4) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The data collected on the different aspects were tabulated and analyzed statistically using the
method of analysis of variance and critical difference technique. The significant and non-
significant differences observed have been analyzed critically within and between the
treatment combinations.

The analyzed data is presented in this chapter under the following headings:
1. Chemical characteristics
2. Microbial characteristics
3. Organoleptic characteristics
4. Statistical characteristics
5. Estimation of cost of production
4.1. Average data for different parameters of control and experiments (in percent)

scores/ values based on mean value of different parameters of treatments CD Values

1. Chemical analysis in percent

Treatments
Parameters T0 T1 T2 T3
Fat 14.73 14.34 14.05 13.75 0.02
Protein 8.31 8.35 8.18 8.01 0.02
Moisture 50.22 50.77 51.75 52.31 0.62
Carbohydrate 24.9 24.45 23.96 23.47 0.11
Ash 1.86 2.05 2.016 1.97 0.02
Total solids 49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25 0.32
Acidity 0.38 0.36 0.35 0.34 0.02
2. Microbiological scores cfu/gm
Treatments
Parameters T0 T1 T2 T3
Yeast&mould(cfu/gm) 3.4 4.2 4 3.8 1.23
Coliform Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil
Standard plate count 15.2 14.2 12.8 12 2.20
3. Organoleptic scores
Treatments
Parameters T0 T1 T2 T3
Color & appearance 7.6 8.1 8.3 7.4 0.58
Flavor and taste 7.9 8.1 8.3 7.6 0.48
Body and texture 8.3 8 7.6 7.3 0.44
Overall acceptability 7.7 8.1 8.2 7.6 0.44
 4.2 CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS

4.2.1. Moisture percentage

The data for moisture percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 50.21 50.22 50.24 50.23 50.2 251.10 50.22
T1 50.79 50.77 50.78 50.76 50.75 253.85 50.77
T2 51.73 51.76 51.74 51.75 51.77 258.75 51.75
T3 52.7 50.72 52.73 52.71 52.71 261.57 52.31

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.62

From the above data on moisture percentage in samples of different treatments and control,
the highest mean moisture percentage was recorded in the sample of T3 (52.31) followed by
T2 (51.75), T1 (50.77), T0 (50.22).

ANOVA

ANOVA for moisture percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.7846 0.1961 0.98296 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 8 7 3 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 13.36 4.45 22.32 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 2.39 0.20

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table, the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was
significant.
 4.2.2. Ash percentage

The data for ash percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 1.86 1.87 1.85 1.84 1.88 9.30 1.86
T1 2.03 2.05 2.06 2.04 2.07 10.25 2.05
T2 2.015 2.017 2.016 2.018 2.014 10.08 2.02
T3 1.99 1.97 1.96 1.95 1.98 9.85 1.97

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.02

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T1 (2.05) followed by T2 (2.02),
T3 (1.97), T0 (1.86).

ANOVA

ANOVA for ash percentage in control and experimental sample;

Source d.f. S.S. M.S.S. F-cal F tab. Result T 5%

Replication 4 0.0045 0.001132 2.9100642 3.2591667 Non 2.178812
3 5 4 3 Signi 8
Treatment 3 0.00 0.00 4.16 3.49 Signi
Error 12 0.00 0.00
Total 19 0.0140
5

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table, the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.
 4.2.3. Carbohydrate percentage

The data for carbohydrate percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 24.9 25 24.7 25.1 24.8 124.50 24.90
T1 24.44 24.45 24.47 24.46 24.43 122.25 24.45
T2 23.98 23.94 23.96 23.95 23.97 119.80 23.96
T3 23.48 23.46 23.49 23.47 23.45 117.35 23.47

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.11

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T0 (24.90) followed by T1
(24.45), T2 (23.96), T3 (23.47).

ANOVA

ANOVA for carbohydrate percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
Non
Rep 4 0.02195 0.005488 0.812461 3.259167 5.952545 Signi 2.178813
Treat 3 5.71 1.90 282.02 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 0.08 0.01

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table, the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.
 4.2.4. Fat percentage

The data for fat percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 14.74 14.73 14.75 14.71 14.72 73.65 14.73

T1 14.33 14.32 14.35 14.34 14.36 71.70 14.34

T2 14.04 14.06 14.03 14.05 14.07 70.25 14.05

T3 13.74 13.75 14.77 13.73 13.76 69.75 13.95

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.32

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T0 (14.73) followed by T1
(14.34), T2 (14.05), T3 (13.95).

ANOVA

ANOVA for fat percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.2161 0.05403 1.0328 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 5 7 1 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 1.84 0.61 11.70 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 0.63 0.05

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table 4.8.b., the F (Cal) value was smaller
than the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was
non-significant.
 4.2.5. Protein percentage

The data for protein percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 8.32 8.31 8.33 8.3 8.29 41.55 8.31

T1 8.33 8.37 8.35 8.36 8.34 41.75 8.35

T2 8.2 8.17 8.19 8.18 8.16 40.90 8.18

T3 7.99 8.01 8 8.03 8.02 40.05 8.01

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.02

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T1 (8.35) followed by T0 (8.31),
T2 (8.18), T3 (8.01).

ANOVA

ANOVA for protein percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.0006 0.00016 0.5820 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 5 2 9 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 0.35 0.12 420.75 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 0.00 0.00

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table, the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.
 4.2.6. Acidity percentage

The data for acidity percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 0.4 0.36 0.39 0.38 0.37 1.90 0.38

T1 0.37 0.34 0.36 0.35 0.38 1.80 0.36

T2 0.34 0.36 0.34 0.38 0.33 1.75 0.35

T3 0.36 0.34 0.35 0.32 0.33 1.70 0.34

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.02

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T0 (0.38) followed by T1 (0.36),
T2 (0.35), T3 (0.34).

ANOVA

ANOVA for acidity percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.0007 0.00018 0.58441 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 5 8 6 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 0.00 0.00 4.55 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 0.00 0.00

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table, the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.
 4.2.7. Total solid percentage

The data for Total solid percentage in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 50.8 49.77 49.79 49.78 49.76 249.90 49.98

T1 49.18 49.22 49.2 49.19 49.21 246.00 49.20

T2 48.24 48.23 48.25 48.22 48.21 241.15 48.23

T3 47.25 47.27 47.24 47.23 47.26 236.25 47.25

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.32

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T0 (49.98) followed by T1
(49.20), T2 (48.23), T3 (47.25).

ANOVA

ANOVA for Total solid percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.2058 0.05146 0.96771 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 5 3 9 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 21.03 7.01 131.85 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 0.64 0.05

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table 4.20.b. the F (Cal) value was smaller
than the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was
non-significant.
 4.3 MICROBIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
4.3.1. Yeast and mould score

The data for Yeast and mould score in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Replications Mean Range F-Test C.D. at

Treatments R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Min. Max. 5% level
T0 3 4 4 3 3 3.40
T1 5 4 5 4 3 4.20
4 3 5 3 5 Signi 1.23
T2 4.00
T3 3 4 3 4 5 3.80

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T1 (4.20) followed by T2 (4.00),
T3 (3.80), T0 (3.40).

ANOVA

ANOVA for Yeast and mould percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
Non
Rep 4 1.3 0.325 0.410526 3.259167 5.952545 Signi 2.178813
Treat 3 1.75 0.58 0.74 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 9.50 0.79

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table, the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.

Table 4.3.1.2: Critical difference for moisture percentage of control and

experimental sample

Treatment Average T0 T1 T2 T3
49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25
T0 49.98 0.78 1.75 2.73
T1 49.2 0.97 1.95
T2 48.23 0.98
T3 47.25

C.D. = 0.32

The following observations are made:

 The difference between the mean values of T0-T1 (0.55) was less than the C.D. value,
0.62 Therefore, the difference was non-significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T2 (1.53) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0..62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T3 (2.094) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T2 (0.98) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T3 (1.544) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T2-T3 (0.564) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 It is therefore concluded that, the difference between control and treatment was found
to be significant in treatments T0- T2, T0- T3, T1- T2, T1- T3, T2- T3.
 50.00
49.50
49.00
48.50
48.00
47.50
47.00
46.50
46.00
45.50
T0 T1 T2 T3

Series1

Fig 4.3.1.1: Average percentage of moisture in the samples of control and experimental
samples.

 T0 - T0 - Control prepared from milk (100:00).

 T1 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (97:2:1).
 T2 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (95:4:1).
 4.3.2. Coliform count

It is evident from the table that the coli from count in control and experimental samples were.

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5

T0 NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL

T1 NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL

T2 NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL

T3 NIL NIL NIL NIL NIL

Nil=Negative

It is evident from the table, a that the coli from test for control and experimental sample was
100% negative. It shows the absence of gram negative bacteria which means the strict
hygienic practice was maintained during the procedure preparation.
 4.3.3. Standard plate count score

The data for standard plate count in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 18 16 15 15 12 76.00 15.20
T1 16 15 16 13 11 71.00 14.20
T2 15 14 12 13 10 64.00 12.80
T3 13 12 10 11 14 60.00 12.00

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 2.20

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T0 (15.20) followed by T1
(14.20), T2 (12.80), T3 (12.00).

ANOVA

ANOVA for Standard plate count percentage in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
Non
Rep 4 31.7 7.925 3.09772 3.259167 5.952545 Signi 2.178813
Treat 3 30.55 10.18 3.98 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 30.70 2.56

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.

Table 4.3.1.2: Critical difference for moisture percentage of control and

experimental sample
Treatment Average T0 T1 T2 T3
49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25
T0 49.98 0.78 1.75 2.73
T1 49.2 0.97 1.95
T2 48.23 0.98
T3 47.25

C.D. = 0.32

The following observations are made:

 The difference between the mean values of T0-T1 (0.55) was less than the C.D. value,
0.62 Therefore, the difference was non-significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T2 (1.53) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0..62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T3 (2.094) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T2 (0.98) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T3 (1.544) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T2-T3 (0.564) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 It is therefore concluded that, the difference between control and treatment was found
to be significant in treatments T0- T2, T0- T3, T1- T2, T1- T3, T2- T3.
 50.00
49.50
49.00
48.50
48.00
47.50
47.00
46.50
46.00
45.50
T0 T1 T2 T3

Series1

Fig 4.3.1.1: Average percentage of moisture in the samples of control and experimental
samples.

 T0 - T0 - Control prepared from milk (100:00).

 T1 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (97:2:1).
 T2 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (95:4:1).
 4.4 ORGANOLEPTIC CHARACTERISTICS
4.4.1. Color and Appearance score

The data for Color and Appearance score in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 8 7.5 7 7.5 8 38.00 7.60
T1 7.5 8.5 8 8.5 8 40.50 8.10
T2 8.5 8 8.5 8 8.5 41.50 8.30
T3 7 8 7.5 7 7.5 37.00 7.40

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.58

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T2 (8.30) followed by T1 (8.10),
T3 (7.40), T0 (7.60).

ANOVA

ANOVA for Color and appearance score in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.42857 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 0.3 0.075 1 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 2.65 0.88 5.05 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 2.10 0.18

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.

Table 4.3.1.2: Critical difference for moisture percentage of control and

experimental sample
Treatment Average T0 T1 T2 T3
49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25
T0 49.98 0.78 1.75 2.73
T1 49.2 0.97 1.95
T2 48.23 0.98
T3 47.25

C.D. = 0.32

The following observations are made:

 The difference between the mean values of T0-T1 (0.55) was less than the C.D. value,
0.62 Therefore, the difference was non-significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T2 (1.53) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0..62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T3 (2.094) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T2 (0.98) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T3 (1.544) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T2-T3 (0.564) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 It is therefore concluded that, the difference between control and treatment was found
to be significant in treatments T0- T2, T0- T3, T1- T2, T1- T3, T2- T3.
 50.00
49.50
49.00
48.50
48.00
47.50
47.00
46.50
46.00
45.50
T0 T1 T2 T3

Series1

Fig 4.3.1.1: Average percentage of moisture in the samples of control and experimental
samples.

 T0 - T0 - Control prepared from milk (100:00).

 T1 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (97:2:1).
 T2 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (95:4:1).
 4.4.2. Body and Texture score

The data for body and Texture score in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 8 8.5 8 8.5 8.5 41.50 8.30
T1 7.5 8 7.5 8.5 8.5 40.00 8.00
T2 7.5 7 8 7.5 8 38.00 7.60
T3 7 7.5 7 7.5 7.5 36.50 7.30

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.44

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T0 (8.30) followed by T1 (8.00),
T2 (7.60), T3 (7.30).

ANOVA

ANOVA for body and texture score in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.2687 2.63265 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 1.075 5 3 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 2.90 0.97 9.47 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 1.22 0.10

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.

Table 4.3.1.2: Critical difference for moisture percentage of control and

experimental sample

Treatment Average T0 T1 T2 T3
49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25
T0 49.98 0.78 1.75 2.73
T1 49.2 0.97 1.95
T2 48.23 0.98
T3 47.25

C.D. = 0.32

The following observations are made:

 The difference between the mean values of T0-T1 (0.55) was less than the C.D. value,
0.62 Therefore, the difference was non-significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T2 (1.53) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0..62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T3 (2.094) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T2 (0.98) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T3 (1.544) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T2-T3 (0.564) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 It is therefore concluded that, the difference between control and treatment was found
to be significant in treatments T0- T2, T0- T3, T1- T2, T1- T3, T2- T3.
 50.00
49.50
49.00
48.50
48.00
47.50
47.00
46.50
46.00
45.50
T0 T1 T2 T3

Series1

Fig 4.3.1.1: Average percentage of moisture in the samples of control and experimental
samples.

 T0 - T0 - Control prepared from milk (100:00).

 T1 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (97:2:1).
 T2 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (95:4:1).
 4.4.3. Flavor and Taste score

The data for flavor and Taste score in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 7.5 7.5 8 8.5 8 39.50 7.90
T1 7.5 8 8.5 8 8.5 40.50 8.10
T2 8.5 8 8.5 8 8.5 41.50 8.30
T3 7 8 7.5 7.5 8 38.00 7.60

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.48

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T2 (8.30) followed by T1 (8.10),
T0 (7.90), T3 (7.60).

ANOVA

ANOVA for flavour and taste score in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
0.2312 1.88135 3.25916 5.95254 Non 2.17881
Rep 4 0.925 5 6 7 5 Signi 3
Treat 3 1.34 0.45 3.63 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 1.48 0.12

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.

Table 4.3.1.2: Critical difference for moisture percentage of control and

experimental sample

Treatment Average T0 T1 T2 T3
49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25
T0 49.98 0.78 1.75 2.73
T1 49.2 0.97 1.95
T2 48.23 0.98
T3 47.25

C.D. = 0.32

The following observations are made:

 The difference between the mean values of T0-T1 (0.55) was less than the C.D. value,
0.62 Therefore, the difference was non-significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T2 (1.53) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0..62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T3 (2.094) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T2 (0.98) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T3 (1.544) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T2-T3 (0.564) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 It is therefore concluded that, the difference between control and treatment was found
to be significant in treatments T0- T2, T0- T3, T1- T2, T1- T3, T2- T3.
 50.00
49.50
49.00
48.50
48.00
47.50
47.00
46.50
46.00
45.50
T0 T1 T2 T3

Series1

Fig 4.3.1.1: Average percentage of moisture in the samples of control and experimental
samples.

 T0 - T0 - Control prepared from milk (100:00).

 T1 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (97:2:1).
 T2 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (95:4:1).
 4.4.4. Overall acceptability score

The data for Overall acceptability score in sample of different treatments are as following:-

Treatment R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 Total Mean

T0 7.5 7 8 7.5 8.5 38.50 7.70
T1 7.5 8 8 8.5 8.5 40.50 8.10
T2 8 8 8.5 8 8.5 41.00 8.20
T3 7.5 7.5 8 7.5 7.5 38.00 7.60

F-Test Signi

C.D. at 5% level 0.44

From the above data on ash percentage in samples of different treatments and control, the
highest mean ash percentage was recorded in the sample of T2 (8.20) followed by T1 (8.10),
T0 (7.70), T3 (7.60).

ANOVA

ANOVA for Overall acceptability score in control and experimental sample;

F table F table
SV DF SS MS F-cal 5% 1% Result T 5%
Non
Rep 4 1.3 0.325 3.25 3.259167 5.952545 Signi 2.178813
Treat 3 1.30 0.43 4.33 3.49 7.59 Signi
Error 12 1.20 0.10

As evident from the result of ANOVA given in the table the F (Cal) value was smaller than
the table value of F (3.49) at 5% level of significance. Therefore; the difference was non-
significant.

Table 4.3.1.2: Critical difference for moisture percentage of control and

experimental sample

Treatment Average T0 T1 T2 T3
49.98 49.2 48.23 47.25
T0 49.98 0.78 1.75 2.73
T1 49.2 0.97 1.95
T2 48.23 0.98
T3 47.25

C.D. = 0.32

The following observations are made:

 The difference between the mean values of T0-T1 (0.55) was less than the C.D. value,
0.62 Therefore, the difference was non-significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T2 (1.53) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0..62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T0-T3 (2.094) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T2 (0.98) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T1-T3 (1.544) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 The difference between the mean values of T2-T3 (0.564) was greater than the C.D.
value, 0.62 Therefore, the difference was significant.
 It is therefore concluded that, the difference between control and treatment was found
to be significant in treatments T0- T2, T0- T3, T1- T2, T1- T3, T2- T3.
 50.00
49.50
49.00
48.50
48.00
47.50
47.00
46.50
46.00
45.50
T0 T1 T2 T3

Series1

Fig 4.3.1.1: Average percentage of moisture in the samples of control and experimental
samples.

 T0 - T0 - Control prepared from milk (100:00).

 T1 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (97:2:1).
 T2 - Experimental sample prepared from Milk, Aloe vera gel and dried Betel leaf
powder (95:4:1).