Lebensm.-Wiss. u.-Technol.

, 33, 132}137 (2000)

Storage Stability of Guava Fruit Bar Prepared Using

a New Process
P. Vijayanand, A. R. Yadav, N. Balasubramanyam and P. Narasimham

P. Vijayanand, P. Narasimham: Fruit and Vegetable Technology, Central Food Technological Research Institute,
Mysore 570 013 (India)
A. R. Yadav, N. Balasubramanyam: Food Packaging Technology, Central Food Technological Research Institute,
Mysore 570 013 (India)

Guava fruit bar prepared from a new process with better textural and sensory properties was assessed for storage stability and packaging
requirements. The guava fruit bar was also compared with the mango bar prepared from the earlier reported process. Moisture sorption
behaviour of the fruit bars at 27 3C under diwerent RH was studied for the selection of suitable packaging material. The sorption studies
revealed that fruit bars from both processes exhibited typical sigmoid sorption behaviour. The guava bar and mango bar with an initial
moisture content of 14% and 14.8% were in equilibrium with 57% RH and 68% RH, respectively. The sorption isotherm of guava bar and
mango bar exhibited a steep rise above 65% RH and 70% RH, respectively. A moisture range of 11 to 15% for guava bar and 10 to 15%
for mango bar was found to be safe for storage of the products. Packaging studies of fruit bars have been carried out in 0.02 kg unit packs
in two yexible packages i.e., pearlized biaxially oriented polypropylene and polyester-polyethylene laminate. The fruit bars packed in
both the materials were highly acceptable with desirable textural and sensory quality up to 3 mo storage in ambient conditions.

( 2000 Academic Press

Keywords: fruit bar; fruit leather; packaging; storage; novel bars

Introduction
Fruit bar or fruit leather is a confectionery product made
by the dehydration of fruit puree into leathery sheets (1).
Preparation of fruit leather from a variety of fruits such
as chiku, jack fruit and apple has been reported elsewhere
(2}4). Mango bar or mango leather is the most popular
fruit bar in India. Mango fruit bar is traditionally pre-
pared by adding cane sugar or jaggery in the ratio of 1:2
or 1:4 to ripe mango puree, spreading the puree on
bamboo mats and drying the puree in the sun. The puree
is added layer by layer after the previous one is dried.
These slabs of sun dried product are cut into uniform
sizes, wrapped in cellophane and marketed (5). The tradi-
tional process was improved by mechanizing the extrac-
tion, blending and drying of the mango puree in a hot air
drier. The process mainly involves mixing mango puree
with additives such as cane sugar, potassium metabisul-
phite, spreading the puree on stainless steel trays and
drying in a hot air drier at 50 to 60 3C for a period of 18
to 22 h. The mango bar prepared using this process had
highly acceptable colour, texture and overall quality.
Variety of mango and consistency of the puree had
a de"nite e!ect on the quality of the bar, and pulpy
varieties were better suited for its preparation (6). Fruit
0023-6438/00/020132#06 $35.00/0
( 2000 Academic Press
bars prepared like this from fruit purees such as banana
and guava, however, resulted in hard textures thereby
rendering the bars unacceptable.
A new process was developed for the preparation of
guava bar which resulted in a highly acceptable texture.
Guava puree was treated enzymatically and suitable ad-
ditives such as maltodextrin, pectin, soluble starch and
wheat #our were added. The puree was then dried to
a "nal moisture content of 14}15%. Using this process,
the fruit bar can be prepared from any type of fruits,
irrespective of their compositional variation (7).
The main objective of the present investigation was to
select a suitable #exible packaging material and also to
evaluate the storage stability of the guava fruit bar pre-
pared using the new process with respect to the mango
bar prepared using the old process.
Materials and Methods
Mango bar preparation
Canned Totapuri mango puree with a total soluble solids
of 18 3 Brix and acidity 5.5 g/kg was adjusted to a total
soluble solids of 253 Brix by adding cane sugar. The
cane sugar used in this study contained 99.8% sucrose.
doi:10.1006/fstl.1999.0627
All articles available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

132

Potassium metabisulphite equivalent to 1000 mg SO /kg
2
puree was added to the mango puree and mixed thor-
oughly. The blended mango puree was applied on stain-
less steel trays (l"34]10~2 m, w"26]10~2 m and
h"2.5]10~2 m dimensions) smeared with glycerol. The
spread puree in the tray had a thickness of 1.3]10~2 m
and was dried at 50 3C, 12% RH in a cross #ow hot air
drier (Magumps, Mumbai, India) to a "nal moisture
content of 14 to 15%. The dried bar was cut into
2.5]10~2 m, 10]10~2 m dimensions and packed in
#exible packaging material to be used in the experiments.
Guava bar preparation
The guava puree was extracted from mature ripe guava
fruits by washing, crushing and extracting the puree
through a pulper. The guava puree contained a total
soluble solids content of 103 Brix and acidity 4.2 g/kg
puree. The puree was added with pectolytic enzyme
Rohapect D5 L at a concentration of 0.5 mL/kg of guava
puree, and incubated at 40 3C for 2 h. The treated puree
was pressed to obtain guava juice and additives such as
maltodextrin, sucrose, soluble starch, wheat #our, pectin
and antibrowning agent were added. The mixture, having
a total soluble solids of 253 Brix, was spread at the rate
of 12 kg/m2 on stainless steel trays (l"34]10~2 m,
w"26]10~2 m and h"2.5]10~2 m dimensions)
smeared with glycerol and dried at 50 3C, 12% RH in
a cross #ow hot air drier (Magumps) to a "nal moisture
content of 14 to 15% (7). The #ow rate of hot air in
the drier was 2.5 m/s. The dried bar was cut into
2.5]10~2 m, 10]10~2 m dimensions and packed in
#exible packaging material.
Packaging materials
Considering the economics, physicochemical attributes
of packaging materials and product deterioration char-
acteristics, two #exible packaging materials: (i) poly-
ester-polyethylene laminate (PP) containing 12k thickness
of polyester on the outside and 37.5k thickness of poly-
ethylene on the inside; and (ii) pearlized biaxially oriented
polypropylene (BOPP) of 37.5k thickness were selected
for storage studies. Unit pouches of the above materials
of size 3]10~2 m width and 11]10~2 m length for
holding 2]10~2 kg of the product were made by heat
sealing. The water vapour transmission rate and the
oxygen transmission rate were determined using a
standard procedure (8,9).
Sorption studies
The moisture}humidity relationship was studied at 27 3C
by exposing weighed quantities of fruit bar samples in
petri dishes to di!erent RH ranging from 11 to 92% in
di!erent dessicators using appropriate saturated salt
solutions (10). The samples were periodically weighed
until they attained constant weight or showed signs
of fungal growth, whichever was earlier. The equili-
brium moisture content of the samples at di!erent
RH was calculated and sorption isotherm plotted. The
133
lwt/vol. 33 (2000) No. 2
equilibrated samples were also analysed for textural
characteristics.
Storage studies
The mango bar made using the old process and the guava
bar made using the new process were packed in unit
pouches of PP or BOPP and stored at accelerated (38 3C
and 92% RH) and ambient (27 3C and 65% RH) storage
conditions. The pouches were withdrawn periodically
and the samples were analysed for physicochemical and
organoleptic characteristics. Samples stored at 4 3C ser-
ved as a control.
Moisture. Initial moisture content was determined by
drying 10 g of sample to a constant weight in a vacuum
oven at 70 3C for 6}8 h under 26 in. Hg vacuum (11).
Colour. Colour of the fruit bar samples was measured by
Shimadzu Colour measuring system (UV-2100, Japan).
The colour re#ectance values &L', &a' and &b' for the
samples are given in Table 1.
¹exture. Fruit bar samples cut into 2.5]10~2 m,
2.5]10~2 and 0.6]10~2 m were compressed to 80%
with a cross head speed of 50 mm/min using Instron
Universal Testing machine system Model-4301. The
force required for the compression was expressed as
Newtons (N). An average of six determinations was
reported.
Nonenzymatic browning. The fruit bar sample (5 g) was
soaked in 15 mL of water and 30 mL of ethanol for 2 h.
The soaked sample was ground with a pestle and mortar
and "ltered through Whatman No. 1 "lter paper. The
optical density of the "ltrate was measured at 420 nm
and expressed as an index for nonenzymatic browning
(11).
Sensory evaluation
The samples were assessed for colour, #avour, texture
and overall quality by a 15-member trained panel on a 10
point scale, where 1}2"poor, 3}4"fair, 5}6"good,
7}8"very good, and 9}10"excellent. The sensory data
was subjected to two way analysis of variance and the
di!erence between the means was analysed by Duncans
multiple range test (12).
Results and Discussion
Guava bar
The sorption data of guava bar prepared using the new
process is given in Table 2. The guava bar from the new
process had an initial moisture content of 14% and
hardness value of 86.32 N and was in equilibrium with
57% RH. The sorption isotherm of the guava bar is of
typical sigmoid type characteristic of sugar rich products
(Fig. 1). Below 44% RH, the guava bar became hard and
unacceptable, exhibiting high textural values. The guava
lwt/vol. 33 (2000) No. 2

Table 1 Changes in colour of guava and mango bars during storage in di!erent conditions

Storage 38 3C, 92% RH 27 3C, 65% RH

condition
Fruit bar L a b L a b

Guava bar (Initial) 43.72 !0.53 12.47

30 d
PP 42.21 2.42 12.29 44.78 0.075 12.87
BOPP 40.09 2.19 11.46 45.14 !0.79 11.16
60 d
PP 34.40 6.93 10.77 47.97 1.15 13.23
BOPP 40.76 6.83 12.14 46.52 1.53 13.74
90 d
PP nd nd nd 47.46 0.9 13.3
BOPP 46.70 0.85 13.13
Mango bar (initial) 29.85 10.08 10.71
30 d
PP 28.12 10.05 9.14 34.58 11.18 11.64
BOPP 30.57 10.16 8.82 29.64 10.29 9.34
60 d
PP 26.84 13.25 10.59 36.17 8.93 8.89
BOPP 26.85 15.78 10.89 31.33 11.75 11.38
90 d
PP nd nd nd 35.12 8.24 8.56
BOPP nd nd nd 30.0 11.40 10.3

L, lightness, a (#), redness, a (!), greenness, b (#), yellowness, b (!), blueness

nd, not determined as the bars became very soft

Table 2 Moisture}humidity relationship of guava fruit bar (new process) and mango fruit bar (old process) stored at
27 3C at di!erent RH for 60 d

Guava bar Mango bar

EMC Hardness Remarks EMC Hardness Remarks

(%) after 60 d (%) after 60 d
RH (%) (kg) (kg)

11 7.0 166.6 Very hard, unacceptable 4.5 289.1 Very hard, unacceptable
22 7.3 164.6 Very hard, unacceptable 4.6 269.5 Very hard, unacceptable
32 7.4 162.6 Very hard, unacceptable 4.8 261.6 Very hard, unacceptable
44 7.6 129.4 Slightly hard, borderline 5.0 245 Very hard, unacceptable
acceptability
52 10.1 94 Soft and good 6.8 139.1 Slightly hard, borderline of
acceptability
64 15.4 65.8 Soft but colour darkened 11.6 91.1 Soft and good
75 25.4 11.7 Very soft and unacceptable 20.9 46 Soft, picked up moisture,
unacceptable
86 36.6 * Developed mould growth 30.8 * Developed mould growth and
and rejected rejected
92 54.7 * Developed mould growth 57.1 * Developed mould growth and
and rejected rejected

Critical moisture contents: guava 11%; mango 8.25%, equilibrium RH: guava 57%; mango 68%
critical RH: guava 48%; mango 55%, critical texture value: guava 110.85 N; mango 127.53 N
initial moisture content: guava 14%; mango 14.8%, initial texture value: guava 86.32 N; mango 79.46 N

bar stored at 11, 22 and 32% RH had an equilibrium
moisture content (EMC) of 7.0, 7.3 and 7.4%, respective-
ly. These equilibrated bars were very hard and unaccept-
able, exhibiting signi"cantly high texture values (162.8
N}166.9 N). The guava bar equilibrated to 44% RH
was slightly hard with marginal acceptability with an
EMC of 7.6% and hardness of 127.5 N. The guava bar
equilibrated at 52 and 64% RH had an EMC of 10.1%
and 15.4%, respectively, with the former having highly
acceptable colour and texture (94.17 N). Though the
guava bar equilibrated at 64% RH had an acceptable
texture (55.91 N) the colour of the bar was slightly
darkened. The bar equilibrated at 75%, 86% and 92%
RH was very soft and was unacceptable due to the
absorption of moisture, having EMC of 25.4%, 36.6%
and 54.7%, respectively. At 86 and 92% RH, all the bars
developed mould growth and were rejected. From the
sorption data it can be inferred that equilibrium moisture

134
 lwt/vol. 33 (2000) No. 2

content of 11}15% corresponding with 52}64% RH in
the sorption isotherm is a safe limit of moisture with
respect to the acceptable texture of the product. Below
11% moisture content, the product tends to become
hard, and above 15% moisture level it is very soft and
microbiological spoilage is likely. It was also reported
that a moisture content of 12}13% corresponding to
a water activity of 0.45 is well below the minimum value
needed to support the microbial growth and maintain the
desired textural characteristics of fruit leather (13).
Mango bar
The mango bar had an initial moisture content of 14.8%
and a textural value of 79.46 N equilibrated to RH of
68%. The sorption data of mango bar is given in Table 3.
The mango bars stored at 11, 22, 32 and 44% RH had an
equilibrium moisture content of 4.5, 4.6, 4.8 and 5%
respectively. These equilibrated mango bars were very
hard with hardness values ranging from 245.25 N to
289.39 N and were unacceptable. The mango bars stored
at 52 and 64% RH had an EMC of 6.8% and 11.6%,
respectively, with the former exhibiting a slight increase
in hardness (139.3 N) and the latter being highly accept-
able with optimum hardness value (91.23 N). The bars
stored at 75, 86, and 92% RH picked up moisture and
reached EMC values of 20.9, 30.8, and 57.1%, respective-
ly. These bars became too soft and also developed mould
growth. The sorption isotherm of the mango bar is also
typical sigmoid type as in the case of guava bar but
exhibited a steep rise above 70% RH. An EMC range of
10}15% corresponding to 59}69% RH in the sorption
isotherm is a safe value of moisture with respect to the
texture and acceptability of the product. Below 10%
moisture the product tends to become hard and above
15.0% it is soft and microbiological spoilage is likely.
Optimum RH for storage of mango sheet from Baneshan
cultivar was theoretically found to be 70.5% when the
initial moisture content was 17.95%, however, the opti-
mum RH ranged between 63 and 70% (6).

Packaging and storage studies

The bars were packed separately in two materials, PP
and BOPP. The PP had a water vapour transmission
rate (WVTR) of 6]10~3 kg/m2/d at 90% RH, 38 3C and
oxygen transmission rate (OTR) of 35]10~3 L/m2/d/at-
mosphere at 25 3C. The BOPP had a water vapour
transmission rate of 4]10~3 kg/m2/d at 90% RH, 383C
and OTR of 2.5 L/m2/d/atmosphere at 25 3C.

Fig. 1 Sorption isotherm of guava and mango bars
(*s*), guava bar; (*K*), mango bar
Texture
Guava and mango bars had similar textural character-
istics initially with hardness values of 86.32 N and 79.95
N, respectively, which marginally reduced to 80.44 N
and 78.20 N after 3 mo storage at ambient conditions
(Table 3). However, reduction in hardness was observed
in both guava (57.87 N) and mango bar (60.82 N) after
2 mo storage at accelerated conditions. The bars packed

Table 3 Texture* (hardness &Newtons') of guava and mango bars packed in di!erent materials during storage

38 3C, 92% RH 27 3C, 65% RH

Fruit bar PP BOPP PP BOPP

Guava bar (Initial) 86.32$0.10*

30 d 60.82$0.14 62.78$0.11 83.38$0.08 85.34$0.14
60 d 57.87$0.11 59.84$0.05 80.44$0.10 82.40$0.11
90 d nd nd 80.44$0.14 81.42$0.10
Mango bar (Initial) 79.95$0.04*
30 d 73.57$0.11 75.53$0.14 79.46$0.18 80.44$0.08
60 d 60.82$0.25 63.76$0.14 78.25$0.11 79.59$0.14
90 d nd nd 78.20$0.14 78.48$0.11

Mean$s ; n"6; nd, not determined as the bars became very soft.
9
* Hardness of the bar measured by Instron texture measuring system

135
lwt/vol. 33 (2000) No. 2

in PP showed slightly more changes in hardness, though
the di!erence was not signi"cant.
Nonenzymatic browning
The changes in nonenzymatic browning (NEB) of the
guava bar and mango bar are presented in Fig. 2. The
NEB of both guava and mango bars stored at accelerated
conditions increased signi"cantly after 60 d of storage.
Nonenzymatic browning of mango bar increased with
increase in storage temperature (14). The NEB of the bars
stored at ambient conditions also increased during stor-
age but the increase was signi"cantly less than that ob-
served at accelerated storage. The changes in NEB of the
bars packed in pearlized BOPP were relatively less than
those packed in PP.

Colour
The colour values of the guava and mango bar are shown
in Table 1. The colour of the guava bar was yellowish-
green initially and turned to yellow during storage. The
colour values of the guava bar indicated decreasing &L'
(lightness) values and increasing &a' (redness) values after
2 mo storage at accelerated conditions, resulting in slight
darkening of the product. No signi"cant changes were
observed in &L' and &a' values, but the &b' (yellowness)
values increased marginally after 3 mo ambient storage.
The colour of the mango bar can be inferred as orange.
The &L' values of the mango bar showed a slight decrease
at the end of 2 mo storage at accelerated conditions in
both types of packaging materials, whereas &a' values
increased, indicating an increase in redness. The colour of
the bar turned to reddish-orange during storage. How-
ever the lightness decreased only marginally and also no
signi"cant changes were observed in both &a' and &b'
values at the end of 3 mo storage at ambient conditions.

Fig. 2 Nonenzymatic browning of guava, and mango bars

during storage. (*r*), GPP, 383C, 92% RH; ( ), GBOPP, Sensory quality of guava and mango bar during storage
38 3C, 92% RH; (*m*), GPP, 273C, 65% RH; (*] *), GBOPP,
27 3C, 65% RH; ( ), MPP, 38 3C, 92% RH; (*d*), Guava and mango bars were analysed for sensory quali-
MBOPP, 38 3C, 92% RH; ( ), MPP, 27 3C, 65% RH; ( ), ties during storage by a trained panel for colour, #avour,
MBOPP, 27 3C, 65% RH texture and overall quality (Table 4). The guava and

Table 4 Sensory quality of guava and mango bars packed in di!erent materials and stored at di!erent conditions

Storage PP BOPP
period
Packaging Colour Flavour Texture Overall Colour Flavour Texture Overall
material quality quality

Guava bar (Initial) 8.01 7.78 7.95 7.90

30 d
27 3C, 65% RH 7.66a 7.43a 7.65a 7.75a 7.66a 7.51a 7.60a 7.63a
38 3C, 92% RH 7.26b 7.32b 7.33b 7.38b 7.40b 7.37b 7.35b 7.40b
60 d
27 3C, 65% RH 7.45a 7.40a 7.62a 7.57a 7.61a 7.60a 7.61a 7.62a
38 3C, 92% RH 6.12b 6.24b 5.92b 5.76b 6.13b 6.19b 6.00b 5.72b
90 d
27 3C, 65% RH 7.57a 7.58a 7.60a 7.59a 7.63b 7.60b 7.58b 7.62b
Mango bar (Initial) 8.15 7.91 8.00 8.20
30 d
27 3C, 65% RH 7.65a 7.58a 7.73a 8.02a 7.61a 7.62a 7.71a 8.01a
38 3C, 92% RH 7.31b 7.30b 7.31b 7.63b 7.29b 7.25b 7.33b 7.69b
60 d
27 3C, 65% RH 7.61a 7.65a 7.75a 7.79a 7.69a 7.61a 7.75a 7.72a
38 3C, 92% RH 7.40b 7.38b 7.30b 7.44b 6.42b 6.30b 6.33b 6.45b
90 d
27 3C, 65% RH 7.28a 7.49a 7.47a 7.49a 7.22a 7.38a 7.55a 7.50a

Means with the same superscript are not signi"cantly di!erent at 1% level

136

mango bars were sensorily acceptable with respect to
colour, #avour, texture and overall quality up to 90 d at
27 3C and 65% RH, and up to 30 d at accelerated condi-
tions of 38 3C and 92% RH. The overall quality of both
the guava and mango bars packed in BOPP and PP
decreased signi"cantly at the end of 60 d storage at accel-
erated conditions and the bars picked up moisture.
Hence further storage of guava and mango bars at this
condition was discontinued. The colour, #avour, texture
and overall quality of the guava and mango bars stored
at 27 3C, 65% RH and 38 3C, 92% RH were signi"cantly
di!erent at 1% level during storage.
Conclusions
Guava fruit bars prepared using the new improved pro-
cess showed better texture, sensory quality and storage
stability. The guava bar made using this process was
comparable to the mango bar in physicochemical and
sensory properties. The sorption studies revealed that
both guava and mango bars exhibited typical sigmoid
sorption behaviour. Equilibrium moisture content of
11}15% (ERH 52}64%) for guava bar and 10}15%
(ERH 59}69%) for mango bar were found to be the safest
moisture levels with respect to the texture and acceptabil-
ity of products. The guava bar and mango bar packed in
pearlized BOPP or PP were sensorily acceptable with
respect to colour, #avour, texture and overall quality up
to 90 d at 27 3C and 65% RH, and 30 d at accelerated
conditions of 38 3C and 92% RH.
References
1 RAAB, C. AND OEHLER, N. Making dried fruit leather,
Oregon State ;niversity Extension Services. USA Fact sheet,
232 (1976)
137
lwt/vol. 33 (2000) No. 2
2 CHE MAN, Y. B. AND TAUFIK. Development and stability of
Jackfruit leather. ¹ropical Science, 3, 245}250 (1995)
3 SUMMERS, S. Getting the most out of apple. Cereal Foods
=orld 39, 10, 746}749 (1994)
4 OWEN, S. R. TUNG, M. A. AND DURANCE, T. D. Cutting
resistance of a restructured fruit bar as in#uenced by water
activity. Journal of ¹exture Studies 2, 191}199 (1991)
5 RAMESHWAR, A. Tandra (mango leather) industry in
Andhra Pradesh. Indian Food Packer, 2, 11}12 (1979)
6 NANJUNDASWAMY, A. M., RADHAKRISHNAIAH SHETTY, G.
AND SAROJA, S. Studies on development of newer products
from mango. Indian Food Packer, 5, 95}103 (1976)
7 VIJAYANAND, P. AND NARASIMHAM, P. A process for prep-
aration of fruit bar from tropical/subtropical/temperate
fruits. CSIR patent, Government of India, New Delhi. File
No. NF-118/98 (1998).
8 IS: 1060, Methods of Sampling and ¹ests for Paper and Allied
Products. Part II. New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards
(1982)
9 ASTM D1434, Determining Gas Permeability Character-
istics of Plastic Films and Sheeting. Philadelphia: American
Society of Testing and Materials (1982)
10 ROCKLAND, L. B. Saturated salt solution of static control of
relative humidity between 5 3C and 40 3C. Analytical Chem-
istry, 32, 1375}1377 (1960)
11 RANGANNA, S. Handbook of Analysis and Quality Control for
Fruit and <egetable Products. 2nd Edn, New Delhi: Tata
McGraw Hill Publishing Company, pp. 3}5, 891}892 (1986)
12 ASKAR, A. AND TREPTOW, H. Quality Assurance in ¹ropical
Fruit Processing. Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, London,
Paris, Tokyo, Hong Kong, Barcelona, Budapest: Springer-
Verlag, pp. 89}103 (1993)
13 TROLLER, J. A. In#uence of water activity on microorgan-
isms in food. Food ¹echnology, 5, 76}80, 82}83 (1980)
14 RAO, V. S. AND ROY, S. K. Studies on dehydration of mango
pulp, Indian Food Packer, 3, 64}71 (1980)