Dryer B290 (Büchi, Flawil, Switzerland). The operating conditions were:
air inlet temperature 170 ± 2 ◦ C, flow rate 8 mL/min, air pressure 3.2
bar and nozzle diameter 1.5 mm.
2.5. Gelatin candies preparation
Process stages: 1) mixture of solids (gelatin (8.0–12.0%), isomalt
(10–15%), stevia (0.8–1.0%), and citric acid (0.5–1.5%)); 2) addition of
EEP (6.5–10%); 3) addition of fruit components (orange juice (10–30%),
2
LWT 141 (2021) 110894
or reconstituted raspberry powder (powder:water 1:3) (10–30%); 4)
dissolution of solids at 100 ◦ C stirring for 10 min; 5) addition of maltitol-
syrup (35–55%) and stirring for 5 min at 100 ◦ C; 6) addition of yogurt
powder (3.0–5.0%), ethylmaltol and essences; 7) placing in silicon
molds and storage at 25 ◦ C for 5 h; 8) unmolding and packing in airtight
bags.
2.6. Minimum inhibitory concentration of propolis extract
Different concentrations of propolis extract (0–7.5%) were studied.
The candies were packed and stored for 210 days at 25 ◦ C. A visual
inspection of the samples (quintupled) was carried out daily, evaluating
the presence or absence of macroscopic superficial mycelium according
to Rivero et al. (2020).
2.7. Water content
AOAC 950.46 method (AOAC, 2005, p. 409) was used. Results were
expressed as g water/100 g sample, as the mean ± standard deviation of
3 determinations.
2.8. Water activity (aw)
It was determined using a Hygrolab C1 meter (Rotronic, Bassersdorf,
Switzerland). Results were reported as the mean ± standard deviation of
4 measurements.
2.9. Texture profile analysis (TPA)
A universal test machine (Instron Corporation, Norwood, MA) with a
5 cm diameter stainless steel tip was used. The samples were compressed
30% of their height, at 0.5 mm/s. Results were reported as the mean ±
standard deviation of 10 measurements.
2.10. Color
A handheld colorimeter MiniScan EZ (HunterLab, Reston, VA) was
used, and the coordinates of the CIELAB color space were obtained.
Global color difference (ΔE00) was calculated according to Luo, Cui, and
Rigg (2001). The results were reported as the mean ± standard deviation
of ten measurements.
2.11. In vitro digestion
The in vitro digestion assay proposed by Minekus et al. (2014) was
followed, including the oral, gastric and intestinal phases. After that, the
samples were centrifuged at 10,000 rpm at 4 ◦ C for 10 min and the
supernatant was recovered.
2.12. Antioxidant capacity (AC)
4 g of gelatin candy were dissolved in distilled water at 35 ◦ C and the
mixture was filled up to 100 mL with distilled water.
The TEAC test (Trolox Equivalent Antioxidant Capacity) was carried
out following the procedure of Archaina et al. (2015), using 2,2′ -azi­
nobis- [3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid] (Merck, Darmstadt,
Germany) to produce the radical free cationic ABTS•+. A Trolox (Merck,
Darmstadt, Germany) solution was used to construct a six-point cali­
bration curve (R2 = 0.9954). The results were expressed as mmol Tro­
lox/100 g, as the mean ± standard deviation of 4 replicates.
For the evaluation of AC after in vitro digestion, the supernatant was
diluted (1/25) and the results were expressed as mmol Trolox/kg of
candy.
R. Rivero et al. LWT 141 (2021) 110894

2.13. Total polyphenols content (TPC)
The Folin Ciocalteu method was used according to Archaina et al.
(2019) procedure. A standard curve of gallic acid (Merck, Darmstadt,
Germany) was obtained between 0 and 0.3 mg/mL (R2 = 0.9909). The
results were expressed as mg equivalent of gallic acid (GAE)/100 g, as
the mean ± standard deviation of 3 replicates.
2.14. Sensory evaluation
2.14.1. Internal panel
The different candies prototypes (See supplementary material)
were evaluated by a sensory internal panel composed of 16 untrained
evaluators, with the aim of finding sensorially accepted formulations
(Watts, Ylimaki, Jeffery & Elias, 1992).
H2O/100 g, and a aw value of 0.324 ± 0.002. According to Kumar and
Mishra (2004), the low water content and water activity values of yogurt
powder helps in storage, and favors its use as a food ingredient.
3.1.3. Raspberry powder
The raspberry powder showed relatively good physical properties:
low values of aw (0.184 ± 0.001) and water content (5.5 ± 0.4 g H2O/
100 g), in agreement with data reported by Syamaladevi, Insan, Dha­
wan, Andrews, and Sablani (2012). Furthermore, the solubility of the
powder (82.2 ± 2.1%) coincided with that reported by Yousefi,
Emam-Djomeh, Mousavi, Kobarfard, and Zbicinski (2015), for dried
raspberry powders. Regarding AC, the obtained value (6.38 ± 0.47
mmol Trolox/100 g) was lower than that published by Bilbao-Sainz,
Thai, Sinrod, Chiou, & McHugh (2019) for lyophilized raspberry pow­
ders (11.14 mmol Trolox/100 g) without the addition of matrix.

2.14.2. Rating of liking test

Candies were evaluated by children and adults. Children’s panel: 77
consumers between 7 and 12 years old from the Scout Group No. 02
“Ceferino Namuncurá” and the dining hall “La casa del niño San Martín
de Porres”, both from Gualeguaychú (Entre Ríos, Argentina). Approval
of the children’s parents/guardians was requested before the sensory
assays. Adult’s panel: 80 assessors between 18 and 65 years old,
including students, teaching and non-teaching staff from Facultad de
Bromatología, Universidad Nacional de Entre Ríos.
A 7-point hedonic scale was used: 1) Dislike very much; 2) Dislike; 3)
Dislike slightly; 4) Neither like nor dislike; 5) Like slightly; 6) Like; 7)
Like very much.
2.14.3. Sensory intensity test (JAR)
This test was performed by adult consumers, and the JAR (Just About
Right) scale evaluated sensory intensities on a scale from 1 to 3: 1) Less
than I like; 2) Just how I like; and 3) More than I like.
2.15. Stability studies
OC and RC samples were packed in clear, hermetically sealed bags
and stored for 90 days at 25 ◦ C under artificial light (C1) or darkness
(C2). Condition C1: samples were exposed to light from two fluorescent
lamps providing 7.20 ± 1.24klx measured at the light source and 0.38 ±
0.03klx measured at the point of exposure, with periods of 12 h lighting
and 12 h of darkness. Condition C2: samples were covered with
aluminum foil. Sampling was carried out every 15 days (quintupled).
2.16. Statistical analysis
The results were statistically evaluated by the analysis of variance
(ANOVA) to determine significant differences between samples. The
analysis of the means was performed through the LSD Fisher procedure
at p < 0.05 using the software Infostat v.2008.
3. Results and discussion
3.2. Gelatin candies formulation
Sensory tests on the different prototypes were performed by an in­
ternal panel (See supplementary material). Two sensory acceptable
products were attained (Table 1): Orange Candy (OC) and Raspberry
Candy (RC). A suitable taste was achieved through blends of various
ingredients. The addition of fruit essences and ethylmaltol in low con­
centrations was needed to highlight the flavors, in order to meet the
local taste of consumers. The developed candies were compared to a
commercial gelatin candy (Table 1), and the main difference was the
high content of sugar and syrups, and the lack of natural products
observed in the commercial product.
3.3. Inhibition of fungal growth
Gelatin candies presented aw values higher than 0.6 suggesting that it
was likely to have deteriorating fungal growth during storage (Ergun,
Lietha, & Hartel, 2010). In this case, citric acid and propolis extract were
included in the formulations to avoid/diminish the development of
fungi. In order to determine if the chosen formulations would be stable
along storage, fungal growth was followed in candies containing
increasing amounts of EEP (Fig. 1). To achieve fungal inhibition for a
period of 210 days, it was necessary to incorporate at least 6% EEP for
OC (Figs. 1A) and 7.5% EEP for RC (Fig. 1B). As 7.5% EEP was sensory
accepted by the internal panel, this concentration was set for both for­
mulations. Regarding the Argentinean legislation (CAA, 2018), the
maximum propolis intake should not be higher than 300 mg/day, and
150 mg/day, for adults and children, respectively. In this case, one
portion of gelatin candies (5 units = 15 g) contain 31 mg of propolis, a
value much lower than the maximum regulated dose.
Table 1
Composition of the developed orange (OC) and raspberry (RC) gelatin candies
and a commercial gelatin candy.
Developed gelatin candies Commercial gelatin candy

Ingredients (%) OC RC Ingredients (%)

3.1. Developed ingredients characterization
Maltitol syrup 52.2 40.7 Sugar and syrups 70–80
3.1.1. Propolis ethanolic extract (EEP) Water – 18.7 Water 10–20
Isomalt 12.5 12.8 Gelatin 3–8
A propolis extract (60% yield) with a resin content of 1.25 ± 0.03 g/ Stevia 1.0 1.0 Citric acid 1–3
100 mL, having an AC of 603 ± 142 mmol Trolox/100 g EEP was ob­ EEP 7.5 7.5 Polyols 0.5–1.0
tained. Comparing with other studies, Brazilian propolis exhibited Gelatin powder 10.8 8.6 Essence and 0.5–1.0
higher AC values between 849.2 and 877.46 mmol Trolox/100 g colorants
Reconstituted raspberry 5.2 Starch NA*
(Augusto-Obara et al., 2019). In contrast, propolis extracts from Buenos –
powder
Aires (Argentina) showed lower AC values, from 84.3 to 168.3 mmol Orange juice 10.9 – *NA= Necessary amount
Trolox/100 g (Fangio, Orallo, Gende, & Churio, 2019). Yogurt powder 4.02 4.57
Citric acid 1.0 0.9
3.1.2. Yogurt powder Ethylmaltol 0.05 0.05
Essence (orange or raspberry) 0.05 0.05
The yogurt powder presented a water content of 4.96 ± 0.13 g of

3
R. Rivero et al. LWT 141 (2021) 110894

Table 3
Characterization of the developed gelatin candies (OC and RC), and a com­
mercial gelatin candy (CGC).
Determinations OC RC CGC

aw 0.768 ± 0.824 ± 0.700 ±

0.004a 0.004b 0.003c
Water content g/100 g 28.6 ± 1.29a 34.1 ± 1.77b 14.9 ± 0.98c
Texture Hardness (mPa) 0.066 ± 0.054 ± 0.077 ±
0.012a 0.009a 0.011b
Cohesiveness 0.896 ± 0.831 ± 0.707 ±
0.045a 0.023a 0.006b
Gumminess (mPa) 0.059 ± 0.045 ± 0.054 ±
0.009a 0.006a 0.009a
Chewiness (mPa) 0.057 ± 0.040 ± 0.047 ±
0.010a 0.005b 0.007ab
Elasticity 0.954 ± 0.911 ± 0.859 ± 0.15b
0.043a 0.019a
Adhesiveness − 0.004 ± − 0.003 ± − 0.004 ±
(mPa*s) 0.002a 0.001a 0.002a

Values with different letters in the same row, show significant differences(p <
0.05).

Fig. 1. Effect of EEP content on fungal growth in gelatin candies during storage
for OC (A) and RC (B). Different letters on the bars show significant differences
(p < 0.05).
3.4. Rating of liking degree
A descriptive statistical analysis was carried out in order to analyze
the semantics used by consumers in the rating of liking. In the case of
adults, the highest number of responses were located in the liking
classifications, mainly in the category “Like” (mode = 6) for both
candies with 74% and 81% consumers, for OC and RC, respectively.
Regarding children, the liking categories were represented by 56%
consumers (mode = 6) for OC, and by 82% consumers (mode = 7) for
RC. A two-way ANOVA analysis (Table 2) showed significant differences
between the candies formulations (p < 0.01) for children, displaying
higher acceptance for RC. Meanwhile, for adults no significant differ­
ences were observed between OC and RC degree of liking.
Based on this, both formulations could be good alternatives for adults
looking for new options of lower calories products. However, in children
the perception of liking was different, possibly owing to multisensory
factors. On one hand, children do not perceive bitter and sweet flavors
with the same intensity than adults (Mennella, Nolden, & Bobowski,
2018), and on the other hand, their attention is strongly influenced by
intense colors (Brunk & Møller, 2019). Therefore, RC could replace
traditional candies for children, providing nutrients and phytochemicals
to their diet, without the incorporation of traditional sugars.
3.5. Candies characterization
Water activity and water content values (Table 3) were in the range
of those reported by Efe, Bielejewski, Tritt-Goc, Mert, and Oztop (2019),
and Mutlu et al. (2018) for jelly candies. Regarding the textural char­
acteristics, there were no significant differences between the formula­
tions except in the chewiness that was lower in RC. When comparing
with a similar commercial gelatin candy, the adhesiveness, gumminess,
and chewiness did not show statistical differences compared to RC and
OC, while the commercial product presented lower hardness and higher
elasticity and cohesiveness.
The color (Table 4) observed in the two candies could be associated
with the different fruits used in their preparation. RC were darker
samples due to the presence of raspberry powder which provided a
lower L* than that given by orange juice. Also, OC showed much higher
b* values due to their natural yellow hue. Additionally, the candies were
opaque due to the presence of yogurt powder.
The potential functional properties of the candies were TPC (491.9 ±
33.8 and 550.8 ± 84.7 mg GAE/100 g for OC and RC, respectively) and
AC (1.60 ± 0.06 and 1.82 ± 0.08 mmol Trolox/100 g for OC and RC,
respectively). The TPC values of OC and RC candies were higher than
those of other potentially functional candies: Cano-Lamadrid et al.
(2020) reported TPC: 72–159 mg GAE/100 g for pomegranate
juice-based candies, while Šeremet et al. (2020) showed TPC: 170–180
mg GAE/100 g for white tea-based candies. Also, Rubio-Arraez, Bena­
vent, Ortolá, and Castelló (2018) developed watermelon jellies with
isomaltulose or tagatose showing higher AC values (8.8 and 8.3 mmol
Trolox/100 g, respectively).
The bioaccessible AC fraction after in vitro digestion was evaluated,
obtaining 6.59 ± 0.87 and 9.71 ± 0.28 mmol Trolox/kg, for OC and RC,
respectively. Gelatin candies are simple food matrices from which
antioxidant compounds could be easily released during the digestion
process, thus providing a favorable antioxidant environment to the
digestive tract. The bioaccessible AC values were comparable with those
reported in lyophilized blackcurrant and yogurt candies, 6.9 mmol
Trolox/kg (Archaina et al., 2019).

Table 4
Table 2 Color parameters and photographs of the developed gelatin candies.
Two-way ANOVA analysis of the degree of liking data, considering OC and RC
formulations, and adults or children consumers. Chromatic coordinates OC RC

Statistical analysis Between formulations

Adults Children

F values 2.32 28.35

P 0.13 <0.01 L* 66.2 ± 0.5a 42.8 ± 2.0b
Critical F 3.96 3.97 a* 4.4 ± 0.2a 8.9 ± 0.3b
b* 33.8 ± 1.9a 4.2 ± 0.3b
If the values of F are higher than those of critical F, the samples are significantly
different for a p < 0.05. Different letters in the same row indicate a significant difference (P < 0.05).

4
R. Rivero et al.
3.6. Sensory perception of attributes
Fig. 2 shows the attributes tested by the panel of adult consumers.
The flavor attributes were perceived in a similar way in both candies,
considering the acidity and bitterness at its right point, but with low
sweetness. The perception of the last two attributes could be intimately
related, since the increase/decrease of one can induce the other to be
perceived inversely (Di Pizio, Shoshan-Galeczki, Hayes, & Niv, 2019).
Regarding texture, a high proportion of the consumers perceived OC
with high gumminess, while RC was mostly perceived as ideal. This
result did not coincide with the instrumental analysis of gumminess
(Table 3), probably because the consumers may have evaluated the
gumminess differently than it is considered with the instrumental test.
Regarding color, OC were considered too light according to the taste
of the consumers, while RC had the intensity just as expected for a
raspberry candy.
3.7. Stability during storage
The potential functional properties, and some texture variables
(cohesiveness, adhesiveness and elasticity) did not present significant
changes along 90 days at 25 ◦ C under artificial light (C1) or darkness
(C2). Furthermore, the addition of citric acid and 7.5% EEP guaranteed
microbiological stability during the stability study.
The characteristics that significantly varied over time were water
Fig. 2. Intensity of the attributes studied during the characterization of the OC and RC. JAR scale: black bars: More than I like; gray bars: Just how I like, and white
bars: Less than I like.
5
LWT 141 (2021) 110894
content (OC: 28%–23%; RC: 34%–30%) and aw (OC: 0.766 to 0.763; RC:
0.821 to 0.812). Only the water content varied significantly with the
type of lighting. Regarding texture, both formulations exhibited slight
but significant increases of hardness (OC: 0.066–0.112 mPa; RC:
0.053–0.080 mPa), gumminess (OC: 0.059–0.093 mPa; RC:
0.045–0.070 mPa) and chewiness (OC: 0.057–0.088 mPa; RC:
0.057–0.065 mPa) after 75 days. This behavior in the texture variables
could be due to the decrease in humidity. Kopjar, Pichler, Turi, and
Piližota (2016) suggested that minimizing moisture loss from gelatin
candies is very important to maintain the structural quality of the
products.
Also, chromatic properties manifested significant changes over time,
being more relevant in condition C1 (Fig. 3). Candies showed darkening,
probably caused by non-enzymatic browning and vitamin C deteriora­
tion in OC (Fig. 3A), and also to changes of the anthocyanins present in
RC (Fig. 3B) (Odriozola-Serrano, Soliva-Fortuny, & Martín-Belloso,
2009). According to Keraitė, Sivakova, and Kiuberis (2017), the color
changes are perceived with the naked eye when 2 < ΔE00<10. There­
fore, both formulations presented perceptible color changes after 40
days for condition C1 and after 60 days for condition C2, being more
important for RC.
4. Conclusions
Two sensory acceptable candies showing an improved nutritional
R. Rivero et al.
Fig. 3. ΔE00 as a function of storage time. OC (A) and RC (B). Blue symbols and
lines (C1); black symbols and lines (C2). Dotted line indicates the threshold for
color changes perception by the human eye. The error bars show the standard
deviation of the means. (For interpretation of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)
profile, were developed, and presented good perspectives to replace
traditional products. Both formulations showed physicochemical char­
acteristics expected for gelatin candies and were sensory acceptable for
adult and children consumers, allowing to have a sweet alternative that
addresses current trends to reduce the consumption of refined sugar.
Interesting potential functional properties were also a positive feature of
these gelatin candies. The products showed slight variations during
storage and depended on the type of lighting, indicating the necessity to
protect them from light to increase their shelf life, mainly to avoid color
deterioration and water loss. In the future, pilot scale studies will be
performed, aiming to transfer this process to small food manufacturers.
Additionally, other fruit components will be assessed in order to broaden
the options.
Statement on conflict of interest
As corresponding author, hereby I declare that the coauthors have
accepted to be represented by myself. All the authors certify that they
have NO affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity
with any financial interest, or non-financial interest in the subject matter
or materials discussed in this manuscript.
Funding
Universidad de Buenos Aires (UBACYT 20020150100188BA), and
Agencia Nacional de Promoción Científica y Tecnológica, Argentina
(PICT 2014/2250).
CRediT author statement
Roy Rivero: Investigation, Validation, Visualization, Writing -
Original Draft. Diego Archaina: Investigation, Validation. Natalia
Sosa: Methodology, Formal analysis, Supervision. Carolina Schebor:
Conceptualization, Methodology, Resources, Writing - Review & Edit­
ing, Supervision, Project administration, Funding acquisition.
6
LWT 141 (2021) 110894
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.lwt.2021.110894.
References
Aoac. (2005). Official methods of analysis of AOAC international (18th ed.). Gaithersburg,
MD: Association of Official Analytical Chemist.
Aranda-González, I., Tamayo-Dzul, O., Barbosa-Martín, E., Segura-Campos, M., Moguel-
Ordoñez, Y., & Betancur-Ancona, D. (2015). Desarrollo de una golosina tipo
“gomita” reducida en calorías mediante la sustitución de azúcares con stevia
rebaudiana B. Nutrición Hospitalaria, 31(1), 334–340.
Archaina, D., Rivero, R., Sosa, N., & Baldi Coronel, B. (2015). Influence of the harvesting
procedure and extracting process on the antioxidant capacity of ethanolic propolis
extracts. Journal of Apicultural Research, 54(5), 474–481.
Archaina, D., Sosa, N., Rivero, R., & Schebor, C. (2019). Freeze-dried candies from
blackcurrant (Ribes nigrum L.) and yoghurt. Physicochemical and sensorial
characterization. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and
Technology, 100, 444–449.
Augusto-Obara, T. R., de Oliveira, J., Micotti da Gloria, E., Spoto, M., Godoy, K., Ferreira
de Souza Vieira, T. M., et al. (2019). Benefits of superfine grinding method on
antioxidant and antifungal characteristic of Brazilian green propolis extract. Scientia
Agricola, 76(5), 398–404.
Bataglia da Silva, L., Bonifácio Queiroz, M., Fadini, A. L., da Fonseca, R. C. C.,
Germer, S. P. M., & Efraim, P. (2016). Chewy candy as a model system to study the
influence of polyols and fruit pulp (açai) on texture and sensorial properties.
Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and Technology, 65, 268–274.
Bilbao-Sainz, C., Thai, S., Sinrod, A. J., Chiou, B. S., & McHugh, T. (2019). Functionality
of freeze-dried berry powder on frozen dairy desserts. Journal of Food Processing and
Preservation, 43(9), Article e14076.
Brunk, L., & Møller, P. (2019). Do children prefer colored plates? Food Quality and
Preference, 73, 65–74.
Buttriss, J. L. (2017). Challenges and opportunities in the use of low-energy sugar
replacers. Nutrition Bulletin, 42(2), 108–112.
Caa. (2018). Código Alimentario Argentino. Capítulo XVII: Alimentos de Regimen o Dieteticos.
Art. 1384 http://www.anmat.gov.ar/webanmat/codigoa/CAPITULO_XVII_Dietet
icos_actualiz-06-09.pdf/.
Cano-Lamadrid, M., Calín-Sánchez, Á., Clemente-Villalba, J., Hernández, F., Carbonell-
Barrachina, Á. A., Sendra, E., et al. (2020). Quality parameters and consumer
acceptance of jelly candies based on pomegranate juice “Mollar de Elche”. Foods, 9
(4), 516.
Di Monaco, R., Miele, N. A., Cabisidan, E. K., & Cavella, S. (2018). Strategies to reduce
sugars in food. Current Opinion in Food Science, 19, 92–97.
Di Pizio, A., Shoshan-Galeczki, Y. B., Hayes, J. E., & Niv, M. Y. (2019). Bitter and sweet
tasting molecules: It’s complicated. Neuroscience Letters, 700, 56–63.
Efe, N., Bielejewski, M., Tritt-Goc, J., Mert, B., & Oztop, M. H. (2019). NMR relaxometry
study of gelatin based low-calorie soft candies. Molecular Physics, 1–12.
Ergun, R., Lietha, R., & Hartel, R. W. (2010). Moisture and shelf life in sugar confections.
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 50(2), 162–192.
Fangio, M. F., Orallo, D. E., Gende, L. B., & Churio, M. S. (2019). Chemical
characterization and antimicrobial activity against Paenibacillus larvae of propolis
from Buenos Aires province, Argentina. Journal of Apicultural Research, 1–13.
Grembecka, M. (2015). Sugar alcohols—their role in the modern world of sweeteners: A
review. European Food Research and Technology, 241(1), 1–14.
Harismah, K., Mirzaei, M., & Fuadi, A. M. (2018). Stevia rebaudiana in food and beverage
applications and its potential antioxidant and antidiabetic: Mini review. Advanced
Science Letters, 24(12), 9133–9137.
Hastaoğlu, E., Can, Ö. P., & Vural, H. (2018). The effects of colorants used in hotel
kitchens in terms of child health. European Journal of Science and Technology, 14,
10–16.
Jiamjariyatam, R. (2018). Influence of gelatin and isomaltulose on gummy jelly
properties. International Food Research Journal, 25(2), 776–783.
Kearsley, M. W., & Deis, R. C. (2012). Maltitol powder. In K. O’Donnell, & M. W. Kearsley
(Eds.), Sweeteners and sugar alternatives in food technology (pp. 295–308).
Keraitė, G., Sivakova, B., & Kiuberis, J. (2017). Investigation of the impact of organic and
inorganic halides on the ageing stability of paper with iron gall ink. Chemija, 28(3),
137–147.
Kia, E. M., Langroodi, A. M., Ghasempour, Z., & Ehsani, A. (2020). Red beet extract usage
in gelatin/gellan based gummy candy formulation introducing Salix aegyptiaca
distillate as a flavouring agent. Journal of Food Science & Technology, 57(9),
3355–3362.
Kopjar, M., Pichler, A., Turi, J., & Piližota, V. (2016). Influence of trehalose addition on
antioxidant activity, colour and texture of orange jelly during storage. International
Journal of Food Science and Technology, 51(12), 2640–2646.
Kumar, P., & Mishra, H. N. (2004). Yoghurt powder - a review of process technology,
storage and utilization. Food and Bioproducts Processing, 82(C2), 133–142.
Luo, M. R., Cui, G., & Rigg, B. (2001). The development of the CIE 2000 colour-difference
formula: CIEDE2000. Color Research & Application, 26(5), 340–350.
Mahato, D. K., Keast, R., Liem, D. G., Russell, C. G., Cicerale, S., & Gamlath, S. (2020).
Optimization of natural sweeteners for sugar reduction in chocolate flavoured milk
and their impact on sensory attributes. International Dairy Journal, 104922.
R. Rivero et al.
Mennella, J. A., Nolden, A. A., & Bobowski, N. (2018). Measuring sweet and bitter taste
in children: Individual variation due to age and taste genetics. Pediatric Food
Preferences and Eating Behaviors, 1–34.
Minekus, M., Alminger, M., Alvito, P., Balance, S., Bohn, T., Bourlieu, C., et al. (2014).
A standardised static in-vitro digestion method suitable for food - an international
consensus. Food and Function, 5(6), 1113–1124.
Naughton, P., McCarthy, M., & McCarthy, S. (2017). Reducing consumption of
confectionery foods: A post-hoc segmentation analysis using a social cognition
approach. Appetite, 117, 168–178.
Odriozola-Serrano, I., Soliva-Fortuny, R., & Martín-Belloso, O. (2009). Influence of
storage temperature on the kinetics of the changes in anthocyanins, vitamin C, and
antioxidant capacity in fresh-cut strawberries stored under high-oxygen
atmospheres. Journal of Food Science, 74(2), C184–C191.
Otálora, M. C., de Jesús Barbosa, H., Perilla, J. E., Osorio, C., & Nazareno, M. A. (2019).
Encapsulated betalains (Opuntia ficus-indica) as natural colorants. Case study:
Gummy candies. LWT - Food Science and Technology (Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und
-Technologie), 103, 222–227.
Przybyłek, I., & Karpiński, T. M. (2019). Antibacterial properties of propolis. Molecules,
24(11), 2047.
Putnik, P., Bezuk, I., Barba, F. J., Lorenzo, J. M., Polunić, I., & Bursać, D. K. (2020). Sugar
reduction: Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni as a natural sweetener. In F. Barba, P. Putnik, &
D. Bursać Kovačević (Eds.), Agri-food industry strategies for healthy diets and
sustainability (pp. 123–152).
Rivero, R., Archaina, D., Sosa, N., Leiva, G., Baldi Coronel, B., & Schebor, C. (2020).
Development of healthy gummy jellies containing honey and propolis. Journal of the
Science of Food and Agriculture, 100(3), 1030–1037.
Rubio-Arraez, S., Benavent, C., Ortolá, M. D., & Castelló, M. L. (2018). Influence of low
glycaemic index sweeteners on antioxidant, sensory, mechanical, and
physicochemical properties of a watermelon jelly. Journal of Food Quality, 1–7.
Salas, A., Zampini, I. C., Maldonado, L., & Isla, M. I. (2018). Development of a bioproduct
for medicinal use with extracts of Zuccagnia-type propolis. Natural Product
Communications, 13(2), 1934578X1801300214.
LWT 141 (2021) 110894
Schweiggert, R. M. (2018). Perspective on the ongoing replacement of artificial and
animal-based dyes with alternative natural pigments in foods and beverages. Journal
of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 66(12), 3074–3081.
Sentko, A., & Willibald-Ettle, I. (2012). Sweeteners and sugar alternatives in food
technology. In K. O’Donnell, & M. W. Kearsley (Eds.), Isomalt (pp. 243–274).
Šeremet, D., Mandura, A., Cebin, A. V., Martinić, A., Galić, K., & Komes, D. (2020).
Challenges in confectionery industry: Development and storage stability of
innovative white tea-based candies. Journal of Food Science, 85(7), 2060–2068.
Soares Miranda, J., Veltre Costa, B., Valente de Oliveira, I., Nunes de Lima, D. C., Furtado
Martins, E. M., de Castro Leite Júnior, B. R., et al. (2020). Probiotic jelly candies
enriched with native Atlantic Forest fruits and Bacillus coagulans GBI-30 6086.
Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und -Technologie- Food Science and Technology, 126, 109275.
Spanemberg, F. E., Korzenowski, A. L., & Sellitto, M. A. (2019). Effects of sugar
composition on shelf life of hard candy: Optimization study using D-optimal mixture
design of experiments. Journal of Food Process Engineering, 42(6), Article e13213.
Syamaladevi, R. M., Insan, S. K., Dhawan, S., Andrews, P., & Sablani, S. S. (2012).
Physicochemical properties of encapsulated red raspberry (Rubus idaeus) powder:
Influence of high-pressure homogenization. Drying Technology, 30(5), 484–493.
Vergara, L. P., Reissig, G. N., Franzon, R. C., Carvalho, I. R., Zambiazi, R. C.,
Rodrigues, R. S., et al. (2020). Stability of bioactive compounds in conventional and
low-calorie sweet chewable candies prepared with red and yellow strawberry guava
pulps. International Food Research Journal, 27(4), 625–634.
Watts, B. M., Ylimaki, G. L., Jeffery, L. E., & Elías, L. G. (1992). Métodos sensoriales básicos
para la evaluación de alimentos. Ottawa, Canadá: CIID.
Who. (2015). Guideline: Sugars intake for adults and children. https://www.who.int/publi
cations/i/item/9789241549028.
Yan, Z., Zhong, Y., Duan, Y., Chen, Q., & Li, F. (2020). Antioxidant mechanism of tea
polyphenols and its impact on health benefits. Animal Nutrition, 115–123.
Yousefi, S., Emam-Djomeh, Z., Mousavi, M., Kobarfard, F., & Zbicinski, I. (2015).
Developing spray-dried powders containing anthocyanins of black raspberry juice
encapsulated based on fenugreek gum. Advanced Powder Technology, 26(2), 462–469.