LWT - Food Science and Technology 149 (2021) 111632

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

LWT

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/lwt

Ultrasonication of mayonnaise formulated with Xanthan and guar gums:

Rheological modeling, effects on optical properties and emulsion stability
, Ariha Devra a, Atul Dhiman a, Pramod K. Prabhakar a,*
Yogesh Kumar a, b, Soumen Roy a
a
Department of Food Science and Technology, National Institute of Food Technology Entrepreneurship and Management, Kundli, Sonipat-131028, Haryana, India
b
Department of Agronomy, Food, Natural Resources, Animals and Environment (DAFNAE), University of Padova, Agripolis Avenue of the University, 16- Legnaro (PD),
Padua, Italy

A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Keywords:
Mayonnaise The present research explored the potential of probe ultrasound homogenizer and hydrocolloids in formulating
Ultrasonication and stabilizing mayonnaise. The effect of ultrasonic (US) treatment (12 min at 20%, 30%, 40% amplitude)
Rheological properties and stabilizers Xanthan gum (XG; 0.5% w/w), guar gum (GG; 0.5% w/w), and XG/GG (1:1) on emulsion
Xanthan gum storage stability (ESS), physicochemical and rheological properties of mayonnaise were studied. Rheological
Guar gum
data comprising of shear rate (γ˙) and shear stress (τ) was analysed through four different rheological
Optical properties
models (Her- schel–Bulkley, Casson, Power Law, and Carreau-Yasuda models), and their fitness was
evaluated. The samples
exhibited non-Newtonian, pseudoplastic behaviour with flow behaviour index (n) < 1 and consistency index (K)
43.58–72.38 Pa sn. The apparent viscosity measured at a shear rate of 0–20/sec, was decreased steeply, by the
application of 40% amplitude, most prominent in GG samples (1007 Pa s to 608 Pa s) while compared with XG
(1625 Pa s to 1304 Pa s). The increase in US amplitude caused a linear increase in the refractive index (ranging
from 1.3681 to 1.3791) and decreased pH (ranging from 3.686 to 3.523). A significant reduction in whiteness (L*
value) from 78.300 to 73.860 was noted for XG/GG (1:1) samples. The ESS decreased with an increase in US
amplitude, and 40% US amplitude-modulated GG sample had the least ESS (90.14%) among all treated and
control samples. However, treated samples had higher ESS than the market sample (86.50%).

1. Introduction
Mayonnaise is a cold, viscous semi-solid that falls in the class of
condiments, salad dressings, or salad creams (Chukwu & Sadiq, 2008).
Chemically, it is defined as an oil-in-water emulsion where oil is the
dispersed phase and water is the dispersion medium obtained by
emulsifying edible vegetable oil in vinegar (aqueous phase) (Mirzana-
jafi-Zanjani, Yousefi, & Ehsani, 2019). Egg-yolk lecithin is commonly
used as an emulsifier as it contains phospholipid classes and fatty acid
composition with unique functional properties such as surface tension
reduction, emulsion stability, and o Xidative stability (Palacios & Wang,
2005). Commercial mayonnaise additionally contains preservatives
such as sodium benzoate and potassium sorbate (Tavakoli, Karami,
Bahramian, & Emamifar, 2021); and anti-oXidants like BHA (butylated
hydroXyanisole), BHT (butylated hydroXytoluene), and TBHQ (tertiary
butylhydroquinone) (Mirzanajafi-Zanjani et al., 2019). Mayonnaise is
prepared by slowly blending oil with a pre-mi X, constituting egg yolk,
mustard, and vinegar resulting in a viscous emulsion of closely packed
oil droplets in the aqueous phase (Depree & Savage, 2001). The quality
of commercial mayonnaise depends upon various factors such as
appearance, particle size, pH, emulsion stability, and flow properties
(Ma & Barbosa-Ca´novas, 1995) which affects the market potential.
The market of mayonnaise in India alone is expected to reach INR
1000 crores by 2020. The global market is expected to grow with a
CAGR (Compound annual growth rate) up to INR 9967 crores by
2021–26 (Research and Markets, 2021). The global mayonnaise market
is pri- marily driven by the rising demand for convenience foods and
the increased utilization of mayonnaise in salad dressing. The
incorporation of plant base emulsifier and stabilizer in mayonnaise
formulation, is attracting the attention of consumers. Like nowadays,
eggless mayon- naise is getting importance because of the consumer
trends towards veganism and vegetarianism. Eggless mayonnaise
consists of many functional ingredients (e.g., whey protein and solid
milk powder) to replicate the creaminess, mouth-feel, and texture of
traditional mayon- naise. Studies suggest that egg-yolk can be replaced
by milk proteins (whey) or plant-based proteins such as chickpea,
broad beans, and lupin

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: p r a m o d k p @ n i f t e m . a c . i n (P.K. Prabhakar).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2021.111632
Received 25 November 2020; Received in revised form 25 April 2021; Accepted 29 April 2021
Available online 10 May 2021
0023-6438/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Kumar et al.
flour (Alu’datt et al., 2017). Eggless mayonnaise also contains different
gums and hydrocolloids such as carboXymethylcellulose, guar gum
(GG), Xanthan gum (XG), alginates, and pectin as stabilizing and
thickening agents to obtain desired consistency and texture (Pradha-
nanga & Adhikari, 2015).
The commercial application of gums such as GG and XG have
increased in the food industry. XG comprises of D-glucose, D-mannose,
and D-glucuronic acid in the molecular ratio of 3:3:2 with several
trisaccharide side chains. Xanthan is soluble in water, readily dissolves
at room temperature and continuous miXing reduces its hydration
time. The viscoelastic properties of the hydrocolloid allow the
formation of weak gels that impart suspending characteristics in food.
It is known to improve the rheological properties and appearance of
food (Wüsten- berg, 2015). GG is made up of a complex polysaccharide
called gal- actomannan, made up of a linear chain of (1 → 4)-linked β-
D-mannopyranosyl units with (1 → 6)-linked α-D-galactopyranosyl
residues as side chains which makes it rich in hydroXyl groups
(Mudgil, Barak, & Khatkar, 2014). When added to water (polar
solvent), it forms hydrogen bond, which helps to thicken the solution
and impart viscos- ity. GG is known for its thickening, emulsifying,
binding, and gelling properties, as well as being quickly soluble in cold
water (Thombare, Jha, Mishra, & Siddiqui, 2016). The dissolution rate
of GG in water is affected by the presence of water-binding agents
(salts or sucrose), particle size, and temperature. The decrease in
particle size and an in- crease in temperature leads to an increased
hydration rate (Maier, Anderson, Karl, Magnuson, & Whistler, 1993).
GG behaves as a thiXo- tropic solution above 0.5% (w/w)
concentration (Srichamroen, 2007) and is stable over a wide range of
pH due to its uncharged non-ionic behaviour (Su, Lien, Lee, & Ho,
2010). Su et al. (2010) reported that the combination of different gums
(XG and GG) might show better rheological and morphological
properties. However, these properties can be improved and altered by
using treatments like ultrasonics, microfluidizer and homogenizers
(Kadian, Kumar, Badgujar, & Sehra- wat, 2021).
In the food industry, low-frequency ultrasound (US) ranging from
16 to 100 kHz is preferred because cavitation occurs within this
frequency range. US treatment offers a diverse range of applications
such as emulsification/homogenization, viscosity modification,
extraction, crystallization, and microbial inactivation (Dhiman &
Prabhakar, 2021; Patist & Bates, 2008). US homogenizer promotes cost-
effective emulsion formation with a lesser amount of emulsifier needed
to maintain the emulsion stability. In the case of mayonnaise, a
desirable opaque white color is also obtained. Ultrasound causes
viscosity alteration leading to differentiated functionality and better
processing attributes (Kiani, Zhang, Delgado, & Sun, 2011). In case of
thiXotropic fluids, high shear microstreaming results in a decrease in
viscosity. It also offers food preservation by inactivating enzymes and
microbial growth, especially at increased temperatures (Villamiel & De
Jong, 2000). Interestingly, US pasteurization provides better quality
concerning color, taste, and physicochemical properties than
traditional pasteurization techniques (Patist & Bates, 2008). The flow
or rheological properties are dealt by the parameters like yield stress
(τ0 ), flow behaviour index (n), and consistency index (K) (Pazhvand &
Khavarpour, 2019; Sui et al., 2017). Various researchers (Gavahian,
Chen, Mousavi Khaneghah, Barba, & Yang, 2018; Mansouri, Pajohi-
Alamoti, Aghajani, Bazargani-Gilani, & Nourian, 2020; Tavakoli et al.,
2021) have worked on the US homoge- nized mayonnaise and have
found that it reduces the particle size of mayonnaise which results into
a higher emulsion storage stability. Gavahian et al. (2018) used three
different techniques such as me- chanical homogenization, in pack
sonication technique (sample sealed inside a package is kept in US
bath), and power US homogenizer (immersing probe directly into the
sample for manufacturing mayon- naise and he reported that power
US homogenized mayonnaise had the smallest particle size and thus
the highest physical stability. Homoge- nization using probe setup was
also better in terms of energy saving, low emulsifier concentration
requirement, and better appearance. In-pack
2
LWT 149 (2021) 111632
sonication can be better in increasing the durability of the probe as
the product and probe are segregated in this technique. Also, it elimi-
nates the risk of migration of metal ions from the US probe to the food
emulsion. In probe US homogenizer, the cavitation of product is ach-
ieved only in the nearby area when dipped in a large vessel. Additional
agitation can enhance the distribution of ultrasounds and thus, ensuring
more effective homogenization in large vessels (Mcclements, 2016a;
2016b). US homogenization preserved low-fat mayonnaise without any
chemical preservative (Tavakoli et al., 2021). At 20 kHz and 750 W, it
was found that the microbial load in mayonnaise was significantly
reduced. This study is an extension of the studies carried in the past on
the US homogenized mayonnaise. However, it is novel in terms of
exploring the effect of US treatment and gums in combination. It is
also relevant to mention that no study has been reported on US
homoge- nizer’s effect on the rheology of mayonnaise. Thus, in this
work, efforts were made: (i) to investigate the effect of gums [XG, GG
and using a combination of these both in the ratio of 1:1] (ii) effect of
US treatment on the physicochemical properties, ESS, and rheological
properties. The data generated in the present study may be used for
designing and upscaling mayonnaise manufacturing process.
Rheological information of US homogenized mayonnaise provided in
the current study can assist food manufacturers in designing pipelines
and pumps.
2. Characterization- materials and method
2.1. Materials
Powdered sugar, table salt, and corn starch (average particle size of
15 μm) were purchased from the local market in New Delhi, India. GG
(C10H14N5Na2O12P3- monomer, molecular mass- 535.15 g/mol, 99%
purity) and XG (C36H58O29P2- monomer molecular mass- 933.748 g/
mol, 99% purity) were purchased from the local supplier of Sigma-
Aldrich, USA. Food grade sodium benzoate (C 7H5NaO2, strength- 0.06
g/L, 99% purity), Acetic acid (CH₃COOH, molecular weight- 60.052 g/
mol, 99% purity) and Citric acid (C₆H₈O₇, Molecular weight- 192.124
g/ mol, 99% purity) were purchased from Advance Inorganics,
Delhi.
Soybean Oil (Fortune refined soybean oil, made in India) was obtained
from a local supermarket, and it was used directly without further pu-
rification. Whey protein concentrate (Scitron raw whey) was purchased
from an online shopping portal. Distilled water was used throughout
the experiment. Fun Foods (Dr. Oetker), Cremica, DelMonte, and Kraft
are the major players functioning in the Indian market. Samples from
these brands were purchased from Reliance Fresh (Narela market, New
Delhi) store for comparison purposes.
2.2. Preparation of mayonnaise emulsion
The formulation concept of Ma and Barbosa-Ca´novas (1995)
was adopted to develop the mayonnaise samples by using a rotary mi Xer.
The requisite ingredients were weighed using a sensitive digital
balance (Citizen, CTG1202, India). Dry ingredients, i.e., sugar, corn
starch, benzoate, gum, whey protein concentrate, and salt, were added
to distilled water in a stainless-steel bowl. All the ingredients were
miXed thoroughly using a hand-held whipper-mi Xer set at 700 rpm
and ho- mogenized for 2 min. Half the total quantity of oil (54% of the
total recipe weight) was slowly added to the mi Xture, and the speed of
the hand whipper was increased to 1000 rpm. The required amount of
acetic acid and citric acid as per the recipe, was weighed and slowly
miXed with the miXture one by one. The remaining quantity of oil and
freshly squeezed lemon juice was added while the miXer was set at
1180 rpm for 3 min. The mayonnaise was transferred to a pre-
sterilized glass jar and
stored at room temperature (20 ◦C). Three different control samples of
XG, GG, and a miX of XG and GG (in the ratio of 1:1) were prepared,
each having a 0.5% (w/w) concentration of gum(s). It should be noted
Y. Kumar et al.
that the concentration of oil and other ingredients was kept constant
in all samples. The samples were further treated with a US probe (6
mm) at
varying levels of amplitude.
2.3. Ultrasonic treatment of
mayonnaise
The US treatment was
performed by Q500 Sonicator
(Q- Sonica,
Q500-110, USA), with a max
power of 500 W & frequency of
20 kHz. A 6 mm probe was used
with an amplitude of 200 μm,
and an aliquot of 30
mL mayonnaise was poured into
a 50 mL flat beaker. Samples
were treated under different
levels of amplitude output (20%,
30%, and 40% amplitude) for 12
min (Sui et al., 2017).
2.4. pH measurement
The pH values of the samples
were determined at the
temperature of 25 ◦C by using a
— 0.42 & b* 4.08) and the values
pH meter (Eutech Instruments,
CyberScan pH tutor, Singapore)
(Pazhvand & Khavarpour,
2019). A sample of 5+g from the
freshly prepared mayonnaise
was filled in a sample beaker.
The elec- trode was lowered
into the mayonnaise sample
carefully to avoid the
formation of any air bubble, and
the pH reading was noted. Each
pH measurements of the
mayonnaise samples were
carried out in triplicate order,
and an average value with
standard deviation was
reported.
2.5. Refractive index
The digital refractometer
(Anton Paar, Abbemat 3X00,
Austria) was fitted with a hinged
sample cover which, when
closed, pressed the sample onto
the refractometer prism with a
gap less than 0.5 mm. A zero-
point calibration was performed
before any measurement to
ensure the highest possible
accuracy.
ab The sample (0.1–0.2 g
approXimate) was applied to the
prism surface. After every
sample measurement, both the
prism and sample cover were
wiped clean with soft tissue.
Using a disposable plastic
pipette (1 mL size), the prism
was flooded with distilled water.
The prism was then cleaned
with a clean dry soft tissue and
dried before applying the
sample. If a bubble was formed
in the sample, the sample was
wiped off, and the prism was
cleaned again in the standard
way, and a fresh sample was
applied. Three replicate samples
of each mayonnaise were
measured in this way, and
average values ± SD (standard
deviation) were reported.
2.6. Color measurement
The color values were
measured using a hand-held
colorimeter
(Konica Minolta, CR 148 400,
Japan) having illuminant D65,
and illu- minating/viewing
system (diffuse illumination/0<◦
viewing angle), which was
calibrated using a standard
calibrated plate (L* 93.46, a*
of L*, a* & b* were obtained. In
this+color system, L* denotes the
lightness ranging from black to
white (L*; 0- dark, 100- light), a*
represents greenness ( 60) to
redness ( 60), and b* represents
blueness ( 60) to yellowness (
60). Samples of mayonnaise
were poured into the cells so that
they fill the cells to avoid air
bubbles. The whiteness index
and total color difference (ΔE*ab)
of the samples (equations (1) and
(2)) were calculated (Himani,
Kumar, Prabhakar, & Pant, 2021;
Hsu, Chen, Weng, & Tseng,
2003).
3
LWT 149 (2021) 111632
mayonnaise samples were also facilitate relaxation and
stored under identical temperature equilibration. The
conditions for seven days. After experiments
seven days, 10 g (Fo) of were conducted at 20 ◦C, with
respective samples were fresh samples loaded every time.
weighed into centrifuge tubes The flow
and heated at 80 ◦C for 30 min. parameters- K and n were
The samples were then determined using the Power
centrifuged at 4500 rotations model. The viscoelastic response
per minute (rpm) for 10 min on versus shear frequency was
Sigma 3-18 KS centrifuge measured using the plate-plate
(Germany). After rheometer (∅ = 50 mm) at a
centrifugation, shear rate of 0–20/sec.
two layers were formed, the top
watery transparent layer and 2.8.2. Rheological models
the bottom thick opaque layer. A mathematical equation
The top layer was carefully that provides an easy and
sucked out using a sy- ringe accurate method to describe the
leaving only the bottom rheological data of a material is
precipitated layer. The called a flow model. They are
precipitated fraction (F1) weight useful to predict the state of a
was measured, and storage material when they are beyond
stability (%) was determined the range of testing instruments.
using the formula given below For example, predicting the
(Pazhvand & Khavarpour, shear stress or viscosity at a very
2019). high shear rate (Rao, 2007).
Based on the state var- iables
F1
Stability (%) = × 100 (like temperature, composition,
F0
shear rate, etc.) that influence
Fo = weight of the sample the
= magnitude of parameters
taken, F1 weight of being measured, the rheological
precipitated sample. The models are of 4 types (Rao,
stability % of the market 2014): (1) Empirical model -
sample, control samples, They are followed by sta-
and the US- tistically evaluating the
treated samples were then experimental data, e.g., Power
further analysed. model of fluid flow. (2)
Theoretical model- They are based
upon theoretical concepts to help
2.8. Rheological analysis
understand the role of structure
and identify the factors that affect
2.8.1. Rheological measurement a rheological parameter. (3)
Rheological measurements Structural model- These models
were performed with a rheometer
are derived considering the
(Anton MCR 52, Austria) using
internal structure and the
both controlled shear rate and
associated changes at applied
shear stress via a plate of 50
forces facilitating the study of
mm diameter. The mayonnaise
rheology in food samples, e.g.,
sample was loaded using a
the Casson model is extensively
spatula, and the upper plate was
used in food products for finding
lowered to achieve a designated
out yield stress. Moreover, the
gap. The experiment was
flow models that are used for
conducted at a gap distance of
yield stress are known as visco-
1.00 mm (Ma & Barbosa-Ca
plastic models. The models used
´novas, 1995). As a preliminary
in the current research are as
test, samples were rested to
follows-
WI√̅ = ̅ 100
̅ ̅ ̅ (1)
— (100
̅
— (2)
̅
L
*
̅
̅2̅ ̅ ̅*̅2̅ ̅
) +a +
̅*2̅ ̅
b
 Y. Kumar et al.
2.8.2.1. H
erschel
where, ΔL* = L*Sample - L*Standard,
Δa* = a*Sample - a*Standard and Δb*
= materials with true yield value,
b*Sample - b*Standard.
2.7. Storage stability
determination
Freshly prepared
mayonnaise was labelled as
control ‘C’ and stored for 7 days
at 25 ◦C along with the market
sample ‘A’. US homogenized
—1
behaviour index, and ‘γ˙’ (s ) is
the shear rate measured.
2.8.2.2. Casson fluid model. It is
a two constant model which
describes the steady-state shear
stress and shear rate relation of
food and biolog- ical materials
like mayonnaise, tomato puree,
yogurt, molten chocolate and
blood (Chhabra & Richardson,
1999). The Casson model
accounts for yield stress. Casson
fluids are shear-thinning which
tend to have infinite viscosity at
zero shear rate. This implies that
they behave as solids. To make
the material flow and achieve a
zero viscosity at an infinite shear
rate, a minimum force needs to
be applied, called yield stress
(Pramanik, 2013).
√ the psychotropic nature of
τ central high-pressure region,
where, τ (Pa) is the shear Stress,
το(Pa) is yield stress, and ηC (Pa
s) is the viscosity.
2.8.2.3. Power law. It is also
known as Ostwald–de Waele
power law. This mathematical
model is extremely simple but
can only describe the behaviour
of a time-independent non-
Newtonian fluid. This model re-
lates effective viscosity to the
shear rate. It is also a three-
parameter model consisting of K
—1
(Pa sn), γ˙ (s ) and n. This
model provides only
an approXimate description of
the flow behaviour because it
cannot predict the behaviour at
stress in
a non-linear way). This model
gives a very good result for
i.e., which remain solid till
particular shear stress and start
flowing above that shear stress
(Chhabra & Richardson, 1999).
τ = το + Kγ˙ n
where ′ τ′ (Pa) is the measured
stress, ′ το′ (Pa) is the measured
yield stress, ‘K’ (Pa.sn) is the
consistency index, ‘n’
(dimensionless) is the flow
reduce, which will cause
problems like low viscosity (Liu
& Tan, 2013). Consumers do
not prefer mayonnaise with low
viscosity as it is more
susceptible to phase separation.
Moreover, a high RI indicates
more oil or other ingredients
used in the product than
required, which increasing the
cost and decreasing the foaming
and swelling properties (Zhao,
Han, Yuan, & Wang, 2018). The
concentration of oil in water
emulsion, measured by the
amount of oil (mass %) in an
emulsion, is often measured
through the RI of an emulsion.
The pH and refractive index
of control and US-treated GG
and XG samples are exhibited
in Table 1. The RI values of
mayonnaise signifi- cantly (P
0.05) increased with an
increase in US amplitude with
XG,
GG, and
combinations, XG/GG (1:1)
to the US, the respectively. Due
tissue gets compressed in the
which in-
very high or low shear rates and
depends heavily on the value of n
(Chhabra & Richardson, 1999).
Therefore, the model is only
useable in a particular range to
which the coefficients were
fitted, but it is still widely used
because of its simplicity and easy
interpretation of experimental
data.
n
τ = K(γ˙)
2.8.2.4. Carreau-Yasuda model.
As observed in the power model,
the deviations of the
experimental data become
significant at very low or very
high shear rates. Hence, it
4
=
becomes necessary to take into
account the limiting values of
viscosities. Therefore, a model
known as the Carreau-Yasuda
viscosity model is used, which
tackles these problems by using
n and λ as curve fitting
parameters. This makes the
Carreau model useful for
predicting the shear-thinning
behaviour of Newtonian and
non-Newtonian fluids over a
large range of shear rates but is a
very complex model to use as it
is a five-parameter model (λ
0.05%) (Chhabra & Richardson,
1999).
≤
μ (7)
—
μ
∞
LWT 149 (2021) 111632
creases both density and RI.
When US waves are propagated
in a tissue, the medium is
compressed in the centre and
rarefied in the adjoining region,
changing its density locally. The
medium is compressed at the
intensity peak of the US wave,
increasing the RI (Chamanzar et
al., 2019). The pH values of
mayonnaise significantly (P
0.05) decreased with an increase
in US amplitude. This can be
attributed to sonolysis (i. e.,
breakdown of water molecules
due to sound), which causes a
decrease in the pH of the
emulsion (Ku, Chen, & Lee, 1997).
Cavitation is≤ the primary
phenomenon responsible for the
breakdown of water mol- ecules
which is the dispersion
medium in mayonnaise that
produces
+
H2O2, H ions, and other reactive
species (Canselier, Delmas,
Wilhelm,
& Abismaïl, 2002). A similar
reduction in pH values of
sonicated low-fat mayonnaise
was observed by Tavakoli et al.
(2021). Reduction in pH was
attributed to the increase in
acidity that might have
happened due to hydrolysis of
triglycerides and thus increased
the content of free fatty acids. It
is crucial to note that pH values
less than 4.5 have an inhibitory
effect on Listeria monocytogenes.
It is known to cause
microbiological hazards in
Ready to Serve (RTS) products
like mayonnaise which is stored
at a low temperature due to
L. monocytogenes (Hwang &
Tamplin, 2005). The pH of
mayonnaise ranged from 3.52 to
3.69 and this low pH (below 4.1)
mayonnaise is considered to be
safe from a food safety point of
view as per Vermeulen (2008).
3.2. Changes in color of
mayonnaise
Color measurements of
different US-treated mayonnaise
are shown in Table 1. The
lightness (L* value) of
mayonnaise has a major impact
on
 Y. Kumar et al.
th
e lightness The highest (78.3)
μ among all
where μ∞ is the viscosity at a
high shear rate, μο is the
viscosity at a low shear rate and
a is the power that determines
the transition between low shear
rate and high shear rate region
and λ is relaxation time
constant.
2.9. Experimental plan and
statistical analysis
The experiment was
replicated three times for each
sample, and average values were
reported. The results obtained
were subjected to a two-way
analysis of variance (2-way
ANOVA) and DUNCAN test (sig-
nificance level 0.05%) using
IBM SPSS 20.0 software.
Different rheo- logical models
(Power, Herschel Bulkley,
Casson, and Carreau- Yasuda)
curves were fitted using Origin
Pro 2020.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Effects on refractive index
and pH of mayonnaise
Physicochemical properties
like refractive index (RI) and pH
are of great importance for the
quality and safety of
mayonnaise. The most
prominent quality defect in
mayonnaise is phase
separation due to emulsion
instability. RI is a crucial
indicator of the stability,
viscosity, and shelf life of
mayonnaise. If the
concentration of oil is too low,
RI will
LWT 149 (2021) 111632
perceived appearance of the
product.
mayonnaise
formulations was
found in
mayonnaise formu-
lated with soybean oil utilizing a
combination of XG/GG (1:1)
(P 0.05). Amin, Elbeltagy,
Mustafa, and Khalil (2014) and
Mun et al. (2009) have
reported similar lighness value
in mayonniase formulated
soybean oil. The increase in L*
value upon addition of gums
was attributed to their smaller
droplet size. US treatment
reduced the L* value of all the
samples in comparison to the
control sample lightness values
(L*) decreased on increase in
the US amplitude (20, 30 and
40%) because US treatment
leads to pyrolytic degradation
of the interfacial layer (Tiwari,
Muthukumarappan, O’Donnell,
& Cullen, 2010) and re-
coalescence of the broken
droplets (Ramisetty &
Shyamsunder, 2011) which, in
turn increases the average ≤
droplet size. However, other
treatments like
homogenization and
microfluidisation of
mayonnaise [XG/GG (1:1]
showed higher values of L* i.e.,
93.89 and 86.34 (Kadian et al.
(2021). This might be due to the
higher refraction of light
because of formation of
smaller molecules (small size
emulsion droplets) and good
homogeneity (Kadian et al.
(2021). The total color
difference
(ΔE*ab) was the least for the =
combination of XG/GG (1:1)
(ΔE*ab
15.849). Hence, it indicated the
sample to be the lightest among
all the samples. The ΔE*ab
showed higher values (Table 1)
for mayonnaise subjected to
40% US amplitude. This might
have happened due to some
degree of oil separation with an
increase in US amplitude.
Chetana, Bhavana, Babylatha,
Geetha, and Suresh Kumar
(2019) have also made a similar
observation for the
mayonnaise formulated with
soybean oil.
5
 The whiteness index (WI) of all samples significantly (P ≤ 0.05)

Mean values followed by the same letter in each column are not significantly different at P ≤ 0.05 by ANOVA and Duncan test. Color parameters system where L* = Lightness, a* = tone (+a red color, -a green color) and b*
cd
decreased as compared to the control samples, with an increase in US

d
d

b
g
a
a

e
c

77.181 ± 0.271 e
Whiteness index

f
74.500 ± 0.577
73.062 ± 0.893

73.841 ± 0.966
73.120 ± 0.903

76.884 ± 0.774
77.723 ± 0.632

78.142 ± 0.674
75.498 ± 0.396

75.111 ± 0.902
73.959 ± 0.155

75.076 ± 0.214
73.748 ± 0.215
amplitude, as shown in Table 1. The whiteness of mayonnaise is an
essential quality parameter that affects consumer appeal and overall
product acceptability (Liu, Xu, & Guo, 2007; Sukkwai, Chonpracha,
Kijroongrojana, & Prinyawiwatkul, 2017). The a* values exhibited
negative denominations (ranging from — 1.45 to 1.66), which implies

16.768 ± 0.263 ab
fg
h
h
d

g
g
a
the presence of a greenish tinge in mayonnaise. Similarly, positive b*

e
c
f

15.849 ± 0.646
19.260 ± 0.602

16.948 ± 0.747
20.631 ± 0.889
20.685 ± 0.899

18.619 ± 0.220
19.695 ± 0.148

19.912 ± 0.203
19.911 ± 0.940
18.314 ± 0.398

18.578 ± 0.881
16.243 ± 0.615
values (ranging from 7.39 to 8.53) indicate a yellow color that
decreased on the application of US treatment. The absorbance of
ΔE*ab

emulsions with linear and branched surfactants decreases in acidic

conditions compared to alkaline conditions. The reduction in a* and b*
values can be attrib- uted to low pH conditions arising due to the

abc
ab
bc

application of US waves in mayonnaise samples (Amin et al., 2014).

d
d

d
d

a
e

e
c

8.520 ± 0.005 e
8.533 ± 0.008
8.033 ± 0.080
7.687 ± 0.160
7.707 ± 0.066

7.533 ± 0.049
7.410 ± 0.059
8.487 ± 0.031

7.390 ± 0.043
7.957 ± 0.209

7.900 ± 0.100
8.127 ± 0.060

7.517 ± 0.038
Color

3.3. Emulsion storage stability

Thermodynamically, all the emulsions are unstable except micro-

emulsions. Emulsion stability depends on factors like density
ab

ab

ab

cd
cd

cd
d

—1.593 ± 0.024 b
a

a
c
c

c
—1.607 ± 0.012
—1.663 ± 0.032

—1.673 ± 0.032
—1.520 ± 0.010
—1.510 ± 0.010
—1.627 ± 0.027

—1.470 ± 0.029
—1.643 ± 0.017

—1.530 ± 0.014
—1.527 ± 0.005

—1.453 ± 0.034

—1.513 ± 0.017

difference between the oil/water phase, the particle size of the

dispersed phase, and emulsion viscosity. The decrease in viscosity and
increased droplet size lead to a reduction in emulsion stability as per
Stokes’s law (Dhiman & Prabhakar, 2021). Mayonnaise with a greater
a*

amount of oil is more stable than the one with a lower concentration.
Mayonnaise with less than 40% (w/w) oil requires a stabilizer (gelling
h
d

d
b
b

73.960 ± 0.971b
a
g
a
e
c

77.333 ± 0.273 f
73.233 ± 0.906

78.300 ± 0.679

73.860 ± 0.217
74.627 ± 0.576
73.177 ± 0.896

77.023 ± 0.779
75.233 ± 0.907
74.073 ± 0.156
75.633 ± 0.397

77.877 ± 0.637

75.197 ± 0.214

agent) (Depree & Savage, 2001). ESS after seven days of different
ultrasonically treated mayonnaise, control sample, and market sample
are shown in Table 1. The ≤ ESS significantly (P 0.05) decreased with an
increase in US amplitude for XG, GG, and XG/GG combinations.
L*

However, the stability of US-treated mayonnaise was significantly

higher than the market sample. Tavakoli et al. (2021) also reported
Emulsion Stability % (After 7 days)

similar kind of findings at low power ultrasound. US homogenization

of low-fat mayonnaise at 20 kHz and 750 W significantly changed its
microstructure and increased its stability. The effect of US treatment
has been widely studied in pre- vious studies, and it has been found
that it increases emulsion stability (Li, Xiang, Wang, & Gong, 2019;
bc
bc

cd

d
0.940b
b

b
a

86.50 ± 0.816e
98.42 ± 0.646 a
c

c
91.40 ± 0.901
98.50 ± 0.570

96.29 ± 0.798
98.60 ± 0.533

90.14 ± 0.773
95.63 ± 0.459

99.06 ± 0.173
99.17 ± 0.346

92.10 ± 0.416
94.10 ± 0.377

Ramisetty & Shyamsunder, 2011). In case of over processing, it is

detrimental to the stability of mayonnaise
93.20 ±

(Kaltsa, Gatsi, Yanniotis, & Mandala, 2014; Sui et al., 2017). US treat-
ment of emulsions has been reported to cause deterioration in the
Color, Refractive index, emulsion stability and pH measurements of mayonnaise samples. Table 1

quality of edible oils (Gharibzahedi, Mousavi, Hamedi, Khodaiyan, &

Razavi, 2012), along with degradation of polysaccharides caused by
molecular weight reduction, gum fractionation, and reduction in vis-
bcd
abc
def

3.630 ± 0.011 def

efg

ab
de

de
cd

fg
g
a

a
3.647 ± 0.015
3.553 ± 0.050

3.657 ± 0.004

3.550 ± 0.021
3.633 ± 0.013

3.523 ± 0.010

3.593 ± 0.020

3.590 ± 0.010
3.687 ± 0.012
3.610 ± 0.036

3.601 ± 0.018
3.543 ± 0.017

cosity (Kaltsa et al., 2014). GG and XG have a positive impact on the

stability of emulsion as they act as stabilizers in eggless mayonnaise. It
= Chroma (+b yellow color, -b blue color), ΔE*ab - Total color difference.

increases the viscosity and thus prevents creaming (phase separation)

pH

(Depree & Savage, 2001). Time and amplitude combination plays a

vital role in preventing the over-processing and ill effects during US
bcd
bcd
abc

treat- ment. Kaltsa et al. (2014) found that 70% amplitude was applied
Refractive Index

ab

ab
de

1.369 ± 0.001 ab
cd
cd
cd

ef
f

1.372 ± 0.002
1.372 ± 0.003
1.373 ± 0.005
1.376 ± 0.005

1.369 ± 0.005
1.380 ± 0.001
1.369 ± 0.000
1.374 ± 0.001
1.374 ± 0.001

1.379 ± 0.013
1.371 ± 0.001

for 3 min provides optimal conditions after which stability decreased

1.368 ± 000

with increasing amplitude or time. Li et al. (2019) found that US

treatment at 270 W for 7 min was optimal for the polysaccharide-
stabilized oil in water emulsion after which the polysaccharide chain
which in turn provided the best emulsion stability. After 7 min, the
Treatment

droplet size increased steeply, and viscosity decreased, which was

detrimental to emulsion stability. It is noteworthy that polymers with
C 20%

smaller mole- cules are more resilient to chain breakage than large
polymers with longer chains (Yan, Wang, Ma, & Wang, 2016). This
Xanthan + Guar Gum (XG/GG)

might be the reason for the better performance of XG stabilized

samples than GG stabilized ones as XG has a smaller and less
branched-chain than GG.

3.3.1. Whey protein concentrate-hydrocolloid gel emulsion

Xanthan Gum (XG)

Whey protein concentrate (WPC) is amphiphilic and interacts with

Guar Gum (GG)

both oil and water. As a result, WPC acts as a stabilizer and emulsifier.
Generally, a hydrocolloid (polysaccharide) is also added as a stabilizer.
Gums
 A hydrocolloid is usually chosen based on interactions with the surface
layer formed. A hydrocolloid with an anionic group is preferred, and

WPC at low pH (below 4) has a positive charge. Therefore, XG can remains unaffected by pH. As a result, the viscosity of the GG control
stabilize the emulsion because it is poly-anionic and contains hetero- sample was found to be the least. The reason can be correlated to the
polysaccharide. Studies have been conducted on the preparation of weak protonation of the hydroXyl groups
mayonnaise using XG and Locust Bean Gum (LBG), etc. (Dolz, Hern
´an- dez, Delegido, Alfaro, & Mun˜oz, 2007). However, GG has not
been used in combination with XG for the production of US
homogenized mayonnaise. The factors affecting the electrostatic
interaction between major proteins of WPC are β-lactoglobulin, α-
Lactalbumin, and poly- saccharides like XG, GG, pectin, have been
widely studied. Many studies have analysed the significant effects of
US treatment on the gel structure formed (Albano, Cavallieri, &
Nicoletti, 2019). Also, adding salt in- creases the gel strength of WPC,
and salts with large cations such as Ca and K have a better effect than
NaCl (El-Garawany, Korolczuk, & Abd El-Salam, 2016). US
homogenization is very useful for making emulsions but ultrasounds
significantly influence the color, stability, and viscosity of mayonnaise.
During the application of the US homogenization, optimal energy
input should be given as two phenomena which are droplet disruption
and re-coalescence occur simultaneously. To avoid over-processing
which leads to an increase in re-coalescence and droplet size, optimal
energy input is necessary. When the droplet size decreases, its
emulsion stability increases, but the viscosity decreases significantly.
Khouryieh, Puli, Williams, and Aramouni (2015) also showed that
emulsions stabilized by GG show the maximum decrease in viscosity
while using LBG results in phase separation (creaming) after as low as
24 h only. Depolymerization of GG takes place due to ultrasonication
while XG and WPC are structurally more resilient to the US and hence
the decrease in viscosity is not as much as in GG stabilized system. The
main factors influencing the WPC-polysaccharide gel structure are
polysaccharide structure, pH, ionic strength, protein to polysaccharide
ratio, and most important processing parameters like amplitude, time,
and temperature. Kaltsa et al. (2014) reported that using high amplitude
(70% and 90%) wave in two stages for a low time (4 min) is more
effective in decreasing the overall droplet size and hence increase the
stability of WPC- XG/WPC- GG stabilized emulsion then using single
high amplitude for the same time.

3.4. Rheological analysis

3.4.1. Viscosity
Commercial mayonnaise has a thick and creamy texture. Viscosity
of mayonnaise is a crucial quality parameter. Moreover, a low viscosity
mayonnaise is prone to phase separation. The concentration of oil, sta-
bilizers, and changes in temperature or pH affect the viscosity of
mayonnaise (Widerstro¨m & O¨ hman, 2017, pp. 1–78). Fig. 1 shows that
the viscosity of all the samples decreased significantly with an increase
in the applied shear rate for the control samples, irrespective of the gums
used. The apparent viscosity of the XG and GG sample decreased from
194 to 14 Pa s, and 188 to 11.85 Pa s, respectively upon increasing the
—1
shear rate from 0 to 14s . The combination of XG/GG had the highest
apparent viscosity among all the three control samples, followed by XG
and GG, respectively.
Apparent viscosity decreased with US treatment and it was more
prominent in GG than XG sample. Viscosity decreased from 1007 to
608 Pa s (GG) and 1625 to 1304 Pa s (XG) when shear rate varied 0 –
20/sec as evident from Fig. 5. The similar kind of observations have
been previ- ously made by Tiwari et al. (2010). The less variation in
viscosity of XG sample may be due to the branched structure of XG
which resists any change in molecular structure. Viscosity is reduced
due to a change in ordered structure (coiled structure) of XG to less
ordered (more random) after US treatment (Casas, Mohedano, & García-
Ochoa, 2000). Also, GG is sensitive to pH and shows maximum
viscosity at a pH of 6.4 (pH of deionized water), which is near its
isoelectric point. A study shows that the viscosity of GG is least at an
acidic pH (below 3) (Wang, Ellis, & Ross-Murphy, 2000), whereas XG
 1),

Fig. 1. Effect of different gum on the apparent viscosity with shear rate.

in galactomannan caused by a high amount of H ions formed. This +

reduces the number of inter and intra hydrogen bonds formed, and
galactomannan molecules are less expanded in acidic media
(Venugopal & M A, 2010). XG/GG samples have high viscosity due to
the synergy of XG and GG. GG shows a synergistic effect because of
intramolecular interaction between the β (1–4) manno backbone of
GG and the glycosyl backbone chain of XG (Misaki, 1993). Another
proposed mechanism of interaction of these two gums is through the
interaction of the side chain of a single strand of XG with a mannosyl
group of adjacent linear gal- actomannan, allowing one unit of XG
molecule to attach with 3 GG molecules through side-chain linkage.
The side chain (galactose portion) of GG is removed at 40% amplitude
of US treatment, and the structure got modified, which increased
synergy (greater H-bonding) between XG and GG, and hence
increased the viscosity (Venugopal & M A, 2010). The resultant curve
suggests that there was a slight or no permanent structure breakdown
during the dynamic measurements (Ma & Barbo- sa-Canovas, 1995).
The miXed gum mayonnaise had the highest visco- elastic properties
in general.

3.4.2. Flow behaviour and consistency index

The shape of rheograms shown in Figs. 2–4 is conclusive evidence
of shear-thinning behaviour (pseudoplastic behaviour) of mayonnaise
which is in agreement with previous research by Moslavac et al.
(2012). ThiXotropic behaviour has also been reported for mayonnaise
(Guilmi- neau & Kulozik, 2007; Liu et al., 2007), but it can display
both behav- iours simultaneously. Shear-thinning fluids, also known
as pseudo-plastics; their viscosity reduces significantly when a
shearing force is applied to them but the viscosity is restored as soon
as the shearing force is removed. When recovery time is very small
(few mi- croseconds), the material quickly returns to its native
structure after the applied shear is removed, and hence the viscosity is
recovered. Thus, the observations made are of pseudo-plasticity. This
is in total agreement with the observations made by Moslavac et al.
(2012). The shear-thinning behaviour in emulsions represents
irreversible structural breakdown due to applied shear rate, which
results in spatial redistri- bution of the emulsified oil droplets
(Mcclements, 2016a, 2016b). It can be concluded from the graphs that
the emulsions made using the GG sample had the highest shear-
thinning behaviour, followed by XG and XG/GG, respectively. Gums
like XG, GG, etc., get disrupted progressively by an increase in shear
rate, which explains the decrease in viscosity and the pseudoplastic
behaviour of mayonnaise (Hayati, Che Man, Tan, & Aini, 2007). It has
been evident from power law modeling that non- Newtonian fluid (n =
1) with shear thinning behaviour have n values less ∕
than 1 (Himani et al., 2021). The values of n obtained from the
Power-law model for all the samples are given in Table 3 (n <

Fig. 2. Flow curve of the mayonnaise using xanthan gum (XG).
Fig. 3. Flow curve of the mayonnaise using guar gum (GG).
Fig. 4. Flow curve of the mayonnaise using miXed gum (XG/GG).
Fig. 5. Effect of ultrasonic treatment on apparent viscosity.
indicate the pseudoplastic nature of mayonnaise (Hayati et al., 2007).
The consistency index (K) of all the mayonnaise samples were found to
be higher than 1 and affected significantly by US treatment and
hydrocolloids.
The K value is the parameter that indicates the viscous nature of the
fluid. The XG/GG sample had the highest K and viscosity values among
all three control samples (Table 2). After US treatment, K value
decreased nonlinearly except for XG/GG (1:1) (ultrasonicated at 40%
amplitude) where it increased compared to the non-treated control
sample from 69.02 Pa. sn to 72.38 Pa. sn. EXcept for this anomaly, a
decrease was found in the XG (58.17 Pa. sn to 54.16 Pa. sn) and GG
(47.13 Pa. sn to 43.58 Pa. sn) samples, which may have been due to the
breakdown of emulsion. One interesting observation was that in XG
samples, viscous nature decreased on the application of 20% and further
increased with 30% amplitude US treatment. On the other hand, the
application of 40% amplitude US waves decreased the K value as
opposed to the original and hence the viscosity. GG samples also
showed a similar trend. However, XG/GG showed an opposite trend in
which the K value increased on the application of increasing amplitude
waves to 30% and decreased when amplitude was 40%. Continuous
exposure to the US causes appreciable heating in the product.
EXposure of products to ultrasounds for a long time leads to chemical
and physical degrada- tions in the food matriX, e.g., denaturation of
proteins, oXidation of lipids, and depolymerization of polysaccharides
(Mcclements, 2016a, 2016b). The degradation of the food matriX might
be the possible reason behind the variation in the K values for
emulsions made with GG, XG, and XG/GG. The reason for this
anomalous behaviour could be studied in future studies.
3.5. Analysis of rheological models
The results obtained from rheological analysis were fitted to four
different mathematical models, namely (1) Herschel–Bulkley fluid
model, (2) The Casson fluid model, (3) Power law model, and (4) Car-
reau viscosity model for understanding the respective physical signifi-
cance and flowing characteristics. All statistical parameters are shown in
Table 3, Table 4, and Table 5. The suitability of rheological models can
be analysed on two bases- 1) Model fitting based on gums (for control
sample) 2) Model fitting based on gums and US treatment. For the first
basis, the control samples were fit into different models to obtain in-
formation about the best fit for different gums. Based on COD (coeffi-
cient of determination) and RMSE (root mean square error) values,
Carreau-Yasuda (CY) model was found to be the best match for XG
and XG/GG, while the Herschel–Bulkley model was found to be
suitable for GG. This can be explained by the intrinsic properties of
gums; XG shows pseudoplastic behaviour in aqueous solutions, GG
exhibits
thiXotropic behaviour above 0.5% (w/w) concentration (the
Y. Kumar et al. LWT 149 (2021) 111632

Table 2
Power Law model parameters of mayonnaise with different gum at different ultrasonic treatment.
2 2
Gums Treatment K n SSR RMSE SSE X R

XG C 58.17 0.297 1.0 0.5054 0.5 0.0 0.9986

216 108 426
20% 49.067 0.268 0.5 0.3689 0.2 0.0 0.9982
445 722 227
30% 40.01 0.378 0.1 0.2012 0.0 0.0 0.9988
621 810 067
40% 54.16 0.298 0.7 0.4418 0.3 0.0 0.9978
808 904 325
GG C 47.133 0.327 3.3 0.9155 1.6 0.1 0.9989
529 764 397
20% 47.955 0.3075 3.1 0.8896 1.5 0.1 0.9989
656 82 319
8
30% 46.592 0.3325 1.6 0.6454 0.8 0.0 0.9991
663 331 694
40% 43.58 0.344 5.8 1.2090 2.9 0.2 0.9992
469 235 436
XG/GG (1:1) C 69.02 0.314 0.1 0.1621 0.0 0.0 0.9992
052 526 044
20% 73.52 0.276 0.3 0.3005 0.1 0.0 0.9979
613 807 150
30% 79.69 0.287 1.1 0.5272 0.5 0.0 0.9973
116 558 463
40% 72.38 0.367 0.3 0.2770 0.1 0.0 0.9969
069 535 128
K- Consistency coefficient (Pa.sn), n- Flow behaviour index (dimensionless) SSR - Sum of squared residuals. R2 - Determination coefficient. X2 - Chi-square, SSE- Std.
error of estimate. RMSE- Root Mean Square Error.

Table 3
Herschel Bulkley model parameters of mayonnaise with different gum at different ultrasonicamplitude.
2 2
Gums Treatment τ0 K n SSR RMSE SSE X R
(Pa)
XG C 53.46 72.587 0.371 1.0786 0.5193 0.5393 0.0 0.9985
5 469
20% 64.82 27.429 0.335 2.1778 0.7379 1.0889 0.0 0.9927
3 947
30% 78.80 26.088 0.383 0.1649 0.2031 0.0825 0.0 0.9988
3 072
40% 63.73 53.753 0.342 0.8091 0.4497 0.4045 0.0 0.9977
352
GG C 17.58 71.458 0.439 2.1705 0.7366 1.0853 0.0 0.9993
8 944
20% 16.41 51.524 0.39 2.3317 0.7635 1.1658 0.1 0.9991
1 014
30% 27.77 26.035 0.284 1.3046 0.5711 0.6523 0.0 0.9993
2 567
40% 11.85 37.494 0.373 13.9778 1.86935 6.9889 0.6 0.9980
2 077
XG/GG (1:1) C 96.63 44.267 0.3 0.1052 0.1622 0.0526 0.0 0.9993
8 045
20% 87.50 38.056 0.379 0.3661 0.3025 0.1830 0.0 0.9979
5 159
30% 70.42 65.439 0.281 1.1245 0.5302 0.5623 0.0 0.9973
5 489
40% 116. 19.132 0.379 13.7054 1.8510 6.8527 0.5 0.8591
464 959
K- Consistency coefficient (Pa.sn), n- Flow behaviour index (dimensionless) SSR - Sum of squared residuals. R2 - Determination coefficient. X2 - Chi-square. SSE- Std.
error of estimate. RMSE-root mean square error.

concentration of GG is 0.5% in the present recipe) (Srichamroen,
2007). Guilmineau and Kulozik (2007) and Liu et al. (2007) had also
used Herschel–Bulkley (HB) model in their respective studies on
thiXotropic fluids and had a COD of 0.99 or above. ThiXotropic
behaviour in mayonnaise can be justified by structural changes due to
the formation of hydrodynamic forces that subsequently rearrange
molecules in the flow direction of the shearing force application
(Kechinski, Schumacher, Marczak, Tessaro, & Cardozo, 2011).
Similarly, CY has been used for shear-thinning, pseudoplastic fluids
with asymptotic viscosities at zero and an infinite shear rate
(Mahmood et al., 2019). CY is a five-parameter model and most
suitable for the description of shear-thinning fluid-like emulsions
(Mahmood et al., 2019). An interesting observation was made on the
model parameters of the CY that initial viscosity ( μο) decreased upon
increasing relaxation time (λ). Also, 1/λ here is analogous to ‘το’ in
HB and represents the critical shear rate at which the viscosity begins
to decline (Hackley & Ferraris, 2001, p. 31). Another key observation
was the increase in ‘το’ value irrespective of gum, which was due to the
change in the structure of molecules on the application of ultrasounds.
For the second basis, i.e., model fitting was executed as per US treat-
ment. It can be seen that the power-law and Carreau-viscosity model
gave a good fit for the experimental data. However, the Carreau model
was not best for control, 20% and 30% amplitude US treated GG samples
when accurately fitted on the curve of Herschel Bulkley model. Hence,
it
can be concluded that the power model was the best as all the experi-
mental data were fitted on the model curve nearly perfectly (R2 =
0.9992) for every sample. These findings are also in agreement with
research conducted earlier by Moslavac et al. (2012).

Table 4
Casson model parameters of mayonnaise with different gum at different ultrasonic amplitude at 20 ◦C.
Gums Treatment το (Pa) K SSR RMSE SSE X2 R2

1
Y. Kumar et al. LWT 149 (2021) 111632

Table 2
XG C 52.08 0.261 78.6610 4.43 39.3 3.2775 0.8922
455 305
20% 66.806 0.46 28.9216 2.688 14.4 1.2051 0.9026
9 608
30% 68.556 0.352 20.8382 2.282 10.4 0.8682 0.8521
4 191
40% 59.519 0.418 29.8312 2.730 14.9 1.2430 0.9158
8 156
GG C 42.095 0.155 18.8162 2.168 9.408 0.7840 0.9937
9 1
20% 35.245 0.122 16.6934 2.042 8.346 0.6956 0.9940
9 7
30% 49.964 0.2 9.1288 1.510 4.564 0.3804 0.9954
7 4
40% 20.753 0.349 23.2678 2.411 11.6 0.9695 0.9967
8 339
XG/GG (1:1) C 78.64 0.224 13.7979 1.857 6.898 0.5749 0.9034
3 9
20% 64.363 0.476 16.6191 2.038 8.309 0.6925 0.9055
3 5
30% 53.08 0.154 44.4835 3.334 22.2 1.8535 0.8917
8 417
40% 95.684 0.289 13.9558 1.867 6.977 0.5815 0.8566
9 9
K- Consistency coefficient (Pa.sn), SSR - Sum of squared residuals. R2 - Determination coefficient. X2 - Chi-square, SSE- Std. error of estimate. RMSE-root mean square
error.

1
Y. Kumar et al. LWT 149 (2021) 111632

Table 5
Carreau - Yasuda model parameters of mayonnaise with different gum at different ultrasonic amplitude.
2 2
Gums Treatmen μ∞(Pa μo(Pa s) λ (s) a n SSR RMSE SSE X R
t s)
XG C 2.0719 183.8 0.0051 7.0782 0.297 0.1854 0.215 0.092 0 0.999
892 0 3 7 0.008 7
8
20% 0.0220 105.6 0.0052 6.8951 0.287 0.1158 0.170 0.057 0.0055 0.999
174 0 1 9 6
30% 0.0056 116.4 0.0049 7.7860 0.307 0.1127 0.167 0.056 0.0054 0.999
053 5 8 3 2
40% 0.0071 104.4 0.0053 6.6629 0.268 0.2092 0.228 0.104 0.0099 0.999
094 0 7 6 4
GG C 0.5649 407.9 0.0035 3.2302 0.327 4.9970 1.117 2.498 0.2379 0.998
878 0 7 5 3
20% 0.4818 435.6 0.0034 3.1528 0.378 4.7765 1.092 2.388 0.2275 0.998
531 0 8 2 3
30% 0.3579 337.0 0.0034 3.0736 0.298 2.9860 0.864 1.493 0.1422 0.998
227 0 0 0 5
40% 0.5465 392.1 0.0018 2.6641 0.367 5.2985 1.151 2.649 0.2523 0.999
244 0 0 3 2
XG/GG (1:1) C 0.0364 94.943 0.0049 6.5931 0.314 0.0496 0.111 0.024 0.0024 0.999
8 0 4 8 6
20% 0.0176 107.64 0.0048 6.4005 0.276 0.3143 0.280 0.157 0.0149 0.998
00 0 3 1 2
30% 0.0559 677.45 0.0057 7.9966 0.344 0.1458 0.190 0.072 0.0069 0.999
2 0 1 9 9 6
40% 0.0654 69.30 0.0052 8.5701 0.332 0.1528 0.195 0.076 0.0073 0.998
938 7 9 5 7 5 4 4
2 2
n-flow behaviour index (dimensionless) SSR - Sum of squared residuals. R - Determination coefficient. X - Chi-square, SSE- Std. error of estimate. RMSE-root mean
square error.

4. Conclusion Authors declare no conflict of interest.

US homogenization results in modifications of physicochemical and

rheological properties of mayonnaise made using hydrocolloids. The
rheological analysis showed that samples had non-Newtonian and
pseudoplastic flow behaviour. The XG and XG/GG control samples
were well described by the CY model (Carreau-Yasuda) and the GG
control sample by HB (Herschel Bulkley) model. Although the viscosity
of XG and GG samples decreased sharply with an increase in the
amplitude of the US wave, but it increased in XG/GG (40% amplitude)
sample. It may be caused by the synergistic effect aided by
sonochemical changes in the structure of gums (GG and XG) which can
be investigated further in another study. Rheological knowledge of
sonicated mayonnaise with hydrocolloids present in it can help food
industries in designing pumps, pipelines, miXers, agitators, and
understanding food functionality. The emulsion stability was adversely
affected by US treatment and was prominent in the samples treated
with 40% amplitude US waves. The mayonnaise made with XG showed
better emulsion stability than GG. The pH values of mayonnaise
significantly decreased with an increase in US amplitude. An apparent
change in the color of the samples was observed. Reduction in L* value
(reduction in whiteness) was most prominent in XG/GG samples and
L* value is considered to be an important due factor because of the
consumer preference for whiter color in mayonnaise. The novelty in
the present study is an efficient application of US homogenization
which improves the mayonnaise stability compare to market samples.
Using of US homogenizers at the industrial level can help to
manufacture a homogeneous and stable mayonnaise. Moreover, the US
treatment process has a lower imple- mentation cost that proves to be
feasible on an industrial scale. How- ever, future studies can be carried
out on the effect of ultrasonication on the fat profile of mayonnaise.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Yogesh Kumar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis,

Investigation, Software, Data curation, Writing – original draft.
Soumen Roy: Methodology, Formal analysis, Investigation, Data
curation, Writing – original draft. Ariha Devra: Methodology, Formal
analysis, Investigation, Writing – original draft. Atul Dhiman: Editing
and Revising. Pramod K. Prabhakar: Conceptualization, Resources,
Su- pervision, Visualization, Editing, Funding acquisition.

Declaration of competing interest

1
Y. Kumar et al. LWT 149 (2021) 111632

Acknowledgment

The support received from NIFTEM is greatly acknowledged.

References

Albano, K. M., Cavallieri, Aˆ . L. F., & Nicoletti, V. R. (2019). Electrostatic interaction

between proteins and polysaccharides: Physicochemical aspects and applications
in emulsion stabilization. Food Reviews International, 35(1), 1–37.
https://doi.org/ 10.1080/87559129.2018.1467442
Alu’datt, M. H., Rababah, T., Alhamad, M. N., Ereifej, K., Gammoh, S., Kubow, S., et al.
(2017). Preparation of mayonnaise from extracted plant protein isolates of chickpea,
broad bean and lupin flour: Chemical, physiochemical, nutritional and therapeutic
properties. Journal of Food Science & Technology, 54(6), 1395–1405. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s13197-017-2551-6
Amin, M. H. H., Elbeltagy, A. E., Mustafa, M., & Khalil, A. H. (2014). Development of
low fat mayonnaise containing different types and levels of hydrocolloid gum
Sensory optimization of low fat mayonnaise (different oils and gums). Journal of
Agroalimentary Processes and Technologies, 20(1), 54–63.
Canselier, J. P., Delmas, H., Wilhelm, A. M., & Abismaïl, B. (2002). Ultrasound
emulsification - an overview. Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology, 23(1–
3), 333–349. https://doi.org/10.1080/01932690208984209
Casas, J. A., Mohedano, A. F., & García-Ochoa, F. (2000). Viscosity of guar gum and
Xanthan/guar gum miXture solutions. Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture,
80(12), 1722–1727. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-
0010(20000915)80:12<1722:: AID-JSFA708>3.0.CO;2-X
Chamanzar, M., Scopelliti, M. G., Bloch, J., Do, N., Huh, M., Seo, D., et al. (2019).
Ultrasonic sculpting of virtual optical waveguides in tissue. Nature
Communications, 10(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07856-w
Chetana, R., Bhavana, K. P., Babylatha, R., Geetha, V., & Suresh Kumar, G.
(2019). Studies on eggless mayonnaise from rice bran and sesame oils.
Journal of Food Science & Technology, 56(6), 3117–3125.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-019-
03819-1
Chhabra, R. P., & Richardson, J. F. (1999). Non-Newtonian fluid behaviour. In
R. P. Chhabra, & J. F. Richardson (Eds.), Non-Newtonian flow in the process industries
fundamentals and engineering applications (pp. 1–36). https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-
0-7506-8532-0.00001-9
Chukwu, O., & Sadiq, Y. (2008). Storage stability of groundnut oil and soya Oil-
based mayonnaise. Journal of Food Technology, 6(5), 217–220.
Depree, J. A., & Savage, G. P. (2001). Physical and flavour stability of mayonnaise.
Trends in Food Science & Technology, 12(2001), 157–163. Retrieved from http://
www.hindustantimes.com/business/wal-mart-metro-cash-flouting-fdi-norms-selling
-to-retail-buyers/story-IzFOIAY94QL5SyLd2PBymO.html.
Dhiman, A., & Prabhakar, P. K. (2021). Micronization in food processing : A
comprehensive review of mechanistic approach , physicochemical , functional
properties and self-stability of micronized food materials. Journal of Food
Engineering, 292, 110248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110248
Dolz, M., Herna´ndez, M. J., Delegido, J., Alfaro, M. C., & Mun˜oz, J. (2007). Influence
of
Xanthan gum and locust bean gum upon flow and thiXotropic behaviour of food
emulsions containing modified starch. Journal of Food Engineering, 81(1), 179–186.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.10.020
El-Garawany, G. A., Korolczuk, J., & Abd El-Salam, M. H. (2016). Effect of stabilizers
and mineral salts on the gel strength of whey protein concentrate. Egyptian Journal of
Dairy Science, 30(2), 325–331.
Gavahian, M., Chen, Y. M., Mousavi Khaneghah, A., Barba, F. J., & Yang, B. B. (2018).
In- pack sonication technique for edible emulsions: Understanding the impact of
acacia gum and lecithin emulsifiers and ultrasound homogenization on salad
dressing emulsions stability. Food Hydrocolloids, 83, 79–87.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodhyd.2018.04.039
Gharibzahedi, S. M. T., Mousavi, S. M., Hamedi, M., Khodaiyan, F., & Razavi, S. H.
(2012). Development of an optimal formulation for oXidative stability of walnut-
beverage emulsions based on gum Arabic and xanthan gum using response
surface

1
Y. Kumar et al.
methodology. Carbohydrate Polymers, 87(2), 1611–1619. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
carbpol.2011.09.067
Guilmineau, F., & Kulozik, U. (2007). Influence of a thermal treatment on the
functionality of hen’s egg yolk in mayonnaise. Journal of Food Engineering,
78(2), 648–654. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.11.002
Hackley, V. a, & Ferraris, C. F. (2001). Guide to rheological Nomenclature : Measurements in
ceramic particulate systems (p. 945). Nist Special Publication.
Hayati, I. N., Che Man, Y. B., Tan, C. P., & Aini, I. N. (2007). Stability and rheology of
concentrated O/W emulsions based on soybean oil/palm kernel olein blends. Food
Research International, 40(8), 1051–1061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodres.2007.05.008
Himani Kumar, N., Prabhakar, P. K., & Pant, V. (2021). Physical, mechanical, functional,
and thermal characterization of chitosan: Maltodextrin blends edible oral film
incorporated with aqueous clove extract. Starch Staerke, 73(1–2), 1–27. https://doi.
org/10.1002/star.201900220
Hsu, C. L., Chen, W., Weng, Y. M., & Tseng, C. Y. (2003). Chemical composition, physical
properties, and antioXidant activities of yam flours as affected by different drying
methods. Food Chemistry, 83(1), 85–92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(03)
00053-0
Hwang, C. A., & Tamplin, M. L. (2005). The influence of mayonnaise pH and storage
temperature on the growth of Listeria monocytogenes in seafood salad. International
Journal of Food Microbiology, 102(3), 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
ijfoodmicro.2004.11.019
Kadian, D., Kumar, A., Badgujar, P. C., & Sehrawat, R. (2021). Effect of homogenization
and microfluidization on physicochemical and rheological properties of mayonnaise.
Journal of Food Process Engineering, 44(4), Article e13661. https://doi.org/10.1111/
jfpe.13661
Kaltsa, O., Gatsi, I., Yanniotis, S., & Mandala, I. (2014). Influence of ultrasonication
parameters on physical characteristics of olive oil model emulsions containing
Xanthan. Food and Bioprocess Technology, 7(7), 2038–2049. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s11947-014-1266-1
Kechinski, C. P., Schumacher, A. B., Marczak, L. D. F., Tessaro, I. C., & Cardozo, N. S. M.
(2011). Rheological behaviour of blueberry (Vaccinium ashei) purees containing
Xanthan gum and fructose as ingredients. Food Hydrocolloids, 25(3), 299–306.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2010.06.007
Khouryieh, H., Puli, G., Williams, K., & Aramouni, F. (2015). Effects of Xanthan-locust
bean gum miXtures on the physicochemical properties and oXidative stability of
whey protein stabilised oil-in-water emulsions. Food Chemistry, 167, 340–348.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.07.009
Kiani, H., Zhang, Z., Delgado, A., & Sun, D. W. (2011). Ultrasound assisted nucleation of
some liquid and solid model foods during freezing. Food Research International, 44
(9), 2915–2921. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2011.06.051
Ku, Y., Chen, K. Y., & Lee, K. C. (1997). Ultrasonic destruction of 2-chlorophenol in
aqueous solution. Water Research, 31(4), 929–935. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-
1354(96)00372-7
Liu, S. H., & Tan, G. B. (2013). Lubricating properties of oil-in-water emulsion with low
oil concentration: Competitive wetting effect. Science China Technological Sciences, 56
(2), 369–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11431-012-5092-2
Liu, H., Xu, X. M., & Guo, S. D. (2007). Rheological, texture and sensory properties of
low-fat mayonnaise with different fat mimetics. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und
-Technologie- Food Science and Technology, 40(6), 946–954. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.lwt.2006.11.007
Li, Y., Xiang, D., Wang, B., & Gong, X. (2019). Oil-in-water emulsions stabilized by
ultrasonic degraded polysaccharide complex. Molecules, 24(6), 1–12. https://doi.
org/10.3390/molecules24061097
Ma, L., & Barbosa-C´anovas, G. V. (1995). Rheological characterization of
mayonnaise. Part II: Slippage at different oil and xanthan gum concentrations.
Journal of Food Engineering, 25(3), 409–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/0260-
8774(94)00011-W
Mahmood, R., Bilal, S., Khan, I., Kousar, N., Seikh, A. H., & Sherif, E. S. M. (2019).
A comprehensive finite element examination of Carreau Yasuda fluid model in a lid
driven cavity and channel with obstacle by way of kinetic energy and drag and lift
coefficient measurements. Journal of Materials Research and Technology, 9(2),
1785–1800. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmrt.2019.12.010
Maier, H., Anderson, M., Karl, C., Magnuson, K., & Whistler, R. L. (1993). Guar, locust
bean, tara, and fenugreek gums. In J. N. BeMiller, & R. L. Whistler (Eds.), Industrial gums:
Polysaccharides and their derivatives (pp. 181–226). Academic Press.
Mansouri, S., Pajohi-Alamoti, M., Aghajani, N., Bazargani-Gilani, B., & Nourian, A.
(2020). Stability and antibacterial activity of Thymus daenensis L. essential oil
nanoemulsion in mayonnaise. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture.
https:// doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.11026, 0–2.
Mcclements, D. J. (2016a). Emulsion formation. In D. J. Mcclements (Ed.), Food emulsions
principles, practices, and techniques (pp. 245–284). CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.
Mcclements, D. J. (2016b). Emulsion rheology. In D. J. Mcclements (Ed.), Food emulsions
principles, practices, and techniques (pp. 383–436). CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group.
Mirzanajafi-Zanjani, M., Yousefi, M., & Ehsani, A. (2019). Challenges and approaches for
production of a healthy and functional mayonnaise sauce. Food Sciences and
Nutrition, 7(8), 2471–2484. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1132
Misaki, A. (1993). Structural aspects of some functional polysaccharides. In K. Nishinari,
& E. Doi (Eds.), Food hydrocolloids: Structures, properties, and functions (pp. 1–19).
Moslavac, T., Pozderovi´c, A., Pichler, A., Benˇci´c, Đ., Viluˇsi´c, M., & Barulek, I.
(2012). The effect of exrta virgin olive oil and lemon juice on rheological properties
of mayonnaise. Meso, XIV(2), 157–162.
10
LWT 149 (2021) 111632
Mudgil, D., Barak, S., & Khatkar, B. S. (2014). Guar gum: Processing, properties and food
applications - a Review. Journal of Food Science & Technology, 51(3), 409–418.
HTTPS://DOI.ORG/10.1007/S13197-011-0522-X
Mun, S., Kim, Y. L., Kang, C. G., Park, K. H., Shim, J. Y., & Kim, Y. R. (2009).
Development of reduced-fat mayonnaise using 4 αGTase-modified rice starch and
Xanthan gum. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 44(5), 400–407.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2009.02.008
Palacios, L. E., & Wang, T. (2005). Egg-yolk lipid fractionation and lecithin
characterization. JAOCS, Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society, 82(8),
571–578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11746-005-1111-4
Patist, A., & Bates, D. (2008). Ultrasonic innovations in the food industry: From the
laboratory to commercial production. Innovative Food Science & Emerging
Technologies, 9(2), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2007.07.004
Pazhvand, R., & Khavarpour, M. (2019). Rheological, physical and sensory properties of
mayonnaise formulated with sesame oil. Journal of Food Biosciences and Technology, 9 (1),
35–44.
Pradhananga, M., & Adhikari, B. (2015). Sensory and quality evaluation of mayonnaise
and its effect on storage stability. Sunsari Technical College Journal, 2(1), 48–53.
Pramanik, S. (2013). Casson fluid flow and heat transfer past an exponentially porous
stretching surface in presence of thermal radiation. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 5
(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asej.2013.05.003
Ramisetty, K. A., & Shyamsunder, R. (2011). Effect of ultrasonication on stability of oil in
water emulsions. International Journal of Drug Delivery, 3(1), 133–140. https://doi.
org/10.5138/ijdd.2010.0975.0215.03063
Rao, M. A. (2007). Influence of food microstructure on food rheology. In M. A. Rao (Ed.),
Understanding and controlling the microstructure of complex foods (pp. 411–424).
Woodhead Publishing Limited.
Rao, M. A. (2014). Flow and functional models for rheological properties of fluid foods.
In M. A. Rao (Ed.), Rheology of fluid, semisolid, and solid foods (pp. 27–61). Boston,
MA: Springer.
Research and Markets. (2021). Mayonnaise market: Global industry trends, share, size,
growth, opportunity and forecast 2021-2026. Retrieved april 22, 2021. Mayonnaise
market: Global industry trends, share, size, growth, opportunity and forecast 2021-2026
(researchandmarkets.com).
Srichamroen, A. (2007). Influence of temperature and salt on viscosity property of guar
gum. Naresuan University Journal, 15(2), 55–62. Retrieved from http://www.nupre
ss.grad.nu.ac.th/journal/index.php/NUJournal/article/download/171/177.
Sui, X., Bi, S., Qi, B., Wang, Z., Zhang, M., Li, Y., et al. (2017). Impact of ultrasonic
treatment on an emulsion system stabilized with soybean protein isolate and
lecithin: Its emulsifying property and emulsion stability. Food Hydrocolloids, 63,
727–734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodhyd.2016.10.024
Sukkwai, S., Chonpracha, P., Kijroongrojana, K., & Prinyawiwatkul, W. (2017).
Influences of a natural colorant on color and salty taste perception, liking, emotion
and purchase intent: A case of mayonnaise-based dipping sauces. International
Journal of Food Science and Technology, 52(10), 2256–2264. https://doi.org/
10.1111/ijfs.13506
Su, H. P., Lien, C. P., Lee, T. A., & Ho, J. H. (2010). Development of low-fat mayonnaise
containing polysaccharide gums as functional ingredients. Journal of the Science of
Food and Agriculture, 90(5), 806–812. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.3888
Tavakoli, R., Karami, M., Bahramian, S., & Emamifar, A. (2021). Production of Low- fat
mayonnaise without preservatives: Using the ultrasonic process and investigating of
microbial and physicochemical properties of the resultant product. Food Sciences and
Nutrition, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.2227
Thombare, N., Jha, U., Mishra, S., & Siddiqui, M. Z. (2016). Guar gum as a promising
starting material for diverse applications: A review. International Journal of Biological
Macromolecules, 88, 361–372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2016.04.001
Tiwari, B. K., Muthukumarappan, K., O’Donnell, C. P., & Cullen, P. J. (2010). Rheological
properties of sonicated guar, Xanthan and pectin dispersions. International Journal of
Food Properties, 13(2), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10942910802317610
Venugopal, K., & M, A. (2010). Study of hydration kinetics and rheological behaviour of
guar gum. International Journal of Pharma Sciences and Research, 1(1), 28–39.
Vermeulen, A. (2008). Microbial stability and safety of acid sauces and mayonnaise-
based salads assessed through probabilistic growth/no growth models Thesis
submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of doctor (Ph.D.). In
Applied biological sciences. University of Ghent.
Villamiel, M., & De Jong, P. (2000). Inactivation of Pseudomonas fluorescens and
Streptococcus thermophilus in Trypticase Soy Broth and total bacteria in milk by
continuous-flow ultrasonic treatment and conventional heating. Journal of Food
Engineering, 45(3), 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(00)00059-5
Wang, Q., Ellis, P. R., & Ross-Murphy, S. B. (2000). The stability of guar gum in an
aqueous system under acidic conditions. Food Hydrocolloids, 14, 129–134.
Widerstro¨m, E., & O¨ hman, R. (2017). Mayonnaise quality and catastrophic phase inversion.
Lund University, Department of Food Technology, Engineering and Nutrition.
Wüstenberg, T. (2015). General overview of food hydrocolloids. In T. Wüstenberg (Ed.),
Cellulose and cellulose derivatives in the food industry: Fundamentals and applications
(first (pp. 1–68). Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH.
Yan, J. K., Wang, Y. Y., Ma, H. Le, & Wang, Z. B. (2016). Ultrasonic effects on the
degradation kinetics, preliminary characterization and antioXidant activities of
polysaccharides from Phellinus linteus mycelia. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, 29, 251–
257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2015.10.005
Zhao, S., Han, K., Yuan, G., & Wang, L. (2018). Method for refractive index detection for
emulsion concentration. Functional Materials, 25(2), 401–405. https://doi.org/
10.15407/fm25.02.401