A comparative evaluation of lycopene content and some chemical properties of commonly consumed brands of tomato paste were investigated. Six double concentrate tomato paste and a locally processed sample (freshly milled and boiled tomato used as control were reviewed. Chemical composition of the samples revealed that locally processed tomato was the least in total solids, pH, viscosity and lycopene, with Gino tomato brand having the highest lycopene content. All brands of tomato paste showed a significant difference (p>0.05) in the chemical parameters. Proximate analysis showed that moisture content ranged from 69.00 – 84.85%, while ash, protein and carbohydrate ranged from 1.11 – 2.80%, 2.95 – 4.87% and 7.91 -18.58% respectively, with the locally processed sample been the least in all cases. The findings in this study showed that there exist significant difference between tomato products in terms of lycopene and other chemical parameters as a result of processing and varietal differences.
| Published in | Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences (Volume 3, Issue 2) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12 |
| Page(s) | 35-37 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2015. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Tomato Paste, Evaluation, Lycopene, Chemical, Brand, Nigeria
| [1] | Aditi Gupta, Kawatra, A and Sehgal, S. (2011): Physical-Chemical properties and nutritional evaluation of newly developed tomato genotypes. African Journal of Food Science and Tech, vol 2(7) pp167-172. |
| [2] | Agarwal, S and Rao, A.V.(2000): Tomato, lycopene and its role in human health and chronic disease. CMAJ 163(6), 739-744. |
| [3] | AOAC (1990): Association of Official Analytical Chemists, 15th Editions. Washington. D.C |
| [4] | Boumendjel, M , Perraya D (2008): Cederon multimedia du cours de conservation des denerees alimentaires. CDAOA Version 1.11 cours ligne (http;//cdaoa. Djamiatic.net).copyright@ office national des Droit |
| [5] | Clinton, S.K. (1998): Chemistry, biology and implimentations for human health and disease. Nut Rev 56(2 pt 1): 36-51 |
| [6] | Di Mascio, P; Kaiser, S and Sies, H. (1989): Lycopene as the most efficient biological carotenoid singlet oxygen quencher. Biochemistry and Biophysics vol 274 (2): 532-538. |
| [7] | Gallais A and Bannerot H (1992): Amelioration des especes vegetales cultivees: Objectifs et criteres de selection-INRA pp 379-391. |
| [8] | Giovannucci, E. (1999): Tomatoes, tmato based products, lycopene and cancer review of the epidemiologic literature. J Natl Cancer Inst 91(4): 317-331 |
| [9] | Hawbecker D.E (1995) ; Microbiology, packaging, HACCP and Ingredients. Plant Quality Control. Comstock Michigan Fruits Div; 7, 261-283. |
| [10] | Khachik, F. Carvalho, L and Berristein, P.S. (2002): Chemistry, distribution and metabolism of tomato carotenoids and their impact on human health. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 227(10): 845-851 |
| [11] | Ravelo-perez Lidia Maria, Javier Hernandez-Borges, Miguel Angel Rodriguez-Delgado(2007): ‘Spectrophotometric Analysis of lycopen in Tomato and Watermelons’’ The chemical Educator vol 13. No 1. |
| [12] | Nguyen, M.L and Schwartz, S.J. (1998): Lycopene stability during food processing. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 281(2): 101-105 |
| [13] | Rao, A.V. and Agarwal, S. (1998): Bioavailability and invivo antioxidant properties of lycopene from tomato products and their possible role in the prevention of cancer Nutr Cancer 31(3): 199-203. |
| [14] | Steel, R. G. and Torrie, J. H. (1980): Principles and Procedures of Statistics. A biomedical approach, 2nd ed. M. C. Graw-Hill, Internationial. Auckland, P. 50-110. |
APA Style
Eke-Ejiofor J. (2015). Comparative Evaluation of Lycopene Content and Some Chemical Properties of Commonly Consumed Brands of Tomato Paste in Port –Harcourt, South-South, Nigeria. Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences, 3(2), 35-37. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12
ACS Style
Eke-Ejiofor J. Comparative Evaluation of Lycopene Content and Some Chemical Properties of Commonly Consumed Brands of Tomato Paste in Port –Harcourt, South-South, Nigeria. J. Food Nutr. Sci. 2015, 3(2), 35-37. doi: 10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12
AMA Style
Eke-Ejiofor J. Comparative Evaluation of Lycopene Content and Some Chemical Properties of Commonly Consumed Brands of Tomato Paste in Port –Harcourt, South-South, Nigeria. J Food Nutr Sci. 2015;3(2):35-37. doi: 10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12,
author = {Eke-Ejiofor J.},
title = {Comparative Evaluation of Lycopene Content and Some Chemical Properties of Commonly Consumed Brands of Tomato Paste in Port –Harcourt, South-South, Nigeria},
journal = {Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences},
volume = {3},
number = {2},
pages = {35-37},
doi = {10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.jfns.20150302.12},
abstract = {A comparative evaluation of lycopene content and some chemical properties of commonly consumed brands of tomato paste were investigated. Six double concentrate tomato paste and a locally processed sample (freshly milled and boiled tomato used as control were reviewed. Chemical composition of the samples revealed that locally processed tomato was the least in total solids, pH, viscosity and lycopene, with Gino tomato brand having the highest lycopene content. All brands of tomato paste showed a significant difference (p>0.05) in the chemical parameters. Proximate analysis showed that moisture content ranged from 69.00 – 84.85%, while ash, protein and carbohydrate ranged from 1.11 – 2.80%, 2.95 – 4.87% and 7.91 -18.58% respectively, with the locally processed sample been the least in all cases. The findings in this study showed that there exist significant difference between tomato products in terms of lycopene and other chemical parameters as a result of processing and varietal differences.},
year = {2015}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparative Evaluation of Lycopene Content and Some Chemical Properties of Commonly Consumed Brands of Tomato Paste in Port –Harcourt, South-South, Nigeria AU - Eke-Ejiofor J. Y1 - 2015/03/02 PY - 2015 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12 DO - 10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12 T2 - Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences JF - Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences JO - Journal of Food and Nutrition Sciences SP - 35 EP - 37 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-7293 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.jfns.20150302.12 AB - A comparative evaluation of lycopene content and some chemical properties of commonly consumed brands of tomato paste were investigated. Six double concentrate tomato paste and a locally processed sample (freshly milled and boiled tomato used as control were reviewed. Chemical composition of the samples revealed that locally processed tomato was the least in total solids, pH, viscosity and lycopene, with Gino tomato brand having the highest lycopene content. All brands of tomato paste showed a significant difference (p>0.05) in the chemical parameters. Proximate analysis showed that moisture content ranged from 69.00 – 84.85%, while ash, protein and carbohydrate ranged from 1.11 – 2.80%, 2.95 – 4.87% and 7.91 -18.58% respectively, with the locally processed sample been the least in all cases. The findings in this study showed that there exist significant difference between tomato products in terms of lycopene and other chemical parameters as a result of processing and varietal differences. VL - 3 IS - 2 ER -
Email: