Evaluation and Standardization of Process For Development of Carrot Candy

Evaluation and Standardization of Process for
Development of Carrot Candy
Haseeba Muzaffar
(2017-H-170-M)
Division of Food Science & Technology

Faculty of Horticulture
Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences &
Technology of Kashmir
2020
1
Evaluation and Standardization of Process for
Development of Carrot Candy
Haseeba Muzaffar
(2017-H-170-M)
Thesis
Submitted to
The Faculty of Horticulture
Sher-e-Kashmir
University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Kashmir
in partial fulfillment of requirements for the award of the degree of
Master of Science in Horticulture (Food Science &

Technology
2020
2
Dedicated
To my
Beloved
Parents
3
Sher-e-Kashmir
Faculty of Horticulture, Division of Food Science & Technology
Certificate – I
This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “Evaluation and

Standardization of Process for Development of Carrot Candy”
submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the
degree of Master of Science in Horticulture (Food Science &
Technology), to the Faculty of Horticulture, Sher-e-Kashmir
University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Kashmir is a
record of bonafide research work carried out by Ms. Haseeba
Muzaffar (Regd. No. 2017-H-170-M) under my supervision and
guidance. No part of the thesis has been submitted for any other
degree or diploma.
It is further certified that any help or information received

during the course of investigation has duly been acknowledged.
(Dr. Abdul Rouf)

Chairman
Advisory Committee
Endorsed
Prof. & Head,

4
Sher-e-Kashmir
Certificate – II
We, the members of the Advisory Committee of Ms. Haseeba
Muzaffar (Regd. No. 2017-H-170-M) a candidate for the degree of
Master of Science in Horticulture (Food Science & Technology)
have gone through the manuscript of the thesis entitled, “Evaluation
and Standardization of Process for Development of Carrot
Candy” and recommend that it may be submitted by the student in
partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree.
Advisory Committee
Chairman Dr. Abdul Rouf
Assistant Professor, Division of Food Science
and Technology, SKUAST-Kashmir
Members
Dr. H. R. Naik
Professor & Head, Division of Food Science
Dr. Syed Zameer Hussain

Associate Professor, Division of Food Science
Dr. Imtiyaz Murtaza

Professor, Division of Basic Science
and Humanities, SKUAST-Kashmir
Dr. Nageena Nazir

Associate Professor, Division of Agri-
Statistics, SKUAST-Kashmir
Dean’s Nominee
Dr. Tarique Askary
Assistant Professor, Division of Entomology,
SKUAST-Kashmir
5
Sher-e-Kashmir
Certificate – III
This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “Evaluation and

Standardization of Process for Development of Carrot Candy”
submitted by Ms. Haseeba Muzaffar (Regd. No. 2017-H-170-M) to
the Faculty of Horticulture, Sher-e-Kashmir University of
Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Kashmir in partial
fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master
of Science in Horticulture (Food Science & Technology) was
examined and approved by the Advisory Committee and External
Examiner on …………….
Chairman External Examiner

Advisory Committee
Prof. & Head,

Dean,
Faculty of Horticulture
SKUAST-Kashmir
6
Sher-e-Kashmir
Name of the student : Haseeba Muzaffar
Registration No. : 2017-H-170-M
Major subject : Food Technology
Minor subject : Biochemistry

Dr. Abdul Rouf
Major advisor :
Assistant Professor,
Division of Food Science and
Technology, SKUAST-Kashmir
Title of the Thesis : Evaluation and Standardization of
Process for Development of Carrot
Candy
ABSTRACT
Study was conducted at Division of Food Science and Technology
SKUAST-K Shalimar during the year 2017-2018 with the aim to standardize the
process technology for the production of carrot candy. Raw material (carrot)
variety Early Nantes procured from local market was processed at fruit processing
and training center, Division of Food Science and Technology. Firm and tender
carrots, free from diseases, blemishes and any visual signs of deformity were
selected and properly washed in running tap water. After proper washing, the
carrots were peeled and sliced into 10-15 mm slices, and subjected to water
blanching for 2-5 minutes. Blanched carrot slices were subjected to pricking with
pricking knives and after cooling they were immediately immersed in different
osmotic solutions. The treatment combinations included 40 and 50% solution,
each of sucrose, glucose, honey, and fructose, where in carrot slices were dipped
for 24 hrs and then subjected to concentration, till the TSS reached 700 brix. After
proper draining off the syrup, carrots from different treatment combinations were
subjected to drying in a cabinet tray dryer, to a pre-determined moisture content of
25 . Prepared candy from different treatments was subjected to physico-
chemical and sensory evaluation. Significant differences were observed among
the treatments for all the parameters under study. Moisture content, Total sugar,
7
reducing sugar, non-reducing sugar, crude protein, crude fat, crude fibre,
carbohydrate, ash and calorific value, acidity, ascorbic acid, beta carotene,
antioxidant activity, dehydration ratio, dietary fibre, color (L*,a*,b*), and
minerals ca, mg, fe (mg/100g) were recorded significantly higher, i.e. 26.13%,
76.23%, 44.86%, 31.35%, 1.20%, 0.80%, 1.35%, 70.16%, 1.63%, 29264
kcal/100g, 0.22%, 2.98mg/100g, 16.26mg/100g, 50.48%, 1.28, 2.25%, 12.45,
48.12, 24.23 and 10.23mg/100g, 12.23mg/100g and 2.12mg/100g respectively,
while as browning index was found significantly lower at 0.025 in T6 (50% honey
solution ). The candy prepared from T6 exhibited superior sensory characteristics
in terms of color, texture, flavor, mouthfeel and overall acceptability. The
standardized candy from the treatment 6 (T6 - 50% honey solution) was further
subjected to storage, to assess its stability in two different packaging materials
viz., Aluminum laminate and PET Jar under ambient temperature for a period of
90 days. The storage parameters evaluated were moisture content (%), color
values (L*, a*, b*), water activity (aw), beta carotene, browning index, texture,
total plate count (cfu/gm) and sensory quality. Moisture content, water activity, a*
and b* value recorded a significant increase in PET Jar after termination of the
storage period, as compared to aluminum laminate, while as L* value and texture
recorded a significant increase in aluminum laminate after termination of storage
period as compared to PET Jar. Further non-significant effect was observed in
beta-carotene and browning index in both the packaging materials. Microbial
count was found to be low in both the packaging materials (i.e, too few to count).
The sensory attributes color, appearance, texture, flavor, mouthfeel and overall
acceptability of candy were recorded higher in aluminum based laminate as
compared to PET Jar. Thus, it can be concluded that honey based carrot candy
(50% honey solution) can be safely stored in aluminum laminate for a period of
90 days under ambient storage conditions without any significant changes in
physicochemical and Organoleptic quality. The economic analysis of the final
product returned a benefit cost ratio of 1:2.88 and as such can be marketed for a
profitable business venture.
Key words: Carrot, Honey, Candy, Shelf life
Signature of Student Signature of Major Advisor

Dated: _____________ Dated: ________________
8
Acknowledgement
All praises to almighty Allah, the cherisher and sustainer of the world, master of the day of judgement,
who bestowed me the health and courage to undertake these studies and may the peace and blessings of
Allah be upon our prophet Muhamad(pbuh), his family and his companions
I gratefully acknowledge the enthusiastic cooperation, Venerable gratitude

extended by my esteemed chairman of my advisory committee Dr. Abdul Rouf
Assistant Professor Division of Food science and Technology, SKUAST-
Kashmir, Shalimar for his highly imaginative and unending inspiration, valuable
guidance, sound counselling, meticulous suggestion sustained interest and above
all his positive attitude towards my abilities which made the achievements of
this goal a challenging, rewarding and stimulating experience.
It gives me immense pleasure to place on record my profound sense of
reverence to my advisory members, Dr. Abdul Rouf Assistant Professor, Division
of Food science and technology; Dr H. R. Naik, Professor and Head, Division of
Food science and technology; Dr. Syed Zameer Hussain Associate Professor,
Division of Food science and technology, Dr. Imtiyaz Murtaza, Professor,
Division of Basic Science and Humanities. Dr. Nageena nazir, Assistant
Professor, Division of Agri-Statistics and Dr. Tarique Askary Assistant
Professor, Division of Entomology (Dean PG Nominee), SKAST-Kashmir,
Shalimar for their keen interest, untiring help valuable comments and noble
suggestions during the entire course of study.
My heartfelt gratitude are due to Dr. Syed Zameer Hussain Associate
Professor, Division of food science andTechnology, SKUAST-Kashmir, Shalimar
for boosting my morale and inspiring me always.
Without failing in my duties, I extend my sincere thanks to Dr. H. R
Naik Professor and Head, Division of food science and Technology SKUAST-
Kashmir, Shalimar for his encouragement and suggestions as and when needed.
I place on record my thanks to worthy Dean, Faculty of Horticulture and
his Staff for their earnest help and cooperation in this endeavor.
Finally, yet importantly I am overwhelmed with rejoice to avail this
opportunity to evince my profound sense of gratitude to my parents, my father
Mr. Muhammad Muzaffar Baba, my beloved mother Mrs. Rafeeqa, my sister
Dr. Zulihuma and my dearly loved brother Er. Burhan Baba, It was their love,
affection, faith and above all optimistic attitude that today I am here and I owe
all my success of life to them.
9
I am also thankful to all the Technical staff members and Non-Teaching
staff especially Ms. Kulsum Malik, Mr. Abdul Ahad Bhat, Mr. Feroze, Mr.
Bilal and Mr. Waseem for their help and support.
I also acknowledge sincere thanks to the staff members of Central
Library and ARIS, SKUAST-Kashmir, Shalimar for rendering all possible help
while collecting the research literature.
This work would have been incomplete without the help and blessings of
my friends, seniors and well-wishers like Ms. Rifat, Ms. Monisa Yousouf, Mr.
Adnan, Ms. Abeeda Mushtaq Ms. Urfia Jan, Ms. Nowsheen Noor, Ms.
Aaiman zehra and Ms. Gousia.
I am highly thankful to Mr. Shahid Sultan of M/S Universal Computers,
Shalimar for composing this manuscript with full dedication, zeal and utmost
care.
Last but not least, I thank all those who helped me any way during the
course of the study. I thank them one and all
Haseeba Muzaffar
Place: Shalimar, Srinagar
Dated:
10
CONTENTS
Page
Chapter Particulars
No.
1. INTRODUCTION 1-3
2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE 4-23
2.1 Preparation of candies 4
2.2 Physicochemical characteristics of fresh carrot 6
2.3 Physicochemical composition of Candies 13
2.4 Effect of drying methods on physico-chemical 15
Characteristics of carrot
2.5 Sensory quality of Candies 18
2.6 Storage studies of Candies 20
2.7 Microbial quality of Candies 22
3. MATERIALS AND METHODS 24-38
3.1 Raw materials 24
3.2 Standardized recipe for carrot candy 24
preparation
3.3 Treatment combinations 25
3.4 Observations recorded during the 25
experimentation
3.5 Evaluation of carrot candy 27
3.6 Storage Stability 37
3.7 Sensory quality evaluation 38
3.8 Economic analysis 38
3.9 Statistical analysis 38
4. EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS 39-75
4.1 Physico-chemical characteristics of fresh 39
carrot
4.2 Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 40
composition of carrot candies
4.3 Storage studies 56
11
4.4 Organoleptic quality of carrot candies 66
4.5 Cost analysis 72
5. DISCUSSION 76-94
5.1 Physico-chemical characteristics of carrot 76
5.2 Physico-chemical characteristics of carrot 76
candy
5.3 Storage studies of honey based carrot candy 85
5.4 Effect of packaging material and storage days 91
on organoleptic characteristics of honey based
carrot candy
6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 95-98
LITERATURE CITED i-xiii
12
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Particulars
No. No.
4.1 Physico- chemical evaluation of carrot 41
4.2a Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 42

4.2b Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 45

4.2c Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 48

4.2d Effect of pre treatments on mineral composition of 50

carrot candies (mg/100g)
4.2e Effect of pre treatments on Colour coordinates of 52

carrot candies
4.2f Effect of pre treatments on Organoleptic quality of 55

carrot candies
4.3a Effect of packaging material and storage days on 57

moisture content (%) of honey based carrot candy
4.3b Effect of packaging material and storage days on 58

browning index of honey based carrot candy
4.3c Effect of packaging material and storage days on beta 59

carotene content of honey based carrot candy
4.3d Effect of Honey and packaging on Total plate count 60

(cfu/gm) of carrot candy during storage
4.3e Effect of packaging material and storage days on 61

Colour value (L*) of honey based carrot candy
13
4.3f Effect of packaging material and storage days on 62
Colour value (a*) of honey based carrot candy
4.3g Effect of packaging material and storage days on 63

Colour value (b*) of honey based carrot candy
4.3h Effect of packaging material and storage days on 64

Texture (N) of honey based carrot candy
4.3i Effect of packaging material and storage days on 65

water activity (aw) of honey based carrot candy
4.4a Effect of packaging material and storage days on 66

appearance of honey based carrot candy
4.4b Effect of packaging material and storage days on 67

colour of honey based carrot candy
4.4c Effect of packaging material and storage days on 68

texture of honey based carrot candy
4.4d Effect of packaging material and storage days on 69

flavor of honey based carrot candy
4.4e Effect of packaging material and storage days on 70

mouth feel of honey based carrot candy
4.4f Effect of packaging material and storage days on 71

overall acceptance of honey based carrot candy
14
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. After page

Particulars
No. No.
1. Cabinet tray drier employed for dehydration of carrot 39

candies
2. Sugar Based Carrot Candy (T1-Dipping in 40% 55

Sucrose Solution) and (T2-Dipping in 50% Sucrose
Solution)
3. Glucose Based Carrot Candy (T 3-Dipping in 40% 55

Glucose Solution) and (T4-Dipping in 50% Glucose
Solution)
4. Fructose Based Carrot Candy (T7-Dipping in 40% 55

Fructose Solution) and (T8-Dipping in 50% Fructose
Solution)
5. Honey Based Carrot Candy (T5-Dipping in 40% 55

Honey Solution)

Honey Solution)

Honey Solution) Packed in PET Jar and Aluminum
Laminate after 90 days of Storage
15
LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS
ANOVA : Analysis of Variance
Α : Alfa
@ : At the rate
aw : Water activity
AOAC : Association of Official analytical Chemist
AAS : Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy
Β : Beta
BEP : Breakeven point
BHA : Butylatedhydroxyanisole
BHT : Butylatedhydroxytoluene
CD : Critical difference
°C : Degree centigrade
Cfu : Colony forming unit
Cm : Centimeter
Conc : Concentration
DPPH : 2,2- diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl
Fig : Figure
FRAP : Ferric reducing antioxidant power
G : Gram
Ha : Hectare
HCl : Hydro chloric acid
HMF : Hydroxy methyl furfural
HDPE : High density polyethylene
Hr : Hour
J : Joules
Kg : Kilo gram
kcal : Kilo calorie
Kj/mol : Kilo Joule per mol
It : Litre
LDPE : Low density polyethylene
Mg : Milligram
16
min : Minute
m/s : Minute per second
ml : milli liter
mm : milli meter
µg : Microgram
N : Normality
NA : Nutrient agar
N : Newton
NaCl : Sodium chloride
NaOH : Sodium hydroxide
ND : Not detected
Mn : Nanometer
OA : Overall Acceptability
OD : Optical density
% : Per-cent
PET jar : Polyethylene terephthalate
Rs : Rupees
ROS : Reactive oxygen species
SD : Standard deviation
Sec : Second
SEM : Standard error mean
SMS : Stable Micro Systems
T : Tone
TPC : Total phenolic content
TA : Texture analyzer
TBHQ : Tertiary -2 Butylhydroquinone
Temp : Temperature
TFTC : Too few to count
TPC : Total plate count
TSS : Total Soluble Solids
USA : United states of America
Vol : Volume
Wt : Weight
17
Chapter I
INTRODUCTION
Carrot (Daucus carrota) belonging to Apiaceae family is the diverse

colored edible vegetable crop grown annually throughout the world and is famous
for its fleshy, delicious and attractive edible roots. The carrot crop is mostly
grown during September to November in tropical and subtropical regions whereas
its cultivation in temperate regions can be carried out throughout the year. Carrot
is one of the most popular agricultural crops of the world. China is the highest
producer of carrot in the world with an annual production of 17.3 million tons
followed by USA (Anon, 2014). In India it occupies an area of 68 thousand
hectares with a production of 10.93 lakh tons per hectare (Anon, 2015). In Jammu
and Kashmir State the total production of carrots is 1.328 mm tons (Anonymous,
2015). Carrot is an excellent source of vitamin A and a good source of ascorbic
acid, vitamin K, dietary fiber and potassium. Bioactive compounds in carrots are
alpha and beta carotene, phenolic acids, lycopene and ascorbic acid which are
responsible for its antioxidant activity. Carrot contains: moisture 86 g,
carbohydrates 10.6 g, fat 0.2 g, fiber 1.2 g, carotene 1890 µg, thiamine 0.04 g,
riboflavin 0.02 g, niacin 0.6 g, phosphorus 530 mg, minerals 1.1 g and vitamin C
3 mg per 100 g (Gopalan et al., 2004). Total phenolic content in carrot is
26.6±1.70 μg/g (Oviasogie et al., 2009). The predominant phenolic acids in raw
carrots are chlorogenic acid, followed by caffeic acid and p-coumaric acids
(Miglio et al., 2008). The consumption of carrot and its products is increasing
steadily due to its recognition as an important source of natural antioxidants
having anticancer activity. Carotenoids help in preventing heart diseases, improve
vision, help in reducing blood sugar and reduce colon cancer. They also act as
free-radical scavengers (Bast et al., 1998; Bramley, 2000). Phenolic compounds
have received considerable attention because of their physiological functions,
including antioxidant, antimutagenic and antitumor activities (Oviasogie et al.,
2009). Antioxidants are naturally occurring chemicals in food that help to counter
1
the detrimental effects of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and free radicals which
causes degenerative human diseases such as cancer, heart diseases etc
(Wresburger, 2002). Diaz et al. (1997) studied the effect of artificial antioxidants
used in food such as Butylatedhydroxyanisole (BHA), Butylatedhydroxytoluene
(BHT) and tertiary – 2 Butylhydroquinone (TBHQ) on human health and found
that they have a possible role in promoting carcinogenesis (Ito et al., 1986) and
liver swelling (Martin and Gilbert, 1968). Thus, the importance of naturally
occurring bioactive compounds in the maintenance of health is raising
considerable interest among scientists, food manufacturers and consumers as the
trend of the future is moving toward functional food with specific health effects.
Hence, a lot of research is focused on exploiting the potential of natural
antioxidants and establishing their association with health benefits. Carrot is
mostly consumed in the form of salad and cooked vegetable. As it is seasonal and
perishable in nature, it is not possible to readily make it available throughout the
year. Thus, carrots are processed into nutritionally rich products like juice, pickle,
preserve, candies etc. to make this important vegetable available round the year.
Dehydration of carrot during the main growing season is one of the important
alternatives of preservation to further develop value added products during off
season. Although consumption of unprocessed fresh food is widely advocated but
the evidence is emerging that bioavailability of many bioactive compounds is
enhanced when vegetables are cooked. Cooking and processing induces
significant changes in chemical composition, influencing the concentration and
bioavailability of bioactive compounds in carrots. It can have both positive and
negative effects depending on process conditions (Miglio et al., 2008). Some
studies have shown that absorption of carotenoids from unprocessed foods is low
but it increases with mild processing (Failla and Chitchumroonchokchai, 2005).
Thus, processing can have beneficial effects on human health. On the other hand,
a significant loss of nutrients may occur as a result of heat degradation or leaching
during blanching, pasteurization and dehydration as well as during storage, home
oats (Haq and Prasad, 2014). The pigments present in different colored roots have
2
widespread medicinal properties towards human health. South-western Asia
especially Afghanistan is considered to be the main center of origin of this crop as
the largest morphological diversity in this crop has been found to occur in this
region. Similarly the wild forms are also seen in Europe. Carrot is traditionally
used in salad and preparation of curries in India, it can commercially be converted
into nutritionally rich processed products like juice, dried powder, candy, pickle,
gajarhalwa and gazrila etc.
Candy is a sweet food prepared from fruits or vegetables by impregnating

them with sugar syrup followed by drying to shelf stable state. Candies are
becoming more and more popular because of high acceptability, minimum
volume, higher nutritional value and longer storage life. These products also have
additional advantage of being least thirst provoking ready-to-eat snacks and save
space in packaging, storage and transportation (Nayak et al., 2012). Fruits and
vegetables like apples, ginger, mangoes, guava, carrots and citrus peels have been
used to prepare candies (Chandu and Prasad, 2006). Honey based candies have
been developed from mangoes, guavas, carrots etc. Carrots contain β-carotene
which serve as precursor of vitamin A and has a laxative property due to high
content of dietary fiber. Though there is sufficient production of carrot in India,
yet its availability is scanty for greater part of the year. Owing to its seasonal
character and perishable nature, a large quantity (about 20-30%) of carrot goes as
waste due to inadequate handling and storage practices (Anisa et al., 2011)
Therefore exploring the carrots for candy preparation will open a new horizon for
its processing in J & K. No systematic work has been done on carrot candy
preparation in J&K. Therefore the study as evaluation and standardization of
process for development of carrot candy was undertaken with the following
objectives:
1. To standardize the process protocol for development of carrot candy
2. To determine shelf stability and economic viability of the product
3
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
This chapter deals with the review of work done by various research
workers relevant to the present study on “Evaluation and Standardization of
Process for Development of Carrot Candy” The available literature has been
reviewed under the following sub headings.
2.1 Preparation of Candies
2.2 Physicochemical characteristics of fresh carrot
2.3 Physicochemical composition of Candies
2.4 Effect of drying methods on physico-chemical Characteristics of carrot
2.5 Sensory quality of Candies
2.6 Storage studies of Candies
2.7 Microbial quality of Candies
A brief review of research work carried out on candy preparation is

presented below:
2.1 Preparation of candies
A candied fruit or vegetable is essentially a preserve from which sugar

syrup is drained. It has sugar concentration higher than preserve and after drying
beyond sticky condition can be stored without spoilage.
Mehta and Bajaj (1984) studied the changes in chemical composition of

citrus peel candy during preparation and storage and found that β-carotenoids
reduced from 4.13 mg/100g to 3.70 mg/100g after 8 months storage. Flavonoids
decreased from 0.56 mg/100g to 0.25 mg/100g and total phenols decreased from
135 mg/100g to 92.50 mg/100g
Durrani and Verma (2011) studied the development and quality evaluation
4
of honey based carrot candy. Candy was prepared with 3 different combinations
of honey and carrot by using 750 g honey + 1, 000 g carrot (T1), 1, 000 g honey +
1, 000 g carrot (T2) and 1, 250 g honey + 1, 000 g carrot (T3). To establish the
best product, sensory evaluation was done on 9 point Hedonic scale. T1 was
found to be most preferred candy. Further the T1 candy was assessed for overall
quality during storage at room temperature (25 to 30 °C) for 6 months. Candy can
be preserved safely for 6 months in both glass and LDPE packaging
materials.
Baber-Shamrez (2013) studied the Preparation and Evaluation of Candies

from Citron Peel Candy was prepared with 4 different combinations of To
(control), sliced citron peel + 30% sugar + Potassium metabisulphite, T2 (Sliced
citron peel + 40% sugar + Potassium metabisulphite and T3 (sliced citron peel +
50% sugar + Potassium metabisulphite) To establish the best product, sensory
evaluation was done on 9-point Hedonic scale. T2 was found to be most preferred
candy. These were assessed for organoleptic quality during storage at room
temperature (25–30 °C) for 6 months. Candy can be preserved safely for 6 months
in polythene bags.
Jakia et al. (2014) studied the development and Shelf-Life Prediction of

Pineapple (Ananas comosus) Preserve and Candy. The present study was
conducted to develop and investigate pineapple (Ananas comosus) preserve and
candy to assess its prospect in marketability and study their storage life. Pineapple
slices were treated with 2% solution of common salt to prevent browning, then cut
into cube shape and treated with 1% calcium chloride and 0.25% potassium
metabisulphide solution and finally processed. The preserves were processed with
60° Brix, 65° Brix and 70° Brix sugar syrup. The candies were processed with 65°
Brix, 70° Brix and 75° Brix sugar syrup. Initially the composition of pineapple
preserves processed with different level of sugar ware found in the range as
moisture content 33.09-35.65%, ash 1.36-1.42%, protein 1.01-1.07%, fat 0.61-
0.66%, total sugar 61.37-63.73% and reducing sugar 30.52-31.46% and pineapple
5
candies were found in the range as moisture content 19.05-20.88%, ash 1.52-
1.58%, protein 1.15-1.21%, fat 0.72-0.77%, total sugar 75.70-77.35% and
reducing sugar 45.16-46.39%. The sensory results showed that color, flavor,
texture, taste and overall acceptability scores differed significantly (p<0.05). The
preserve (P2) processed from 65° Brix sugar syrup and the candy (C2) processed
from 70° Brix sugar syrup was the favorite sample of the sensory evaluation with
the highest overall acceptability among others of the similar product. The shelf-
life of candy (6 month) packed in high-density polyethylene bag is higher than
preserve (4 month) packed in glass bottle when stored at ambient temperature (27°
C to 30°C)
Madan and Dhawan (2005) have developed carrot candies by using sugar
and jaggery syrups. Fresh coconut powder was used for enrolling sugar candies.
Such candies, even on 60th day of storage at room temperature when packed in
polyethylene bags scored above 7 on a 9-point hedonic scale with respect to its
fresh organoleptic characteristics.
2.2 Physicochemical characteristics of fresh carrot
2.2.1 Total solids
Moisture content in fruit is an important constituent. Approximately 86 per

cent of carrot weight is due to water according to Gopalan et al. (2004).
Sagar et al. (2004) conducted studies on the dehydration of carrot (Daucus

carota L.) and assessed four varieties of carrots viz. Pusa Kesar, Pusa Meghali,
Sel-14 and Sel-16 which were found to have 8.85, 10.06, 11.17 and 10.04 per cent
of total solids respectively. Gebczynski (2006) found that fresh carrot contained
13.02 g dry matter.
2.2.2 Total soluble solids
Total soluble solids in carrots range from 8.46 to 9.98 oB (Sandhu et al.,
1988).
6
Singh (1996) reported that TSS of pure carrot juice ranges from 6 to 9◦ B.
PC-34 carrot variety was found to have TSS of 8.5◦B whereas Selection-21 carrot
variety had 7.0 ◦B TSS
Pandove (2007) studied the effect of storage on TSS content of carrots

was studied and it was found that carrot samples stored under CA conditions did
not show any significant change in the total soluble solids with storage time.
Conversely, the total soluble solid content of the refrigerated carrot increased with
storage time. The longer the storage time, the increment in the total soluble solid
content became higher. The total soluble solids for the CA stored
carrots ranged from 7.7 to 9.2 ◦B and for the refrigerated stored carrots the values
varied from 8.3 to 28.5 oB (Opoku et al., 2009).
Rashidi and Khabbaz (2010) reported that carrot contains 75-88 per cent
water and 8.5-12.5 per cent soluble solids. The minimum TSS of carrot is 8.60
whereas maximum TSS is 12.3 (Rashidi and Gholami, 2011).
2.2.3 Acidity
Carrot roots have a low content of organic acids. These represent about
0.2% of the fresh weight (Phan and Hsu, 1973). It was observed that the pH of
plain carrot juice ranged from 6.18 to 6.24 and total acidity from 0.40 to 0.43 per
cent (Singh, 1996).
Sagar et al. (2004) reported that acidity of ‘Pusa Kesar’ and ‘Pusa
Meghali’ variety of carrot was 0.10 per cent whereas it was 0.08 per cent in ‘Sel-
14’ and 0.09 per cent in ‘Sel-16’. Acidity in carrot cultivars was found to be 0.06
per cent in ‘Sel 21’, 0.04% in ‘PC-34’, 0.06 per cent in ‘Ambala local’ and 0.05
per cent in ‘Nantes’ (Sra et al., 2011).
2.2.4 Ascorbic acid
Ascorbic acid is one of the most important vitamins present in vegetables

having significant health benefits. Ascorbic acid content in fresh carrot was found
to be 2.75 mg/100g (Pruthi et al., 1980).
7
Salvini (1997) reported that raw carrots had low value of ascorbic acid (2.3
and 30.8 mg/100g for fresh and dry matter, respectively) in comparison to other
vegetables.
Favell (1998) observed that the ascorbic acid content in fresh carrots
ranged from 2.8- 4.5 mg/100g.Vitamin C content varied between 1.25 and 5.33
mg/100g, being lowest in white and highest in orange varieties (Alasalvar et al.,
2001).
Kapoor and Kaur (2001) estimated that the ascorbic acid content of fresh
unbalanced carrots is 5 mg/100g.
Dhaliwal (2001) reported that ascorbic acid content in fresh carrots was
5.8 mg/100g. Some Mauritian vegetables were analyzed for vitamin C levels and
it was found that broccoli, cauliflower, mugwort and chilli pepper contained most
vitamin C, followed by carrot, chinese cabbage, white cabbage and onion
containing 298, 253, 188 and 187 μg/g fresh weight respectively. Tomato and
lettuce were poor sources of vitamin C, with levels of 86 and 25 μg/g fresh weight
respectively (Bahorun et al., 2004).
Gopalan et al. (2004) reported the ascorbic acid content of carrot is 3 mg/
100g. Similarly, Miglio et al. (2008) reported that raw carrots have low value of
ascorbic acid (2.3 and 10.8 mg/100 g for fresh and dry matter respectively).
2.2.5 Total carotenoids and β-carotene
Carotenoids are a group of yellow, orange and red phytochemicals found

in most vegetables. Beta-carotene accounts for more than half the total vitamin A
contribution (Umiel and Gabelmal, 1971).
Sethi and Anand (1983) found that the β-carotene content of raw carrots is
11.88 mg/100g. Carrot roots are rich in carotenoids. Six carotenes (α-, β-, γ -, ζ -
carotenes, β-zeacarotene and lycopene) can be routinely separated and quantified
in typical and dark orange carrots (Arscott and Tanumihardjo, 2010). The total
carotenoids content in the edible portion of carrot roots range from 6, 000 to 54,
8
800 μg/100 g (Simon and Wolff, 1987). The predominant carotenoids are the
provitamin A carotenes, that is, α- and βcarotene, accounting for 13 to 40 per cent
and 45 to 80 per cent of the carotenoids in orange carrots, respectively (Simon and
Wolff, 1987; Gross, 1991). Total carotenoids ranged from 96 mg/100g in Hisar
Gairic to 47 mg/100g in PusaKesar (Kalloo et al., 1993)
Gopalan et al. (1997) stated that the beta-carotene content of raw carrot is
6.46 mg/100g whereas According to Miglio et al. (2008) raw carrots showed high
concentrations of two vitamin precursors, the carotenoids α- and β-carotene (4.6
and 6.4 mg/100g). Typical orange carrot contains high amounts of α- and β-
carotene which account for about half of the provitamin A (Sun et al., 2009).
According to Dark and Booth (2009) the average total carotene value for common
types of carrot (excluding certain very high value varieties and the almost
colorless varieties) is 13·8 mg /100 g fresh carrot.
2.2.6 Antioxidant activity
Organic varieties of carrots were found to have lower antioxidant activity

than conventionally grown carrot varieties as determined by DPPH method. The
per cent radical scavenging capacity was 40 per cent for organic varieties of carrot
and 48 per cent for conventionally grown carrots (Faller and Fialho, 2009). The
antioxidant activity of both hydrophilic and hydrophobic extract of different
colored carrots was determined by ABTS and DPPH method. It was found that the
antioxidant capacities of orange, dark orange and red carrots were lower than the
purple yellow and purple-orange carrots whereas yellow and white carrots had
lowest antioxidant capacities (Sun et al., 2009).
Carrots have been reported to have diuretic, N-balancing properties and

are effective in the elimination of uric acid (Anon, 1952). The α-tocopherol
content of fresh carrot roots varies from 0.11 to 0.50 mg/100g (Bunnell et al.,
1965). In human system, the physiological activity of α- and β-carotene has been
50 and 100 per cent of the provitamin A activity, respectively (Panalaks and
9
Murray, 1970; Simpson, 1983). Carrot is a significant source of phytonutrients
including phenolics (Babic et al., 1993), polyacetylenes (Hansen et al., 2003;
Kidmose et al., 2004) and carotenoids. The presence of high concentration of
antioxidant carotenoids especially β-carotene may account for the biological and
medicinal properties of carrots. Carotenoids have been linked with the
enhancement of immune system and decreased risk of degenerative diseases such
as cancer, cardiovascular disease, age related macular degeneration and cataract
formation (Mathews-Roth, 1985; Bendich and Olso, 1989; Bendich, 1990;
Krinsky, 1990; Byers and Perry, 1992; Bendich, 1994; Krinsky, 1994; Faulks and
Southon, 2001).
Carotenoids have been identified as a potential inhibitor of Alzheimer’s

disease (Zaman et al., 1992). Numerous animal experiments and epidemiological
studies have indicated that carotenoids inhibit carcinogenesis in mice and rats and
may have anticarcinogenic effects in humans. In biological systems, β-carotene
functions as a free radical-trapping agent and single oxygen quencher and have
antimutagenic, chemopreventive, photoprotective and immune enhancing
properties (Deshpande et al., 1995). In the past decade carotenoids such as β-
carotene have attracted considerable attention because of their possible protective
effect against some types of cancers (Bast et al., 1996; Santo et al., 1996; Van,
1996). Gazzani et al. (1998) investigated the pro-oxidant activity of carrot,
cauliflower, celery, eggplant, mushroom, garlic and zucchini. Juices obtained by
centrifugation of vegetables were treated at different temperatures (2, 25 and 102
o
C) and assessed for antioxidant activity. The final antioxidant activity of carrot
juice prepared at 2◦C slightly increased when juice was treated at 25◦ C. Chinese
cabbage, broccoli and onion are reported to have high antioxidant activities
(Proteggente et al., 2002; Luximon et al., 2003; Chu et al., 2002; Cao et al., 1996)
and vegetables such as carrot and lettuce to be weak antioxidants in in vitro
assays. However, high antioxidant activities have been reported in tomato,
cabbage and carrot and lower activities in onion, chilli pepper and cauliflower
10
using a model system consisting of β- carotene and linoleic acid (Kaur and
Kapoor, 2002) The low antioxidant activities of tomato and carrot may be
attributed to the extraction process resulting in the assay of more water-soluble
extracts. Defatting and maceration have largely contributed to the removal of the
antioxidant carotenoids and tocopherols present in these vegetables (Bahorun et
al., 2004). Carrot being rich in β-carotene, ascorbic acid and tocopherol is
classified as vitaminized food (Hashimoto and Nagayama, 2004). Zhang and
Hamauzee (2004) reported 80.1 per cent total antioxidant activity in carrot peels.
Fresh carrot contained 13.02 g dry matter, 8.9 mg vitamin C, 11.6 mg carotenoids,
7.0 mg beta-carotene and 20.9 mg polyphenols/100 g; its antioxidative activity
was 19.4 per cent radical scavenging activity. After 12-months storage carrot
prepared for consumption retained 36-45 per cent of vitamin C, 50-77 per cent of
carotenoids, 70-80 per cent of betacarotene, 73-78 per cent of polyphenols while
its antioxidative activity was reduced to 30-39 per cent of the initial level
(Gebczynski, 2006). Due to appreciable level of variety of different compounds
present, carrots are considered as a functional food with significant health
promoting properties (Hager and Howard, 2006).
Chantaro et al. (2008) demonstrated the feasibility of using carrot peels, a

by-product from food industry, to produce antioxidant rich dietary fiber powder
rich in bioactive compounds which may be used as a food ingredient. The total
antioxidant activity of the fresh peels found in the study was 94.67 per cent.
Murcia et al. (2009) found that garlic, endive, Brussels sprout, pea,
broccoli, zucchini, eggplant, carrot, onion, asparagus, chicory, lettuce, celery,
cucumber, maize, green bean and radish contain antioxidants with percentages
between 75 per cent and 50 per cent. Medium antioxidant activity was observed
for cauliflower, leek and pepper with percentages of between 50 per cent and 25
per cent. Beetroot, spinach, Swiss chard, broad bean and artichoke showed higher
antioxidant capacity than BHA, propyl gallate and BHT (100 mg/g),
with significant differences.
11
Assous et al. (2014) studied the Evaluation of red pigment extracted from
purple carrots and its utilization as antioxidant and natural food colorants.
Anthocyanins derived from purple carrots were extracted and identified by using
HPLC. Extracted pigments from purple carrots are used as alternative natural red
colorants for preparing hard candy and sweet jelly and also red carrot pigment
used as natural antioxidant on sunflower oil to delay the rancidity of sunflower
oil. Purple carrots contain 168.7 mg anthocyanin /100 g on fresh weight basis,
where the major constituents were Cyanidin-3-xylosyl-glucosyl-galactoside
acylatedwithferulic acid (33.65%) followed by Cyanidin-3-xylosyl-glucosyl-
galactoside acylated with coumaric acid (29.85%) and Cyanidin-3-xylosyl-
galactoside (28.70%) as determined by HPLC. Dextrin was the best carrier for
purple carrots anthocyanin pigment followed by cellulose, soluble starch and
glucose respectively. On the other hand, the highest pigment colour stability of
anthocyanin derived from purple carrots was obtained at pH values ranged
between 1.0 and 4.0 and temperatures ranged between 40 and 80° C, while the
degradation ratio of anthocyanin being 15% of total pigments after 180 min at
100° C. Analysis of variance for sensory evaluation of prepared hard candy and
sweet jelly indicated that there were no significant differences for hard candy
contains and sweet jelly anthocyanins pigments from purple carrots and control
hard candy and sweet jelly.
Bystricka et al. (2015) evaluated Carrot (Daucuscarota L. ssp. Sativus

(Hoffm.) Arcang.) as source of antioxidants and vitamins and showed that carrot
Carrot is a significant source of vitamins (A, B, C) and beta carotene. Further it
contains vitamins B, C, E, H, folic acid and pantothenic acid. Carrot is an
important source of trace elements (K, Na, Ca, Mg, P, S, Mn, Fe, Cu and Zn).
Consumption of carrot improves eyesight, lowers cholesterol and improves
digestion. Further total polyphenols, ß-carotene and antioxidant activity in five
varieties of carrot viz. (’Jitka’, Kardila’, ̓Katlen ̓, ̓Rubína’and ̓Koloseum )̓ were
estimated. Total polyphenols content in samples ranged from 81.25 ± 13.11 mg/kg
12
to 113.69 ± 11.57 mg/kg and content of ß-carotenes ranged from 24.58 ± 2.38
mg/kg to 124.28 ± 3.54 mg/kg. Antioxidant activity in selected varieties of carrot,
which varied from 6.88 ± 0.92 % to 9.83 ± 0.62 %. Significantly the highest value
of total polyphenols was recorded in variety of Koloseum (113.69 ± 11.57 mg/kg).
This variety was also characterized by the highest content of ß- carotene (124.28 ±
3.54 mg/kg) as well as the highest value of antioxidant activity (9.83 ± 0.62 %)
2.3 Physicochemical composition of Candies
Mehta and Bajaj (1984) studied the changes in chemical composition of

citrus peel candy during preparation and storage and found that β-carotene
reduced from 4.13 mg/100g to 3.70 mg/100g after 8 months storage Flavonoids
decreased from 0.56 mg/100g to 0.25 mg/100g and total phenols decreased from
135mg/100g to 92.50mg/100g.
Miglio et al. (2008) investigated the effect of three common cooking

practices i.e., boiling, steaming and frying on phytochemical content such as
polyphenols, carotenoids and ascorbic acid. Ascorbic acid concentration is slightly
but significantly affected by boiling (9%) and steaming (38%) whereas not
detectable in fried carrots. Cooking had a small but significant effect on total
carotenoids. There was slight increase (14%) of total carotenoids during boiling
whereas steaming and frying caused a slight decrease. Boiling had the most
detrimental effect on carrot polyphenols, resulting in the complete loss of each
compound likely because of their diffusion in the boiling water. Steaming and
frying had less negative effect on total phenolics (-43 and-31%) respectively. All
cooking methods significantly increased carrot total antioxidant capacity except in
the case of streamed carrots.
Hasanuzzaman et al. (2014) studied on tomato candy which was prepared

by dehydration technique using different sugar solutions the aim of the research
was to develop a self-stable dehydrated tomato product using different sugar
solutions and to study the effects of the sugar solution on the characteristic of
13
tomato candy. Tomato was immersed into the sugar solution with the
concentrations of 40%, 50% and 60% for 24 hours. Moisture, ash, protein, fat,
vitamin C, acidity, total sugar, crude fiber, total SO2 and salt content and
organoleptic quality and microbiological status of the prepared candy were
analyzed. There was a tendency of decreasing moisture, ash, protein, fat, vitamin
C, acidity, crude fiber and increasing total sugar content with increased
concentration of sugar solution used. On the microbiological analysis, total
bacteria and total fungus load were increased with increasing the concentration of
sugar solution. The best characteristic of tomato candy was found with 40% sugar
solution, with highest nutrient and sensory score and lowest microbial load than
candy prepared with 50% and 60% sugar solution.
Owolade et al. (2017) studied physico-chemical properties, antioxidant

activity and shelf stability of carrot (Daucuscarota) and pineapple
(Ananascomosus) juice blend of different formulation viz., 100% pineapple juice
(T1), 100% carrot juice (T2) and pineapple-carrot blend at ratio 2:1(T3) and 1:1
(T4) respectively. The Juice drinks produced were analyzed for various physico-
chemical properties, antioxidant activity, sensory and microbial qualities. The
result revealed mean PH value for T1, T2 T3 and T4 was 3.90, 4.30, 4.00 and 3.94
respectively. The mean total soluble solid for (T1)was 13.8% and 3.60% for
(T2).The 100% pineapple (T1) has the least beta-carotene content of
0.932mg/100ml which was significantly lower (p<0.05) than (T2) (T3) and (T4)
respectively. The microbial loads of the fruit juice were below 106cfu/ml, thus,
within acceptable limit for human consumption.
Alam et al. (2018) reported the Quality Evaluation of Ginger Candy

Prepared by Osmotic Dehydration Techniques The study was carried out to
develop and compare Ginger candy from fresh indigenous and China Ginger.
Ginger was immersed into the sugar solution with the concentrations of 50%, 60%
and 70% sugar solution. Moisture, ash, protein, fat, crude fiber and total sugar
content and organoleptic quality and microbial status of the prepared candy were
14
analyzed. Moisture, ash, protein, fat and crude fiber content was found to be lower
with increased concentration of sugar solution used, whereas total sugar content
was found to be higher. Total bacterial count was increased with increasing the
concentration of sugar solution. The best characteristic of Ginger candy was found
with 50% sugar solution, with highest nutrient and lowest microbial load than
candy prepared with 60% and 70% sugar solution
2.4 Effect of drying methods on physico-chemical Characteristics of

carrot
Reyes et al. (2002) analyzed the drying curves for 3 kg batches of carrot
dice (9 X 9 X3 mm) in a mechanically agitated fluidized bed drier operated at
temperature of 70-160°C, air velocities of 1.1 -2.2 m/s and stirring rates of 30-70
rpm. Drying kinetics were modeled by Fick's second law, for which an optimal
agreement with the experimental data was obtained when the effective diffusivity
was determined by a correlation based on air velocity, air temperature and the
dimensional less moisture content of carrot dice. Loss of carotenes was minimum,
when drying was carried out at about 130°C with a drying time below 12 min.
Suman et al. (2002) studied β-carotene retention and shelf-life of

dehydrated carrot products. Carrots were dried by solar drying, hot air cabinet
drying and direct sunlight. Sun-dried carrots had maximum loss of β-carotene
(71%) followed by solar (52%) and hot air cabinet drying (42%). Dehydrated
carrot products viz. carrot chops, carrot shreds and carrot powder were developed
by drying in hot air cabinet dryer. The β-carotene content of dried carrot chops,
shreds and powder were 24.7, 22.5 and 23.9 mg/100g, respectively, Different
recipes like carrot curry, carrot halwa and biscuits were prepared with dehydrated
carrots.
Machewad et al. (2003) studied the drying properties of carrots and their
suitability for producing various value added products. Chemical properties of
carrots indicated their suitability for drying and the feasibility of using carrot
15
shreds for further processing. Leaching losses were observed in reducing sugars
and total sugars during pre-treatments and an adverse effect was seen on beta-
carotene content in allsamples. Reconstitution ratio of dried carrot shreds was
higher in pre-treated samples than untreated. Carrot shreds dried in open air had a
lower reconstitution ratio. It was suggested that dried carrot shreds could be used
as a base material for preparation of carrot halwa.
Doymaz et al. (2004) studied the drying kinetics of carrot cubes.

Convective air drying characteristics of carrot cubes were evaluated in a cabinet
dryer. Drying was carried out at 50, 60, 65, 70°C and drying data were analyzed
to obtain diffusivity values from the period of falling drying rate. In the falling
rate period, moisture transfer from carrot cubes was described by applying the
Fick‟s diffusion model and effective moisture diffusion coefficients were
calculated. Effective diffusivity increased with increase in temperature. An
Arrhenius relation with an activation energy value of 28.36 kJ/mol expressed the
effect of temperature on the diffusivity. Two mathematical models were fitted to
the experimental data. The Page model gave better prediction than the Henderson
and Pabis model and satisfactorily described one drying characteristics of carrot
cubes.
Gornicki et al. (2007) subjected carrot cubes to combined treatments of

blanching and drying. Blanching was alternatively performed for 3 min in boiling
5% brine solution, 3 min in boiling water or 6 min in boiling water. It was
observed that the applied pre-treatments influenced the drying kinetics.
Berruti et al. (2009) studied the effects of air temperature and flow rate on
the drying of cylindrical carrot samples in a tunnel dryer. The drying was carried
out at 30 21, 42 and 56°C and at air superficial velocities of 0.5, 0.625, 0.75 and
0.95 m/s. A simpler approximation was implemented using Crank’s surface
evaporation equations to develop a model for predicting the diffusivity and mass
transfer coefficient. Using this new model, an Arrhenius relation with activation
16
energy of 31.76 kJ/mol successfully described the effect of temperature on the
diffusivity.
2.4.1 Conventional drying method
Conventional air drying is the most frequently used dehydration operation

in food industry.
Arya et al. (1982) reported that freezing before conventional hot air drying
considerably improved the stability of carotenoids and lipids in dehydrated
carrots.
Mohamed and Hussain (1994) found that long drying time adversely
affects the ascorbic acid and rehydration ability than the high drying temperature,
while carotenoids were more sensitive to high drying temperature than drying
time. They found that ascorbic acid and 17 rehydration ability were good at 60°C
drying temperature, while carotenoids and colour of dried carrots was good at
40°C drying temperature. In hot air conventional drying, the drying kinetics is
greatly affected by air temperature and material characteristic dimension, while all
other process factors exert practically negligible influence (Kiranoudis et al.,
1997).
Banga and Bawa (2002) dehydrated grated carrots at 50°C, 60°C and 70°C
in a cabinet dryer after blanching in water and 3 per cent NaCl solution. The rate
of drying curves revealed that most of moisture removal took place in falling rate
period. The maximum dehydration ratio was 9.57 for blanched samples and 7.52
for unblanched ones dehydrated at 60°C and 70°C respectively. Dehydrated carrot
products like carrot chops, shreds and powder have been utilized
for the preparation of recipes like curry, halva and biscuits (Suman and Kumari,
2002). A kheer mix has been formulated based on dehydrated carrot, skim milk,
sugar and other ingredients (Manjunatha et al., 2003).
Sagar et al. (2004) reported that Sel-14 and Sel-15 varieties dried faster as
compared to Pusa Kesar. Pusa Meghali took 14 h to dry the product upto 5.0 per
17
cent moisture level, at an air temperature of 58-60°C at a tray load of 2.0 kg/sqm.
Less carotene loss (38.31 per cent) during drying was observed in carrot slices
prepared from ‘Sel-14’ and higher (40.86 per cent) in the slices prepared from
‘Pusa Kesar’, might be due to higher degree of oxidation of carotenoids during
drying.
Scalzo et al. (2004) found that during drying of some fruits and vegetables,
the increase in the amounts of some phenolic substances having antioxidant
activity was associated with two concomitant events- first, the thermally induced
extraction of antioxidant molecules previously complexed or polymerized and
second, the retention of active compounds caused by the inactivation of the
enzymes involved in their catabolism.
Sagar and Neelavathi (2005) significant variations in total carotenoids and

β-carotene were observed in different packaging materials. The packaging
material HDPE had better retention of total carotenoids and β-carotene as
compared to LDPE pouches. In studies conducted by Chang et al. (2006) two
tomato varieties (AD-SN and ADITH) were air dried at 80°C for 2 hours and then
at 60°C for 6 hours. Subsequently, analyses revealed that the total flavonoid
content in AD-SN increased by 89 per cent and in AD-ITH by 50 per cent. The
total phenolic content increased by 13 and 50 per cent respectively. Dehydration
kinetics of carrot pomace revealed that optimal drying temperature was 65 °C on
the basis of β-carotene and ascorbic acid retention (Upadhyay et al., 2008).
2.5 Sensory quality of Candies
Rani et al. (1985) evaluated the organoleptic quality of pear candy based
on appearance, texture, flavor and overall acceptability by a taste panel consisting
of 12 judges. The samples kept at 37°C deteriorated faster and were found not
acceptable after 16 weeks whereas those stored at room temperature and in the
refrigerator were acceptable even after 40 weeks of storage. Sugar coated papaya
18
candy was found to be organoleptically acceptable for 3 weeks at ambient
temperature (Sandhu, 1994).
Mainuddin-Molla et al. (2008) reported the candies which were prepared

from Jackfruit bulbs and mango slices which were treated with preservatives and
firming agents to standardize the procedure and packed in different packaging
materials for 6 months. Initially, moisture content of jackfruit and mango candy
was 10.0%, whereas total sugar, reducing sugar, ascorbic acid and acidity were
45.46% and 26.50%, 18.54% and 16.45%, 6.90 mg/100g and 11.19 mg/100g and
0.12% and 0.91% respectively. The candies were tasted by a taste-testing panel
for different sensory attributes using 9-point hedonic scale. During 6 months
storage, the results showed that jackfruit and mango candy packed in metalex foil
pouch secured the highest sensory score and more nutritional quality, while
packed in high density polyethylene pouch and polypropylene pouch showed the
lowest score.
Vasundhra and Prameela (2015) reported the physico-chemical and

sensory evaluation of natural nutra candy. Candy was developed using natural
ingredients without any addition of chemical compounds or preservatives to
supplement iron, calcium and vitamin E in the diet. Moisture content, texture,
carbohydrates, nitrogen content, protein content, calcium, iron, phosphorus,
vitamin E and aflatoxins were evaluated and 9-point hedonic test was used to
analyze the overall acceptability of the nutra candy. Fresh candy had 5.8 % of
moisture content which gradually increased to 10 % in low density polyethylene
(LDPE) packaging material and up to 8.8 % in glass packaging material on 140th
day of storage. Total sugars were estimated to be 163.5 µg/ml in freshly prepared
candy and an increase in this value was recorded during the storage period.
Mineral estimation was carried using the atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS)
method. The candy reportedly had 71.5 mg% of iron, 130 mg% of calcium, 2.8
mg% of phosphorus and, 17.3 mg% of vitamin E. It was also observed that candy
could be preserved for 140 days in LDPE and glass packaging material at room
19
temperature (23 ± 5°C). Process was optimized to reduce loss of nutrients, which
was essential to retain calcium, iron and vitamin E in the final product as no
fortification has been done. The present study suggested that the candy can partly
meet the vitamin E requirement and supplement iron and calcium as per
recommended dietary allowance
Zeeshan et al. (2017) reported the physicochemical and Sensory

Evaluation of Dhakki Dates Candy. The experiment was conducted to develop
candy from Dhakki dates picked at Khalal stage. Physicochemical and sensory
characteristics like moisture, pH, TSS, color, flavor, texture and overall
acceptability were studied for total period of six months. Candy was prepared
from 5 different sugar concentrations, i.e., T0 (control), T1 (20%), T2 (40%), T3
(60%) and T4 (70%). Among them, best treatment was identified on the basis of
overall acceptability. Candy prepared from T3 (60%) proved to be best but the
candy prepared from T2 (40%) was equally good. The least acceptable was the
candy of T1 followed by T4. Sensorial properties, moisture and pH decreased
while TSS increased during six months of storage. Candy packed in HDPE bags
can be kept safely up to six months.
2.6 Storage studies of Candies
Sharma et al. (1998) studied the effect of preparation method, packaging

and storage on apple candies. The candies were prepared by both slow and fast
method. They were packed in glass jars, polythene pouches and tin containers.
One lot was stored at room temperature (Maximum-15 to 25oC, Minimum- 4 to
14oC and Relative humidity 34 per cent to 58 per cent) and another lot was stored
under refrigeration for 6 months. The TSS of fresh candy was 71.50◦B in slow and
75.50 oB in fast method which increased to 75.00oB and 77.50oB after 6 months.
Acidity decreased from 1.40 per cent at zero month to 1.32 per cent after six
months in both polythene pouches and tin containers whereas in glass jars it was
1.31 per cent.
20
Grigoreva et al. (2001) reported the storage studies for candy prepared
from the combination of rose syrup and carrot pulp, revealed that ascorbic acid
content was 65 per cent and 30 per cent of original concentration after 3 and 6
months of storage respectively. The evaluation of β-carotene content of
dehydrated carrots exhibited that the shreds lost the most β-carotene followed by
powder and chops during 3 months storage (Suman and Kumari, 2002).
Priyanka-Nayak et al. (2012) studied the changes of nutritional and

organoleptic quality of flavored candy prepared from aonla (Emblica officinalis
G.) during storage. Aonla is an important crop indigenous to Indian subcontinent
which is used in alternative medicine, health foods and herbal products. It has got
great potential in processed forms but little information is available regarding the
dehydration and storage quality of aonla. The aonla fruits of each cultivar
(Krishna, NA-7, NA-10 and Chakkaiya) were washed and blanched in boiling
water containing 2% alum for 8 to 10 min. The segments were separated after
cooling the fruits in tap water. The segments were stepped for 24 h in successively
increasing concentration of sugar syrup (50 to 700B); added flavors of ginger and
cardamom in syrup having 700B for three days. The excess syrup drained out and
the segments were dried in cabinet drier. The segments were packed and stored
under ambient conditions. The nine months storage study revealed that the
moisture content in the candy was found to decrease with storage. It decreases
from an initial value of about 16% to a final value of about 14% at the end of
storage. All the treatments reduced vitamin C content candy. The tannin content
of the various aonla candies was statistically significant with respect to aonla
varieties. Total soluble solids, acidity, total reducing and browning was found to
increase with storage period, while the non-reducing sugar was decreased with
storage period. On the basis of organoleptic evaluation and biochemical characters
concluded that the candy prepared from cv. Krishna and flavored with cardamom
powder found to be the best aonla candy.
21
2.7 Microbial quality of Candies
Navneet-Sidhu et al. (2015) Studied the Biochemical, Microbial Stability

and Sensory Evaluation of Osmotically Dehydrated Kinnow Peel Candy and Peel
Powder. Kinnow peel is a rich source of ascorbic acid, pectin, naringin and
limonin that goes waste during processing and utilization of kinnow into various
products. Kinnow peel candy and peel powder prepared by osmotic dehydration
retain color, aroma, taste and nutritional components of the peel for longer
duration. In this present investigation, products were packed in four different
packaging materials (HDPE, LDPE, laminate bag and glass jar) and stored under
ambient (37-44°C, relative humidity 56%) and refrigerated conditions (4-6°C,
relative humidity 95%) for 60 days to study the effect of storage conditions and
packaging material. The acceptability of the products was tested through
biochemical, microbiological analysis and sensory evaluation of the peel candy
and powder at regular intervals (0, 30 and 60 days) during storage. All packaged
materials were capable of maintaining the microbial load below the limits. The
candy packed in HDPE bag and peel powder packed in laminate bag was overall
acceptable and microbiologically stable till storage of 60 days under both
(ambient and refrigerated) conditions.
Sabeera-Muzzaffar et al. (2016) studied the effect of storage on

physicochemical, microbial and antioxidant properties of pumpkin (Cucurbita
moschata) candy. Pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata) is highly nutritious and
antioxidant-rich vegetable widely grown all over the world. Present study reports
the effect of storage on physicochemical, microbial and antioxidant properties of
pumpkin candy. Pumpkin and its candy were analyzed for the physicochemical
characteristics like moisture content, ash, total soluble solids (TSS), titrable
acidity, total sugar, reducing sugar and color. Beta-carotene and vitamin-C content
of pumpkin and its candy were also studied. Antioxidant properties like 1, 1-
Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP),
total phenolic content (TPC), reducing power and lipid peroxidation of methanolic
22
extracts of pumpkin and processed candy were evaluated. During storage, a
significant increase in TSS while a non-significant increase in titrable acidity,
reducing and total sugars was observed. Beta-carotene, vitamin C, colour and
antioxidant properties (DPPH, FRAP, TPC, reducing power and lipid
peroxidation) also showed a non-significant decrease during storage at ambient
temperature. Microbial load of pumpkin candy (1.74–3.2 log cfu/g) suggested that
candies were safe for human consumption during storage. Hence, candy
preparation from pumpkin could be an effective method for preservation of
pumpkin and retention of its bioactive component.
23
Chapter 3
MATERIALS AND METHODS
The experiment entitled “Evaluation and Standardization of Process for

Development of Carrot Candy” was conducted at Food Processing and Training
Centre in the Division of Food Science and Technology, Shere-e Kashmir
University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology, Shalimar campus
3.1 Raw materials

Carrot variety ‘Early Nantes’ was procured from the local market and
processed at fruit processing and training center, Division of Food Science and
Technology. Fresh Carrots of uniform size, shape, free from transportation
injuries, bruises, insect damage and disease free were selected.
3.2 Standardized recipe for carrot candy preparation

Standard operational procedure as adopted by Sidappa and Tandon (2010)
with slight modification was followed for the preparation of carrot candy. The
flow sheet for the preparation of carrot candy is given below:
Flow sheet for the preparation of carrot candy
24
3.3 Treatment combinations
Carrot slices of 10-15 mm thickness, after blanching was dipped in below

mentioned solutions for 24 hours as per Table 1.
Table 1: Pre treatments
Treatments Solutions % Solutions
T1 Sucrose 40%
T2 Sucrose 50%
T3 Glucose 40%
T4 Glucose 50%
T5 Honey 40%
T6 Honey 50%
T7 Fructose 40%
T8 Fructose 50%
3.4 Observations recorded during the experimentation
The following physico-chemical parameters of the carrot candies were

recorded during experimentation.
3.4.1 Physico chemical parameters recorded in fresh carrot
1. Moisture content (%)
2. Colour (L*, a*, b*)
3. Texture (N)
4. Water activity (aw)
5. Browning index
6. Acidity (%)
25
7. Total sugars (%)
8. Reducing sugar (%)
9. Non-reducing sugar (%)
10. Crude Protein (%)
11. Crude Fat (%)
12. Crude fiber (%)
13. Carbohydrate (%)
14. Ash (%)
15. Calorific value (kcal/100g)
16. Ascorbic acid (mg/100g)
17. Beta carotene (mg/100g)
18. Antioxidant activity (DPPH method) (% Inhibition)
19. Minerals ( Ca, Mg, Fe) (mg/100g)
20. Dehydration ratio
21. Dietary fiber (%)
Sensory quality (9-point hedonic scale)
3.4.2 Organoleptic evaluation
The organoleptic quality of pretreatments was evaluated by experienced

panel comprising 10 faculty members drawn from Division of Food Science and
Technology, SKUAST-Kashmir, Shalimar. The panelists were provided with
coded samples of carrot candy of different treatments and were requested to
assign scores on the basis of color, appearance, flavor, texture and mouth feel,
overall acceptability using 09-point hedonic scale as prescribed by Amerine et al.
(1965) with the following description
26
Hedonic scale description
Like extremely : 9
Like very much : 8
Like moderately : 7
Like slightly : 6
Neither like nor dislike : 5
Dislike : 4
Dislike moderately : 3
Dislike very much : 2
Dis like extremely : 1
3.5 Evaluation of carrot candy
The carrot candy was evaluated for the following parameters using the
standard procedures:
3.5.1 Moisture content (%)
Moisture content was determined by following the standard procedure of

AACC (2000). 5 g of sample were dried in a clean, dry and pre-weighed moisture
dish at 120 ±1 οC for 1 hour using hot air oven. The samples were then cooled in
desiccators and weighed. Moisture content was determined on fresh weight basis:
Weight of fresh sample (g) – Weight of dried sample (g)

Moisture content (%) = × 100
Weight of fresh sample (g)
3.5.2 Colour (L*, a*, b*)
Colour was determined by using colour difference meter (Model SN

3001476, Accuracy Micro Sensors, New York). The instrument was calibrated
with the user supplied black plate calibration standards that were used for zero
setting. Minolta supplied white calibration setting was used for white calibration.
27
The samples were uniformly packed in clean petriplates with lids. The instrument
was placed on the plate and their exposure at different places was conducted.
Readings were displayed as L*, a*, b* colour parameter according to the CIELAB
system of colour measurement. L* (Luminosity or brilliance) varies from black
(zero) to white (100), a* from green (-100) to red (+100) and b* from blue (-100)
to yellow (+100)
3.5.3 Hardness (N)
The hardness of the carrot candy was checked by using texture analyzer
(Model TA-TX, Stable Micro Systems Ltd, UK) equipped with 500 kg load cell
and texture expert system for data collection. A candy 40 mm in size was
compressed with a probe SMS-P/75-75 mm diameter at a crosshead speed 5mm/s
to 3mm of 90% of diameter of the candy. The compression generated a curve with
force over distance. The highest first peak value was recorded as this value
indicated the first rupture of candy at one point and this value of force was taken
as a measurement for hardness (Stojecska et al., 2009).
3.5.4 Water activity
Water activity was estimated by computer digital water activity meter

(HW3 model, Rotronic International, Switzerland), where direct measurements
were taken at room temperature. Standard cuvett was used in which products were
filled up to the rim and placed below the sensor of the water activity meter, which
gave direct reading of water activity of the sample.
3.5.5 Browning index
Browning index was determined in terms of optical density (O.D.) by

method recommended by Srivastava and Kumar (1994). A brief description is
given below
10 g of sample was taken in a beaker and 10 ml of distilled water and 30

ml of 60% ethyl alcohol was added. It was thoroughly mixed and the sample was
filtered using Whatman filter paper and filtrate was collected. The filtrate was
28
taken in cuvette and optical density of filtrate at 440 nm was measured by
spectrophotometer using 60% ethyl alcohol as a blank. The recorded value gives
the browning index of the sample.
3.5.6 Acidity (% citric acid)
For acidity a known weight of sample was boiled for 30 minutes with
small quantity of distilled water, loss of water during evaporation was made up by
addition of distilled water. The solution was filtered through Whatman No.4 filter
paper and volume was made up to 100 ml. with previously boiled distilled water.
A known aliquot of the above extract was titrated against standard 0.01N NaOH
using phenolphthalein as indicator and acidity was calculated using equation 3.4.
Titre value × Normality of alkali ×dilution × 67

Acidity (% as citric acid) = × 100
Weight of sample × Aliquot taken ×1000
3.5.7 Total sugars (%)
Total and reducing sugars were estimated by Lane and Eynon method, as
described by Ranganna (1997).
Sample preparation
Ten grams of sample were macerated and homogenized with distilled

water for 5 minutes. The homogenate was transferred to 250 ml volumetric flask
and neutralized with 1.0N NaOH. To it 2 ml of lead actetate (45%) were added,
shaken well and left undisturbed for 10 minutes, then it was de-leaded with 2 ml
of potassium oxalate (22%) and volume made up to 250ml. the solution was filtered
through Whatman No.4 filter paper and filtrate was marked as ‘Solution A’. For
estimating reducing sugars, solution (A) was used. But for the estimation of total
sugars 50ml of solution (A) was inverted in 250ml titration flask, hydrolyzed with
concentrated 5ml hydrochloric acid (HCl) and left overnight. The solution was
neutralized with 5.0N NaOH and volume was made up to 250 ml by adding
distilled water. This was marked as ‘Solution B’
29
Titration
Fehling’s solution (A) and (B) were used for titrometric estimation of
reducing and total sugars. Five ml of each Fehling’s solution (A) and Fehling’s
solution (B) were taken in a conical flask containing 25ml distilled water and
titrated against ‘Solution-A’ for reducing sugars and ‘solution-B’ for total sugars,
until brick red colour was observed. After this few drops of methylene blue
indicator were added and titration was continued until brick red precipitate was
observed. During the entire period the flask was kept on burner to keep the
contents boiling. Percentage of reducing and total sugars was calculated as under
equation 3.
Fehling’s factor × Volume made up

Reducing/total sugars (%) = × 100
Titre value × weight of sample
3.5.8 Crude Protein (%)
Crude Protein was determined as per the method given in AOAC (2012).
2gr of samples were taken and dried at 105oC to constant weight and transferred
to digestion tube. To each sample 7gr of K2SO4, 5 gram selenium powder, 12 ml
H2SO4 and 5ml of H2O2 was added it was then heated for 60 minutes at 400 oC the
digestion tube was cooled then t 50-60 oC 50 ml of NaoH was added to the sample
the sample was then titrated with 0.2 n HCL.
Calculation:-
Titre value × normality ×14× volume of aliquot

Nitrogen (%) = × 100
Weight of sample × Aliquot of digest taken ×100
Protein content = nitrogen × 6.25
3.5.9 Crude Fat (%)
The Soxlet method of Association of official and Analytical chemists

AOAC (2012) was used for fat estimation of carrot candy 20g dried sample was
taken in a thimble the thimble was placed in the extraction tube and this tube was
30
connected with the weighed flask and also the condenser The heat vaporized the
volatile solvent, which passes up the side and was condensed in the condenser the
condensed solvent fell drop by drop on the thimble. When sufficient amount of
solvent had thus been transferred to the extracting tube to fill the siphon arm, it
siphoned back over in to the weighed flask this process was continued was 20
hours until the process of extraction was completed then the bottom flask was
removed, the volatile solvent was evaporated and fat extracted was obtained as
residue the following formula was used for the estimation of fat:
Weight of residue left after evaporation of solvent

Fat content (%) = × 100
Weight of sample taken
3.5.10 Crude Fiber content (%)
Crude Fibre was determined as per method prescribed by Pearson (1990).

Crude Fiber was determined as loss in weight on ignition of dried residues
remaining after digestion of defatted material with 1.25% H2SO4 and boiling
1.25% NaOH. The per cent crude fibre was expressed on dry weight basis.
Samples were transferred into 750 ml Erlenmeyer flasks and half gram of asbestos
added. 200 ml of boiling 1.25% H2SO4was then added to each flask and the flask
was set on the hot plate as the condenser was connected to the power source. It
was timed for 30 minutes after which flask was removed and contents filtered
through linen cloth in funnel and washed with boiling water until washings were
no longer acidic. The washed sample from the acid treatment was then returned
into the flask with 200 ml boiling 1.25% NaOH solutions using wash bottles
calibrated to deliver 200 ml. The flask was connected to the condenser and boiled
for another 30 minutes. The flask was removed and contents filtered through linen
cloth and washed thoroughly with boiling water. The residue was transferred into
a Gooch crucible and oven-dried for one hour at 100°C. It was cooled in a
desiccator and reweighed.
31
3.5.11 Ash (%)
Total ash content in the samples was determined according to AOAC

(2012) procedures. 10 gm. of sample in triplicate was weighted accurately into pre
weighed Silica dish, charred over a flame and kept in muffle furnace at 600ºC for
4-6 hrs. The dish was cooled in desiccators and weighed accurately. The ash
percentage was calculated by equation:
Weight of ash
Ash content (%) = × 100
Weight of sample
3.5.12 Carbohydrate (%)
The total carbohydrate content of carrot candy by mass included crude

fiber was obtained as follows:-
Total carbohydrate= 100-P+F+A+M+F
Where,
p is mass% of protein
F is mass% of fat
A is mass% of ash
M is moisture content%
F is mass of % Fiber
3.5.13 Calorific value (kcal/100g)
The calorific value of carrot candy can be obtained as follows:-
9×Fat+4×Protein+4×Carbohydrate
3.5.14 Ascorbic acid (mg/100g)
The ascorbic acid content was estimated as per the method given by
Ranganna (1997). The details are as follows:-
32
I. Preparation of 3% Meta phosphoric acid (HPO3) solution: For
preparation of 3% Meta phosphoric acid (HPO3) solution, 15g sticks or
pellets of Meta phosphoric acid was dissolved in 500ml distilled water.
II. Preparation of standard ascorbic acid: 100 mg of L-ascorbic acid was

weighed and the volume was made up to 100 ml with 3% Meta phosphoric
acid. 1ml of this solution was diluted to 10ml by adding 3% HPO3 (1ml =
0.1 mg ascorbic acid).
III. Preparation of dye solution: 52 mg (0.052 g, 52/1000) of Sodium salt of

2, 6-dichlorophenol indophenol was dissolved in 150 ml of hot distilled
water containing 42 mg (0.042 g) Sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3). After
cooling, it was diluted with 200ml distilled water and stored in refrigerator
and standardized every day.
IV. Standardization of dye: In 5 ml of standard Ascorbic acid solution, 5 ml

of HPO3 was added. Micro burette was filled with the dye solution.
Standard Ascorbic acid was titrated against dye solution up to a pink
colour, which persisted for 15 seconds. 1mg of ascorbic acid was used per
ml of dye to determine the dye factor as follow:
Dye factor = 0.5/Titration value
V. Preparation of sample: 10 g of sample to be analyzed was mixed with

100ml of 3% HPO3 and after that, it was filtered.
VI. Assay of Ascorbic acid: An aliquot (10ml) of the sample was taken and
titrated against standard dye to a pink colour end point, which persisted for
15 seconds. Ascorbic acid content of the sample was calculated by using
the following formula:
Titre × Dye factor × Dilution

Ascorbic acid (mg/100ml) = × 100
Weight of sample
33
3.5.15 β- Carotene (mg/100g)
A known weight of sample (20-25 g was dissolved in the solvent (acetone)

and ground till the whole colour was extracted, then the liquid was transferred into
a separating funnel. Separated coloured portion was collected after adding
petroleum ether and 5 per cent sodium sulphate solution. The final volume was
made up to 25 ml. The optical density was taken at 452 nm and the reading was
compared with the standard curve (Ranganna, 2009). The quantity of carotenoids
was calculated by using the following formula:
Concentration of carotene in solution from

standard curve × final volume × dilution
β-Carotene mg of per 100 g of sample = × 100
Weight of sample
3.5.16 Antioxidant activity (DPPH) (% inhibition)
The antioxidant activity of the extract was determined by DPPH (2,2-

diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) method described by Ravichandran et al. (2013). 0.2
ml of the methanol extract was mixed for 30 s with 3.8 ml of DPPH solution (6
×10-5 M), and left to react for 30 mints, after which the absorbance of the mixture
was measured at 517nm.The DPPH solution without extract was analyzed as a
control. The antioxidant activity was calculated as follows:
(Acontrol- Asample)
DPPH radical-scavenging activity (%) = × 100
Acontrol
Where A is the absorbance at 517nm.
3.5.17 Minerals (mg/100g)
Estimation of calcium (Ca), magnesium (Mg), iron (Fe)
Digestion of sample for estimation of Ca, Mg, Fe.
Procedure: Digestion of sample was done in 10ml di-acid (mixture of nitric acid
and perchloric acid, in the ratio of 9:4). 2 g of sample was taken in the flask and
20 ml di-acid mixture is added in a 100 ml flask. The flasks were kept undisturbed
overnight and next day were placed on hot plate at about 115-118 οC for digestion
34
till a watery transparent aliquot was obtained. The digested samples were filtered
and were diluted with double distilled water to make volume of 50 ml which was
ultimately used for estimation of above mentioned nutrient.
1. Calcium : The calcium was estimated by versenate method as described by

Jackson (1973)
2. Magnesium :The magnesium was estimated by flame photometer as per

procedure given by Piper (1966)
3. Iron: The iron was estimated by versenate method as described by Jackson

(1973).
3.5.18 Dehydration ratio
Know weight of samples was dried and the weight of dried sample was
recorded. Dehydration ratio was calculated using equation:
Weight of prepared material

Dehydration ratio =
Weight of dried material
3.5.19 Dietary fiber (%)
Dietary fiber was estimated by the dietary fiber system (fibraplus DF). The
method is given by JAOAC (1988).
A known quantity of sample was incorporated in four 500ml beakers in

equal amount. 50ml of 0.08 M phosphate buffer (pH-6) was added to each beaker
with 0.1 ml α- amylase. Beakers were covered with aluminum foil and placed in
water bath shaker for 15 mints at 950 C. After cooling the beakers to room
temperature 10 ml of 0.275 N NaOH solution was added to beakers to adjust the
pH to 7.5. 5 mg of protease was added to each beaker and 0.1 ml of 0.08 M
phosphate buffer to adjust the pH to 6. Again the beakers were incubated in water
shaker for 30 min at 600C. After cooling, 10 ml of 0.325 N hydrochloric acid
solution was added to maintain pH to 4.5. 0.3 of amylo-glucosidase was added to
each beaker and incubated for 30 min at 600C. Solution obtained was filtered
35
through crucibles. Precipitate was transferred from enzymatic digest to crucibles
and washed with 20 ml of 78 % ethanol and 10 ml of 95 % ethanol and finally
with % 10 ml of acetone. Crucibles containing residue were dried in hot air oven
and cooled. Crucibles were weighed to determine the weight of IDF (insoluble
dietary fiber) residue. Duplicate residue was analyzed for protein by micro-
Kjeldahl method as outlined by Thimmaiah (1999). Another residue was
incinerated for ash. The left over filtrate, four volumes of 95 % ethanol were
added to precipitate SDF (soluble dietary fiber). After one hour, the precipitate
was transferred into crucibles, fitted in filtration module and the above procedure
of estimating protein in sample residue and ash content in duplicate sample
residue is repeated to get SDF value.
Calculation
Blank (%) = weight of the blank residue – (protein in blank residue + ash in blank ×100 residue)
(Wt. of IDF residue) – (protein in IDF residue + ash in IDF residue ) – blank
IDF % = × 100
weight of sample (g)
(Wt. of SDF residue) – (protein in SDF residue + ash in SDF residue ) – blank
SDF % = × 100
weight of sample (g)
TDF (%) = IDF + SDF
Experiment No. 2: Standardization of pre-treatments for preparation of

carrot candy
Samples within overall acceptability score of ≥ 6 were selected and based

on the range and desirability of physico-chemical characteristics, the
standardization was done.
36
Standardization was done on the basis of below mentioned parameters:
S. No. Parameters
1. Minimum browning
2. Maximum acidity%
3. Minimum dehydration ratio
4. Minimum loss of ascorbic acid (mg/100g)
5. Maximum beta carotene content (mg/100g)
6. Maximum antioxidant activity (% inhibition)
Experiment No. 3: To determine the storage stability and economic

viability of the final product
3.6 Storage Stability
The standardized product obtained on the basis of physi-co-chemical and

sensory quality evaluation on 9 point hedonic scale were packed in aluminum
based laminate and PET jars and stored under ambient conditions. The product
were evaluated for the following parameters at first, 30th, 50th, 65th, 80th and 90th
day of storage, using standard procedures as described below
As described in (3.5.1)
3.6.2 Colour
As described in (3.5.2)
3.6.3 Total plate count (cfu/g)
The carrot candy samples prepared were analysed for total bacteria and
fungi by standard serial dilution plate count method using nutrient agar
(Anonymous, 1957), Martin’s Rose Bengal agar (Martin, 1950). The total micro
37
flora of carrot candy was analyzed by suspending 10 g of candy in 90 ml water
blank. The aliquots after stirring for 5 minutes were serially diluted and used for
plate count techniques. One ml of aliquots from appropriate dilutions was
transferred aseptically into sterile plates and molten agar media cooled to 500 C
were poured into respective plates. The plates were gently rotated to uniformly
distribute the inoculums before the medium was solidified, the plates were then
incubated at 30 0C temperature for 3-7 days and colony counts were recorded.
3.6.4 Hardness
As described in 3.5.3
3.6.5 Browning Index
3.6.6 β- Carotene
3.6.7 Water activity
3.7 Sensory quality evaluation
As described in 3.9
3.8 Economic analysis:
In order to determine the economic viability of the product the four

economic parameters i.e. cost of candy preparation, benefit cost ratio, breakeven
point and payback period was determined
3.9 Statistical analysis
Results were analyzed statistically for their interpretation using completely

randomized design experiment using R-software.
38
Chapter 4
EXPERIMENTAL FINDING
4.1 Physico-chemical characteristics of fresh carrot

The physic-co-chemical characteristics of fresh carrot (Cv. Early Nantes)
has been presented in Table 4.1.
The moisture content (%), colour (L*, a*, b*), ash (%), crude fat (%),
crude fiber (%), crude protein (%), carbohydrate (%), acidity (% citric acid), total
sugars (%), reducing sugars (%), non-reducing sugars (%), ascorbic acid
(mg/100g), dietary fiber (%), beta carotene (mg/100g), antioxidant activity (%
inhibition), minerals (ca, mg, fe) (mg/100g) of carrot was recorded as 86.8, 16.65,
43.37, 22.55, 1.1, 0.2, 1.2, 0.7, 10.00, 0.07, 4.53, 3.35, 1.18, 4.31, 3.21, 10.13,
23.77, 9, 11, 2.0 respectively.
Table 4.1: Physico- chemical evaluation of carrot (Variety= Early Nantes)

Parameters Fresh carrot
Moisture (%) 86.8
Color
L* 16.65
a* 43.37
b* 22.55
Ash (%) 1.1
Crude Fat (%) 0.2
Crude Fiber (%) 1.2
Crude Protein (%) 0.7
Carbohydrate (%) 10.00
Acidity (% Citric acid) 0.07
Total sugars (%) 4.53
Reducing sugars (%) 3.35
Non-reducing sugar (%) 1.18
Ascorbic acid (mg/100g) 4.31
Dietary fiber (%) 3.21
Beta-carotene (mg/100g) 10.13
Antioxidant activity (DPPH method) (% inhibition) 23.77
Minerals (mg/100g)
Ca 9
Mg 11
Fe 2.0
39
Fig. 1: Cabinet tray drier employed for dehydration of carrot candies
40
4.2 Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical composition of carrot
candies
The data pertaining to the moisture content of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2a. Perusal of the data revealed significant influence of treatments on
moisture content of the product. The moisture content was found to vary among
the treatments from 23.01-26.13 %, with significantly highest value of (26.13%)
in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) and the lowest value of (23.01%) recorded
in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution). Further moisture content of T1, T2, T3, T5,
T7, T8 was recorded as 25.04, 25.07, 23.03, 26.09, 24.06 and 24.08% respectively.
4.2.2 Texture (N)
Study of data as presented in the Table 4.2a. revealed significant influence

of treatments on the hardness of carrot candy. The hardness was found to vary
among the treatments from 34.51-49.52 (N). With significantly maximum
hardness (49.52 N) recorded in treatment combination T4 (50% Glucose solution)
(49.52 N) and minimum of (34.51 N) recorded in Treatment combination T 6 (50%
Honey solution) (34.51 N).Further hardness of T1, T2, T3, T5, T7, T8 was recorded
as 40.89, 41.58, 48.61, 34.84, 35.32 and 36.62 N respectively.
4.2.3 Water activity (aw)
The data pertaining to the water activity of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2a. Significant difference was observed among the treatments for water
activity of the carrot candy. Water activity was recorded significantly higher
(0.628) in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest water activity
(0.427) was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution). Further water
activity of treatments T1, T2, T3, T5, T7, T8 was recorded as 0.554, 0.558, 0.429,
0.623, 0.516 and 0.520 respectively.
40
The effect of pre-treatments on browning index of carrot candy is

presented in Table 4.2a. The highest (0.230) browning index was recorded in
treatment T8 (50% Fructose solution) while the lowest (0.025) was recorded in
treatment combination T6 (50% Honey solution). Further browning index of T1,
T2, T3, T4, T5 and T7 was recorded as 0.195, 0.205, 0.125, 0.143, 0.035 and 0.215
respectively.
4.2.5 Acidity (% citric acid)
The data pertaining to the acidity of carrot candy is presented in Table

4.2a. Study of the data indicated that acidity of carrot candy varied from 0.063-
0.223 %. The acidity of carrot candy using different treatment combinations T1,
T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as 0.120, 0.140, 0.063, 0.073, 0.198,
0.223, 0.165 and 0.175 % respectively. Significantly highest (0.223%) acidity was
recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution).while as the lowest acidity
(0.063%) was recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose solution).
The data related to the total sugar content of carrot candy is presented in
Table 4.2a. The data depicts that that total sugar content of carrot candy varied
from 65.71-76.23%. The total sugar content of carrot candy using different
treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 was recorded as 70.75, 71.03,
65.71, 65.98, 75.94, 76.23, 70.04 and 70.16 % respectively Significantly
maximum total sugar content (76.23%) was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey
solution) while as minimum total sugar content (65.71%) was recorded in
treatment T3 (40% Glucose solution).
4.2.7 Reducing sugars (%)
The data pertaining to the reducing sugar content of carrot candy is

presented in Table 4.2a. Perusal of the data indicated the significant influence of
treatments on reducing sugar (%) content of carrot candy. The reducing sugar
41
Table 4.2a: Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical composition of carrot candies
Water Browning Total Reducing

Treatment Moisture% Texture (N) Acidity %
activity (aw) index sugars% sugars%
T1 25.04 40.89 0.554 0.195 0.120 70.75 42.35
T2 25.07 41.58 0.558 0.205 0.140 71.03 42.51
T3 23.03 48.61 0.429 0.125 0.063 65.71 39.50
T4 23.01 49.52 0.427 0.143 0.073 65.98 39.92
T5 26.09 34.84 0.623 0.035 0.198 75.94 44.74
T6 26.13 34.51 0.628 0.025 0.223 76.23 44.86

42
T7 24.06 35.32 0.516 0.215 0.165 70.04 43.35
T8 24.08 36.62 0.520 0.230 0.175 70.16 43.52
Mean 24.56 40.24 0.531 0.146 0.144 70.73 42.59
SE (m) 0.016 0.430 0.001 0.007 0.011 0.328 0.446
CD at (≤) 0.5 0.046 1.261 0.002 0.020 0.034 0.963 1.310

T1 = 40% Sucrose solution, T2 = 50% Sucrose solution
T3 = 40% Glucose solution, T4 = 50% Glucose solution
T5 =40% Honey solution, T6 = 50% Honey solution
T7 =40% Fructose solution, T8 = 50% Fructose solution
content was found to vary between the treatments from 39.50-44.86%. Treatment
T6 (50% Honey solution) recorded the highest reducing sugar content (44.86%)
while as the reducing sugar content of treatment T3 was found lowest and recorded
as (39.50%). Further reducing sugar content of T1, T2, T4, T5, T7, T8 was recorded
as 42.35, 42.51, 39.92, 44.74, 43.35 and 43.52 % respectively.
4.2.8 Non-reducing sugars (%)
The data generated regarding to the non-reducing sugar content of carrot

candy is presented in Table 4.2b. Study of the data indicated that non-reducing
sugar content of carrot candy varied from 26.19-31.35%. The non-reducing sugar
content of carrot candy using different treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5,
T6, T7, T8 was recorded as 28.40, 28.50, 26.19, 26.30, 31.20, 31.35, 27.64 and
27.71% respectively. Significantly highest (31.35%) non-reducing sugar content
was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest (26.19%)
non-reducing sugar content was recorded in treatment T 3 (40% Glucose solution).
4.2.9 Crude Protein (%)
The data pertaining to the crude protein content of carrot candy is

presented in Table 4.2b. The data depicts that crude protein content of carrot
candy varied from 1.14-1.20 %. The crude protein content of different treatment
combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as 1.14, 1.16, 1.10,
1.12, 1.18, 1.20, 1.13 and 1.15% respectively. Significantly highest (1.20%) crude
protein content was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the
lowest (1.10 %) crude protein content was recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose
solution).
4.2.10 Crude Fat (%)
The data related to the crude fat content of carrot candy is presented in
Table 4.2b. Perusal of the data indicated that crude fat content of carrot candy
varied from 0.62-0.80 %. The crude fat content of different treatment
43
0.68, 0.78, 0.80, 0.74 and 0.76 % respectively. Significantly highest (0.80%)
crude fat content was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the
lowest (0.62%) crude fat content was recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose
solution).
4.2.11 Crude Fiber (%)
The data generated regarding to the crude fiber content of carrot candy is
presented in Table 4.2b. Study of the data indicated that crude fiber of carrot
candy varied from 1.13-1.35%. The crude fiber content of different treatment
1.16, 1.32, 1.35, 1.28 and 1.30% respectively. Significantly highest (1.35%) crude
fiber content was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the
lowest (1.13%) crude fiber content was recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose
solution).
The data regarding to the carbohydrate content of carrot candy is presented

in Table 4.2b. Perusal of the data revealed that carbohydrate content of carrot
candy varied from 70.03-72.72 %. The carbohydrate content of different treatment
72.72, 70.03, 70.16, 71.24 and 71.26 % respectively. Significantly highest
(72.72%) carbohydrate content was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose
solution) while as the lowest (70.03%) carbohydrate content was recorded in
treatment T5 (40% Honey solution).
4.2.13 Ash (%)
The data pertaining to the ash content of carrot candy is presented in Table
4.2b. Study of the data indicated that ash content of carrot candy varied from 1.44-
1.63%. The ash content of carrot candy using different treatment combinations T1,
T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 were 1.51, 1.53, 1.44, 1.46, 1.60, 1.63, 1.55, 1.57
respectively. Significantly highest (1.63%) ash content was recorded in
44
Table 4.2b: Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical composition of carrot candies
Non- Calorific
Crude Crude Carbohydrat
Treatment reducing Crude Fat% Ash% value
Protein% Fiber% e%
sugar % Kcal/100g
T1 28.40 1.14 0.70 1.23 70.38 1.51 292.37
T2 28.50 1.16 0.74 1.26 70.40 1.53 292.90
T3 26.19 1.10 0.62 1.13 72.69 1.44 296.73
T4 26.30 1.12 0.68 1.16 72.72 1.46 297.47
T5 31.20 1.18 0.78 1.32 70.03 1.60 291.85

45
T6 31.35 1.20 0.80 1.35 70.16 1.63 292.63
T7 27.64 1.13 0.74 1.28 71.24 1.55 296.13
T8 27.71 1.15 0.76 1.30 71.26 1.57 296.47
Mean 28.41 1.14 0.72 1.25 71.23 1.53 294.56
SE (m) 0.391 0.006 0.025 0.009 0.013 0.008 0.007
CD at (≤) 0.5 1.148 0.019 0.075 0.028 0.037 0.022 0.019

treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest (1.44 %) ash content was
recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose solution).
The data generated regarding to the calorific value of carrot candy is

presented in Table 4.2b. Perusal of the data indicated that calorific value of carrot
candy varied from 291.85-297.47 kcal/100g. The calorific value of carrot candy
using different treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was
recorded as 292.37, 292.90, 296.73, 297.47, 291.85, 292.63, 296.13 and 296.47
respectively. Significantly highest calorific value (297.47 Kcal/100g) was
recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution) while as the lowest calorific
value (291.85) was recorded in treatment T5 (40% Honey solution).
The data pertaining to the ascorbic acid of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2c. The data depicts that ascorbic acid of carrot candy varied from 2.80-
2.98 mg/100g. The ascorbic content of carrot candy using different treatment
combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 was recorded as 2.86, 2.89, 2.83, 2.80,
2.96, 2.98, 2.90 and 2.94 mg/100g respectively. Significantly highest (2.98
mg/100g) ascorbic acid was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while
as the lowest (2.80 mg/100g) ascorbic acid was recorded in treatment T4 (50%
Glucose solution).
4.2.16 Beta- carotene (mg/100g)
The data related to the beta-carotene content of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2c. Perusal of the data indicated that beta-carotene content of carrot candy
varied from 12.20-16.26%.The beta-carotene content of different treatment
combinations T1, T 2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as 14.22, 14.28, 12.21,
12.20, 16.20, 16.26, 13.25 and 13.29 mg/100 g respectively. Significantly highest
beta-carotene content of (16.26 mg/100g) was recorded in treatment T6 (50%
46
Honey solution) while as the lowest beta-carotene content of (12.20 mg/100g) was
4.2.17 Antioxidant activity (%DPPH activity)
The data pertaining to the antioxidant activity of carrot candy is presented

in Table 4.2c. Study of the data indicated that antioxidant activity of carrot candy
varied from 41.20-50.48% inhibition. The antioxidant activity of different
treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as 43.22,
43.40, 41.38, 41.20, 50.20, 50.48, 45.28 and 45.39 % inhibition respectively.
Significantly highest antioxidant activity (50.48 % inhibition) was recorded in
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest antioxidant activity (41.20
% inhibition) was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution).
The data generated regarding to the dehydration ratio of carrot candy is

presented in Table 4.2c. The data depicts that dehydration ratio of carrot candy
varied from 1.21-1.66. The dehydration ratio of different treatment combinations
T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as 1.42, 1.35, 1.66, 1.61, 1.28, 1.21,
1.53 and 1.45 respectively. Significantly maximum dehydration ratio (1.66) was
recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose solution) while as the minimum
dehydration ratio (1.21) was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution).
4.2.19 Dietary fibre (%)
The data pertaining to the dietary fibre of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2c. Perusal of the data indicated that dietary fibre of carrot candy varied
from 2.09-2.25%. The dietary fibre of different treatment combinations T1, T 2, T3,
T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 were 2.15, 2.18, 2.09, 2.12, 2.22, 2.25, 2.20 and 2.23 %
respectively. Significantly highest dietary fibre (2.25%) was recorded in treatment
T6 (50% Honey solution) while the lowest dietary fibre (2.09%) was recorded in
treatment T3 (40% Glucose solution).
47
Table 4.2c: Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical composition of carrot candies
Antioxidant
Ascorbic acid Beta carotene
Treatment activity DPPH Dehydration ratio Dietary fibre %
mg/100g mg/100g
(% Inhibition)
T1 2.86 14.22 43.22 1.42 2.15
T2 2.89 14.28 43.40 1.35 2.18
T3 2.83 12.21 41.38 1.66 2.09
T4 2.80 12.20 41.20 1.61 2.12
T5 2.96 16.20 50.20 1.28 2.22

48
T6 2.98 16.26 50.48 1.21 2.25
T7 2.90 13.25 45.28 1.53 2.20
T8 2.94 13.29 45.39 1.45 2.23
Mean 2.89 13.98 45.06 1.43 2.18
SE (m) 0.006 0.423 0.425 0.011 0.022
CD at (≤) 0.5 0.018 1.242 1.248 0.031 0.064

4.2.20 Effect of pre treatments on mineral composition of carrot candies
4.2.20.1 (Ca)
The data pertaining to the calcium content of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2d. The data depicts that calcium content of carrot candy varied from
(8.14-10.23 mg/100g).The calcium content of different treatment combinations
T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as 9.18, 9.28, 8.14, 8.24, 10.13,
10.23, 8.17 and 8.27 mg/100g respectively. Significantly highest calcium content
(10.23 mg/100g) was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while the
lowest calcium content (8.14 mg/100g) was recorded in treatment T3 (40%
Glucose solution).
4.2.20.2 (Mg)
The data related to the magnesium content of carrot candy is been

presented in Table 4.2d. Perusal of the data indicated that magnesium content of
carrot candy varied from (10.24-12.23 mg/100g).The magnesium content of
different treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 was recorded as
11.15, 11.23, 10.24, 10.35, 12.13, 12.23, 10.28 and 10.36 mg/100g respectively.
Significantly highest magnesium content (12.23 mg/100g) was recorded in
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while the lowest magnesium content (10.24
mg/100g) was recorded in treatment T 3 (40% Glucose solution).
4.2.20.3 (Fe)
The data generated regarding to the Iron content of carrot candy is been
presented in Table 4.2d. Study of the data indicated that the Iron content of carrot
candy from (2.3-2.12mg/100g).The Iron content of different treatment
combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 was recorded as 2.8, 2.10, 2.3, 2.4,
2.11, 2.12, 2.5 and 2.6 mg/100g respectively. Significantly highest iron content
(2.12 mg/100g) was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while the
lowest iron content (2.3 mg/100g) was recorded in treatment T3 (40% Glucose
solution).
49
Table 4.2d: Effect of pre treatments on mineral composition of carrot
candies (mg/100g)
Treatment Ca Mg Fe
T1 9.18 11.15 2.8
T2 9.28 11.23 2.10
T3 8.14 10.24 2.3
T4 8.24 10.35 2.4
T5 10.13 12.13 2.11
T6 10.23 12.23 2.12
T7 8.17 10.28 2.5
T8 8.27 10.36 2.6
Mean 8.95 10.99 2.36
SE (m) 0.009 0.010 0.005
CD at (≤) 0.5 0.025 0.030 0.016

50
4.2.21 Effect of pre treatments on colour values of carrot candies
4.2.21.1 (L*)
The data pertaining to the L* value of carrot candy is presented in Table

4.2e. The data depicts that L* value of carrot candy varied from (12.45-18.63).The
L* value of different treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7, T8 was
recorded as 14.19, 14.30, 18.52, 18.63, 12.56, 13.32 and 13.22 respectively.
Significantly maximum L*value (18.63) was recorded in treatment T4 (50%
Glucose solution) while as the minimum L* value (12.45) was recorded in
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution).
4.2.21.2 (a*)
The data related to the a* value of carrot candy is been presented in Table
4.2e. Perusal of the data indicated that a* value of carrot candy varied from
(38.77-48.12).The a* value of different treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5,
T6, T7, T8 was recorded as 40.54, 41.23, 38.77, 39.47, 47.21, 48.12, 41.25 and
41.93 respectively. Significantly maximum a*value (48.12) was recorded in
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the minimum a* value (38.77) was
4.2.21.3 (b*)
The data pertaining to the b* value of carrot candy is presented in Table

4.2e. Study of the data indicated that b* value of carrot candy varied from (18.62-
28.13).The b* value of different treatment combinations T1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7,
T8 was recorded as 27.28, 28.13, 18.62, 19.64, 23.36, 24.23, 20.78 and 22.04
respectively. Significantly maximum b*value (28.13) was recorded in treatment
T4 (50% Glucose solution) while as the minimum b* value (18.62) was recorded
in treatment T2 (50% Sucrose solution).
51
Table 4.2e: Effect of pre treatments on Colour coordinates of carrot candies
Treatment L* a* b*
T1 14.19 40.54 19.64
T2 14.30 41.23 18.62
T3 18.52 39.47 27.28
T4 18.63 38.77 28.13
T5 12.56 47.21 23.36
T6 12.45 48.12 24.23
T7 13.32 41.25 20.78
T8 13.22 41.93 22.04
Mean 14.64 42.31 23.01
SE (m) 0.006 0.143 0.204
CD at (≤) 0.5 0.017 0.420 0.599

52
4.2.22 Effect of pre treatments on organoleptic quality of carrot candies
4.2.22.1 Appearance
The data with regard to appearance of carrot candy is presented in Table

4.2f. Perusal of the data revealed significant difference among the treatments for
mean appearance values of the carrot candies. Highest mean appearance value
(8.41) was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest
mean appearance value (6.12) was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose
solution. Further mean appearance values of treatments T1, T2, T3 T4, T5, T6, T7
and T8 were recorded 7.21, 7.23, 6.13, 6.12, 7.12, 8.41, 7.35 and 7.43respectively.
4.2.22.2 Flavor
The data pertaining to the flavor of carrot candy is presented in Table 4.2f.
Perusal of the data revealed significant difference among the treatments for mean
flavor values of the carrot candies. Highest mean flavor value (8.75) was recorded
in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest mean flavor value (6.0)
was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution. Further mean flavor values
of treatments T1, T2, T3 T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 were recorded as 7.33, 7.76, 6.03,
6.0, 7.62, 8.75, 7.43 and 7.44 respectively.
4.2.22.3 Colour
The data with regard to colour of carrot candy is presented in Table 4.2f.
colour values of the carrot candies. Highest mean colour value (8.74) was
recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest mean colour
value (6.04) was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution. Further mean
colour values of treatments T1, T2, T3 T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 were recorded as 7.83,
7.91, 6.05, 6.04, 8.52, 8.74, 7.38 and 7.46 respectively
53
4.2.22.4 Texture
The data with regard to texture of carrot candy is presented in Table 4.2f.
texture values of the carrot candies. Highest mean texture value (8.68) was
recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the lowest mean texture
value (6.03) was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution. Further mean
texture values of treatments T1, T2, T3 T 4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 were recorded as 7.61,
7.84, 6.04, 6.03, 7.38, 8.68, 7.23 and 7.38 respectively.
4.2.22.5 Mouth feel
The data with regard to mouthfeel of carrot candy is presented in Table

4.2f. Perusal of the data revealed significant difference among the treatments for
mean values for the mouthfeel of the carrot candies. Highest mean value for
mouthfeel (8.64) was recorded in treatment T6 (50% Honey solution) while as the
lowest mean value for mouthfeel (6.02) was recorded in treatment T4 (50%
Glucose solution. Further mean texture values of treatments T1, T2, T3 T4, T5, T6,
T7 and T8 were recorded as 7.34, 7.41, 6.08, 6.02, 8.43, 8.64, 7.36 and 7.48
respectively.
4.2.22.6 Overall acceptability
The data with regard to overall acceptability of carrot candy is presented in

Table 4.2f. Perusal of the data revealed significant difference among the
treatments for mean values for the overall acceptability of the carrot candies.
Highest mean value for overall acceptability (8.59) was recorded in treatment T6
(50% Honey solution) while as the lowest mean value for overall acceptability
(6.04) was recorded in treatment T4 (50% Glucose solution. Further mean overall
acceptability values of treatments T1, T2, T3 T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8 were recorded as
7.46, 7.63, 6.06, 6.04, 7.81, 8.59, 7.35 and 7.43
54
Table 4.2f: Effect of pre treatments on Organoleptic quality of carrot candies
Mouth Overall
Treatments Appearance Flavor Color Texture
feel acceptability
T1 7.21 7.33 7.83 7.61 7.34 7.46
T2 7.23 7.76 7.91 7.84 7.41 7.63
T3 6.13 6.03 6.05 6.04 6.08 6.06
T4 6.12 6.0 6.04 6.03 6.02 6.04
T5 7.12 7.62 8.52 7.38 8.43 7.81
T6 8.41 8.75 8.74 8.68 8.64 8.59
T7 7.35 7.43 7.0/./38 7.23 7.36 7.35
T8 7.43 7.44 7.46 7.38 7.48 7.43
Mean 7.12 7.29 7.49 7.27 7.34 7.29
SEM 0.004 0.017 0.005 0.003 0.006 0.003
CDat(≤)0.5 0.010 0.050 0.008 0.006 0.0011 0.009

55
Fig. 2: Sugar Based Carrot Candy (T1-Dipping in 40% Sucrose Solution) and
(T2-Dipping in 50% Sucrose Solution)
Fig. 3: Glucose Based Carrot Candy (T3-Dipping in 40% Glucose Solution)

and (T4-Dipping in 50% Glucose Solution)
56
Fig. 4: Fructose Based Carrot Candy (T7-Dipping in 40% Fructose Solution)
and (T8-Dipping in 50% Fructose Solution)
Fig. 5: Honey Based Carrot Candy (T5-Dipping in 40% Honey Solution)
57
Before drying
After drying
58
4.3 Storage studies
4.3.1 Effect of packaging material and storage period on physicochemical

constituents of Honey based carrot candy during storage at ambient
temperature
The various physico-chemical characteristics of Final product (Honey

based carrot candy) was packed in aluminum based laminate and PET Jars and
kept under ambient conditions for a period of 90 days. The samples were
evaluated for below mentioned parameters viz., moisture content (%), browning
index, beta carotene (mg/100), texture, water activity (aw), colour values (L*, a*, b*),
total plate count (cfu/gm) and sensory quality evaluation on 0, 30th, 50th, 65th, 80th and
90th day of storage respectively.
4.3.1.1 Effect of packaging material and storage days on moisture content

(%) of honey based carrot candy
The data pertaining to the effect of packaging material and storage days on
moisture content (%) of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in
Table 4.3a. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging
material and storage days on moisture content of honey based carrot candy
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution). Further interactive effects of packaging
material and storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean
moisture content was found significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in
PET Jar (27.35) while as it was significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored
in aluminum laminate (27.27).Further it was also observed that mean moisture
was found to increase significantly with the advancement of the storage period (0-
90 days) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study. With higher
moisture contents recorded after 90 days of storage (28.10%) and lowest being
recorded at 0 days of storage (26.13%)
56
Table 4.3a: Effect of packaging material and storage days on moisture
content (%) of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
Storage days PET Jar Mean
laminate
0 26.13 26.13 26.13
30 27.09 27.20 27.14
50 27.28 27.37 27.32

65 27.42 27.51 27.46
80 27.73 27.84 27.78
90 28.01 28.10 28.05
Mean 27.27 27.35
CD (≤.0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0117
Packaging Material : 0.0067
Packaging Material x storage period : 0.017
4.3.1.2 Effect of packaging material and storage days on browning index of

honey based carrot candy
The data regarding to the effect of packaging material and storage days on
browning index of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in Table
4.3b. Perusal of the data indicated non-significant influence of packaging material
on browning index of honey based carrot candy. Browning index was recorded as
0.045 for honey based carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate which was
statistically at par with honey based carrot candy stored in PET Jar (0.051).
Further interactive effects of packaging material and storage days were also found
to be statistically significant. Browning index was also found to increase
significantly with the advancement of the storage period with lowest browning
index recorded at 0 days of storage (0.025) and highest being recorded at 90 days
of storage (0.075) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study.
57
Table 4.3b: Effect of packaging material and storage days on browning
index of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 0.025 0.025 0.025
30 0.035 0.038 0.036
50 0.045 0.048 0.046
65 0.050 0.055 0.052
80 0.056 0.067 0.061
90 0.064 0.075 0.069
Mean 0.045 0.051
CD (≤.0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0121
Packaging Material : N.S
4.3.1.3 Effect of packaging material and storage days on beta carotene

content of honey based carrot candy
beta carotene content of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in
Table 4.3c. Perusal of the data indicated non-significant influence of packaging
material on beta carotene content of honey based carrot candy. Beta carotene
content was recorded as (13.90 mg/100g) for honey based carrot candy stored in
aluminum laminate which was statistically at par with honey based carrot candy
stored in PET Jar (13.80 mg/100g). Further interactive effects of packaging
material and storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Beta
carotene content was also found to decrease significantly with the advancement of
the storage period with the highest beta carotene content recorded at 0 days of
storage (16.26 mg/100g) and lowest being recorded at 90 days of storage
(12.00mg/100g) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study.
58
Table 4.3c: Effect of packaging material and storage days on beta carotene
content of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 16.26 16.26 16.26
30 14.41 14.20 14.30
50 14.11 14.00 14.05
65 13.47 13.31 13.39
80 13.17 13.08 13.12
90 12.03 12.00 12.01
Mean 13.90 13.80
CD (≤.0.05)
Days (D) : 0.7297
Packaging Material : N.S.
4.3.1.4 Effect of packaging material and storage days on total plate count
(cfu/gm) of honey based carrot candy
total plate count of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in Table
4.3d. Perusal of the data indicated that honey based carrot candy did not show any
microbial growth as reflected by TPC. Microbial growth could not be detected
during 90 days of storage of honey based carrot candy when packed in PET jar
and aluminum based laminate.
59
Table 4.3d: Effect of honey and packaging on total plate count (cfu/gm) of
carrot candy during storage
Storage days Aluminum laminate PET Jar
0 ND ND
30 ND ND
50 ND ND
65 ND ND
80 ND ND
90 ND ND
ND- Not detected

4.3.1.5 Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value (L*) of
colour (L*) value of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in Table
4.3e. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging material
and storage days on colour (L*) value of honey based carrot candy treatment T6
(50% Honey solution). Further interactive effects of packaging material and
storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean L* value was
found significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate
(11.44) while as it was significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored in PET
Jar (11.38). Further it was also observed that mean L* value was found to
decrease significantly with the advancement of the storage period (0-90 days)
irrespective of the packaging material used in the study. With higher L* value
recorded at 0 days of storage (12.45) and lowest being recorded at 90 days of
storage (10.61)
60
Table 4.3e: Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value
(L*) of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 12.45 12.45 12.45
30 11.76 11.67 11.71
50 11.52 11.43 11.47
65 11.38 11.29 10.33
80 10.84 10.75 10.79
90 10.69 10.61 10.65
Mean 11.44 11.38
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0141
4.3.1.6 Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value (a*) of
The data regarding to the effect of packaging material and storage days on colour
(a*) value of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in Table 4.3f.
Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging material and
storage days on colour ( a*) value of honey based carrot candy treatment T6 (50%
Honey solution). Further interactive effects of packaging material and storage
days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean L* value was found
significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in PET Jar (47.56) while as it
was significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate
(47.48). Further it was also observed that mean L* value was found to decrease
significantly with the advancement of the storage period (0-90 days) irrespective
of the packaging material used in the study. With higher L* value recorded at 0
days of storage (48.12) and lowest being recorded at 90 days of storage (46.73)
61
Table 4.3f: Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value
(a*) of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 48.12 48.12 48.12
30 47.77 47.87 47.82
50 47.61 47.70 47.65
65 47.43 47.53 47.48
80 47.25 47.36 47.30
90 46.73 46.83 46.78
Mean 47.48 47.56
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0231
4.3.1.7 Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value (b*) of
colour (b*) value of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in Table
4.3g. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging material
and storage days on colour ( b*) value of honey based carrot candy treatment T6
(50% Honey solution). Further interactive effects of packaging material and
storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean b* value was
found significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in PET Jar (23.54) while
as it was significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate
(23.45). Further it was also observed that mean b* value was found to decrease
62
of the packaging material used in the study. With higher L* value recorded at 0
days of storage (24.23) and lowest being recorded at 90 days of storage (22.73)
Table 4.3g: Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value
(b*) of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 24.23 24.23 24.23
30 23.72 23.80 23.76
50 23.58 23.69 23.63
65 23.32 23.43 23.37
80 23.17 23.28 23.22
90 22.73 22.86 22.79
Mean 23.45 23.54
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0122
4.3.1.8 Effect of packaging material and storage days on texture (N) of honey
based carrot candy
The data related to the effect of packaging material and storage days on
texture of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in Table 4.3h.
Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging material and
storage days on texture of honey based carrot candy treatment T6 (50% Honey
solution). Interactive effects of packaging material and storage days were also
found to be statistically significant. Mean texture was found significantly higher
in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate (33.81) while as it was
significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored in PET Jar (33.75). Further it
63
was also observed that mean texture was found to increase significantly with the
advancement of the storage period (0-90 days) irrespective of the packaging
material used in the study. With higher texture recorded at 0 days of storage
(34.51) and lowest being recorded at 90 days of storage (33.36)
Table 4.3h: Effect of packaging material and storage days on texture (N) of
Aluminum
laminate
0 34.51 34.51 34.51
30 33.89 33.82 33.85
50 33.78 33.71 33.74
65 33.69 33.62 33.65
80 33.57 33.50 33.53
90 33.44 33.36 33.40
Mean 33.81 33.75
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0150
4.3.1.9 Effect of packaging material and storage days on water activity (a w) of

water activity (aw) of honey based carrot candy during storage is presented in
Table 4.3i. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging
material and storage days on water activity (a w) of honey based carrot candy
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution). Interactive effects of packaging material and
storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean water activity
64
(aw) was found significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in PET Jar
(0.662) while as it was significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored in
aluminum laminate (0.654). Further it was also observed that mean water activity
(aw) was found to increase significantly with the advancement of the storage
period (0-90 days) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study. With
lowest recorded at 0 days of storage (0.628) and highest being recorded at 90th day
of storage (0.662)
Table 4.3i: Effect of packaging material and storage days on water activity
(aw) of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 0.628 0.628 0.628
30 0.634 0.644 0.639
50 0.649 0.656 0.652
65 0.658 0.669 0.663
80 0.673 0.683 0.678
90 0.684 0.694 0.689
Mean 0.654 0.662
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0009
65
4.4 Organoleptic quality of carrot candies
4.4.1 Appearance
The data with regard to appearance of the honey based carrot candy
revealed significant influence of both packaging material and storage days.
to statistically significant. Mean appearance scores were found higher in honey
based carrot candies stored in aluminum laminate, while as lowest was recorded in
candies stored in PET Jar. Further mean scores for appearance was found to
decrease with the increase in the storage period in both the packaging materials.
The highest scores for appearance was recorded at 0 days of storage (8.41) and the
lowest was recorded after 90 days of storage (7.08) irrespective of the packaging
material used in the study.
Table 4.4a: Effect of packaging material and storage days on appearance

of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 8.41 8.41 8.41
30 8.32 8.23 8.27
50 8.22 8.11 8.16
65 8.20 8.02 8.11
80 7.27 7.23 7.25
90 7.10 7.08 7.09
Mean 7.92 7.84
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0160
66
4.4.2 Colour
The data relatednto the colour of honey based carrot candy showed a
significant influence of both packaging material and storage days. Further
interactive effects of packaging material and storage days was also found to
statistically significant. Mean colour scores were found higher in honey based
carrot candies stored in aluminum laminate, than the candies stored in PET Jar.
Further mean scores for colour was found to decrease with the increase in the
storage period in both the packaging materials. The highest scores for colour was
recorded at 0 days of storage (8.74) and the lowest was recorded after 90 days of
storage (7.04) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study.
Table 4.4b: Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour of

Aluminum
laminate
0 8.74 8.74 8.74
30 8.45 8.31 8.38
50 8.38 8.20 8.29
65 8.30 7.32 7.81
80 7.29 7.14 7.21
90 7.06 7.04 7.05
Mean 8.02 7.77
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0189
67
4.4.3 Texture
The data with regard to texture of the honey based carrot candy revealed
interactive effects of packaging material and storage days were also found to
statistically significant. Mean texture scores were found higher in honey based
Further mean scores for texture was found to decrease with the increase in the
storage period in both the packaging materials. The highest scores for texture was
Table 4.4c: Effect of packaging material and storage days on texture of

Aluminum
laminate
0 8.68 8.68 8.68
30 8.63 8.61 8.62
50 8.53 8.50 8.51
65 8.25 7.30 7.77
80 8.07 7.16 7.61
90 7.11 7.08 7.09
Mean 8.21 7.88
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0137
68
4.4.4 Flavor
The data with regard to flavor of the honey based carrot candy revealed
interactive effects of packaging material and storage days was also found to
statistically significant. Mean flavor scores were found higher in honey based
Further mean scores for flavor was found to decrease with the increase in the
storage period in both the packaging materials. The highest scores for flavor was
Table 4.4d: Effect of packaging material and storage days on flavor of

Aluminum
laminate
0 8.75 8.75 8.75
30 8.53 8.43 8.48
50 8.42 8.30 8.36
65 8.22 7.25 7.73
80 7.29 7.21 7.25
90 7.06 7.03 7.04
Mean 8.04 7.81
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0147
69
4.4.5 Mouth feel
The data with regard to mouth feel of the honey based carrot candy
revealed significant influence of both packaging material and storage days.
to statistically significant. Mean mouth feel scores were found higher in honey
based carrot candies stored in aluminum laminate, than the candies stored in PET
Jar. Further mean scores for mouth feel was found to decrease with the increase in
the storage period in both the packaging materials. The highest scores for mouth
feel was recorded at 0 days of storage (8.64) and the lowest was recorded after 90
days of storage (7.07) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study.
Table 4.4e: Effect of packaging material and storage days on mouth feel of
Aluminum
laminate
0 8.64 8.64 8.64
30 8.54 8.51 8.52
50 8.47 8.40 8.43
65 8.33 8.13 8.23
80 8.15 8.02 8.08
90 7.09 7.07 7.08
Mean 8.20 8.12
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0310
70
4.4.6 Overall acceptability
The data with regard to overall acceptability of the honey based carrot
candy revealed significant influence of both packaging material and storage days.
to statistically significant. Mean overall acceptability scores were found higher in
honey based carrot candies stored in aluminum laminate, than the candies stored
in PET Jar. Further mean scores for overall acceptability was found to decrease
with the increase in the storage period in both the packaging materials. The
highest scores for overall acceptability was recorded at 0 days of storage (8.59)
and the lowest being recorded after 90 days of storage (7.02) irrespective of the
packaging material used in the study
Table 4.4f: Effect of packaging material and storage days on overall

acceptance of honey based carrot candy
Aluminum
laminate
0 8.59 8.59 8.59
30 8.50 8.41 8.45
50 8.39 8.30 8.34
65 8.27 7.58 7.92
80 7.61 7.30 7.45
90 7.08 7.02 7.05
Mean 8.08 7.86
CD (≤0.05)
Days (D) : 0.0260
71
PET Jar Aluminum Laminate

Packed in PET Jar and Aluminum Laminate after 90 days of Storage
56
4.5 Cost analysis
The Product formulation involved two types of costs-one fixed cost and
another variable cost.
Fixed costs are those which run over lay period and only part of services of
these assets are utilized in a single production period while as variable costs are
those which get transformed into the ultimate production during a production
season. Under such situations fixed costs are related to machinery and
equipment’s while as the variable cost involved expenditure on chemicals, raw
material, packaging, fuel etc. The cost estimates in respect of fixed and variable
costs were drawn; break-even quantity was identified and estimated
The break-even quantity is the number of incremental units that the firm
needs to sell to cover the cost of a marketing program or other type of investment.
A) Facility available
One concrete building comprising of one room of 20 x 18 feet and one

hall of 10 x 12 dimensions.
The cost of building= Rs.4.0 Lakhs
B) List of Machinery/ equipment’s/ other items to be purchased

S. No. Name of items Number Cost
1. Dyer 01 Rs.70, 000
2. Packaging machine 01 Rs.20, 000
3. Working table 01 Rs.6500
4. Slicer 02 Rs.5000
5. Osmotic tanks 02 Rs.2000
6. Peeling, coring and cutting knives 02 (each) Rs.2000
7. Microwave oven 01 Rs.20, 000
8. Weighing balance 01 Rs.1000
9. Other accessories - Rs.15, 000
Total = Rs.1, 41, 500
72
C) Raw material
Amount
S. No. Raw material Qty/day Rate/kg (Rs.)
(Rs.)
1. Fresh carrot 1kg Rs. 40 Rs. 40
2. Honey 3kg Rs.200 Rs.600
3. Packaging material 50 packs Rs. 2.5/bag Rs.125
4. Cardboard carton 2 Rs. 30/ carton Rs. 200
5. Fuel charges - - Rs. 5
Total = Rs. 970
D) Wages
S. Np. Labour No. Days Wages Amount
1. Skilled 2 200 400/ day Rs. 800
E) Utility
S. No. Utility Amount
1. Electric charges Rs. 200/ month
2. Water fees Rs. 100/ month
Total =Rs. 300
F) Total working capital for 200 working days

Raw material Rs. 1, 86, 000
Wages Rs. 1, 20, 000
Utility Rs. 2, 100
Total = Rs. 308, 100
F) Estimation of Production cost

S.No. Production cost Amount
1. Recurring expenditure Rs. 308, 100
2. Depreciation cost @ 10% 432.29/hr
Total = Rs. 322, 250
73
G) Net profit = TR-(FC+VC)
Where,
TR = Total Returns (Rs. 53, 333)
FC = Fixed Cost (Rs. 858.57)
VC = Variable Cost (Rs. 17617.06)
Net profit = Rs. 34857.70
H) Benefit cost ratio
Total income (Rs/hr)

= × capacity (kg/hr)
Total cost of production (Rs/kg)
53,333
=
92.37× 200
53,333
=
18474
Benefit cost ratio = 2.88
I) Breakeven point
= Total Fixed cost (Rs)
Working hours (hr/year) × Capacity (kg)

=
Total income (Rs/hr) – Total variable cost
858.57 (Rs/hr)
=
53,333 (Rs/hr) – 1761706
1728 × 200kg/hr
=
858.57
35715.94
=
345600
74
J) Pay Back period
IC X H
=
TB X H
IC = Initial cost
TB = Total benefit
H= Working hours
4150000 x 1728
=
34857.70 x 1728
= 34857.70
= 119 hrs
75
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION
5.1 Physico-chemical characteristics of carrot
Physico-chemical characteristics of fresh carrot as presented in Table (4.1)

revealed that fresh carrot possessed the average moisture content of 86.8 %,
colour (L*, a*, b*) 16.65, 43.37, 22.55, respectively ash 1.1 %, crude fat 0.2 %,
crude fiber 1.2 %, crude protein 0.7 %, carbohydrate 10.00 %, acidity 0.07 %
citric acid, total sugars 4.53 %, reducing sugars 3.35%, non-reducing sugars
3.35%, ascorbic acid 4.3mg/100g, dietary fiber 3.21%, beta carotene
10.13mg/100g, antioxidant activity 23.77% inhibition), minerals (ca, mg, fe) 9,
11, 2.0 mg/100g respectively. The results are consistent with the findings of
Alasalvar et al. (2001), Gebezynski et al. (2006) and Tarko et al. (2010), Sra et al
(2011) and Raees et al. (2014)
5.2 Physico-chemical characteristics of carrot candy
The effect of treatments on moisture content (%) of carrot candy is

presented in (Table 4.2a.) Perusal of the data revealed that moisture content was
found significantly higher in case of treatment T 6 (50% honey solution) while as it
was found significantly lowest in case of treatment T4 (50% glucose solution).This
can be attributed to high hygroscopic nature of honey as compared to candies
treated with 50% glucose solution (treatment T4 ) resulting in higher moisture
being absorbed at the surface of honey based carrot candies (Madan and Dhawan,
2005).
Further similar results have also been reported by Madan et al. (2005),
Durrani et al. (2011) , Aggarwal et al. (2014)and Sabeera et al. (2016) which are
consistent with our findings.
76
5.2.2 Texture (N)
The textural property of honey carrot candy determined by measuring the

force required to break the candy. The higher value of maximum peak force
required in Newtons, which means the force indicated the hardness of the sample.
The data pertaining to the effect of pre-treatments on texture of carrot candy as
presented in Table 4.2a revealed significantly, the highest hardness in case of
treatment T4 (50% glucose solution) while as it was found significantly lowest in
case of treatment T 6 (50% honey solution) respectively.
The minimum hardness of honey based carrot candy was due to higher
moisture content, which confirm the general observation that honey has the
capability to retain water present in carrot and honey made product viz. cakes
remain moist for longer period than those made with other osmotic agents.
(Madan et al., 2005).
Similar findings have been reported by Sangeeta et al. (2009) and Phisut et
al. (2013)
5.2.3 Water activity (aw)
Study of the data indicates that treatment combinations showed significant

influence on the water activity (a w) of honey based carrot candy. The data
pertaining to the effect of pre-treatments on water activity (a w) of carrot candy as
presented in Table 4.2a. revealed significantly highest water activity (aw) in case
of treatment T6 (50% honey solution) while as it was found significantly lowest in
case of treatment T4 (50% glucose solution) respectively. The reason for higher
water activity was due to the hygroscopic nature of honey which absorbs moisture
from air and with increase in moisture content water activity also increases.
(Madan et al., 2005). The results are in conformity with the findings of Sangeeta
et al. (2009).
Study of the data from Table 4.2a. indicates that treatment combinations
77
showed significant influence on the browning index of carrot candy. Browning
index was reported significantly higher in carrot candies treated with 50% fructose
solution (T4) than in carrot candies treated with 50% honey solution (T6). The
highest browning index as found in fructose based carrot candies can be attributed
to the presences of highly reactive reducing sugar groups of fructose which
directly enter into Millard browning reactions, as compared to honey (Sangeeta et
al.,2009). Further it can also be attributed to honey being composed of complex
carbohydrate and as such more energy is required to break these carbohydrates to
liberate reducing sugars that directly enter into millards browning reactions.
(Madan et al., 2005). Similar findings have also been reported by Sangeeta et al.
(2009); which corroborate with our results.
5.2.5 Acidity (% Citric acid)
The data from Table 4.2a. indicates that treatment combinations showed
significant influence on the acidity of carrot candy. Statistically significant highest
and the lowest acidity were recorded in Treatment T6 (50% honey solution) and
treatment T3 (40% glucose solution), respectively. This can be attributed to the
highly acidic nature of honey (pH value ranges from 3.2-4.5) as compared to
glucose solution (Sangeeta et al., 2009). Further acidic nature of honey based
carrot candies can also be attributed to lesser leaching losses of organic acids from
carrot slices during the dipping process when compared to dipping in glucose
solution Madan et al. ( 2005)
The results are in conformity with the findings of Durrani et al (2011);

Kumar et al. (2013) and Aggarwal et al. (2014)
The data presented in the Table 4.2a. indicates that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the total sugars of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and the lowest total sugar content were recorded in treatment
T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment T3 (40% glucose solution) respectively.
78
Honey is a polysaccharide and principally glucose and fructose are the
predominant sugars present in honey and increase in total sugar content can be
attributed to hydrolysis of polysaccharide resulting in conversion of soluble
compounds like sugar, further attributed to high concentration of sugars.
(Sangeeta et al., 2009).The results are also in conformity with the findings of
Madan et al. (2005), Verma et al. (2006), Nayak et al. (2012), Jakia et al. (2014)
and Muzzaffar, et al. (2016)
5.2.7 Reducing sugar (%)
The data from the Table 4.2a. indicates that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the reducing sugars of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and the lowest reducing sugar were recorded in treatment T6
(50% honey solution) and treatment T3 (40% glucose solution) respectively. It
may be attributed to high concentration of sugars due to inversion during the
drying process. (Jakia et al., 2014). Similar findings have been reported by Madan
et al. (2005); Kumar et al. (2013); Rashmi et al. (2014) and Babariya et al.
(2014)
5.2.8 Non-reducing sugar (%)
The data from the Table 4.2b indicates that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the non-reducing sugars of carrot candy.
Statistically significant highest and the lowest non-reducing sugar content were
recorded in Treatment T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment T3 (40% glucose
solution) respectively. It may be attributed to increased inversion of sugars. (Jakia
et al., 2014). Similar findings have been reported by Nayak et al. (2012); Kumar
et al. (2013) and Rashmi et al. (2014)
5.2.9 Crude protein (%)
Perusal of the data indicated that treatment combinations showed

significant influence on the crude protein content of honey based carrot candy.
The data pertaining to the effect of pre-treatments on crude protein content of
79
carrot candy as presented in Table 4.2b revealed significantly highest crude
protein content in case of treatment T6 (50% honey solution) while as it was found
significantly lowest in case of treatment T3 (40% glucose solution) respectively.
The increase in crude protein content in honey based carrot candy may be
attributed to the presences of free amino acids present in honey (Sangeeta et al.
2009). Similar findings have been reported by Jakia et al. (2014),
5.2.10 Crude fat (%)

significant influence on the crude fat content of honey based carrot candy. The
data pertaining to the effect of pre-treatments on crude fat content of carrot candy
as presented in Table 4.2b. revealed significantly highest crude fat content in case
case of treatment T 3 (40% glucose solution) respectively. The increase in crude fat
content in honey based carrot candy may be due to the waxes present in honey
(Sangeeta et al. 2009).Similar findings have been reported by Jakia et al. (2014)
5.2.11 Crude fiber (%)
Study of the data indicated that treatment combinations showed significant

influence on the crude fiber content of honey based carrot candy. The data
pertaining to the effect of pre-treatments on crude fiber content of carrot candy as
presented in Table 4.2b revealed significantly highest crude fiber content in case
case of treatment T3 (40% glucose solution) respectively. The increase in crude
fiber content in honey based carrot candy can be attributed to concentrated
aqueous solution of invert sugar, complex mixture of enzymes, amino groups,
organic acid, pigments, pollen grains and waxes (Sangeeta et al. 2009).Similar
findings have been reported by Jakia et al. (2014)
The data from the Table 4.2b indicates that treatment combinations
80
showed significant influence on the carbohydrate content of carrot candy.
Statistically significant highest and lowest carbohydrate content were recorded in
Treatment T4 (50% glucose solution) and treatment T5 (40% honey solution)
respectively. The variation in carbohydrate content may be due to compositional
changes among the sample. Similar findings have been reported by Sangeeta et al.
(2009)
5.2.13 Ash (%)
Study of the data from the Table 4.2b indicates that treatment
combinations showed significant influence on the ash content of carrot candy.
Statistically significant highest and lowest ash content were recorded in Treatment
T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment T3 (40% glucose solution) respectively.
The ash value is a measure of the amount of minerals. Natural ash content is due
to the minerals like calcium, phosphorous and iron. Ash content of food stuffs
represents inorganic residue remaining after destruction of organic matter (Rao et
al., Cooley, 1993). They are not destroyed by heating and have low volatility
when compared to other food components. A higher amount of ash was found in
the honey based carrot candy. The reason for the higher amount of ash content in
honey incorporated samples than in the glucose based samples may be due to the
contribution of the ash content by honey itself (Muzaffar et al., 2016).Similar
findings have been reported by Jakia et al. (2014), Saghir et al. (2015)
Perusal of the data Table 4.2b indicated that treatment combinations

showed significant influence on the calorific value of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and lowest calorific value were recorded in Treatment T4 (50%
glucose solution) and treatment T5 (40% honey solution) respectively. The
variation in calorific value may be due to compositional changes among the
sample. Similar findings have been reported by Sangeeta et al. (2009).
81
The data from the Table (4.2.c) indicates that treatment combinations showed
significant influence on the ascorbic acid of carrot candy. Statistically significant
highest and the lowest ascorbic acid were recorded in Treatment T6 (50% honey
solution) and treatment T4 (50% glucose solution) respectively. Ascorbic acid is
the most unstable of all the vitamins. In solution, it easily gets oxidized on
exposure to heat. Losses during processing may be due to oxidation or thermal
degradation of vitamin C (Lee and Kader, 2000).The maximum ascorbic acid was
recorded in honey based carrot candy due to lesser leaching in syrup, minimum
loss of water, minimum oxidation or thermal degradation of vitamin C (Priya and
Khatkar, 2013). Similar findings have been reported by Sethi et al. (1983);
Tripathi et al. (1988); Lee et al. (2000) and Kumar et al. (2013)
5.2.16 Beta carotene (mg/100g)

significant influence on beta carotene content of honey based carrot candy. The
data pertaining to the effect of pre-treatments on beta carotene content of carrot
candy as presented in Table 4.2c revealed significantly highest beta carotene
content in case of treatment T6 (50% honey solution) while as it was found
significantly lowest in case of treatment T4 (50% glucose solution) respectively.
The reason for the increase in beta carotene content in honey based carrot candy
can be attributed to minimum leaching in syrup, minimum oxidation as well as
thermal degradation as compared to the glucose based candies. (Lee and Kader,
2000). The results are in conformity with the findings of Rodriguez et al. (2004),
Madan et al. (2005)
5.2.17 Antioxidant activity (% inhibition)
Study of the data from Table (4.2.c) indicates that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the antioxidant activity of carrot candy.
Statistically significant highest and lowest antioxidant activity were recorded in
82
Treatment T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment T4 (50% glucose solution)
respectively. The increase in antioxidant activity in honey based carrot candy can
be attributed to increase in the levels of bioactive compounds such as ascorbic
acid, total carotenoids and phenolic compounds.The results are in conformity with
the findings of Alabran et al. (1973); Tarko et al. (2010)
The data from the Table (4.2.c) indicates that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the dehydration of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and lowest dehydration ratio were recorded in Treatment T3
(40% glucose solution) and treatment T6 (50% honey solution) respectively. The
reason for the minimum dehydration ratio in honey based carrot candy can be
attributed to its higher hygroscopicity than other osmotic agents. The results are in
conformity with the findings of Selvakumar et al. (2011)
5.2.19 Dietary fiber (%)
Study of the data from Table (4.2.c) indicated that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the dietary fiber of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and the lowest dietary fiber were recorded in Treatment T6
(50% honey solution) and treatment T3 (40% glucose solution) respectively. The
reason for the maximum dietary fiber content in honey based carrot candy can be
attributed to the presences of complex mixture of waxes and pollen grains in
honey. Similar findings have been reported by Sangeeta et al. (2009).
5.2.20 Minerals (mg/100g)
5.2.20.1 Ca
Perusal of the data (4.2.d) indicated that treatment combinations showed

significant influence on the calcium content of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and the lowest calcium were recorded in treatment
combinations T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment combination T3 (40%
glucose solution), respectively. The reason for the higher amount of calcium
83
present in honey based candies may be attributed to the contribution of the
mineral content by honey itself as compared to glucose based candies. Similar
findings have been reported by Shukla et al. (2015)
5.2.20.2 Mg
Study of the data from Table (4.2.d) indicates that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on the mineral content (mg) of carrot candy.
Statistically significant highest and the lowest magnesium were recorded in
treatment combinations T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment combination T3
(40% glucose solution) respectively. The reason for the higher amount of
magnesium present in honey incorporated samples may be due to the contribution
of the mineral content by honey itself. The results are in line with the findings of
Shukla et al. (2015)
5.2.20.3 (Fe)
The data from (Table 4.2d) indicates that treatment combinations showed
significant influence on the mineral content (fe) of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and lowest iron were recorded in treatment combinations T6
(50% honey solution) and treatment combination T3 (40% glucose solution)
respectively. The reason for the higher amount of iron present in honey
incorporated samples may be due to the contribution of the mineral content by
honey itself. The results are in line with the findings of Shukla et al. (2015)
5.2.21 Effect of treatments on Colour values (L*, a*, b*) on carrot candy
5.2.21.1 (L*)
The data from the table (4.2f) indicated that treatment combinations
showed significant influence on colour (L* values) of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and the lowest L* value were recorded in treatment
combinations T4 (50% glucose solution) and treatment combination T6 (50%
honey solution) respectively. The reason for higher L* value in glucose based
84
candies can be attributed to crystallization of glucose solution after drying. The
results are in conformity with the findings of Aggarwal et al. (2014)
5.2.21.2 (a*)
Perusal of the data (4.2f) indicated that treatment combinations showed

significant influence on the colour (a* values) of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and the lowest a* value were recorded in treatment
combinations T6 (50% honey solution) and treatment combination T4 (50%
glucose solution) respectively. The reason for higher a* value in honey based
candies can be attributed to presences of Hydroxymethyl furfural content (0.08-
0.14%) in honey. The results are in conformity with the findings of Sangeeta et al.
(2009)
5.2.21.3 (b*)
The data presented in table (4.2f) indicated that treatment combinations

had a significant influence on the colour (b* values) of carrot candy. Statistically
significant highest and lowest b* value were recorded in treatment combinations
T2 (50% sucrose solution) and treatment combination T4 (50% glucose solution)
respectively. This can be attributed to concentration of pigments (carotenoid
pigments) due to higher water losses exhibited by carrot slices when treated with
50% glucose solution as compared to sucrose, honey and fructose based candies.
The results are in conformity with the findings of Aggarwal et al. (2014)
5.3 Storage studies of honey based carrot candy
5.3.1 Effect of packaging material and storage days on moisture content

(%) of carrot candy
The data from the table 4.3a showed significant influence of both the
packaging material and storage days on moisture content of carrot candies.
Significantly higher moisture content was recorded in PET Jar and lowest
moisture content was recorded in aluminum based laminate. This can be attributed
to the permeability differences in the oxygen and water vapour barriers of the two
85
packaging materials. The results of present study related to moisture content of
honey carrot candy are similar to those reported by Madan et al. (2005). Further
the increase in moisture content during storage may be attributed to hygroscopic
nature of honey which absorbs moisture from air. Similar results have been
reported by Madan et al. (2005) and Durrani et al. (2011).
5.3.2 Effect of packaging material and storage days on browning index of

carrot candy
The data Presented in table 4.3b indicated non-significant influence of

packaging material on browning index of honey based carrot candy. Further
interactive effects of packaging material and storage days was found to be
statistically significant. Browning index was also found to increase significantly
with the advancement of the storage period. The increase in browning index
during storage may be attributed to non- enzymatic reactions and presence of
sugar which support the formation of brown pigments. Exposure to heat during
preparation of candy also might have resulted in formation of brown pigments and
also due to loss of sulphur dioxide. Further several factors such as temperature,
moisture, organic acid. Sugar, oxygen are responsible for browning. Packaging
material had no significant effect on browning index and it was observed that
honey based carrot candy had significantly very low browning index (Madan et
al., 2005), It is well known that the colour of honey is significantly affected by the
storage temperature and period (Gupta et al., 1992). Period of storage of honey
significantly increases the colour intensity of honey, which could be attributed to
the Maillard reaction resulting in the formation of coloured pigments and higher
colloid contents. Further increase in browning index during storage may be due to
loss of ascorbic acid and due to sugar amino acid condensation or caramelization
of sugars. Similar results have been reported by Madan et al. (2005) and Durrani
et al. (2011).
86
5.3.3 Effect of packaging material and storage days on beta carotene
content (mg/100g) of carrot candy
beta carotene content of honey based carrot candy during storage has been
presented in Table (4.3c). Perusal of the data indicated non-significant influence
of packaging material on beta carotene content of honey based carrot candy.
Further interactive effects of packaging material and storage days was also found
to be statistically significant. Beta carotene content was also found to decrease
significantly with the advancement of the storage period. However, the decrease
in Beta-carotene content of samples packed in PET Jar had slightly higher value
as compared to samples packed in aluminum laminates, probably due to the
permeability differences in the oxygen and water vapour barriers of the two
packaging materials. The results of present study related to Beta-carotene content
of honey carrot candy are similar to those reported by Madan et al. (2005). The
decrease in Beta-carotene content during storage can be attributed to its sensitivity
to light and oxygen. Similar findings were reported by Premavalli et al. (1991)
and Madan et al. (2005).
5.3.4 Effect of packaging material and storage days on total plate count of
carrot candy
total plate count of honey based carrot candy during storage has been presented in
Table (4.3d). Perusal of the data indicated that honey based carrot candy did not
show any microbial growth as reflected by TPC. TPC could not be detected
during 90 days of storage when packed in PET jar and aluminum based laminate.
The reasons for low presence of microbes on honey carrot candy can be attributed
to antimicrobial effect of honey due to factor called inhibine. The inhibine effect
is caused due to hydrogen peroxide produced and accumulated by the action of
enzyme glucose oxidase on glucose (White and Subers, 1963). It has been
reported that honey has bactericidal, bacteriostatic and antifungal activities and
87
nature of antimicrobial factors are due to osmotic effect, acidity, hydrogen
peroxide, flavonoids, aromatic and acidic substances. Growth of bacterial species
such as E. coli, S. aureus, H. pylori, Salmonella typhimurium. Shigella sps, etc.
are controlled bacteriostatically or by bactericidal activity of honey (Shamala and
Jyothi, 1999). Honey's acidity also has antibacterial properties. The increase in
TPC during prolonged storage of honey carrot candy may be due to favorable
environmental factors like temperature, Rh, storage conditions and food factors
like pH, redox potential, water activity, moisture content and nutrients present as
suggested by Garg and Mandokhst (1984). External contamination may also help
in increasing the counts during storage. However, these counts were below the
prescribed limits.Similar findings have also been reported by reported by Jakia et
al. (2014) and Sabeera et al. (2016).
5.3.5 Effect of packaging material and storage days on texture (N) of carrot
candy
The data related to the effect of packaging material and storage days on
texture of honey based carrot candy during storage has been presented in Table
4.3e. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging material
and storage days on texture of honey based carrot candy. Further interactive
effects of packaging material and storage days were also found to be statistically
significant. Mean hardness was found significantly higher in case of carrot candy
stored in aluminum laminate while as it was significantly lower in case of carrot
candy stored in PET Jar Further it was also observed that mean hardness was
found to increase significantly with the advancement of the storage period (0-90
days) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study. This can be
attributed to the lower permeability of PET jar to water vapor as compared to
aluminum based laminate. Similar findings have been reported by Madan et al.
(2005) in sugar candies and jaggery syrups.
88
5.3.6 Effect of packaging material and storage days on water activity (a w) of
carrot candy
water activity (a w) of honey based carrot candy during storage has been presented
in Table 4.3h. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging
material and storage days on water activity (aw) of honey based carrot candy.
to be statistically significant. Mean water activity (aw) was found significantly
higher in case of carrot candy stored in PET Jar while as it was significantly lower
in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate. It was also observed that
mean water activity (aw) was found to increase significantly with the advancement
of the storage period (0-90 days) irrespective of the packaging material used in the
study. It is due to the lower permeability of PET jar to water vapor as compared to
aluminum based laminate, which has an aluminum foil barrier and provides
superior light, air, moisture barrier along with reduce flavor absorption. As
reported by (Sidhu et al., 2015)
5.3.7 Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour value (L*) of
carrot candy
colour (L*) value of honey based carrot candy during storage has been presented
in Table 4.3e. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging
material and storage days on colour (L*) value of honey based carrot candy
treatment T6 (50% Honey solution). Further interactive effects of packaging
material and storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean L*
value was found significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum
laminate than carrot candy stored in PET Jar. It was also observed that mean L*
value was found to decrease significantly with the advancement of the storage
period (0-90 days) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study. It may
be attributed to the transparency of PET jar which is prone to chemical
89
deterioration due to oxidation by sunlight. Decrease in L* value suggests
darkening of the product and can be attributed to the occurrence of non-enzymatic
browning. (Baiano et al., 2005). Similar findings have been reported by
Chutintrasri et al. (2007), Gliemmo (2009) and Brasava et al. (2013).
5.3.8 Effect of packaging material and storage days on Colour value (a*) of
colour (a*) value of honey based carrot candy during storage has been presented
in Table 4.3f. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both packaging
material and storage days on colour ( a*) value of honey based carrot candy.
to be statistically significant. Mean a* value was found significantly higher in case
of carrot candy stored in PET Jar while as it was significantly lower in case of
carrot candy stored in aluminum laminate. It was also observed that mean a*
value was found to decrease significantly with the advancement of the storage
period (0-90 days) irrespective of the packaging material used in the study. It may
be attributed to the transparency of PET jar which is prone to chemical
deterioration due to oxidation by sunlight (Baiano et al., 2005). Similar findings
have been reported by Chutintrasri et al. (2007), Gliemmo (2009) and Brasava et
al. (2013)
5.3.9 Effect of packaging material and storage days on Colour value (b*) of
The data pertaining to the effect of packaging material and storage

days on colour (b*) value of honey based carrot candy during storage has been
presented in Table 4.3g. Perusal of the data indicated significant influence of both
packaging material and storage days on colour ( b*) value of honey based carrot
candy treatment T6 (50% Honey solution). Interactive effects of packaging
material and storage days were also found to be statistically significant. Mean b*
90
value was found significantly higher in case of carrot candy stored in PET Jar.
While as it was significantly lower in case of carrot candy stored in aluminum
laminate. Further it was also observed that mean b* value was found to decrease
of the packaging material used in the study. It is due to the transparency of PET
jar which is prone to chemical deterioration due to oxidation by sunlight. Further
it may be attributed to degradation of carotene pigment during storage which is
responsible for the decrease in b* value of carrot candy (Gliemmo, 2009). Similar
findings have been reported by Baiano et al. (2005), Chutintrasri et al. (2007) and
Brasava et al. (2013).
5.4 Effect of packaging material and storage days on organoleptic

characteristics of honey based carrot candy
The sensory and the organoleptic characteristics of honey based carrot

candy were recorded on the basis of (colour, appearance, texture, flavour, mouth
feel and overall acceptability) throughout storage condition at ambient
temperature after 0, 30th, 50th, 65th, 80th and 90th days of storage period.
5.4.1 Effect of packaging material and storage days on Appearance of

Perusal of the data (Table 4.4a) indicated significant effect of packaging

material and storage period on mean appearance scores of carrot candies. Mean
score for appearance was found significantly higher in carrot candies stored in
aluminum based laminate, when compared to candies stored in PET Jar after 90
days of storage. Further mean score for appearance decreased with the length of
the storage period (0-90 days).This can be attributed to higher barrier properties
and low water vapour transmission rates of aluminum based laminates as
compared to PET Jar.
Similar findings have been reported by Madan and Dhawan (2005),

Shamrez et al. (2013). while evaluating the carrot candy developed in sugar, sugar
91
with coconut powder and jaggery syrups had also observed the score of 9 on first
day in all products (rated better than honey carrot candy) which significantly
decreased during 60 days storage at ambient conditions
5.4.2 Effect of packaging material and storage days on colour of honey

based carrot candy
Perusal of the data (Table 4.4b) indicated significant effect of packaging

material and storage period on mean colour scores of carrot candies. Mean score
for colour was found significantly higher in carrot candies stored in aluminum
based laminate, when compared to candies stored in PET Jar after 90 days of
storage. Further mean score for colour decreased with the length of the storage
period (0-90 days).The decrease in colour score of honey based carrot candy may
be due to its high honey content. Darkening in colour of honey is one of the major
changes that occurs during storage and is influenced by temperature, moisture
content, pH, free amino acids and reactions between amino acids and reducing
sugars (Ramsey and Milum, 1933; Lea and Hannan, 1949; Schade et al., 1958).
Gupta et al, (1992) have also reported that colour of honey is significantly
affected by storage temperature and period. Period of storage, irrespective of
temperature and treatments, significantly increase the colour intensity of honey
which could be attributed to the maillard reaction resulting in the formation of
coloured pigments and higher colloidal contents (Wootton et al., 1976; Paine and
Lothrop, 1933; Ghazali and Sin, 1986; Hodge, 1953; Petrou, 1971 and Shamrez et
al., 2013).
5.4.3 Effect of packaging material and storage days on flavour of honey

based carrot candy
Perusal of the data (Table 4.4c) indicated significant effect of packaging

material and storage period on mean flavour scores of carrot candies. Mean score
for flavour was found significantly higher in carrot candies stored in aluminum
based laminate, when compared to candies stored in PET Jar after 90 days of
92
storage. Further mean score for flavour decreased with the length of the storage
period (0-90 days). It is due to the lower permeability of PET jar, which provides
less barrier properties to light, air and moisture along with flavor absorption.
Further it is attributed to the processing of honey and its storage temperature
which affect the flavour of honey (Gupta et al., 1992).
Similar findings have been reported by Madan and Dhawan (2005), Sidhu
et al. (2015) while evaluating the carrot candy developed in sugar, sugar with
coconut powder and jaggery syrups. They observed the score of 9.00 on first day
in all products (rated better than honey carrot candy) which significantly
decreased during 60 days storage at ambient conditions.
5.4.4 Effect of packaging material and storage days on texture of honey

based carrot candy
Perusal of the data (Table 4.4d) indicated significant effect of packaging

material and storage period on mean texture scores of carrot candies. Mean score
for texture was found significantly higher in carrot candies stored in aluminum
based laminate. When compared to candies stored in PET Jar after 90 days of
storage. Further mean score for texture decreased with the length of the storage
period (0-90 days). Similar findings have been reported by Madan and Dhawan
(2005), Chauhan et al. (2014) while evaluating the carrot candy developed in
sugar, sugar with coconut powder and jaggery syrups. They observed the score of
9.00 on first day in all products (rated better than honey carrot candy) which
significantly decreased during 60 days storage at ambient conditions.
5.4.5 Effect of packaging material and storage days on mouth feel of honey
based carrot candy
Perusal of the data (Table 4.4e) indicated significant effect of packaging

material and storage period on mean mouth feel scores of carrot candies. Mean
score for mouth feel was found significantly higher in carrot candies stored in
aluminum based laminate, when compared to candies stored in PET Jar after 90
93
days of storage. Further mean score for mouth feel decreased with the length of
the storage period (0-90 days). Similar findings have been reported by Madan and
Dhawan (2005), while evaluating the carrot candy developed in sugar, sugar with
coconut powder and jaggery syrups had also observed the score of 9.00 on first
day in all products (rated better than honey carrot candy) which significantly
decreased during 60 days storage at ambient conditions.
5.4.6 Effect of packaging material and storage days on over all-

Acceptability mouth feel of honey based carrot candy
Perusal of the data (Table 4.4f) indicated significant effect of packaging

material and storage period on mean over all- acceptability scores of carrot
candies. Mean score for over all- acceptability was found significantly higher in
carrot candies stored in aluminum based laminate, when compared to candies
stored in PET Jar after 90 days of storage. Further mean score for over all-
acceptability decreased with the length of the storage period (0-90 days).
In terms of acceptability these corresponded to:
(a) Between 'liked extremely to liked very much' in fresh condition.
(b) Between 'liked very much to liked moderately' after 90 days storage.
Similar results were observed by Hussain et al. (2004), Balaji et al. (2014).
94
Chapter 6
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The present investigation entitled, “Evaluation and Standardization of

Process for Development of Carrot Candy” was conducted in the Division of Food
Science and Technology, Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and
Technology Kashmir, with an aim to standardize the process protocol for
development of carrot candy. The experiments were planned using Completely
Randomized Design (CRD). The results of these investigations are summarized
and concluded below:
a) Physico-chemical characteristics of carrot
 During the course of present study, it was observed that the fresh carrot
possessed an average moisture content of 86.8 (%), colour (L*, a*, b*)
16.65, 43.37, 22.55, ash 1.1 (%), crude fat 0.2 (%), crude fiber 1.2 (%),
crude protein 0.7 (%), carbohydrate 10.00 (%), acidity 0.07 (% citric acid),
total sugars 4.53 (%), reducing sugars 3.35(%), non-reducing sugars
3.35(%), ascorbic acid 4.3 (mg/100g), dietary fiber 3.21(%), beta carotene
10.13 (mg/100g), antioxidant activity 23.77 (% inhibition), minerals (ca,
mg, fe) 9, 11, 2.0 (mg/100g).
 Significant differences were observed among the treatments for all the
physico-chemical characteristics under study. The average moisture
content (%), water activity (a w), acidity (%), total sugar (%), reducing
sugar (%), non-reducing sugar (%), crude protein (%), crude fat (%), crude
fiber (%), ash (%), ascorbic acid (%), beta carotene (mg/100g), antioxidant
activity (% inhibition), dietary fiber (%) and mineral content (Ca, Mg, Fe)
were found significantly higher in case of honey based carrot candy (T6)
and was recorded as 26.13%, 0.628, 0.223%, 76.23%, 44.86%, 31.35%,
1.20%, 0.80%, 1.35%, 1.63%, 2.98 mg/100g, 16.26 mg/100g, 50.48%
inhibition, 2.25% 10.23 mg/100g, 12.23 mg/100g, 2.12 mg/100g,
95
respectively. While as significantly lowest moisture content (%), water
activity, acidity (%), total sugar (%), reducing sugar (%), non-reducing
sugar (%), crude protein (%), crude fat (%), crude fiber (%), ash (%),
ascorbic acid (%), beta carotene (mg/100g), antioxidant activity (%
inhibition), dietary fiber (%) and mineral content (Ca, Mg, Fe) were found
significantly lower in case of glucose based carrot candy T3 (40 % glucose
solution) and T4 ( 50% glucose solution) as 23.01%, 0.427, 0.063 %,
65.71%, 39.50%, 26.19% 1.10%, 0.62%, 1.13%, 1.44%, 2.80%,
12.20mg/100g, 41.20% inhibition, 2.09% and 8.14 mg/100g, 10.24
mg/100g, 2.3 mg/100g respectively. Moreover L* value (18.63) was
significantly higher in case of candies treated with 50% glucose solution
(T4) and lowest (12.45) in candies treated with 50% honey solution (T6).
Similarly a* value (48.12) was recorded higher in case of candies treated
with 50% honey solution (T 6) and lowest in candies treated with 50%
glucose solution (T4). Similarly b* value (28.13) was significantly higher
in case of candies treated with 50% glucose solution (T4) and lowest
(18.62) in candies treated with 50% sucrose solution (T2).
 Organoleptic and sensory quality evaluation of carrot candies as per

different treatments (T 1, T2, T3, T4, T5, T6, T7 and T8) revealed significantly
highest mean scores for appearance (8.41), colour (8.74), flavor (8.75),
texture (8.68), mouth feel (8.64) and over all acceptability (8.59) in case of
treatment T6 (50% honey solution) and lowest in case of treatment T4
(50% glucose solution) for appearance (6.12), colour (6.04), flavor (6.0),
texture (6.04), mouth feel (6.02) and over all acceptability (6.04)
respectively.
 The honey based carrot candies from the standardized treatment (T6) based
on superior physico-chemical and organoleptic characteristics viz.,
moisture content (%), water activity (aW), acidity (%), ascorbic acid
(mg/100g), beta carotene content (mg/100g), antioxidant activity (%
96
inhibition) and on sensory quality attributes viz., appearance, color, flavor,
texture, mouthfeel and over all acceptability, were subjected to storage in
two different packaging materials, viz., aluminum laminate and PET Jar
for period of 90 days. Significantly lowest moisture content (27.27%),
browning index (0.045), water activity (aw) 0.654, beta carotene content
(13.80mg/100g), a* value (47.48), b* value (23.45), was recorded in
aluminum laminate while as it was significantly higher in PET Jar
moisture content (27.35%), browning index (0.051), water activity (aw)
0.654, beta carotene content (13.90mg/100g), a* value (47.56), b* value
(23.54) respectively. Further irrespective of the packaging material used in
the study, moisture content (26.13 to 28.05%), browning index (0.025-
0.069), water activity aw (0.628 to 0.689) was found to increase with
advancement of the storage period (0 to 90 days).Decrease in beta carotene
content (16.26 to 12.01mg/100g), colour values (L*, a*, b*) (12.45 to
10.65, 48.12 to 46.78, 24.23 to 22.79) texture (34.51 to 33.40 N) was also
recorded with progressive increase in the storage period (0-90 days).
 There was as such no change in the microbiological quality of the honey

based carrot candies when packed and stored in both the packaging
materials (aluminum laminate, PET Jar). Further advancement of the
storage period had no pronounced effect on microbial quality as well.
 Sensory quality in terms of appearance, color, texture, flavor, mouthfeel

and over all acceptability was found excellent in case of honey based
carrot candies stored in aluminum laminate as reflected by mean score of
7.92, 8.02, 8.21, 8.04, 8.20 and 8.08 respectively. Further mean score for
appearance, color, texture, flavor, mouthfeel and over all acceptability was
found to decrease progressively with the advancement of storage period
(0-90 days) reflected by the mean score of 7.84, 7.77, 7.88, 7.81, 8.12 and
7.86 respectively at 90th day of storage.
97
CONCLUSIONS
Among the different treatment combinations under study, the carrot candy
prepared from the treatment T6 (50% honey solution) was found superior both in
terms of physico-chemical and sensory quality attributes as compared to other
treatment combinations and as such confirms the feasibility of the said treatment
(T6) for the preparation of carrot candy.
The carrot candy prepared from T6 was found shelf stable in both the
packaging materials. However physico-chemical and organoleptic quality
attributes were recorded better in aluminum laminate. Hence it can be concluded
that honey based carrot candies stored in aluminum laminate exhibited better
physico-chemical and organoleptic attributes and as such was found to be an ideal
packaging material for its safe storage.
Further economic analysis of honey based carrot candy from standardized

treatment (T6) returned the benefit cost ratio of 1:2.88, which is indicative of the
fact that developed product can be commercialized and can prove to be a
profitable business venture.
98
LITERATURE CITED
AACC, 2000. Approved Methods of American Association of Cereal Chemists,

10th Edition. The Association St. Paul, MN.
Alabran, D. M. and Mabrouk, A. F. 1973. Carrot flavor. Sugars and free

nitrogenous compounds in fresh carrots. Journal of Agriculture Food
Chemistry 21: 205-08.
Alam, M. S., Kamruzzaman, M., Khanom, S. A. A., Patowary, M. R. H., Elahi,

M. T. Hasanuzzaman, M. and Paul, D. K. 2018. Quality evaluation of
ginger candy prepared by osmotic dehydration techniques. Journal of
Food and Nutrition 9: 376-389
Alasalvar, C., John, M. G., Zhang, D. Peter, C. Q. and Shahidi, F. 2001.

Comparison of volatiles, phenolics, sugars, antioxidant vitamins and
sensory quality of different colored carrot varieties. Journal of Agriculture
Food Chemistry 49: 1410-16.
Anonymous, 1957. Manual of Microbiological Methods. McGraw Hill Book Co.

New York pp. 127.
Anonymous, 2014. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Anonymous, 2015. National Horticulture Board. Ministry of Agriculture and

Farmers Welfare, Government of India.
AOAC, 2000. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official

Agriculture Chemists, Association of Analytical Chemists, Washington, D.
C.
AOAC,1988. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official

Agriculture Chemists, Association of Analytical Chemists.
i
AOAC. 2005. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official
Agriculture Chemists, Association of Analytical Chemists, Washington,
DC.
Assous, M. T. M. 2014. Evaluation of red pigment extracted from purple carrots

and its utilization as antioxidant and natural food, Faculty of Agriculture,
Ainshams University. pp.1-7.
Babariya, V. J., Makwana, A. N., Hadwani, M. and Panjair, N., 2014.

Standardization of a recipe for the preparationof candy (tuti fruiti) from
unripe papaya. The Asian Journal of Horticulture 9: 94-99.
Baber-Shamrez, Samra-Aftab, Muhammad-Junaid, Nazeer-Ahmed and Saeed-

Ahmed 2013. IOSR Journal of Environmental Science, Toxicology and
Food Technology (IOSR-JESTFT) e-ISSN: 2319-2402, pp. 2319-2399
Baiano, A., Tamagnone, P., Marchitelli, V. and Nobile, M. A. D. 2005. Quality

decay kinetics of semi-preserved Sauce as Affected by Packaging. Journal
of food Science 70(2): E92-E97.
Balaji, V., Prasad, V. M. and Saroj, P. L. 2014. Comparative study of varieties,

honey coating and storage durations on aonla candy. Indian Journal of
Horticultural 71(1): 104-108.
Bast, A., Haenen, G. R., Vanden-Berg, R. and Vanden-Berg. B. 1998.

Antioxidants effect on carotenoids. International Journal of Vitamin and
Nutrition Research 68: 399-403.
Berruti, 2009. Model for convective drying of carrots for pyrolysis, Journal of
Food Engineering 92: 196-201.
Berruti, F. M., Klass, M., Briens, F. and Berruti, C. 2009. Model for convective
drying of carrots for pyrolysis. Journal of Food Engineering. 92: 196-201.
ii
Bose, T. K., Kabir, J., Das, P. and Joy, P. P. 2000. Tropical Horticulture, Naya
Prokash, Calcuta 1: 145.
Bramley, P. 2000. Is lycopene beneficial to human health. Phytochemistry. 54:

233.
Chandu and Prasad 2006. Development of guava candies. Journal Food Science
Technology 43: 210-212.
Chantaro, 2008. Production of antioxidant high dietary fibre powder from carrot
peels, Journal of Food Science and Technology 41: 1987-1994.
Chutintrasri B., Athapol and Noomhorm 2007. Thermal inactivation of

polyphenoloxidase in pineapple puree. LWT Journal of Food Science and
Technology 39(5): 492-495.
Diaz, M N., Frei, B., Vita, J. A. and Keaney, J. F. 1997. Antioxidants and
atherosclerotic heart disease. Journal of Medicine 337: 408-16.
Doymaz, 2004. Convective air drying characteristic of thin layer carrots, Journal
of Food Engineering 61(3): 359-364.
Durrani, A. M. 2011. Development and quality evaluation of honey based carrot

candy. Journal of Food Science and Technology 48(4): 502-505.
Failla, M. L. and Chitchumroonchokchai, C. 2005. In vitro Models as tools for

screening the relative bioavailabilities of Provitamin A Carotenoids in
Foods pp 12. Harvest Plus Technical Monograph 3 Harvest plus,
Washington DC.
Favell, D. J. 1998. A comparison of the vitamin C content of fresh and frozen

vegetables. Journal of Food Chemistry 62: 59-64.
iii
Gebczynski, P. 2006. Content of selected antioxidative compounds in raw carrot
and in frozen product prepared for consumption. Electronic Journal of
Polish Agricultural Universities 9: 32-67.
Ghazali, H. M. and Sin, M. K. 1986. Coconut honey. The effect of storage

temperature on some of its physico-chemical properties, Journal of Apic
Research 25: 109.
Gliemmo, M. F., Latorre, E., Gerschenson, L. and Carmen, C. 2009. Colour

stability of pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata, Duchesne ex Poiret) puree
during storage at room temperature: Effect of pH, potassium sorbate,
ascorbic acid and packaging material. LWT-Food Science and Technology
42(1): 196-201.
Gopalan, C., Rama-Shastri, B. V. and Balasubramanian, S. C. 2004. Nutritive

value of Indian foods. National Institute of Nutrition. Indian Council of
Medical Research, Hyderabad pp. 32-67.
Gornicki, 2007. Drying curve modeling of blanched carrot cubes under natural
convective condition, Journal of Food Engineering 82: 160-170.
Gupta, J. K., Kaushik, R. and Joshi, V. K. 1992. Influence of different treatments,

storage temperature and period on some physico-chemical characteristics
and seasory qualities of Indian Honey, Journal of Food Science and
Haq and Prasad 2014. Carotene of the most nutritious root crops. Ingredients
South Asia, 1-15th October pp. 94-95.
Hasanuzzaman, M., Kamruzzaman, M., Islam, M., Anjuman, D., Khanom, A.,
Mashiar, R., Laisa, A. L. and Dipak, K. P. 2014. Study on tomato candy
iv
prepared by dehydration technique using different sugar solutions. Journal
of Food and Nutrition Sciences 5: 1261-1271.
Hashimoto, T. and Nagayana, T. 2004. Chemical composition of ready to eat fresh

carrot. Journal of Food Hygiene Society, Japan 39: 324-328.
Hodge, J. 1953. Chemistry of browning reactions in model systems, Journal of

Agriculture food Chemistry 1: 928.
Hussain, I, Iqbal, M., Shakir, I. and Ayub, M. 2004. Effect of sucrose and glucose
mixture on the quality characteristics of osmotically dehydrated banana
slices. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 3(5): 282-284.
Ito, N., Hirose, M., Fukushima, H., Tsuda, T., Shirai, T. and Tatenatsu, M. 1986.
Studies on antioxidants: Their carcinogenic and modifying effects on
chemical carcinogens. Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology 24:
1071. 092
Jackson, M. L. 1967. Soil Chemical Analysis. Prentice Hall of Englewood cliffs,

New Jersey, USA.
Jakia, Sultana and Jothi 2014. Studied the development and Shelf-Life Prediction
of Pineapple 10: 77-82.
Judita, B., Petra, K., Janette, M., Alena, V., Tomas, T. and Mananna, L. 2015.
Carrot (Daucuscarota L. ssp. Sativus (Hoffm.) Arcang.) as source of
antioxidants and vitamins, Dept. of Chemistry, Faculty of Biotechnology
and Food Science, Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra; Slovak
Republic Slovakia.
Kapoor, H. C. and Kaur, C. 2001. Effect of different blanching methods on the

physic chemical qualities of frozen french beans and carrots. Journal of
Food Science and Technology 38: 65-67.
v
Khanum, F. M., Swamy, M. S., Krishna, K. R., Santhanam, K. and Visvanathan,
K. R. 2000. Dietary fiber content of commonly fresh and cooked
vegetables consumed in India. Plant Foods Human Nutrition 55: 207-218.
Kumar, S., Kumar, K. and Prakash, C. 2015. Effect of sugar and jaggery on the
quality characteristics of papaya leather and shelf life stability at room
temperature. South Asian J. Food Technol. Environ. 1(1): 79-85.
Lea. C. H. and Hannan. R. S. 1949. Studies on the reaction between proteins and
reducing sugars in the dry state. The effect of activity of water, pH and of
temperature on the primary action between casein and glucose,
Biochemistry Biophysics Acta, 3: 313.
Lee, S. K. and Kader, A. A. 2000. Preharvest and postharvet factors influencing

vitamin C content of horticultural crops. Journal of Postharvest Bio
Lija, D., Eva, U., Ingrida, A., Sandra, M. B., Vita, L and Rakcejeva, T. 2013.
Evaluation of the influence of various biodegradable packaging materials
on the quality and shelf life of different food products. Department of
Food Technology, LLU.
Machewad, 2003. Studies on dehydration of carrot, Journal of Food Science and

Technology 40:406-408.
Madan and Dhawan 2005. Development and quality evaluation of honey based
carrot candy, Journal of Food Science and Technology 48: 502-505.
Mainuddin-Molla, M. 2008. Preparation of fruits candy from jackfruit and mango

using a mechanical dryer. China Agriculture University, College of Food
Science and Nutritional Engineering.
vi
Martin, 1950. Use of acid, rose Bengal and streptomycin in plate method for
estimating soil fungi. Soil Science 69: 215-232.
Martin, A. D. and Gilbert, D. 1968. Enzyme changes accompanying liver

enlargement in rats treated with 3-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyanisole. Journal of
Biochemistry 10: 22-27.
Mehta, U. and Bajaj, S. 1984. Changes in the chemical composition and

organoleptic quality of citrus peel candy during preparation and storage.
Journal of Food Science and Technology 21: 422-424.
Miglio, C., Chiavaro, E., Visconti, A., Fogliano, V. and Pellegrini, N. 2008.
Effects of different cooking methods on nutritional and physicochemical
characteristics of selected vegetables. Journal of Agricultural Food
Chemistry 56: 139-147.
Navneet, S., Maninder, A. and Alam, M. S. 2015. Biochemical, Microbial

Stability and Sensory Evaluation of Osmotically Dehydrated Kinnow Peel
Candy and Peel Powder. International Journal of Science and Research
(IJSR) pp. 2319-7064.
Nayak, P., Tandon, D. K. and Bhatt, D. K. 2012. Study on changes of nutritional

and organoleptic quality of flavored candy prepared from anola
(Emblicaofficinalis G.) during storage. International Journal of Nutritional
and Metabolism 4(7): 100-106.
Opoku. A., Meda, V. and Wahab, J. 2009. Effects of storage methods on quality
characteristics of carrots grown under organic and conventional
management. In: Proc. presentation at the CSBE/SCGAB 2009 Annual
Conference, Hosted by the Canadian Society for Bioengineering
(CSBE/SCGAB), Rodd fs Brudenell River Resort, Prince Edward Island
vii
Oviasogie, P. O., Okoro, D. and Ndiokwere, C. L. 2009. Determination of total
phenolic amount. African Journal of Biotechnology 8: 2819-2820.
Owolade, 2017. Study on physico-chemical properties, antioxidant activity and

shelf stability of carrot (Daucuscarota) and pineapple (Ananascomosus)
juice blend. International Food Research Journal 24(2): 534-540.
Paine, H. S. and Lothrop, R. E. 1933. Determination of Amino Acids and Related

Compounds in Honey. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry Analytical
Edition 5:103-105.
Pandove, G. 2007. Preparation of low alcoholic, self-carbonated beverages from

carrots and its blends. M. Sc. thesis, Punjab Agricultural University,
Ludhiana, India.
Petrov, V. 1971. Qualitative determination of amino acids in some Australian

honeys using paper chromatography, Journal of Aphis Research 10: 153.
Phan, C. T. and Hsu, H. 1973. Physical and chemical changes occurring in the
carrot root during growth. Can Journal of Plant Science 53l: 629-34.
Piper, C. S. 1966. Soil and Plant Analysis. Journal of Physical Chemistry 49: 45.
Premwalli, K. S. and Arya, S. S. 1991. Effect of vegetables oils on the stability of

carotenoids in Carrot-Halwa. India Food Packer 45(4): 22-26.
Priya, M. D. and Khatkar, B. S. 2013. Effect of processing methods on keeping

quality of aonla (Emblica Officinalis Gaertn.) Preserve. International Food
Research Journal 20(2): 617-622.
Pruthi, J. S., Saxena, A. K. and Manan, J. K. 1980. Studies on the determination

of optimum conditions of preservation of fresh vegetables in acidified
viii
sulphited brine for subsequent use in Indian style curries, etc. Indian Food
Packer 34: 9.
Rajesh, K. and Kirad, K. S. 2013. Effect of different levels of sugar in the

preparation of pineapple candy. World Research Journal of Biotechnology
ISSN: 2322-0600 & E-ISSSN: 2322-0619.
Ramsey, R. J. and Milum, V. G. 1933. The discolouration of honey. American

Bee Journal 73: 305.
Ranganna, 1997. Handbook of analysis and quality control for fruit and vegetable.
III Edition. Tata McGraw Hill Publisher Co. Ltd. New Delhi pp. 127-137.
Rani, U. and Bhatia 1985. Studies on pear candy processing. Indian Food Packer
39: 40-46.
Rao, M. A., Van-Buren, J. P. and Cooley, H. J. 1993. Rheological changes during

gelation of high methoxy pectin/fructose dispersions; effect of temperature
and ageing. Journal of Food Sciences 58: 173–176.
Rashidi, M. and Gholami, M. 2011. Prediction of carrot firmness based on total

soluble solids of carrot. Middle-East Journal of Science Research 7: 91-94.
Rashidi, M. and Khabbaz, B. G. 2010. Prediction of total soluble solids and

firmness of carrot based on carrot water content. Proc 17th World
Congress of the International Commission of Agricultural and Biosystems
Engineering. Canadian Society for Bioengineering, Quebec City, Canada.
Rashmi-Patil, Raut, V. U. and Wankhade, R. S. 2014 Studies on preparation of

karonda candy. International Journal of Processing and Post-Harvest
Technology 5(2): 136-140.
ix
Ravichandran, K., Saw, N.M.M.T., Mohdaly, A.A., Gabr, A.M., Kastell, A.,
Riedel, H., Cai, Z., Knorr, D. and Smetanska, I. 2013. Impact of
processing of red beet on betalain content and antioxidant activity. Food
Research International, 50: 670-675
Reyes, 2002. Drying of carrots in a Fluidized bed. Effects of drying conditions

and modeling. International Journal of Drying Technology 7: 1463-1483.
Rodriguez-Amaya, D. B. and Kimura, M. 2004. Harvest plus handbook for

carotenoid analysis. International Food Policy Research Institute and
International Center for Tropical Agriculture. Washington DC
Sabeera, M., Waqas, N. B., Nuzhat, N., Masoodi, F. A., Bhat, M. M. and Rafiya,
B. 2016. Effect of storage on physicochemical, microbial and antioxidant
properties of pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata) candy. Cogent Food and
Agriculture 2: 1163650.
Saghir, A. and Nanda, K. 2015. Studies on the effects of honey incorporation on

quality and shelf life of aonla preserve. Cogent Food and Agriculture 1:
1009334.
Salvini, S. 1997. A food composition database for epidemiological studies in

Italy. Cancer Lett 114: 299-300.
Sandhu, K. S., Joshi, A. K. and Bajaj, K. L. 1988. Effects of nitrogen fertilizer and
weed control on nutritive quality of carrots (Daucus carota L.). Plant
Foods for Human Nutrition 38: 67-73.
Sangeeta, 2009. Development and quality evaluation of selected honey based food
products Thesis, department of home science faculty of agricultural
sciences Aligarh Muslim university.
x
Saxena, S. K. and Vikas, J. 2005. Wonders of Golden Liquid Honey. Process
Food Industry pp. 42-50.
Schade, J. E., Marsh, G. L. and Eckert, J. E. 1958. Diastase activity and hydrogen
methyl fiirfiiral in honey and their usefulness in detecting heat alteration,
Food Research 23: 446.
Selvakumar, R. 2011. Studies on osmotic dehydration of carrot (Daucus carota)

Thesis submitted to the University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore.
Sethi, V. and Anand, J. C. 1983. Retention of nutrients in carrot and amla

preserves. Indian Food Packer 37: 64-67.
Shamala, T. R. and Jyothi, Y. S. 1999. Honey-It is more than just sweet, Indian
Food Industry, Nov-Dec. 18(6): 349-357.
Shamrez, B., Aftab, S., Junaid, M., Ahmed, N. and Ahmed, S., 2013. Preparation
and Evaluation of Candies from Citron Peel. IOSR Journal of
Environmental Science, Toxicology and Food Technology 7: 21-24.
Singh, C. 1996. Development of flavoured milk with fortified carrot juice. M. Sc.
Thesis, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India.
Sorrenti, V., Salerno, L. D. and Giacomo, C. 2006. Imidazole derivatives and

antioxidants and selective inhibitors of n NOS. Article in Nitric Oxide 14:
45-50.
Sra, S. K., Sandhu, K. S. and Ahluwalia, P. 2011. Effect of processing parameters

on physicochemical and culinary quality of dried carrot slices. Journal of
Food Science and Technology 48: 159-166.
Srivastava, P. R. and Kumar, S. 1994. Fruit and vegetable preservation principles

and practices. International book Distributing Co. Ltd., Lucknow.
xi
Stojceska, V., Ainsworth, P., Plunkett, A., Ilbanoglu, E. and Ilbanoglu, S. 2009.
Cauliflower by-product as a new source of dietary fibre, antioxidant and
proteins in cereal based ready to eat expanded snacks. Journal of Food
Engineering 87: 554-563.
Suman, M. and Kumari, K. 2002. A study on sensory evaluation, β-carotene

retention and shelf-life of dehydrated carrot products. Journal of Food
Science and Technology-Mysore 39(6): 677-681.
Suman, M. and Kumari, K. K. 2002. A study on sensory evaluation, β –carotene

retention and shelf life of dehydrated carrot products. Journal of Food
Science and Technology 39: 677-81.
Tarko, T., Duda-Chodak, A., Sroka, P., Satora, P. and Tuszynski, T. 2010.
Production of flavored apple chips of high antioxidant activity. Journal of
Food Processing and Preservation 34: 728-42.
Thimmaiah, R. S. 1999. Standard Methods of Biochemical Analysis. Kalyani

Publishers, New Delhi.
Tripathi, V. K., Singh, M. B. and Singh, S. 1988. Studies on comparative

compositional changes in different preserved products of amla var.
Banarsi. Indian Food Packer 42: 60-66.
Vasundhra, S. and Prameela, K. 2015. Development, physico-chemical and

sensory evaluation of natural nutra candy. Journal of Food Science and
Venkata, 2014. Potato, Beetroot and Carrot Fetches better price during harvest,
Faculty of Tamil Nadu Agriculture University, Coimbatore 641: 003.
xii
Verma, S., Srivastava, P. K. and Durrani, A., 2006. Organoleptic characteristics of
honey based amla murabba. 40th ISAE Annual Convention, Tamil Nadu
Agricultural University, Coimbatore.
White, J. W. and Subers, M. H. 1963. Studies on honey inhibine. A Chemical

Assay Journal of Apic Research 2: 93-100.
Wootton, M., Edwards, R. A., Faraji-Haremi, R. and Jhonson, A. T. 1976. Effect

of accelerated storage conditions on the chemical composition and
properties of Australian honeys. I. Colour acidity and total nitrogen
content, Journal of Apic Research 15: 23.
Wresburger, J. H. 2002. Lifestyle, health and disease prevention: The underlying

mechanism. Journal of Cancer Prevention S(2): 1-7.
Zeeshan, M., Saleem, S. A., Ayub, M., Shah, M. and Jan, Z. 2017.
Physicochemical and sensory evaluation of dhakki dates candy. Journal of
Food Processing & Technology 8:3.
xiii
Sher-e-Kashmir
Shalimar Campus Srinagar – 190 025
-::o::-
CERTIFICATE
Certified that all the corrections/amendments as suggested by External

Examiner Dr. Idrees Ahmed Wani, Senior Assistant Professor,
Department of Food Technology, University of Kashmir during Viva-
Voce examination held on 19-02-2020 have been incorporated in the
manuscript entitled “Evaluation and Standardization of Process for
Development of Carrot Candy” submitted by Ms. Haseeba
Muzaffar (Regd. No. 2017-H-170-M).
(Dr. Abdul Rouf)

Chairman
Advisory Committee
xiv

Evaluation and Standardization of Process For Development of Carrot Candy

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation and Standardization of Process For Development of Carrot Candy

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation and Standardization of Process for

Development of Carrot Candy

Division of Food Science & Technology

Master of Science in Horticulture (Food Science &

This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “Evaluation and

It is further certified that any help or information received

(Dr. Abdul Rouf)

Prof. & Head,

Dr. Syed Zameer Hussain

Dr. Imtiyaz Murtaza

Dr. Nageena Nazir

This is to certify that the thesis entitled, “Evaluation and

Chairman External Examiner

Prof. & Head,

Name of the student : Haseeba Muzaffar

Registration No. : 2017-H-170-M

Major subject : Food Technology

Minor subject : Biochemistry

Key words: Carrot, Honey, Candy, Shelf life

Signature of Student Signature of Major Advisor

I gratefully acknowledge the enthusiastic cooperation, Venerable gratitude

4.1 Physico- chemical evaluation of carrot 41

4.2a Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 42

4.2b Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 45

4.2c Effect of pre treatments on physico-chemical 48

4.2d Effect of pre treatments on mineral composition of 50

4.2e Effect of pre treatments on Colour coordinates of 52

4.2f Effect of pre treatments on Organoleptic quality of 55

4.3a Effect of packaging material and storage days on 57

4.3b Effect of packaging material and storage days on 58

4.3c Effect of packaging material and storage days on beta 59

4.3d Effect of Honey and packaging on Total plate count 60

4.3e Effect of packaging material and storage days on 61

4.3g Effect of packaging material and storage days on 63

4.3h Effect of packaging material and storage days on 64

4.3i Effect of packaging material and storage days on 65

4.4a Effect of packaging material and storage days on 66

4.4b Effect of packaging material and storage days on 67

4.4c Effect of packaging material and storage days on 68

4.4d Effect of packaging material and storage days on 69

4.4e Effect of packaging material and storage days on 70

4.4f Effect of packaging material and storage days on 71

Fig. After page

1. Cabinet tray drier employed for dehydration of carrot 39

2. Sugar Based Carrot Candy (T1-Dipping in 40% 55

3. Glucose Based Carrot Candy (T 3-Dipping in 40% 55

4. Fructose Based Carrot Candy (T7-Dipping in 40% 55

5. Honey Based Carrot Candy (T5-Dipping in 40% 55

6. Honey Based Carrot Candy (T6-Dipping in 50% 55

7. Honey Based Carrot Candy (T6-Dipping in 50% 71

Carrot (Daucus carrota) belonging to Apiaceae family is the diverse

Candy is a sweet food prepared from fruits or vegetables by impregnating

1. To standardize the process protocol for development of carrot candy

2. To determine shelf stability and economic viability of the product

2.1 Preparation of Candies

2.2 Physicochemical characteristics of fresh carrot

2.3 Physicochemical composition of Candies

2.4 Effect of drying methods on physico-chemical Characteristics of carrot

2.5 Sensory quality of Candies

2.6 Storage studies of Candies

2.7 Microbial quality of Candies

A brief review of research work carried out on candy preparation is

2.1 Preparation of candies

2. Colour (L, a, b*)