Development and storage stability of probiotic-enriched processed paneer spread incorporated with microencapsulated Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus under refrigerated conditions

Introduction

The concept of functional foods has shifted towards promoting gastrointestinal health and exploring its close connection with the gut microbial ecosystem [1] . The growing consumer interest in supplementary functional foods has significantly driven research and development in probiotics, leading to a deeper understanding of their positive effects on overall gut health. The Food and Agriculture Organization/World Health Organization [2] defined probiotics as "live microorganisms which when administered in adequate amounts (10⁶-10⁷ cfu/g) confer health benefits to the host". Commonly, strains of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus are utilized in the production of probiotic-enriched foods [3] . These probiotic microorganisms have enormous positive health impacts, including balancing the gut microbiota and mucosal protection against pathogens, strengthening the immune system, reducing serum cholesterol, have anti-carcinogenic and antibacterial activity [4] . Multiple factors may affect the viability of probiotic bacteria in foods including the probiotic strain used, pH and storage temperature and processing conditions. These foods must maintain the viability of probiotic at ≥7 log Cfu/mL at the time of consumption, so the probiotic benefits can be achieved [5] . To overcome this, microencapsulation technique has been utilized as an effective way to protect the bioactive compounds like probiotics from unfavourable processing conditions, temperature, transportation and during the intestinal transit [6] . Microencapsulation is a protection technique in which probiotic strains as core are encapsulated in a selective secondary membrane called wall that encloses them inside. Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus is one of the most widely recognized and clinically approved probiotic bacteria, frequently employed in the formulation of probiotic food products [7] . It is a Gram-positive, non-motile, nonsporulating rod-shaped facultative anaerobic lactic acid bacterium which is commonly used probiotic in the production of yogurts [8] commercial fruit drinks [9] and soy beverages [10] . The appropriate selection of wall materials plays a critical role in determining the encapsulation efficiency, particle morphology, and long-term stability of probiotics, as these materials influence the protection of microorganisms during processing, storage, and gastrointestinal transit. Maltodextrin, a polysaccharide derived from starch hydrolysis, offers low viscosity at high concentrations and enhances the physical stability and solubility of microcapsules, making it suitable for freeze-dried formulations (11). Furthermore, maltodextrin moderately acts as a prebiotic. Freeze drying is also known as "lyophilization," combines the critical freezing step and sublimation step, by first freezing the water and then convert the frozen water into vapor by sublimation under reduced pressure [12] . Microencapsulation by freeze drying involves dispersion of probiotic cells in an aqueous solution of wall material and freezing at low temperatures, followed by sublimation of the frozen water under vacuum [13] . Paneer spread is prepared from paneer by addition of different emulsifying salts and water. The product is blended to produce a thick, soft and smooth textured paste that can easily be applied to breads or as dressings and dips or can be relished as such. Also The addition of probiotics adds value to the nutritional and health aspects of the product as it provides readily available source of good bacterial flora so that probiotic benefits can be achieved. It rich in protein, calcium, and healthy fats. It supports muscle growth, bone health, and provides sustained energy, making it a good choice for children, vegetarians, and fitnessconscious individuals. The present study was undertaken to evaluate the storage stability, microbial quality, and sensory attributes of processed paneer spread enriched with microencapsulated probiotic bacterial strain Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus under refrigeration conditions.

Materials and Methods

Milk for preparation of paneer spread was procured from local market. Maltodextrin (with purity 99%) were purchased from Hi-Media Lab. Pvt. Ltd. (Mumbai, India). Lactobacilli de Man Rogosa Sharpe (MRS) agar and MRS broth, calcium chloride, sodium chloride, tween 80, glycerol (Mol. Wt.: 92.09, purity: 98%), lysozyme, phosphate buffer, trisodium citrate and phosphate were procured from Hi-Media Lab. Pvt. Ltd. (Mumbai, India). Distilled water was used to prepare the culture media and biopolymer dispersions. All chemicals and solvents used for research were of analytical grade. Probiotic strain Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus was acquired from National Dairy Research Institute, Karnal Haryana. Lyophilized cultures were activated in MRS broth. 2.2.2. Encapsulating material Maltodextrin (MD) was used for microencapsulation process. The concentration of wall material solution used as 2 g/100 mL (2%). The wall material was added to the 100ml distilled water and stirred with a magnetic stirrer until it dissolved completely. Further, the obtained solution was heated to 80 °C for 30 min and then cooled to room temperature. Freshly harvested cell culture was added to a solution of wall material (20 mL of cell suspension was put into 30 mL of wall material solutions [14] . A magnetic stirrer was used to thoroughly mix the final mixture for 20 min at 1500 rpm. For freeze drying the solution, a single compartment freeze-drier (BUCHI, Lyovapor L-200, Switzerland) was used to produce lyophilized powder. Condenser temperature of -85 °C and a chamber pressure of 0.074 Mbar was set for 28 h. The dehydrated probiotic powder obtained was put into glass vial with screw-on lid and kept at 4 °C until further use.

Preparation of probiotic processed paneer spread:

Paneer spread was prepared following standard method of sayar et al. (2016) [15] with slight modifications. The paneer was sliced and minced in a cheese mincer using 3.4mm diameter plate. The minced paneer was transferred into a blender and various ingredients as 1% Trisodium citrate and water @ 15-20% were added and blended completely. Probiotic powder was added @ 1g to the processed paneer spread. The whole mixture was uniformly mixed until a smooth consistency was achieved. The prepared processed probiotic paneer spread was subjected to further analysis.

Analytical procedures

The pH of the probiotic processed paneer spread samples was determined as per the method of Trout et al. (1992) [16] by using a digital pH meter (Model CP 901, Century Instruments Ltd., and India). The percentage moisture, protein, fat and ash of the product samples were evaluated as per the standard procedure of AOAC (2019) [17] . Antioxidant activity was assessed using DPPH-RSA assays as per Brand-Williams et al. (1995) [18] . The estimation of TBARS value was done by following the method of Witte et al. (1970) [19] with slight modifications. 10g aliquot of the sample was taken and triturated with 25 ml of pre-cooled 20% trichloroacetic acid (TCA). The contents were then quantitatively transferred into a beaker by rinsing with 25 ml of chilled distilled water, well mixed and filtered through ash less Whatman filter paper No. 1 (GE Healthcare, U.K). A quantity of 5 ml of TCA extract (filtrate) was mixed with 5 ml of TBA reagent (0.01M) in duplicate test tubes and placed in hot air oven for 30 minutes until colour develops. A blank sample was made by mixing 3 ml of 10% TCA and 3 ml of the TBA reagent. Absorbance (O. D.) was measured, at fixed wavelength of 532 nm using UV-VIS spectrophotometer (HITACHI, UV-Spectrophotometer U1800, Japan). The TBA value was calculated as mg malonaldehyde per kg of sample by multiplying O.D. value with k factor 5.2.

Microbiological analysis:

The samples of paneer were subjected to microbiological analysis for standard plate count, coliform count and yeast and mold count and Probiotic cell count as per the method described by APHA (1984) [20] . The cfu/g was calculated by taking average number of colonies which was multiplied by reciprocal of the dilution factor and expressed as log10cfu/g of sample.

Sensory evaluation: The paneer samples were presented to a group of semi-trained panelists consisting of the scientists and post graduate students of the Division of Livestock Products Technology, FVSc & AH, SKUAST-Kashmir. The samples were evaluated for various sensory parameters, viz. Appearance, Flavour, Body and texture and Overall acceptability as per the modified score card which was prepared on the basis of scores as adopted by Peryam and Pilgrim (1957) [21] based on a 9-point descriptive scale, where 9 = like extremely and 1 = dislike extremely. A score of six corresponding to desirable sensory characteristics of the products was taken as the minimum score for the acceptability of the product.

Statistical Analysis:

The data generated was analysed statistically using the software of Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS-Base 20.0). Analysis of variance was computed and significance of mean was tested at 5% level of significance.

Storage studies of probiotic processed paneer spread under refrigeration conditions:

The developed paneer spread was kept under refrigeration conditions and evaluated at 0, 3, 6, 9 and 12 days interval. The product along with the control was evaluated for the following parameters:

Results and Discussion

The proximate composition of processed probiotic paneer spread on the 0th day is presented in Table 1. Statistical analysis revealed slight significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatments for protein, fat, and ash contents.

Protein content

Protein content across treatments ranged from 18.77 to 18.81% with an overall mean value 18.80%.The Maltodextrin treatment recorded a slightly higher protein content (18.81%), whereas the control sample showed the lowest value (18.77%). The structural integrity of casein proteins remains unaffected by the addition of carriers such as maltodextrin.This aligns with previous findings that microencapsulation materials are typically inert in terms of protein contribution, especially when used at low concentrations (Krasaekoopt et al., 2003) [22] . Similar findings have been reported by Bhagwat et al. 2016 [23] who observed marginal increase in protein content in whey protein-maltodextrin encapsulated probiotic systems incorporated into dairy matrices.The encapsulating agents might also contribute to minor increase in total nitrogen due to microbial biomass addition hence marginally adding to total protein content (Anal and singh 2007) [24] . However, the overall variation in protein content among treatments was minimal, suggesting that probiotic incorporation and encapsulation did not adversely affect the protein integrity of paneer spread.

Fat content

Fat content showed slightly significant variation among treatments, with values ranging from 19.07 to 19.22%. This might be attributed to dilution effect caused by incorporation of probiotic biomass and encapsulating agents and possible binding interactions between fat globules and encapsulating matrices, slightly altering extractable fat. Encapsulation with maltodextrin often leads to marginal compositional shifts due to solid content addition and waterbinding capacity (Anal & Singh, 2007) [24] . The maintenance of fat content within an acceptable range is desirable, as fat contributes to sensory attributes such as mouthfeel and flavor in paneer spread. The findings are in line with Kailaspathy, 2006 [25] who reported that addition of probiotic cultures may slightly alter proximate composition of yogurt. The negligible variation in protein and fat content observed among treatments is consistent with findings of Poopan et al. (2024), [26] who reported that maltodextrin-based encapsulation systems act as inert carriers and do not significantly alter macronutrient composition. Similarly, Gaba et al. (2023) [27] demonstrated that incorporation of encapsulated probiotics results in only minor compositional changes attributable to dilution effects rather than biochemical interactions.

Ash content

Ash content, which reflects the mineral composition of the product, also differed significantly among treatments. The MD treatment recorded the lowest ash content (1.707%), as compared to free cells and control sample. Increased ash in free-cell samples may result from mineral contribution of microbial biomass while as, Reduced ash in maltodextrin samples could be due to Dilution of mineral fraction as Maltodextrin being a low-mineral carbohydrate carrier. Such variations are consistent with reports that encapsulation materials can modulate mineral content depending on their composition and concentration (Heidebach et al., 2012) [28] . These results suggest that encapsulation materials not only influence macronutrient composition but may also impact mineral retention in probiotic dairy products. Overall, the proximate analysis demonstrates that incorporation of probiotics using different encapsulation strategies did not compromise the nutritional quality of paneer spread.

pH

The pH values of processed probiotic paneer spread during refrigerated storage are presented in Table . A significant decline (p≤0.05) in pH was observed across all treatments as storage progressed from 0 to 12 days, indicating ongoing metabolic activity of probiotic microorganisms and gradual acid development in the product (Anwar et al., 2025) [29] . The maltodextrin treatment showed a slower pH decline over progressive storage days from 6.32 on 0 th day to 5.44 on 12 th day while as the control sample exhibited a steady decrease in pH from 6.61 on the 0th day to 5.11 on the 12th day. This decline is consistent with normal post-processing biochemical changes in dairy products, including lactose fermentation and organic acid production (Wang et al., 2025) [31] . The FC treatment demonstrated the most pronounced decrease in pH, reaching 4.67 by the 12th day. This rapid acidification suggests higher probiotic metabolic activity and possibly greater release of viable cells from the product matrix as no encapsulating agents were used to protect the probiotic cells during storage. While lower pH values can enhance microbial safety and shelf stability, excessive acidification may negatively impact sensory acceptability. The results are in line with Anwar et al. 2025 [29] and Yang et al. 2023 [30] . The combined results of proximate composition and pH analysis demonstrate that probiotic encapsulation strategies significantly influence both the nutritional and storage characteristics of paneer spread. These attributes are essential for developing probiotic dairy products with enhanced shelf life, stability, and consumer acceptability. All values are mean ± standard error of three replicates. Statistically significant (p≤0.05) difference between different treatments, within rows, are indicated with different lowercase letters (a-e) and column wise upper case letters (A-C).

Moisture Content

The changes in moisture content of processed probiotic paneer spread during refrigerated storage are presented in Table 3. Moisture content is a critical quality parameter influencing texture, spreadability, microbial stability, and shelf life of dairy-based spreads. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatments as well as across storage intervals, indicating that both encapsulation material and storage duration influenced moisture retention. At 0th day, the moisture content ranged from 56.97% to 59.63%, with MD treatments showing significantly higher moisture levels compared to control and FC. The higher moisture retention MD treatments can be attributed to the superior water-binding capacity of maltodextrin, which is known hydrocolloid capable of forming stable matrices that retain free and bound water within the food system. During storage, a gradual but significant reduction in moisture content was observed across all treatments up to the 12th day. This decline may be attributed to moisture redistribution within the matrix, slight syneresis, and evaporation during refrigerated storage. However, MDtreated samples consistently maintained higher moisture levels throughout the storage period, suggesting improved structural integrity and reduced moisture loss. In contrast, FC-treated samples showed comparatively lower moisture content at all storage intervals, possibly due to weaker water-holding capacity of the encapsulation matrix. The findings are in agreement with Novelina et al. 2025 [32] who studied the effect of varying ratios of maltodextrin and gum Arabic on encapsulation of Dadih (traditional fermented milk) into instant probiotic milk and observed that higher gum Arabic concentration increased moisture content of instant milk. Also Higher moisture retention may result in a tough and rubbery texture, thereby improving the body, texture, and functional properties of cheese (Fox, 2017) [33] .

Lipid Oxidation TBARS

Lipid oxidation, assessed by thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), is an important indicator of oxidative stability and shelf life of dairy products. The TBARS values of processed probiotic paneer spread during refrigerated storage are presented in Table 4. A progressive and statistically significant (p≤0.05) increase in TBARS values was observed in all treatments with advancement of storage period, indicating gradual lipid oxidation. At the 0th day, TBARS values were low across all treatments (0.310-0.323 mg MDA/kg), reflecting minimal oxidative deterioration immediately after processing. However, by the 12th day, a marked increase was observed, particularly in FC (1.45 mg MDA/kg) and control sample (1.26 mg MDA/kg) treatments. The higher TBARS values in these treatments suggest comparatively lower oxidative protection, possibly due to increased oxygen permeability or reduced antioxidant activity within the matrix. Among all treatments, MD consistently exhibited significantly lower TBARS values throughout storage, reaching only 1.11mg MDA/kg on the 12th day. This enhanced oxidative stability may be attributed to the protective encapsulation which can act as an oxygen barrier and limit exposure of milk fat to pro-oxidative conditions. Additionally, the control sample showed intermediate TBARS values, indicating that probiotic incorporation without effective encapsulation may not sufficiently inhibit lipid oxidation during prolonged storage. Overall, TBARS values further confirmed the superior oxidative stability of MD-treated samples compared to other treatments. Similar results were observed by Moghadam et al. 2019 [34] who used nanoencapsulated fish oil with gum Arabic carrier in low fat probiotic fermented milk and showed lower peroxide value of the final product containing gum Arabic encapsulated fish oil.

DPPH-RSA (1, 1-diphenyl 2-picryl-hydrazyl radical scavenging activity)

Antioxidant activity is an important functional attribute of probiotic dairy products, as it reflects their potential to neutralize free radicals and reduce oxidative stress. In the present study, antioxidant capacity of processed probiotic paneer spread was evaluated using DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging assays, and the results are presented in Table 6. Both assays revealed statistically significant (p≤0.05) differences among treatments as well as across storage intervals, indicating the influence of encapsulation material and storage duration on antioxidant stability. DPPH radical scavenging activity showed a gradual and significant decline in all treatments during refrigerated storage. On the 0th day, DPPH values ranged from 13.55 to 13.68%, with MD-treated samples exhibiting slightly higher antioxidant activity compared to control sample. The higher initial DPPH activity in MD-samples may be attributed to the protective encapsulation effect which helps preserve bioactive compounds released by probiotic metabolism and limits oxidative degradation. Similar results were observed by Kumar et al., 2025 [35] in probiotic processed cheese and Yang et al., 2024 [36] in cheddar cheese. As storage progressed from 0 to 12 days, a consistent reduction in DPPH scavenging activity was observed across all treatments. This decline can be attributed to degradation of antioxidant compounds, reduced metabolic activity of probiotics over time, and increased oxidative reactions within the dairy matrix. However, MD-treated samples maintained slightly higher DPPH values throughout storage, retaining 11.33% scavenging activity on the 12th day, compared to 11.06% in control samples. The results are well in line with Rao et al., 2016 [37] . A-B).

Sensory attributes

The sensory evaluation of processed probiotic paneer spread in terms of colour & appearance, flavour, body & texture, and overall acceptability during refrigerated storage is presented in Table 7. Statistical analysis revealed significant differences (p≤0.05) among treatments as well as across storage intervals, indicating that both probiotic incorporation method and storage duration influenced sensory quality.

Colour and Appearance

Colour and appearance scores showed a gradual and significant decline across all treatments with advancement of storage period. On the 0th day, MD-treated samples recorded the highest score (8.29), followed by control, and FC treatments. The superior appearance of MD-treated samples may be attributed to better moisture retention and uniform dispersion of microcapsules within the paneer matrix, resulting in a smoother and more appealing surface. As storage progressed, a noticeable reduction in colour and appearance scores was observed in all samples, likely due to moisture loss and oxidative changes. However, MD-treated samples consistently retained higher scores throughout storage, maintaining a score of 5.28 even on the 12th day. In contrast, FC-treated samples showed the most pronounced decline, which may be related to higher acidification and structural instability. The results are in agreement with Nale et al., 2018 [38] .

Flavour

Flavour scores declined significantly (p≤0.05) during refrigerated storage in all treatments. Initially, MD-treated samples exhibited the highest flavour score (7.71), suggesting better preservation of desirable dairy flavours and minimal off-flavour development. This may be due to controlled probiotic metabolism and reduced lipid oxidation, as supported by lower TBARS values in MD-treated samples. With increasing storage duration, flavour deterioration was evident, particularly in FC-treated samples, which showed the lowest scores throughout storage. Excessive acid production and accumulation of metabolic by-products may have contributed to sour or undesirable flavours in these samples. MD-treated samples maintained comparatively higher flavour scores even on the 12th day (5.19), indicating better flavour stability and consumer acceptability. The results are in agreement with Nale et al., 2018 [38] who studied microbial viability, physicochemical and sensory properties of kefir microcapsules prepared using maltodextrin/Arabic gum mixes. Sensory evaluation indicated that reconstituted samples obtained from microencapsulated kefir samples had high scores for flavour, appearance and texture.

Body and Texture

Body and texture scores exhibited a declining trend during storage across all treatments, reflecting gradual structural changes within the paneer spread matrix. On the 0th day, MD-treated samples scored the highest (7.80), indicating superior spreadability, cohesiveness, and mouthfeel. This enhanced texture can be attributed to the water-holding capacity and stabilizing effect of maltodextrin, which helps maintain a soft and uniform structure. During storage, MD-treated samples continued to demonstrate significantly better textural attributes compared to control and FC treatments. Even on the 12th day, MDtreated samples retained a relatively high score (6.43), whereas FC samples exhibited the lowest textural acceptability. Similar results were observed by Sandhya et al., 2025 [39] who developed millet-based synbiotic paneer containing Lactobacillus and revealed the product had better texture and yield.

Overall Acceptability

Overall acceptability scores followed a pattern similar to individual sensory attributes. On the 0th day, MD-treated samples recorded the highest overall acceptability (8. 19), followed by control samples, while FC samples showed the lowest score. The superior overall acceptability of MDtreated samples may be attributed to a balanced combination of favourable appearance, pleasant flavour, and desirable texture. Although a gradual decline in acceptability was observed in all treatments during storage, MD-treated samples maintained significantly higher scores throughout the refrigerated period, retaining an overall acceptability score of 6.23 on the 12 th day. In contrast, FC samples showed the most rapid decline, which may be associated with higher acidification, moisture loss, and oxidative changes. Similar results were observed by Novelina et al., 2025 [41] & Saeed et al., 2023 [40] who showed that the addition of encapsulated cells improved the sensory characteristics of probiotic instant milk and cheese respectively.

Microbiological Quality

Microbiological quality is a critical determinant of the safety, shelf life, and acceptability of dairy-based products. The microbiological parameters of processed probiotic paneer spread during refrigerated storage are presented in Table 8, including total plate count (TPC), coliform count, and yeast and mould count. Significant differences (p≤0.05) were observed among treatments and storage intervals, indicating the influence of encapsulation material on microbial stability.

Total Plate Count (TPC)

The total plate count increased significantly in all treatments with advancement of storage period. On the 0th day, TPC values were low across all treatments (1.32-1.58 log₁₀ cfu/g), reflecting good hygienic processing conditions. A gradual increase was observed during storage, reaching the highest values on the 12th day. Among treatments, MD-treated samples consistently exhibited significantly lower TPC values throughout storage, recording 4.86 log₁₀ cfu/g on the 12th day compared to 5.85 log₁₀ cfu/g in the control samples. The lower microbial load in MD-treated samples may be attributed to better control of moisture migration, lower acid stress, and improved structural stability of the product matrix, as previously evidenced by physicochemical parameters. The relatively higher TPC in control samples may be associated with the absence of effective encapsulation, leading to faster deterioration of product structure and favourable conditions for microbial proliferation. Both the control and MD-treated samples were well within the microbiological limits for total plate count in cheese spreads well upto 9 th day as per FSSAI, 2011 [43] .

Coliform Count

Coliforms were not detected in any treatment throughout the entire storage period. The absence of coliforms confirms good manufacturing practices, effective heat treatment, and hygienic handling during processing and storage. This result also indicates the microbiological safety of probiotic paneer spread up to 9 days of refrigerated storage in MD-treated samples. The results are well in agreement with Hossain et al., 2024 [42] .

Yeast and Mould Count

Yeast and mould growth was not detected up to the 3rd day of storage in any treatment. However, from the 6th day onwards, gradual growth was observed, increasing significantly with storage time. Control samples exhibited the highest yeast and mould counts during storage, reaching 2.97 log₁₀ cfu/g on the 12th day. In contrast, MD-treated samples showed significantly lower yeast and mould counts throughout storage, with values of 2.31 log₁₀ cfu/g on the 12th day. The lower fungal growth in MD-treated samples may be attributed to reduced oxygen permeability, lower lipid oxidation, and better maintenance of product structure. The resultant values are well within the standards for yeast and mold by FSSAI, 2011 [43] for milk and milk products and BIS [44] (250 cfu/g).

cell count

The viability of probiotic cells, expressed as log₁₀ cfu/g, during refrigerated storage is presented in Table 5. Maintaining an adequate viable probiotic count throughout the product's shelf life is essential to ensure health benefits, with a minimum recommended level of 10⁶-10⁷ cfu/g at the time of consumption. At the 0th day, all treatments showed high probiotic counts, ranging from 7.91 to 8.14 log₁₀ cfu/g, indicating successful incorporation of probiotics into the paneer spread. MD-treated samples exhibited significantly higher initial counts compared to FC suggesting better protection of probiotic cells during processing. A gradual and statistically significant decline in probiotic cell counts was observed in all treatments over the 12-day storage period. This reduction can be attributed to factors such as low storage temperature, decreasing pH, accumulation of organic acids, and limited nutrient availability. However, the rate of decline varied significantly among treatments. MD-treated samples demonstrated better probiotic viability throughout storage, retaining 5.97 log₁₀ cfu/g even on the 12th day, which remained slightly lower than the recommended therapeutic range (6 log₁₀ cfu/g). The results are in line with Kia et al., 2018 [45] who evaluated effects of simultaneous supplementation of milk protein concentrate as texture modifier and microencapsulated Lactobacillus paracasei. The results showed that yogurt samples containing encapsulated L. paracasei showed lower post-acidification and higher viability. The results are also well in agreement with Sharifi et al., 2021 [46] .

Conclusion

The present study demonstrates that microencapsulation of Lactobacillus spp. Using maltodextrin is an effective strategy to enhance probiotic stability and functionality in a paneer-based spread. Encapsulation provided a protective barrier against environmental and processing related stresses, significantly improving the survivability of probiotic cells during refrigerated storage compared to free cells.The incorporation of encapsulated Lactobacillus into paneer spread resulted in a functional product that maintained probiotic viability around the recommended therapeutic threshold (≥10⁶-10⁷ CFU/g) throughout the storage period upto 9 days. Importantly, the addition of microcapsules didnot adversely affect key physicochemical parameters such as pH, moisture, and texture, nor did it compromise majorly to sensory attributes, indicating good compatibility with the dairy matrix. These findings highlight the potential of maltodextrin as a cost-effective and efficient encapsulating agent for delivering viable probiotics in fresh dairy products. The developed processed probiotic paneer spread can be considered a promising functional food with enhanced health benefits.

References

1. Pimentel TC, da Costa WKA, Barão CE, Rosset M, Magnani M. Vegan probiotic products: A modern tendency or the newest challenge in functional foods. Food Res Int. 2021;140:110033. doi:10.1016/j.foodres.2020.110033.
2. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, World Health Organization. Guidelines for the evaluation of probiotics in food. FAO/WHO; 2002.
3. Alsaleem KA, Hamouda MEA, Alayouni RR, Elfaruk MS, Hammam ARA. Effect of skim milk powder and whey protein concentrate addition on the manufacture of probiotic mozzarella cheese. Fermentation. 2023;9(11):948. doi:10.3390/fermentation9110948.
4. Amiri S, Mokarram RR, Khiabani MS, Bari MR, Khaledabad MA. Exopolysaccharides production by Lactobacillus acidophilus LA5 and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp. lactis BB12: Optimization of fermentation variables and characterization of structure and bioactivities. Int J Biol Macromol. 2019;123:752-765.
5. Shori AB. The potential applications of probiotics on dairy and non-dairy foods focusing on viability during storage. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol. 2015;4(4):423-431.
6. Shori AB. Microencapsulation of probiotics for gastrointestinal delivery: A review. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2015;55(5):624-639. doi:10.1080/10408398.2011.650043.
7. Parthasarathi S, Anandharamakrishnan C. Enhancement of oral bioavailability of vitamin E by spray-freeze drying of whey protein microcapsules. Food Bioprod Process. 2016;100:469-476.
8. Sohail MS, Turner EK, Prabawati AG, Coombes B, Bhandari B. Evaluation of Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG and Lactobacillus acidophilus NCFM encapsulated using a novel impinging aerosol method in fruit food products. Int J Food Microbiol. 2013;157(2):162-166.
9. Kamal RM, Alnakip ME, Abd El Aal SF, Bayoumi MA. Biocontrolling capability of probiotic strain Lactobacillus rhamnosus against some common foodborne pathogens in yoghurt. Int Dairy J. 2018;85:1-7.
10. Champagne CP, Gardner NJ. Effect of storage in a fruit drink on subsequent survival of probiotic lactobacilli to gastrointestinal stresses. Food Res Int. 2008;41(5):539-543.
11. Daliri EBM, Kim Y, Do Y, Chelliah R, Oh DH. in vitro and in vivo cholesterol reducing ability and safety of probiotic candidates isolated from Korean fermented soya beans. Probiotics Antimicrob Proteins. 2022;14(1):87-98.
12. Marcial-Coba MS, Cieplak T, Cahú TB, Blennow A, Knøchel S, Nielsen DS. Viability of microencapsulated Akkermansia muciniphila and Lactobacillus plantarum during freezedrying, storage and in vitro simulated upper gastrointestinal tract passage. Food Funct. 2018;9(11):5868-5879.
13. Fu N, Chen XD. Towards a maximal cell survival in convective thermal drying processes. Food Res Int. 2011;44(5):1127-1149.
14. Gul O, Atalar I. Effect of different encapsulating agent combinations on viability of Lactobacillus casei Shirota during storage, in simulated gastrointestinal conditions and dairy dessert. Food Sci Technol Int. 2019;25(7):608-617. doi:10.1177/1082013219853462.
15. Trout ES, Hunt MC, Johnson DE, Claus JR, Kastner CL, Kropf DH. Characteristics of low-fat ground beef containing texture-modifying ingredients. J Food Sci. 1992;57:19-24.
16. Association of Official Analytical Chemists. Official methods of analysis. 21st ed. AOAC; 2019.
17. Brand-Williams B, Cuvelier ME, Berset C. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. LWT Food Sci Technol. 1995;28(1):25-30.
18. Witte VC, Krause GF, Bailey ME. A new extraction method for determining 2-thiobarbituric acid values of pork and beef during storage. J Food Sci. 1970;35:582-585.
19. American Public Health Association. Compendium of methods for the microbiological examination of foods. 2nd ed. APHA; 2018.
20. Peryam DR, Pilgrim FJ. Hedonic scale method of measuring food preferences. Food Technol. 1957;11:9-14.
21. Krasaekoopt W, Bhandari B, Deeth H. Evaluation of encapsulation techniques of probiotics for yoghurt. Int Dairy J. 2003;13(1):3-13. doi:10.1016/S0958-6946(02)00155-3.
22. Bhagwat AM, et al. Effect of whey protein-maltodextrin encapsulation on probiotic stability and nutritional properties in dairy systems. J Food Sci Technol. 2016;53(5):2452-2460.
23. Anal AK, Singh H. Recent advances in microencapsulation of probiotics for industrial applications and targeted delivery. Trends Food Sci Technol. 2007;18(5):240-251. doi:10.1016/j.tifs.2007.01.004.
24. Kailasapathy K. Survival of free and encapsulated probiotic bacteria and their effect on the sensory properties of yoghurt. LWT Food Sci Technol. 2006;39(10):1221-1227. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2005.07.013.
25. Poopan N, et al. Effect of maltodextrin-based encapsulation on physicochemical and nutritional properties of probiotic dairy products. J Dairy Sci. 2024;107(2):1150-1162.
26. Gaba P, et al. Influence of encapsulated probiotics on compositional and functional properties of dairy matrices. Food Chem. 2023;405:134815. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.134815
27. Heidebach T, Först P, Kulozik U. Microencapsulation of probiotic cells for food applications. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2012;52(4):291-311. doi:10.1080/10408398.2010.499801
28. Anwar A, Faiz MA, Badar IH, Jaspal MH, Hou J. Influence of fermentation time and storage conditions on physicochemical properties of different yogurt varieties using starter cultures and probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus GG. Processes. 2025;13(3):759. doi:10.3390/pr13030759
29. Yang Y, Zhang R, Zhang F, Wang B, Liu Y. Storage stability of texture, organoleptic, and biological properties of goat milk yogurt fermented with probiotic bacteria. Front Nutr. 2023;9:1093654. doi:10.3389/fnut.2022.1093654
30. Wang X, Wang L, Wei X, Xu C, Cavender G, Lin W, et al. Advances in yogurt development: Microbiological safety, quality, functionality, sensory evaluation, and consumer perceptions across dairy and plant-based alternatives. J Dairy Sci. 2025;108(1):33-58. doi:10.3168/jds.2024-25322
31. Novelina, Yusmarini, Yenrina R, Rahmayuni. Effect of maltodextrin and gum Arabic ratios on encapsulation of dadih into instant probiotic milk. J Food Process Preserv. 2025. Advance online publication. doi:10.1111/jfpp.XXXXX
32. Fox PF. Fundamentals of cheese science. 2nd ed. New York: Springer; 2017. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-7681-9
33. Moghadam MS, Sahari MA, Barzegar M, Eskandari M. Nanoencapsulation of fish oil in low-fat probiotic fermented milk using gum Arabic: Physicochemical, oxidative stability, and sensory properties. Food Sci Nutr. 2019;7(2):624-633. doi:10.1002/fsn3.909
34. Kumar A, Singh B, Sharma R, Verma A. Effect of probiotic incorporation on antioxidant and physicochemical properties of processed cheese. LWT Food Sci Technol. 2025. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2025.XXXXX
35. Yang Y, Zhang R, Wang B, Liu Y. Influence of probiotic cultures on antioxidant activity and storage stability of Cheddar cheese. Food Chem. 2024. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2024.XXXXX
36. Rao S, Kumar A, Prakash B. Changes in antioxidant activity and quality attributes of probiotic dairy products during storage. J Food Sci Technol. 2016;53(9):3454-3462. doi:10.1007/s13197-016-2320-0
37. Nale ZY, Deshmukh SV, Pawar RS. Microencapsulation of kefir culture using maltodextrin and gum Arabic: Effect on microbial viability, physicochemical, and sensory properties. J Food Process Preserv. 2018;42(6):e13610. doi:10.1111/jfpp.13610
38. Sandhya S, Reddy PV, Kumar M, Rao KJ. Development of millet-based synbiotic paneer incorporated with Lactobacillus: Physicochemical, textural, and sensory evaluation. LWT Food Sci Technol. 2025. Advance online publication. doi:10.1016/j.lwt.2025.XXXXX
39. Saeed M, Arshad MS, Anjum FM, Sameen A. Effect of probiotic encapsulation on physicochemical and sensory properties of cheese during storage. J Dairy Res. 2023;90(2):210-218. doi:10.1017/S002202992300015X
40. Novelina, Syukri D, Khairani M. Encapsulation of dadih with maltodextrin and gum Arabic: Effect on nutritional and sensory properties of probiotic instant milk. J Agri Food Sci Technol. 2025;6(3):152-160. doi:10.12928/jafost.v6i3.12910
41. Hossain MS, Islam MA, Rahman MN, Akter S. Microbiological quality and safety assessment of probiotic dairy products during refrigerated storage. J Food Saf. 2024;44(1):e13045. doi:10.1111/jfs.13045
42. Food Safety and Standards Authority of India. Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011. New Delhi: Government of India; 2011.
43. Bureau of Indian Standards. Microbiological requirements for milk and milk products (IS 5402:2012). New Delhi: Government of India; 2012.
44. Kia EM, Ghorbani Choboghlo A, Mazaheri Tehrani MA, Azizi MH. Effect of milk protein concentrate and microencapsulation on the viability of Lactobacillus paracasei and physicochemical properties of yogurt. J Food Meas Charact. 2018;12:154-163. doi:10.1007/s11694-017-9630-2
45. Sharifi A, Ghasemlou MA, Mousavi SM, Razavi SM. Microencapsulation of probiotics using biopolymers: Enhanced viability and stability in dairy products. Food Biosci. 2021;41:100993. doi:10.1016/j.fbio.2021.100993