Journal of Food Science and Technology

, Volume 56, Issue 2, pp 624–633 | Cite as

Characterization, processing potential and drivers for preference of pepper cultivars in the production of sweet or spicy jellies

  • Jéssica Almeida Alves
  • Paula Nogueira Curi
  • Rafael Pio
  • Edwaldo dos Santos Penoni
  • Moacir Pasqual
  • Vanessa Rios de SouzaEmail author
Original Article


Due to the importance of studying alternatives to reduce pepper post-harvest loss and verify the processing potential of the several cultivars/varieties available, the objective of this study was to characterize common peppers in Brazil, and to evaluate their potential for further processing into jelly form. More specifically, the most-consumed species and varieties in Brazil were investigated, that is: Habanero, Cheiro do Norte, Biquinho, Malagueta, Cayenne, Paprika and Dedo de Moça. Additionally, the drivers of liking for pepper jelly were sought so as to understand the desirable characteristics of this product. The different peppers were initially assessed by the following physical and physicochemical analyses: length, diameter, unit mass, total soluble solids, total titratable acidity, pH, color, total phenolic content, antioxidant activity, and vitamin C levels. Jellies made with different pepper types were also analyzed for total titratable acidity, pH, color, and texture profile, and a sensory study was conducted to elucidate the drivers of liking. As expected, different pepper types varied in physical and physicochemical properties, and the resulting jellies also differed in terms of physical, physicochemical, textural and sensory characteristics. In general, less pungent peppers (Biquinho, Paprika and Cheiro do Norte) were the most suitable for processing to produce jellies with more desirable attributes for consumers: reddish color, characteristic flavor and aroma of a pepper, sweet taste, and low pungency.


Capsicum ssp Pepper types Jelly Consumer profile 



To FAPEMIG, CNPq and CAPES for the financial support.


  1. Adams J, Williams A, Lancaster B, Foley M (2007) Advantages and uses of check all-that-apply response compared to traditional scaling of attributes for salty snacks. In: 7th Pangborn sensory science symposium, 12–16 August, Minneapolis, MN, USAGoogle Scholar
  2. Bourne MC (1968) Texture profile of ripening pears. J Food Sci 33:223–226. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bourne MC (1978) Texture profile analysis. Food Technol 32:62–66Google Scholar
  4. Brandt MA, Skinner LZ, Coleman JA (1963) Texture profile method. J Food Sci 28:404–409. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brand-Williams W, Cuvelier ME, Berset C (1995) Use of a free-radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. Food Sci Technol 28:25–30. Google Scholar
  6. Costa LV, Bentes JLS, Lopes MTG, Alves SM, Viana Júnior JM (2015) Caracterização de acessos de pimentas do Amazonas. Hortic Bras 33:290–298. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Finger FL, Casali VWD (2006) Colheita e manejo pós-colheita da pimenta. Inf Agropecu 27:99–103Google Scholar
  8. Friedman HH, Whitney JE, Szczesniak AS (1963) The texturometer- a new instrument for objective texture measurement. J Food Sci 28:390–396. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gennadios A, Weller CL, Hanna MA, Froning GW (1996) Mechanical and barrier properties of egg albumen films. J Food Sci 61:585–589. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hervert-Hernández D, Sáyago-Ayerdi SG, Goñi I (2010) Bioactive compounds of four hot pepper varieties (Capsicum annuum L.), antioxidant capacity, and intestinal bioaccessibility. J Agric Food Chem 58:3399–3406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hoffman PG, Lego MC, Galetto WG (1983) Separation and quantitation of red pepper major heat principles by reverse-phase high pressure liquid chromatography. J Agric Food Chem 31:1326–1330. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. IAL—Instituto Adolfo Lutz (2005) Normas Analíticas do Instituto Adolfo Lutz. Instituto, São PauloGoogle Scholar
  13. Larrauri JA, Ruperez P, Saura-Calixto F (1997) Effect of drying temperature on the stability of polyphenols and antioxidant activity of red grape pomace peels. J Agric Food Chem 45:1390–1393. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lunn J (2007) Nutrição e envelhecimento saudável. Nutrição em Pauta 85:5–9Google Scholar
  15. Marco GI (1968) Rapid method for evaluation of antioxidants. J Am Oil Chem Soc 45:594–598. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Matsufuji H, Hiroshi M, Keiko I, Osamu N, Makoto C, Mitsuharu T (2007) Anti-oxidant content of different coloured sweet peppers, white, green, yellow, orange and red (Capsicum annuum L.). Int J Food Sci Technol 42:1482–1488. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nunes CA, Pinheiro ACM, Bastos SC (2011) Evaluating consumer acceptance tests by three-way internal preference mapping obtained by parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC). J Sens Stud 26:167–174. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pinheiro ACM, Nunes CA, Vietoris V (2013) SensoMaker: a tool for sensorial characterization of food products. Ciênc Agrotec 37:199–201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pinto CMF, Pinto CLO, Donzeles SML (2013) Pimenta Capsicum: propriedades químicas, nutricionais, farmacológicas e medicinais e seu potencial para o agronegócio. Rev Bras Agropecu Sustent 3:108–112. Google Scholar
  20. Ramful D, Tarnus E, Aruoma OI, Bourdan E, Bahorun T (2011) Polyphenol composition, vitamina C content and antioxidant capacity of Mauritian citrus fruit pulps. Food Res Int 44:2088–2099. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Re R, Pellegrini N, Proteggente A, Pannala A, Yang M, Rice-Evans C (1999) Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Adv Free Radic Biol Med 26:1231–1237. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ribeiro CSC, Lopes CA, Carvalho SIC, Henz GP, Reifschneider FJB (Org.) (2008) Pimentas Capsicum. Embrapa Hortaliças, Brasília, pp 55–69Google Scholar
  23. Sanatombik K, Sharma GJ (2008) Capsaicin content and pungency of different Capsicum spp. Cultivars. Notulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca 36:88–90.
  24. Singleton VL, Orthofer R, Lamuela-Raventos RM (1999) Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of Folin–Ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol 299:152–178. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Souza VR, Pereira PAP, Pinheiro ACM, Nunes CA, Pio R, Queiroz F (2014) Evaluation of the jelly processing potential of raspberries adapted in Brazil. J Food Sci 79:407–412. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Stone HS, Sidel JL (1993) Sensory evaluation practices. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  27. Strohecker RL, Henning HM (1967) Análises de vitaminas: métodos comprovados. Paz Montalvo, Madri, p 428Google Scholar
  28. Szczesniak AS (2002) Texture is a sensory property. Food Qual Prefer 13:215–225. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Szczesniak AS, Kahn EE (1971) Consumer awareness of and attitudes to food texture I. Adults J Texture Stud 2:280–295. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Topuz A, Dincera C, Özdemir KS, Feng H, Kushad M (2011) Influence of different drying methods on carotenoids and capsaicinoids of paprika (Cv., Jalapeno). Food Chem 129:860–865. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Van Vliet T (1991) Terminology to be used in cheese rheology. Int Dairy Fed 268:5–15Google Scholar
  32. Vasco C, Ruales J, Kamal-Eldin A (2008) Total phenolic compounds and antioxidant capacities of major fruits from Ecuador. Food Chem 111:16–823. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wahyuni Y, Ballester AR, Sudarmonowati E, Bino RJ, Bovy AG (2011) Metabolite diversity in pepper (Capsicum) fruits of thirty-two diverse accessions: variation in health-related compounds and implications for breeding. Phytochemistry 72:1358–1370. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Food Scientists & Technologists (India) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Food ScienceFederal University of LavrasLavrasBrazil
  2. 2.Department of AgricultureFederal University of LavrasLavrasBrazil

Personalised recommendations