Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Enzymatic added extraction and clarification of fruit juices–A review

Sharma, Harsh P., Patel, Hiral, Sugandha·2017·Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition

Abstract

Enzymatic treatment for juice extraction is most commonly used now a days. The enzymatic process is claimed to offer a number of advantages over mechanical-thermal comminution of several fruit pulps. Enzymes are an integral component of modern fruit juice manufacturing and are highly suitable for optimizing processes. Their main purposes are: increase extraction of juice from raw material, increase processing efficiency (pressing, solid settling or removal), and generate a final product that is clear and visually attractive. Juice extraction can be done by using various mechanical processes, which may be achieved through diffusion extraction, decanter centrifuge, screw type juice extractor, fruit pulper and by different types of presses. Enzymatic treatment prior to mechanical extraction significantly improves juice recovery compared to any other extraction process. Enzymatic hydrolysis of the cell walls increases the extraction yield, reducing sugars, soluble dry matter content and galacturonic acid content and titrable acidity of the products. Enzymatic degradation of the biomaterial depends upon the type of enzyme, incubation time, incubation temperature, enzyme concentration, agitation, pH and use of different enzyme combinations. We can conclude from the technical literature that use of the enzymes i.e. cellulases, pectinases, amylases and combination of these enzymes can give better juice yield with superior quality of the fruit juice. Pectinase enzyme can give maximum juice yield i.e. 92.4% at 360 minutes incubation time, 37°C incubation temperature and 5 mg/100 g of enzyme concentration. Whereas the combination of two enzymes i.e. pectin methyl esterase (PME) and polygalacturonase (PG) at 120 minutes of incubation time, 50°C of incubation temperature and 0.05 mg/100 gm of enzymatic concentration can give the maximum yield of 96.8% for plum fruits. This paper discusses the use of enzymes in fruit juice production focusing on the juice recovery, clarity and effect of the particular enzyme on the biochemical properties of the fruit juices.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10408398.2014.977434

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 51 references

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Sharma, H. P., Patel, H., & Sugandha
Venue
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition
Published
2016-01-05
Volume
57
Issue
6
Pages
1215-1227
ISSN
  • 1040-8398 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-7852
OpenAlex
W2189605098
Cited by
266
References
51
FWCI
14.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Enzymatic added extraction and clarification of fruit juices–A review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10408398.2014.977434
The paper
Sharma, H. P., Patel, H., & Sugandha. (2017). Enzymatic added extraction and clarification of fruit juices–A review. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2014.977434

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.