Journal of Texture Studies ISSN 1745-4603

TEXTURE QUALITY OF CANDIED FRUITS AS INFLUENCED BY

OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION AGENTS
~ 2, ANDRE
ALICE VILELA1,4, CARLA SOBREIRA2, ANA S. ABRAAO  M. LEMOS2 and
3
FERNANDO M. NUNES
1
CQ-VR, Chemistry Research Centre, Department of Biology and Environment, Universidade de Tr
as-os-Montes e Alto Douro, 5001-801 Vila Real, Portugal
2
Chemistry Department, Universidade de Tras-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal
3
CQ-VR, Chemistry Research Centre, Chemistry Department, Universidade de Tr as-os-Montes e Alto Douro, Vila Real, Portugal

KEYWORDS ABSTRACT
Candying, osmotic dehydration,
fructooligosaccharides, galactooligosacchar- Candied fruits produced with healthier ingredients for obtaining low glycemic index, low
ides, fructose, sorbitol and maltitol, sensorial energy and/or dietary fiber enriched products were develop by substituting the
evaluation, textural characteristics traditionally used osmotic dehydration sugars sucrose and glucose by fructose, sorbitol,
4
maltitol, fructooligosaccharides and galactooligosaccharides. Quality of candied fruits was
Corresponding author.
evaluated chemically, rheologically and sensorially. For all fruits the final composition was
TEL: 1351-25-035-0592;
FAX: 1351-35-935-0480;
dependent on the osmotic dehydration agent used and, in all cases, the final composition
EMAIL: avimoura@utad.pt show that fruits can be impregnated successfully with the healthier ingredients.
Each of the different osmotic dehydration agents significantly influenced the
Received for Publication September 9, 2015 texture and sensorial profile of the candied fruits, but the changes were dependent
Accepted for Publication January 24, 2016 on the fruits, with the texture and sensorial quality of some products being better
Published online Article Accepted on February and other poorer than the commercial candied fruits. For all fruits tested, the
26, 2016 osmotic dehydration agent sorbitol imprinted peculiar characteristics. The
chemical composition of the final products show that candied fruits obtained with
doi:10.1111/jtxs.12177
these alternative osmotic dehydration agents are suitable healthier alternatives of
the traditional candied fruits. Still, only a consumers trial would assess the
palatability of the different fruits/osmotic dehydration agents tested.

PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
One of the main objectives of food processing is the preservation of perishable foods.
Candying of fruits results in a decrease of water activity by osmotic dehydration,
prolonging fruits shelf-life. This process changes the textural and sensorial properties but
also has an impact on its dietary value, due to sucrose and glucose used in candying,
accused for being responsible for various illness. Therefore, the candying industry is
looking for substitutes, those so called healthy ingredients that can be used for
osmotic dehydration and yield products with similar or even better quality properties
(structural, textural and organoleptic). Fructose, sorbitol, maltitol, and dietary fiber
oligosaccharides, are possible candidates for substitution of sucrose in the candying
industry. With this work we aim to increase the knowledge about modifications at the
textural and sensorial level occurring on these fruits after the candying process to
adequately control candying and improve the quality of candied fruits.

INTRODUCTION
One of the main objectives of food processing is the preser-
vation of perishable foods in a stable form that can be stored
for consumption after the production period. Candying of
fruits results in a decrease of water activity by osmotic dehy-
dration, which slows down deteriorative reactions and
increases fruits microbial stability, hence prolonging fruits
shelf-life. Candying changes the textural and sensorial

Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V

C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 239
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
properties of the final products, as fruits and vegetables are
enriched with the osmotic dehydration agent, traditionally a
mixture of sucrose and glucose, this will impact not only its
sensory properties, but also has an impact on its dietary
value (Torreggiani and Bertolo 2001).
Candied fruits and vegetables can be added to foods such
as desserts, confectionery, and bakery products. After addi-
tional drying, they can also be used as components of cereals
or snacks for direct consumption (Torreggiani and Bertolo
2001). Nevertheless sucrose, the main sugar used in candying
industry, due to its nutritional properties has been blamed for
various illness, including hyperactivity in children, type 2 dia-
betes, dyslipemia and cardiovascular diseases (Barnard et al.
1998). In view of this healthy issues, the candying industry is
looking for substitutes of sucrose, those so called healthy
ingredients that can be used for osmotic dehydration and
yield a product with similar or even better quality properties,
namely structural, textural and organoleptic properties.
Fructose, sorbitol, maltitol, and dietary fiber oligosaccha-
rides, namely fructooligosaccharides (FOS) and galactooligo-
saccharides (GOS) are possible candidates for substitution of
sucrose in the candying industry. Fructose is a simple sugar
found in many foods and is one of the three most important
blood sugars along with glucose and galactose. Fructose is the
sweetest naturally occurring sugar and is often recommended
for people with diabetes mellitus or hyperglycemia, because it
has a very low Glycemic Index (GI) relative to sucrose.
Polyols like sorbitol and maltitol, in contrast to glucose
which is absorbed in the small intestine by active transport,
are absorbed relatively slowly by passive transport or diffu-
sion. As a result only a limited fraction of them pass throw
the intestinal membrane. Maltitol is absorbed in amounts of
5075% and his energy is about 3050% lower than that of
sucrose (Dobreva et al. 2013). Control of blood glucose, lip-
ids and weight are the three major goals of diabetes manage-
ment today. Sorbitol is slowly absorbed. Therefore, when
sorbitol is used, the rise in blood glucose and the insulin
response associated with the ingestion of glucose is signifi-
cantly reduced. The reduced caloric value (2.6 calories per
gram versus 4.0 for sugar) of sorbitol is consistent with the
objective of weight control. Products sweetened with sorbitol
in place of sugar may be useful in providing a wider variety
of reduced calorie and sugar free choices to people with dia-
betes (Calorie Control Council 2015).
FOS has interesting technological properties both as a
low-caloric sweetener and bulking agent, as well as a fat sub-
stitute. In addition, it presents beneficial effects on human
physiology such as low cariogenic sugar substitute, nondi-
gestibility and modification of the colonic microflora. FOS
presents a sweet taste and prebiotic properties and is pro-
duced by an enzymatic transformation of sucrose to short-
chain fructooligosaccharides (scFOS), similar to short-chain
inulin, with no aftertaste or artificial. The relative sweetening
240
A. VILELA ET AL.
power compared with sucrose is reduced to 1/3 and the
energy is reduced to 8.37 kJ g21 (Guggisberg et al. 2011).
GOS as functional food constituents play a special role as
prebiotics in gastrointestinal tract. A rapid uptake and fer-
mentation of available carbohydrates contribute to main-
taining the micro biota in the human small intestine
(Zoetendal et al. 2012).
With this work we aim of increasing the knowledge about
modifications at the texture and sensory level occurring on
fruits after the candying process (osmotic dehydration with
fructose, sorbitol, maltitol, FOS and GOS). This knowledge is
needed to adequately control the candying process and improve
the quality of candied fruits, namely with desirable texture and
sensory characteristics, which is decisive for consumer accep-
tance on the market. Candied fruits with healthy ingredients
can be used as energetic delicacy and healthy goody.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Fruit Material and Sample Preparation
Pineapple, orange-peel and citron samples for osmotic dehy-
dration were kindly supplied by the company Douromel
(Tabuaco, Portugal). Fruit samples were supplied stabilized
in a sodium chloride solution (5%) containing sodium
metabisulfite (75 mg/L). Before candying they were thor-
oughly desalted by immersion in tap water for 12 h with five
water renewals (total time 60 h). Osmotic dehydration
agents (fructose, sorbitol, maltitol, and actilight [FOS]) used
were supplied by Brenntag (Oporto, Portugal) and Vivinal
GOS was a kind gift of Friesland Foods Domo (Holland).
For the osmotic dehydration, fructose, sorbitol, maltitol,
FOS and GOS solutions with 65 Brix were used at 60C,
according to the methodology described by Abra~ao et al.
(2013). Pineapple samples were cut into ring slices; orange-
peel into small pieces of about 2.0 cm in length and 4.0 cm in
width and citron samples into pieces of about 6.0 3 6.0 cm.
Water Activity (aw) and Weight Gain (WG)
The weight gain (WG) was calculated according to the fol-
lowing equations:
wsample
t 2 W0sample
WG5 (1)
W0sample
Moisture was determined gravimetrically after freeze-
drying samples until constant weight.
Water activity (aw) was measured using a LabSwift-aw
(Novasina, Switzerland) hygrometer. Measurements were
made at room temperature (20C). The effect of the different
ingredients used on water activity was evaluated by
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
A. VILELA ET AL.
determining the Ks constant, which is supposed to be some-
what related with the chemical structure of nonelectrolyte
solute, by applying Eq. (2) developed by Norrish (1966) on
the basis of a very simple Eq. (3) for calculation of activity
coefficients proposed by Hildebrand and Scott (1962) which
states that for an aqueous solution,
2
aw 5Xw e2Ks Xs
ln c 5Ks Xs2
where c is the activity coefficient of water, aw is the measured
water activity, Xw is the mole fraction of water, Xs is the mole
fraction of solute (ingredient). For the Actilight ingredient,
composed by a mixture of different fructooligosaccharides
(FOS), the apparent molecular weight was used (617 g/mol)
taking into account the relative amounts of the different oli-
gosaccharides present (glucose 1 fructose 1 sucrose <4%,
GF2 (oligosaccharide containing one glucose and 2 fructose
units) 30.38%, GF3 50.18% and GF4 15.69%) (Kr ol and
Grzelak 2006), for GOS an apparent molecular weight of
417.8 g/mol was used taking into account the Vivinal GOS
composition (Galactose, glucose, lactose, Degree of Polymer-
ization (DP) varying from 2 to >4: (DP2) GOS, DP3 GOS,
DP4 GOS and DP >4 GOS) (Coulier et al. 2009) and for
polydextrose a mean molecular weight of 2000 g/mol was
used (Craig 2001). Standard ingredient solutions of concen-
tration between 40-70% were prepared unless the ingredient
solubility did not allow it, and the water activity was meas-
ured as described above. Three measurements were made for
each sample.
Sugar Composition and Energy
For the quantification of sugars (maltitol, sucrose, fruc-
tose, glucose, fructooligosaccharides and galactoglucooli-
gosaccharides) on the final osmodehydrated fruits, 1.00 g
of dried fruit was homogenized (Ultra-turrax, IKA T25
digital) with 50 mL of water. After diluting the homoge-
nate with water to 200 mL, the content was further diluted
and analyzed by high performance anion exchange chro-
matography with pulsed amperometric detection
(HPAEC-PAD, ICS-3000, Dionex). For the analysis of
sucrose, glucose, fructose, sorbitol and maltitol, the sepa-
ration was performed with a CarboPac PA-20 column
(150 mm 3 3 mm) with a CarboPac PA20 precolumn
(Dionex) using an isocratic elution with a 10 mM NaOH
solution containing 2 mM Ba(OH)2. The injection volume
was 5 lL, the flow rate was 0.3 mL/min and the column
temperature was maintained at 35C during the run. For
the analysis of fructooligosaccharides and galactoglucooli-
gosaccharides the separation was performed with a Carbo-
Pac PA-100 column (250 mm 3 3 mm) with a CarboPac
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
PA100 pre-column (Dionex) using an isocratic elution
with a 60 mM NaOH solution containing 15 mM sodium
acetate and 2 mM Ba(OH)2. The injection volume was 25
3L, the flow rate was 0.7 mL/min and the column tem-
perature was maintained at 358C during the run. All elu-
ents were kept under nitrogen to reduce carbonate
buildup and biological contamination. The electrochemi-
(2) cal detector consisted of an Au working electrode, Ag/
AgCl reference electrode, and Ti counter electrode. The
(3)
ED cell waveform was 10.1 V from 0.00 to 0.40 s, then
22.0 V from0.41 to 0.42 s, and a ramp 22.0 to 10.6 V
from 0.42 to 0.43 s, followed by 20.1 V from 0.44 to
0.50 s (end of cycle). The integration region was from
0.2 s to 0.4 s. For quantification of sucrose, fructose, glu-
cose, sorbitol and maltitol, galactose and lactose, a stand-
ard curve was used with pure standards. For actilight, and
vivinal GOS, as these ingredients were composed by a
mixture of short chain fructoligosaccharides plus small
amounts of glucose, fructose and sucrose for actilight and
galactose, glucose, lactose and short chain galactooligosac-
charides, and the lack of pure standards for all oligossa-
charides, the ingredients were used for calibration,
corrected for the amount of glucose, fructose and sucrose
present in actilight and for galactose, glucose and lactose
on Vivinal GOS.
The caloric value was calculated by using the sugar com-
position determined by sugar analysis and the energy con-
version values of the 2008/100/CE Directive. For FOS, due to
the limitations in quantification described previously, the
caloric value was calculated by estimating the amount of
FOS by subtracting the solid content of fruits, water content
and fructose present to 100%.
For sugar composition and energy determinations, three
measurements were made for each sample.
Color Measurements
Osmodehydrated fruit pieces were tested in a Hunterlab col-
orimeter to obtain the a*, b* and L* parameters as an aver-
age of three measurements. The equipment was calibrated
with a white standard (L* 5 97.71; a* 5 20.59 and
b* 5 2.31) and each sample was scanned at three different
locations. From these values, chroma (C*) was calculated
according to the Eq. (4) (Hunt 1991):
q
 2
C 5 a 1 b 2 (4)
Difference between two colors or DE* was given by Eq.
(5) (Hunt 1991):
 2  2  2
DE 5 L1 2L2 1 a1 2a2 1 b1 2b2 (5)
241
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
Rheological Properties and Texture Profile
Analysis
Stress and strain at fracture and texture profile analysis
(hardness, fracturability, elasticity, adhesiveness, cohesiveness
and chewiness) were performed using a texturometer
equipped with a 30 kg compression cell (TA-XT2i Texture
Analyzer, Stable Micro Systems, Godalming, Surrey, UK).
Measurements were performed with a lubricated 75-mm
diameter cylindrical probe. Stress and strain at fracture were
performed on the fruits after osmotic dehydration (five rep-
licates). Test samples cut in cylinders (30.0 mm in length
and 10.6 mm in diameter) were compressed between two
lubricated flat Teflon surfaces. The fruits were deformed at a
constant crosshead speed of 2 mm/s up to 80% deformation.
Assays were performed at room temperature. The force (F)
and height at fracture (h) obtained from these tests were
converted to true normal stresses (rtrue) and strains (etrue),
assuming constancy of sample volume during compression,
using the following equations (Hamann 1983):
Fh0 2 Dh
rtrue 5 (6)
pR2 h0
 
Dh
etrue 52ln 12 (7)
h0
For texture profile analysis a two-cycle compression was
performed on nonlubricated samples. All experiments were
conducted in a controlled temperature room at 20C. The
crosshead was allowed to descend at the rate of 2 mm/s to a
total deformation 80% compression. When the compression
stroke was completed, plunger abruptly reversed direction
and started its upward stroke at 2 mm/s. Then a second
down and up cycle was run on the same sample. All opera-
tions were automatically controlled by the Texture Analyzer.
The instrument automatically recorded the forcedisplace-
ment or forcetime curve. Ten replicates were conducted.
Candied Fruits Descriptive Sensorial
Analysis
Candied fruits sensory evaluation was performed by a panel
of 12 participants aged from 3550 years old. All participants
were experienced in food sensory evaluation. The panelists
were nonsmokers and refrained from wearing perfume and
drinking or consuming foods that could affect performance
in the hour before tasting.
All the samples were evaluated in triplicate in three tasting
sessions, one session per week, from 10.00 h a.m. to 12:00 h.
Sucrose candied fruits were presented as a comparative sam-
ple. Sessions were carried out under controlled temperature
conditions (20 6 2C) and relative humidity (60 6 20%) in a
laboratory specifically constructed for performing sensory
242
A. VILELA ET AL.
tests, with individual booths for each panelist. A sensory
vocabulary was developed over two sessions lasting 1.5 h.
The final vocabulary consisted of 23 attributes for pineaplle
fruits (Supporting Information Table 2S), 32 for orange peel
and citron fruits (Supporting Information Tables 3S and 4S,
respectively).
The panel was calibrated in a pretest where two samples
were evaluated. One with extremely low attributes and
another with high attributes level. Attribute intensities were
scored with a 5-point intensity scale (0 lower intensity to 5
higher intensity). The samples were left at room tempera-
ture for 2 h to obtain a temperature of about 18C and were
presented in a white plate. Panelists were required to cleanse
their palates with a bite of low-salt cracker, a sip of room
temperature water and a small time lag before every sample.
Statistical Analysis
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and cluster analysis
(the average Euclidean distance, method UPGMA
unweighted pair-group average) were performed using the
software Statistica (Stat Soft Inc) 2010. The analysis of the
fruit sensory profile was performed using the spider graphic.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Selection of the Healthy Ingredients for
Candying
One of the main objectives of candying of fruits and vegeta-
bles is lowering the water activity by impregnation of the
fruits and vegetables with solids (Torreggiani 1993) that can
bind water and increasing the shelf life of fruits and vegeta-
bles by inhibition of bacterial and fungal growth (Marn
et al. 1998). The water activity of the traditional candied
fruits is in average 0.831 (oscillating from 0.80 to 0.86, based
in our previously results from measurement of a range of
commercial candied products), so of the various ingredients
available today, besides their functional properties, they
must have the appropriate technological properties to be
used for production of candied fruits. For evaluation and
prediction of water activity in nonelectrolyte solutions the
Norrish equation was used (Norrish 1966). In Supporting
Information Table 1S, there are presented the Norrish con-
stant Ks and the estimated amount of ingredient needed to
obtain a water activity of 0.83.
The values obtained for sucrose, glucose, fructose, sorbi-
tol, xylitol, glycerol are in accordance with literature values
(Chirife et al. 1980; Chirife et al., 1982; Sereno et al. 2001;
Baeza et al., 2010) but the value obtain for eritritol is not in
accordance with that of Chirife et al. (1980) that obtained a
value of 1.34. As far as we know there is no data on the
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
A. VILELA ET AL.
literature available for maltitol, lactitol, GOS, FOS and poly-
dextrose, although the values obtained for these last three
ingredients were calculated based on the apparent molecular
weight dependent on their real composition that in the case
of FOS and GOS contain other sugar besides the oligosac-
charides. Although there is observed a trend in the number
of hydroxyl groups in the molecule and the value of Ks, this
relation is not perfect and this may be attributed to different
spatial orientation of the hydroxyl groups, presence of the
hemiacetal ring in sugars and anomeric configuration of the
reducing end (Norrish, 1966; Baeza et al. 2010).
For eritritol the amount of solids needed to obtain a water
activity of 0.83 exceeds the solubility of the ingredient exper-
imentally determined, the same being observed for maltitol.
However, eritritol was not used because the maximum
amount that could be used was 40 g/100 g and maltitol
could be used in a much higher concentration 60 g/100 g,
although lower than that needed for having the desired water
activity, was still high enough to perform the experiments.
For the dietary fiber ingredients the amount needed are
approximately the same (6974), and taking into account
that polydextrose does not present a sweet flavor it was
excluded. For the alditols, xylitol is the ingredient needing
lower mass to decrease the water activity, nevertheless it pre-
liminary sensorial analysis revealed an unpleasant taste at
this level (results not show). The same was found for glyc-
erol. Also for lactitol the products obtained after candying
did not show a sweet taste and were unpleasant (results not
shown) as its sweetness is much lower than that of maltitol
and sorbitol (Mortensen 2006). So taking these factors into
account the ingredients selected for producing healthier can-
died fruits were fructose, sorbitol, maltitol, GOS and FOS.
Chemical Composition, Shelf-Life and
Energy Value of Candied Fruits
Experimental values of fruits weight gain, % of residual
water, water activity at the end of the osmotic dehydration
(OD) process for the different fruits and OD agents are pre-
sented in Table 1, along with the observation of microbial
growth during storage at room temperature. Orange peel
samples presented the highest value of weight gain for all the
OD agents whereas, pineapple samples presented the lowest
values in the OD agents maltitol, GOS and fructose, whereas,
citron samples presented the lowest values in the OD agents
sorbitol and FOS. Fruits OD with FOS or GOS present, in
general, a higher percentage of residual water and a higher
value of water activity (aw), followed by the fruits osmodehy-
drated with maltitol. These results are in line with the effect
of each ingredient on water activity discussed previously. It
was only in the fruits osmodehydrated with this three agents
(maltitol, FOS and GOS) that microbial growth, namely mul-
ticellular filamentous fungi, occurred at the end of 3 to 4
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
months after storage at room temperature. Two important
environmental parameters that determine the ability of molds
to grow on food are water activity (aw) and temperature (T)
(Marn et al. 1998), the effect of aw on mold growth being
more important than temperature (Holmquist et al. 1983).
For the fruits OD with fructose and sorbitol no mold growth
was observed after one year of storage at room temperature.
As expected the final sugar composition of the fruits was
dependent of the OD agent used (Table 1, Fig. 1). Sucrose
was absent in all the fruits analyzed except those candied
with sucrose and glucose, however, fructose and glucose were
present in very small values, in all the fruits, independently of
the OD agent used (sorbitol, maltitol, FOS or GOS). The low
values of fructose and glucose present are derived from the
natural sugars present in the fruits and vegetables before can-
dying and also from the presence of these sugars in the acti-
light and Vivinal GOS ingredients. The exceptions are the
fruits candied with fructose were this sugar occurs in higher
concentrations and is the sugar responsible for the amount of
total sugars found in these fruits (Table 1, Fig. 1). Also the
fruits candied with Vivinal GOS presented significant
amounts of glucose (and galactose) and lactose, a higher
amount than that present in the initial ingredient used (Fig.
1). This is due to the lower molecular weight of these sugars
when compared to the galactooligosaccharides that increase
their diffusion into the fruit during the osmotic dehydration
process (Panagiotoua et al. 1999). The same is observed for
the FOS present in the actilight, as there is an enrichment of
the lower molecular weight FOS when compared to the origi-
nal formulation (Fig. 1). Due to this different diffusion rates
of the oligosaccharides the amount of FOS and GOS on the
final product is difficult to measured, as different molecular
weight oligosaccharides present a different response on the
pulsed amperometric detector (Koch et al. 1998).
The energy density values of the commercial and alter-
native candied fruits are listed in Table 1. As can be
observed the commercial fruits and fruits candied with
fructose, as expected contained the higher energy values,
in average 251 kcal/100 g for commercial fruits and 221
kcal/100 g for the fruits candied with fructose. The fruits
candied with sorbitol and maltitol ranged second in
energy values, with fruits candied with sorbitol and mal-
titol presenting in average 140 kcal/100 g, showing that
the substitution of the candying agent by these two aldi-
tols result in a 44% decrease in the energy value in rela-
tion to the commercial candied fruits. For the fruits
candied with FOS and GOS the energy value is even
lower, 122 kcal/100g, representing a 51% decrease in the
energy value. For the FOS and GOS candied fruits the
amount of dietary fiber present in 100g of candied prod-
uct represent 132% and 79%, respectively, of the recom-
mended daily adequate intake of dietary fiber (Institute
of Medicine 2014).
243
244
TABLE 1. WEIGHT GAIN (WG), CHEMICAL COMPOSITION, ENERGY AND MICROBIAL GROWTH OF PINEAPPLE, ORANGE PEEL AND CITRON AFTER OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION WITH SIX DIFFERENT
OSMOTIC DEHYDRATING AGENTS*
Sorbitol Maltitol FOS GOS Fructose Commercial
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY

P OP C P OP C P OP C P OP C P OP C P OP C
WG (%) 107 111 103 108 125 118 108 123 100 101 125 116 110 128 120 2 2 2
Water (%) 35.5 31.9 38.3 31.9 35.2 34.9 33.3 33.3 35.2 35.6 33.3 37.0 32.4 33.5 35.3 23.9 31.3 27.0
Glucose 0.94 0.10 0.21 1.95 0.11 0.81 1.02 0 0 15.4 2.74 9.34 0.19 0 0 29.8 22.9 23.9
Fructose 0.93 0.05 0.15 0.64 0 0.27 11.0 0 0.11 58.0 50.0 57.2 0.06 0.08 0.26
Sucrose 0.06 0.08 0.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44.5 38.7 27.9
Lactose 8.56 8.20 6.86
Sorbitol 59.2 58.7 55.8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Maltitol 2 2 2 57.4 54.6 54.2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
FOS 2 2 2 2 2 2 94.6 170 105 2 2 2 2 2 2
GOS 30.7 31.1 28.0
Total 61.1 58.9 56.1 60.0 54.7 55.3 107 170 106 54.7 42.0 44.2 58.2 50.0 57.2 74.4 61.7 52.1
aw 0.820 0.804 0.824 0.881 0.873 0.889 0.888 0.888 0.905 0.890 0.884 0.931 0.819 0.799 0.818 0.792 0.840 0.802
Energyk 150 142 135 148 131 134 140# 106 103 157 106 121 233 200 229 298 247 208
MG** 2 2 2 4 4 3 4 3 3 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

*Final concentration of the osmotic dehydration solution of 65 g/100 g.

g/100g.
Pineapple.
Orange Peel.
Citron.
kkcal/100g.
**Microbial growth in months.
#Estimated value based on the difference between water content and solids from fruits.

Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V

C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
A. VILELA ET AL.
A. VILELA ET AL. HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY

FIG. 1. SUGAR COMPOSITION OF CANDIED ORANGE PEELS WITH A. COMMERCIAL PRODUCT, B. FRUCTOSE, C. SORBITOL, D. MALTITOL, E.
ACTILIGH (FOS), F. VIVINAL GOS (GOS), AND COMPOSITION OF THE G. ACTILIGHT, H. VIVINAL GOS INGREDIENTS
GLC, Glucose; FRU, Fructose; GAL, Galactose; SUC, Sucrose; LAC, Lactose: GOS, Galactooligosaccharides; GF2, kestose; GF3, Nystose; GF4,
Fructosylnystose.

Color and Rheological Properties

The OD changed significantly the color of the osmodehy-
Optical properties such as color, translucency and gloss have drated fruits when compared to each other and to the com-
a great impact on consumer acceptance of candied products. mercially candied fruits. As it was expected, the parameters

Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V

C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 245
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
DC* (chromaticity or saturation) and DE* 5 total color dif-
ference value, present higher values for orange peel samples,
independently of the OD agent used, however, the highest
value is found when the OD agent used is FOS. The OD pro-
cess, independently of the OD agent used, changes the com-
position of the internal fruits solution, making it more
homogenous throughout the osmodehydrated sample,
which leads to more homogenous refractive indexes, pro-
moting light absorption against scattering, resulting in can-
died products with increased transparency (Chiralt and
Talens 2005).
In order to understand the influence of the OD agent in
the fracture behavior of the osmodehydrated fruits, uniaxial
compression tests were performed. Osmotic dehydration
with the five different osmotic dehydration agents changed
their fracture behavior (Table 2). The classification of tex-
tural terms for solids and semi-solids gave rise to a profiling
method of texture description (TPA) applicable to both sen-
sory (Brandt et al. 1963) and instrumental measurements
(Szczesniak et al. 1963). Some sensory parameters, particu-
larly the mechanical ones, seem to be fairly straight forward.
For example, hardness, firmness and softness are on a scale
of resistance of the food to the applied compressive forces.
However, as state by Szczesniak (2002) it is still not known
exactly whether the human being reacts to the physical stress
or to the strain, and how to simulate with instruments the
high strain rates experienced in the mouth.
Hardness and fracturability increased, for all the fruits,
with the exception of pineapple, when the OD agent used
was FOS (actlight) compared with the fruits candied with
sorbitol, maltitol, GOS and fructose, nevertheless, these val-
ues are slightly higher in commercially candied fruits (fruits
candied with sucrose). Elasticity is higher in orange peel,
independently of the OD agent used, with the exception of
FOS. The same occur for cohesiveness and chewiness;
Orange peel presents the higher values, independently of the
OD agent used.
Also the texture parameters stress (rtrue) and strain (etrue)
of the osmodehydrated fruits changed for the different OD
agents (Table 2). The edible part of the fruits and is mainly
composed of thin-walled parenchymatous cells composed by
pectic polysaccharides, cellulose, hemicelluloses, and minor
components such as structural proteins and phenolic com-
pounds (Vincken et al. 2003). Many aspects of fruits cell
structure and mechanical properties are affected during
osmotic dehydration with sugar solutions, such as alteration
of cell walls, splitting of the middle lamella, lysis of mem-
branes, and tissue shrinkage (Mafra et al. 2007; Waldron
et al. 1997).
The complex microstructure of the fruits influences the
candying process, since water and solutes leave the interior
of the cells and sugars diffuses to and penetrates into the free
spaces of the cell structure (Peir o et al. 2006; Quiles et al.
246
A. VILELA ET AL.
2003). Changes on cell walls microstructure are the main
contributing factor to the modification of the textural prop-
erties, including cellular turgor and cell wall integrity. This
change in behavior is probably related with the different
solid content of the different fruits. Krokida et al. (1999)
observed lowering the water content of plant tissues, and
hence an increase in solid content, the larger will be the
needed stress to break the samples. The results show that as
a result of the OD agent, the osmodehydrated fruits became
more brittle and less tough as the water content was reduced
and the solid content was increased, and this may be related
to the reinforcement of the cell walls due to the increase in
total sugars concentration in the osmodehydrated fruits tis-
sues (Torreggiani 1993). Thus, true normal stresses (rtrue) is
higher on citron fruits candied with sucrose and maltitol
and true normal strains (etrue) are higher on orange peel
fruits candied with FOS (Table 2).
To develop a deeper insight of the internal data structure
and evaluate the effect of the different osmotic dehydration
agents used on color and rheological properties of the final
product, a principal component analysis was performed on
the data set. PCA was performed for each fruit separately as
they have a very different cellular and chemical structure.
For all fruits PCA yielded three principal components
explaining >89% of the total variance in the original data
set.
As can be observed in Fig. 2, from the score plot obtained
by representing PC1 vs. PC2 for pineapple and citron and
PC2 vs PC3 for orange peel, no alternative osmotic dehydra-
tion agent yielded products with similar attributes to the
commercial candied fruits. PC2 and PC3 for orange peel
were used, instead of PC1 and PC2, because were the factors
that showed the correlations and accounted for the variabili-
ty in the desired variables that were discussed in the other
two fruits. Also depending on the fruits the most variable
characteristics were different as can be observed from the
loadings plot obtained for the different fruits. The loadings
express how well the new PCs correlate with the original var-
iables and their proximity in the scatter allow to observe
which variables are correlated. In all fruits the rTrue was cor-
related with fruit hardness and fracturability measured by
TPA. The percentage of water in the final products was cor-
related with the lightness for all fruits. etrue was negatively
correlated with the percentage of water for pineapple and
citron, not being observed the same correlation for the
orange peel. Also L* and b* were correlated for orange peel
and citron and not for pineapple.
Nevertheless for the different fruits the different OD agents
did not result in the same set of changes. For example for the
pineapple sorbitol resulted in products with a higher hardness,
fracturability, rtrue, chewiness and elasticity with the other OD
agents rendering products with higher adhesiveness, and the
commercial product having a higher etrue. On the other hand
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
 A. VILELA ET AL.

TABLE 2. COLOR, TEXTURE PROFILE, STRESS AND DEFORMATION AT FRACTURE BY UNIAXIAL COMPRESSION OF PINEAPPLE, ORANGE PEEL AND CITRON AFTER OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION WITH
SIX DIFFERENT OSMOTIC DEHYDRATING AGENTS*
Sorbitol Maltitol FOS GOS Fructose Commercial

Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V

P OP C P OP C P OP C P OP C P OP C P OP C
L* 38.5 40.6 30.7 47.3 44.1 29.8 44.9 45.7 34.0 45.8 39.2 33.3 45.8 41.3 29.6 38.4 33.2 23.3
a* 20.14 0.00 22.50 21.22 4.65 20.96 21.48 6.85 20.29 20.77 1.20 21.87 21.15 3.16 20.69 20.63 3.02 20.26
b* e 13.8 21.5 8.64 12.0 33.2 7.37 17.9 34.6 10.9 22.0 22.5 7.09 13.6 26.7 5.72 12.5 14.0 3.78
DC* (chroma) 1.42 8.14 5.35 0.75 19.32 3.66 5.53 20.94 7.07 9.48 8.67 3.68 1.22 12.67 1.99 12.48 14.30 3.79
DE* (Difference between two colors) 1.42 11.0 9.08 8.85 22.2 7.41 8.50 24.4 12.8 12.0 10.6 10.6 7.44 15.1 6.54 40.4 36.2 23.7

C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Hardness 90.4 92.0 73.9 17.1 78.1 85.7 28.1 114 119 24.6 103 93.0 19.4 83.4 100 31.6 135 123
Fracturability 60.4 72.1 69.5 12.0 41.8 84.6 26.6 127 132 23.2 84.1 82.6 11.6 62.8 90.0 18.2 102 122
Elasticity 0.409 0.522 0.284 0.309 0.366 0.258 0.341 0.311 0.269 0.326 0.526 0.252 0.279 0.404 0.321 0.374 0.439 0.371
Adhesiveness 2152 266.0 266.3 229.5 294.3 269.3 222.5 211.8 237.8 227.0 250.5 239.0 228.3 295. 7 249.0 242.8 269.4 291.5
Cohesiveness 0.124 0.240 0.103 0.078 0.229 0.101 0.084 0.201 0.112 0.074 0.303 0.097 0.087 0.225 0.123 0.148 0.236 0.126
Chewiness 4.58 11.5 2.16 0.409 6.54 2.22 0.807 7.16 3.58 0.595 16.5 1.94 0.474 7.57 3.98 1.76 14.0 5.73
rtrue (true normal stresses) 0.555 0.357 0.587 0.114 0.256 0.750 0.230 0.572 0.980 0.201 0.397 0.728 0.104 0.323 0.764 0.097 0.576 0.813
etrue (true normal strains) 0.278 0.941 0.409 0.293 0.710 0.361 0.408 1.04 0.537 0.375 0.985 0.368 0.318 0.904 0.396 0.846 0.804 0.636

*Final concentration of the osmotic dehydration solution of 65 g/100 g.

Pineapple
Orange Peel.
Citron.
L* is the vertical coordinate of a three-dimensional system of colours, which has values from 0 (black) to 100 (for white).
a* is the horizontal coordinate the values of which range from 280 (green) to 180 (red).
b* is the horizontal coordinate the values of which range from 280 (blue) to 180 (yellow).
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY

247
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
FIG. 2. PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS (PCA) PERFORMED TO EVALUATE THE EFFECT OF THE DIFFERENT OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION AGENTS
USED ON COLOR AND RHEOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF THE FINAL PRODUCT. PCA WAS PERFORMED FOR EACH FRUIT SEPARATELY AS THEY
HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT CELLULAR AND CHEMICAL STRUCTURE
for orange peel the commercial product presented a higher
hardness and rtrue, with FOS and GOS enriched products con-
taining a higher adhesiveness and etrue. For citron both the
commercial and FOS enriched product presented a higher
hardness, fracturability and rtrue and FOS presenting addition-
ally a higher adhesiveness and sorbitol presenting the lower
hardness, fracturability and rtrue. These results show that the
effect of the OD agent on the color and rheological properties
of the final product are dependent on the product itself.
Candied Fruits Sensory Profile
The sensory profile of each fruit/OD agent is shown graphi-
cally in Fig. 3A, B and C. We did not made the sensorial
evaluation of fruits candied with GOS because as the glucose
levels were very high in the products candied with GOS, due
to the composition of the ingredient, if we did it, the flavor
would be certainly the result of the presence of glucose and
not from the GOS itself.
Due to a large number of attributes, graphs of sensory pro-
file were very confused and difficult to understand, therefore,
we grouped the attributes of the same category. For pineapple
samples: Color; Aspect (juicy, glossy, rough and oxidized);
Aroma (pineapple, stewed fruit and, sweet aroma); Flavor
(pineapple, candy, sweet, fresh, cooked fruit and liquor); Tex-
ture (crumbly, soft, fibrous, hard, uneven, crunchy and
rough); Taste (sweet and acid); Aftertaste (sweet, spoiled pine-
apple and persistent). For orange peel and citron samples:
Color; Aspect (juicy, shiny and rough); Aroma (characteristic,
248
A. VILELA ET AL.
citrus and fresh aroma); Flavor (stewed fruit, characteristic,
citrus, sweet, tangerine, caramel, bitter, fresh and rotten); Tex-
ture (stiff, gummy, fibrous, firm, fine, consistent and rough);
Taste (sweet, acid and bitter); Aftertaste (bitter, acid, sweet,
astringent, spicy and herbaceous). The sum of average values
assigned by the panelists for each group of attributes is
marked on the corresponding axis. The sensory profile reveals
itself when the dots are connected. The analysis of the Fig. 3A
shows that pineapple fruits candied with sorbitol (symbol -o-)
presents a sensory profile quite distinct from the other samples
in what concerns the attributes Flavor (pineapple, candy,
sweet, fresh) and the taste/textural/mouth-feel - crumbly tex-
ture, fibrous texture, hard texture, uneven texture, rough
aspect, pineapple flavor, sweet taste, sweet flavor and sweet
aftertaste (not shown in the graphics due to attributes group-
ing). Maltitol decreased the panelist perception of almost all
the attributes and, pineapple samples candied with fructose
and FOS present a very similar profile.
In what concerns orange peel sensory characteristics, the
analysis of Fig. 3B shows, once again, that fruits candied
with sorbitol are very distinguished from the others in
almost all the parameters evaluated, namely: Aroma (charac-
teristic, citrus and fresh); Flavor (stewed fruit, tangerine);
Taste (acid), Texture (firm and fine) and Sweet aftertaste.
However, fructose is the sugar that gives to orange peel more
suitable characteristics (not shown in the graphics due to
attributes grouping), namely: orange peel characteristic
color, characteristic flavor, citrus flavor and fresh flavor. As it
happened with pineapple, maltitol also decreased the
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
A. VILELA ET AL.
FIG. 3. SENSORY PROFILE OF PINEAPPLE (A), ORANGE PEEL (B) AND CITRON (C) CANDIED SAMPLES WITH FIVE DIFFERENT OD AGENTS.
COMMERCIAL (-D-); SORBITOL (-O-); FRUCTOSE (w); FOS (--); MALTITOL (--)
panelist perception, but, in this case, for all the sensory
parameters evaluated. However, orange peel candied with
maltitol and FOS presents a very similar profile. In citron
sensory evaluation (Fig. 3C) all the sugars present a very
similar sensory profile, however, FOS seems do diminish the
caramel flavor when compared with the rest of the OD
agents used and sorbitol enhanced the tangerine flavor (not
shown in the graphics due to attributes grouping).
Some authors have reported that for osmodehydrated
products the most important characteristics are flavor and
texture that depend on the solute used in preparing the
osmotic solution and can generate residual flavor (Brande-
lero et al. 2005). In all three fruits evaluated, compared to
the commercial candied fruits, the osmodehydrated fruits
had differences in flavor acceptance and some flavors are
more or less evident in the commercial candied fruits than
in the FOS, maltitol, sorbitol or fructose candied fruits. As
also reported by Konopacka et al. (2009), the majority of the
sensory attributes investigated turned out to be significantly
influenced by the osmotic agent used.
To develop a deeper insight of the internal data structure
and evaluate the effect of the different osmotic dehydration
agents used on sensorial properties of the final product and
possible correlations between the sensorial texture and instru-
mental texture and distinguishing the weight of each descrip-
tor to the similarities of the studied osmodehydrated fruits, a
principal component analysis was performed on the data set.
Again, PCA was performed for each fruit separately as they
have a very different cellular and chemical structure. In all
the PCAs performed, the first two factorial axes (PC1 and
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
PC2) represent a percentage higher than 70% of the original
variability, so according to Mardia et al. (1979) they satisfac-
torily explain the variability among the samples tested. In
Supporting Information Table 2S, we find the principal com-
ponent loadings for pineapple candied samples with maltitol,
sorbitol, fructose, FOS and commercial samples.
From PCA analysis it can be inferred that pineapple candied
with FOS share a similarity with the commercial candied pine-
apple and fructose candied pineapple, these last two samples
showing the higher similarity, and maltitol and sorbitol candied
fruits being the most different (Fig. 4A,D). In factor 1 positive
coordinate, with a loading value higher than 0.7 we have the
attribute adhesiveness. In factor 2 positive coordinates the attrib-
utes yellow color, rough aspect, oxidized aspect, stewed fruit
aroma, cooked fruit and spoiled pineapple aftertaste (Support-
ing Information Table 2S). This attributes, or parameters, are
the ones responsible for positioning fructose, FOS and commer-
cial pineapple samples in the upper- right PCA quadrant (Fig.
4A). However, maltitol candied pineapple samples are on the
lower- right PCA quadrant, which means that the attributes
responsible for his position are in factor 1 positive coordinate
the attribute adhesiveness and in factor 2 negative coordinates
the attribute soft texture (Supporting Information Table 2S). On
the other hand, sorbitol pineapple candied samples are posi-
tioned in the lower-left PCA quadrant (Fig. 4A), which means
that the attributes responsible for his position, in factor 1 nega-
tive coordinates are: juicy aspect, glossy aspect; pineapple aroma;
sweet aroma, crumbly texture, fibrous texture, hard texture,
uneven texture, rough texture, pineapple flavor, sweet taste, acid
taste, candy flavor, sweet flavor, fresh flavor, liquor flavor, sweet
249
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
FIG. 4. PCA SAMPLES PROJECTION AND PHENOGRAMS OBTAINED BY CLUSTER ANALYSIS, OF SENSORY, CHEMICAL COMPOSITION AND
TEXTURE PROFILE DATA OF PINEAPPLE (A AND D), ORANGE PEEL (B AND E) AND CITRON (C AND F) SAMPLES CANDIED WITH THE SUGARS
MALTITOL, SORBITOL, FRUCTOSE, FOS AND SUCROSE (COMMERCIAL CANDIED FRUITS)
aftertaste, persistent aftertaste, hardness, fracturability, elasticity,
chewiness and rtrue (Supporting Information Table 2S). For the
pineapple samples the sensorial parameters crumbly texture,
fibrous texture, hard texture, uneven texture and rough texture
were positively correlated with the instrumental texture parame-
ters hardness, fracturability, elasticity, chewiness and stress at
fracture and negatively correlated with adhesiveness.
A similar analysis can be made with the data on Supporting
Information Table 3S (principal component loadings for orange
peel candied samples with the same osmodehydrated agents).
From the PCA it can be inferred orange peels candied with mal-
titol and fructose share similar characteristics, and in another
group we can find orange peels candied with FOS and com-
mercial orange peels (Fig. 4B, E). Once again, sorbitol samples
are distinguished from the other four candied products. Orange
peel candied with sorbitol are positioned in the lower-left PCA
quadrant (Fig. 4B), which means that the attributes responsible
for his position in factor 1 negative coordinates are: shiny
appearance, rough aspect, characteristic aroma, citrus aroma,
fresh aroma, stewed fruit flavor, stiff texture, gummy texture,
fibrous texture, firm texture, fine texture, consistent texture,
rough texture, characteristic flavor of orange peel; sweet taste,
acid taste, bitter taste, sweet flavor, tangerine flavor, flavor of
caramel, bitter flavor, fresh flavor, rotten flavor, sweet aftertaste,
astringent aftertaste and elasticity (Supporting Information
Table 3S). Commercial orange peel and FOS candied orange
peels are better defined by the positive coordinates of factor 2
(PC2), attributes such us citrus flavor, bitter aftertaste, acid
aftertaste, spicy aftertaste, hardness, fracturability, adhesiveness
250
A. VILELA ET AL.
and rtrue (Fig. 4B). Fructose and maltitol candied orange peel
samples are on the lower- right PCA quadrant, which means
that the attributes responsible for his position are lower values
of shiny appearance, rough aspect, characteristic aroma, citrus
aroma, fresh aroma, stewed fruit flavor, stiff texture, gummy
texture, fibrous texture, firm texture, fine texture, consistent
texture, rough texture, characteristic flavor of orange peel; sweet
taste, acid taste, bitter taste, sweet flavor, tangerine flavor, flavor
of caramel, bitter flavor, fresh flavor, rotten flavor, sweet after-
taste, astringent aftertaste and elasticity when compared to sor-
bitol candied orange peels and also lower values citrus flavor,
bitter aftertaste, acid aftertaste, spicy aftertaste, hardness, frac-
turability, adhesiveness and rtrue when compared to commercial
and FOS candied orange peels. For candied orange peels all sen-
sorial textural parameters, stiff texture, gummy texture, fibrous
texture, firm texture, fine texture, consistent texture, rough tex-
ture, are correlated with the instrumental elasticity.
Although being a citrus fruit (with similar characteristics with
orange), the OD agents FOS, fructose, sorbitol and maltitol
imprinted peculiar characteristics to the citron fruits. In fact, in
Fig. 4F we can see that fruits candied with maltitol and fructose
share some similar characteristics, followed by fruits candied with
FOS and commercial candied citron and then, again, citron can-
died with sorbitol are very distant from the other ones. On Sup-
porting Information Table 4S are presented the PCA component
loadings for citron candied samples with FOS, sorbitol, fructose,
maltitol and commercial candied citron. The commercial sam-
ples are positioned in the upper-left PCA quadrant (Fig. 4C).
The negative factor 1 attributes that better characterize those
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
A. VILELA ET AL.
samples are: citron characteristic color, rough aspect, citrus
aroma, fresh aroma, consistent texture, characteristic flavor of cit-
ron, sweet taste, bitter taste, citrus flavor, sweet flavor, tangerine
flavor, fresh flavor, rotten flavor, acid aftertaste, sweet aftertaste,
spicy aftertaste and herbaceous aftertaste. In factor 2 positive
coordinates the sensory attributes: characteristic aroma, gummy
texture, bitter aftertaste, fracturability and elasticity. Sorbitol can-
died citron fruits are positioned on the lower-left quadrant of the
PCA output (Fig. 4C), which means that the attributes that better
characterize this fruits are, in factor 1 negative coordinates the
same that were described for sucrose candied citron samples, and
in factor 2 negative coordinates: flavor of caramel and astringent
aftertaste (Supporting Information Table 4S). Fructose and malti-
tol candied citron samples are positioned in the lower-right PCA
quadrant (Fig. 4C) and the attributes that better characterize
these samples are those found in factor 2 negative coordinates:
flavor of caramel and astringent aftertaste (Supporting Informa-
tion Table 4S). In factor 1 positive coordinate there is no attribute
with a loading value higher than 0.7, so, the factor 1 attributes
are not important for the discrimination of FOS candied citron
samples (Supporting Information Table 4S). In factor 2 positive
coordinates we find the sensory attributes: characteristic aroma,
gummy texture, bitter aftertaste, and the textural parameters frac-
turability, and elasticity. The sensorial gummy texture is corre-
lated with the instrumental Fracturability, Elasticity and
Adhesiveness, whereas the sensorial consistent and firm structure
is correlated with the instrumental deformation at fracture.
CONCLUSIONS
The use of alternative osmotic dehydration ingredients for
replacing sucrose and glucose in traditional candying results in
candied fruits with lower glycemic index, lower energy and
enrichment in dietary fiber depending on the ingredient use, as
there is a successful change in the chemical composition of the
candied products. Ingredients able to reduce efficiently the water
activity of the final products, resulted in candied fruits with a
higher shelf-life from a microbiological point of view. Neverthe-
less the use of alternative ingredients also influence significantly
the textural and sensorial properties of the final products when
compared to the traditional process, although the changes
observed were dependent on the fruit and also for the same
fruits on the ingredient used. Compared to the commercial can-
died fruits the osmodehydrated fruits presented differences in
flavor and some flavors were more evident in the commercial
than in the FOS, maltitol sorbitol or fructose candied fruits. For
all the fruits the use of sorbitol imprinted peculiar characteristics
that distinguish them from the other ingredients tested, some
characteristics being positive but others can be depreciated by
consumers. However, from a commercial point of view, it would
be necessary a consumers trail to assess the palatability of the
different fruits and osmotic dehydration agents tested.
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors want to acknowledge QREN, ADI, Programa
Operacional do Norte and FEDER for the financial support
of the Project Nutridouro n.13311. The authors also would
like to thank the entire tasting panel that participated in this
work. The authors declare no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES
2008/100/CE DIRECTIVE. 2008. Amending Council Directive 90/
496/EEC on nutrition labelling for foodstuffs as regards
recommended daily allowances, energy conversion factors and
definitions. Official J Eur Union, 608/200, 912.
ABRAAO,~ A.S., LEMOS, A.M., VILELA A., SOUSA, J.M., and
NUNES, F.M. 2013. Influence of osmotic dehydration process
parameters on the quality of candied pumpkins. Food Bioprod.
Process. 91(4), 481494.

BAEZA, R., PEREZ, 
A., SANCHEZ, V., ZAMORA, M. C., and
CHIRIFE, J. 2010. Evaluation of Norrishs equation for
correlating the water activity of highly concentrated solutions
of sugars, polyols and polyethylene glycols. Food Bioprocess.
Tech. 3(1), 8792.
BARNARD R.J., ROBERTS, C.K., VARON, S.M., and BERGER,
J.J. 1998. Diet-induced insulin resistance precedes other aspects
of the metabolic syndrome. J. Appl. Phys. 84, 13111315.
BRANDELERO, R.P.H., VIEIRA, A.P., TELIS, V.R.N., TELIS-
ROMERO, J., and YAMASHITA, F. 2005. Aplicac~ao de
revestimento comestvel em abacaxis processados por metodos
combinados: isoterma de sorc~ao e cinetica de desidratac~ao
osm otica. Ci^enc. Tecnol. Aliment. 25(2), 285290.
BRANDT, M. A., SKINNER, L. Z., and COLEMAN, J. A. 1963.
Texture profile method. J. Food Sci. 28, 404409.
CALORIE CONTROL COUNCIL 2015. Facts About Polyols.
http://polyol.org/facts-about-polyols/sorbitol/(accessed January
10, 2015).
CHIRALT, A., and TALENS, P. 2005. Physical and chemical
changes induced by osmotic dehydration in plant tissues. J.
Food Eng. 67(12), 167177.
CHIRIFE, J., FERRO FONTAN,  C., and BENMERGUI, E.A.
1980.The prediction of water activity in aqueous solutions in
connection with intermediate moisture foods. J. Food Technol.
15, 5970.
CHIRIFE, J., FAVETTO, G., and FERRO FONTAN,  C. 1982. The
water activity of fructose solutions in the intermediate
moisture range. Lebensm. Wiss. U-Technologie 15, 159160.
COULIER, L., TIMMERMANS, J., BAS, R., VAN DEN DOOL, R.,
HAAKSMAN, I., KLARENBECK, SLAGHEK, T. and VAN
DONGEN, W. 2009. In-depth characterization of prebiotic
galacto-oligosaccharides by a combination of analytical
techniques. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 84888495.
CRAIG, S.A.S. 2001. Polydextrose: Analysis and physiological
benefits. In Advanced Dietary Fibre Technology (B.V. McCleary
and L. Prosky, eds.) pp. 503508, Blackwell Science Ltd,
Oxford, UK.
251
HEALTHY CANDIED FRUITS QUALITY
DOBREVA, V., HADJIKINOVA, M., SLAVOV, A., HADJIKINOV,
D., DOBREV, G., and ZHEKOVA, B. 2013. Functional
properties of maltitol. J. Agric. Sci. Tech. 5(2), 168172.
GUGGISBERG, D., PICCINALI, P., and SCHREIER, K. 2011.
Effects of sugar substitution with Stevia, ActilightTM and Stevia
combinations or PalatinoseTM on rheological and sensory
characteristics of low-fat and whole milk set yoghurt. Int. Dairy
J. 21(9), 636644.
HAMANN, D.D. (1983). Structural failure in solid foods. In
Physical Properties of Food, (E.B. Bagley and M. Peleg, eds.) pp.
351383, AVI Publishing Co., Westport.
HILDEBRAND, J.H., and SCOTT, R.L. 1962. Regular Solutions,
Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall.
HOLMQUIST, G.U., WALKER, H.W., and STAHR, H.M. 1983.
Influence of temperature, pH, water activity and antifungal
agents on growth of Aspergillus flavus and A. parasiticus. J.
Food Sci. 48, 778782.
HUNT, R.W.G. 1991. Measuring color, 2nd Ed., Ellis Horwood,
New York.
INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE. 2014. Dietary Reference Intakes
(DRIs): Recommended Dietary Allowances and Adequate
Intakes, Total Water and Macronutrients. Food and Nutrition
Board, Institute of Medicine, National Academies. https://fnic.
nal.usda.gov/sites/fnic.nal.usda.gov/files/uploads/DRI_RDAs_
Adequate_Intakes_Total_Water_Macronutrients.pdf (accessed
10 January 2015).
KOCH, K., ANDERSSON, R., and AMAN, P. 1998. Quantitative
analysis of amylopectin unit chains by means of high-
performance anion-exchange chromatography with pulsed
amperometric detection. J. Chromatogr. A, 800, 199206.
KONOPACKA, D., JESIONKOWSKA, K., KLEWICKI, R., and
BONAZZI, C. 2009. The effect of different osmotic agents on
the sensory perception of osmo-treated dried fruit. J. Hortic.
Sci. Biotech. 84, 8084.
KROKIDA, M.K., KIRANOUDIS, C.T., and MAROULIS, Z.B.
1999. Viscoelastic behavior of dehydrated products during
rehydration. J. Food Eng., 40(4), 269277.
 B., and GRZELAK, K. 2006. Qualitative and quantitative
KROL,
composition of fructooligosaccharides in bread. Eur. Food Res.
Technol. 223(6), 755758.
MAFRA, I., BARROS, A.S., and COIMBRA, M.A. 2007. The
combined effects of black oxidizing Fig olive process and
ripening on the cell wall polysaccharides of olive pulp.
Carbohydr. Polym. 68(4), 647657.
MARDIA, L.V., KENI, J.T., and BIBBY, J.M. 1979. Multivariate
analysis, 1st Ed., Academic Press, London.
MARIN, S., SANCHIS, V., TEIXIDO, A., RAMOS, A.J., VINAS, I.,
and MAGAN, N. 1998. Environmental factors, in vitro
interactions, and niche overlap between Fusarium monoliforme,
F. proliferatum, and F. graminearum, Aspergillus and Penicillium
species from maize grain. Mycol. Res. 102, 831837.
252
A. VILELA ET AL.
MORTENSEN, A. 2006. Sweeteners permitted in the European
Union: safety aspects. Scand. J. Food Nutr. 50(3), 104116.
NORRISH, R.S. 1966. An equation for the activity coefficients
and equilibrium relative humidities of water in confectionery
syrups. J. Food Technol. 1, 2539.
PANAGIOTOUA, N. M., KARATHANOSA, V. T., and
MAROULISA, Z.B. 1999. Effect of osmotic dehydration agent on
osmotic dehydration of fruits. Dry Technol. 17 (12), 175189.
 R., DIAS, V.M.C., CAMACHO, M.M., and MARTINEZ-
PEIRO,
NAVARRETE, N. 2006. Micronutrient flow to the osmotic
solution during grapefruit osmotic dehydration. J. Food Eng.
74(3), 299307.
QUILES, A., PEREZ-MUNUERA, I., HERNANDO, I., and
LLUCH, M.A. 2003. Impact of mass transport on
microstructure of Granny Smith apple parenchyma during
osmotic dehydration. J. Sci. Food Agric. 83(5), 425429.
SERENO, A.M., HUBINGER, M.D., COMESANA ~ J.F., and
CORREA, A. 2001. Prediction of water activity of osmotic
solutions. J. Food Eng. 49, 103114.
STAT SOFT INC 2010. Electronic Statistics. Tulsa, Oklahoma.
SZCZESNIAK, A.S. 2002. Texture is a sensory property. Food
Qual. Prefer. 13, 215225.
SZCZESNIAK, A.S., BRANDT, M.A., and FRIEDMAN, H. 1963.
Development of standard rating scales for mechanical
parameters of texture and correlation between the objective and
sensory methods of texture evaluation. J. Food Sci. 28, 397403.
TORREGGIANI, D. 1993. Osmotic dehydration in fruit and
vegetable processing. Food Res. Int. 26(1), 5968.
TORREGGIANI, D., and BERTOLO, G. 2001. Osmotic pre-
treatments in fruit processing: chemical, physical and structural
effects. J. Food Eng. 49(2), 247253.
VINCKEN, J.P., SCHOLS, H.A., OOMEN, R., MCCANN, M.C.,
ULVSKOV, P., VORAGEN A.G.J and VISSER R.G.F. 2003. If
homogalacturonan were a side chain of rhamnogalacturonan I.
Implications for cell wall architecture. Plant Physiol. 132(4),
17811789.
WALDRON, K.W., SMITH, A.C., PARR, A.J., NG A., and
PARKER, M.L. 1997. New approaches to understanding and
controlling cell separation in relation to fruit and vegetable
texture. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 8(7), 213221.
ZOETENDAL, E.G., RAES, J., VAN DEN BOGERT, B.,
ARUMUGAM, M., BOOIJINK, C.C., TROOST, F.J., BORK, P.,
WELS M., DE VOS, W.M., and KLEEREBEZEM, M. 2012. The
human small intestinal microbiota is driven by rapid uptake
and conversion of simple carbohydrates. ISME j. 6, 14151426.
SUPPORTING INFORMATION
Additional Supporting Information may be found in the
online version of this article.
Journal of Texture Studies 47 (2016) 239252 V
C 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.