article · European Journal of Nutrition & Food Safety
This study evaluated the physicochemical, nutritional, and sensory qualities of juice produced from blends of pineapple (Ananas comosus), beetroot (Beta vulgaris), and watermelon (Citrullus lanatus). Juice blends were formulated in five different proportions: Sample A (100% pineapple), Sample B (50% pineapple, 50% watermelon), Sample C (70% pineapple, 20% watermelon, 10% beetroot), Sample D (60% pineapple, 30% watermelon, 10% beetroot), and Sample E (50% pineapple, 40% watermelon, 10% beetroot) to determine the influence of blending ratios on parameters such as pH, total soluble solids, titratable acidity (TTA), vitamin C content, mineral composition, proximate composition, and sensory acceptability. The TSS values ranged from 8.37 ± 0.15 to 13.03 ± 0.15oBrix, with the highest recorded in the 100% pineapple sample. pH values ranged from 3.75 ± 0.09 to 4.16 ± 0.05, while titratable acidity varied inversely with pH, from 0.30 ± 0.02 to 0.61 ± 0.02%. The inclusion of beetroot and watermelon significantly influenced moisture, fibre, and mineral content. The vitamin C content ranged from 25.40 ± 0.10 to 43.10 ± 1.10 mg/100 g, showing that pineapple-rich blends had higher ascorbic acid levels. Sample D was the richest in mineral composition containing the highest level of magnesium, potassium and manganese. Sensory evaluation indicated that the blend containing 60% pineapple, 30% watermelon, and 10% beetroot achieved the highest overall acceptability (8.21 ± 0.97), combining desirable sweetness, colour, and flavour balance. The findings demonstrated that blending fruits with complementary properties improved the nutritional profile and sensory quality of juice products. The study concluded that the 60:30:10 formulation (Sample D) had the most balanced profile of sweetness and acidity, and highest score for taste, appearance and consumer acceptability; while sample C had enhanced nutrient composition. Therefore, sample D was recommended for commercial juice production based on overall acceptability.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.9734/ejnfs/2026/v18i31979
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.