2013
DOI: 10.3923/ijds.2014.1.14
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Production of Functional Spreadable Processed Cheese Analogue Supplemented with Chickpea

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
5
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
2
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…This could be due to the changes in pH and SN content of UF processed cheese (El-Garhi et al, 2018). Similar outcomes were reported by Ahmed, (2014). UF processed cheese obtained from ABT-8 starter cultures (PC80-3 and PC80-1) exhibited the highest meltability (7.78 and 7.79, respectively) compared to other starter cultures.…”
Section: Melting Resistancesupporting
confidence: 81%
“…This could be due to the changes in pH and SN content of UF processed cheese (El-Garhi et al, 2018). Similar outcomes were reported by Ahmed, (2014). UF processed cheese obtained from ABT-8 starter cultures (PC80-3 and PC80-1) exhibited the highest meltability (7.78 and 7.79, respectively) compared to other starter cultures.…”
Section: Melting Resistancesupporting
confidence: 81%
“…This may be due to the pH value of the algae themselves; Abdel-Razik and mentioned that the pH value is 6.5 for Chlorella vulgaris biomass. When storing all products at 7°C, the pH value was noticed to decrease as the storage duration increased, which could be attributed to the acidity increase of the cheese during storage, which can be observed in Table 5 and conforms to the report of Faten et al (2014) and Nayra et al (2017).…”
Section: Effect Of Adding Dried Chlorella Vulgaris On Properties Of Processed Cheesesupporting
confidence: 76%
“…Specimens were verified at room temperature of 22 ± 0.5 °C and arranged in randomized order in plastic vessels. The panel evaluated the samples of the two-week old lupin cheeses via touch and mouthfeel interactions for appearance, color, flavor, and texture, using a 5-point hedonic scale (5—excellent; 4—good; 3—satisfactory; 2—less competent; 1—unsatisfactory) [ 31 ]. Outcomes were analyzed via one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with SPSS 24 software.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%