See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227781464

Functionality of Palm Oil as a Stabilizer in

Peanut Butter

Article in Journal of Food Science May 2003

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2621.2003.tb09643.x

CITATIONS READS

13 1,639

4 authors, including:

A.V.A. Resurreccion M.s. Chinnan

University of Georgia University of Georgia
153 PUBLICATIONS 2,521 CITATIONS 80 PUBLICATIONS 1,901 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by A.V.A. Resurreccion on 19 September 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Functionality of Palm Oil as
a Stabilizer in Peanut Butter
K.J ARYANA, A.V.A. RESURRECCION, M.S. CHINNAN , L.R. BEUCHAT

ABSTRACT: Studies have shown that palm oil is an effective stabilizer in peanut butter. The objective of our
investigation was to better define the role of palm oil as a stabilizer. Peanut butters without and with palm oil
added at concentrations of 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5% (w/w of peanuts), and Fix-X (hydrogenated rapeseed and
cottonseed oils as commercial control) were stored at 0, 21, 30, and 45 C for 23 wk. Palm oil improved the oil
holding capacity (OHC) of peanut butters, but had no effect on their adhesiveness and hardness characteristics.
The unstabilized and palm oil-stabilized peanut butters were not as good as the Fix-X stabilized peanut
butters with regard to their OHC, hardness, and adhesiveness characteristics.
Keywords: palm oil, stabilizer, peanut butter, oil separation

Introduction 1985). Oil holding capacity (OHC) is a mea- Materials and Methods

P EANUT BUTTER PRODUCTION IN THE UNIT- sure of the ability of the fat crystal matrix to

Food Engineering and Physical Properties

ed States has increased from 742 mil-
lion pounds in 1990 to 745 million pounds
in 1998 (USDA-NASS 2000). Natural pea-
nut butter, a popular product among some
consumer groups, does not contain a stabi-
lizer, is less firm, and flows more easily
than stabilized commercial peanut butter.
Peanut butter without a stabilizer exhibits
oil separation problems, coupled with the
formation of a hard layer of peanut solids
at the bottom of the container due to set-
tling ( Weiss 1983). Stabilizers commonly
used in commercial peanut butter include
hydrogenated canola and cottonseed oils.
Use of these stabilizers results in a firm
but spreadable peanut butter that does not
exhibit oil separation over time. A stabiliz-
er that not only imparts the peanut butter
its flowable texture, which is preferred by
some consumer groups, but also prevents
the oil from separating over time has not
been identified.
Edible fats consist of suspensions of
crystals in liquid oil (Moran 1994). Hard-
ness, work-softening, and plastic behavior
of fats depend on how these crystals inter-
act based on their shape, size, and number
(Moran 1994). Triglycerides occur in the ,
, and polymorphs and possess multiple
melting points (Timms 1994). The poly-
morph is the least stable with the lowest
melting point, and and polymorphs are
more stable with the highest melting point
(Timms 1994). Palm oil crystallizes on rapid
cooling (Kheiri 1985) and is used to stabi-
lize oil dispersions to impart a smooth tex-
ture to products such as margarine (Kheiri
hold liquid oil.
Determining OHC is important when
developing products with desired physical
characteristics. Hinds and others (1994) re-
ported that peanut butter stabilized with
palm oil was softer than that stabilized with
hydrogenated vegetable oils when stored
at similar temperatures. They further indi-
cated that 2 to 2.5% palm oil is effective in
stabilizing peanut butter at 21 to 24 C for
1 y; however, this prediction was based on
results from a 2-wk storage study. The high
glyceride content of unhydrogenated palm
oil contributes to the consistency or degree
of density, firmness, and viscosity while the
low linoleic acid content imparts favorable
heat stability (Kheiri 1987).
The health benefits provided by palm oil
warrant its examination as an alternative to
currently used commercial stabilizers
(Hinds and others 1994). Palmitic and oleic
acids, which are predominant in palm oil
(Rossell and others 1985), appear to be neu-
tral in influencing serum cholesterol levels
in normal individuals (Ng and others 1992).
Palm oil may reduce lipoprotein and apoli-
poprotein-associated cardiovascular prob-
lems (Sundaram and others 1992). Howev-
er, the role of palm oil as a stabilizer in
peanut butter is not well understood.
The overall objective of this study was to
determine the effect of palm oil as a stabiliz-
er in peanut butter. Specific objectives were
to determine the role of palm oil in prevent-
ing oil separation in peanut butter and the
effect of palm oil on hardness, cohesiveness,
and adhesiveness in peanut butter.
Experimental design
Palm oil was used at 1.5, 2, and 2.5% (w/w
of peanuts) as a stabilizer in peanut butter.
Controls consisted of peanut butter without
stabilizer and peanut butter stabilized with
a commercial stabilizer, Fix-X (Procter and
Gamble Co., Cincinnati, Ohio), which con-
sists of hydrogenated rapeseed and cotton-
seed oils. Products were stored at 0, 21, 30,
and 45 C for 23 wk. Two replicate trials were
done in which 3 samples of each replicate
treatment were analyzed at each sampling
time. Oil holding capacity (OHC) was mea-
sured at 16, 18, and 23 wk of storage. Acceler-
ated oil separation measurements were con-
ducted at 6, 13, 18, and 23 wk. Instrumental
texture measurements were made at 1, 6,
9,11,13,16, and 23 wk of storage. The OHC
was measured later (16, 18, and 23 wk) in the
storage period because that was when the
oil from the peanut butter surfaced and be-
came conspicuous.
Peanut butter preparation
Peanut butter was prepared according to
Muego and others (1990) with slight modifi-
cations. Runner-type peanuts (Arachis hy-
pogaea L. cv. Florunner) obtained from Mc-
Cleskey Mills (Smithville, Ga., U.S.A.) were
used. Kernels were stored at 7 C until pro-
cessed. A gas-heated roaster (Model L5, Pro-
bat Inc., Memphis, Tenn., U.S.A.), preheated
at 177 C was used to roast peanuts in 22-Kg
batches, which were then maintained at
138 C for 10 min to achieve a medium roast
level and a color lightness (L), end point of
49.2 ( Johnson and others 1988). Roasted
 Palm oil functionality in peanut butter . . .
peanuts were cooled in a perforated metal
container and passed through a dry blanch-
er (Model EX, Ashton Food Machinery Co.,
Inc., Newark, N.J., U.S.A.) for 5 min to re-
move testae. Kernels were blanched a 2nd
time after discarding damaged kernels. Pea-
nuts were then ground in a Morehouse mill
(Morehouse Industries, Los Angeles, Calif.,
U.S.A.) set at a stone clearance of 0.25 mm
(10 notches) and maintained at 77 C with
steam. The following ingredients (w/w) were
added to the ground peanuts: 1% salt (Astor
Plain Salt, Jacksonville, Fla., U.S.A.); 6% corn
syrup solids (Star-Dri 42 R, A.E. Staley Man-
ufacturing, Decatur, Ill., U.S.A.); 1.5, 2.0,
2.5% palm oil (Palm Oil Research Institute of
Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia), or 1.5%
hydrogenated rapeseed and cottonseed
oils (Fix-X, Proctor and Gamble, Cincin-
nati, Ohio, U.S.A.). These ingredients were
manually mixed, then ground a 2nd time in
a Morehouse mill. Peanut butter was de-
posited into 225-g jars (Ball Corp., Muncie,
Ind., U.S.A.) at room temperature and
stored at 0, 21, 30, and 45 C for 23 wk.
Food Engineering and Physical Properties
Oil holding capacity (OHC)
Oil holding capacity was measured as
described by Haque and Mozaffar (1992)
for casein and modified casein, with appro-
priate modifications for peanut butter. Ten
grams of each sample were deposited into
centrifuge tubes. Peanut oil (3.5 g) was add-
ed to the sample and mixed with a 3-mm dia
steel rod. The numbers of stirs per sample
were kept constant at 10 for each of the fol-
lowing directions; north south, east west,
clockwise, and counterclockwise. Samples
were centrifuged for 5 min at 48400 g using
a Beckman centrifuge (Model J2-21M, Beck-
man Instruments Inc., Palo Alto, Calif.,
U.S.A.). The centrifugation time and g force
were selected based on the preliminary tri-
als to arrive at a constant maximum oil sep-
aration value for each sample. A control
sample without added oil was also analyzed.
Oil separated after centrifugation was pipet-
ted into 85-g capacity plastic cups and
weighed using a Mettler balance (Model PJ
360, Mettler Instrument Corp., Hightstown,
N.J., U.S.A.) with accuracy of measurement
of 0.001g. The weight of oil removed from
sample containing 3.5 g added oil was sub-
tracted from the weight of oil separated
from its respective control. This value was
then subtracted from 3.5 (g) and the result
was expressed as a percentage of added oil
held within peanut butter.
Oil holding capacity of the hard layer at
the bottom of the peanut butter that formed
at 15 wk was also measured. In the first 6 wk
of storage, this hard layer was not present in
the peanut butter. A thin film started to de-
velop in the seventh wk and progressed as
the storage time increased. At 15 wk, the
hard layer was distinctly visible to obtain
samples necessary to conduct OHC mea-
surements. Peanut butter jars were equili-
brated at 21 C for 1 h. Peanut butter jars
were tilted to allow the top flowable portion
to collect to the side of the jar, thus exposing
the hard layer at the bottom. The top layer
was moved aside and a sample (10 g) of the
hard layer was taken and subjected to OHC
measurements as described above.
Accelerated oil separation (AOS)
Barbut (1996) described a procedure for
measuring accelerated fat separation in var-
ious foods by high-speed centrifugation.
Preliminary trials were done using various
centrifugation times and gravity forces to
arrive at a constant maximum oil separation
value. The optimum oil separation was
achieved by centrifuging peanut butter
samples for 5 min at 48400 g. These condi-
tions were used in the analysis. Ten grams
of each peanut butter sample were weighed
into tubes and centrifuged. Oil that sepa-
rated during centrifugation was pipetted
into tarred 25 g plastic cups and weighed on
a Mettler balance. The oil separation (% w/
w) was calculated from the weight of oil that
released from the 10 g sample. Sample
preparation for accelerated oil separation
(AOS) of the hard layer at the bottom of the
container was done in a similar manner as
described for OHC. The AOS was calculated
in percentage as described above.
Texture quality measurements
Hardness, cohesiveness, and adhesive-
ness were measured using an Instron Uni-
versal Testing Instrument (Instron model
1122, Instron Corp., Canton, Mass., U.S.A.)
according to the method of Ahmed and Ali
(1986). A flat plunger rod (2.5 cm dia) was
attached to a 2 Kg compression load cell fit-
ted in a crosshead, set at 0.5 cm/min speed.
Chart speed and zero load were set at 5.0
cm/min and at a third of the distance from
the base of the chart, respectively. Contain-
er size was adapted from Ahmed and Ali
(1986). Samples (20 g) were placed into
glass petri dishes, 5 cm dia x 1.5 cm deep
and left undisturbed for 1 h to relieve shear
effects produced during sample prepara-
tion and to equilibrate sample to ambient
temperature. Petri dishes were secured with
a sample support frame to prevent them
from moving during penetration and with-
drawal of the plunger rod. Crosshead direc-
tion was downward and set for the plunger
to penetrate the peanut butter sample to a
depth of 0.4 cm. The ratio of petri dish sur-
face area to plunger cross section was 4:1.
Force deformation curves during pene-
tration (1st peak) and withdrawal (2nd
peak) of the plunger rod from the sample
were recorded. The distance traveled by the
moving crosshead was converted to time
(Bourne 1982; Ahmed and Ali 1986; Muego
and others 1990), since crosshead and chart
were driven synchronously. Hardness, co-
hesiveness, and adhesiveness values were
calculated based on the force deformation
curves. A digitizer (Model HDG-1111C, Hi-
tachi Seiko, Ltd. Japan) interfaced with a
personal computer was used to obtain the
area under the 2nd peak to calculate work
necessary to remove the sample from the
plunger rod (Ahmed and Ali 1986). Hard-
ness (height of 1st peak) was calculated as
the force required in penetrating the sample
and reported in Newtons (N). Cohesiveness
and adhesiveness were determined by the
work required in removing the sample from
the plunger surface and expressed in Joule,
maximum force per unit area of withdrawal
of plunger rod (N/cm2), and time-to-break
peanut butter column (s) (Ahmed and Ali
1986).
Statistical analysis
Data collected for OHC, AOS, and texture
measurements were analyzed by regres-
sion analysis. The full regression model con-
sidered was:
Y = 0 + 1X1 + 2X2 + 3X3 +
4X12 + 5X22 + 6X32 + 7X1X2 + 8X1X3 +
9X2X3 + 10X1X2X3 + e
where:Y = value of response variable (OHC,
AOS, hardness, work done, maximum force
of withdrawal, and time-to-break peanut
butter column) X1 = treatment (Palm oil con-
centration), X2 = number of wk, X 3 = tem-
perature, e = random error, and is are coef-
ficients. Adjusted coefficients of
determination (R2) of the dependant vari-
ables and the probability were generated by
the regression procedure (PROC REG) of the
Statistical Analysis System (SAS 1985) soft-
ware. The truncated model was selected
based on the highest adjusted R2, the low-
est Cp, lowest mean squared error, lowest
number of independent variables and their
interaction terms resulting in the highest
adjusted R2. Nonsignificant differences be-
tween a proposed reduced model and the
full 2nd order model were calculated by par-
tial F statistics as follows:
([SSE(red.) SSE (full)] / [df(red.) df (full)])
F=
(MSE (full))
where, SSE is the sum of squares of error,
Palm oil functionality in peanut butter . . .

Table 1The adjusted coefficient of determination (Adjusted R 2), conceptual predictive statistics (C p), mean square
error (MSE) and variables in the model for oil holding capacity, accelerated oil separation, hardness, work done,
maximum force of withdrawal and time to break column of peanut butter.
Type of model Adjusted R 2 Cp MSE Variables in model and parameter estimates for the reduced model 1
OHC 2 (full) 0.7931 11.0000 1.6192 All2
OHC 2 (reduced) 0.7952 5.1638 1.6029 58.22 + 6.7799 X1 + 7.1497X2 0.1257 X31.0945 X12 0.1879 X22
0.1264 X1 X2+ 0.00348 X2 X3
AOS4 (full) 0.5518 11.0000 2.0716 All2
AOS 4 (reduced) 0.5465 11.3961 2.0958 14.0077 + 0.1189 X2 + 0.05595 X3 + 0.3929 X12 0.0083 X22 0.00184 X2 X3
0.04122 X1X2 X3
Hardness (full) 0.0101 11.0000 39.2 x 10-4 All2
Hardness (reduced) 0.0214 3.2507 38.8 x 10 -4 0.07932 0.00848 X1 + 0.00086859 X3 + 0.00441 X12 + 0.00033852 X1 X2
0.00007459 X2 X3 0.00000825 X1X2 X3
Work done (full) 0.3746 11.0000 42.0 x 10 -7 All2
Work done (reduced) 0.3758 3.3764 41.9 x 10 -7 0.00655 0.00017142 X3 + 0.00000256 X32 0.00000268 X1 X2
Max. force (full) 0.3222 11.0000 78.1 x 10 -7 All2
Max. force (reduced) 0.3255 3.3927 77.7 x 10-7 0.01016 0.00028476 X3 + 0.00000373 X32 + 0.00003442 X1 X3
0.00000200 X1X2 X3
Time-to-break col. (full) 0.3508 11.0000 1904.62 All2
Time-to-break col. (red.) 0.3549 5.9296 1892.53 121.6725 + 3.8636 X2 2.95859 X3 + 5.5385 X12 0.3435 X22 + 0.03486 X32 +
0.06259 X2 X3 0.38573 X1 X3
1 X = treatment, X = number of wk, X = temperature
1 2 3
2 All = X , X , X , X 2, X 2, X 2 , X X , X X , X X , X X X
1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 2 3 1 3 1 2 3
3OHC = Oil holding capacity
4 AOS = Accelerated oil separation

MSE is mean square error and df is degree Results and Discussion better OHC than the control and other sam-
ples stabilized with palm oil. The palm oil-

Food Engineering and Physical Properties

of freedom. The above equation was used
to determine the simplest truncated mod-
el which was not significantly different
from the full model at a = 0.05. Data from
peanut butter samples stabilized with hy-
drogenated rapeseed and cottonseed oils
were not included in the regression analy-
sis, because the objective was not so much
to determine their impact on peanut but-
ter stabilization, but to observe how palm
oil stabilized peanut butter samples com-
pared to those stabilized by the commercial
stabilizer.
Figure 1Oil holding capacity (%) of peanut butter manufactured with no palm
oil or Fix-X (unstabilized), 1.5% palm oil, 2% palm oil, 2.5% palm oil, and Fix
X (commercial stabilizer) and stored at (A) 0, (B) 21, (C) 30, and (D) 45 C for 23
wk.
Oil holding capacity
The OHC of the samples stored at 16, 18,
and 23 wk are shown in Figure 1. Samples
held at 0 C as expected, appeared to have
the highest OHC compared to those held at
21, 30, or 45 C. The OHC of peanut butter
stabilized with palm oil increased at 18 wk
followed by an apparent decrease. This ob-
served decrease in OHC, would result in an
increase in free oil as reported by Muego
and Resurreccion (1992). At 23 wk, peanut
butter stabilized with 2% palm oil showed
stabilized peanut butter samples appeared
to have better OHC than those without any
stabilizer, but relatively inferior in OHC
when compared to the ones stabilized with
Fix-X. MuegoGnanasekharan and Res-
urreccion (1992) reported an increase in oil
separation in peanut pastes, with storage
time. Peanut butter stabilized with palm oil
appears to have a higher OHC than unsta-
bilized peanut butter. This confirms its su-
perior stabilizing potential as reported by
Hinds and others (1994), who predicted that
2 to 2.5% palm oil would be effective in sta-
bilizing peanut butter at 21 to 24 C for 1
y. The high palmitic acid (46.8%) and stearic
acid (4 to 5.5%) content of palm oil (Rossell
and others 1985) enabled the formation of
crystals, which are smaller than crystals
(Weiss 1983). The larger surface area of
smaller crystals, resulted in the retention of
large amounts of liquid oil in the fat crystal
network (Moran 1994). The commercial
stabilizer,Fix-X imparted the best OHC to
peanut butter. In the full model, the equa-
tion with the dependent variable, OHC and
the independent variables: temperature,
treatment (palm oil concentration), storage
time, all the possible 2-way and 3-way inter-
actions, and the squared terms of each of
the independent variables, resulted in an
adjusted R2 of 0.7931. The adjusted R2 in the
reduced model was 0.7952 (Table 1). This
was based on 6 observations per tempera-
ture, treatment, and storage time. The OHC
was correlated (r = 0.60) with palm oil con-
centration (Table 2).
A hard layer at the bottom of the peanut
 Palm oil functionality in peanut butter . . .

butter was observed in samples stored at Table 2Pearson correlation coefficients(r) of response variables with inde-
21, 30, and 45 C for 15 wk. This was due to pendent variables
insufficient liquid oil in the peanut solids Independent variables
matrix, causing it to separate to the top of Response Storage Palm oil
the container over the 15-wk storage period. variables wk Temperature concentration
Peanut butter stored at 0 C, however, did
Oil holding capacity (%) 0.38 0.35 0.60
not develop a hard layer at the bottom. The Accelerated oil separation (%) 0.66 0.22 0.15
OHC values of the hard layer in stabilized Hardness (N) 0.13 NS1 NS1
and unstablized peanut butter samples are Adhesiveness (J) 0.08 0.55 NS1
shown in Table 3. The OHC of samples held Max. force of withdrawal (N) 0.08 0.48 0.08
Time-to-break column (s) 0.38 0.31 NS1
at 21, 30, and 45C were better compared to (Adhesiveness and cohesiveness)
those held at 0 C because the bottom layer 1 Not significant at = 0.05
matrix had less oil than its capacity to phys-
ically entrap additional oil. Even though the
bottom layers of unstabilized and stabilized
peanut butters held at 21, 30, and 45 C had
a superior OHC compared to 0 C, the layer other temperatures. The solid fat content of for peanut butter samples stored at 21, 30,
was hard because the forces that physically palm and peanut oils was higher at low tem- or 45 C, which is indicative of the presence
hold the entrapped oil were slowly over- peratures and markedly reduced as temper- of maximum oil in the bottom layer. On the
come by the constant and prolonged densi- ature increased (Weiss 1983). Timms (1994) contrary, the low AOS values indicate the
ty differences between the oil and peanut reported that palm oil had a solid fat content presence of a hard layer of relatively low oil
particles over the storage period. This hard of more than 50% at 10 C, but as tempera- content.
layer was due to the gravitational settling of tures approached 30 C and higher, the solid The bottom layer of peanut butter sam-
solid particles over the storage period (Free- fat content decreased to nearly 0%. The ad- ples stabilized with Fix-X and held at 21,
man and Singleton 1952). Primary bonds, a justed R2 for the reduced model based on 6 30, and 45 C have AOS values almost twice
reason for hardness, are formed by the observations at each temperature, treat- that of other treatments, indicating a high
Food Engineering and Physical Properties

crystallization of glycerides between adja-
cent crystals (Moran 1994). This could be
another possible reason for the hard layer
formation.
The bottom layer of peanut butter sam-
ples stabilized with Fix-X and held at 0
and 45 C had similar capacities to retain oil.
This implies that Fix-X retains liquid pea-
nut oil with forces that are not overcome by
the slow and prolonged gravitational force
and density differences between the oil and
peanut particles during storage. Despite the
seemingly better OHC that palm oil impart-
ed to peanut butter compared to that of
unstabilized peanut butter, the samples
developed a hard layer at the bottom along
with a layer of oil at the top.
ment, and storage time was 0.5465. The
AOS values were correlated (r = 0.66) with
storage wk (Table 2). Muego-Ganansekha-
ran and Resurreccion (1992) reported in-
creased oil separation in peanut pastes
over a 161 d storage period.
Mean values of AOS of the hard layer are
shown in Table 4. Upon comparing unstabi-
lized and palm oil stabilized samples, the
data revealed that all samples held at 0 C
had higher AOS values. The difference was
several times greater than those observed
liquid oil content. This probably explains
why the Fix-X stabilized peanut butter
samples did not develop a hard layer at the
bottom like the other treatments (Table 3).
Kheiri (1987) reported that palm oil had
slow crystallization properties, which result-
ed in structural hardness in the finished
product. Palm oil also had a tendency for
recrystallization, which resulted in the im-
pairment of texture. Kheiri (1987) further
pointed out that unhydrogenated palm oil
had a high free fatty acid content, which fa-

Accelerated oil separation

There was a decrease in AOS of peanut
butter containing palm oil held for 18 and
23 wk (Figure 2). The smaller amount of oil
separating out of the product on centrifuga-
tion indicates that less free oil was present
within the product as storage time in-
creased. Woodroof (1983) reported a gradual
increase in free oil on the surface of peanut
butter with time, as did Muego-Gnan-
asekharan and Resurreccion (1992). The lat-
ter researchers measured oil separation re-
sulting from gravitational forces after
storing samples undisturbed for 52 wk. Pea-
nut butter stabilized with Fix-X appeared
to have the lowest AOS values compared to
the other treatments. There was less free oil Figure 2Accelerated oil separation (%) of peanut butter manufactured with
no palm oil or Fix-X (unstabilized), 1.5% palm oil, 2% palm oil, 2.5% palm
in unstabilized and palm oil stabilized pea- oil, and Fix X (commercial stabilizer) and stored at (A) 0, (B) 21, (C) 30, and (D)
nut butter samples held at 0 C compared to 45 C for 23 wk.
Palm oil functionality in peanut butter . . .

cilitated the attraction of pro-oxidant con- Table 3Mean 1 standard deviation of oil holding capacity (%) of the hard layer
taminants, thus reducing the stability of oil at the bottom of the jar at 15-wk
during storage. Storage Palm oil concentration (% v/w)
temp. (C) 0 1.5 2 2.5 Fix-X2
Texture measurements
0 7.51 0.05 9.99 0.11 11.92 0.09 12.19 0.10 23.02 0.07
Hardness values at 0 C were constant
21 27.01 0.09 26.86 0.06 20.32 0.12 25.56 0.08 20.75 0.05
from 6 to 16 wk (Figure 3) for the control and 30 30.22 0.11 29.72 0.04 24.91 0.08 25.91 0.11 20.49 0.08
all the palm oil stabilized peanut butter 45 17.21 0.07 23.31 0.12 26.51 0.05 29.91 0.06 23.47 0.10
samples. There appeared to be an increase 1 Mean of 3 observations
in hardness at 0 C for the palm oil treated 2 Fix-X = Hydrogenated rapeseed and cottonseed oils
samples. At 21 and 45 C, the hardness val-
ues reached a peak at 9 wk followed by a
decline until 16 wk. Hardness values of pea-
nut butter samples stabilized with 2% palm
oil were similar to that of unstabilized pea-
nut butter samples. Unstabilized and palm
oil stabilized peanut butter samples ap-
peared to be softer when compared to pea-
nut butter samples stabilized with Fix-X
(Figure 3).
Hardness values exhibited an adjusted
R2 of 0.0214, indicating that the response
could not be predicted from linear or qua-
dratic models. The reason for the low R2 was
the variability in data. To obtain a homoge-
neous sample, peanut butter was stirred to

Food Engineering and Physical Properties

mix the free oil on top of the product with
the rest of the sample before placing into
petri dishes (Ahmed and Ali 1986) for 1 h
prior to analysis. However, samples held at
0 C and samples containing Fix-X were
not stirred, since they did not have any free
oil on the surface. Figure 3Hardness (N) of peanut butter manufactured with no palm oil or Fix-
Gravitational settling of peanut solids X (unstabilized), 1.5% palm oil, 2% palm oil, 2.5% palm oil, and Fix-X (com-
mercial stabilizer) and stored at (A) 0, (B) 21, (C) 30, and (D) 45 C for 23 wk.
over time results in hardening in unstabi-
lized peanut butter ( Weiss 1983). Citerne
and others (2001) reported that peanut but-
ter stabilized with vegetable oil exhibited a
solid-like behavior due to strong repulsive
(steric) forces induced by the stabilizer.
Muego-Ganansekharan and Resurreccion
(1992) reported a decrease in hardness in
peanut pastes stabilized with Fix-X over a
period of 52 wk.
Graphical representations of the force
deformation curves have been described
(Ahmed and Ali 1986, Muego and others
1990). Adhesiveness was determined by the
amount of work needed to break the peanut
butter column from the surface of the
plunger rod during its withdrawal (Ahmed
and Ali 1986). The unstabilized, 1.5-, and
2.0%-palm oil-stabilized peanut butter sam-
ples stored at 0 C appeared to be most ad- Figure 4Work done (J) to remove plunger rod from peanut butter manufac-
hesive compared to the peanut butters tured with no palm oil or Fix-X (unstabilized), 1.5% palm oil, 2% palm oil 2.5%
palm oil, and Fix-X (commercial stabilizer) and stored at (A) 0, (B) 21, (C) 30,
stored at the other temperatures studied and (D) 45 C for 23 wk.
over the entire storage period (Figure4).
There was no difference in the adhesive-
ness of unstabilized and palm oil stabilized
peanut butters (Figure 4). The palm oil-sta- and Resurreccion (2000) reported that there Muego and others (1990) reported that
bilized peanut butter samples appeared to was no linear relation between sensory ad- commercially stabilized peanut butter was
be less adhesive compared to peanut but- hesiveness and storage time, temperature, more adhesive compared to laboratory-
ter samples stabilized with Fix-X. Gills and concentrations of palm oil. made peanut butter and peanut paste as
 Palm oil functionality in peanut butter . . .

determined by the Ahmed and Ali (1986) Table 4Mean 1 standard deviation values of accelerated oil separation (%)
method. Muego-Gnanasekharan and Res- of hard layer at the bottom of the jar at 15-wk.
urreccion (1992) reported a decrease in ad- Storage Palm oil concentration (% v/w)
hesiveness in peanut pastes stabilized with temp. (C) 0 1.5 2 2.5 Fix-X2
Fix-X and stored at 30 C.
Ahmed and Ali (1986) used the time-to- 0 12.84 0.12 14.32 0.15 15.39 0.02 15.64 0.07 13.07 0.09
21 4.95 0.5 4.86 0.15 3.98 0.04 5.51 0.09 13.31 0.06
break the column of peanut butter as an 30 3.034 0.06 3.06 0.10 3.98 0.13 2.56 0.11 13.48 0.05
indication of adhesiveness and cohesive- 45 3.79 0.35 4.27 0.05 2.63 0.12 4.04 0.09 12.23 0.11
ness. Unstabilized, 1.5 and 2.0% palm oil 1 Mean of 3 observations
2 Fix-X = Hydrogenated rapeseed and cottonseed oils
stabilized peanut butter samples stored at
0C appeared to need more time to break
the column compared to peanut butter
samples held at other temperatures (Figure
5).
At 23 wk there seemed to be a reduction
in time-to-break the column compared to
earlier sampling times, indicating a de-
crease in adhesiveness and cohesiveness at
the end of the storage period. There was no
marked difference between unstabilized
and palm oil stabilized peanut butter sam-
ples. Furthermore, at 23 wk, unstabilized
and palm oil stabilized peanut butter sam-
ples required less time to break peanut but-
ter column (less adhesive and cohesive)
compared to the peanut butter samples sta-
Food Engineering and Physical Properties

bilized with Fix-X. Muego-Ganansekhe-

ran and Resurreccion (1992) reported a de-
crease in adhesiveness of peanut pastes
stored at 30 C for 1 y compared to freshly
prepared samples. Shieh and others (1996) Figure 5Time (s)-to-break column of peanut butter manufactured with no palm
oil or Fix-X (unstabilized), 1.5% palm oil, 2% palm oil, 2.5% palm oil, and Fix-
reported that Fix-X played a crucial role in X (commercial stabilizer) and stored at (A) 0, (B) 21, (C) 30, and (D) 45 C for
the physical properties of low fat peanut 23 wk.
spread.
The unstabilized, 1.5-, 2.0-, and 2.5% palm
oil-stabilized peanut butter samples stored
at 0 C appeared to have a high maximum
force of withdrawal compared to the peanut
butter samples stored at other temperatures
for 23 wk (Figure 6). This may be attributed to
the high solid fat content in oils at 0 C
(Timms 1994). There was no marked differ-
ence between unstabilized and palm oil sta-
bilized peanut butter samples.
The palm oil-stabilized peanut butter
samples appeared to have a higher maxi-
mum force of withdrawal when compared to
those stabilized with Fix-X. Similar obser-
vation, of a significantly less maximum
force of withdrawal was reported for com-
mercially stabilized peanut butter when
compared with laboratory-made peanut
butters and pastes (Muego and others
1990).
Figure 6Maximum force (N/cm2) of widthdrawal of plunger rod from peanut
The adjusted R2 for work done to remove
butter manufactured with no palm oil or Fix-X (unstabilized), 1.5% palm oil,
the peanut butter from the plunger rod, 2% palm oil, 2.5% palm oil, and Fix-X (commercial stabilizer) and stored at
time-to-break the peanut butter column (A) 0, (B) 21, (C) 30, and (D) 45 C for 23 wk.
and maximum force of withdrawal of the
plunger rod were 0.3758, 0.3549, and
0.3255, respectively (Table 1). This indicat- The Pearson coefficient indicated that (r = 0.66) between maximum force and
ed that the relation between the response the temperature correlated with work work. Hardness and time-to-break peanut
and independent variables could not be (r = 0.55) and maximum force (r = 0.48). butter column were not influenced by the
predicted by the full model. This was due to a strong correlation storage variables.
Palm oil functionality in peanut butter . . .
Conclusion
I N CONCLUSION, PALM OIL ENHANCED THE
OHC of peanut butter, indicating its po-
tential as a stabilizer. Samples held at 0 C
appeared to have the highest OHC, the least
free oil, no hard layer at the bottom of the
container, and maximum values for adhe-
siveness and cohesiveness. As storage time
increased, there was a decrease in OHC and
AOS. Palm oil had no effect on the adhesive-
ness and hardness characteristics of peanut
butter. The Fix-X stabilized peanut butter
was better than unstabilized and palm oil
stabilized peanut butter with regards to the
OHC, hardness, and adhesiveness charac-
teristics.
Appendix
Hardness was calculated as follows:
(1st peak height in mm) (0.4g/mm)
(1Kg/1000g) (9.8 N/Kg)
Work done (J) was calculated as:
(area of 2nd peak in mm2) (g force/ mm)
(9.8 10-3N/g force) (1 m/1000 mm)
The peak below the zero line is the 2nd
peak.
Maximum force of withdrawal per cm2 of
plunger surface area was calculated as:
(2nd peak height in mm) (0.4g/1mm)
(1Kg/1000g) (9.8N/Kg) (1/4.91cm2)
View publication stats
Time-to-break peanut butter column
was calculated as:
(width of 2nd peak in mm)
(60 in s/min/chart speed in mm/min)
where width of 2nd peak was the difference
between the starting and ending points of
the 2nd peak.
References
Ahmed EM, Ali T. 1986. Textural quality of peanut
butter as influenced by peanut seed and oil con-
tents. Peanut Sci 13:18-20.
Barbut S. 1996. Determining water and fat holding.
In: Hall GM, ed. Methods of Testing Protein Func-
tionality. New York: Chapman and Hall. p 186-220.
Bourne MC. 1982. Food texture and viscosity: con-
cept and measurement. New York: Academic Press.
325 p.
Citerne GP, Carreu PJ, Moan M. 2001. Rheological prop-
erties of peanut butter. Rheol Acta 40(1):86-96.
Freeman AF, Singleton WS. 1952. Prevention of oil
separation in peanut butter. Peanut J Nut World
31(4):23, 30, 45-6.
Gills LA, Resurreccion AVA. 2000. Sensory and phys-
ical properties of peanut butter treated with palm
oil and hydrogenated vegetable oil to prevent oil
separation. J Food Sci 65(1):173-80.
Haque ZU, Mozaffar Z. 1992. Casein hydrolysate II.
Functional properties of peptides. Food Hydrocoll
5:559-71.
Hinds MJ, Chinnan MS, Beuchat LR. 1994. Unhydro-
genated palm oil as a stabilizer for peanut butter. J
Food Sci 59(4):816-20, 832.
Johnson PB, Civillie GV, Vercellotti JR, Sanders TH,
Dus CA. 1988. Development of a lexicon for the
description of peanut flavor. J Sens Stud 3:9-17.
Kheiri SA. 1985. Palm oil products in cooking fats. J
Am Oil Chem Soc. 62:410-6.
Kheiri SA. 1987. End uses of palm oil; Human foods.
In: Gunstone FD, ed. Palm oil. New York: John Wiley
& Sons. p 71-83.
Moran DPJ. 1994. Fats in spreadable products. In:
Moran DPJ, Rajah KK. eds. Fats in Food Products
Westport, CT: AVI Publishing Co., Inc. p 155-207.
Muego KF, Resurreccion AVA, Hung YC. 1990. Charac-
terization of the textural properties of spreadable
peanut based products. J Text Stud 21:61-73.
Muego-Gnanasekharan KF, Resurreccion AVA. 1992.
Physicochemical and sensory characteristics of
peanut paste stored at different temperatures. J
Food Sci 57(6):1385-9.
Ng TKW, Hayes KC, DeWitt GF, Jegathesan M, Satgu-
nasingam N, Ong ASH, Tan D. 1992. Dietary palm-
itic and oleic acids exert similar effects on serum
cholesterol and lipoprotein profiles in normocho-
lesterolemic men and women. J Am Coll Nutr
11:383-90.
Rossell JB, King B, Downes MJ 1985. Composition of
oil. J Am Oil Chem Soc 62:221-30.
SAS Institute, Inc. 1985. SAS Users Guide: Statistics,
5th ed. SAS Institute Inc., Cary N.C.
Shieh CJ, Akoh CC, Koehler PE. 1996. Optimizing low
fat peanut spread containing sucrose polyester. J
Food Sci 61(6):1227-9.
Sundaram K, Hornstra G, Houwelingen ACV, Kester
ADM. 1992. Replacement of dietary fats with palm
oil: effect on human serum lipids, lipoproteins and
apolipoproteins. Br. J Nutr. 68:677-92.
Timms RE. 1994. Physical chemistry of fats. In: Mo-
ran DPJ, Rajah KK. ed. Fats in Food Products West-
port, CT: AVI Publishing Co., Inc. p 155-207.
USDA-NASS. 2000. Agricultural statistics. CD ROM
version, Washington D.C.
Weiss TJ 1983. Food oils and their uses. Westport,
Conn.: The AVI Publishing Co., Inc. p 14.
Woodroof JG. 1983. Peanut Butter. In: Woodroof JG ed.,
Peanuts: Production, Processing, Products. 3rd ed.
Westport, CT: The AVI Publishing Co. Inc. p 181-227.
MS 20020072 Submitted 2/1/02, Revised 11/6/02, Ac-
cepted 12/15/02, Received 3/31/03
Food Engineering and Physical Properties
This work was supported by a grant from the U.S. Agency for
International Development, Peanut Collaborative Research
Support Program (grant nr LAG-4048-G-OO-6013-00).
Vijayalakshmi Mantripragadas assistance in manuscript
preparation is appreciated. Palm oil used in this study was
provided by the Palm Oil Research Institute of Malaysia.
The authors are with the Dept. of Food Science
and Technology, Univ. of Georgia, 1109 Experi-
ment St., Griffin, GA 30223-1797. Author Aryana is
now with the Dept. of Dairy Science, Louisiana
State Univ. Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA
70803. Direct inquiries to author Resurreccion (E-
mail: aresurr@uga.edu).