Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Agriculture in China

ISSN 1673-7334

ISSN 1673-744X(Online)

CN 11-5729/S

Front Agric Chin    2011, Vol. 5 Issue (3) : 407-412     DOI: 10.1007/s11703-011-1120-4
RESEARCH ARTICLE |
Optimization of fermentation technology of hawthorn-pear wine by uniform design and response surface design
Yanghui WANG1, Jianlou MU2, Jie WANG2,3()
1. College of Life Science, Agricultural University of Hebei, Baoding 071001, China; 2. Food Science and Technology College, Agricultural University of Hebei, Baoding 071001, China; 3. Agricultural Products Processing Engineering Technology Research Center of Hebei, Baoding 071001, China
Download: PDF(246 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract  

Uniform design methodology and response surface methodology were used to determine the optimum conditions for hawthorn-Yali pear wine. By using uniform design, the effects of fermentation temperature, sugar content, the ratio of hawthorn to pear, soaking time of hawthorn, additional volume of SO2, and yeast dosage on sensory quality were investigated, which indicated that the first three aspects were of great significance to the sensory quality. By using three-factor, three-level response surface methodology, a prediction model was established in the form of quadratic polynomial regression equation, with the best processing conditions hereby determined under the conditions of fermentation temperature (25.18°C), sugar content (22.00%), the ratio of hawthorn to pear (21.19:100), and the alcohol degree (11.05 (V/V %)).

Keywords hawthorn      pear wine      uniform design      response surface design     
Corresponding Authors: WANG Jie,Email:wj591010@163.com   
Issue Date: 05 September 2011
URL:  
http://academic.hep.com.cn/fag/EN/10.1007/s11703-011-1120-4     OR     http://academic.hep.com.cn/fag/EN/Y2011/V5/I3/407
TermGrading standardScore
Color (20)Clear, crystal, cheerful18-20
Clear, crystal, colored typically for fruit wine15-17
Clear, inclusion undetected, not so cheerfully colored12-14
Turbid, no luster, uncheerful<12
Aroma (30)Fruity, wine aroma strongly fragrant and coordinated26-30
Fruity, fragrant, and still coordinated22-25
Less fruity, probably with other smells, not appealing18-21
Undesirable smell, disgusting<18
Taste (40)Rich, strong, coordinated, and cheerful36-40
Coordinated, pure, and cheerful30-35
Either plain, bitter, sour, or astringent, unappealing25-29
Peculiar smell, disgusting<24
Typicality (10)Typical, unique, and excellent9-10
Typical and unique8
Typical, no so elegant7
Nothing typical<6
Tab.1  Grading standards for fruit wine sensory evaluation
No.Temperature(°C)Sugar content (%)Hawthorn soaking time (h)Ratio of pear juice to hawthorn (g/g)Dosage of SO2 (mg/L)Dosage of yeast (g/L)
11713.865∶100500.1
21715.3810∶100550.2
32116.81015∶100600.3
42118.31220∶100650.4
52519.81425∶100700.5
62521.31630∶100750.6
72922.81835∶100800.7
82924.32040∶100850.8
93325.82245∶100900.9
103327.32450∶100951.0
Tab.2  Variables and levels of uniform experiment of filtered juice
No.Temperature (°C)Sugar content (%)Hawthorn soaking time/hRatio of hawthorn to pear juice (g:g)Usage of SO2 (mg/L)Usage of SO2 (mg/L)Sensory evaluation
1123571069.0
2246103982.8
3369410890.1
448196783.7
5510432683.2
661789585.3
7731025482.6
885271388.3
997518287.9
10109864172.5
Tab.3  Design and results of uniform experiment of filtered juice
LevelsVariables
A (Fermentation temperature)(°C)B (Sugar content)(%)C (Ratio of hawthorn to pear juice) (g:g)
-1211815∶100
0252025∶100
+1292235∶100
Tab.4  Contrast of variables and levels
NumberABCResponse (Y, V/V %)
-1-10
11-107.61
20119.43
3-1-107.92
40-1-18.34
510-18.25
60009.14
71017.93
80009.28
9-10-18.81
10-1018.43
1101-110.02
120-117.86
131109.57
14-1109.71
150009.07
Tab.5  Design of response surface
Variation sourceSum of squaredfMean squareF-valueP-value
Model8.06390.89638.0454E-04
A0.28510.28512.1030.018
B6.12516.125260.103<0.0001
C0.39210.39216.6300.010
AB0.00710.0070.3070.604
AC9E-0410.0010.0380.853
BC0.00310.0030.1280.735
A20.95710.95740.6500.001
B20.00910.0090.3660.571
C20.33010.33014.0330.013
Lack of fit0.09530.0322.7660.277
Residual0.11850.024
Cor Total8.1814
Tab.6  Results of response surface design
Fig.1  Alcohol degree response surface to sugar content and temperature. and represent fermentation temperature and sugar content, respectively.
Fig.2  Alcohol degree response surface to ratio and temperature. is fermentation temperature and is ratio of hawthorn to pear juice.
Fig.3  Alcohol degree response surface to ratio and sugar content. is sugar content and is ratio of hawthorn to pear juice.
Optimum conditionActual level
Fermentation temperature (°C)25.18
Sugar content (%)22.00
Ratio of hawthorn to pear21.19∶100
Responsespredicted valueexperimental value
meanrange
Alcohol degree/(V/V %)10.1110.05±0.1110.16-9.94
Tab.7  Optimum condition, predicted and experimental values of response at optimum conditions
1 Careri M, Corradini C, Elviri L, Nicoletti I, Zagnoni I (2003). Direct HPLC analysis of quercetin and trans-resveratrol in red wine, grape, and winemaking byproducts. J Agric Food Chem , 51(18): 5226–5231
doi: 10.1021/jf034149g pmid:12926863
2 Charoen C, Graham H F, Paul A H (1998). Effects of temperature, ph, and sugar concentration on the growth rates and cell biomass of wine yeasts. Am J Enol Vitic , 49(3): 283–288
3 Constantinos D, Olga L (1994). Effects of pH, sulphur dioxide, alcohol content, temperature and storage time on colour composition of a young Portuguese red table wine. J Sci Food Agric , 65(4): 477–485
doi: 10.1002/jsfa.2740650416
4 GB/T 15038 (2006) Analytical methods of wine and fruit wine (in Chinese)
5 Jin R C, Zhou S T (2009). Uniform design compare with orthogonal design on Astragalus extract active components. J of biomathematies , 24(3):515–522 (in Chinese)
6 Li S S, Xu H D, Li Y J, Yan C (2011). Optimization of fermentation process for onion wine by response surface methodology. Food Science , 32(6): 135–138 (in Chinese)
7 Martendal E, Budziak D, Carasek E (2007). Application of fractional factorial experimental and Box-Behnken designs for optimization of single-drop microextraction of 2,4,6-trichloroanisole and 2,4,6-tribromoanisole from wine samples. J Chromatogr A , 1148(2): 131–136
doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.02.079 pmid:17397852
8 Niu G C, Zhu D, Wang J, Fan Z J, Li Z J (2009). Screening and molecular identification of superior yeasts for Hippophae rhamnoides L. wine. Journal of Chinese Institute of Food Science and Technology , 9(6): 60–65 (in China)
9 Ratnam B V V, Narasimha R M, Damodar R M, Subba R S, Ayyanna C (2003). Optimization of fermentation conditions for the production of ethanol from sago starch using response surface methodology. World J Microbiol Biotechnol , 19(5): 523–526
doi: 10.1023/A:1025174731814
10 Rigelsky J M, Sweet B V (2002). Hawthorn: pharmacology and therapeutic uses. Am J Health Syst Pharm , 59(5): 417–422
pmid:11887407
11 Serra A, Strehaiano P, Taillandier P (2005). Influence of temperature and pH on Saccharomyces bayanus var. uvarum growth; impact of a wine yeast interspecific hybridization on these parameters. Int J Food Microbiol , 104(3): 257–265 15979182
doi: 10.1016/j.ijfoodmicro.2005.03.006
12 Tang C H, Cai S X (2006). Application of the combined use of uniform experimental design and orthogonal experimental design in biomedical engineering. Sheng Wu Yi Xue Gong Cheng Xue Za Zhi , 23(6): 1228–1231 (in Chinese)
pmid:17228714
13 Torija M J, Beltran G, Novo M, Poblet M, Guillamón J M, Mas A, Rozès N (2003). Effects of fermentation temperature and Saccharomyces species on the cell fatty acid composition and presence of volatile compounds in wine. Int J Food Microbiol , 85(1-2): 127–136
doi: 10.1016/S0168-1605(02)00506-8 pmid:12810277
14 Wu Y, Yang Q L, Aikebaier 000, Li J Y, Yang H Y (2009). Study on brewing process of wine with dried jujube from hami area of xinjiang. Food Science , 30(2): 283–285 (in Chinese)
15 Xing J, Li Z G (2008). Uniform design in optimizing waler extraction technology of schisandra chinensis. China Pharmaceuticals , 17(10): 51–52 (in Chinese)
16 Xu H, Xu H E, Ryan D (2009). A study of the comparative effects of hawthorn fruit compound and simvastatin on lowering blood lipid levels. Am J Chin Med , 37(5): 903–908
doi: 10.1142/S0192415X09007302 pmid:19885950
17 Yannam S K, Reddy S P, Obulam V S R (2009). Optimisation of fermentation conditions for mango (Mangifera indica L.) wine production by employing response surface methodology. Int J Food Sci Technol , 44(11): 2320–2327
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.2009.02076.x
18 Yuan L, Wang J, Zhang W, Li C W (2003). Problems in the brewing of juicy pear wine and the relative solutions. Liquor-making Science & Technology , 1: 72–73 (in Chinese)
19 Zhao S Y, Song K (2009). Development of soft pear fruit wine. Liquor-Making Science & Technology , 1: 87–88 (in Chinese)
20 Zhou Y, Xu H D, Mi L F, Cai S (2011). Optimizing the fermentation process for Radix Astragali Wine by response surface methodology. Food Science , 32(4): 293–296 (in Chinese)
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed