Experiment 15c Fat Replacements in Muffins

Fn-240 Food Science

Samantha Jochum

1
 I. Introduction

According to the article, effect of fat and sugar replacement on cookie properties, daily fat

consumption in the USA and Europe is about 40 percent of total caloric intake, which is 10

percent higher than the recommended intake. This means that people are consuming almost half

of their diet in fats. As we know, overconsumption of fat can lead to serious health problem like

heart disease, hypertension, and obesity. Scientist in the food industry are trying to come up with

ways to minimizing the amount of fat that is inside foods. There have been several studies that

have tried to substitute parts of fats with synthetic molecules to minimize the amount of fat in

that product. One of the major concerns with removing fat from products is the changes that can

happen in the characteristics of that food.

According to the book, Principles of Food Science, fat helps stabilize mixtures, carry flavor

compounds, add smooth creamy textures, tenderizes doughs, controls ice crystal formation in

frozen foods, and forms foams such as whipped cream. Scientist have been trying to use starches,

proteins, and chemically altered fats to come up with ways to replace the undesired results of

fats.

The book Principles of Food Science also had a history story on one of the first fat replacers.

In 1869, margarine was first developed by a French chemist. Napoleon III offered a prize to the

first person who came up with an alternative to butter. It was made out of beef fat and was

named Oleo because a large portion of it was made of Oleic acid. Margarine first became

popular in the United States in the 1940s. This was because of the butter rations during WWII

and the homemakers needed something to fill in for the butter. Another factor that made

margarine more appealing was that they added a yellow color to make it look more like butter.

The color changes made and buyer see it more like butter and were interested. Then in the 1960s

2
margarine sales spiked again because consumers were becoming more aware of the health effects

of saturated fats and heart disease.

Although the margarine was less expensive, further studies proved that the same health

effects excited. Margarine was made from hydrogenated vegetable oils. The process of

hydrogenation produces trans fats. According to the Dietary Guidelines, saturated fats should

provide less than 10 percent of daily calories while trans fat should provide less than 1 percent.

Companies are trying to lower the amount of trans fat in products, however this is not always the

easiest. It is important to always check the nutrition labels for trans fat in food products.

In an article called, HPMC and Inulin as fat replacers in biscuits: Sensory and instrumental

evaluation, they discuss the difference between a fat replacer and a fat substitute. The article

said, Fat replacers are substances of carbohydrate or protein nature which can imitate the

functional and sensory properties of fat while fat substitutes are the substances that provide

identical physical and sensory properties to fats, but do not provide calories. It is very difficult

for scientist to find fat substitutes so most of the time they have to be made in a lab. These fats

can also be called manufactured fats. An example of this is Olestra. Olestra is a sucrose

polyester. The body has no enzymes to break Olestra down, this causes it to pass through the

body undigested leading to no calories. One problem with this is that because the body cannot

digest Olestra, the Olestra takes with it all the fat soluble vitamins. Scientist have come up with

the solution of attaching fat soluble vitamins to Olestra right away so it cannot take any

additional fat soluble vitamins with it. However, Olestra can still affect drugs that are fat soluble.

Principles of Food Science also talked about the nutrient claims that can be on food labels.

When a food says that it is Fat Free this means that the food has less than 0.5 grams of fat per

serving. Less fat means that the food has at least 25 percent less fat than it did originally. Low

3
fat means that there has to be 3 grams of fat or less per serving. It is important to pay attention

the nutrient claims because even though it sounds better for you, that is not always the case.

Another important thing to think about is that even though the fat content has gone down, what

did they replace that fat with?

II. Objective

The objective of this experiment was to test what fat replacement had the best appearance,

sweetness flavor, overall flavor, overall texture, and aftertaste. The experiment tested six

different fat replacements inside muffins. The six different fat replacers used were the control of

vegetable oil, pureed prunes, applesauce, liquid pectin, powder protein, and pudding.

III. Materials and Methods

The materials used for this experiment included an electronic balance, large mixing bowl,

100mL graduated cylinder, small mixing bowl, wooden spoon, muffin tin, serrated knife, 12

paper baking cups. The supplies used for this experiment included 250 grams of all-purpose

flour, 65 grams of sugar, 5 grams of salts, 7 grams of baking powder, 1 egg, 50 mL applesauce

and 250mL low fat milk. To begin the experiment, the oven was preheated to 425 degrees

Fahrenheit. While the oven was preheating, the large mixing bowl and the small mixing bowl

were taken out. The 250 grams of all-purpose flour, 65 grams of sugar, 5 grams of salt, and 7

grams of baking powder were all put into the large mixing bowl. While the large mixing bowl

was being prepared, the egg, 250mL of low fat milk, and 50mL of applesauce were mixed in the

small mixing bowl. In the large mixing bowl a well was made out of the dry ingredients and the

wet ingredients were poured into the well. Then, with the wooden spoon, the ingredients were all

mixed together. It was important to not over stir the ingredients because the batter needed to

4
have lumps. While the batters were being mixed, the 12 paper baking cups were placed inside the

muffin tin. The batter was then poured into the paper baking cups two thirds of the way full.

Once the batter was in all the paper baking cups, the muffin tins were then placed into the

preheated oven. The muffins were then baked for 18 minutes. After 18 minutes, the muffins were

taken out of the oven. Then the tallest muffin and shorted muffin were cut in half. One half of the

tallest muffin was laid horizontally on the table next to a ruler to take a measurement in

centimeters. Then one half of the shortest muffin was laid horizontally on the table next to a ruler

to take a measurement in centimeters. The two measurements were then added together and

divided by two to get the average of the muffins standing height. The remaining muffins were

then cut into fourths and put on a tray to be sent to the sensory lab. Once inside the sensory lab,

the muffins were put into sensory cups and labeled with a number that can only be identified by

the professor. Each student was then given a sensory cups containing one of each fat

replacements being tested. Each student then used a liking scale to say what they thought about

each far replacement in the following categories, appearance, sweetness, overall flavor, overall

texture, and aftertaste. The liking scale was 1 to 5. 1 meant that it was extremely disliked, 3

meant that it was neither liked nor disliked, 5 meant that it was extremely liked.

IV. Results and Discussion

5
 Figure 1. Average Standing Height of Muffins with
Different Fat Replacements
5.95 5.90
6.00
5.25
5.00
4.25 4.31
3.90
4.00
Height in cm

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00
Vegetable oil Pureed Prunes Applesauce Liquid Pectin Powder Pectin Pudding

Fat Replacements n=2

6
 Figure 2. Average Mean Score* of Appearance in Muffins
with Different Fat Replacements
5.00

4.50

4.00 3.82
3.45 3.50
3.50 3.32
Liking Scale

3.04
3.00

2.50 2.27

2.00

1.50

1.00
Vegetable oil Pureed Prunes Applesauce Liquid Pectin Powder Pectin Pudding

Fat Replacements

*Where: 1= dislike very much, 2= dislike, 3 = neither dislike nor like, 4= like, 5= like very
much, n=22

7
 Figure 3. Average Mean Score* of Sweetness in Muffins with
Different Fat Replacements
5.00

4.50
4.18

4.00
3.64
3.50 3.32
Liking Scale

3.00 2.86
2.64 2.64
2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00
Vegetable oil Pureed Prunes Applesauce Liquid Pectin Powder Pectin Pudding

Fat Replacements

*Where: 1= dislike very much, 2= dislike, 3 = neither dislike nor like, 4= like, 5= like very
much, n=22

8
 Figure 4. Average Mean Score* of Overall Flavor in
Muffins with Different Fat Replacements
5.00

4.50 4.36

4.00 3.68
3.41
3.50
Liking Scale

3.14
3.00 2.77
2.64
2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00
Vegetable oil Pureed Prunes Applesauce Liquid Pectin Powder Pectin Pudding

Fat Replacements

*Where: 1= dislike very much, 2= dislike, 3 = neither dislike nor like, 4= like, 5= like very
much, n=22

9
 Figure 5. Average Mean Score* of Overall texture in
Muffins with Different Fat Replacements
5.00

4.50
3.95
4.00
3.50
3.50
Liking Scale

3.14
3.00
3.00
2.54 2.50
2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00
Vegetable oil Pureed Prunes Applesauce Liquid Pectin Powder Pectin Pudding
Fat Replacements

*Where: 1= dislike very much, 2= dislike, 3 = neither dislike nor like, 4= like, 5= like very
much, n=22

10
 Figure 6. Average Mean Score* of Aftertaste in Muffins with
Different Fat Replacements
5.00

4.50
4.05
4.00

3.50 3.36 3.32

Liking Scale

3.09
3.00
2.55 2.59
2.50

2.00

1.50

1.00
Vegetable oil Pureed Prunes Applesauce Liquid Pectin Powder Pectin Pudding

Fat Replacements

*Where: 1= dislike very much, 2= dislike, 3 = neither dislike nor like, 4= like, 5= like very
much, n=22

11
 Figure 1 shows the average standing height of muffins that were baked with different fat

replacements. Measuring standing heights shows what muffin has the most fluff and rose the

highest. The muffin baked with liquid pectin as its fat replacement had the tallest standing height

(5.90cm). The muffin baked with pudding as its fat replacement had the shortest standing height

(3.90cm). The difference between the tallest muffin and the shortest muffin is 2.00cm.

Figure 2 shows the average mean score of appearance in muffins baked with different fat

replacements. In the sensory lab, 22 students rated the appearance based of the liking scale. The

class rated the muffin made with applesauce (3.82) as having the best appearance. The class

rated the muffin made with liquid pectin (2.27) as having the worst appearance.

Figure 3 shows the average mean score of sweetness in muffins baked with different fat

replacements. The 22 students in the sensory lab then used the liking scale to rate the sweetness

in the muffins. According to the results, the muffin made with the pudding replacement was the

sweetest with the liking scale of 4.18. While the muffins made with pureed prunes and liquid

pectin were the least sweet muffins with a rating of 2.64 each on the liking scale.

Figure 4 shows the average mean score of the overall flavor in muffins baked with

different fat replacements. The results from the sensory lab, showed that the muffin made with

the pudding fat replacement had the best overall flavor at 4.36. The muffin made with the

powder pectin had the least liked overall flavor at a rating of 2.64.

Figure 5 shows the average mean score of the overall texture in muffins baked with

different fat replacements. 22 students in the sensory lab used the liking scale to rate the overall

textures. The results showed that the muffin made with the control fat replacement of vegetable

12
oil had the best overall texture with a liking rating of 3.95. The muffin made with pudding as fat

replacement had the least liked overall texture with a rating of 2.50.

Figure 6 shows the average mean score of the aftertaste in muffins baked with different

fat replacements. The sensory lab results, based off of 22 students using the liking scale, showed

that the muffin made with pudding as the fat replacement had the best aftertaste of 4.05. The

muffin that had the lowest liking rating is the liquid pectin muffin with a rating of 2.55.

When looking at all the figures, the pudding fat replacement stands out on half of the

figures. The pudding was the most liked for sweetness, overall flavor, and aftertaste. According

to the article Effects of health related claims on the differential threshold of consumers sweetness

sensation, peoples experience of taste is influenced by cues that suggest particular taste sensations.

This is an interesting point to consider when looking at the fat replacement of pudding. The participants

were asked to give the liking scale of the sweetness of the pudding replacement before the overall

flavor. The participants already had the perception of the sweetness and that could have led to them

believing that it had a really great overall flavor and aftertaste.

V. Conclusion

Overall the experiment showed that each fat replacement changed the muffins in its own

way. For example, the pudding fat replacement had positive changes in sweetness, overall flavor,

and aftertaste but negative changes in standing height, appearance, and overall texture. The

applesauce replacement muffin had the best overall qualities. This fat replacement had the

highest or second highest ratings in each sensory category. This evidence shows that fat

contributes to a lot of characteristics in food. Finding fat replacements that make the same exact

food product characteristics is extremely difficult.

13
 References

Chiou, W., Yeh, L., & Chang, M. (2009, November 20). Effects Of Health-Related Claims On
The Differential Threshold Of Consumers' Sweetness Sensation. Journal of Sensory Studies,
24(4), 621-633. doi:10.1111/j.1745-459x.2009.00230.x

Dietary Guidelines. (2016, November 20). Retrieved November 20, 2016, from
https://health.gov/dietaryguidelines/

Laguna, L., Primo-Martn, C., Varela, P., Salvador, A., & Sanz, T. (2013, December 17). HPMC
and inulin as fat replacers in biscuits: Sensory and instrumental evaluation. LWT - Food Science
and Technology, 56(2), 494-501. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2013.12.025

Ward, J. D., & Ward, L. T. (2002). Principles of food science (3rd ed.). Tinley Park, IL:
Goodheart-Willcox.

Zoulias, E., Oreopoulou, V., & Kounalaki, E. (2002). effect of fat and sugar replacement on
cookie properties. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 82(14), 1637-1644.
doi:10.1002/jsfa.1230

14