| Title |
Effects of Rosemary extracts on oxidative stability of chikkis fortified with microalgae biomass
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Food Science and Technology, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13197-014-1439-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Srinivasan Babuskin, Kesavan Radhakrishnan, Packirisamy Azhagu Saravana Babu, Muthusamy Sukumar, Mohammed Abbas Fayidh, Kalleary Sabina, Ganesan Archana, Meenakshisundaram Sivarajan |
| Abstract |
The present study evaluates the oxidative stability in chikkis enriched with omega 3 fatty acids using natural antioxidant from Rosmarinus officinalis. The best condition for the extraction of phenolic compounds from Rosmarinus officinalis L. (rosemary) was established, and the antioxidant activity was demonstrated based on inhibition of DPPH free radical formation. Nannochloropsis oculata and Isochrysis galbana are rich sources of Eicosapentanoic acid (EPA) and Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Biomass of these microalgae were incorporated in chikkis as omega 3 fatty acid source. Effects of addition of natural and synthetic antioxidants (BHA) on oxidative stability of chikkis were analyzed for storage period of 2 months. Evaluation of peroxide value (PV) and fatty acid profile showed that the process of oxidation slowed down. Natural antioxidant was found to be more effective when compared to synthetic antioxidant (BHA). Omega-3 PUFA levels (EPA+DHA) of 75 and 240 mg/100 g chikkis were observed if enriched with 1 and 3 % Nannochloropsis oculata biomass respectively. Similarly, Omega-3 PUFA levels (EPA+DHA) of 102 and 320 mg/100 g chikkis were observed if enriched with 1 and 3 % Isochrysis galbana biomass respectively. The effects of microalgae and antioxidant incorporation on the chikkis showed that color values remained stable during storage period of 2 months with no significant change (P < 0.05) in texture. Sensory evaluation revealed that up to 3 % microalgal biomass incorporation was positively classified and accepted. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Italy | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 34 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 15% |
| Researcher | 4 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 9 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 24% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 5 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 12% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 10 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 June 2015.
All research outputs
#17,761,927
of 22,811,321 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#874
of 1,439 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#155,658
of 228,280 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#18
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,811,321 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,439 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 228,280 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.