Sweetener blends or Sugar substitutes : A way to enhance the sweetness

“The two sweeteners when combined have a synergistic effect that is the sweetness of the combination is greater than the sum of the individual parts. This is true for most sweetener blends”

1. Introduction :

A sweetening agent can play a number of important roles in solid and oral liquid formulations such as enhancing flavor, masking bitter taste and increasing viscosity. Sweeteners are often used in combination to provide certain sensory profile and to take advantage of the synergism that occurs with sweetener combinations. Mixture of certain sweeteners has been reported to produce a total sweetness intensity that is greater than theoretical sum of the sweetening effect of the individual component of the mixture. The two sweeteners when combined have a synergistic effect that is the sweetness of the combination is greater than the sum of the individual parts. This is true for most sweetener blends.  The search for the perfect sweetener continues, but it has long been recognized that the ideal sweetener does not exist. Even sucrose the “gold standard” is not perfect and is unsuitable for some pharmaceuticals. Sweetener blends provide and expand food and beverage choices to control caloric, carbohydrate or specific sugar intake, assist in weight maintenance or reduction, aid in the management of distabetes, assist in the control of dental caries, enhance the usability of pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, provide sweetness in times of sugar shortage and assist in the cost effective use of limited resources.

2. Need of for this study :

 1. Taste properties such as

(1) Saccharin is generally reported to have a bitter aftertaste,

(2) Stevioside to have a menthol aftertaste,

(3) Aspartame to have a delayed sweetness.

2. Lack of bulking properties.

3. Stability problems, during processing and storage, as for example aspartame loses its sweetness in aqueous solutions and is not stable at high temperatures, thaumatin react with tannins and lose its sweetness.

4. Sweetening blends can offer a simplified and more economical process, if synergy, taste quality and flexibility are assured. The promise in sweetening blends lies in the selection of suitable sweetening agent.

5. No single sweetener fulfills the entire optimum requirement. In the most instances evaluation of sweetening properties of these sweeteners are required before selecting them as a part of formulation.

6. Each sweetener has merits and demerits hence there is still need for sweetening blends, which exhibits a satisfactory performance in terms of all parameters required for synergy, taste quality and flexibility, compatible, potent with easy availability, diabetic safe and economic. 

3. Advantages of Sweetener Blends :

The advantages of combining sweeteners may lead to

1. Formulate products that closely imitate the taste and stability of their sugar-sweetened counterparts.

2. Create totally new taste experiences by using sweeteners in the same manner the food industry uses flavors.

3. Meet cost restrains.

4. Method of prepration of Sweetener Blends :

The binary and ternary blends were prepared by mixing the two or more sweeteners having their different equisweet concentration of 3%, or 5%, or 7% sucrose. The blends used were  prepared by taking  Half concentration of individual blends equivalent to 3% or 5% or 7% equisweet sucrose was taken and compared with the 3% or 5% or 7% equisweet sucrose solution respectively.

5. Organization of testing panel: 

Trained taste panels of 15 subjects having 8 male and 7 female participated in the tasting study. They were organized in the lab. The maximum number of subjects who participated in each tasting session was 15 and minimum number was 8. All subjects were affiliated with organigation. Their mean age was 25±3 years.

6. Tasting of blends solutions:

Before evaluating all binary and ternary blends solution, the trained taste panelists tasted sweet taste with 3 sweet, 5 sweet and 7 sweet, also tested bitter taste with 2.2 bitter and 4 bitter and sour tastes with 2.1 sour and 7.4 sour. These references were based in previous evaluation by the present panelists, as well as other trained panels.

Trained panel lists received 15ml of each binary and ternary solution in 30 ml plastic medicine cups. Each blends solution was assigned a random three digit number. And cups containing that blends solutions were labeled with that number. After sampling the references subjects were instructed to swirl each blends solution around in their mouths and then expectorated. Panelist made a full taste profile evaluation of the sample. Subject gave a mark of 15 for standard solutions of 3% or 5% or 7% sucrose solutions.

The marks reflect the intensity received of each taste noted by the panel. Between tasting the five samples on any given taste day, the trained panelist rinsed their mouth thoroughly with distilled water and deionized water then ate unsalted crackers to eliminate any lingering taste in their mouth.

7. Current Research was done in this field:

1.Schiffmanetal.,(1995), worked on investigation of synergism in binary mixtures of sweeteners.The study was taken to determine the presence and degree of synergism among all binary mixtures of 14 sweeteners varying in chemical structure and a trained panel was evaluated binary combinations of the following sweeteners: three sugar (fructose, glucose and sucrose) two polyhydric alcohols (mannitol and sorbitol), two diterpenoid glycosides (rebaudioside-A and B), two dipeptide derivatives (aspartame and alitame), one sulfamate (Na-cyclamate), one protein (thaumatin), two N-sulfonyl amides (Acesulfame-K and Na-saccharin) and one dihydrochalcone (Neohesperdin, dihydrochalcone). Each sweetener was tested at three concentrations that were iso-sweet with 3%, 5% and 7% sucrose.

2.Marie -oldie et al., (1998), studied that descriptive profiles of synergistic mixtures of bulk and intense sweeteners.The descriptive profile of three bulk and intense sweetener blends (maltitol – cyclamate, maltitol-Acesulfame-k, and sucrose-cyclamate.) were established with reference to a 10% sucrose solution. These blends were chosen because they had been demonstrated in a previous study (Hutteau et al., 1998) as having a significant level of synergy.

3.Scnimman et al., (2006), studied on time to maximum sweetness intensity of binary and ternary blend of sweeteners– In this study that is comprised of three separate experiments, trained panelists evaluated the time to maximum sweetness intensity of sweeteners tested in both binary and ternary combinations. Sixteen sweeteners that varied widely in chemical structure were evaluated. Sweetener blend containing the protein thaumatin had the latest time to maximum sweetness intensity, as a group, blend containing Neohesperdin Dihydrochalcone, alitame, steviosides and rebaudioside –A or neotame had later times of maximum sweetness intensity than blend with sugars and sugar alcohols many sweetener blend exhibited times to maximum sweetness intensity that fell intermediate between the earliest and latest of its constituents self-mixtures.

4.Bonnie et al., (2002), studied on a comparison of aspartame and sucrose with respect to carryover effect in yogurt – The sensory profiling tests were carried out on natural, unsweetened yogurt consumed directly after yogurt sweetened with sucrose, aspartame or mixtures of aspartame + acesulfame – K. There was no evidence that residual sweetness or bitterness from aspartame, either alone or blended, was perceived in the natural yogurt although sourness appeared to be masked. Natural yogurt had the highest bitter aftertaste when preceded by yogurt containing sucrose, which was explained as a contrast effect. In repeated consumption tests, flavored fruit yogurts tended to increase in sweetness and decrease in sourness over the rounds of repeated consumption independent of sweetener type.

5. Mukhopadhay et al., (1998), worked on in-vivo cryogenic studies on blends of aspartame and Acesulfame-k, it was concluded that non-nutritive sweeteners, are permitted individually in diets and beverages. These sweeteners of different classes, used in combination have been found to presses a synergistic sweetening effect. They also have a synergistic genotoxic effect is unknown.

8. Conclusion:

1.Blend sweetener shared best sweetening intensity and also they had better physiochemical property like moisture content, loss on drying, pH and melting point.

2.Blend sweetener reduced reported problem of individual sweetener such as bitter after taste, menthol after taste, delayed sweetness.

3.Blend sweetener produced potent in dose.

4.Blend sweetener have economic.

5.Blend sweetener are produced high order of compatibility of each blends.

6.Blendsweetener are mainly produced normglycemic effects means they are more diabetic safe.

7.Blend sweetener are more stable than individual sweetener during processing and storage.

9.References :

1.  Schiffman, S.S., Booth, B.J., and Carr, B.T. (1995). Investigation of synergism on Binary mixtures of Sweeteners, Pergamon, 65-70.

2. Mukhopadhyey, M., Mukherjee, A. and Chakrabarti, J. (1998). In vivo cyto genetic studies on Blends of Aspartame and Acesulfame-K. Food and chemical Toxicology, Pergaman, 75-76.

3. Brewster, Elizabeth. (2007). Mixing it up new sweetener blends offer high intensity, nutritive ore combinations. Journal of Goliath, 160-168.

4. Bill, Riha. (2005). Blending better sweetener systems. Functional foods and Nutraceuticals, the global Resource for healthy products innovation. 1-5.

5. Bayarri, S., Izquierdu, L., and Costell, E. (2006). Sweetening power of aspartame in hydrocolloids gels: influence of texture. Journal of food Hydrocolloids, 1265-1274.

6. Janusz, J.M. (2005). Peptide Sweeteners beyond Aspartame. In progress in Sweeteners, Elsevier London, Pp 1-46.

7. Portmann, Marie.odile. and Kilcast, David.  (1997). Descriptive Profiles of synergistic mixtures of Bulk and Intense sweeteners, food quality and preference, 71-72.

About Authors:

Mr. Piyush tiwari, Mr. Ashish Jain, Mr. Rajesh S Jadon, Dr. Satish Nayak

Mr Piyush tiwari (M.Pharm), Department of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology, Bansal College of Pharmacy, Kokta, Aanand Nagar, Bhopal-462021, M.P., India. Email: piyush.tiwarig@gmail.com

Mr. Ashish Jain ( M.Pharm, Ph.D*) is presently working as Assistant professor cum Research Scholar in the department of Pharmaceutics and Pharmaceutical Technology at Bansal College of Pharmacy, Kokta, Aanand Nagar, Bhopal-462021, M.P., India.
E-mail: aashish.pharmatech@gmail.com
Mob. No. +919981574693

Mr. Rajesh S Jadon is presently working as Assistant professor in the department of biotechnology at Bansal College of Pharmacy, Kokta, Aanand Nagar, Bhopal-462021, M.P., India .

Dr. Satish Nayak is currently working as Principal in Bansal College of Pharmacy, Kokta, Aanand Nagar, Bhopal-462021, M.P., India . He earned his Ph.D in pharmacogonosy. Dr. Satish Nayak has 15 years of academic and research experience. He has more than 25 national and international research papers to his credit.