International Journal of Chemical Studies 2019; 7(3): 280-282
P-ISSN: 2349–8528
E-ISSN: 2321–4902
IJCS 2019; 7(3): 280-282
© 2019 IJCS
Received: 17-03-2019
Accepted: 21-04-2019
Monika Yadav
M.Sc. Scholar, Food Science and
Technology, Warner College of
Dairy Technology, SHUATS,
Prayagraj, Allahabad, Uttar
Pradesh, India
SK Aktar Hossain
Associate Professor, Warner
College of Dairy Technology,
SHUATS, Prayagraj, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh, India
Binod Kumar Bharti
Assistant Professor Cum Jr.
Scientist, SGIDT Bihar Animal
Sciences University, Patna,
Bihar, India
Anamika Das
Assistant Professor, Warner
College of Dairy Technology,
SHUATS, Prayagraj, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh, India
Prachi K Wasnik
Ph.D., Scholar, Dairy
Technology Warner College of
Dairy Technology, SHUATS,
Prayagraj, Allahabad, Uttar
Pradesh, India
SN Thakur
Assistant Professor, Warner
College of Dairy Technology,
SHUATS, Prayagraj, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh, India
Correspondence
SK Aktar Hossain
Associate Professor, Warner
College of Dairy Technology,
SHUATS, Prayagraj, Allahabad,
Uttar Pradesh, India
Study on microbiological characteristics of
different brands of jam, honey and jelly
Monika Yadav, SK Aktar Hossain, Binod Kumar Bharti, Anamika Das,
Prachi K Wasnik and SN Thakur
Abstract
The present study of microbiological characteristics (Yeast & mould and coliform) by using the
microbiological methods and the values were found in average count of Jam, Honey and Jelly. The mean
value of yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) count in Jam was found to be T1 (5.67), T2 (5.67) and T3 (6.33)
and the mean value indicate that sample T3 has highest yeast and mould count (6.33) and the lowest value
was obtained by sample T1 (5.67) and coliform (×103cfu/ml) was found to be nil. The mean value of
yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) count in Honey was found to be T1 (1.67), T2 (1.33) and T3 (2.33) and the
mean value indicate that sample T3 has highest yeast and mould count (2.33) and the lowest value was
obtained by sample T2 (1.33) and coliform (×103cfu/ml) was also found to be nil. Similarly, the mean
value of yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) count in Jelly was found to be T1 (5.00), T2 (4.33) and T3 (4.67)
and the mean value indicate that sample T1 has highest yeast and mould count (5.00) and the lowest value
was obtained by sample T2 (4.33) and coliform (×103cfu/ml) was found to be nil.
Keywords: Jam, honey, jelly, yeast & mould, coliform
Introduction
Honey is an important food for Homo sapiens since the beginning. This wonderfully rich
golden liquid has been extolled in almost all religious manuscripts as the nectar of the gods
which is a medicinal food (National Honey Board, 2010) [10]. In most ancient cultures honey
has been used for both nutritional purposes and for drug (Bogdanov 2012) [3]. Codex
Alimentarius Commission (2009) [4], defined as honey is the natural sweet substance and it
produced by honey bees, Apis mellifera, from the nectar of plants or excretions of plant
sucking insects on the living parts of plants, which honey bees collect, transform by combining
with specific substances of their own, dehydrate, deposit, store and leave in the honey comb to
ripen and mature (Codex Alimentarius Commission 2001a [6]; Codex Alimentarius
Commission 2001b) [5]. The bees are said to produce honey in order to serve as their source of
food in times of scarcity and also during harsh weather conditions (James et al., 2009) [7].
Honey as a functional health food and uses of other honey-bee products are still incipient and
the need to understand and analyze the health benefits of natural honey becomes imperative
(Al-Quassemi and Robinson 2003) [1].
Jams are solid gels made from fruit pulp or fruit juice, sugar and added pectin. It is made from
single fruits or a combination of fruits. Jam is the product brought to a suitable consistency,
made from the whole fruits, pieces of fruits, the unconcentrated and concentrated fruit pulp or
fruit puree of one or other kinds of fruit, which is mixed with food stuffs with sweetening
properties with or without addition of water (Codex Alimentarius Commission 2009) [4]. The
ingredients of fruit jam are fruit pulp, sugar and glucose syrup, thickeners and citric acid to
bring the pH into desired range (Javanmard and JohariEndan, 2010) [8]. Sugar has a key
technological role in the traditional jam’s confection, as it influences the soluble solids content
there by being essential for the physical, chemical, and sensorial properties of jams and also
increasing its microbiological stability and hence safety (Basu et al., 2010) [2]. In the traditional
manufacturing of jams, sucrose binds water inducing pectin gelatinization (Suutanen 2002) [11],
Jam is an intermediate moisture food prepared for boiling fruit pulp with sugar, pectin, acid
and other ingredients to reasonably thick consistency firm enough to hold the fruit tissues in
position. (Lal et al., 1998) [9].
Jellies are defined by the products brought to semisolid gelled consistency and made from the
juice and/or aqueous extracts of one or more fruits or vegetables, mix with foodstuffs with
~ 280 ~
International Journal of Chemical Studies

sweetening properties with or without the addition of water Table 3: Average data of jelly in triplets of different parameters
(Codex Alimentarius Commission 2009) [4]. Jelly should not Parameters Treatment (Mean) value
be gummy, sticky, or syrupy or have crystallized sugar. The T1 T2 T3 S/NS
jelly product should free from dullness with little or no Microbiological analysis
synersis and neither tough nor rubbery. The objective of the Yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) 5.00±1.00a 4.33±0.70a 4.67±0.70a NS
present study was to investigate the microbiological Coliform (×101cfu/ml) NIL NIL NIL _
characteristics of selected different brands of jam, honey and Table indicates the mean ± S.D. and superscript shows non-
jelly. significant difference between the Treatment (P≥0.05)

Material and Methods Jam

All experimental studies were carried out at the lab of Food Yeast and Mould (×103cfu/ml) count
Science and Technology, Warner College of Dairy The mean value of Yeast and Mould in different sample of
Technology, Sam Higginbottom University of Agriculture, Jam in triplicate was found to be 5.67 to 6.33 for different
Technology and Sciences, Prayagraj, U.P. and Research Lab sample. The mean value indicate that sample T3 has highest
“FICCI Research and Analysis Centre plot no.2A, Sector 8 Yeast and mould count (6.33) and the lowest value was
Dwarka, New Delhi-110077. obtained by sample T1 (5.67). The C.D. value at 5% was
observed 2.20. The difference between the mean value of T1-
Material required T2 (0.00), T1-T3 (0.67) and T2-T3 (0.67) was less than the C.D.
Raw Materials Value (2.20). Therefore, the difference was non- significant.
Three (3) samples of Honey, jam and jelly collected from
Reliance shopping mall located in Dwarka, New Delhi. All
the samples were collected freshly in sterile containers
(labelled with numbers, place and date of collection) and
stored at ambient temperature until analyse.
Chemicals and Reagents- All chemicals and reagents were
used of analytical grade, unless state otherwise.
Microbial analysis was determined as per procedure laid
down in IS: 1947 part 3 and manual in food bacteriology,
ICAR Publications (1972)
Statistical analysis- All data were analyzed by MS Excel,
2007.

Results and Discussion

The present study was undertaken to evolve “Study on
microbiological characteristics of different brands of Jam,
honey and jelly”. The data collected on different aspects were
tabulated and analysed statistically by using the method of
analysis of variance (ANOVA) and critical difference (C.D.).
The significance and non-significance differences observed
were analysed critically within and between combinations.
The microbial results obtained from the analysis are presented
under the average data of jam, honey and jelly in triplets of
different parameters. A comparative study of physico-
chemical property in different brands of jam, honey and jelly
was reported by Yadav (2018) [12].
Table 1: Average data of jam in triplets of different parameters
Parameters Treatment (Mean) value
T1 T2 T3 S/NS
Microbiological analysis
Yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) 5.67±0.5a 5.67±1.07a 6.33±1.07a NS
Coliform (×101cfu/ml) NIL NIL NIL _
Table indicates the mean ± S.D. and superscript shows non-
significant difference between the treatments (P≥0.05)
Fig 1: Graph depicting average Yeast and mould of different jam
samples
Coliform (×101cfu/ml)
The mean value of coliform was found to be as NIL in
different jam samples.
Honey
Yeast and Mould (×103cfu/ml) count
The mean value of Yeast and mould was found to be 1.33 to
2.33 for different sample. The mean value indicate that
sample T3 has highest yeast and mould (2.33) followed by the
sample T1 (1.67) and the lowest value was obtained by sample
T2 (1.33). It was statistically analysed that the C.D. value at
5% was 1.51. The difference between the mean value of T1-T2
(0.33), T1-T3 (0.67) and T2-T3 (1.00) was less than the C.D.
Value (1.51). Therefore, the difference was non-significant.

Table 2: Average data of honey in triplets of different parameters

Parameters Treatment (Mean) value
T1 T2 T3 S/NS
Microbiological analysis
Yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) 1.67±0.74a 1.33±1.29a 2.33±0.99a NS
Coliform (×101cfu/ml) NIL NIL NIL _
Table indicates the mean ± S.D. and superscript shows non-
significant difference between the treatments (P≥0.05) Fig 2: Graph depicting average Yeast and mould of different honey
samples
~ 281 ~
International Journal of Chemical Studies
Coliform (×101cfu/ml)
The mean value of coliform (×101cfu/ml) in different sample
of honey, in triplicate, was found to be as NIL.
Jelly
Yeast and Mould (×103cfu/ml) count
The mean value of Yeast and mould was found to be 4.33 to
5.00 for different sample. The mean value indicate that
sample T1 has highest Yeast and mould value (5.00) followed
by the sample T3 (4.67) and the lowest value was obtained by
sample T2 (4.33), further the data was subjected to statistically
analysed that the C.D. at 5% to be 1.85. The result of
ANOVA Shows that F calculated value (0.5) is less than the F
tabulated value (6.944) at 5% level of significant. Therefore,
the difference was non- significant between different Jelly
Sample. The difference between the mean value of T1-T2
(0.67), T1-T3 (0.33) and T2-T3 (0.33) was less than the C.D.
Value (1.85). Therefore, the difference was non- significant.
Fig 3: Graph depicting average percent of Yeast and mould of
different jelly samples
Coliform (×101cfu/ml)
The mean value of coliform, in triplicate was found to be as
NIL in different jelly samples.
Conclusion
In this study, three samples of honeys, jam and jelly were
investigated for microbiological analysis. In this investigation,
the mean value of Jam sample T3 has highest Yeast and
mould (×103cfu/ml) the lowest value was obtained by Jam
sample T1 and T2. Therefore, the difference was non-
significant between different samples. Coliform (×101cfu/ml)
of Jam was recorded in all the sample was NIL. Similarly, the
mean value of Honey sample T3 has highest yeast and mould
(×103cfu/ml) and the lowest value was obtained by Honey
sample T2. Coliform (×101 cfu/ml) of Honey was recorded in
all the sample was NIL. The mean value of Jelly sample T1
has highest Yeast and mould (×103cfu/ml) count and the
lowest value was obtained by Jelly sample T2. Therefore, the
difference was non- significant between different samples.
Coliform (×101cfu/ml) of Jelly was recorded in all the sample
was NIL.
Acknowledgement
The authors are highly thankful to the Dean, Warner College
of Dairy Technology, Sam Higginbottom University of
Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Prayagraj (U.P.) and
Research Lab “FICCI Research and Analysis Centre, Dwarka,
New Delhi for providing the facilities required and financial
support for conducting the research work.
~ 282 ~
References
1. Al-Quassemi R, Robinson RK. Some special nutritional
properties of honey - a brief review. Nutrition and Food
Science. 2003; 33(6):254-260.
2. Basu S, Shivhare US. Rheological, textural,
microstructural and sensory properties of mango jam.
Journal of Food Engineering. 2010; 100(2):357-365.
3. Bogdanov S. Honey as Nutrient and Functional Food.
Bee Product Science. 2012; 15:1-37.
4. Codex Alimentarius Commission, 2009.
5. Codex Alimentarius Commission. Codex Standard 12,
Revised Codex Standard for Honey, Standards and
Standard Methods 11, 2001b.
6. Codex Alimentarius Commission. Codex Standard for
Honey, FAO, Rome. Alinorm. 2001a; 1:19-26.
7. James OO, Mesubi MA, Usman LA, Yeye SO, Ajanaku
KO. Physical characteristics of some honey samples from
North-Central Nigeria. International Journal of Physical
Sciences. 2009; 4:464-470.
8. Javanmard M, Johari Endan N. A Survey on Rheological
Properties of Fruit Jams, International Journal of
Chemical Engineering and Applications. 2010; 1(1):31-
37.
9. Lal G, Siddappaa GS, Tandon GL. Preservation of Fruit
and Vegetables, Directorate of Information and
Publications of Agriculture, Krishi Anusandhan Bhawan
ICAR Publication, Vinayak Press, New Delhi (INDIA),
1998, 156-157.
10. National Honey Board. Carbohydrates and the Sweetness
of Honey, 2010. Available: http://nhb.gov.in/area-
pro/database.
11. Suutarinen M. Effects of pre-freezing treatments on the
structure of strawberries and jams (Ph.D. thesis), VTT,
Helsinki University of Technology, Espoo, Finland,
2002.
12. Yadav Monika, Hossain SK Aktar, Bharti Binod Kumar,
Jaiswal Meghna. Comparative study of physico-chemical
property in different brands of jam, honey and jelly.
Journal of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry. 2018;
7(5):2186-2191.