Sugar Tech

pp 1–7 | Cite as

Optimization of Spray Drying Technology for Sugarcane Juice Using Natural and Synthetic Encapsulating Agents

  • Jyoti NishadEmail author
  • Shabir Ahmad Mir
  • Kanika Walia
Research Article


The present study investigated the optimum process conditions for spray drying of sugarcane juice using different natural (carrot fiber) and synthetic (maltodextrin, gum arabic, liquid glucose) encapsulating agents. Spray drying was performed in a pilot-scale spray dryer under the varying conditions of inlet air temperature (140–160 °C), outlet air temperature (90–105 °C), concentration of encapsulating agents (10–50% w/w), and total soluble solids (TSS) of the feed (13–15 g/100 g). The interaction between process variables and glass transition temperature (Tg) of sugarcane juice revealed a significant effect on dried powder yield. Based on recovery of spray-dried powder, 30% maltodextrin, 14 g/100 g TSS, 150 °C inlet air temperature, and 100 °C outlet air temperature was optimized for sugarcane juice powder. The obtained powders were then analyzed for their nutritional, physical, and morphological properties. Moreover, sensory acceptability of reconstituted sugarcane juice powder proved spray drying as a potential tool for conversion of sugarcane juice into a shelf stable convenience processed product.


Encapsulating agents Glass transition temperature Maltodextrin Spray drying Sugarcane juice 



The authors express their gratitude to the Central Instrumentation Facility and Department of Food Science and Technology, Pondicherry University for their support and facilitation.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Alcarde, A.R., J.M.M. Walder, and J. Horii. 2001. Comparison between gamma radiation and Kamoran HJ in the decontamination of sugarcane must. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation 25 (2): 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AOAC. 2000. Official methods of analysis, 17th ed. Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.Google Scholar
  3. Bhandari, B.R., N. Datta, and T. Howes. 1997. Problems associated with spray drying of sugar-rich foods. Drying Technology 15 (2): 671–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brochier, B., G.D. Mercali, and L.D.F. Marczak. 2016. Influence of moderate electric field on inactivation kinetics of peroxidase and polyphenol oxidase and on phenolic compounds of sugarcane juice treated by ohmic heating. LWT-Food Science and Technology 74: 396–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carr, R.L. 1965. Classifying flow properties of solids. Chemical Engineering 1: 69–72.Google Scholar
  6. Cynthia, S.J., J.D. Bosco, and S. Bhol. 2015. Physical and structural properties of spray dried tamarind (Tamarindus indica L.) pulp extract powder with encapsulating hydrocolloids. International Journal of Food Properties 18 (8): 1793–1800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DAC and FW (Department of Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers Welfare), Directorate of Economics and Statistics, Agricultural Statistics Division. 2017. First advance estimates of production of commercial crops for 2017–2018. Accessed 13 July 2018.
  8. Fang, Z., and B. Bhandari. 2012. Comparing the efficiency of protein and maltodextrin on spray drying of bayberry juice. Food Research International 48 (2): 478–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Goula, A.M., K.G. Adamopoulos, and N.A. Kazakis. 2004. Influence of spray drying conditions on tomato powder properties. Drying Technology 22 (5): 1129–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goula, A.M., and K.G. Adamopoulos. 2008. Effect of maltodextrin addition during spray drying of tomato pulp in dehumidified air: II. Powder properties. Drying Technology 26 (6): 726–737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hausner, H.H. 1967. Friction conditions in a mass of metal powder. International Journal of Powder Metallurgy 3: 7–13.Google Scholar
  12. Jinapong, N., M. Suphantharika, and P. Jamnong. 2008. Production of instant soymilk powders by ultrafiltration, spray drying and fluidized bed agglomeration. Journal of Food Engineering 84 (2): 194–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jindal, V., and P. Boonyai. 2001. Effect of processing conditions on the quality of spray dried soy milk. Proceedings of the Asian Oceania Drying Conference 2: 477–486.Google Scholar
  14. Medcalf, D.G., and K.A. Gilles. 1965. Wheat starches. I. Comparison of physicochemical properties. Cereal Chemistry 42: 558–568.Google Scholar
  15. Ozoglu, H., and A. Bayindirli. 2002. Inhibition of enzymic browning in cloudy apple juice with anti-browning agents. Food Control 13: 213–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Papadakis, S.E., C. Gardeli, and C. Tzia. 2006. Spray drying of raisin juice concentrate. Drying Technology 24 (2): 173–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Perring, L., and J. Blanc. 2008. Faster measurement of minerals in milk powders: Comparison of a high power Wavelength Dispersive XRF system with ICP-AES and potentiometry reference methods. Food Analytical Methods 1: 205–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Qudsieh, H.Y.M., S. Yusof, A. Osman, and R.A. Rahman. 2002. Effect of maturity on chlorophyll, tannin, color, and polyphenol oxidase (PPO) activity of sugarcane juice (Saccharum officinarum Var. Yellow Cane). Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 50 (6): 1615–1618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Quek, S.Y., N.K. Chok, and P. Swedlund. 2007. The physicochemical properties of spray-dried watermelon powders. Chemical Engineering and Processing 46 (5): 386–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ranganna, S. 1986. Handbook of analysis and quality control for fruit and vegetable products. New York: Tata McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
  21. Sankhla, S., A. Chaturvedi, A. Kuna, and K. Dhanlakshmi. 2012. Preservation of sugarcane juice using hurdle technology. Sugar Tech 14 (1): 26–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schoch, T.J. 1964. Swelling power and solubility of granular starches. Methods in Carbohydrate Chemistry 4: 106–108.Google Scholar
  23. Songsermpong, S., and W. Jittanit. 2010. Comparison of peeling, squeezing and concentration methods for the sugarcane juice production. Suranaree Journal of Science & Technology 17 (1): 49–55.Google Scholar
  24. Taylor, B. 2005. Other beverage ingredients. In Chemistry and technology of soft drinks and fruit juices, ed. P.R. Ashurst, 90–128. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  25. Tonon, R.V., C. Brabet, and M.D. Hubinger. 2008. Influence of process conditions on the physicochemical properties of açai (Euterpe oleraceae Mart.) powder produced by spray drying. Journal of Food Engineering 88 (3): 411–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yusof, S., L.S. Shian, and A. Osman. 2000. Changes in quality of sugarcane juice upon delayed extraction and storage. Food Chemistry 68 (4): 395–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Sugar Research & Promotion 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Food Science and Postharvest TechnologyICAR-Indian Agricultural Research InstituteNew DelhiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Food TechnologyIslamic University of Science and TechnologyAwantiporaIndia

Personalised recommendations