Loading...

Agricultural Reviews

​Effects of Addition of Pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) Pulp on the Physico-chemical and Sensory Properties of Burfi and its Cost Structure

DOI: 10.18805/ag.DR-1685    | Article Id: DR-1685 | Page : 478-482
Citation :- ​Effects of Addition of Pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) Pulp on the Physico-chemical and Sensory Properties of Burfi and its Cost Structure.Agricultural Reviews.2021.(42):478-482
Rahul Govinda Kolwate, Ashish Ashok Uikey, S.R. Shegokar ashishashokuikey@gmail.com
Address : Department of Animal Husbandry and Dairy Science, College of Agriculture, Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Agriculture University, Parbhani-431 402, Maharashtra, India.
Submitted Date : 16-04-2021
Accepted Date : 31-08-2021
First Online:

Abstract

Background: During present investigation burfi was prepared from different combinations of cow milk khoa and pumpkin pulp [viz., 100:00 (T1), 75:25 (T2), 70:30 (T3), 65:35 (T4) and 60:40 (T5)] and the samples were subjected to sensory evaluation, chemical analysis and cost was computed considering the ingredients and processing costs. The pumpkin pulp (as per treatments) and sugar (30% by weight of khoa) were mixed with khoa at different stage of khoa preparation. Then, the mixture was heated till burfi was obtained.
Methods: For preparation of burfi fresh cow milk was obtained from Livestock Instructional Farm, Akola. The milk was standardized to 4.0 per cent fat and 9.0 per cent SNF for the preparation of burfi. The khoa blended with pumpkin (Cucurbita pepo) pulp at different ratios, the product without using pumpkin pulp served as control. The burfi was analyzed for chemical composition (viz., fat protein, total sugars, ash and total solids). The organoleptic attributes of burfi were analyzed in terms of its flavor, body and texture and color and appearance, wherein the total score was out of 100; the judging panel comprised on 5 members.
Result: The total sensory scores of burfi obtained were 87.81, 90.46, 95.46, 92.99 and 84.30 for the treatment T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 respectively. The burfi prepared from various combinations involving use of up to 70 per cent cow milk khoa in blend with pumpkin pulp was found acceptable. The fat content of burfi’s was 19.61, 15.40, 14.38, 13.40 and 12.37 per cent, protein content was 14.89, 12.64, 12.11, 11.61 and 11.04 per cent, total sugar content was 32.78, 36.73, 37.59, 38.45 and 39.31 per cent, ash content was 2.69, 2.55, 2.53, 2.49 and 2.45 per cent, total solids content was 69.94, 67.30, 66.60, 65.94 and 65.17 per cent for the treatment T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 respectively. The fat, protein, ash and total solids of burfi tended to decrease while total sugar and moisture content tended to increase with an increase in the level of pumpkin pulp used as additive. The per kg cost of production of pumpkin based burfi decreased with increasing level of incorporation of pumpkin pulp in burfi formulation i.e. ₹ 240 (100:00 khoa), ₹ 204.51 (75:25, khoa: pulp), ₹ 199.11 (70:30 khoa: pulp), ₹ 194.33 (65:35 khoa: pulp), ₹ 189.25 (60:40, khoa : pulp) for the treatment T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 respectively. The most acceptable burfi i.e. T3 was computed to be priced at ₹ 199.11 per kg.

Keywords

 Burfi Organoleptic Pumpkin Physico-chemical properties Pumpkin pulp

References

  1. Adebayo, O.R., Farombi, A.G. and Oyekanmi, A.M. (2013). Proximate, mineral and anti-nutrient evaluation of pumpkin pulp (Cucurbita pepo). IOSR Journal of Applied Chemistry. 4 (5): 25-28. https://doi.org/10.9790/5736-0452528. 
  2. Aneja, R.P., Mathur, B.N., Chandan, R.C. and Banerjee, A.K. (2002). Technology of Indian Milk Products, Dairy India Year Book Publications, New Delhi. ISBN: 8190160303.
  3. Bhosale, S., Ingole, A.S., Atkare, V.G., Mane, R.L. and Patil, L. (2017). Effect of bottle gourd pulp on sensory quality and proximate composition of cow milk burfi. Journal of Soils and Crops. 28(1): 132-135. https://www.journalofsoilsandcrops.com/ Download/Jun2018/21.pdf.
  4. BIS (1981). Handbook of Food Analysis, XI; Dairy Products, SP:18. Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi.
  5. Chetana, R., Ravi, R. and Yella Reddy, S. (2010). Effect of processing variables on quality of milk burfi prepared with and without sugar. Journal of Food Science and Technology. 47(1): 114-118. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-010-0005-5.
  6. Dar, A.H., Sofi, S.A. and Rafiq, S. (2017). Pumpkin the functional and therapeutic ingredient: A review. International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition. 2(6): 168-170. http://www.food sciencejournal.com/archives/2017/vol2/issue6/2-5-50. 
  7. Dhande, S.S. and Bhosale, S. (2017). Effect of ash gourd pulp on sensory quality and chemical composition of cow milk burfi. Trends in Biosciences. 10(32). 6933-6936. http:// trendsinbiosciencesjournal.com/upload/49-8886_(S_S__ Dhande).pdf. 
  8. Food Data Central. (2019). https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/ food-details/168449/nutrients. 
  9. Fu, C., Shi, H. and Li, Q. (2006). A review on pharmacological activities and utilization technologies of pumpkin. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 61(2): 73-80. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11130-006-0016-6. 
  10. Gomez, K.A. and Gomez, A.A. (1984). Statistical Procedures for Agricultural Research, John Wiley and Sons. New York, pp: 241-266.
  11. IS: 1224 (1977). Determination of Fat by Gerber’s Method, part II: Indian Standard Institution, Manak Bhavan, New Delhi.
  12. IS: 1479, (Part II) (1961). Method of Test for Dairy Industry. Chemical Analysis of Milk. Indian Standard Institution, Manak Bhavan, New Delhi.
  13. ISI: (1981). Hand Book of Food Analysis Dairy Products Part (XI) Indian Standards Institution, Manak Bhavan, New Delhi.
  14. Marie-Magdeleine, C., Mahieu, M. and Archimède, H. (2011). Pumpkin (Cucurbita moschata Duchesne ex Poir.) Seeds as an Anthelmintic Agent? In: Nuts and Seeds in Health and Disease Prevention, [Preedy, V.R., Watson, R.R. and Patel, V.B. (Eds.)], 1st ed., Academic Press. pp. 933-939. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-375688-6.10110-0. 
  15. Pal, G.V. and Gupta, M.S. (1985). Sensory evaluation of burfi using 100 point hedonic scale. Indian Dairyman. 48(8): 422.
  16. Rahman, M.M., Juahir, H., Islam, M.H., Khandaker, M.M., Ariff, T.M. and Nik, W.M.N. (2019). Prophetic vegetable Pumpkin, its impressive health benefits and total analysis. Bioscience Research. 16(4): 3987-3999. https://www.isisn.org/BR16 (4)2019/3987-3999-16(4)2019BR19-526.pdf. 
  17. Ramteke, V.M., Atkare, V.G. and Khupse, S.M. (2018). Studies on preparation, sensory evaluation and cost configuration of potato (Solanum tuberosum) flour burfi. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences. 7(8): 1610-1615. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2018. 708.184.
  18. Singh, T., Pathak, V. and Goswami, M. (2017). Development and quality evaluation of apple pomace incorporated burfi. Indian Journal of Dairy Science. 70(2): 162-166. http:// epubs.icar.org.in/ejournal/index.php/IJDS/article/view/ 55759/pdf. 
  19. Talekar, S.S., Dodake, S.R. and Bainwad, D.V. (2015). Organoleptic properties of khoa burfi blended with coconut. International Journal of Tropical Agriculture. 33(2): 309-312. https:// serialsjournals.com/abstract/60709_27.pdf.
  20. Ware, M. (2019). What are the health benefits of pumpkins? https:/ /www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/279610#benefits. 

Global Footprints