MASKING THE BITTERNESS OF STEVIA REBAUDIANA BER. EXTRACT USING NATURAL ADJUVANT AND THEIR EFFECT ON RECOVERY OF STEVIOSIDES IN FINAL EXTRACT

K. SINGH¹, G. TIWARI²*, P.S. NAYAK³, A. UPADHYAY^4
1Department of Plant Physiology, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, 482004, Madhya Pradesh, India
²Department of Plant Physiology, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, 482004, Madhya Pradesh, India
³Department of Plant Physiology, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, 482004, Madhya Pradesh, India
⁴Department of Plant Physiology, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, 482004, Madhya Pradesh, India
* Corresponding Author : drgyanendratiwari@gmail.com

Received : 01-07-2020     Accepted : 27-07-2020     Published : 30-07-2020
Volume : 12     Issue : 14       Pages : 10067 - 10070
Int J Agr Sci 12.14 (2020):10067-10070

Keywords : Stevia rebaudiana, Stevia extract, Stevioside, Rebaudiosides and organoleptic test
Conflict of Interest : None declared
Acknowledgements/Funding : Authors are thankful to Department of Plant Physiology, College of Agriculture, Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidyalaya, Jabalpur, 482004, Madhya Pradesh, India
Author Contribution : All authors equally contributed

Stevia is one the most popular natural low calorie sweeteners used extensively in the food and pharmaceutical industries. The leaves of herb have been used to substitute the sugar to counteract the bitter taste of plant based medicine and for treatment of diabetic person. It is 10-15 times sweeter than sucrose, but its metallic bitter aftertaste after use limits its overall acceptability for general consumers. In order to reduce or mask the bitter aftertaste of stevia extract ten adjuvants were used before hot water extraction (first method) and after hot water extraction (second method) and compared with control (hot water extraction without adjuvants).Evaluation of masking effect was done using organoleptic/sensory test along with quantification of sweet principle (stevioside content) in extracts using two methods. Further, seasonal variation in stevioside content in leaves of along with proximate analysis of stevia and adjuvants were done. On the basis of sensory evaluation, the second method was found more effective. In this method stevia leaves were extracted individually and adjuvants were mixed while leaf extract was hot and kept it for 24hrs before filtration. After that it took for sensory evaluation test. On the other hand in first method stevia leaves mixed with adjuvants (10) and extracted and filtered before sensory evaluation test. In both the methods sweet basil, activated charcoal, wood charcoal, lemon grass and mint leaves were found better in overall acceptability in organoleptic test. Maximum stevioside recovery in extracts was found in sole stevia extract. Mixing adjuvants reduced steviosides (the sweet principle) content in final extract. Using sweet basil, activated charcoal, wood charcoal, lemon grass, mint leaves improved sensory properties of extract without much sacrifice in stevioside content. Minimum stevioside recovery was found in extract with wood ash, tulsi leaves, mint and coffee using first method of extraction. Minimum stevioside recovery was found using second method with Tulsi. December picking of stevia leaves gave maximum stevioside in their leaves than August and April picked one.

1. Puri M., Sharma D., Tiwari A.K. (2011) Biotechnology Advances, 29, 781-791.
2. Crammer B. and Ikan R. (1986) Chemistry in Britain, 22(10), 915-917.
3. Mohammed Abdalbasit A., Gasmalla Ruijin, Yang Abubakr, Musa Xiao. Hua, Fayin, Ye. (2017) Arabian Journal of Chemistry, 10(5), 726-731.
4. Kaubaa M., Roselolo S.E., Sic Zlabur J., Jambrak R.A., Brncis M., Grimi N. and Barba F.J. (2015) Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 63 (31), 6835-6846.
5. Savita S.M., Sheela K., Sunanda S., Shankar A.G. and Ramakrishnan P. (2010) Journal of Human Ecology, 15(4), 261-264.
6. Lemus M.R., Vega G.A., Zura B.L. and Ah-Hen K. (2012) Food Chemistry, 132 (3),1121-1132.
7. Abau-Arab A.E., Abau-Arab A.A. and Abu Salim M.F. (2010) African Journal of Food Science, 4, 269-281.
8. Zlabur J.S., Voca S., Cevi N., Jezek D. and Brncic M. (2013) Journal of Agriculturae Conspectus Scientificus, 78 (1), 25-30.
9. Goyal S.K., Goyal R.K. and Samsher (2010) International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition, 61(1), 1-10.
10. Reis F., Alcaire F., Deliza R. and Ares G. (2017) Quality and Preference, 111, 579-589.
11. Amerin M.A., Pongborn R.M. and Roessler E.B. (1965) Principle of sensory evolution of food. Academic Press, New York.
12. Karishma C., Ennus T., Tamboli, Singh M. and Ahmad S. (2012) J Pharm Bioallied Sci, 4(4), 276-281.
13. Fisher R.A. (1992) Statistical methods for research workers. In, Kotz S., Johnson N. L. (eds) Breakthroughs in Statistics. Springer Series in Statistics (perspectives in Statistics). Springer, New York, NY
14. Epinoza M.I., Vincken J.P., Sauders M., Castro C., Stieger M. and Agrosin E. (2014) Journals of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 62(49), 11797-11804.
15. Katja O.B.S., Jakob P.L., Katharina V.R. and Krammer G. (2010) Proceeding of 4th stevia symposium 2010) Publisher, Euprint, heverlee, Belgium, Ed (s), J.M.C. Genus, 121-134.