Cider Production from King Mandarin ( Citrus nobilis Lour.) and Its Antioxidant Activity

With the necessity of diversifying alcoholic beverages, cider has become a kind of drink that can fulfill this demand. This is because the cider will be diversified depending on the kinds of fruit that are chosen to be used for the cider fermentation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the ef...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inE3S web of conferences Vol. 428; p. 2007
Main Authors Thien Vo, Hao, Ngoc Thi Bui, Bich, Minh Luu, Chau, Ngoc Nguyen, Thanh, Dang Hoang Bui, Long, Yen Thi Tran, Nhi, Tan Dao, Phat, Xuan Huynh, Phong
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published EDP Sciences 01.01.2023
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:With the necessity of diversifying alcoholic beverages, cider has become a kind of drink that can fulfill this demand. This is because the cider will be diversified depending on the kinds of fruit that are chosen to be used for the cider fermentation. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the effects of dilution ratio, Brix, pH, and yeast concentration on the production of cider from king mandarin ( Citrus nobilis Lour. ), and to evaluate the analytical characteristics and antioxidant activity of the product. After the investigation, it can be claimed that the dilution of the juice causes the ethanol content to decrease, whereas the increase of Brix, pH, and yeast concentration makes the ethanol content increase. However, the proportional increase in the ethanol content with Brix, pH, and yeast concentration has its limitations. Specifically, when the Brix and the yeast concentrations were, respectively, higher than 16 ° Brix and 0.04%, the ethanol content tended to maintain the same. This is also the same when the pH was lower than 4.5. In addition, by using the DPPH and ABTS ●+ methods, the antioxidant activity of cider is estimated to be lower than the one of the juice before fermentation, which is smaller than 3.78 times for the DPPH method and 3.76 times for the ABTS ●+ method.
ISSN:2267-1242
2267-1242
DOI:10.1051/e3sconf/202342802007