Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Sensory Preference Modeling of Probiotic Shrikhand Employing Soft Computing

  • Full-Length Research Article
  • Published:
Agricultural Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shrikhand is a traditional fermented milk product of Indian origin that is made from fresh dahi (curd). Present investigation was carried out (1) to manufacture probiotic Shrikhand using mixed culture (1:1:1 ratio, mesophilic dahi culture NCDC-167: Bifidobacterium bifidum NCDC-255: Lactobacillus acidophilus NCDC-14), and (2) to compare its sensory quality with available market samples employing a soft computing tool, fuzzy logic to avoid market failure. Trained panel of 16 judges performed sensory evaluation. Importance of quality attributes for Shrikhand samples in general was determined as (in decreasing order): flavor, color & appearance, body & texture and mouthfeel. Observed sensory quality of the developed probiotic and control (without probiotic) samples was better than market probiotic and control samples. Strong as well as weak attributes of each sample were also determined. For developed probiotic Shrikhand, the most vital quality attribute was flavor, body & texture, followed by color & appearance, and mouthfeel. Ranking of Shrikhand samples by fuzzy logic and 9-point hedonic scale was similar.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aneja RP, Mathur BN, Chandan RC, Banerjee AK (2002) Cultures/fermented products. In: Aneja et al (eds) Technology of Indian milk products, 1st edn. Dairy India Publication, New Delhi, pp 170–177

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arazi S, Kilcast D (2001) Leatherhead of food R.A. Food Process J 21–22

  3. Chambers E IV, Wolf MB (eds) (1996) Sensory testing methods. ASTM manual series; MNL 26, 2nd edn

  4. Chakraborty D (2001) Structural quantization of vagueness in linguistic expert opinions in an evaluation programme. Fuzzy Set Syst 119:171–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chakraborty D, Das S, Das H (2011) Aggregation of sensory data using fuzzy logic for sensory quality evaluation of food. J Food Sci Technol. doi:10.1007/s13197-011-0433-x

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chen SM (1988) A new approach to handling fuzzy decision making. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 18:1012–1016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Das H (2005) Food processing operations analysis, 1st edn. Asian Books, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  8. Devshete NG, Hembade VG, Mandwade KG, Burbade R (2013) Preparation of omega-3 enriched probiotic Shrikhand using walnut powder. Int J Proc Post Harvest Technol 4(2):74–78

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dubois D, Prade H, Yager RR (1996) Fuzzy information engineering: a guide tour of application, 1st edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. Falade KO, Omojola BS (2008) Effect of processing methods on physical, chemical, rheological, and sensory properties of okra (Abelmoschus esculentus). Food Bioprocess Technol 3:387–394. doi:10.1007/s11947-008-0126-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. FSSR (2011) Food safety and standards regulations. Gazetted notifications. http://www.fssai.gov.in/gazettednotifications.aspx. Internet document, accessed on 06/08/2015

  12. Giusti AM, Bignetti E, Cannella C (2008) Exploring new frontiers in total food quality definition and assessment: from chemical to neurochemical properties. Food Bioprocess Technol 1:130–142. doi:10.1007/s11947-007-0043-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Imm BY, Lee JH, Lee SH (2011) Sensory quality index (SQI) for commercial food products. Food Qual Prefer 22(8):135–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jaya S, Das H (2003) Sensory evaluation of mango drinks using fuzzy logic. J Sens Stud 18(2):163–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kemp SE, Hollowood T, Hort J (2009) Sensory evaluation—a practical handbook, 1st edn. Wiley-Blackwell, Chichester

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Kulkarni C, Belsare N, Lele A (2006) Studies on Shrikhand rheology. J Food Eng 74:169–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar S, Bhat ZF, Kumar P (2011) Effect of apple pulp and celosia argentea on the quality characteristics of Shrikhand. Am J Food Technol 6(9):817–826

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lazim MA, Suriani M (2009) Sensory evaluation of the selected coffee products using fuzzy approach. World Acad Sci Eng Technol 50:717–720

    Google Scholar 

  19. Martinez L (2007) Sensory evaluation based on linguistic decision analysis. Int J Approx Reason 44:148–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Meena GS, Gupta S, Majumdar GC, Banerjee R (2011) Growth characteristics modeling of Bifidobacterium bifidum using RSM and ANN. Braz Arch Biol Technol 54:1357–1366

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Meena GS, Gupta VK, Khetra Y, Raghu HV, Parmar PT (2015b) Fuzzy logic (similarity analysis) modelling for sensory evaluation of market samples of Kheer Mohan. Indian J Dairy Sci 68(4):326–333

    Google Scholar 

  22. Meena GS, Kumar N, Majumdar GC, Banerjee R, Meena PK, Yadav V (2014) Growth characteristics modeling of Lactobacillus Acidophillus using RSM and ANN. Braz Arch Biol Technol 57:15–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Meena PK, Gupta VK, Meena GS, Raju PN, Parmar PT (2015) Application of ultrafiltration technique in the quality improvement of Dahi. J Food Sci Technol. doi:10.1007/s13197-015-1951-8

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Mitsuoka T (1990) Bifidobacteria and their role in human health. J Ind Microbiol 6:263–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Molnar PJ (1995) A model for overall description of food quality. Food Qual Prefer 6:185–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mukhopadhyay S, Majumdar GC, Goswami TK, Mishra HN (2013) Fuzzy logic (similarity analysis) approach for sensory evaluation of chhana podo. LWT Food Sci Technol 53:204–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Nadaf NY, Patil RS, Zanzurne CH (2012) Effect of addition of gulkand and rose petal powder on chemical composition and organoleptic properties of Shrikhand. Recent Res Sci Technol 4(10):52–55

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nigam N, Singh R, Upadhyay PK (2009) Incorporation of chakka by papaya pulp in the manufacture of Shrikhand. J Dairy Foods Home Sci 28(2):115–118

    Google Scholar 

  29. Prajapati JB, Sreeja V (2013) Dahi and related products. New Delhi Publishers, New Delhi

    Google Scholar 

  30. Rajesh R, Tomar SK, Singh RRB, Singh AK (2013) The role of mixed starter cultures in enhancing the techno-textural and microstructural characteristics of Shrikhand. Indian J Dairy Sci 66(1):11–21

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rao PK, Das H (2003) Fuzzy logic based optimization of ingredients for production of mango bar and its properties. J Food Sci Technol 40(6):576–581

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reinoso E, Mittal G, Lim L (2008) Influence of whey protein composite coatings on plum (Prunus domestica L.) fruit quality. Food Bioprocess Technol 1:314–325. doi:10.1007/s11947-007-0014-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Routary W, Mishra HN (2012) Sensory evaluation of different drinks formulated from dahi (Indian yoghurt) powder using fuzzy logic. J Food Process Preserv 36(1):1–10. doi:10.1111/j.1745-4549.2011.00545.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sarkar S (2008) Innovations in Indian fermented milk products: a review. Food Biotechnol 22:78–97

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Singh KP, Mishra A, Mishra HN (2012) Fuzzy analysis of sensory attributes of bread prepared from millet-based composite flours. LWT Food Sci Technol 48:276–282

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Sinija VR, Mishra HN (2011) Fuzzy analysis of sensory for quality evaluation and ranking of instant green tea powder and granules. Food Bioprocess Technol 4:408–416

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Srinivasa KA, Rao GR, Venkatesh M (2012) Effect of whey protein concentrate on the quality of enriched probiotic Shrikhand. Mysore J Agric Sci 46(4):836–841

    Google Scholar 

  38. Stone H, Sidel JL (2004) Sensory evaluation practices, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Laguna Hills

    Google Scholar 

  39. Uprit S, Mishra HN (2002) Fuzzy multi-attribute decision making approach for development and comparison of soy fortified paneer. J Sens Stud 17:163–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inform Control 8(3):338–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Zadeh LA, Kacprzyk J (1999) Computing with words in information intelligent—Part 1: Foundations, Part 2: Applications. Springer, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  42. Zhang Q, Litchfield JB (1991) Applying fuzzy mathematics to product development and comparison. Food Technol 45(7):108–115

    Google Scholar 

  43. Zhao HL, Li QY, Zhao ZT, Wei XY (2009) Study on fuzzy synthesis evaluation method of yogurt quality. Sci Technol Food Ind 10:041

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Ziemer CJ, Gibson GR (1998) An overview of probiotics, prebiotics and symbiotic in the functional food concept: perspectives and future strategies. Int Dairy J 8:473–479

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Zimmermann HJ (2001) Fuzzy set theory and its applications, 4th edn. Kluwer, Boston

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

First author sincerely acknowledge the faculty members of Agricultural and Food Engineering Department, IIT Kharagpur, India, for their cooperation during the sensory evaluation of Shrikhand samples. He also thanks to the Head, AGFE department and staff of Downstream processing, Food and Microbiology labs of the department for providing all the facilities to conduct this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dairy Technology, ICAR-National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal, Haryana, 132001, India

    Ganga Sahay Meena, Pankaj T. Parmar & Yogesh Khetra

  2. Food Engineering, NIFTEM, Kundli, Haryana, India

    Nitin Kumar

  3. Department of Agriculture and Food Engineering, IIT, Kharagpur, West Bengal, 721302, India

    Rintu Banerjee & Gautam Chandra Majumdar

Authors
  1. Ganga Sahay Meena
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nitin Kumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pankaj T. Parmar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rintu Banerjee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Gautam Chandra Majumdar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yogesh Khetra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ganga Sahay Meena.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Meena, G.S., Kumar, N., Parmar, P.T. et al. Sensory Preference Modeling of Probiotic Shrikhand Employing Soft Computing. Agric Res 5, 362–372 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-016-0221-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-016-0221-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation