Characteristics of White Soft Cheese Fortified with Hibiscus Soft Drink as Antimicrobial and Hypertension Treatment

Abstract

Objective: This study was carried out to use hibiscus soft drink as antimicrobial and hypertension treatment on the characteristics and quality of white soft cheese. Methodology: Functional white soft cheese was manufactured from UF retentate containing hibiscus soft drink at ratios of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10%. Hibiscus soft drinks were prepared by two methods: Soaking and blanching. Characteristics of white soft cheese resultant were assessment. Results: Cheese colour parameters (L*, a*, b*, ΔE, A420nm, C*, H* and BI) were clear increased in cheese samples containing blanching hibiscus soft drink than that containing soaking hibiscus soft drink. Total solid, protein, fat and pH values were decreased with increase hibiscus extract ratio. Hardness of cheese was decreased from 11.80 g in the control sample to 2.10 g in the treatment containing 10% of soaking hibiscus soft drink. Gumminess and chewiness decreased from 8.72 g and 7.41g mm⁻¹ in the control samples to 1.34 g and 0.89 g mm⁻¹ in that treatment containing 10% soaking hibiscus soft drink, respectively. Cheese containing blanching hibiscus soft drink showed low hardness values reached to 1.80 g with 10% blanching hibiscus soft drink. Gumminess and chewiness of blanching hibiscus soft drink cheese appeared lowest values compared to that containing soaking hibiscus soft drink. Results indicated that the anthocyanine assessment (Polymeric Colour (PC), colour density (TCD), tannin contributions (CDT) and concentration of total anthocyanins (TACN)) were lower in blanching hibiscus cheese samples than that with soaking hibiscus cheese samples. Cheese colour was acceptable of that containing up to 6% soaking or blanching hibiscus soft drink while that containing more hibiscus soft drink was rejected by scoring persons. Cheese containing soaking or blanching hibiscus percent up to 4% had gained more score and more acceptability than that containing higher percent of hibiscus soft drink compared to control sample. Total plate count, yeast and mould counts were lower in blanching hibiscus cheese samples than that found in soaking hibiscus cheese compared to the control cheese samples. Conclusion: These results support that the application of hibiscus soft drink addition as an antimicrobial activity (food preservation technique) and hypertension treatment in white soft cheese that can be explored commercially to benefit for both the producers and consumers.

Full text

OPEN ACCESS International Journal of Dairy Science
ISSN 1811-9743
DOI: 10.3923/ijds.2017.122.129

Research Article
Characteristics of White Soft Cheese Fortified with Hibiscus Soft
Drink as Antimicrobial and Hypertension Treatment
1A.F. Farrag, 1Hala M. Bayoumi, 2Wafaa A. Ibrahim, 1M.M. El-Sheikh and 2Hesham A. Eissa
1Department of Dairy, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
2Department of Food Technology, National Research Centre, Dokki, Cairo, Egypt
Abstract
Objective:Thisstudywascarriedouttousehibiscussoftdrinkasantimicrobialandhypertensiontreatmentonthecharacteristicsand
qualityofwhitesoftcheese.Methodology:FunctionalwhitesoftcheesewasmanufacturedfromUFretentatecontaininghibiscussoft
drinkatratiosof0,2,4,6,8and10%.Hibiscussoftdrinkswerepreparedbytwomethods:Soakingandblanching.Characteristicsofwhite
softcheeseresultantwereassessment.Results:Cheesecolourparameters(L*,a*,b*,)E,A420nm,C*,H*andBI)wereclearincreasedin
cheesesamplescontainingblanchinghibiscussoftdrinkthanthatcontainingsoakinghibiscussoftdrink.Totalsolid,protein,fatandpH
valuesweredecreasedwithincreasehibiscusextractratio.Hardnessofcheesewasdecreasedfrom11.80ginthecontrolsampleto
2.10ginthetreatmentcontaining10%ofsoakinghibiscussoftdrink.Gumminessandchewinessdecreasedfrom8.72gand7.41gmmG1
inthecontrolsamplesto1.34gand0.89gmmG1inthattreatmentcontaining10%soakinghibiscussoftdrink,respectively.Cheese
containing blanching hibiscus soft drink showed low hardness values reached to 1.80  g with 10% blanching hibiscus soft drink.
Gumminessandchewinessofblanchinghibiscussoftdrinkcheeseappearedlowestvaluescomparedtothatcontainingsoakinghibiscus
softdrink.Resultsindicatedthattheanthocyanineassessment(PolymericColour(PC),colourdensity(TCD),tannincontributions(CDT)
andconcentrationoftotalanthocyanins(TACN))werelowerinblanchinghibiscuscheesesamplesthanthatwithsoakinghibiscuscheese
samples.Cheesecolourwasacceptableofthatcontainingupto6%soakingorblanchinghibiscussoftdrinkwhilethatcontainingmore
hibiscussoftdrinkwasrejectedbyscoringpersons.Cheesecontainingsoakingorblanchinghibiscuspercentupto4%hadgainedmore
scoreandmoreacceptabilitythanthatcontaininghigherpercentofhibiscussoftdrinkcomparedtocontrolsample.Totalplatecount,
yeastandmouldcountswerelowerinblanchinghibiscuscheesesamplesthanthatfoundinsoakinghibiscuscheesecomparedtothe
controlcheesesamples.Conclusion:Theseresultssupportthattheapplicationofhibiscussoftdrinkadditionasanantimicrobial
activity(foodpreservationtechnique)andhypertensiontreatmentinwhitesoftcheesethatcanbeexploredcommerciallytobenefitfor
boththeproducersandconsumers.
Keywords: Whitesoftcheese,hibiscusextract,textureproperties,cheesecolour,anthocyanines,antimicrobialeffect
Received: August16,2016 Accepted: October28,2016 Published: February15,2017
Citation: A.F.Farrag, HalaM. Bayoumi,WafaaA. Ibrahim,M.M.El-SheikhandHeshamA.Eissa,2017. Characteristicsofwhitesoftcheesefortifiedwith
hibiscussoftdrinkasantimicrobialandhypertensiontreatment.Int.J.DairySci.,12:122-129.
CorrespondingAuthor: A.F.Farrag,DepartmentofDairy,NationalResearchCentre,Dokki,Cairo,Egypt
Copyright: ©2017A.F.Farrag
etal
.ThisisanopenaccessarticledistributedunderthetermsofthecreativecommonsattributionLicense,whichpermits
unrestricteduse,distributionandreproductioninanymedium,providedtheoriginalauthorandsourcearecredited.
CompetingInterest: Theauthorshavedeclaredthatnocompetinginterestexists.
DataAvailability: Allrelevantdataarewithinthepaperanditssupportinginformationfiles.

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
INTRODUCTION
Cheeseisadairy product thathasplayeda key rolein
humannutritionforcenturies.Whitesoftcheeseisthemost
popularvarietiesofcheeseavailableinlargequantitiesonthe
marketsofEgypt.Themainobjectivehasalwaysbeenandstill
istoconvertmilkintoaproductwithalongershelflifewhilst
preservingmostofitsnutrients1.
Today's, the current consumerʼs interest towards
functional products that contributeto decrease risks of
diseasesso,thereisagrowingmarketforfoodscontaining
probioticbacteriaandsaleshaveincreasedfrom7-32%each
year as a function of products and geographical regions2.
Recently,consumers expect theirfoodtobehealthy andto
prevent illness as they are increasingly interested in their
personal health3. Many documents tries to clarify the
improvingqualityofwhite cheese usingdifferentadditives
likelime and grapefruit4, cinnamon andthyme5, cranberry
fruitextract6,lupinmilk7andsoyprotein8.
Hibiscus (
Hibiscus sabdariffa
) is originally cultivated
throughout tropical and subtropical regions, especially in
Egypt,Sudan,ThailandandChina.Hibiscusalsoisknownas
karkade,redtea,redsorrel,Jamaicasorrel,rosella,soborodo
(Zobo drink), karkadi, roselle and sour tea9,10. The karkade
flowersprovideasoftdrink,highlyappreciated all over the
world for the particular sensation of freshness conveyed.
Karkade based products are used in popular medicine to
obtain an anti-hypertensive effect11 as well as to prevent
cardiovascularandhepaticdiseases.Also,hibiscuspetalsare
potentially a good source of antioxidant agents as
anthocyaninsandascorbicacid12.HibiscusAnthocyanins(HAs)
isagroupofnaturalpigmentsoccurringinthedriedflowers
whichisalocalbeveragematerialand  medical herb13.
Chen
et al
.14 showed that the karkade may be effective
againstlow-densitylipoproteinoxidationandhyperlipidemia.
Moreover,soakedhibiscusinwater(coldextraction)isableto
preservevitamin C ofhibiscus, whichis auseful partner of
polyphenolsintheirangio-protectiveactivity.Polyphenols
aregeneral constituents  of plant-derived foodssuchas
hibiscusandaretheprincipalantioxidantinthehuman
diet.  They  show  a  variety  of  biochemical  activities,
includingantioxidant,apoptosis,antiaging,anticancer,
anti-inflammation, anti-atherosclerosis, cardiovascular
protectionandendothelialfunctionenhancingactivities,as
well as angiogenesis inhibition and cell proliferation
activities15.
Also,hibiscuspigmentsmayplayaroleintheprevention
ofoxidativedamageinlivingsystems.However,anthocyanin
andPolymericColourAnthocyanine(PCA)havebeenshown
tohave antioxidant activityand to offerprotection against
atherosclerosisandcancer16,DNAisavitalmoleculeinthecell
activitiesandwasthemaintargetforchemicalsinducedcell
injury.Thecommercialpigmentorcolouringagenthasbeen
implicatedinseveralclinicalconditionsbutmostexperimental
workhasconcentratedonchildhoodhyperactivity,articaria,
asthma17.
Thepurpose of thisstudy is conductedto identifythe
effectofhibiscussoftdrinkasantimicrobialandhypertension
treatment onthe characteristics and quality of white soft
cheese.
MATERIALSANDMETHODS
Plantmaterialandhibiscussoftdrinkpreparation:
Freshcalycesof
Hibiscus sabdariffa
Linn.(Malvaceae)was
purchased from the Ministry  of Agriculture, Egypt and
shade-driedundersunnyconditionsatambienttemperatures.
The dried
Hibiscus sabdariffa
 calices were ready to use in
produceoftraditionalhibiscusflowersoftdrinkorbeverage.
Hibiscussoftdrinkpreparation
Blanching-hibiscussoftdrink:Adecoctionof
blanching-hibiscusflowersoftdrinkwaspreparedasfollow:
Boiling50gofdried calycesof
Hibiscussabdariffa
Linn., at
100ECfor5min with about 1000mLofdistilled water and
then rapidly filtered through a Buchner funnel and filled
accordingto thecalibratedvolumeglassbottles(1000mL).
Thismaterial(50g)wasextractedtwicewithwaterfor5min
at100ECandtheextractthenwasre-dissolvedin1Lof
drinkablewater.Thetraditionalblanchinghibiscusdrink
wasstoredatrefrigeratortemperature(4EC)untilused10.
Soaking-hibiscussoftdrink:Adecoctionofsoakinghibiscus
flowersoftdrinkwaspreparedasfollow:Soaking50gofdried
calyces of
Hibiscus sabdariffa
 Linn. in about 1000 mL of
distilledwateratroomtemperature25ECfor12handeach
extractwasrapidlyfilteredthroughaBuchnerfunnelandfilled
accordingtothecalibratedvolumeglassbottles(1000mL).
The traditional soaking hibiscus soft drink was stored at
refrigeratortemperature(4EC)untilused10.
White softcheesemanufacture:  Milk retentate was
obtainedfromDairyIndustryUnit,AnimalProduction
ResearchInstitute,MinistryofAgriculture,Dokki,Cairo,Egypt.
Theaveragechemicalcompositionofmilkretentatewas:
Totalsolids = 32.44%
Proteins = 13.76%
Fat = 14.00%
Lactose = 4.10%
pH = 6.80
123

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
Table1:Hibiscusratiosfortifiedtotheretentate
Ratios/Treatments Retentateratio Hibiscussoftdrinkratio Total
Control 100 0 100
1 98 2 100
2 96 4 100
3 94 6 100
4 92 8 100
5 90 10 100
Cheesemanufacture:Milkretentatewassaltedatratioof3%
withsodiumchloride(NaCl).Saltedretentatewasheatedto
72ECfor15 sec and then cooledimmediatelyto43EC.The
retentate was divided to several portions to fortify it with
hibiscussoftdrinkaccordingtothefollowingratios,asseen
inTable1.
Cheese manufacture was done according to that
describedbyFoda
etal
.18.Previous prepared milkretentate
wererennetingatabout42ECandthenpouredatplasticcups,
incubating for 30 min to complete coagulation. After
coagulationalltreatmentswerekeptinrefrigerator5EC±2.
Alltreatmentswerereplicate3times.
Methodsofanalysis:Thecheesesampleswereanalysed
formoistureandfatasdescribedbyAOAC19.Tota lnitr ogen
as described in IDF standard20. Lactose was determined
according to Barnett andTawab21.ThepHvaluewas
measuredusingalaboratorypHmeterwithglasselectrode.
Texture profile of white soft cheese: The Texture Profile
Analysis(TPA)ofwhitesoftcheesewasperformedusing
multitest1-dtextureanalyzer,mecmesinlimited,Slinfold,
WestSussex,UKaccordingtothemethodofEl-Aziz
etal
.22.
Experiments were carried out by a compression test that
generatedaplotofforce(N)versustime(sec).Samples
weredoublecompressedatacompressionspeedof
2cmminG1.Theanalysiswascarriedoutat10EC.Hardness(g),
springiness(mm),chewiness (gmmG1),gumminess(g) and
cohesiveness were calculated from the obtained TPA
accordingtothedefinitiongivenbytheInternationalDairy
Federation(IDF)23.
Colour characteristics and parameters determinations:
Huntera*,b*andL*parametersweremeasuredwithacolour
differencemeterorthecolourofwhite soft cheesefortified
with different ratios of soaked and blanched hibiscus soft
drinkwasmeasuredusingaspectro-colourimeter(Tristimulus
colourmachine)withtheCIElab.,colourscale(Hunter,Lab.,
Scan XE-reston VA, USA) in the reflection mode. The
instrument was standardized each time with white tile of
HunterLab.,colourstandard(LXNo.16379):X=72.26,
Y=81.94andZ= 88.14(L*=92.46,a*=-0.86,b* =-0.16)24.
Colourdifference,deltaEwascalculatedfroma*,b*andL*
parameters,usingHunter-Scotfieldʼsequation25asfollows:
Delta E = (delta a2+delta b2+delta L2)1/2
where,a-ao,b-boandL-Lo;"o"indicatescolourofcontrolor
untreatedsample.
TheHue(H)*,Chroma(C)*andBrowningIndex(BI)was
calculatedaccordingtothemethodofPalou
etal
.26asfollows:
(1)
b
*
H* = tan-1 a*
C* = Square root of [a2*+b2*] (2)
BI = [100 (x-0.31)] 10.72 (3)
Where:
(a*+1.75L*)
X = (5.645L*+a*-3.012b*)
Pigmentandanthocyaninanalyses:PolymericColour(PC),
colour density (TCD) and tannin contributions (CDT) were
determinedusingspectralmethodsdescribedby
Spayd
etal
.27.ForTotalColourDensity(TCD),a2mLsample
wasdiluted2mLdistilledwaterandabsorbance420,515
(at the absorbance maximum) and 700 nm on the
spectrophotometer.TheTCDwascalculatedasfollows:
TCD = (A420+A515)-2 (A700)(4)
ForPolymericColour(PC),a2mLsamplewastreatedwith
2 mL 20% K2S2O5. Samples were held 1 h at 20EC under
commerciallightprior to measurement of absorbance420,
515and700nm.Polymericcolourwascalculatedasfollows:
PC = (A420+A515)-2(A700)(5)
Percentofcolourduetotannin(%CDT)wascalculatedas:
(6)
PC
CDT (%) = 100
TCD 
Concentration of total anthocyanins (TACN) was
determinedbythepHdifferentialmethodasdescribed
byWrolstad
28.Absorbancewasmeasuredinthe
spectrophotometerat515andat700nminbufferpH
1.00andpH4.50,usingA=(A515-A700 )pH1.00-(A515-A700)
pH4.50.Resultswereexpressedasmilligramsof
cyanidin-3-glucosideequivalentperliteroffreshweightusing
anextinction coefficient of29600and molecular weightof
445.2gmolG1.
124

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
Microbiologicalevaluation:Whitesoftcheesefortifiedwith
differentratiosofsoakedandblanchedhibiscussoftdrinkwas
determinedintriplicatefortotalaerobicbacteriaandyeast
and moulds according to FDA29. Untreated and treated
sampleswereseriallydilutedwith0.1%peptone(DIFCOLabs.,
Detroit, MI) and pour-plated in duplicate. Total aerobic
bacteria counts: One milliliter aliquot of each sample was
plated using a plate count agar medium (Merck KGaA,
Darmstadt,Germany)andincubated at 35-37EC for 48 h to
counting. Yeast and moulds  (Y  and M) were determined
usingmaltextract agar(MerckKGaA,Darmstadt, Germany)
after incubation  at  25ECfor3days.Thenumberof
colonies (total aerobic bacteria or yeast and moulds) that
appearedon the plateswas countedand expressedas log
colonyformingunitpermilliliterorlogCFUmLG1.
Sensoryevaluation:TheUFsoftcheesefortifiedwithhibiscus
softdrinkwerescoredfororganolepticpropertiesbyataste
panel of 15 persons for National Research Centre staff as
describedbyIsmail30.Thepanelistsscoredthecheeseflavour
(outof50 points), body  andtexture (out of35points) and
appearanceandcolour(outof15points).
Statistical analysis: Mean values from the three separate
experimentsorreplicateanalysiswerereported.Theobtained
resultswereanalyzedstatisticallyusingStandardDeviations
(n=3)andaverageasdescribedbyRichardandGouri31.
RESULTSANDDISCUSSION
Chemical composition: Table 2 shows the chemical
compositionoffreshwhitesoftcheesefortifiedwithdifferent
ratiosofsoakedorblanchedhibiscussoftdrink.Totalsolids,
proteinand fat contentswere decreasedwith increase the
ratioofhibiscussoftdrinkfortification.Thesedecreasedueto
decreaseofhibiscussoftdrinktotalsolidcontents.Also,pHs
decreased from 6.80 in the control sample to 5.87 of that
containing10%soakedhibiscussoftdrink.ThepHscontinued
tomoredecreasefrom6.62-5.76withblanchedhibiscussoft
drinkinthesameorder.Thiscanbeattributedtotheacidityof
hibiscussoftdrinkfortificationused.
Textureprofile:Thedatameasuredbythetextureanalyzer
areshowninTable3.Hardnessofthehibiscuscheesesamples
decreased with the increasing the ratio of hibiscus
fortification.Hardnessofcontrolsampleappearedhardnessof
11.80 g decreased to 8.20 g with that fortified 2% soaked
hibiscussoftdrinkand decreasedsharplyto2.10 g with 10
soakedhibiscussoftdrinkwhilethecheesefortifiedwith
Table2: Chemicalcompositionofwhitesoftcheesefortifiedwithsoakedand
blanchedhibiscussoftdrink
Test/Treatment pH TS TP Fat
Soakedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 6.80 35.66 13.95 14.2
1 6.50 35.04 13.46 13.5
2 6.31 34.29 12.54 12.7
3 6.11 33.86 12.12 12.2
4 5.95 33.22 11.76 12.0
5 5.87 32.79 11.31 11.5
Blanchedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 6.62 35.34 13.11 13.2
1 6.36 36.06 11.97 12.0
2 6.16 34.07 11.24 11.5
3 5.93 33.22 11.03 11.2
4 5.71 32.90 10.55 11.0
5 5.67 32.10 10.03 10.5
TS:Totalsolid,TP:Totalprotein
Table3: Textural prop erties of white soft cheese fortified withsoakedand
blanchedhibiscussoftdrink
Test/Treatment Hardness Springiness Gumminess Chewiness
(%) (g) (mm) Cohesiveness (g) (gmmG1)
Soakedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 11.80 0.85 0.76 8.72 7.41
1 8.20 0.78 0.76 6.27 4.89
2 3.90 0.78 0.74 2.96 2.31
3 3.10 0.68 0.56 1.74 1.18
4 3.30 0.68 0.60 1.99 1.36
5 2.10 0.66 0.64 1.34 0.89
Blanchedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 10.00 0.80 0.81 7.62 6.63
1 7.20 0.75 0.79 5.54 3.98
2 3.00 0.70 0.74 2.22 1.89
3 2.40 0.65 0.70 1.68 1.43
4 2.10 0.65 0.67 1.41 0.99
5 1.80 0.60 0.60 1.19 0.83
blanchedhibiscussoftdrinkshowedmorelowerhardnessof
7.20gwith2%blanchedhibiscussoftdrinkandreachedto
1.80g with thatcontain 10%blanched hibiscussoft drink.
Approximately, no differences in the springiness or
cohesivenessofcheesefortifiedwith2or4%soakedhibiscus
soft drink. Gumminess or chewiness of cheese samples
decreased with increasing the ratios of hibiscus soft drink.
Cheesefortifiedwithblanchedhibiscussoftdrinkappeared
lowervaluesofgumminessandchewinessof5.54gand
3.98gmmG1at2%fortificationwhichdecreasedto2.22gand
1.89gmmG1at4%fortificationandreachedto1.19gand
0.83 g mmG1 at 10% fortificationcompared to that cheese
fortifiedwithsoakedhibiscussoftdrink.Theresultsclearthat
thecheese fortificationbysoakedorblanchedhibiscussoft
drinkledtodecreaseofcheesetextureparametersvalues.
Colourcharacteristics,pigmentandanthocyanincontents
ofwhitesoftcheesefortifiedwithtraditionalblanchingand
soakinghibiscussoftdrink:Colourisonlypartoftheoverall
125

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
Table4:Colourcharacteristicsofwhitesoftcheesefortifiedwithhibiscussoftdrink
Ratios/Treatments L* a* b* )EA
420nm C* H* BI
Cheesewithsoakedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 85.50 -1.24 16.45 83.23 47.75 16.50 85.69 21.74
1 72.81 -0.16 10.58 78.34 28.00 10.58 85.43 18.17
2 70.64 0.76 9.28 75.84 25.77 9.31 85.32 18.80
3 66.97 1.72 8.57 73.60 21.51 8.74 78.65 21.14
4 59.58 2.82 8.36 71.27 13.27 8.82 71.36 26.80
5 60.57 3.25 8.64 70.15 10.02 9.23 69.39 28.31
Cheesewithblanchinghibiscussoftdrink
Control 88.96 -0.48 13.57 14.17 57.57 13.58 87.97 18.49
1 79.73 1.11 10.15 16.56 44.29 10.21 83.76 18.87
2 75.65 1.73 9.78 19.76 38.02 9.94 79.97 20.78
3 64.12 3.12 9.80 30.36 16.24 10.28 72.34 28.63
4 66.97 3.73 11.25 28.38 25.50 11.85 71.66 31.90
5 56.67 5.05 11.26 38.11 24.04 12.34 65.84 42.37
L*:Brightness,a*:Redness,b*:Yellowness,)E:DeltaE,C*:Chroma,H*:HueandBI:Browingindex
appearancebutisprobablyamajorqualityfactorincheese
andsoftdrinkproducts.Colourcharacteristicsmeasurement
directlyinthecheesefortifiedwithsoftdrinksampleswitha
Hunter Lab., Ultra Scan revealed that colour changed in
cheese fortified with traditional blanching and soaking
hibiscussoftdrinksample(Table4).Inthiscase, brightness
(L*-values) decreased, redness (a*-values) increased and
yellowness(b*-values)decreased.However,anthocyaninloss
canbeeasilydeterminedbypigment,colouranalysisandalso
tristimuluscolourimetry.Tristimuluscolourimetryincolouris
avaluable tool fordiscriminatingchanges in colour dueto
both Milard reaction and anthocyanin degradation32. The
results of periodically examined properties of the cheese
fortifiedwithtraditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoft
drinkareshowninTable4.Inthisstudy,theeffectsofcheese
fortifiedwithtraditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoft
drinkonL*-value(lightnessindex),a*-value(rednessindex),
b*-values(yellownessindex),H*,C*,BrowningIndex(BI),)E,
A420 nm (NE), polymeric colour, colour density, tannin
contributionandtotalanthocyanincontentwerestatistically
significantfound(p<0.01)incheesefortifiedwithtraditional
blanchingandsoakinghibiscussoftdrink.
TheL*-valuesweregenerallydecreasedincheesefortified
withtraditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoftdrink,that
isthecolourwastoclearup.ThedecreaseinL*-valuespoint
toincreaseofthecolourwasresultofanthocyaninincreasing.
The a*-values obtained increased in cheese fortified with
traditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoftdrinksamples.
The increase of a*-value may stem from polimerization of
anthocyaninsandbrowning.Theb*-valuesofcheesefortified
with traditional blanching and soaking hibiscus soft drink
samplesmoredecreasedincheesefortifiedwith
traditionalsoakinghibiscussoftdrinkwhiledecreasedinthe
cheesefortifiedwithtraditionalblanchinghibiscussoftdrink
samples.
Theredcolourintensityalsodecreasedcheesefortified
with traditional blanching and soaking hibiscus soft drink
accompanied by the tonality changes from red to yellow
colour(b*-values),astheC*andH*valuesdecreased(Table4).
Inaddition, since theL*, b*, a*,C*, H*, )Eand BI valuesof
cheese fortified with traditional blanching and soaking
hibiscussoftdrinkindicatethatanthocyaninincreasingcanbe
easilyperceived by humaneyesGonnet33.Saturationindex
(Chroma)andBrowningIndex(BI)wereincreasedincheese
fortifiedwithtraditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoft
drinksamples,whileHunterhueangle(H*)increasedinthe
same samples. The )E increased in cheese fortified with
traditional blanching hibiscus soft drink but decreased in
cheesefortifiedwith traditional soakinghibiscus softdrink
samples(Table4).AsshowninTable4,browningcouldnotbe
noticed in cheese fortified with traditional blanching and
soakinghibiscussoftdrinksamples.Forexample,theA420nm
of cheese control without soft drink was 57.57 and 47.75
comparedto10.02-44.29incaseofthecheesefortifiedwith
traditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoftdrinksamples.
Crandall
etal
.34concludedthattwomeasuresofbrowning
wereused,coloura*orL*andabsorbanceat420nmwhere
thehighernumbersindicateincreasedabsorbanceduetothe
formationofbrownpigments.
DataillustratedinTable4revealthatthePolymericColour
(PC), colour density (TCD),  tannin contributions (CDT) and
totalanthocyanines (TACN)were zeroin white soft cheese
(control) samples, while were high in all white soft cheese
fortifiedwithblanchingandsoakedhibiscussoftdrink.Also,
resultsindicatedthattheTCD andTACNincheesesamples
increasedbyincreasingblanchingandsoakedhibiscus soft
drinkratiofrom2-10%(Table5).Approximately,nodifferences
126

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
8642 0
Soaking-TPC
Soaking-Y and M
Blaching-TPC
Blaching-Y and M
Microbial counts (log CFU mL )
G
1
10
Cheese with hipiscus ratios treatments (%)
inthePCofcheesefortifiedwithblanchingandsoaked
hibiscus soft drink. The total anthocyanines (TACN) were
increased to 10.58(mg/100 mL) incheese fortify with10%
soaked hibiscus soft drink but were 9.57 (mg/100 mL) in
cheesefortifywith10%blanchedhibiscussoftdrink
(Table5).Ascendingtotalanthocyanines(TACN)resultswere
corresponding to the results of ascending a*-values by
increasinghibiscussoftdrinkratiofrom 2-10%inwhitesoft
cheese samples, as seen in Table 4 and 5. However,
anthocyanine pigments, being most heat sensitive may
preferablybeusedasanindexoffoodproductquality.
Microbiological evaluation of white soft cheese fortified
withtraditionalblanchingandsoakinghibiscussoftdrink:
White soft cheese is the most widely used cheeses in the
cheesesindustry.Also,hibiscusisawidelysoftdrinkinasoft
drink.TotalAerobicBacteria (TAB) countnumberwas2.36
andtheyeastandmouldcounts(YandM)numberwas
1.46CFUmLG1inwhitesoftcheese(Fig.1),whichwasalready
lowerthanthelegalstandard(lessthan105CFUmLG1)35.
Duringthe processing are used to decontaminate the
microorganismsbutiftheyarepoorlymanaged,theoriginal
contaminationcanremainveryhigheveninfreshlywhitesoft
cheese36. From the results, it wasthought that sterilization
process or adding an antimicrobial agent is necessary to
ensureminimaladversechangesinquality.Figure1showsthe
totalcountsofaerobicbacteria,yeastandmouldofwhitesoft
cheesesamples. The microbiologicaltestswere carried out
immediatelyafter the processing.The viablecounts of the
microorganismsinthewhitesoftcheesesampleswerehigh
(Fig. 1). Fortify blanching and soaking hibiscus soft drink
effectsonwhitesoftcheesewereobservedinthepopulations
of the total aerobic, yeast and mould (Fig. 1). Differences
betweenblanchingandsoakinghibiscuscheesesampleswere
observed,whereas,thepopulationsofthetotalaerobic,yeast
andmouldinblanchinghibiscuscheesesampleswaslower
thaninsoakinghibiscuscheesesamples.
The initial populations of the total aerobic bacteria in
whitesift cheesewere reducedby increasingof blanching
hibiscusconcentrationbetween2and10%(0.98and
1.46CFUmLG1).Approximately,0.48CFUmLG1werereduced
inthepopulationsofthetotalaerobicbyblanchinghibiscus
cheese,whilethesoakinghibiscuscheeseandcontrolshowed
the highest population (2.12 and 2.36 CFU mLG1) in the
samples. A b o ut0.6CF U m L G1werereducedinthepopulations
oftheyeastandmouldbyblanchinghibiscuscheese,while
thesoakinghibiscuscheeseandcontrolshowedthehighest
population(1.33and1.46CFUmLG1)inthesamples.Results
indicatedthatthemicrobialcountsoftheTotalPlateCount
Fig.1: Totalplatecount,yeastandmoldcounts(CFUmLG1)of
whitesoftcheesefortifiedwithblanchingandsoaked
hibicussoftdrink
Table5: Pigmentparametersandanthocyaninecontent(TACNmg/100mL)of
whitesoftcheesefortifiedwithhibiscussoftdrink
TACN
Test/Treatments TCD PC CDT(%) (mg/100mL)
Cheesewithsoakedhibiscussoftdrink
C0000
1 0.044 0.04 98.20 2.13
2 0.072 0.06 78.83 4.17
3 0.115 0.06 52.88 7.51
4 0.138 0.06 46.38 8.72
5 0.158 0.07 41.96 10.58
Cheesewithblanchinghibiscussoftdrink
C0000
1 0.131 0.029 22.14 1.75
2 0.128 0.028 21.88 3.70
3 0.152 0.030 19.76 6.87
4 0.192 0.038 19.83 8.10
5 0.218 0.038 17.43 9.57
TCD:Colourdensity,PC:PolymericcolourandCDT:Tannincontributions
(TPC), yeast and mould decreased in blanching hibiscus
cheese samples compared with soaking hibiscus cheese
samples(Fig.1).
Sensoryevaluation:Sensoryanalysisindicatedthatscoresfor
thedifferentattributeswereaffectedbytheratioofhibiscus
softdrink fortification Table6. Cheesecolour isone ofthe
most parameter affected by the hibiscus soft drink
fortification.Compared to the colour ofcontrolsample,the
colourofcheesefortifiedwith2and4%byhibiscussoftdrink
had judging score acceptable but more percent hibiscus
fortificationgainedrejectedbythescoringpersons.Cheese
fortifiedwith blanched hibiscussoft drink gainedrelatively
flavourscorecomparedwiththatfortifiedbysoakedhibiscus
127

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
Table6: Sensor y evaluation of white soft cheese fortified with soakedand
blanchedhibiscussoftdrin
Bodyand Flavour Total
Item/Treatments Colour15 texture35 50 score100
Soakedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 14.33 33.83 46.83 94.99
1 13.66 33.50 45.83 92.99
2 13.00 33.00 45.66 91.66
3 12.33 32.16 43.33 87.82
4 11.83 31.66 42.83 86.32
5 11.00 31.33 40.50 82.83
Blanchedhibiscussoftdrink
Control 14.28 34.28 47.85 96.41
1 13.14 34.28 47.42 94.84
2 12.57 34.14 46.43 93.14
3 11.42 33.14 44.14 88.70
4 10.14 31.85 41.71 83.70
5 9.43 30.14 40.43 80.00
softdrink.Overall,cheesefortificationupto6%ofhibiscussoft
drink had gained acceptable organoleptic properties.
Increasing the percentage hibiscus soft drink fortification
morethan4%ledtorejectedbythescoringpersonsespecially
ofcheesecolour.
CONCLUSION
Cheesecolourandflavourcanbemoreacceptableand
satisfiedbythescoringexpertswithfortificationbyhibiscus
soft drink up to 6%. Microbial quality was improved with
hibiscusfortification.Whitesoftcheesecanbeproduced
withfortificationbyhibiscussoftdrink asantimicrobial
(food preservation technique) and hypertension treatment
that can be explored commercially to benefit for both the
producersandconsumers.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
TheauthorsareverygratefultoDr.TarekNour,researcher
inNationalResearchCentreforhisassistanceinthetexture
profileanalysisofthecheesesamples.
REFERENCES
1. Ahmed,I.A.M.,E.E.BabikerandN.Mori,2010.pHstabilityand
influenceofsaltsonactivityofamilk-clottingenzymefrom
Solanumdubium
seedsanditsenzymaticactiononbovine
caseins.LWT-FoodSci.Technol.,43:759-764.
2. Fortin,M.H.,C.P.Champagne,D.St-Gelais,M.Britten,
P.FustierandM.Lacroix,2011.Effectoftimeofinoculation,
starteraddition,oxygenlevelandsaltingontheviabilityof
probiotic cultures duringcheddar cheese production.Int.
DairyJ.,21:75-82.
3. Kailasapathy, K., 2009. Encapsulation technologies for
functional foods and nutraceutical product development.
CABRev.,4:1-19.
4. Elhaseen,H.A.,O.I.A.HamidandO.A.O.ElOwni,2014.Effect
of lime and Grape fruit extract as coagulants on chemical
compositionofSudanesewhitesoftcheeseduringstorage.
Int.J.Adv.Res.Biol.Sci.,1:123-130.
5. Saad,M.F.andA.B.Abdel-Salam,2015.Improvementofsome
parametersofwhite soft cheese byaddingcinnamonand
thyme.GlobalVeterinaria,14:830-836.
6. Khalifa,S.A. andK.M. Wahdan, 2015. Improvingthequality
characteristics of white soft cheese using cranberry
(
Vacciniummacrocarpon
)fruitextract.Int.FoodRes.J.,
22:2203-2211.
7. Elsamani,M.O.,S.S.Habbani,E.E.BabikerandI.A.M.Ahmed,
2014.Biochemical,microbialandsensoryevaluationofwhite
softcheesemadefromcow and lupin milk. LWT-FoodSci.
Technol.,59:553-559.
8. Rinaldoni,A.N.,D.R.Palatnik,N.ZaritzkyandM.E.Campderros,
2014.Softcheese-likeproductdevelopmentenriched
withsoyproteinconcentrates.LWT-FoodSci.Technol.,
55:139-147.
9. Morton,J.F.,1987.Roselle,
Hibiscussabdariffa
L.In:Fruits
of Warm Climates, Morton, J.F. (Ed.). Florida Flair Books,
Miami,FL.,USA.,ISBN-13:978-0961018412,pp:281-286.
10. Prenesti, E., S. Berto, P.G. Daniele and S. Toso, 2007.
Antioxidant power quantification of decoction and cold
infusionsof
Hibiscussabdariffa
flowers.FoodChem.,
100:433-438.
11. Onyenekwe,P.C.,E.O. Ajani, D.A. AmehandK.S.Gamaniel,
1999.Antihypertensiveeffectofroselle(
Hibiscussabdariffa
)
calyx infusion in spontaneously hypertensive rats and a
comparison of its toxicity with that in Wistar rats. Cell.
Biochem.Funct.,17:199-206.
12. Ali,B.H.,H.M.Mousaand S.El-Mougy,2003.Theeffectofa
waterextractandanthocyaninsof
Hibiscussabdariffa
L.
onparacetamol-inducedhepatoxicityinrats.Phytother.
Res.,17:56-59.
13. Wang,C.J.,J.M.Wang,W.L.Lin,C.Y.Chu,F.P.Chouand
T.H. Tseng,  2000.  Protective  effect  of
 Hibiscus

anthocyanins against
tert
-butyl hydroperoxide-induced
hepatictoxicityinrats.FoodChem.Toxicol.,38:411-416.
14. Chen,C.C.,F.P.Chou,Y.C.Ho,W.L.LinandC.P. Wang
etal
.,
2004. Inhibitory effects of
Hibiscus sabdariffa
 L extract on
low-densitylipoproteinoxidationandanti-hyperlipidemia
infructose-fedandcholesterol-fedrats.J.Sci.FoodAgric.,
84:1989-1996.
15. Han,X.,T.Shenand H. Lou,2007.Dietarypolyphenolsand
theirbiologicalsignificance.Int.J.Mol.Sci.,8:950-988.
16. Satue-Gracia, M.T., M. Heinonen and E.N. Frankel, 1997.
Anthocyanins as antioxidants on human low-density
lipoprotein and lecithin-liposome systems. J. Agric. Food
Chem.,45:3362-3367.
128

Int.J.DairySci.,12(2):122-129,2017
17. Rowe,K.S.andK.J.Rowe,1994.Syntheticfoodcoloringand
behavior:Adoseresponseeffectinadouble-blind,
placebo-controlled,repeated-measuresstudy. J. Pediatr.,
125:691-698.
18. Foda,M.I.,M.M.El-Sheikh,W.I.El-KholyandF.L.Seleet,2006.
Herbsasawayforimprovingthequalityandprolongingshelf
lifeofsoftcheese.Ann.Agric.Sci.,51:457-467.
19. AOAC., 2000. Official Methods of Analysis. 16th Edn.,
AssociationofOfficialAnalyticalChemists,Washington,DC.,
USA.
20. IDFStandard,1986.Milk:Determinationofnitrogencontent
andcalculateofcrudeprotein content. International Dairy
FederationStandard20A,Washington,DC.,USA.
21. Barnett,A.J.G.andG.A.Tawab,1957.Arapidmethodforthe
determination of lactose in milk and cheese. J. Sci. Food
Agric.,8:437-441.
22. El-Aziz,M.A.,F.M.Assem,F.Select,N.S.Mehannaand
M.H.El-Salam,2012.Theuseofsoyproteinconcentrateinthe
manufactureofUF-buffalosoftcheese.Egypt.J.DairySci.,
40:159-167.
23. IDF., 1991. Rheological and fracture properties of cheese.
BulletinoftheInternationalDairyFederationNo.268/1991,
Brussels,Belgium,pp:1-67.
24. Sapers, G.M. and F.W. Douglas Jr., 1987. Measurement of
enzymaticbrowningatcutsurfacesandinjuiceofrawapple
andpearfruits.J.FoodSci.,52:1258-1285.
25. Hunter, R.S., 1975. Scales for Measurements of Colour
Differences.In:TheMeasurementforAppearance,Hunter,
R.S.(Ed.).JohnWileyandSonsInc.,NewYork,pp:133.
26. Palou,E.,A.Lopez-Malo,G.V.Barbosa-Canovas,
J.Welti-ChanesandB.G.Swanson,1999.Polyphenoloxidase
activityandcolorofblanchedandhighhydrostaticpressure
treatedbananapuree.J.FoodSci.,64:42-45.
27. Spayd,S.E.,C.W.Nagel,L.D.HayrynenandS.R.Drake,1984.
Color stability of apple and pear juices blended with fruit
juicescontaininganthocyanins.J.FoodSci.,49:411-414.
28. Wrolstad, R.E., 1976. Color and pigment analyses in fruit
products.Oregon State University AgriculturalExperiment
StationBulletin624,Corvallis,OR.,USA.,pp:1-17.
29. FDA., 1998. Bacteriological Analytical Manual. 8th Edn.,
Association of Official Analytical Chemists International,
Gaithersburg,MD.,USA.
30. Ismail, M.M., 2005. Manufacture of Domiatti cheese from
reconstitutedskimmilkanddifferenttypesofcream.Egypt.
J.DairySci.,33:247-259.
31. Richard, J. and B. Gouri, 1987. Statistics: Principles and
Methods.JohnWilesandSons,NewYork,pp:403-427.
32. Buglione,M. and J.Lozano,2002.Nonenzymaticbrowning
andchemicalchangesduringgrapejuicestorage.J.FoodSci.,
67:1538-1543.
33. Gonnet, J.F., 2001. Colour effects of co-pigmentation of
anthocyaninrevisited-3.AfurtherdescriptionusingCIELAB
differences and assessment of matched colours using the
CMCmodel.FoodChem.,75:473-485.
34. Crandall,P.G.,J.K.UpadhyayaandK.C.Davis,1990.Portable,
low-costequipmentforsmall-scalefruitjuiceprocessing.Int.
J.FoodSci.Technol.,25:583-589.
35. KFDA.,2008.Standardsandspecificationsbyfoodtype18-1.
Fruit and vegetable beverages. Food Code 5-18-1-5-18-3,
KoreaFoodandDrugAdministration,Korea.
36. Cho, J.M., S.C. Kwon, G. Tu, J.H. Jeong and K.H. Lee, 2009.
Effectofozonetreatment for safetyimprovementof fresh
vegetablejuice.J.KoreanSoc.FoodSci.Nutr.,38:612-617.
129