DextranSPRI 04

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 16

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/292586652

Dextran in refined sugar: Impact on hard candy processing

Article · January 2004

CITATIONS READS
4 511

3 authors, including:

Lynn Haynes
Mondelēz International
19 PUBLICATIONS   226 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Lynn Haynes on 04 April 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.


Dextran in Refined Sugar: Impact to Hard
Candy Processing
L. Haynes, N. Zhou, and W. Hopkins
Kraft Foods Research, 200 DeForest Ave., East Hanover, NJ
07936, USA

Abstract

Dextran content in sugar is a major concern for end users such as candy
manufacturers. Contamination of the sugar with dextran, above a certain ppm
level, will affect hard candy processing. The impact is measured in changes in
candy thickness/weight and is related to dextran content in sugar. We report on
the monitoring of dextran in refined sugar, over the course of several months,
using the Midland Sucrotest monoclonal antibody method. We correlate dextran
content in refined sugar with changes in hard candy weight and geometry. Data
suggests that dextran content in refined sugar is related to the amount in raw
sugar used in refining. Estimates of dextran removal during the refining process
are given.

Introduction:
Refined sugar is the key ingredient for the manufacture of hard candy. It plays a strong
functional role in the flavor, texture and appearance of hard candy. The functional
performance of sugar is affected by its purity, especially with regard to high molecular
polysaccharide contaminants like dextran. Dextran, Figure 1, is a high molecular weight,
branched glucose polymer synthesized by the Leuconostoc soil bacterium found in and
around sugar cane and juice. There have been reports of hard boiled candy distortion on
high speed die cutting machines where the candy rope “pulls away” from the die cut as
the candy cools leading to packaging problems and high reject rates (1-3). Very close
tolerances in candy thickness and weight, in order to “fit” the packing equipment, require
control of product size and shape. A thickness variation of 2 millimeters causes problems
in certain types of packaging. We report on the study of the effect of dextran on candy
weight and geometry, using an analysis method to measure and monitor dextran in
refined sugar. We correlate dextran content in refined sugar with changes in hard candy
weight and geometry. Estimates of dextran removal during the refining process are given.
Methods:
Three methods of measuring dextran in sugar are listed in Table 1 along with our
assessment of ease of testing and expense. All three methods are used to measure the
higher amount of dextran found in raw sugar but none are used to measure dextran in
refined sugar. We chose to use the newer Midland Sucrotest antibody method for
measurement of dextran in refined sugar for this study because it was simpler to execute
and was specific for dextran.

Procedure:

A few modifications were made to the test procedure in order to adapt the dextran
Sucrotest to give greater sensitivity for measurement of lower concentrations of dextran
in refined sugar. We dissolved the refined sugar to give a 40 brix solution. The liquid
sugar sampling volume was increased from 10 microliters up to 50 microliters. The
antibody was dissolved into a twelve milliliter volume of buffer instead of six milliliters.
The materials need for testing and the modified method are specified below. A diagram
of the Midland Sucrotest procedure can be found in Figure 2.

Materials:

Three dextran standards: 68K, 200K, and 2M MW (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) where used to
establish the standard curve of turbidity as a function of dextran concentration and
molecular weight. We choose the two million molecular weight standard for use in these
studies. A monoclonal antibody test kit was purchased from Midland Research
Laboratories, Inc., Lenexa, KS and contained Monoclonal Antibody (M9010), freeze
dried; Phosphate buffer powder (M9008), pH 7; Membrane cartridge filter (M9000), 0.45
micrometer pore size; Cuvettes and Turbidimeter (Nephelometer) (M9020).

Sample preparation:

For the calibration curve a two million molecular weight dextran standard was dissolved
in distilled water to make solutions with concentrations in the range of 10 to 150 ppm.
For test samples, sugar or hard candy was dissolved in distilled water (40% w/w), stirred
magnetically for an hour, and then filtered with 0.45 micrometer membrane cartridge
filter before measurement.

Antibody preparation:

Prepare buffer solution (pH 7) by dissolving one vial of phosphate buffer powder in 100
ml distilled water. Add 6 ml of buffer solution in antibody vial shake gently then let it sit
until antibody is dissolved. Pour the solution out. Add another 6 ml of buffer solution to
rinse the vial. Combine the two 6 ml solutions (12 ml of buffer/vial in total) and mix
them well and let stand for an hour before the test.
Results:
The amount of dextran was measured in refined sugar using the Midland Sucrotest
method for dextran. Results of the testing for two sugar refiners are showing in Table 2.
Typical values for dextran in refined sugar ranged from <10 ppm up to > 200 ppm. Some
differences in the average levels of dextran were noted between the two sugar refiners.

An experiment design trial was conducted at the plant to determine the effect of dextran
on hard candy manufacturing. Control candy was made with 20-ppm dextran (dry sugar
weight basis) for six different candy flavors. The effect of dextran on candy thickness,
diameter and weight was measured. Higher levels of dextran were tested by adding
dextran (Sigma, Industrial grade, average molecular weight 5 million to 40 million) to the
sugar, at levels of 250 ppm (dry sugar basis) or 500 ppm (dry sugar basis), as it is
liquefied and cooked during processing. The test variables and number of runs are listed
in Table 3.

Dextran affects the number of broken and rejected product. The extent of dextran impact
on candy line breakage and removal due to deformity is mediated by type of flavor as
shown in Table 4. For flavor A, the amount of line breakage and misshapen candy
removed from the process nearly doubled from 2.3% up to 4.2% when dextran increased
from 20 ppm to 500 ppm. For flavor C, the amount of line breakage and misshapen candy
tripled from 1.2% up to 3.7%.

Dextran affects candy thickness and diameter. Very close tolerances in candy thickness
and weight are required in order for the candy to “fit” the packing equipment. A candy
thickness variation of 2 millimeters causes problems in packaging. Listed in Table 5 are
the measured candy thickness (height), weight and diameter. At a target candy weight of
32 g, with 500 ppm dextran, the thickness of the candy is found to exceed control candy
thickness by at least 2 mm (Flavor A) or 2.4 mm (Flavor C). When candy thickness or
height of candy pieces is expressed as a ratio of the height divided by the weight, a linear
relationship is observed between the height to weight ratio of the candy and the level of
dextran as shown in Figure 3.

Average package weight is plotted as a function of the amount of dextran. The weight of
the candy package drops below target weight of 32g at dextran levels above 250 ppm
(dry sugar basis) as shown in Figure 4. Packages that are underweight cannot be sold.

Dextran Removed During Refining:

Refiner A, running a typical refining process, using phosphatation in the process,


measured dextran in raw sugar received into the refinery over the course of about six
months. During this same period, dextran is measured in the refined sugar received into
the candy processing plant from refiner A. The data in Figure 5 show signification
purification of the sucrose crystals occurs during refining. It appears that dextran removal
during purification is dependent upon dextran level in raw sugar, with better removal of
dextran at lower dextran levels in raw sugar coming into the refinery. We estimate about
50% of the contaminating dextran is removed if content of dextran in raw sugar does not
exceed 250ppm. Working with sugar suppliers, dextran can be controlled to 125 ppm or
less for sugar sent to candy manufacturing. Figure 6 shows that, although the dextran
content in the refined sugar fluctuates, levels of dextran are controlled to 125 ppm or less.

Disscussion:

Dextran levels in sugar above 125 ppm lead to significant changes in candy geometry and
appearance. Candy height/thickness increases along with decrease in diameter and
rough/irregular surface appearance. Geometry changes prevent candies from meeting
package size and weight requirements resulting in product rejection and high cost to
candy manufacturing. Sugar refining removes significant amounts of dextran providing
the raw sugar is not heavily contaminated (i.e. < 250 ppm). Dextran level in refined sugar
fluctuates but can be control by careful monitoring of raw sugar and refining process.

References:

(1) Vink, Walter. “Dextran in Hard Candy”, 42nd P.M.C.A. Production Conference,
1988, p.136-139.

(2) Vane, G.W., “The Effect of Dextran on the Distortion of Hard Candy”, Sugar
Industry Technology, 1981, vol. 40, p.95-102.

(3) Morel du Boil, P.G. and Naidu, N. “Distorted Hard Candy (Boiled Sweets)”, Sugar
Milling Research Institute, March 2, 1998 (unpublished communication).

(4) Day, Donal, et.al. “Goats, Mice and Dextran, The Road to a Dextran Process Control
Test Kit”, 31st Annual Joint Meeting of the Florida and Louisiana Division, American
Society of Sugar Cane Technologist, June 2001.

(5) AOAC Official Method 988.12. “Dextran in Raw Cane Sugar”. AOAC Official
Methods of Analysis, 2000, Chapter 44, p.13 –14.

(6) ICUMSA method GS 1-15. “The Determination of Dextran in Raw Sugar by a


Modified Haze Method”, 1994, ICUMSA Method Book.

(7) Midland Research Laboratory, version 4.0. “Analytical Procedure using Antibody for
Rapid Dextran Test”. August 8, 2001.
Figure 1.
Table 1: Testing Method Pros and Cons

Test Sample Equipment Disadvantages


Method preparation
Haze Alpha amylase, TCA Nephelometer Sample preparation time
(method GS1- ppt.
15, 1994) [5]
Robert’s Precipitate and filter Spectrophotometer Hazardous reagent (conc.
(AOAC H2SO4)
988.12) [6]
Antibody Filter Nephelometer Expensive antibody;
Sucrotest [7] needs collaboration
Figure 2.
Table 2.

Dextran content of Refined white sugar from two suppliers

Supplier A Supplier B
Samples Dextran (ppm) Lot # Dextran (ppm)
dry wt. Basis Samples dry wt. Basis
1 74.41 1 3.56
2 52.29 2 138.83
3 212.88 3 78.55
4 81.49
4 147.49
5 59.22
5 142.44
6 98.50
6 111.43 7 65.32
7 59.26 8 48.93
8 23.92 9 26.67
9 60.94 10 4.20
10 48.20 11 1.03
Average 93.33 12 36.24
13 8.70
14 53.18
Average 50.32
Table 3.

Experiment Design to Test Effect of Dextran

Run # Flavor Variable Dextran (ppm, dwb)


1 A 20
2 250
3 500
4 B 20
5 250
6 C 20
7 250
8 500
9 D 20
10 250
11 E 20
12 250
13 F 20
14 250
Table 4.

Dextran Affects Candy B&R


Control 250ppmDextran500ppmDextran
FlavorA 2.30% 3.40% 4.20%
FlavorB 1.50% 2.90%
FlavorC 1.20% 1.80% 3.70%
FlavorD 1.70% 2.30%
FlavorE 1.90% 2.20%
FlavorF 1.20% 2.70%
Table 5.

Candy Geometry
Sample Dextran Height Diameter Weight
(ppm dwb) (cm) (cm) (g)

Flavor A 20 ppm 9.09 cm 2.05 cm 31.9 g


control

500 ppm 500 ppm 9.28 cm 2.01 cm 31.5 g


Flavor C 20 ppm 9.15 cm 2.05 cm 32.2 g
control

500 ppm 500 ppm 9.39 cm 2.03 cm 32.3 g


Figure 3.

Effect of Dextran on Height/weight Ratio

2.96
R2 = 0.9541
2.94
Height/weight Ratio

2.92
R2 = 0.9949
2.9

2.88

2.86

2.84
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Dextran Content (ppm sucrose basis)

Flavor A Flavor C
Figure 4.

Dextran Effect on Package Weight

33
32.8
Package wt (g)

Flavor A
32.6
Flavor B
32.4
32.2 Flavor C
32 Flavor D
31.8
31.6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Dextran (ppm)
Figure 5.

Correlation of Dextran in Raw vs. Refined

400.0 Dextran

350.0

300.0
Dextran (ppm)

250.0

200.0

150.0

100.0

50.0

0.0
4/4 5/4 6/3 Date 7/3 8/2 9/1

Raw Refined Plant Receiving


Figure 6.

Dextran content in Refined Sugar fluctuates, but is controlled to <125 ppm

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
9/1/2002 10/21/2002 12/10/2002 1/29/2003 3/20/2003

View publication stats

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy