Production and Evaluation of Table Wine Using Two Different Varieties of Pawpaw (Carica papaya)

• 作者: David Barine Kiin-Kabari Lucretia Ifeoma Barber Queen Igbo
• 来源期刊: 食品科学与工程:英文版(美国)
• 学科: 工学
• 关键词: RED ROSE YELLOW PAWPAW TABLE wine.
• 年，卷（期）: spkxygcywbmg_2019,（6）
• 页码范围: 199-209
• 页数: 11页
• 分类号: TS

摘要

The aim of this study was to produce and evaluate table wine from two different varieties of pawpaw (rose red and yellow pawpaw). The must was evaluated for physicochemical and microbiological changes during fermentation while the wine was analyzed for physicochemical characteristics, microbiological quality and sensory properties and compared with commercial grape wine. Specific gravity of the “must” during fermentation decreased from 1.059-0.995 for rose red pawpaw and 1.005-0.990 for yellow pawpaw. The sugar content decreased from 13-3% on the 14th day of fermentation for rose red pawpaw while yellow pawpaw “must” decreased from 12.5-3%. pH drop for the yellow pawpaw “must” was 4.7-3.4 on the 14th day and 4.0-3.4 for rose red pawpaw “must”. Titratable acidity of the pawpaw “must” increased from 0.16-0.32% for rose red pawpaw “must” and 0.20-0.52% for yellow pawpaw “must”. Microbial analysis of the “must” during fermentation showed that yeast count increased from no growth to 3.0 × 10^6 cfu/mL for yellow pawpaw must and 4.0 × 10^6 cfu/mL for rose red pawpaw, respectively while total bacterial count decreased from 5.4 × 10^7-l.5 × 10^7 cfu/mL for yellow pawpaw must and 5.2 × 10^7-1.2 × 10^7 cfu/mL for rose red pawpaw “must”. Coliform recorded no growth throughout the period of fermentation. Physicochemical analysis of the wine showed that the yellow pawpaw wine has a specific gravity of 0.999, alcohol content 8.00%, titratable acidity of 0.59%, pH of 3.5 and sugar content of 3%. The rose red pawpaw wine had sugar content of 3%, titratable acidity of 0.38%, alcohol content 7.69%, specific gravity 0.997 and pH of 3.5. Microbial analysis of the wine showed no growth of coliform and yeast while bacterial count was 1.0 × 10^6 cfu/mL for both wines. Sensory results for the pawpaw wine showed no significant (p > 0.05) difference in the clarity and overall acceptability from the commercial wine.