A Review: Sugar-Based Confectionery and the Importance of Ingredients



Abstract Views
4200

Downloads
4373

Citations

Share

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.sidebar##

Submitted Jul 31, 2022
Published Oct 26, 2022
10.24018/ejfood.2022.4.5.552

Abstract viewed = 4200 times

Table of Contents

##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

Sugar-based confectionery products have a historical basis for many cultures and sugar-based confectionery, especially soft candies, has increased in popularity in recent years. Optimizing a well-designed candy is important to meet consumer expectations, which includes ingredient information about water, sucrose, corn syrup and various kinds of sugar substitutes, and gelling agent alternatives. For instance, water content, temperature, pH, glass transition temperature, molecular weight, and natural gelling properties of the gelling agents have impacts on the quality parameters of the final product. The objective of this review is to examine the production of sugar-based candies focusing on hard candies, soft candies, and Turkish delight. The review also reports on new trends in the formulations and how ingredients affect the final product in a very simple way.

Keywords: Corn Syrup, Gelatin, Soft Candy, Sugar Alcohol.

References

  1. Lees R, Jackson BE. Sugar Confectionery and Chocolate Manufacture. Blackie Academic & Professional, 1973.
     Google Scholar
  2. Potter NN, Hotchkiss JH. Food Science. 5th ed., Chapman & Hall, 1995.
     Google Scholar
  3. Alikonis JJ. Candy Technology. AVI Pub. Co, 1979.
     Google Scholar
  4. Duyff RL, Birch LL, Byrd-Bredbenner C, Johnson SL, Mattes RD, Murphy MM, Nicklas TA, Rollins BY, Wansink B. Candy Consumption Patterns, Effects on Health, and Behavioral Strategies to Promote Moderation: Summary Report of a Roundtable Discussion. Advances in Nutrition. 2015;6. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3945/an.114.007302.
     Google Scholar
  5. Pomeranz Y. Functional Properties of Food Components. 1st ed., Academic Press, INC, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-561280-7.50003-6.
     Google Scholar
  6. Oro CED, Puton BMS, Fusinato VB, Marciniak C, Denti AF, Bernardi JL, Tres BP, Paroul N, Valduga E, Steffens J, Dallago RM. Clarification of reprocessed syrup and use in the formulation of lollipop-type hard candies. Biointerface Research in Applied Chemistry. 2020;10:6846–6864. https://doi.org/10.33263/BRIAC106.68466864.
     Google Scholar
  7. Kalogeras IM, Hagg Lobland HE. The Nature of the Glassy State: Structure and Glass Transitions. Journal of Materials Education. 2012;34:69–94.
     Google Scholar
  8. Sahin S, Sumnu SG. Physical Properties of Foods. Springer Science+Business Media, New York, 2006.
     Google Scholar
  9. Efe N, Bielejewski M, Tritt-Goc J, Mert B, Oztop MH. NMR relaxometry study of gelatin based low-calorie soft candies. Molecular Physics. 2019;0:1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/00268976.2018.1564392.
     Google Scholar
  10. Cedeño-Pinos C, Martínez-Tomé M, Murcia MA, Jordán MJ, Bañón S. Assessment of rosemary (Rosmarinus officinalis L.) extract as antioxidant in jelly candies made with fructan fibres and Stevia. Antioxidants. 2020;9:1–16. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox9121289.
     Google Scholar
  11. Otálora MC, de Jesús Barbosa H, Perilla JE, Osorio C, Nazareno MA. Encapsulated betalains (Opuntia ficus-indica) as natural colorants. Case study: Gummy candies. LWT. 2019;103:222–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2018.12.074.
     Google Scholar
  12. Cappa C, Lavelli V, Mariotti M. Fruit candies enriched with grape skin powders: Physicochemical properties. LWT. 2015;62:569–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2014.07.039.
     Google Scholar
  13. Romo-Zamarrón KF, Pérez-Cabrera LE, Tecante A. Physicochemical and Sensory Properties of Gummy Candies Enriched with Pineapple and Papaya Peel Powders. Food and Nutrition Sciences. 2019; 10:1300–1312. https://doi.org/10.4236/fns.2019.1011094.
     Google Scholar
  14. Moghaddas Kia E, Ghaderzadeh S, Mojaddar Langroodi A, Ghasempour Z, Ehsani A. Red beet extract usage in gelatin/gellan based gummy candy formulation introducing Salix aegyptiaca distillate as a flavouring agent. Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2020;57:3355–3362. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04368-8.
     Google Scholar
  15. Ramezanzade L, Hosseini SF, Nikkhah M. Biopolymer-coated nanoliposomes as carriers of rainbow trout skin-derived antioxidant peptides. Food Chemistry. 2017;234:220–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.04.177.
     Google Scholar
  16. Amjadi S, Ghorbani M, Hamishehkar H, Roufegarinejad L. Improvement in the stability of betanin by liposomal nanocarriers: Its application in gummy candy as a food model. Food Chemistry. 2018;256:156–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.02.114.
     Google Scholar
  17. Hartel RW. & Hartel AK. Candy Bites the Science of Sweets. 2001.
     Google Scholar
  18. Batu A, Kirmaci B.. Production of Turkish delight (lokum). Food Research International. 2009;42:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2008.08.007.
     Google Scholar
  19. Minifie BW. Chocolate, Cocoa and Confectionery: Science and Technology. Springer, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-7924-9.
     Google Scholar
  20. Kavak DD, Akpunar EB. Quality characteristics of Turkish delight (lokum) as influenced by different concentrations of cornelian cherry pulp. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. 2018;42. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13656.
     Google Scholar
  21. Burey P, Bhandari BR, Rutgers RPG, Halley PJ, Torley PJ. Confectionery gels: A review on formulation, rheological and structural aspects. International Journal of Food Properties. 2009;12(1):176-210. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942910802223404.
     Google Scholar
  22. Gönül M. Türk Lokumu Yapım Teknig ̆i Üzerine Araßstırmalar. 1st ed., Ege Mühendislik Fakültesi Ders Kitapları, Izmir, 1985.
     Google Scholar
  23. Yetim H, Kesmen Z. Gida Analizleri. 2nd ed., Erciyes University, KAYSERI, 2009.
     Google Scholar
  24. Srinivasan D, Parkin K, Fennema OR. Fennema’s Food Chemistry. 4th Edition, 2008.
     Google Scholar
  25. Ergun R, Lietha R, Hartel RW. Moisture and shelf life in sugar confections. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2010;50:162–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408390802248833.
     Google Scholar
  26. Kirtil E, Oztop MH. Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Relaxometry and Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Applications in Food Science and Processing. Food Enginnering. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-015-9118-y.
     Google Scholar
  27. Hashemi RH, William G, Christopher J. MRI The Basics. 2nd ed., Philadelphia, USA, 2011.
     Google Scholar
  28. Pocan P, Ilhan E, Oztop MH. Effect of d-psicose substitution on gelatin based soft candies: A TD-NMR study. Magnetic Resonance in Chemistry. 2019;57:661–673. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrc.4847.
     Google Scholar
  29. Kawai K, Hagiwara T. Control of Physical Changes in Food Products. AEMB, 2018.
     Google Scholar
  30. Hadjikinova R, Marudova M. Thermal behaviour of confectionary sweeteners’ blends. Bulgarian Chemical Communications. 2016;48:446–450.
     Google Scholar
  31. Lu Q, Zografi G. Properties of citric acid at the glass transition. J Pharm Sci. 1997;86:1374–1378. https://doi.org/10.1021/JS970157Y.
     Google Scholar
  32. Johari GP, Hallbrucker A, Mayer E. The glass-liquid transition of hyperquenched water. Oxford University Press, 1987.
     Google Scholar
  33. Raudonus J, Bernard J, Janûen H, Kowalczyk J, Carle R. Effect of oligomeric or polymeric additives on glass transition, viscosity and crystallization of amorphous isomalt. Food Research International. 2000:41–51. https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0963996900000223/1-s2.0-S0963996900000223-main.pdf?_tid=6bcb9ef8-cbb3-11e7-b7df-00000aab0f6b&acdnat=1510935892_96d80dfea68734c6cc06aa7d9486982b (accessed November 17, 2017).
     Google Scholar
  34. Allan MC, Chamberlain MC, Mauer LJ. Effects of sugars and sugar alcohols on the gelatinization temperatures of wheat, potato, and corn starches. Foods. 2020;9. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9060757.
     Google Scholar
  35. Labropoulos A, Anestis S. Nutritional Aspects, Applications, and Production Technology, 2012.
     Google Scholar
  36. Coultate TP. Food-The Chemistry of Its Components. Fourth Edi, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2002.
     Google Scholar
  37. Lekahena NVJ, Boboleha MR. The Effects of Sucrose Substitution with Sorbitol on Physicochemical Properties and Sensory Evaluation of Seaweed Jelly Candy, 2020.
     Google Scholar
  38. IFIC Foundation. Sugar Alcohols Fact Sheet, Your Nutrition and Food Safety Resource. 2018. https://www.foodinsight.org/articles/sugar-alcohols-fact-sheet (accessed July 3, 2018).
     Google Scholar
  39. Sucrose. (n.d.). https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/Sucrose#section=Wikipedia (accessed May 18, 2021).
     Google Scholar
  40. Edwards P. Science of sugar confectionery. Royal Society of Chemisry, Cambridge, UK, 2000.
     Google Scholar
  41. Ergun R, Lietha R, Hartel RW. Moisture and Shelf Life in Sugar Confections. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 8398 2010;50(2):162-192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408390802248833.
     Google Scholar
  42. Prabhakar K, Mallika EN. Water Activity, Encyclopedia of Food Microbiology: Second Edition. 2014:751–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384730-0.00435-3.
     Google Scholar
  43. van der Sman RGM, Mauer LJ. Starch gelatinization temperature in sugar and polyol solutions explained by hydrogen bond density. Food Hydrocolloids. 2019;94:371–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.03.034.
     Google Scholar
  44. Dokic L, Jakovljevic J, Dokic P. Relation between viscous characteristics and dextrose equivalent of maltodextrins. Starch/Staerke. 2004;56:520–525. https://doi.org/10.1002/star.200400294.
     Google Scholar
  45. Zumbe A, Lee A, Storey D. Polyols in confectionery: the route to sugar-free, reduced sugar and reduced calorie confectionery. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1079/BJN2000260.
     Google Scholar
  46. Bartkiene E, Ruzauskas M, Lele V, Zavistanaviciute P, Bernatoniene J, Jakstas V, Ivanauskas L, Zadeike D, Klupsaite D, Viskelis P, Bendoraitiene J, Navikaite-Snipaitiene V, Juodeikiene G. Development of antimicrobial gummy candies with addition of bovine colostrum, essential oils and probiotics. International Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2018;53:1227–1235. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.13701.
     Google Scholar
  47. Martínez-Cervera S, Salvador A, Sanz T. Comparison of different polyols as total sucrose replacers in muf fi ns : Thermal, rheological, texture and acceptability properties. Food Hydrocoll. 2014; 35:1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2013.07.016.
     Google Scholar
  48. Ahmad J, Khan I, Blundell R, Azzopardi J, Mahomoodally MF. Stevia rebaudiana Bertoni.: an updated review of its health benefits, industrial applications and safety. Trends in Food Science and Technology. 2020;100:177–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2020.04.030.
     Google Scholar
  49. Sun Y, Hayakawa S, Ogawa M, Izumori K. Antioxidant properties of custard pudding dessert containing rare hexose, d-psicose. Food Control. 2007;18:220–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2005.09.019.
     Google Scholar
  50. O’Charoen S, Hayakawa S, Matsumoto Y, Ogawa M. Effect of d-Psicose Used as Sucrose Replacer on the Characteristics of Meringue. Journal of Food Science. 2014;79:E2463–E2469. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.12699.
     Google Scholar
  51. Hadjikinova R, Hasan Y. Isomaltulose as an alternative to sucrose in the composition of Turkish delight (lokum). BIO Web of Conferences. 2022;45:01007. https://doi.org/10.1051/bioconf/20224501007.
     Google Scholar
  52. Panesar PS, Bali V. Prebiotics, Encyclopedia of Food and Health. 2016:464–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-384947-2.00560-2.
     Google Scholar
  53. Schrieber R, Gareis H. Gelatin Handbook. WILEY-VCH, WILEY-VCH, 2007.
     Google Scholar
  54. Alipal J, Mohd Pu’ad NAS, Lee TC, Nayan NHM, Sahari N, Basri H, Idris MI, Abdullah HZ. A review of gelatin: Properties, sources, process, applications, and commercialisation, in: Materials Today: Proceedings, Elsevier Ltd, 2019: pp. 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.922.
     Google Scholar
  55. Tau T, Gunasekaran S. Thermorheological evaluation of gelation of gelatin with sugar substitutes. LWT – Food Science and Technology. 2016;69:570–578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2016.02.015.
     Google Scholar
  56. Sobral PJA, Habitante AMQB. Phase transitions of pigskin gelatin. Food Hydrocolloids. 2001;15:377-382(6).
     Google Scholar
  57. Efe N. Characterization and Formulation of Gelatin Based Soft Candies. M.S. Thesis Middle East Technical University, 2018:1–132.
     Google Scholar
  58. Hollingworth CS. Food Hydrocolloids Characteristics, Properties and Structures. Nova Science Publishers, Inc., New York, 2010.
     Google Scholar
  59. Wang R, Hartel RW. Confectionery gels: Gelling behavior and gel properties of gelatin in concentrated sugar solutions. Food Hydrocolloids. 2022; 124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2021.107132.
     Google Scholar
  60. Veis A. The Macromolecular Chemistry of Gelatin. Academic Press, New York, 1964.
     Google Scholar
  61. Fonkwe LG, Narsimhan G, Cha AS. Characterization of gelation time and texture of gelatin and gelatin-polysaccharide mixed gels. Food Hydrocolloids. 2003;17:871–883. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0268-005X(03)00108-5.
     Google Scholar
  62. Hani NM, Romli SR, Ahmad M. Influences of red pitaya fruit puree and gelling agents on the physico-mechanical properties and quality changes of gummy confections. International Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2015;50:331–339. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.12638.
     Google Scholar
  63. Cedeño-Pinos C, Marcucci MC, Bañón S. Contribution of green propolis to the antioxidant, physical, and sensory properties of fruity jelly candies made with sugars or fructans. Foods. 2021;10. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112586.
     Google Scholar
  64. Rivero R, Archaina D, Sosa N, Schebor C. Development and characterization of two gelatin candies with alternative sweeteners and fruit bioactive compounds. LWT. 2021;141:110894. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2021.110894.
     Google Scholar
  65. Yang Q, Zhang W, Li J, Gong X, Feng B. Physicochemical Properties of Starches in Proso (Non-Waxy and Waxy) and Foxtail Millets (Non-Waxy and Waxy), 2019.
     Google Scholar
  66. Ozel B, Dag D, Kilercioglu M, Sumnu SG, Oztop MH. NMR relaxometry as a tool to understand the effect of microwave heating on starch-water interactions and gelatinization behavior. LWT – Food Science and Technology. 2017;83:10–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2017.04.077.
     Google Scholar
  67. Wang S, Li C, Copeland L, Niu Q, Wang S. Starch Retrogradation: A Comprehensive Review. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. 2015;14:568–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12143.
     Google Scholar
  68. Tireki S, Sumnu G, Sahin S. Correlation between physical and sensorial properties of gummy confections with different formulations during storage. Journal of Food Science and Technology. 2021;58:3397–3408. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04923-3.
     Google Scholar
  69. Ashogbon AO, Akintayo ET. Recent trend in the physical and chemical modification of starches from different botanical sources: A review. Starch/Staerke. 2014;66:41–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/star.201300106.
     Google Scholar
  70. Punia S. Barley starch modifications: Physical, chemical and enzymatic – A review. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules. 2020;144:578–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.12.088.
     Google Scholar
  71. Marfil PHM, Anhe ACBM, Telis VRN. Texture and Microstructure of Gelatin / Corn Starch-Based Gummy Confections. Food Biophysics. 2012;7:236–243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11483-012-9262-3.
     Google Scholar
  72. Delgado P, Bañón S. Effects of replacing starch by inulin on the physicochemical, texture and sensory characteristics of gummy jellies. CyTA – Journal of Food. 2018;16:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/19476337.2017.1327462.
     Google Scholar
  73. Pereira DG, de T. Benassi M, Beleia ADP. Gummy candies produced with acid‐thinned cassava starch Physical and sensory evaluation. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. 2022.
     Google Scholar
  74. Akkaya S, Ozel B, Oztop MH, Yanik DK, Gogus F. Physical characterization of high methoxyl pectin and sunflower oil wax emulsions: A low-field 1H NMR relaxometry study. Journal of Food Science. 2021;86:120–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.15560.
     Google Scholar
  75. Endreß H-U and Christensen SH. Pectins, in: P.A. Phillips, G.O. Williams (Eds.). Handbook of Hydrocolloids, 2nd ed., CRC Press., 2009.
     Google Scholar
  76. Sessler T, Weiss J, Vodovotz Y. Influence of pH and soy protein isolate addition on the physicochemical properties of functional grape pectin confections. Food Hydrocolloids. 2013;32:294–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2013.01.013.
     Google Scholar
  77. Einhorn-Stoll U. Pectin-water interactions in foods – From powder to gel. Food Hydrocolloids. 2018;78:109–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2017.05.029.
     Google Scholar
  78. Flutto L. PECTIN | Properties and Determination, Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition. 2003:4440–4449. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-12-227055-X/00901-9.
     Google Scholar
  79. Ranalli N, Adornato L, Califano AN, Andrés SC. Impact of processing conditions and gelling agent on physical and sensorial properties of pecan oil-dulce de leche gummy candies. Brazilian Journal of Food Technology. 2020;23. https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-6723.17719.
     Google Scholar
  80. de Avelar MHM, Efraim P. Alginate/pectin cold-set gelation as a potential sustainable method for jelly candy production. LWT. 2020;123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2020.109119.
     Google Scholar