Postgraduate Science Framework

Department of Science
School of Health and Life Sciences

FOOD SCIENCE AND BIOTECHNOLOGY (with advance

practices)
FPL4025-N
Academic Level 7

Module Leader: DR. JIBIN H. E.

Title: FOOD CHEMISTRY COMPOSITION AND ANALYSIS

Name of Student: EVELYN AKHIGBE

Student ID:
ABSTRACT

This study aimed to evaluate the content of pectin in different mango cultivars by using
a conventional hot-acid method and also compare the conventional hot-acid extraction
method with novel techniques for pectin extraction from the mango peel of a mango
cultivar. Three mango cultivars were used for the experiment, and their peels were
manually peeled, dried, and ground into fine powder. The conventional method involved
the use of 1M HCl solution under high temperature, while the novel techniques
employed enzyme-assisted and ultrasound-assisted extractions. Results indicated that
the pectin yield obtained by the novel techniques was significantly higher than that from
the conventional method. Among the novel methods, the Ultrasound extraction yielded
the highest amount of pectin. Furthermore, the study revealed that the type of mango
cultivar affected the yield of pectin obtained with Tommy Atkins yielding the highest
amount of pectin. The findings suggest that novel extraction techniques have the
potential to improve pectin yield, and this information can be used to optimize the
production process for pectin from mango peels.
1.0 INTRODUCTION

The mango fruit has a rich history that originated in India over 4,000 years ago, and it is
now grown in many countries worldwide. Mangifera indica is the scientific name for
mango and belongs to the Mangifera genus of the Anacardiaceae family (Morton, 1987).
The fruit has many different cultivars, including Palmer, Tommy Atkins, and Glenns,
each with their own unique features. Palmer is known for its large size and sweet flavor,
while Tommy Atkins is one of the most widely grown varieties and is known for its firm
flesh and long shelf life. Glenns, on the other hand, is a newer cultivar that is popular for
its sweet and juicy flesh (Knight et al, 2009). Mango peels, which contain high levels of
pectin, are often discarded but have potential health benefits, such as reducing
cholesterol levels and improving gut health (Malviya & Kulkarni, 2012; Ajila & Rao,
2013).

1.1 Pectin extraction and use case

Pectin is a very complex carbohydrate found in the cell walls of plants. It is composed of
a linear chain of galacturonic acid units that are connected by α(1→4) glycosidic bonds
(Voragen et al., 2009; Sommano, et al., 2018.). Pectin is widely used in the food
industry as a gelling agent, stabilizer, and thickener due to its ability to form a gel when
it is mixed with sugar and acid (Voragen, et al., 2003; de Lourdes, et al., 2013).

There are several methods of pectin extraction. The traditional method like acid
extraction and more novel methods like enzymatic extraction, and microwave-assisted
extraction. Acid extraction involves the use of strong acids, such as hydrochloric acid or
sulfuric acid, to break down the cell wall and release the pectin. Enzymatic extraction
uses enzymes, such as pectinase or cellulase, to break down the cell wall and release
the pectin. Microwave-assisted extraction uses microwave radiation to heat the plant
material and release the pectin (Kumar, A & Chauhan, G., 2010; Maran, J., Swathi, K.,
Jeevitha, P., Jayalakshmi, J. and Ashvini, G., 2015).

The extraction method used can have an effect on the chemical composition of the
pectin (Gawkowska, D., Cybulska, J. and Zdunek, A., 2018). For example, traditional
acid extraction can lead to a decrease in the molecular weight and degree of
esterification of the pectin, while novel methods like enzymatic extraction can lead to an
increase in the molecular weight which means a higher yield of pectin and degree of
esterification of the pectin. Another novel method is Microwave-assisted extraction
which can result in a higher yield of pectin compared to other extraction methods even
though this method can also lead to a decrease in the degree of esterification (Kumar, A
& Chauhan, G., 2010).

This project report explores the various effects of both traditional and novel techniques
on the extraction of pectin from mango peel as well as some other factors that may
affect the yield of pectin. In the first dataset, we investigate the effect of thermal and
non-thermal processing methods on the release of pectin from the matrix, while in the
second dataset, we explore the impact of these methods on the yield and techno-
functional properties of the extracted pectin.

The objectives of this study are to compare the effects of conventional and novel
techniques on the extraction of pectin from mango peel, to evaluate the yield and
techno-functional properties of the extracted pectin, and to determine the most efficient
and effective method for pectin extraction from mango peel.

2.0 RESULT

To analyze the data, we first performed a normality test on each dataset using a
Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Shapiro-Wilk test statistic to determine the statistical
difference between the two groups at 95% confidence interval. The null hypothesis of
normality test is that the data is normally distributed, while the alternative hypothesis is
that the data is not normally distributed.

2.1 Test for normality

Before analyzing, a normality test was done. From the two Datasets, it was clear to
identify 2 outliners, one is Dataset 1 in Palmer sample of 9.25 g/100g DM pectin extract
and the other at Dataset 2 in enzymatic extraction of Tommy Atkins of 27.90 g/100g DM.
Those 2 outliners were removed to normalized the data and done the normality test
again. (Outliners are highlighted in Appendix I and normality test results are attached in
Appendix II after removing the outliners)

2.2 Sample Test

Table 4 Pectin yield for each of the extraction

methods

Extraction technique Mean Std. Error of Mean

Hot-acid extraction 16.0370 .80244

Enzymatic extraction 25.4950 .26839

Ultrasound extraction 30.8780 .11741

Total 20.8968 1.00694

Table 4: Pectin yield for each extraction method

The result in table 4 showed that the Ultrasound extraction method gave the highest
yield of pectin which is then followed by the enzymatic extraction and then the hot-acid
extraction.
Comparison of Pectin extract yield (g/100 g DM)

Mango cultivar Mean Std. Error of Mean

Palmer 15.5790 .71684

Tommy Atkins 25.8760 .74002

Glenn 11.2770 .32456

Total 20.8968 1.00694

Table 3 Pectin yield for each cultivar

The result in the table showed that the Tommy Atkins cultivar gave the highest yield of
pectin 25.88 g/100g DM which is then followed by the palmer cultivar of 15.58 g/100g
DM and then the Glenn extraction of g/100g DM.
Comparison of Pectin extract yield (g/100 g DM)

3.0 ANALYTICAL DISCUSSION

3.1 Pectin extract from Mango

Mangoes are nutritious fruit that contains vitamins, minerals, fiber, and pectin (Rymbai
et al., 2013; Ajila & Rao, 2013.). Pectin is a complex carbohydrate found in plant cell
walls that is commonly used in the food industry as a gelling agent, stabilizer, and
thickener in jams, jellies, and fruit preserves (Sommano, et al. , 2018; Gawkowska,
Cybulska & Zdunek, 2018). The amount and quality of pectin in mangoes determine
their usefulness in the food industry. The quality of pectin extracted from different
mango cultivars can be influenced by factors such as genetics, environmental
conditions, and farming practices.

Pectin is popular in the food industry because of its functional properties. It can thicken
and stabilize food products such as jams, jellies, and fruit fillings due to its gelling ability
(Akhtar, Dickinson, Mazoyer & Langendorff, 2002). Pectin can also replace fat in low-fat
or fat-free products and provide the desired texture and mouthfeel (Dartey, Trainor &
Evans, 1990). Additionally, pectin has prebiotic properties that promote gut health
(Burkitt, Walker & Painter, 1972; Gómez, et al, 2016).

However, using too little or too much pectin in food production can have negative effects
on the final product. Inadequate use of pectin can lead to poor texture and stability in
food products, while excessive use can result in a too-firm texture and an undesirable
taste. Therefore, it is crucial to regulate the amount of pectin used in food production
carefully to ensure the desired quality and texture of the final product (Beli, 1997).

3.2 Extraction methods and their effect on pectin extraction

The economic feasibility of using different mango cultivars in food industries largely
depends on the pectin yield and extraction method used. This study used three
extraction techniques: hot-acid, enzymatic, and ultrasound to extract pectin from
different mango cultivars. The results indicate that the yield of pectin extracted from
each cultivar and extraction method can provide insights into the potential for using
these cultivars in food production. The Tommy Atkins cultivar yielded the highest amount
of pectin, making it the most desirable for use in food industries. The choice of
extraction method is also significant, as it can affect the quality and yield of pectin
obtained (Gawkowska, D., Cybulska, J. and Zdunek, A., 2018). Enzymatic extraction
produces pectin with a higher molecular weight and viscosity compared to conventional
extraction methods, while ultrasound-assisted extraction increases the yield of pectin
compared to conventional methods.

The results indicate that the novel extraction methods can give higher yields of pectin
compared to the traditional hot-acid extraction method, and the yields differ depending
on the specific extraction method and mango cultivar used. Enzyme-assisted extraction
was found to be a better method for extracting pectin from mango peels than hot-acid
extraction, while ultrasound-assisted extraction was the most effective. The extraction
method used can however affect the physicochemical properties of pectin, such as
gelling and emulsifying properties, are affected by the extraction method used.
Conventional hot-acid extraction produced pectin with the highest gelling strength, while
enzyme-assisted extraction and ultrasound-assisted extraction produced pectin with
lower gelling strengths. However, the pectin extracted by enzyme-assisted extraction
had higher emulsifying activity and stability than the pectin extracted by conventional
hot-acid extraction. The pectin extracted by ultrasound-assisted extraction had the
highest emulsifying activity and stability. Therefore, the choice of extraction method
should be carefully considered to maximize the yield and quality of pectin extracted from
mango peels. Furthermore, the origin, cultivar, and growth conditions of the fruits used
for pectin extraction should also be taken into account, as these factors can affect the
yield and functionalities of the extracted pectin.

The study also indicates that environmental factors and agronomic practices can affect
the pectin content and quality in mango cultivars. For example, in research conducted
by Russell, Laird & Mallarino (2006), stated that over-fertilization with nitrogen can
reduce the pectin content in mangoes. Hence, these factors should also be considered
when choosing mango cultivars and extraction methods. Overall, this study provides
valuable insights into the potential of different mango cultivars and extraction techniques
for pectin production in the food industry.

3.3 Mechanisms for each extraction method used in this report

The different mechanisms for extracting pectin from mango peel using three methods
were explained in this study. Conventional hot-acid extraction, which involves the use of
solutions of mineral or organic acids under high temperatures, was the first method. The
process involved using 1 M hydrochloric acid to adjust the pH of the mixture to 2.0, heat
treatment at 90 °C for 1 hour under constant stirring (200 rpm) to rupture the cell walls
of the mango peel, and the addition of four volumes of absolute ethanol at 4 °C
overnight to precipitate the pectin. The crude pectin was recovered through re-
centrifugation, washing twice with 80% ethanol, and freeze-drying.

The second method was enzyme-assisted extraction, which used a commercial multi-
catalytic enzyme preparation called Celluclast® 1.5L to assist in the extraction. The
Celluclast was added to the mango peel powder suspension and incubated at 50 °C
and pH 4.5 overnight under constant stirring (200 rpm). The enzymatic activity of
Celluclast cleaves the pectin molecules, and the crude pectin was recovered from the
supernatant by following the procedure described in the conventional extraction method.

The third method was ultrasound-assisted extraction, which used a probe-type

ultrasound system to deliver ultrasonic waves at 700 W and 20 kHz. The ultrasonic
waves produced acoustic cavitation, which created localized pressure and temperature
changes that disrupted the cell walls of the mango peel and released the pectin. The
ultrasonic extraction process was carried out at 70 °C for 30 minutes under constant
stirring (200 rpm), and the crude pectin was recovered from the supernatant by
following the procedure described in the conventional extraction method.

Dataset 1 showed that the hot-acid extraction method had a significantly high pectin
yield for all three mango cultivars, although relatively lower compared to the other
extraction methods. This could be because the hot-acid extraction method involves the
high-temperature treatment, which is effective in rupturing the cell walls and releasing
the pectin and could possibly have caused pectin degradation in quantity, its financial
implication is relatively low as compared to other methods as seen in Dataset 2. The
enzyme-assisted and ultrasound-assisted extraction methods involve milder but more
robust processing conditions and machinery, which could be why they are effective in
releasing more pectin, its robustness makes them more complicated and financially
unfriendly.

The extraction of pectin from mango peel can be achieved by conventional and novel
methods, including hot-acid extraction, enzyme-assisted extraction, and ultrasound-
assisted extraction. Each method has its advantages and disadvantages, as discussed
in the report on the extraction of pectin from mango peel.

The conventional hot-acid extraction method is well-established and widely used for
pectin extraction from fruit by-products, including mango peel. It is a relatively simple
and easy method that yields high amounts of pectin. However, it requires the use of
hazardous and corrosive chemicals, and high temperatures, and may result in the
extraction of unwanted compounds, such as sugars (Coral & Escobar-Garcia, 2019).
Enzyme-assisted extraction is a gentler and milder method that selectively extracts
pectin and does not extract unwanted compounds, making it ideal for low-quality raw
materials and a wide range of fruit and vegetable by-products. However, it requires
costly enzymes and is a slower and more time-consuming process that requires
overnight incubation (Dominika, et al., 2014; Wikiera, et al., 2015).

Ultrasound-assisted extraction is a rapid and efficient method that does not involve
hazardous or corrosive chemicals. It can extract pectin in a short time and with very
high yields, making it ideal for large-scale operations. However, it requires specialized
and expensive equipment, may cause mechanical degradation of the pectin, and may
require optimization of several parameters (Santos, et al., 2009; Karbuz & Tugrul,
2021).

3.4 Other novel extraction techniques for pectin extraction

The report provides an overview of the traditional and novel techniques used for pectin
extraction from fruit by-products. Traditional methods include the use of mineral acids or
organic acids under high temperature, while novel techniques include ultrasound-
assisted, microwave-assisted, enzyme-assisted extractions, and combined extraction
methods.

Aside from the methods mentioned in the report, there are other novel extraction
techniques that can be used for pectin extraction. One of these techniques is subcritical
water extraction. This method involves the use of water at high temperatures and
pressures below its critical point to extract pectin from fruit by-products. Subcritical
water extraction is considered a green extraction technique since it eliminates the need
for organic solvents and reduces energy consumption compared to traditional methods.

Another novel extraction technique is microwave-assisted hydro distillation. This method

involves the use of microwaves to heat the extraction solvent and facilitate the
extraction of pectin from fruit by-products (Grassino, A. N., Brnčić, M., Vikić-Topić, D.,
Roca, S., Dent, M., & Brnčić, S. R., 2016). Microwave-assisted hydrodistillation is
considered a more efficient and rapid extraction method compared to traditional
methods. (Worsfold P. J., 2019).

Another technique is an enzyme- and microwave-assisted extraction. This method

involves the use of enzymes and microwaves to extract pectin from fruit by-products.
Enzymes are used to break down the cell walls of the fruit, while microwaves are used
to heat the extraction solvent and facilitate the extraction of pectin. This method is
considered to be a more efficient and rapid extraction method compared to traditional
methods (Worsfold P. J., 2019).

Lastly, there is also the use of supercritical fluid extraction. This method involves the use
of supercritical carbon dioxide to extract pectin from fruit by-products. Supercritical fluid
extraction is considered a green extraction technique since it eliminates the need for
organic solvents and reduces energy consumption compared to traditional methods
(Patil et al., 2021).

However, the pectin yield depends also on several factors, such as the origin, cultivar,
and growth condition of the fruits used for pectin extraction, and the structural
characteristics of the pectin obtained. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation of the
extraction methods is required to determine the most suitable method for pectin
extraction from mango peel.

3.5 Possible ways to increase pectin yield

Possible ways to increase pectin yield may include agricultural means such as
improving cultivar selection, optimizing environmental conditions and agronomic
practices, and using bio-stimulants and biofertilizers. Bio-stimulants and biofertilizers
are natural products that can be used to enhance plant growth and development, which
can in turn increase the yield and quality of pectin obtained (Abou, et al., 2018).
Additionally, advances in extraction technology may help to improve the efficiency and
yield of pectin extraction, which could make it more economically feasible to use
(Mohsen, et al., 2021)

Another potential way to increase pectin yield is through genetic modification of the
plants themselves. Scientists have already identified genes involved in pectin synthesis
and modification, and modifying these genes could potentially increase the amount and
quality of pectin produced by plants. However, there are concerns about the safety and
environmental impact of genetically modified crops, so this approach may not be widely
adopted.

In addition to increasing pectin yield, there is also ongoing research into alternative
sources of pectin. Currently, citrus fruits are the primary source of commercial pectin,
but other sources such as apple pomace, sugar beet pulp, and sunflower heads are
being investigated as potential alternative sources. Utilizing these alternative sources
could help to diversify the pectin industry and reduce reliance on a single crop.

4.0 CONCLUSION

This study aimed to evaluate the content of pectin in different mango cultivars using
both conventional hot-acid extraction and novel techniques. The results of the
experiment revealed that pH, temperature, and extraction time were the main factors
that significantly influenced pectin extraction. The structure and properties of pectin,
including gelling ability and viscosity, were found to be greatly influenced by the
extraction method and source of pectin.

Comparing the different extraction methods, it was observed that the ultrasound
extraction method yielded the highest amount of pectin, followed by enzymatic
extraction and hot-acid extraction. Among the mango cultivars tested, the Tommy Atkins
cultivar exhibited the highest pectin yield, followed by the Palmer cultivar and the Glenn
cultivar. These findings highlight the variations in pectin yield depending on the
extraction method and mango cultivar used.

The report also provided an overview of both traditional and novel techniques for pectin
extraction from fruit by-products. While traditional methods involve the use of mineral or
organic acids at high temperatures, novel techniques such as ultrasound-assisted,
microwave-assisted, enzyme-assisted, and combined extractions have emerged. The
study demonstrated that these novel extraction methods generally yield higher amounts
of pectin compared to the conventional hot-acid extraction method. It is important to
note that the choice of extraction method can impact the physicochemical properties of
the extracted pectin, including gelling and emulsifying properties.

Specifically, conventional hot-acid extraction produced pectin with the highest gelling
strength, while enzyme-assisted and ultrasound-assisted extractions resulted in pectin
with lower gelling strengths. However, pectin obtained through enzyme-assisted
extraction exhibited higher emulsifying activity and stability compared to pectin obtained
through conventional hot-acid extraction. Ultrasound-assisted extraction yielded pectin
with the highest emulsifying activity and stability.

To maximize pectin yield and quality, careful consideration should be given to the choice
of extraction method, as well as the origin, cultivar, and growth conditions of the
mangoes used. Furthermore, environmental factors and agronomic practices, such as
nitrogen fertilization, can also impact pectin content and quality in mango cultivars.
REFERENCES

Abou Chehade, L., Al Chami, Z., De Pascali, S.A., Cavoski, I. and Fanizzi, F.P., 2018.
Biostimulants from food processing by‐products: agronomic, quality and
metabolic impacts on organic tomato (Solanum lycopersicum L.). Journal of the
Science of Food and Agriculture, 98(4), pp.1426-1436.

Ajila, C.M. and Rao, U.P., 2013. Mango peel dietary fibre: Composition and associated
bound phenolics. Journal of functional foods, 5(1), pp.444-450.

Akhtar, M., Dickinson, E., Mazoyer, J. and Langendorff, V., 2002. Emulsion stabilizing
properties of depolymerized pectin. Food Hydrocolloids, 16(3), pp.249-256.

Beli R. Thakur, Rakesh K. Singh, Avtar K. Handa & Dr. M. A. Rao (1997) Chemistry and
uses of pectin — A review, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 37:1,
47-73, DOI: 10.1080/10408399709527767.

Burkitt, D.P., Walker, A.R.P. and Painter, N.S., 1972. Effect of dietary fibre on stools and
transit-times, and its role in the causation of disease. The Lancet, 300(7792),
pp.1408-1411.

Coral, L. T. & Escobar-Garcia, A. H., 2019. Characterization of fruits of varieties of

mango (Mangifera indica) conserved in Peru. ISSN 0100-2945 DOI:
http://dx.doi.org /10.1590/0100-29452021710.

Dartey, C.K., Trainor, T.M. and Evans, R., Nabisco Brands Inc, 1990. Low cholesterol
mayonnaise substitute and process for its preparation. U.S. Patent 4,948,617.

de Lourdes García-Magaña, M., García, H.S., Bello-Pérez, L.A., Sáyago-Ayerdi, S.G.

and de Oca, M.M.M., 2013. Functional properties and dietary fiber
characterization of mango processing by-products (Mangifera indica L., cv
Ataulfo and Tommy Atkins). Plant foods for human nutrition, 68, pp.254-258.

Dominiak, M., Søndergaard, K.M., Wichmann, J., Vidal-Melgosa, S., Willats, W.G.T.,
Meyer, A.S., Mikkelsen, J.D. (2014). Application of enzymes for efficient
extraction, modification, and development of functional properties of lime pectin.
Food Hydrocolloids, 40, 273-282.
Gawkowska, D., Cybulska, J. and Zdunek, A., 2018. Structure-related gelling of pectins
and linking with other natural compounds: A review. Polymers, 10(7), p.762.

Gómez, B., Gullón, B., Yáñez, R., Schols, H. and Alonso, J.L., 2016. Prebiotic potential
of pectins and pectic oligosaccharides derived from lemon peel wastes and sugar
beet pulp: A comparative evaluation. Journal of Functional Foods, 20, pp.108-
121.

Grassino, A. N., Brnčić, M., Vikić-Topić, D., Roca, S., Dent, M., & Brnčić, S. R., 2016.
Ultrasound assisted extraction and characterization of pectin from tomato waste.
Food chemistry, 198, 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.11.095 .

Karbuz, P., Tugrul, N. Microwave and ultrasound assisted extraction of pectin from
various fruits peel. J Food Sci Technol 58, 641–650 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04578-0.

Knight, R.J. & Campbell, R.J. & Maguire, I., 2009. Important mango cultivars and their
descriptors. The Mango, 2nd Edition: Botany, Production and Uses. 42-66.
10.1079/9781845934897.0042.

Kumar, A & Chauhan, G., 2010. Extraction and characterization of pectin from apple
pomace and its evaluation as lipase (steapsin) inhibitor. Carbohydrate Polymers.
82. 454-459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.05.001.

Malviya, R., & Kulkarni, G. T., 2012. Extraction and characterization of mango peel
pectin as pharmaceutical excipient. Polimery w medycynie, 42(3-4), 185–190.

Maran, J.P., Swathi, K., Jeevitha, P., Jayalakshmi, J. and Ashvini, G., 2015. Microwave-
assisted extraction of pectic polysaccharide from waste mango peel.
Carbohydrate polymers, 123, pp.67-71.

Mohsen G, et al., 2021. Emerging technologies to obtain pectin from food processing
by-products: A strategy for enhancing resource efficiency. Trends in Food
Sciences, pp.42-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2021.06.018 .

Morton, J., 1987, Mango. Fruits of warm climates.

https://hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/morton/mango_ars.html .
Patil, P., Patil, S., Kelkar, R., Patil, N., Pise, P. & Nadar, S., 2021. Enzyme-assisted
supercritical fluid extraction: An integral approach to extract bioactive
compounds. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 116.
10.1016/j.tifs.2021.07.032.

Russell, A.E., Laird, D.A. and Mallarino, A.P., 2006. Nitrogen fertilization and cropping
system impacts on soil quality in Midwestern Mollisols. Soil Science Society of
America Journal, 70(1), pp.249-255.

Rymbai, H & Srivastav, M & Sharma, R. & Patel, C.R. & Singh, A., 2013. Bio-active
compounds in mango (Mangifera indica L.) and their roles in human health and
plant defence – A review. Journal of Horticultural Science and Biotechnology. 88.
369-379. DOI:10.1080/14620316.2013.11512978.

Santos, H. M., Lodeiro, C., & Capelo-Martínez, J. L. (2009). The Power of Ultrasound.
In J. L. Capelo-Martínez (Ed.), Ultrasound in Chemistry: Analytical Applications
(pp. 1-16). Weinheim: Wiley VCH.

Sommano, S.R., Ounamornmas, P., Nisoa, M., Sriwattana, S., Page, P. and Colelli, G.,
2018. Characterisation and physiochemical properties of mango peel pectin
extracted by conventional and phase control microwave-assisted extractions.
International Food Research Journal, 25(6), pp.2657-2665.

Voragen, A., Coenen, G., Verhoef, R., & Schols, H., 2009. Pectin, a versatile
polysaccharide present in plant cell walls. Structural Chemistry. 20. 263-275.
10.1007/s11224-009-9442-z.

Voragen, A., Schols, H., & Visser, R., 2003. Advances in Pectin and Pectinase
Research. Springer Science & Business Media. 140201144X, 9781402011443.

Wikiera, A., Mika, M., Grabacka, M. (2015). Multicatalytic enzyme preparations as

effective alternative to acid in pectin extraction. Food Hydrocolloids, 44, 151-161.

Worsfold P. J., Poole C., Townshend, A., Miró, M., 2019. Encyclopedia of Analytical
Science. ISBN 978-0-08-101984-9. Imprint Elsevier.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-101983-2.11001-1 .
APPENDIX
Appendix I: Datasets 1 and 2
Outliners are highlighted and removed to normalize the data.
Extraction
Mango cultivar technique Replicate Pectin yield (g/100 g DM)
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 1 16.03
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 2 16.68
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 3 16.52
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 4 15.71
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 5 15.66
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 6 15.84
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 7 16.8
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 8 9.25
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 9 16.73
Palmer Hot-acid extraction 10 16.57
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 1 20.55
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 2 21.18
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 3 20.56
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 4 21.69
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 5 22.02
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 6 21.91
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 7 21.22
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 8 21.88
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 9 20.28
Tommy Atkins Hot-acid extraction 10 21.26
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 1 11.05
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 2 11.1
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 3 11.17
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 4 11.38
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 5 10.59
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 6 10.87
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 7 14.12
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 8 10.98
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 9 10.65
Glenn Hot-acid extraction 10 10.86
Dataset 1
Mango cultivar Extraction technique Replicate Pectin yield (g/100 g DM)
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 1 25.15
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 2 25
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 3 25.2
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 4 24.62
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 5 27.09
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 6 24.56
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 7 26.85
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 8 25.58
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 9 25.47
Tommy Atkins Enzymatic extraction 10 25.43
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 1 30.85
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 2 31.27
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 3 30.27
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 4 31.1
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 5 30.74
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 6 31.15
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 7 30.23
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 8 31.14
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 9 30.86
Ultrasound
Tommy Atkins extraction 10 31.17
Dataset 2
Appendix 2

Tests of normality

H0: Data are normally distributed

H1: Data are not normally distributed

P value < 0.05 data, Reject H0, are not normally distributed

Table1 Tests of Normality for extraction techniques of Pectin from mango

cultivars

Kolmogorov-Smirnov Shapiro-Wilk

Extraction technique Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Pectin yield (g/100 g DM) Hot-acid extraction .189 30 .068 .879 30 .053

Enzymatic extraction .260 10 .054 .858 10 .071

Ultrasound extraction .225 10 .163 .848 10 .055

The p-values for the tests of normality in Table 1 for Kolmogorov-Smirnov were 0.008,
0.054 and 0.163 for Hot-acid extraction, enzymatic extraction, and Ultrasound extraction
methods, respectively. Since all the p-values are greater than 0.05, we fail to reject the
null hypothesis that the data is normally distributed.

Table 2. Tests of Normality for Mango cultivar pectin yield

Kolmogorov-Smirnova Shapiro-Wilk

Mango cultivar Statistic df Sig. Statistic df Sig.

Pectin yield (g/100g DM) Palmer .414 10 .000 .541 10 .000

Tommy Atkins .192 30 .006 .868 30 .002

 Glenn .360 10 .001 .589 10 .000

The p-values for the tests of normality in Table 2 for Kolmogorov-Smirnov were 0.000,
0.006 and 0.001 for Palmer, Tommy Atkins, and Glenn respectively. Since all the p-
values are not greater than 0.05, we fail to reject the alternative hypothesis that the data
is not normally distributed. Next, we check outliers in the data set using the box and
whiskers plot

Figure 1 Box and whiskers plot for outlier detection in mango cultivar pectin yields
The pectin yield for the various cultivars of mango (Palmer, Tommy Atkins and Glenn)
were checked for the presence of outliers using box and whiskers plot in Figure 1.
There are no outliers in the Tommy Atkins cultivar while the data number 8 and 27 for
Palmer and Glenn cultivars respectively are outliers. One of the ways of handling outlier
is by removing them if they are plenty or replacing them with the mean or median value
of the remaining data point of the corresponding variable.

Figure 2 Box and whiskers plot for outlier detection in pectin yield extraction methods

The pectin yield for the various extraction methods (Hot-acid, enzymatic and
Ultrasound) were checked for the presence of outliers using box and whiskers plot in
Figure 2. There are no outliers in the hot-acid and ultrasound extraction methods while
the data number 35 and 37 for enzymatic extraction method are outliers.

The pectin yield for each cultivar and extraction method is shown in Tables 3 and 4,
respectively.

Table 3 Pectin yield for each cultivar

Mango cultivar Mean Std. Error of Mean

Palmer 15.5790 .71684

Tommy Atkins 25.8760 .74002

Glenn 11.2770 .32456

Total 20.8968 1.00694

Table 3: Pectin yield for each mango cultivar

Mango Cultivar Pectin Yield (g/100g DM)

Glenn 11.2770 ± 0.32

Palmer 15.579 ± 0.72

Tommy Atkins 25.8760 ± 0.74

Table 4 Pectin yield for each of the

extraction methods

Extraction technique Mean Std. Error of Mean

Hot-acid extraction 16.0370 .80244

Enzymatic extraction 25.4950 .26839

Ultrasound extraction 30.8780 .11741

Total 20.8968 1.00694

Table 4: Pectin yield for each extraction method

Extraction Method Pectin Yield (g/100g DM)

Enzyme-assisted 25.4950 ± 0.268

Ultrasound-assisted 30.878 ± 0.117

Conventional 16.037 ± 0.802

Figure 3 Bar chart of the mean pectin yield for each mango cultivar.
Figure 4 Bar chart of the mean pectin yield for each extraction technique.

Table 5 ANOVA Table for test of difference in mean pectin yield of the mango cultivars

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Pectin yield (g/100 g DM) *Between Groups (Combined) 1951.968 2 975.984 86.197 .000
Mango cultivar
Within Groups 532.171 47 11.323

Total 2484.139 49
Consider Table 5, there is a significant difference in the pectin yield among the three
mango cultivars. Tommy Atkins has the highest pectin yield (25.8760 ± 0.74 g/100g
DM), followed by Palmer (15.579 ± 0.72 g/100g DM) and Glenn (11.2770 ± 0.32 g/100g
DM).

Table 5 ANOVA Table for test of difference in mean pectin yield of the extraction methods

Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Pectin yield (g/100 g DM) *Between Groups (Combined) 1916.208 2 958.104 79.289 .000
Extraction technique
Within Groups 567.931 47 12.084

Total 2484.139 49

Consider Table 5, there is a significant difference in the pectin yield among the three
extraction methods. Ultrasound-assisted extraction has the highest pectin extraction
(30.878 ± 0.117 g/100g DM), followed by Enzyme-assisted (25.4950 ± 0.268 g/100g
DM) and Conventional (16.037 ± 0.802 g/100g DM).