JP6091362B2 - Fruit-containing flakes and method for producing the same - Google Patents

Description

  The present invention relates to fruit-containing flakes and a method for producing the same.

In recent years, with the diversification of consumer preferences for food and drink, various types of food and drink have been developed.
For example, there is a processed fruit product obtained by freeze-drying a fruit (for example, see Patent Document 1). In the freeze-dried treatment, the processed fruit product is sublimated in the portion where moisture was present, forming a cavity, and becomes porous. The fruit has a high moisture content of about 65% to 90% by mass or more than 90% by mass, and the processed fruit product obtained by freeze-drying has a low solid content density, is susceptible to impact, etc. Become. In addition, the texture of the processed fruit product is crisp by freeze-drying and has a non-crisp texture. Therefore, the processed fruit product has a problem that it is not suitable for uses that require a crunchy texture with a hard eating response.

As a method for obtaining a freeze-dried processed fruit product that is hard to collapse and has a crunchy and hard texture, a method of increasing the solid content density of the raw material can be considered. As a method for increasing the solid content density, a method of increasing the solid content by adding a sugar such as dextrin to pasted fruit or a liquid squeezed from the fruit can be considered. However, even if the solid content density is increased by the above-mentioned method and freeze-dried, there is a problem that it is difficult to collapse and a hard and crunchy texture is insufficient, and a satisfactory one cannot be obtained.
Further, when a certain amount or more of the saccharide is used, the saccharide is dissolved in the water in the raw material, and the freezing point is lowered. As a result, the liquid that does not freeze at the time of freeze-drying is boiled and dried in a foamed state, so that there is a problem that the intended difficulty of collapsing and a crunchy hard texture cannot be obtained.

  As an application of the freeze-dried processed fruit product having a hard and crunchy texture, for example, it can be considered to be included in a cereal food to be eaten over milk. In this case, the processed fruit product is also required to have water resistance capable of maintaining a crunchy and hard texture even when in contact with moisture such as milk.

  However, a processed fruit product having a crunchy and hard texture and excellent shape retention and water resistance has not been developed yet, and its rapid development is strongly demanded.

JP 2004-236612 A

  An object of the present invention is to solve the above-described problems and achieve the following objects. That is, the present invention aims to provide a fruit-containing flake having a crunchy and hard texture, excellent shape retention and water resistance, and a production method capable of efficiently producing the fruit-containing flake. To do.

Means for solving the problems are as follows. That is,
<1> A mixing step of mixing at least the fruit raw material and agar;
A freezing step of freezing the mixture;
And a freeze-drying step of freeze-drying the frozen mixture.
<2> The method for producing fruit-containing flakes according to <1>, including a pulverization step of pulverizing the freeze-dried mixture.
<3> The mixture according to any one of <1> to <2>, wherein the mixture contains water, and the blending amount of agar in the mixing step is 3% by mass to 5% by mass with respect to the total mass of the components excluding water. It is a manufacturing method of the described fruit containing flakes.
<4> The method for producing fruit-containing flakes according to <3>, wherein the blending amount of agar in the mixing step is 4% by mass to 5% by mass with respect to the total mass of the components excluding water.
<5> The fruit according to any one of <1> to <2>, wherein the mixture does not contain water, and the blending amount of agar in the mixing step is 3% by mass to 5% by mass with respect to the mass of the mixture. It is a manufacturing method of containing flakes.
<6> The method for producing fruit-containing flakes according to <5>, wherein the blending amount of agar in the mixing step is 4% by mass to 5% by mass with respect to the mass of the mixture.
<7> The method for producing a fruit-containing flake according to any one of <1> to <6>, wherein the Brix value of the mixture in the mixing step is 26% to 34%.
<8> A fruit-containing flake produced by the method for producing a fruit-containing flake according to any one of <1> to <7>.

  According to the present invention, the above-mentioned problems can be solved, the object can be achieved, the fruit-containing flakes have a crunchy and hard texture, and are excellent in shape retention and water resistance, and the fruit-containing The manufacturing method which can produce flakes efficiently can be provided.

FIG. 1A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Reference Example 1. FIG. 1B is a diagram illustrating a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Reference Example 1. FIG. 1C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Reference Example 1. FIG. 1D is a diagram showing a state of a mixture when the grindability of Reference Example 1 is evaluated. FIG. 1E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Reference Example 1. FIG. 1F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Reference Example 1. 2A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Example 2. FIG. 2B is a diagram showing a side view of the mixture taken out of the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 2. FIG. FIG. 2C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 2. FIG. 2D is a diagram showing the state of the mixture when the grindability of Example 2 was evaluated. FIG. 2E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Example 2. 2F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Example 2. FIG. 3A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Example 3. FIG. 3B is a diagram showing a side view of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 3. FIG. FIG. 3C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 3. FIG. 3D is a diagram showing the state of the mixture when the grindability of Example 3 was evaluated. FIG. 3E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Example 3. 3F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Example 3. FIG. 4A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 1. FIG. 4B is a diagram illustrating a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 1. FIG. FIG. 4C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 1. FIG. 4D is a diagram showing a state of the mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 1 is evaluated. 4E is a diagram showing a state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 1. FIG. FIG. 4F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 1. FIG. 5A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 2. FIG. 5B is a diagram showing a side view of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 2. FIG. 5C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 2. FIG. 5D is a diagram illustrating a state of a mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 2 is evaluated. FIG. 5E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 2. FIG. 5F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 2. 6A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 3. FIG. 6B is a diagram illustrating a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying process of Comparative Example 3. FIG. 6C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying process of Comparative Example 3. FIG. FIG. 6D is a diagram showing a state of a mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 3 is evaluated. FIG. 6E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 3. FIG. 6F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 3. FIG. 7A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 4. FIG. 7B is a view showing a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 4. FIG. 7C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 4. FIG. 7D is a diagram showing a state of a mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 4 is evaluated. FIG. 7E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 4. FIG. 7F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 4. FIG. 8A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 5. FIG. 8B is a diagram showing a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 5. FIG. 8C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 5. FIG. 8D is a diagram illustrating a state of a mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 5 is evaluated. FIG. 8E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 5. FIG. 8F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 5. FIG. 9A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 6. FIG. 9B is a diagram showing a side view of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 6. FIG. 9C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying process of Comparative Example 6. FIG. 9D is a diagram showing a state of a mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 6 is evaluated. FIG. 9E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 6. FIG. 9F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 6. FIG. 10A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 7. FIG. 10B is a diagram showing a side view of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 7. FIG. 10C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Comparative Example 7. FIG. 10D is a diagram showing a state of a mixture when the grindability of Comparative Example 7 is evaluated. FIG. 10E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 7. FIG. 10F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Comparative Example 7. FIG. 11A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Example 4. FIG. 11B shows a side view of the mixture taken out of the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 4. FIG. 11C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 4. FIG. 11D is a diagram showing the state of the mixture when the grindability of Example 4 was evaluated. FIG. 11E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Example 4. FIG. 11F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Example 4. 12A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step of Example 5. FIG. 12B is a view showing a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 5. FIG. FIG. 12C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Example 5. FIG. 12D is a diagram showing the state of the mixture when the grindability of Example 5 was evaluated. FIG. 12E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Example 5. FIG. 12F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Example 5. FIG. 13A is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after the freeze-drying step in Reference Example 6. FIG. 13B is a diagram illustrating a side surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step in Reference Example 6. FIG. 13C is a view showing the back surface of the mixture taken out from the tray after the freeze-drying step of Reference Example 6. FIG. 13D is a diagram showing a state of a mixture when the grindability of Reference Example 6 is evaluated. FIG. 13E is a diagram showing the state of the mixture after immersion in the water resistance evaluation of Reference Example 6. FIG. 13F is a graph showing the results of measuring the hardness of the mixture in Reference Example 6.

(Fruit-containing flakes and production method thereof)
The fruit-containing flakes of the present invention can be produced by the method for producing fruit-containing flakes of the present invention.
Hereinafter, the fruit-containing flakes of the present invention will be described together with the description of the method for producing the fruit-containing flakes of the present invention.

  The method for producing fruit-containing flakes of the present invention includes at least a mixing step, a freezing step, and a freeze-drying step, and further includes other steps as necessary.

<Mixing process>
The mixing step is a step of mixing at least the fruit raw material and agar (hereinafter sometimes referred to as “mixture”).

-Mixture-
The mixture contains at least a fruit raw material and agar, and further contains other components such as water as necessary.

--- Fruit ingredients--
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as a fruit of the said fruit raw material, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, a strawberry, a blueberry, a kiwi fruit, a mango, etc. are mentioned.
The said fruit may be used individually by 1 type, and may use 2 or more types together.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as an aspect of the said fruit raw material, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, puree, a paste, fruit juice etc. are mentioned.
The said fruit raw material may use what consists only of 1 type, and may use it combining the thing of a different aspect.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as a compounding quantity of the said fruit raw material, According to the objective, it can select suitably.

−−Agar−−
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said agar, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, a commercial item can be used. As said commercial item, Inagar A-6 (made by Ina Food Industry Co., Ltd.) is mentioned suitably, for example.
The said agar may be used individually by 1 type, and may use 2 or more types together.
The blending amount of the agar is not particularly limited and may be appropriately selected depending on the purpose.However, when the mixture includes water, the total mass of the components excluding water in the mixture, When the said mixture does not contain water, 3 mass%-5 mass% are preferable with respect to the mass of the said mixture, 4 mass%-5 mass% are more preferable, and 4 mass% is especially preferable. When the blending amount of the agar is less than 3% by mass or exceeds 5% by mass, a crunchy and hard texture (hereinafter sometimes referred to as “crispy feeling”) may not be obtained. On the other hand, when the amount of the agar is within the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in that a more preferable crunchy and hard texture can be obtained.

-Other ingredients-
The other components are not particularly limited as long as the effects of the present invention are not impaired, and can be appropriately selected according to the purpose. For example, water, carbohydrates (monosaccharides, disaccharides, polysaccharides, sugar alcohols, etc.) ), Starch, modified starch, starch degradation product, thickening polysaccharide, dietary fiber, protein, colorant, flavor, acidulant and the like. Among these, it is preferable that a starch decomposition product is contained in the point which does not impair the increase in solid content and flavor.
The said other component may be used individually by 1 type, and may use 2 or more types together.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as a compounding quantity of the said other component, According to the objective, it can select suitably.

There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said water if it can be used for a foodstuff, According to the objective, it can select suitably. In addition, the water in the said mixing process does not contain the water | moisture content contained in a fruit raw material, but means what is used as water.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as the compounding quantity of the said water, According to the moisture content derived from a fruit raw material, the quantity of water can be selected suitably. For example, when the amount of water derived from the fruit raw material is very large, it is possible to dissolve agar or the like with the water, and it is not necessary to add water.

There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said starch decomposition product, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, a commercial item can be used. As said commercial item, Sanus 2002 (made by Nippon Starch Co., Ltd.) is mentioned suitably, for example.
The said starch degradation product may be used individually by 1 type, and may use 2 or more types together.
The blending amount of the starch degradation product is not particularly limited and can be appropriately selected according to the purpose. However, when the mixture contains water, the total mass of the components excluding water in the mixture is not limited. When the mixture does not contain water, it is preferably 3% by mass to 30% by mass, more preferably 3% by mass to 25% by mass, and more preferably 4% by mass to 20% by mass with respect to the mass of the mixture. Particularly preferred. If the blended amount of the starch degradation product is less than 3% by mass, the freeze-dried product may easily absorb moisture, and if it exceeds 30% by mass, the color becomes whitish and the fruit flavor, aroma components, etc. are thin. And the texture may change and a good texture may not be obtained. On the other hand, when the blended amount of the starch degradation product is within the particularly preferred range, it is advantageous in that the fruit color, flavor and aroma components remain, and a good texture can be obtained.

-Brix value-
The Brix value of the mixture is not particularly limited and may be appropriately selected depending on the intended purpose, but is preferably 26% to 34%, more preferably 28% to 33%, and particularly preferably 30% to 32%. . When the Brix value is 15% or less, the amount of water contained in the mixture is large, and it becomes light and very easy to collapse after lyophilization. When the Brix value is 16% to 25%, the shape is solid after lyophilization. Although it remains, the texture may be crunchy and easy to crumble. Also, if the Brix value is 35% or more, it will not be completely frozen, it will be boiled / foamed during lyophilization processing, or it will melt into a bowl-like shape, and it will stick to your teeth when you eat it. May occur, or the hardness may be as if the heel has been bitten. On the other hand, when the Brix value is within the preferred range, it is advantageous in that a hard and crispy texture is obtained after lyophilization and the physical properties are not easily broken.

-Mixed-
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as a mixing order of each component in the said mixture, According to the objective, it can select suitably, Each component may be mixed collectively at once, and may be mixed separately. There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said mixing means, A well-known means can be selected suitably and can be used.

-Heating-
In the mixing step, heat treatment is preferably performed to dissolve the agar. There is no restriction | limiting in particular as the aspect of the said heat processing, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, the aspect which heats the mixture which mixed all the components, the thing which mixed agar and water beforehand is heated. And the like. In addition, in the aspect which heats what mixed the agar and water previously, the mixture can be obtained by adding and mixing the said fruit raw material etc. to what agar melt | dissolved by the said heating.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said heating temperature, Although it can select suitably according to the objective, 75 to 95 degreeC is preferable, 80 to 90 degreeC is more preferable, 85 to 90 degreeC is especially preferable. If the heating temperature is less than 75 ° C, the agar may not dissolve, and if it exceeds 95 ° C, it may be burnt. On the other hand, when the heating temperature is within the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in terms of dissolution of agar and maintenance of fruit flavor.

<Freezing process>
The freezing step is a step of freezing the mixture.

  There is no restriction | limiting in particular as temperature of the said freezing process, Although it can select suitably according to the objective, -25 degreeC--50 degreeC is preferable, -25 degreeC--40 degreeC is more preferable, -30 degreeC- -35 ° C is particularly preferred. When the freezing temperature is lower than −25 ° C., it may boil during lyophilization in an unfrozen state. On the other hand, when the freezing temperature is within the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in terms of maintaining a crunchy texture.

  There is no restriction | limiting in particular as time of the said freezing process, Although it can select suitably according to the objective, 12 hours or more are preferable, 15 hours or more are more preferable, and 16 hours or more are especially preferable. If the time of the freezing step is less than 12 hours, it may evaporate and boil during drying in an unfrozen state. On the other hand, when the time of the freezing step is within the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in terms of maintaining a crunchy texture.

  There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said freezing means, A well-known freezing means can be selected suitably and can be used.

<Freeze drying process>
The freeze-drying step is a step of freeze-drying the frozen mixture.
In the freeze-drying step, a freeze-dried food solidified with agar can be obtained by freeze-drying a gelled jelly-like product unique to agar.
When freeze-drying high-concentration fruit ingredients, if the agar is not added, the food is boiled and foamed without freeze even during freeze-drying due to the freezing point depression, but when the agar is added, the gel strength increases. Thus, strong cross-linking unique to agar occurs, and even if a high concentration of fruit raw material is used, there is no change such as foaming during freeze-drying, and it is considered that a hard eating responsive texture can be obtained.

  The pressure in the freeze-drying step is not particularly limited as long as it is a vacuum condition, and can be appropriately selected according to the purpose, but is preferably 133 Pa or less. When the pressure is higher than 133 Pa, the mixture may melt and boil. On the other hand, when the pressure is within the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in terms of maintaining a crunchy texture.

  There is no restriction | limiting in particular as temperature of the said freeze-drying process, Although it can select suitably according to the objective, As temperature of the said mixture, 25 to 55 degreeC is preferable, 30 to 50 degreeC is more preferable, 43 C.-47.degree. C. is particularly preferred. If the temperature is less than 25 ° C, the drying time may take a long time, and if it exceeds 55 ° C, it may burn and discolor. On the other hand, when the temperature is within the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in that color and texture are maintained.

  The lyophilization means is not particularly limited, and a known apparatus can be appropriately selected and used.

  There is no restriction | limiting in particular as the moisture content of the said mixture after the said freeze-drying, Although it can select suitably according to the objective, 5 mass% or less is preferable, 4 mass% or less is more preferable, and 3 mass% or less is preferable. Particularly preferred. When the water content exceeds 5% by mass, the dried product may be softened and the crunchy feeling may not be maintained. On the other hand, when the water content is in the particularly preferable range, it is advantageous in terms of maintaining a crunchy texture.

<Other processes>
The other steps are not particularly limited as long as the effects of the present invention are not impaired, and can be appropriately selected according to the purpose. Examples thereof include a fruit raw material preparation step and a pulverization step.

-Fruit raw material preparation process-
The said fruit raw material preparation process is a process of processing the said fruit.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said process, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, the process made into a pure form, the process made into a paste form, the process to crush, the process to shred, etc. are mentioned.
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as the method to make the said puree, the method to make the said paste, the method to crush, and the method to shred, It can carry out by selecting a well-known means suitably.

-Crushing process-
The pulverizing step is a step of pulverizing the freeze-dried mixture.
Since the freeze-dried mixture is hardly crushed and crushed into flakes, generation of powder when crushed can be reduced.

  There is no restriction | limiting in particular as said grinding | pulverization means, According to the objective, it can select suitably, For example, a hammer, a crusher, a dicing machine etc. are mentioned.

<Fruit-containing flakes>
There is no restriction | limiting in particular as a magnitude | size of the said fruit containing flakes, Although it can select suitably according to the objective, 3 mm-10 mm of maximum length are mentioned preferably.
The fruit-containing flakes do not collapse easily even after lyophilization, have hard physical properties, and have a crispy texture that is crunchy when eaten. Moreover, since it remains as a shape, it has a presence in appearance and texture.
The fruit-containing flakes are hard and difficult to collapse and remain in shape, so they can be used for kneading confectionery, etc., and because of their hard properties, water, milk, juice, soup, soup, etc. Since it does not dissolve for a while when placed in a liquid, it can maintain a crunchy texture and can be used to make a characteristic food.

  EXAMPLES The present invention will be specifically described below with reference to examples and comparative examples, but the present invention is not limited to these examples.

( Reference Example 1)
The frozen koji was pureed with a hand mixer (manufactured by Kuisinart Sanei Co., Ltd.).
<Mixing process>
A mixture having the composition shown in Table 1-1 was prepared as follows.
Puree koji (fruit raw material), starch degradation product (Sanasu 2002, manufactured by Nippon Starch Co., Ltd.), granulated sugar (produced by Hokkaido Sugar Co., Ltd.), and agar (Ina Agar S-6, Ina Food Industry) Co., Ltd.) and water were mixed and heated to 80 ° C. by hot water heating. After reaching 80 ° C., it was held for 5 minutes, then cooled to 70 ° C., and citric acid (manufactured by Fuso Chemical Industries, Ltd .; acidulant) was added. The Brix value of the mixture was 30.3% (actual value: 30.3%).

In Table 1-1, “%” represents “% by mass”.

<Freezing process>
The mixed and heated mixture was poured into a small plastic mold tray. The small molding tray is tapered, and one section is 36 mm long, 41 mm wide, and 19 mm high. The weight of the mixture after the tray injection was 200.1 g (7 compartments).
The tray into which the mixture was injected was frozen in a freezer at −35 ° C. for 20 hours.

<Freeze drying process>
The frozen mixture was freeze-dried using a freeze dryer (manufactured by Kyowa Vacuum Technology Co., Ltd.) under the following conditions. The weight of the freeze-dried mixture was 63.3 g (yield: 31.63%) (water content was 5% by mass or less).
Freeze drying conditions:
・ Pressure ・ ・ ・ 30Pa
・ Product temperature: 45 ℃

<Crushing process>
The freeze-dried mixture was pulverized with a hammer, and after pulverization, sieved with a stainless steel sieve to obtain fruit-containing flakes having a length (maximum length) of 3 mm to 10 mm.

<Evaluation>
-Workability-
The mixture in the freezing step was evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2.
[Evaluation criteria]
◎ ・ ・ ・ Very good (fluid, easy to transfer to a small mold tray. Easy to mix without burning.
○ ・ ・ ・ Good (Slightly viscous, but fluid, can be transferred to a small mold tray. Minimal scorching. Dama can be done to some extent).
Δ: Normal (although there is fluidity, there are some parts that are viscous and difficult to transfer to a small mold tray, but can be stored in a small mold tray).
× ・ ・ ・ Poor (no fluidity, difficult to transfer to a small mold tray. Easy to burn, difficult to mix.

-Shape retention-
The mixture after lyophilization was evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2. FIG. 1A shows a state where the mixture is taken out from the freeze dryer, FIG. 1B shows a side view of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. 1C shows the back side of the mixture taken out from the tray (of the tray). Bottom side).
[Evaluation criteria]
◎ ・ ・ ・ Very good (exfoliation from the small molding tray is good. The shape of the small molding tray is maintained).
○ ・ ・ ・ Good (Slightly sticks to the small mold tray, but peels off immediately. There is some shrinkage and expansion, but does not protrude from the small mold tray).
Δ: Normal (Small molded tray is stuck, but can be peeled off by hand. Shrinkage and expansion, but slightly beyond the small molded tray)
X ... Bad (peeling off from the small molding tray is bad. The shape of the small molding tray is not maintained).

-Crushability-
The lyophilized mixture was lightly tapped about 5 times with a hammer and evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2. FIG. 1D shows the mixture after hitting with the hammer.
[Evaluation criteria]
◎ ・ ・ ・ Very good (less pulverization during crushing, not softened, hardness enough to be smashed with a hammer).
○ ・ ・ ・ Good (Slight generation of powder during crushing. Some softened but hard enough to be smashed with a hammer).
Δ: Normal (powder is generated during crushing. Some softened but hard enough to be smashed with a hammer).
× ・ ・ ・ Poor (a lot of powder is generated during pulverization. Softening. Hard enough not to be smashed with a hammer).

-Hardness-
The hardness of the mixture after lyophilization (one section, hereinafter may be referred to as “block”) is measured with a texture analyzer TA. XT. Using Plus (manufactured by Eiko Seiki Co., Ltd., the software is “Texture Exponent 32” Windows XP (registered trademark)), it was measured with the following set values and evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2. In addition, the measurement results are shown in FIG. 1F (a graph indicated by a solid line in FIG. 1F).
[Setting value]
・ Compression speed: 0.5mm / second (speed when compressing the block)
-Strain value to the object: up to 50% (distorted up to 50% of the thickness of the block)
・ Probe: 5 mm (contact area with the block at the tip of the probe)
[Evaluation criteria]
A: Very good (shows continuous vertical lines while maintaining a load value of about 5 kg to 15 kg from a strain value of less than 10%).
Good ... (From the strain value of 10% to 20%, a continuous vertical line is shown while maintaining a load value of about 5 kg to 15 kg).
Δ: Normal (continuous vertical lines are shown while maintaining a load value of about 3 kg to 10 kg).
X: Poor (shows continuous vertical lines, curves, straight lines, etc. outside the load value range of 5 kg to 15 kg).

-Water resistance-
The mixture after lyophilization (one section) was put in 200 mL of milk at around 10 ° C., immersed for 1 minute, tested in the same manner as the evaluation of the hardness, and evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2. FIG. 1E shows the mixture after the immersion, and FIG. 1F (a graph indicated by a dotted line in FIG. 1F) shows the measurement result.
[Evaluation criteria]
◎ ... very good (moisture does not soak, keeps it hard)
○ ... Good (water is slightly immersed in the surface, but the central part remains hard).
Δ: Normal (moisture is immersed in the surface and inside, but maintains a hard texture).
X: Poor (water soaks and softens).

-Texture (crispness)-
The texture of the fruit-containing flakes was evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2.
[Evaluation criteria]
◎ ・ ・ ・ Very good (there is moderate hardness and a crunchy texture).
○ ・ ・ ・ Good (hardness is slightly weak, but there is a crunchy texture).
Δ: Normal (crisp and light texture).
× ・ ・ ・ Bad (fluffy texture, or hard and crunchy texture).

-Sensory evaluation (color and taste)-
The taste of the fruit-containing flakes was evaluated according to the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2.
[Evaluation criteria]
◎ ・ ・ ・ Very good (strongly fruit color and taste).
○ ・ ・ ・ Good (fruit color, taste is not strong, but has)
Δ: Normal (fruit color and taste are inferior to those before lyophilization, but have).
× ・ ・ ・ Bad (no fruit color, no taste).

-Comprehensive evaluation-
Based on each said evaluation, comprehensive evaluation was performed with the following evaluation criteria. The results are shown in Table 1-2.
[Evaluation criteria]
A: Very good (no x and 3 or more).
B: Good (no x, ◎ is 2 or less, ○ is 4 or more).
C: Bad (not applicable to the criteria of “A (very good)”, “B (good)”, “D (very bad)”)
D: Very bad (x is 3 or more).

(Examples 2-3 and Comparative Example 1)
In the reference example 1, each fruit-containing flake was produced in the same manner as in the reference example 1 except that the composition of each component in the mixture was changed as shown in Table 2-1 below.
In Example 2, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 31.3%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 194.5 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 65.7 g (yield: 33.78%, water content was 5% by mass or less).
Moreover, in Example 3, the Brix value of the mixture was 31.3% (actual value: 29.9%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 201.5 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 63.0 g (yield: 31.27%, water content was 5% by mass or less).
In Comparative Example 1, the Brix value of the mixture was 28.8% (actual value: 29.3%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 208.8 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 64.0 g (yield: 30.65%, water content was 5% by mass or less).

In Table 2-1, “%” represents “mass%”.

The mixture obtained in Examples 2-3 and Comparative Example 1 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1.
For Example 2, each evaluation result is shown in Table 2-2, FIG. 2A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 2B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. The back of the mixture taken out from the tray is shown, FIG. 2D shows the mixture after hitting with a hammer, FIG. 2E shows the state of the mixture after immersion (1 hour), and FIG. Indicated. In the water resistance evaluation of Example 2, the immersion time in milk was evaluated for 10 minutes and 1 hour in addition to 1 minute. In FIG. 2F, the “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after freeze-drying, the “two-dot chain line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute, and the “single-dot chain line” indicates the milk. The result measured about the case where the immersion time to 10 minutes was shown is shown, and a "dotted line" shows the result measured about the case where the immersion time to milk is 1 hour.
For Example 3, each evaluation result is shown in Table 2-3, FIG. 3A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 3B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. The back of the mixture taken out from the tray is shown, FIG. 3D shows the mixture after being struck with a hammer, FIG. 3E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 3F shows the measurement result by a hardness meter. In FIG. 3F, the “solid line” indicates the measurement result for the mixture after lyophilization, and the “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.
Table 2-4 shows the evaluation results for Comparative Example 1, FIG. 4A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 4B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. The back of the mixture taken out from the tray is shown, FIG. 4D shows the mixture after being struck with a hammer, FIG. 4E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 4F shows the mixture after lyophilization measured with a hardness meter The results were shown. In addition, regarding the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 1, since the mixture after being immersed in milk was too soft, data by a hardness meter could not be obtained.

From the results of Reference Example 1 , Examples 2 to 3, and Comparative Example 1, Comparative Example 1 containing no agar does not have shape retention, foams during freeze-drying, and a hard texture cannot be obtained. all right. It was also found that there was no water resistance.
On the other hand, in Reference Example 1 and Examples 2 to 3 using agar, a crunchy texture was obtained. Among these, Example 2 in which the blending ratio of agar was 4% by mass (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding moisture) was most preferable, and then the blending ratio of agar was 5% by mass (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding moisture). Example 3 was preferred. These were excellent in texture, shape retention, pulverization (low generation of powder during pulverization), and water resistance. In Reference Example 1 in which the mixing ratio of agar was 3% by mass (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding moisture), although a crunchy texture was obtained, it was slightly light and easily broken.

(Comparative Example 2)
In Example 2, 4.00% by mass of agar (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding water) was used, and 4.00% by mass of gelatin (made by Nitta Gelatin Co., Ltd.) (in the mixture excluding water) The fruit-containing flakes of Comparative Example 2 were produced in the same manner as in Example 2 except that the rate was changed.
In Comparative Example 2, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 28.4%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 199.0 g, and the freeze-dried mixture The weight was 61.7 g (yield: 31.01%, water content was 5 mass% or less).
The mixture obtained in Comparative Example 2 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3-1. 5A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 5B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, FIG. 5C shows the back of the mixture taken out from the tray, and FIG. Fig. 5E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and Fig. 5F shows the result of measuring the mixture after freeze-drying with a hardness meter. In addition, regarding the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 2, since the mixture after being immersed in milk was too soft, data by a hardness meter could not be obtained.

(Comparative Example 3)
In Example 2, 4.00 mass% (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding water) of agar was used, and 4.00 mass% (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding water) of pectin (manufactured by Danisco Japan Co., Ltd.). The fruit-containing flakes of Comparative Example 3 were produced in the same manner as in Example 2 except that it was replaced with ().
In Comparative Example 3, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 30.0%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 189.6 g, and the freeze-dried mixture The weight was 56.5 g (yield: 29.80%, water content was 5 mass% or less).
The mixture obtained in Comparative Example 3 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3-2. 6A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 6B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, FIG. 6C shows the back of the mixture taken out from the tray, and FIG. 6D shows the hammer. 6E shows the mixture after dipping, FIG. 6E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 6F shows the result of measuring the mixture after lyophilization with a hardness meter. In addition, regarding the water resistance evaluation of Comparative Example 3, the mixture after being immersed in milk was too soft, so data from a hardness meter could not be obtained.

(Comparative Example 4)
In Example 2, 4.00% by mass of agar (mixing ratio in a mixture excluding water) was used, and 4.00% by mass of guar gum (manufactured by Takaragen Co., Ltd.) (mixing ratio in a mixture excluding water). The fruit-containing flakes of Comparative Example 4 were produced in the same manner as in Example 2 except that it was replaced with ().
In Comparative Example 4, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 28.4%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 199.0 g, and the freeze-dried mixture The weight was 61.7 g (yield: 31.01%, water content was 5 mass% or less).
The mixture obtained in Comparative Example 4 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3-3. 7A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 7B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, FIG. 7C shows the back of the mixture taken out from the tray, and FIG. Fig. 7E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and Fig. 7F shows the result of measurement with a hardness meter. In FIG. 7F, the “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after lyophilization, and the “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.

(Comparative Example 5)
In Example 2, 4.00% by mass (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding water) of agar was used, and 4.00% by mass of locust bean gum (manufactured by Takaragen Co., Ltd.) in the mixture excluding water. A fruit-containing flake of Comparative Example 5 was produced in the same manner as in Example 2 except that the blending ratio was changed.
In Comparative Example 5, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 31.9%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 183.4 g, and the freeze-dried mixture The weight was 64.5 g (yield: 35.17%, moisture content was 5 mass% or less).
The mixture obtained in Comparative Example 5 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3-4. 8A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 8B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, FIG. 8C shows the back of the mixture taken out from the tray, and FIG. FIG. 8E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 8F shows the measurement result by a hardness meter. In FIG. 8F, the “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after lyophilization, and the “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.

(Comparative Example 6)
In Example 2, 4.00% by mass (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding water) of agar was used, and 4.00% by mass of κ-carrageenan (manufactured by Takaragen Co., Ltd.) in the mixture excluding water. A fruit-containing flake of Comparative Example 6 was produced in the same manner as in Example 2 except that the blending ratio was changed.
In Comparative Example 6, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 31.3%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 178.6 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 61.1 g (yield: 34.21%, water content was 5% by mass or less).
The mixture obtained in Comparative Example 6 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3-5. 9A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 9B shows a side view of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, FIG. 9C shows the back side of the mixture taken out from the tray, and FIG. 9D shows a hammer. Fig. 9E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and Fig. 9F shows the measurement result by a hardness meter. In FIG. 9F, “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after freeze-drying, and “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.

(Comparative Example 7)
In Example 2, 4.00% by mass of agar (mixing ratio in a mixture excluding water) was used, and 4.00% by mass of xanthan gum (manufactured by Takaragen Co., Ltd.) (mixing ratio in a mixture excluding water). The fruit-containing flakes of Comparative Example 7 were produced in the same manner as in Example 2 except that it was replaced with ().
In Comparative Example 7, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.7% (actual value: 30.8%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 191.1 g, and the freeze-dried mixture The weight was 60.6 g (yield: 31.71%, moisture content was 5 mass% or less).
The mixture obtained in Comparative Example 7 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The results are shown in Table 3-6. 10A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 10B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, FIG. 10C shows the back of the mixture taken out from the tray, and FIG. 10D shows the hammer. FIG. 10E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 10F shows the measurement result with a hardness meter. In FIG. 10F, the “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after freeze-drying, and the “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.

  From the results of Comparative Examples 2 to 7, when agar was used as another thickening agent, the texture was slightly crunchy and crumbled, and the texture was as if the candy was crushed when it was chewed. The crunchy texture required in the present invention was not obtained. Further, in Comparative Examples 2 to 7, it was found that the shape retention was weak and was far from the desired physical properties.

Example 4
In Reference Example 1, the point of using pureed koji as a fruit raw material was replaced with pureed blueberries prepared as follows, except that the formulation of each component was changed as shown in Table 4-1 below. Produced the fruit-containing flakes of Example 4 in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The mixture obtained in Example 4 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1.
In Example 4, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.4% (actual value: 29.9%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 357.5 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 104.9 g (yield: 29.34%, water content was 5% by mass or less).
For Example 4, the evaluation results are shown in Table 4-2, FIG. 11A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 11B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. The back side of the mixture taken out from the tray is shown, FIG. 11D shows the mixture after being struck with a hammer, FIG. 11E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 11F shows the measurement result by a hardness meter. In FIG. 11F, “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after lyophilization, and “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.
-Preparation of fruit ingredients-
Frozen whole blueberries were pureed with a hand blender (manufactured by Crazy Nart Sanei Co., Ltd.).

(Example 5)
In Reference Example 1, the point of using pureed koji as a fruit raw material was replaced with pureed kiwifruit prepared as follows, and the formulation of each component was changed as shown in Table 4-1 below. Except for the above, fruit-containing flakes of Example 5 were produced in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The mixture obtained in Example 5 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1.
In Example 5, the Brix value of the mixture was 29.9% (actual value: 30.8%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 300.3 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 97.2 g (yield: 32.37%, water content was 5% by mass or less).
For Example 5, each evaluation result is shown in Table 4-3, FIG. 12A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 12B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. The back of the mixture taken out from the tray is shown, FIG. 12D shows the mixture after being struck with a hammer, FIG. 12E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 12F shows the measurement result by a hardness meter. In FIG. 12F, “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after lyophilization, and “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.
-Preparation of fruit ingredients-
Frozen kiwifruit was pureed with a hand blender (manufactured by Crazy Nart Sanei Co., Ltd.).

( Reference Example 6)
In Reference Example 1, the point of using pureed koji as a fruit raw material was replaced with pureed mango prepared as follows, and the formulation of each component was changed as shown in Table 4-1 below. Produced the fruit-containing flakes of Reference Example 6 in the same manner as in Reference Example 1. The mixture obtained in Reference Example 6 and the fruit-containing flakes were evaluated in the same manner as in Reference Example 1.
In Reference Example 6, the Brix value of the mixture was 30.9% (actual value: 31.1%), the weight of the mixture after tray injection was 378.1 g, and the lyophilized mixture The weight was 121.8 g (yield: 32.21%, water content was 5% by mass or less).
For Reference Example 6, Table 4-4 shows the evaluation results, FIG. 13A shows the state of the mixture after lyophilization, FIG. 13B shows the side of the mixture taken out from the tray after lyophilization, and FIG. The back of the mixture taken out from the tray is shown, FIG. 13D shows the mixture after being struck with a hammer, FIG. 13E shows the state of the mixture after immersion, and FIG. 13F shows the measurement result by a hardness meter. In FIG. 13F, “solid line” indicates the measurement result of the mixture after lyophilization, and “dotted line” indicates the measurement result when the immersion time in milk is 1 minute.
-Preparation of fruit ingredients-
Mango was pureed with a hand blender (manufactured by Crazy Nart Sanei Co., Ltd.).

In Table 4-1, “%” represents “mass%”.

From the results of Examples 4 and 5 and Reference Example 6, it was found that excellent results were obtained even when the fruit raw material was changed.
In addition, according to a fruit (with skin and flesh) raw material having a solid content of about 10% by mass to 15% by mass (for example, according to the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 5th edition Japanese food standard component table), the solid content of koji is 10 mass %, The solid content of blueberries is 13.6% by mass, the solid content of kiwifruit is 15.3% by mass), and agar is 4% to 5% by mass (mixing ratio in the mixture excluding water) Then, it was found that a better crispness was obtained.
In the present invention, solid content such as fiber and pectin contained in the skin and pulp is prevented from foaming during freeze-drying, and the cross-linking strength is increased by binding with agar. Is considered to have been obtained.

Claims (3)

At least a mixing step of mixing the fruit raw material, agar, and starch decomposition product ,
A freezing step of freezing the mixture;
A lyophilization step of lyophilizing the frozen mixture,
Amount of agar in the mixing step, if it contains water the mixture is added to the mixture, based on the total weight of the components except the water, a 4% to 5% by weight, wherein the mixture If free water that is added to the mixture, relative to the weight of the mixture, are four% to 5% by mass,
When the blending amount of the starch decomposition product in the mixing step includes water added to the mixture, the mixture is 4% by mass to 20% by mass with respect to the total mass of the components excluding the water, If the mixture does not contain water added to the mixture, it is 4% to 20% by weight with respect to the weight of the mixture,
The Brix value of the mixture in the mixing step is 26% to 34%,
In the freezing step, the temperature is −25 ° C. to −50 ° C., and the time is 12 hours or more.
The manufacturing method of the fruit containing flake characterized by not including the freezing process hold | maintained at the temperature of -5 degreeC--12 degreeC for 6 hours-8 hours .   The manufacturing method of the fruit containing flakes of Claim 1 including the grinding | pulverization process which grind | pulverizes the freeze-dried mixture. Fruit-containing flakes containing at least a fruit raw material, agar, and a starch degradation product,
The amount of agar in the fruit-containing flakes is 7.9 mass% to 11.0 mass%,
The compounding quantity of the starch decomposition product in the said fruit containing flakes is 8.3 mass%-40.3% by mass,
When the hardness of the fruit-containing flakes was measured using a texture analyzer, with a compression speed of 0.5 mm / second, a strain value of up to 50% on the object, and a probe of 5 mm, the strain value was less than 10% and the load value was 5 kg. Fruit-containing flakes characterized by showing continuous vertical lines while maintaining a load value of 5-15 kg up to a strain value of 40%.