International Journal of Food Properties

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ljfp20

Physicochemical and sensory properties of ice

cream prepared using sweet lupin and soymilk as
alternatives to cow milk

Abebe Mengist Asres, Henock Woldemichael Woldemariam & Feyera

Gobena Gemechu

To cite this article: Abebe Mengist Asres, Henock Woldemichael Woldemariam & Feyera
Gobena Gemechu (2022) Physicochemical and sensory properties of ice cream prepared using
sweet lupin and soymilk as alternatives to cow milk, International Journal of Food Properties,
25:1, 278-287, DOI: 10.1080/10942912.2022.2032733

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2022.2032733

© 2022 Abebe Mengist Asres, Henock Published online: 03 Feb 2022.

Woldemichael Woldemariam and Feyera
Gobena Gemechu. Published with license
by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.Published
with license by Taylor & Francis Group,
LLC.© 2022 Abebe Mengist Asres, Henock
Woldemichael Woldemariam and Feyera
Gobena Gemechu

Submit your article to this journal Article views: 4036

View related articles View Crossmark data

Citing articles: 7 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ljfp20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD PROPERTIES
2022, VOL. 25, NO. 1, 278–287
https://doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2022.2032733

Physicochemical and sensory properties of ice cream prepared

using sweet lupin and soymilk as alternatives to cow milk
Abebe Mengist Asresa, Henock Woldemichael Woldemariam b
,
and Feyera Gobena Gemechub
a
Department of Human Nutrition and Food Science, Debre Markos University, Debre Markos, Ethiopia; bDepartment of
Food Process Engineering, Biotechnology & Bioprocess Centre of Excellence (Biocenex), Addis Ababa Science and
Technology University, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Sweet lupine and soybean are legumes of high prospects as functional foods Received 15 July 2021
due to their rich protein content and low levels of fat, which sparked Revised 17 January 2022
increased interest in incorporating these ingredients in food product devel­ Accepted 18 January 2022
opment. This study aimed to investigate the effect of different levels of sweet KEYWORDS
lupine and soymilk substitution on the physicochemical and sensory proper­ Milk substitute; Cow milk; Ice
ties of vanilla-flavored ice cream. Characterization of raw materials revealed cream; lupine;
that higher protein content was obtained in sweet lupine (5.86%) than in physichochemical; sensory;
soymilk (4.83%) and cow milk (3.40%). However, the crude fat content of soymilk
sweet lupine was much lower than cow milk and soymilk with values of
1.21%, 4.40% and 5.70%, respectively. Ice cream formulated from sweet
lupine exhibited protein content ranging from 4.27 to 4.79% while maximum
protein content of 4.39% was obtained for soymilk ice cream. The crude fat
content of soymilk ice cream was higher than the sweet lupine ice cream
with values of 7.47% and 6.6%, respectively. Formulation of soymilk and
sweet lupine ice cream was effective as improved overrun of 84.05% was
obtained when compared to 83% of the ice cream made from cow milk. The
melting resistance for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk
ice creams at different blend ratios ranged from 83.01 to 84.50% and 83.23 to
84.40%, respectively. The melting resistance increased as the amount of soy
and sweet lupine milk increased. Sensory attributes of the formulated ice
cream samples were evaluated and the taste and texture were reported to be
similar to the ice cream made from cow milk up to 25% replacement.
However, the ice cream preference of the panelists decreased with increased
addition of soy and sweet lupine. As a result, ice creams made from soymilk
and sweet lupine could be utilized as a better alternative to cow milk ice
creams.

Introduction
Market demands in different milk alternatives are in the rise in current years.[1,2] Due to increased
change of lifestyle, special demand of diets and functional foods popularity, milk alternatives are
attracting attention recently.[3] Substitutes of milk in formulated food products are derived either from
plants such as cereal, legume or nut-based milks[1,2,4] or plant-based food byproducts (Iriondo-
Dehond, Miguel and Del Castillo, 2018; Gemechu F G, 2020). There are growing commercially
available milk alternatives having significant physicochemical properties.[5]

CONTACT Henock Woldemichael Woldemariam henock.woldemichael@aastu.edu.et Department of Food Process

Engineering, Biotechnology & Bioprocess Centre of Excellence (Biocenex), Addis Ababa Science and Technology University, Addis
Ababa, Ethiopia
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.
© 2022 Abebe Mengist Asres, Henock Woldemichael Woldemariam and Feyera Gobena Gemechu. Published with license by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD PROPERTIES 279

Lupine and soybean milk are among the alternative constituents of animal product source foods
such as cheese, yogurt and ice cream.[6–8] Ice cream is among the dairy products that are increasingly
concerned with milk replacement.[9] Ice cream is a milk, fat, sugar, stabilizer, emulsifier mixture and
often contains aromatic and coloring elements.[10] The ingredients used in their preparation are
different for the composition of the ice cream. The composition of healthy ice cream is 12% milk
fat, 14% milk solids not fat, 15% sugar, 0.2% stabilizer, 6.2% emulsifier, 55% to 64% water from milk or
other flavoring compounds.[11]
The acceptance by consumers of ice cream largely depends on the chemical composition, texture
consistency, melting resistance and taste. Some people cannot value the smooth texture and ice cream
richness due to the presence of cow’s milk. Cow’s milk is the second most popular food allergy, mostly in
infants, according to the American Academy of Allergy Asthma & Immunology.[12] Although the product
picture of cow milk is even more well-thought-of than plant milk, as shown in studies,[13] an increasing
consumer’s preference of milk alternatives is due to a variety of factors, including lactose intolerance,
environmental protection, lifestyle and healthcare.[13,14] Intolerance to lactose and milk allergies is becom­
ing global issues. Food businesses have tried to change their recipes but preserved their original flavor,
texture and to give customers the food they typically do not get used to. Since the milk of cows is a popular
allergen, milk substitutes are needed which can preserve the aroma and texture of ice cream.[4][15][16]
There has also been a great deal of emphasis on the processing of functional foods including certain
plant sources of related food properties such as soymilk. Studies show that future ice cream integration
leads to a consumer demand brand with better functional and physicochemical properties.[17] The use
of soymilk in the formulation of ice cream contributes to a unique balanced, nutritious product. In
addition to being an independent substitute and an appropriate replacement for cow’s milk, soymilk
can also be used in the development of dairy derivatives and ice cream to fix milk deficit.[18] The
proteins content of soya milk and cow’s milk (3.5–4.0%) are identical and are close to their pattern of
amino acid, but soymilk is sulfur deficient in the amino acid content. Soymilk provides around 60 to
90% of the nutrient content of cattle and has similar nutritional value to the cow’s milk value but
contains slightly added quantities of methionine.[19]
Soy protein offers a range of functionalities such as water retention, binding and emulsification.[20]
The soy cream formulation has high digestibility and is free of lactose. For people, in particular people
allergic to cow’s milk, with diabetes, and who have allergy to lactose and cannot use normal ice cream,
this may be a safer alternative.[18]
Lupine is known to be a convenient alternative to other plant legumes, because it comprises similar
amounts of amino acid pattern proteins to soybean. New and affordable food sources, among which
lupine is a potential protein food, are on the increase.[21] As a food product, lupine has the benefit to be
a higher ingredient for dietary fiber (~28%) compared with soya bean (~19%).[22] The isolates of the
lupine protein are strong emulsions and have important features in functional ingredients and its
polysaccharides have a great deal of promise for usage as a nutraceutical and functional ingredient
with therapeutic efficacy.[23,24] Lupine and other underused legumes are previously tested for their
nutritional composition.[25] However, there is only limited scientific experiment of lupine incorpora­
tion in ice cream making so far.
Plant-based milks are colloidal systems made up of large dispersed particles like fat globules, solid
particles from raw materials, proteins, and starch granules, which make it difficult to obtain a stable
product that can be stored for long periods of time due to solid particle sedimentation or settling. The
size of dispersed phase particles determines the stability of plant-based milk. Various strategies can be
used to improve the stability of plant-based milk by lowering the size of dispersed phase particles.
Similarly, in order to be acceptable by consumers, soymilk and sweet lupine incorporation into emulsions
of ice cream are required to exhibits better properties. Particularly their emulsion property which also
affects the final product’s texture is due to the protein nature as enhanced by different techniques.[26–28]
The current study was motivated by the belief that adding other high-protein ingredients to ice
cream can make it healthier and more beneficial to one’s health with improved physico-chemical and
sensorial properties. Even though attempts have been made over the years to develop better
280 A. M. ASRES ET AL.

alternatives to cow’s milk due to increasing pricing of cow’s milk and its products, simultaneous
evaluation of ice cream formulation from soymilk and sweet lupine milk with respect to product
properties is limited. The purpose of this study was therefore to assess effect of adding fiber and
protein-rich soymilk and sweet lupine milk to ice cream on the qualities of resultant formulation.
Efforts were made over the years to develop cheaper alternatives to cow milk due to the rising prices of
cow milk and its components, despite their high nutritional content in terms of proteins. Milk
replacements have been demonstrated to be effective in studies.

Materials and methods

Raw material collection
Soy bean and sweet lupine were collected from Adet Agricultural Research Center and milk and other
ingredients were collected from Bahir Dar local market in Ethiopia.

Raw materials preparation

For 18 h at ambient temperature both soy bean and sweet lupine had been cleaned, weighed, washed
and soaked in water. Once soaking, the soybean and the sweet lupine were repeatedly rinsed and
drained with cold water. The amount of water needed to produce the milk was weighed back. A soy
bean/sweet lupine-to-water ratio of 1:7 was used to prepare soy and sweet lupine milk for molten
grinding (Model: JB/T8680-2008, China). The mix was then filtered and the filtrate was boiled for
10 minutes.

Ice cream processing

Liquid ingredients of soymilk, sweet lupine and cow’s milk were blended and heated up at tempera­
tures of about 49°C. The other ingredients of ice cream were blended and slowly added to the liquid
ingredients by properly extracting them in order to achieve a uniform mixing with a mixer at 1000 to
10 minutes (Model: SWFS1.1–00, China). Special pasteurizer (Model: HMP 2000, UK) was used for
pasteurizing the ice cream mix at 70°C for 15 minutes. Furthermore, the ice cream mix was homo­
genized at 200 bar for 5 minutes using a homogenizer (Model: FT9-A, England). The mixture was
refreshed and aged at 4°C for 12 h, and vanilla flavor was added at a rate of 5 ml/l. In a freezer (Model:
LH44/2GC-2-2DS, UK), batch type, three kilograms (3 kg) of ice cream mix was frozen at −4 to −5°C
for 10 minutes. The ice cream was kept overnight at −26°C in a deep freezer for hardening. Mixed
samples have been taken prior to freezing to analyze the different physicochemical properties.

Physicochemical determination
Proximate analysis
Standard methods of Asociation of Official Analytical Chemists AOAC (2000) were used for evaluat­
ing the moisture, raw protein, crude fat, ash, crude fibers and total carbohydrates.

Total solids
Samples were weighed into a previously weighted moisture dish. It was first evaporated to dryness in
drying oven (Model: DHG-9140, China) at 105°C for 3 h. It was refreshed and weighed in the dryer.
For final drying, the weighed sample was returned to the oven. It was then cooled and measured at an
hourly interval until there was no weight difference observed.

Solid -nonfat (SNF)

The SNF was estimated by difference method.[29] It was calculated using Equation (1)
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD PROPERTIES 281

% SNF ¼ %TS % Fat (1)

where; TS is total Solids

Overrun
Overrun refers to the quantity of ice cream that is air absorbed into the product during the freezing
process in order to expand the product. This expansion depends on both the cream quality and the
process of making ice cream. The higher the percentage of the overrun, the higher air is absorbed
into it and thus the lighter the ice cream is. With less absorved air into the cream however, dense ice
cream is resulted from the process. Equation (2) is used to calculate overrun of the samples of ice
cream.[30]
%Overrun ¼ ½ðVolumeðm3 Þof icecream Volumeðm3 Þof mixÞ=Volumeðm3 Þof mix� � 100% (2)

Melting resistance
From each formulated ice cream, 30 grams of samples were placed at the top of the bottle in a Buchner
funnel and allowed to melt at ambient temperature (24 ± 1°C) for 15 minutes..[11] Thereafter, the
dipped volume was weighed and Resistance to melting was achieved with the aid of Equation (3):
Meltingresistanceð%Þ ¼ ½ðA1 A2 Þ=A1� � 100% (3)
where; A1 and A2 are the weight of initial sample and melted sample, respectively.

Sensory evaluation
The formulated ice cream samples were subjected to sensory evaluation using 15 semi-trained pane­
lists. The 7-point hedonic scale (7 – like extremely, 4 – neither like nor dislike, 1 – dislike extremely)
was used. Accordingly, the appearance, taste, flavor, texture and overall acceptability of ice cream
quality have been evaluated.[30]

Data analysis
The experiment was set in a factorial design involving types of milk (soymilk/sweet lupine milk and
cow milk) and blending ratio with five levels (0:100, 25:75, 50:50, 75:25 and 100:0). All experiments
and analyses were conducted in triplicates. Triplicate data collected for physicochemical and sensory
properties were subjected to ANOVA and means were compared for their significance at p < .05 using
Statistical Analysis System (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) version 9.0. Values are expressed as mean ±
standard deviation.

Results and discussion

Physicochemical properties of raw materials and ice cream samples
Before production of ice cream samples, the basic raw materials were analyzed for various physico­
chemical compositions. Table 1 compares the proximate compositions of cow milk, sweet lupine milk
and soymilk.
Different soy/sweet lupine milk and cow milk blend ice cream samples were analyzed for their
physicochemical properties immediately after formulations are developed. Total solids, solid-nonfat,
moisture, crude protein, fat, ash, carbohydrates, overrun and melting resistance were analyzed, the
results of which are presented in Tables 2 and 3.
282 A. M. ASRES ET AL.

Table 1. Proximate compositions of cow milk, soymilk and sweet lupine milk.
Proximate compositions (%) Cow milk Soymilk Sweet lupine milk
Moisture 87.23 ± 0.50 86.74 ± 0.80 85.43 ± 0.46
Crude protein 3.40 ± 0.30 4.83 ± 0.51 5.86 ± 0.38
Crude fat 4.40 ± 0.52 5.70 ± 0.30 1.21 ± 0.23
Ash 0.65 ± 0.14 0.94 ± 0.34 0.83 ± 0.71
Total carbohydrate 4.32 ± 0.37 1.79 ± 0.49 6.67 ± 0.45

Table 2. Physicochemical composition of soy and cow milk blend ice creams.
Blend ratios of soy milk to cow milk
Physicochemical Properties (%) 0:100 25:75 50:50 75:25 100:0
Total solids 31.34 ± 0.29b 34.04 ± 0.01a 31.07 ± 0.02c 34.07 ± 0.06a 34.130 ± 0.00a
Solid-nonfat 24.21 ± 0.49b 27.03 ± 0.02a 23.95 ± 0.04b 26.61 ± 0.06a 26.72 ± 0.09a
Moisture 69.00 ± 0.50a 69.0 ± 0.04b 68.93 ± 0.02a 65.90 ± 0.10b 65.87 ± 0.00b
Crude protein 4.27 ± 0.01a 4.31 ± 0.20a 4.33 ± 0.07a 4.37 ± 0.08a 4.39 ± 0.01a
Crude fat 6.80 ± 0.02d 7.01 ± 0.01c 7.12 ± 0.02b 7.46 ± 0.01a 7.47 ± 0.09a
Ash 0.75 ± 0.01d 0.92 ± 0.02c 0.51 ± 0.00e 1.02 ± 0.01b 1.19 ± 0.06a
Crude fiber ND 0.14 ± 0.01c 0.16 ± 0.01c 0.23 ± 0.01b 0.28 ± 0.02a
Total carbohydrate 19.20 ± 0.50c 18.80 ± 0.23a 19.11 ± 0.03c 21.25 ± 0.18b 21.37 ± 0.08ab
Overrun 83.01 ± 0.00e 83.10 ± 0.01d 83.17 ± 0.00c 83.25 ± 0.02b 83.32 ± 0.01a
Melting resistance 83.01 ± 0.17e 83.67 ± 0.01d 83.90 ± 0.00c 84.32 ± 0.08b 84.50 ± 0.10a
ND: not detected.
Means with different superscript letters within a row are significantly different at p < .05.

Table 3. Physicochemical composition of sweet lupine and cow milk blend ice creams.
Blend ratios of sweet lupine milk to skim milk
Physicochemical Properties (%) 0:100 25:75 50:50 75:25 100:0
Total solid 31.34 ± 0.29c 33.54 ± 0.06b 33.67 ± 0.02b 34.14 ± 0.02a 34.33 ± 0.02a
Solid-nonfat 24.54 ± 0.30d 26.76 ± 0.07c 26.94 ± 0.02c 27.45 ± 0.03b 27.72 ± 0.10a
Moisture 69.00 ± 0.48a 67.88 ± 0.04b 66.81 ± 0.15c 66.66 ± 0.03c 66.55 ± 0.05c
Crude protein 4.27 ± 0.01c 4.29 ± 0.01c 4.30 ± 0.05c 4.42 ± 0.04b 4.49 ± 0.01a
Crude fat 6.80 ± 0.02a 6.78 ± 0.01a 6.73 ± 0.03ab 6.68 ± 0.04bc 6.60 ± 0.10c
Ash 0.75 ± 0.01e 0.77 ± 0.01d 0.79 ± 0.003c 0.90 ± 0.003b 0.98 ± 0.002a
Crude fiber NDe 0.13 ± 0.01d 0.18 ± 0.01c 0.22 ± 0.02b 0.30 ± 0.02a
Total carbohydrate 19.19 ± 0.48c 20.28 ± 0.06b 21.38 ± 0.10a 21.34 ± 0.03a 21.38 ± 0.10a
Overrun 83.01 ± 0.01e 83.58 ± 0.03d 83.75 ± 0.03c 83.97 ± 0.01b 84.05 ± 0.02a
Melting resistance 83.231 ± 0.17e 83.58 ± 0.02d 83.86 ± 0.03c 84.19 ± 0.06b 84.40 ± 0.02a
Means with different superscript letters within a row are significantly different at p < .05.

The total solids for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at
different blend ratios ranged from 31.34 to 34.13% (Table 2) and 31.338 to 34.33% (Table 3),
respectively. The samples were significantly different at p < .05 and percentage total solids increased
in all the samples as the proportion of soy and sweet lupine milk increased. Abdullah et al., (2003)
reported maximum amount of 34.19% total solids to which the findings of the current study are
comparable. Insufficient ice cream solutes create poor texture and weak body. Total ice cream solids
play a major role in ice cream consistency. Poor texture can result if present solids are present in
excess, while low content can lead to a coarse texture and ice crystal formulation.
The solids-nonfat for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at
different blend ratios ranged from 24.21 to 26.72% (Table 2) and 24.54 to 27.72% (Table 3), respec­
tively. As the proportion of soy and sweet lupine milk increased, solid-nonfat increased. The highest
value (27.72%) was recorded for the sample of 100% lupine milk ice cream, while the value of solid-
nonfat of 100% cow milk was found to be lower (24,21%).
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD PROPERTIES 283

The percentage moisture content for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice
cream samples at different blend ratios ere ranged from 65.871 to 69.00% (Table 2) and 66.55 to
69.00% (Table 3), respectively. The moisture contents of all samples of ice creams were significantly
different at p < .05. According to,[31] the moisture content of ice cream ranged from 55 to 64% which
may potentially originate from the milk. The findings of this research are on the upper range of values
reported by the authors. The moisture content of ice cream decreased as the quantity of soymilk and
sweet lupine milk proportion increased with cow milk in all the samples of ice cream. This meant that
the soy and sweet lupine milk contributed to reduce the moisture content of the ice cream samples
than the cow milk. This was due to the low moisture content of soy and sweet lupine milk. However,
the moisture content of soymilk ice cream was found to be lower than sweet lupine milk ice cream.
The crude protein content for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream
samples at different blend ratios ranged from 4.27 to 4.40% (Table 2) and 4.27 to 4.49% (Table 3),
respectively. With increasing levels of soymilk, the protein content increased due to a higher protein
content of soymilk (3.6%). Bisla et al., (2012) similar findings. Samples of ice cream formulated from
100% sweet lupine milk had the highest percentage protein content. Pereira et al., (2011) found in
a related study that the addition of extracts of soymilk rather than skim milk raises protein content,
which is attributed to the high level of soy protein extract. The reason for ice cream having the highest
protein content in the present study could be the substantial amount of protein contained in sweet
lupine milk that added up to the protein of the cow milk. Protein helps to incorporate air into the
mixture facilitating the formation of small air bubbles and modify the texture of ice cream. It also helps
in emulsifying the fat by suspending the fat molecules in the mixture.
The crude fat content for soymilk to cow milk and for sweet lupine milk to cow milk ice
cream samples at different blend ratios ranged from 6.80 to 7.47% (Table 2) and 6.60 to 6.80%
(Table 3), respectively, which comes mainly from the milk. The samples had a significant
difference in the fat content at p < .05. The 100% soymilk ice cream showed comparatively
high fat content of 100% (7.41 ± 0.09) implying that soymilk extract contains high fat compared
to cow’s milk (Table 2). The current finding comply with studies of Abdullah et al., (2003) who
indicated that samples containing skim milk have low fat compared to soymilk samples. As the
proportion of soymilk increases, the fat content of the ice cream samples increase. Milk fat gives
ice cream a rich flavor, color, body and texture. Fat affects all aspects of food perception
including appearance and mouth feel.
The ash content for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples
at different blend ratios ranged from 0.75 to 1.19% (Table 2) and 0.752 to 0.98% (Table 3),
respectively. According to Umelo et al., (2014), the ice cream samples’ ash content range from
0.60 to 1.71% and their report is correlated with the results of this analysis. Ash content for all
the samples was not significantly different at p < .05. The 100% soymilk ice cream sample had
the maximum amounts of ash up to 1.19% and a sample formulated from 100% cow milk ice
cream was the least detectable. As the proportion of soy/sweet lupine milk blend with cow’s milk
increases, the ash content value increased. This indicates that ash content of soymilk is greater
than that of cow milk.
The crude fiber content for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream
samples at different blend ratios ranged from 0.00 to 0.28% (Table 2) and 0.00 to 0.30%
(Table 3), respectively. For all samples, the content of crude fibers was not significantly different
at p < .05. The crude fiber content of ice cream increased as the quantity of soy/sweet lupine
milk increased. Most of the results in this study are in line with the results of Umelo et al.,
(2014) who reported that crude fiber content of ice cream samples derived from cow milk and
tigernut ranged to be from 0.03 to 0.25%.
The carbohydrate content for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream
samples at different blend ratios ranged from 19.186 to 21.367% (Table 2) and 19.186 to 21.38%
(Table 3), respectively. The samples were significantly different at p < .05. The total ice cream
284 A. M. ASRES ET AL.

carbohydrates were the highest in formulations made from 100% sweet lupine milk, with a mean value
of 21.34, whereas samples of ice cream made from 100% cow milk, was found to contain 19.19
(Table 3).
The overrun for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at
different blend ratios ranged from 83.01 to 83.32% and 83.01% to 84.05% (Table 3), respectively. All
the samples were significantly different at p < .05. Hui et al., (2004) estimated that the normal ice
cream overrun range is 60 to 90%, comparable to the results of the current work. The overrun
increases with the rise in the proportion of soy and lupine milk.
The melting resistance for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples
at different blend ratios ranged from 83.01 to 84.50% (Table 2) and 83.23 to 84.40% (Table 3),
respectively. All the samples were significantly different at p < .05. The melting resistance increased
as the amount of soy and sweet lupine milk increased in ice cream production. These results were
similar to the findings of Bahramparvar et al., (2009) who reported that melting resistances were
significantly different (p < .05), ranging from 40.01 to 98.35%. This result indicate that melting
resistance of the ice creams improve as the proportion of the soymilk and sweet lupine milk increases.
This could be due to the plant fibers, which could result in a thicker, more pleasant dessert that takes
longer to melt. As a result, particularly in hot weather, this would allow for a more relaxing and
delightful eating experience.[32]

Sensory properties of ice cream

Samples of ice cream were stored overnight in refrigerator at −26°C prior to sensory evaluation and
were served (~50 g) under normal white fluorescent lighting for panelists. The samples were assessed
for their appearance, taste, flavor, texture and overall acceptability as presented below.
The appearance for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at
different blend ratios ranged from 3.83 to 6.50% (Table 4) and 4.03 to 6.50% (Table 5), respectively.
The samples were significantly different at p < .05. Ice crystals, air cells, fat globules, unfrozen liquid
protein and gel structure contribute toward the appearance of ice cream. The taste for soymilk:cow
milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at different blend ratios ranged from 3.80
to 6.40% (Table 4) and 3.70 to 6.40% (Table 5) which comes from the milk or other ingredients,
respectively. The samples were significantly different at p < .05. Results showed that taste of soy/sweet
lupine milk blend ice cream increased with the increase of quantity of cow milk.

Table 4. Mean scores of sensory attributes of soymilk to cow milk ice creams.
Blend ratios of soy milk to cow milk
Sensory Attributes 0:100 25:75 50:50 75:25 100:0
Appearance 6.50 ± 0.01a 6.03 ± 0.52b 5.90 ± 0.51b 4.63 ± 0.35c 3.83 ± 0.35d
Taste 6.40 ± 0.00a 6.00 ± 0.51a 5.73 ± 0.49b 4.86 ± 0.46c 3.80 ± 0.51d
Flavor 6.60 ± 0.00a 6.20 ± 0.51b 6.06 ± 0.51b 4.87 ± 0.45c 4.00 ± 0.41d
Texture 6.70 ± 0.02a 6.43 ± 0.44a 6.33 ± 0.34a 5.30 ± 0.41b 4.16 ± 0.32c
Overall Acceptability 6.60 ± 0.00a 6.13 ± 0.51b 6.00 ± 0.50b 4.93 ± 0.49c 4.07 ± 0.52d
Means with different superscript letters within a row are significantly different at p < .05.

Table 5. Mean scores of sensory attributes of sweet lupine milk to cow milk ice creams.
Blend ratios of sweet lupine milk to cow milk
Sensory Attributes 0:100 25:75 50:50 75:25 100:0
Appearance 6.50 ± 0.01a 6.08 ± 0.02b 5.82 ± 0.22b 4.82 ± 0.07c 4.03 ± 0.14d
Taste 6.40 ± 0.00a 6.01 ± 0.01a 5.53 ± 0.08b 4.82 ± 0.45c 3.70 ± 0.36d
Flavor 6.60 ± 0.00a 5.96 ± 0.34b 6.01 ± 0.51b 4.77 ± 0.15c 4.20 ± 0.01d
Texture 6.70 ± 0.02a 6.25 ± 0.03a 6.22 ± 0.04a 5.25 ± 0.21b 4.24 ± 0.10c
Overall Acceptability 6.60 ± 0.00a 6.10 ± 0.03b 6.12 ± 0.02b 4.83 ± 0.07c 4.21 ± 0.31d
Means with different superscript letters within a row are significantly different at p < .05.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD PROPERTIES 285

The flavor for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at different
blend ratios ranged from 4.00 to 6.60% (Table 4) and 4.20 to 6.60% (Table 5) which comes from the
milk or other ingredients, respectively. The samples were significantly different at p < .05.
The texture for soymilk:cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at different
blend ratios ranged from 4.16 to 6.70% (Table 4) and 4.24 to 6.70% (Table 5), respectively. Ice cream
solids play a major role in ice cream consistency. If they are high, the curding texture is obtained,
whereas low content could lead to the formation of ice crystals and coarse texture. Ice cream texture is
specifically correlated with the structure. Air cells arrangement, ice crystal, lactose and fat clumps
affect the structure of an ice cream. A smooth texture indicates that small ice and air crystals are
uniform, and that no noticeable crystals are present while tasting. The overall acceptability for soymilk:
cow milk and for sweet lupine milk:cow milk ice cream samples at different blend ratios ranged from
4.07 to 6.60% (Table 4) and 4.21 to 6.60% (Table 5), respectively.

Conclusion
Different types of ice creams were formulated from soymilk/sweet lupine milk and cow milk with
different blend ratios. Physicochemical analysis of ice cream samples indicated that there was an
increase in crude protein, crude fat, ash, crude fiber, and total carbohydrate content with increase in
the amount of soymilk/sweet lupine milk in the blend. The newly formulated soymilk and sweet lupine
milk-based ice cream exhibited a better melting resistance, a property that adds value for the
consumers, providing handling convenience and longer enjoyment of the ice cream without melting.
Moreover, the overrun of the formulations was found to be enhanced while techniques of the process
need to be further studied to optimize it. Ice creams made with incorporated soymilk and sweet lupine
milk therefore could be used by the community as these have comparable overall acceptability. It can
be concluded that soymilk and sweet lupine milk can be used for the preparation of frozen desserts
especially ice cream with acceptable sensorial appearance, taste, flavor, texture and overall accept­
ability with enhanced melting resistance. As a result of this research, processors can assist provide low-
cost, nutritional modern alternatives to milk-allergic people, as well as alternative goods for religious
organizations who abstain from eating animal-based foods during fasting periods.

Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the Faculty of Chemical and Food engineering for providing laboratory facilities
and the School of Research and Postgraduate Studies of Bahir Dar Institute of Technology for its support.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

ORCID
Henock Woldemichael Woldemariam http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8764-4834

References
[1] Pontonio, E. Rizzello, C. G. Milk Alternatives and Non-Dairy Fermented Products: Trends and Challenges.
Foods. 2021 Jan, 10(2), 222. doi:10.3390/foods10020222.
[2] Aydar, E. F., Tutuncu, S., and Ozcelik, B. Plant-based Milk Substitutes: Bioactive Compounds, Conventional and
Novel Processes, Bioavailability Studies, and Health Effects. In Journal of Functional Foods. Vol. 70Elsevier Ltd
103975.Jul. 01, 2020 10.1016/j.jff.2020.103975.
286 A. M. ASRES ET AL.

[3] and Hayta, M. Effect of Soymilk Substitution on the Rheological and Sensory Properties of Salep (Traditional
Turkish Milk Beverage). International Journal of Food Properties.10.3,413–420.Jul 2007 10.1080/
10942910600813596.
[4] Sethi, S. Tyagi, S. K. Anurag, R. K. Plant-based Milk Alternatives an Emerging Segment of Functional Beverages:
A Review.J. Food Sci. Technol. 53.9,Springer India 3408–3423.Sep. 01, 2016 10.1007/s13197-016-2328-3.
[5] Jeske, S. Zannini, E. Arendt, E. K. Evaluation of Physicochemical and Glycaemic Properties of Commercial
Plant-Based Milk Substitutes. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition. 2017 Mar, 72(1), 26–33. doi:10.1007/s11130-016-
0583-0.
[6] Al-Saedi, N. Agarwal, M. Islam, S. Ren, Y. L. Study on the Correlation between the Protein Profile of Lupin Milk
and Its Cheese Production Compared with Cow’s Milk. Molecules 2021, 268, 2395 10.3390/
MOLECULES26082395. Apr. 2021
[7] Al-Saedi, N. Agarwal, M. Ma, W. Islam, S. Ren, Y. Study on Effect of Extraction Techniques and Seed Coat on
Proteomic Distribution and Cheese Production from Soybean Milk. Molecules 2020, 2514, 3237 10.3390/
MOLECULES25143237. Jul. 2020
[8] Vogelsang-O’Dwyer, M. Sahin, A. W. Zannini, E. Arendt, E. K. Physicochemical and Nutritional Properties of
High Protein Emulsion-type Lupin-based Model Milk Alternatives: Effect of Protein Source and Homogenization
Pressure. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 2021. DOI: 10.1002/JSFA.11230.
[9] AOCS. Taking the Cream Out of Ice Cream. American Oil Chemists Society, AOCS 2019.
[10] Marshall, R. T. Goff, H. D. Hartel, R. W.2003. Ice Cream. Springer US: Boston, MA.
[11] Arbuckle, W. S.;. Ice Cream; Springer US: Boston, MA, 1986.
[12] El-Agamy, E. I. The Challenge of Cow Milk Protein Allergy. Small Ruminant Research. 2007 Mar, 68(1–2), 64–72.
doi:10.1016/j.smallrumres.2006.09.016.
[13] Haas, R. Schnepps, A. Pichler, A. Meixner, O. Cow Milk versus Plant-Based Milk Substitutes: A Comparison of
Product Image and Motivational Structure of Consumption. Sustainability. 2019 Sep, 11(18), 5046. doi:10.3390/
su11185046.
[14] Mäkinen, O. E.; Wanhalinna, V.; Zannini, E.; Arendt, E. K. Foods for Special Dietary Needs: Non-dairy
Plant-based Milk Substitutes and Fermented Dairy-type Products. Critical Reviews in Food Science and
Nutrition. 2016 Feb, 56(3), 339–349. doi:10.1080/10408398.2012.761950.
[15] Iriondo-Dehond, M.; Miguel, E. Del Castillo, M. D. Food Byproducts as Sustainable Ingredients for Innovative
and Healthy Dairy Foods.Nutrients.10.10,MDPI AG Oct. 01, 2018,1358.10.3390/nu10101358.
[16] Gemechu, F. G. Embracing Nutritional Qualities, Biological Activities and Technological Properties of Coffee
Byproducts in Functional Food Formulation. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 104, 235–261. DOI: 10.1016/j.
tifs.2020.08.005.
[17] Jardines, A. P.; Arjona-Román, J. L.; Severiano-Pérez, P.; Totosaus-Sánchez, A.; Fiszman, S.; Escalona-Buendía,
H. B. Agave Fructans as Fat and Sugar Replacers in Ice Cream: Sensory, Thermal and Texture Properties. Food
Hydrocolloids. Nov 2020, 108, 106032. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2020.106032.
[18] Bisla, G.Verma, P.Sharma, S. Development of Ice Creams from Soybean Milk & Watermelon Seeds Milk and
Evaluation of Their Acceptability and Nourishing Potential.Pelagia Res. Libr. Adv. Appl. Sci. Res., vol. 2012, no. 1,
pp. 371–376, 2012, Accessed, 2021www.pelagiaresearchlibrary.com
[19] Abdullah, M.; Saleem-ur-rehman, H. Z.; Saeed, H. M.; Kousar, S.; Shahid, M. Effect of Skim Milk in Soymilk
Blend on the Quality of Ice Cream. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition. 2003 Aug, 2(5), 305–311. doi:10.3923/
pjn.2003.305.311.
[20] Akesowan, A. Influence of Soy Protein Isolate on Physical and Sensory Properties of Ice Cream. Thai J. Agric. Sci
2009, 42(1), 1–6.
[21] Small, E. Lupins - Benefit and Harm Potentials. Biodiversity. 2012, 13(1), 54–64. DOI: 10.1080/
14888386.2012.658327.
[22] Bähr, M.; Fechner, A.; Hasenkopf, K.; Mittermaier, S.; Jahreis, G. Chemical Composition of Dehulled Seeds of
Selected Lupin Cultivars in Comparison to Pea and Soya Bean. LWT - Food Science and Technology. 2014 Nov, 59
(1), 587–590. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2014.05.026.
[23] Raikos, V.; Neacsu, M.; Russell, W.; Duthie, G. Comparative Study of the Functional Properties of Lupin, Green
Pea, Fava Bean, Hemp, and Buckwheat Flours as Affected by pH. Food Science & Nutrition. 2014 Nov, 2(6),
802–810. doi:10.1002/fsn3.143.
[24] Thambiraj, S. R.; Reddy, N.; Phillips, M.; Koyyalamudi, S. R. Biological Activities and Characterization of
Polysaccharides from the Three Australian Sweet Lupins. International Journal of Food Properties. 2019 Jan, 22
(1), 522–535. doi:10.1080/10942912.2019.1588298.
[25] Bhat, R.; Karim, A. A. Exploring the Nutritional Potential of Wild and Underutilized Legumes. Compr. Rev. Food
Sci. Food Saf. 2009, 8(4), 305–331. DOI:10.1111/j.1541-4337.2009.00084.x.
[26] Chapleau, N.; De Lamballerie-Anton, M. Improvement of Emulsifying Properties of Lupin Proteins by High
Pressure Induced Aggregation. Food Hydrocolloids. 2003 May, 17(3), 273–280. doi:10.1016/S0268-005X(02)
00077-2.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF FOOD PROPERTIES 287

[27] Maghamian, N.; Goli, M.; Najarian, A. Ultrasound-assisted Preparation of Double Nano-emulsions Loaded with
Glycyrrhizic Acid in the Internal Aqueous Phase and Skim Milk as the External Aqueous Phase. LWT. Apr 2021,
141, 110850. DOI: 10.1016/J.LWT.2021.110850.
[28] Zaghian, N.; Goli, M. Optimization of the Production Conditions of Primary (W1/O) and Double (W1/O/W2)
Nano-emulsions Containing Vitamin B12 in Skim Milk Using Ultrasound Wave by Response Surface
Methodology. Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 2020, 146, 3216–3226 10.1007/S11694-020-
00567-1. Jul. 2020
[29] AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, Maryland, USA, 2000.
[30] Clarke, C.;. The Science of Ice Cream; Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2007.
[31] Umelo, M. C.; Uzoukwu, A. E.; Odimegwu, E. N.; Agunwah, I.; Njoku, N.; Alagbaoso, S. Proximate,
Physicochemical and Sensory Evaluation of Ice Cream from Blends of Cow Milk and Tigernut (Cyperus
Esculentus) Milk. Int. J. Sci. Res. Innov. Technol 2014, 1(4), 63–76.
[32] “Banana Plant Extract Could Be Key to Creamier, Longer Lasting Ice Cream - American Chemical
Society.”Accessed:Jan. 14,2022.[Online].Available: https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/pressroom/newsreleases/
2018/march/banana-plant-extract-could-be-key-to-creamier-longer-lasting-ice-cream.html.