Nutritional composition, antioxidant properties, and microbiological quality of fig (ficus carica)-incorporated camel and buffalo milk based khoa burfi under refrigerated storage conditions

Introduction

India is the world's largest milk producer, achieving approximately 248 million tonnes annually with a per capita milk availability of 485 g/day. Despite this abundance, valueadded utilization of diverse milk types remains limited. Khoa, a heat-desiccated indigenous dairy product, forms the base for a wide array of traditional Indian sweets, including burfi, peda, and gulabjamun. Burfi is among the most popular khoa-based confections consumed across India and increasingly sought after in global markets with Indian diaspora (Kumar, 2013) [27] . Camel milk has attracted considerable scientific interest due to its unique bioactive composition, including antimicrobial peptides, insulin-like proteins, and immunoglobulins. It is characterized by low fat (1.5-3%), high vitamin C, and anti-diabetic and anti-cancer properties (Agarwal et al., 2003; Magjeed, 2005) [3,30] . Buffalo milk, conversely, is nutritionally superior in fat, protein, and calcium, making it ideal for traditional Indian dairy products (D'Ambrosio et al., 2008) [14] . The blend of camel and buffalo milk (50:50) thus presents an opportunity to produce khoa burfi that combines the functional advantages of both milk species. Fig ( Ficus carica) is a nutritionally dense fruit rich in dietary fibre, polyphenols, flavonoids, anthocyanins, calcium, potassium, and iron (Caliskan and Polat, 2011; Veberic et al., 2008) [11,52] . Incorporation of fig paste into dairy confections not only enriches their Inflammatory, and antimicrobial properties attributed to the phytochemicals present in the fruit (Mawa et al., 2013; Oliveira et al., 2022) [31,35] . Fig has been reported to possess significant free radical-scavenging activity, making it a promising functional ingredient for extending the shelf life of dairy products. While prior studies from this research program have established the sensory quality and textural profile of fig-incorporated camel and buffalo milk khoa burfi there exists a critical gap in the literature regarding its proximate composition, antioxidant properties, storage stability indices, and microbiological quality during refrigerated storage. Understanding these parameters is essential for product commercialization, shelf-life determination, and regulatory compliance under BIS standards. The present investigation was therefore undertaken to evaluate: (i) proximate composition (moisture, ether extract, crude protein, total ash, carbohydrate) of fig-incorporated burfi; (ii) storage stability as measured by pH, titratable acidity, TBARS, ABTS, and DPPH radical-scavenging activity over 15 days of refrigerated storage (4 ± 1 °C); (iii) microbiological quality (standard plate count, yeast and mould count, coliform count) during storage; and (iv) the cost of production of the developed product.

Materials and Methods

Collection of Raw Materials

Fresh camel milk was collected from the camel dairy maintained at ICAR-NRC on Camel, Bikaner, and fresh buffalo milk was sourced from the Buffalo Unit, Department of Livestock Products Technology, CVAS, RAJUVAS, Bikaner. Fig fruits were procured from the local Bikaner market, cleaned, soaked in water for 12 hours, and homogenized into paste using a mixer-grinder. Powdered sugar was purchased from the local market. All milk samples were collected in sterile bottles under chilled conditions and transported immediately for processing.

Preparation of khoa burfi

Burfi was prepared following the method described by Reddy (1985), with a standardized blend of 50% camel milk and 50% buffalo milk (6% fat, 9% SNF). Milk was preheated to 35-40 °C, filtered, and subjected to continuous stirring-cum-scrapping in an iron karahi over moderate heat until a pasty consistency was achieved. Temperature was lowered to 88-89 °C, after which sugar (30% w/w of khoa) and fig paste at specified levels were added with continuous stirring until a solid mass was obtained. The product was spread in greased stainless-steel trays, cooled, cut into rectangular blocks (approximately 30 g each), and stored at

Proximate analysis

Proximate analysis of the prepared burfi samples was performed in quadruplicate using standard procedures (AOAC, 2000) [1] . Moisture content was determined gravimetrically at 100 °C (IS: 1479, Part-II, 1961). Fat content was estimated by Gerber's method (IS: 1224, Part-II, 1977). Crude protein was estimated by the micro-Kjeldahl method (IS: 1981) using nitrogen-to-protein conversion factor 6.38. Total ash was determined by incineration at 550 °C for 3.5 h in a muffle furnace (IS: 1981). Carbohydrate content was calculated by difference: Carbohydrate (%) = Total Solids -(Fat + Protein + Ash).

Storage stability analysis

Stored burfi samples (T0-T3) were analyzed at 0, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 days under refrigeration (4 ± 1 °C) for the following parameters • PH: Measured using a digital pH meter (AOAC, 1995) [2] on a 10 g/50 mL suspension in distilled water, calibrated with standard pH 4.0 and 7.0 buffers. • Titratable acidity (% lactic acid): determined by titrating a 10 mL homogenate (10 g burfi + 90 mL water) against 0.1 N NaOH using phenolphthalein indicator to a faint pink end-point.

• TBARS (Thiobarbituric Acid Reactive Substances):

Lipid oxidation was measured by the extraction method of Witte et al. (1970) [55] . Absorbance was recorded at 532 nm and expressed as mg MDA/kg using the formula: TBARS = A₅₃₂ × 5.2. • ABTS Radical-scavenging activity: Determined spectrophotometrically according to Salami et al.

(2009) [42] . ABTS⁺ cation radical was generated by reacting ABTS stock solution with 2.45 mM potassium persulphate and allowing 16 h in dark at room temperature. Absorbance of reaction mixture was read at 734 nm after 20 min. ABTS activity (% inhibition) = [(0.70 -A_t20)/0.70] × 100. • DPPH Radical-scavenging activity: estimated by the method of Brand-Williams et al. (1995) [9] . Briefly, 2 mL DPPH (100 μM) was mixed with 0.5 mL Tris-HCl buffer (0.1 M, pH 7.4) and 50 μL sample, incubated in dark for 20 min at room temperature, and absorbance read at 517 nm. DPPH activity (% inhibition) = 100 -[(A_t20/A_t0) × 100].

Microbiological analysis

Microbiological examination was performed according to BIS standards [8] . Standard plate count (SPC) was determined using plate count agar (IS: 5402, 1969), incubated at 37 °C for 48 h. Yeast and mould count (YMC) was determined using potato dextrose agar (pH 3.5 with tartaric acid) (IS: 5403, 1969), incubated at 25 °C for 5 days.

Coliform count was determined using violet red bile agar, incubated at 37 °C for 24 h. All results are expressed as log cfu/g.

Cost evaluation

The cost of production of the developed burfi was calculated based on prevailing market prices of raw materials, processing, packaging, and incidental expenses at the time of the experiment.

Statistical analysis

All experiments were conducted in triplicate, and samples were analyzed in duplicate. Data were subjected to two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) as described by Snedecor and Cochran (1994) [47] . Significant differences between means were evaluated using Duncan's New Multiple Range Test (DNMRT) as modified by Kramer (1957). Statistical significance was set at p<0.01 and p<0.05. [53] for mandarin orange burfi (17.93-20.88%), Navale et al. (2014) [33] for wood apple burfi (16.96-20.30%), and Singh (2020) [45] for watermelon seed-incorporated camel and buffalo milk khoa burfi. Mete and Sadawarte (2017) [32] also reported a significant decrease in moisture content with increasing levels of khajoor in burfi.

Ether extract (fat) content

Ether extract (fat) content decreased significantly (p<0.01) from 26.14 ± 0.064% in control to 15.32 ± 0.022% in T3. This declining trend results from the dilution effect: as fig paste (which is essentially fat-free) replaces a proportion of the fat-rich khoa fraction, the total fat percentage decreases proportionally. Lahankar (2017) [29] reported fat content of 20.50-22.20% in green pea burfi, and Dua et al. (2018) [18] recorded 27.96% fat in ghee residue burfi, while lower fat values in fruit-incorporated burfi are consistent with the present findings. The reduction in fat content with fig addition may also confer potential health benefits, as high dietary fat intake is associated with non-communicable disease risk (WHO, 2023) [54] .

Crude Protein content

Crude protein content increased significantly (p<0.01) from 16.10 ± 0.194% (T0) to 23.15 ± 0.348% (T3). This progressive increase reflects the protein contribution of fig,

which contains approximately 4.9 g protein per 100 g dry weight (Slatnar et al., 2011) [46] . Dried figs are a recognized source of essential amino acids (Ercisli et al., 2012) [20] , and their incorporation substantially enriched the protein content of the burfi matrix. The values obtained are comparable to those reported for ghee residue burfi (23.68% protein; Dua et al., 2018) [18] and higher than values reported for khoa from traditional formulations. This protein enrichment is a significant value-addition, especially for populations requiring high-protein supplementation.

Total ash content

Total ash content decreased significantly from 4.86 ± 0.081% (T0) to 4.03 ± 0.127% (T3), likely due to the diluting effect of adding fig paste which has a relatively lower mineral concentration than the concentrated milk solids in khoa. These values fall within the range reported by Nikam (2012) for ash gourd burfi, Navale et al. (2014) [33] for wood apple burfi (2.56-2.98%), and Sharma and Gupta (1982) for market burfi. Importantly, the ash content of the product remained within acceptable limits throughout, indicating adequate mineral retention. [37] . This carbohydrate enrichment, combined with dietary fibre from fig, makes the product a good source of quick energy and beneficial prebiotic compounds.

Carbohydrate content

Storage stability parameters 3.2.1 PH Determination

The pH values of camel and buffalo milk khoa burfi incorporated with fig paste during 15 days of refrigerated storage (4 ± 1 °C) are presented in Table 2. The overall pH of control (T0) was 6.70 ± 0.064, declining progressively to values of 6.62 ± 0.044 (T1), 6.41 ± 0.059 (T2), and 6.14 ± 0.069 (T3). A highly significant difference (p<0.01) was observed between storage periods and between treatment groups. [48] . The progressive decline in pH during storage is attributed to microbial activity producing lactic acid and other organic acids through glycolysis of residual lactose and fig sugars (Daifas et al., 1999) [15] . The Maillard reaction and associated organic acid production during khoa manufacture may also contribute to the gradual pH decrease (Goyal and Srinivasan, 1989) [22] . Similar pH decrease trends during refrigerated storage have been reported by Chaudhary et al. (2019) [12] in aloe vera burfi, Shrivas et al. (2018) [44] in rava burfi, and Singh (2020) [45] in watermelon seed-incorporated khoa burfi.

Titratable acidity values of the burfi samples during refrigerated storage are presented in Table 3. Initial titratable acidity (day 0) was significantly higher in figincorporated treatments (T3: 1.19 ± 0.042%) compared to control (T0: 0.68 ± 0.023%), reflecting the inherent acidity of fig paste. A highly significant (p<0.01) increase in titratable acidity was observed with both increasing storage duration and increasing fig incorporation level. The rise in titratable acidity during storage is consistent with microbial production of lactic acid, formic acid, acetic acid, and other short-chain organic acids from the fermentation of lactose and sugars (O'Brien, 1997) [34] . The higher acidity in fig-incorporated treatments (T2, T3) from day 0 is directly due to the organic acid content of fig, particularly citric and malic acids (Pereira et al., 2017) [37] . These results are in conformity with findings of Banjare et al. (2015) [7] in traditional peda, Shrivas et al. (2018) [44] for rava burfi, Kumar et al. (2016) [28] for pineapple burfi, and Pal et al. (2018) [36] for bottle gourd and carrot burfi. The observed increase in acidity was well below levels that would cause sensory rejection, indicating adequate storage life under refrigeration.

Thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (tbars)

TBARS values, used as an index of lipid oxidation and rancidity development, are presented in Table 4. Initial TBARS values ranged from 0.143 ± 0.025 (T0) to 0.206 ± 0.021 mg MDA/kg (T3), increasing significantly (p<0.01) to 1.016-1.071 mg MDA/kg by day 15 across all treatments.

Fig 3: TBARS value of camel and buffalo milk based khoa burfi blended with fig paste

All TBARS values throughout the 15-day storage period remained below the permissible limit of 1.5 mg MDA/kg for fat-containing dairy products (Das et al., 2015) [16] , indicating no organoleptic rancidity. The progressive increase in TBARS with storage duration reflects gradual oxidation of unsaturated fatty acids (particularly from camel milk, which contains proportionally higher C18:2 and C18:3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (Konuspayeva et al., 2009) [26] . The slightly higher TBARS in fig-incorporated treatments compared to control at equivalent storage periods suggests that fig paste, while containing antioxidant compounds, may also carry pro-oxidant phenolics at higher concentrations or introduce minor amounts of iron that catalyze lipid peroxidation (Slatnar et al., 2011) [46] . Comparable TBARS increases during refrigerated storage of dairy products have been documented by Bukhari et al. (2012) [10] in kaladhi, Devi (2018) [17] in camel-buffalo milk nuggets, Prajapat (2019) [38] in camel-goat milk paneer, and Singh (2020) [45] in watermelon seed khoa burfi.

ABTS Radical-scavenging activity ABTS (% inhibition

) values of all burfi samples during 15 days of refrigerated storage are presented in Table 5. The antioxidant activity assessed by the ABTS method was significantly (p<0.01) higher in fig-incorporated samples than in control, with T3 recording the highest overall ABTS activity (45.42 ± 0.531%) compared to T0 (23.14 ± 0.474%). A highly significant (p<0.01) decline in ABTS activity was observed with increasing storage duration across all treatment groups. [35,52] . Additionally, camel milk is a known source of bioactive peptides and vitamin C that contribute to radical-scavenging activity (El-Hatmi et al., 2007; Agrawal et al., 2011) [4,19] . The ABTS activity of T3 declined from 57.35% at day 0 to 31.30% by day 15, indicating gradual degradation of heatlabile antioxidant compounds during extended storage under refrigeration. This observation aligns with Devi (2018) [17] in flaxseed-incorporated camel-buffalo milk nuggets (53.20% Declining to 21.71%), Badola et al. (2018) [6] in herbal Essential oil burfi, and Singh (2020) [45] in watermelon seed burfi. The superior antioxidant retention in fig-burfi compared to plain burfi throughout storage suggests that fig incorporation meaningfully extends the oxidative stability of the product.

DPPH Radical-Scavenging Activity

DPPH radical-scavenging activity data (Table 6) corroborated the ABTS findings. Overall DPPH activity was significantly (p<0.01) higher in T3 (14.56 ± 0.345%) compared to control (8.72 ± 0.317%), and a highly significant decrease (p<0.01) was observed with advancing storage period as well as interaction between treatment and period. [39] . The correlation between higher ABTS and DPPH activities in fig-enriched burfi is expected, as both assays measure hydrogen-donating and electrontransfer capacities of phenolic antioxidants. These results are consistent with Gorachiya (2017) [21] in pomegranate whey beverages, Tak (2017) [49] in fermented camel milk, Devi (2018) [17] in flaxseed milk nuggets, and Singh (2020) [45] in khoa burfi.

Microbiological quality during refrigerated storage 3.3.1 Standard plate count

The standard plate count (SPC) data for all treatment groups during 15 days of refrigerated storage are presented in Table 7. SPC increased significantly (p<0.01) with advancing storage period across all treatments. At day 0, SPC ranged from 3.272 ± 0.102 log cfu/g (T0) to 4.143 ± 0.093 log cfu/g (T3). By day 15, SPC had increased to 3.567 log cfu/g (T0) and 4.232 log cfu/g (T3). [13] in doda burfi, Vasava et al. (2018) [51] in gluten-free gulabjamun, and Singh (2020) [45] in watermelon seed khoa burfi.

Yeast and mould count

Yeast and mould count (YMC) data during refrigerated storage are presented in Table 8. No yeast or mould growth was detected (NIL) in any treatment group up to day 6 of refrigerated storage, demonstrating good hygienic preparation conditions. From day 9 onwards, YMC began to increase significantly, reaching a maximum of 1.081 ± 0.068 log cfu/g in T3 by day 15. The BIS specification (IS 5550:2005) for burfi mandates yeast and mould count not exceeding 10 cfu/g (log 1.0). At day 15, the YMC of T3 (1.081 log cfu/g = approx. 12 cfu/g) marginally exceeded this limit, while T0, T1, and T2 remained within acceptable levels. The detection of yeast and mould only from day 9 onwards indicates that the product is microbiologically safe for at least 6 days of refrigerated storage without yeast or mould concerns. The subsequent growth from day 9 is attributable to the increasing moisture availability and decreasing pH providing a favorable environment for osmophilic yeasts and xerophilic moulds (Sachdeva and Rajorhia, 1982; Chawla et al., 2015) [13,41] . The slightly higher YMC in figincorporated treatments may be due to the higher sugar content of fig promoting yeast growth. Similar observations have been reported by Vaja (2012) [50] in gulabjamun, Chawla et al. (2015) [13] in doda burfi, and Aparna et al. (2018) [5] in rava burfi.

Coliform count

No coliform organisms were detected in any of the burfi treatment groups (T0-T3) throughout the entire 15-day refrigerated storage period. This finding confirms the hygienic manufacturing conditions maintained during product preparation and demonstrates that the product met the BIS specification for burfi (IS 5550:2005), which requires absence of coliforms. The elimination of coliforms is consistent with the heat treatment applied during khoa preparation (continuous heating at >100 °C), which effectively destroys coliform organisms (Sarkar et al., 2002) [43] . These results are in agreement with Gupta et al. (2010) in coconut burfi, Shrivas et al. (2017) [44] in rava burfi, Vasava et al. (2018) [51] in gluten-free gulabjamun, and Singh (2020) [45] in watermelon seed khoa burfi. Coliform absence is an important indicator of product safety and good manufacturing practices.

Cost evaluation of the developed khoa burfi

The cost of production of the developed camel and buffalo milk khoa burfi with varying levels of fig paste incorporation is presented in Table 9. The cost increased progressively from ₹290/kg (T0, control) to ₹366/kg (T1, 10% fig) ,₹442 Given the superior sensory acceptability of T1 and the present findings of acceptable proximate composition, antioxidant activity, and microbial quality, T1 (₹366/kg) represents the most commercially viable formulation. The modest premium of ₹76/kg over the control is justified by the nutritional and functional value addition conferred by fig incorporation particularly the protein enrichment, dietary fibre, and antioxidant properties. Similar cost-quality tradeoff analyses have been conducted for fruit-fortified dairy products (Kamble et al., 2010; Lahankar, 2017) [25,29] . Considering that artisanal and premium Indian sweets command higher prices in urban and export markets, the T1 product at ₹366/kg remains competitively priced.

Conclusion

This study comprehensively established the proximate composition, antioxidant properties, storage stability, and microbiological safety of fig-incorporated camel and buffalo milk (50:50) khoa burfi over 15 days of refrigerated storage. The incorporation of fig paste significantly enhanced the crude protein content (up to 23.15% at 30% fig level) and carbohydrate content while reducing moisture and fat. Fig incorporation imparted significantly higher antioxidant activity (both ABTS and DPPH radical-scavenging) to the burfi, with the effect diminishing progressively during storage but remaining significantly superior to control throughout. Storage stability analyses confirmed progressive but controlled increases in titratable acidity and TBARS, and decreases in pH, consistent with cold-chain preservation. Microbiologically, the product demonstrated acceptable quality with no coliforms detected at any storage day, yeast and mould below BIS limits up to day 12 (T0-T2), and SPC well within permissible limits throughout. On the basis of optimum sensory quality textural properties, proximate enrichment, antioxidant activity, and microbial safety, 10% fig paste incorporation (T1) at ₹366/kg is recommended as the optimal and commercially viable formulation for aerobically packaged camel and buffalo milk khoa burfi with a refrigerated shelf life of 12 days.

Acknowledgement

AcknowledgementsThe authors acknowledge the support of ICAR-NRC on Camel, Bikaner for providing camel milk, and the Department of Livestock Products Technology, CVAS, RAJUVAS, Bikaner for laboratory facilities. The authors also thank the panel of judges for sensory and microbiological evaluation assistance.

References

1. AOAC. Official methods of analysis. 17th ed. Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists; 2000.
2. AOAC. Association of Official Analytical Chemists International. Guidelines for collaborative study procedure to validate characteristics of a method of analysis. J AOAC. 1995; 78:143A-160A.
3. Agarwal RP, Swami SC, Beniwal R, Kochar DK, Sahani MS, Tuteja FC, et al. Effect of camel milk on glycemic control, risk factors and diabetes quality of life in type-1 diabetes: A randomized prospective controlled study. J Camel Pract Res. 2003; 10(1):45-50.
4. Agrawal RP, Budania S, Sharma P, Gupta R, Kochar DK, Panwar RB, et al. Zero prevalence of diabetes in camel milk consuming Raica community of north-west Rajasthan, India. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011; 76(2):290-296.
5. Aparna AS, Suneeta VP, Sunil MP, Smitha B. Effect of storage on composition, physico-chemical, rheology, sensory and microbiological quality of Indian cookie Rava Burfi. J Appl Nat Sci. 2018; 10(1):88-97.
6. Badola R, Panjagari NR, Singh RRB, Singh AK, Prasad WG. Effect of clove bud and curry leaf essential oils on the anti-oxidative and anti-microbial activity of burfi, a milk-based confection. J Food Sci Technol. 2018; 55(12):4802-4810.
7. Banjare K, Kumar M, Goel BK. Effect of storage on chemical, textural and sensory attributes of traditional indigenous sweet peda. Asian J Dairy Food Res. 2015; 34(2):104-108.
8. BIS. IS 5550:2005. Indian Standard for Burfi. New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards; 2005.
9. Brand-Williams W, Cuvelier ME, Berset CLWT. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. LWT Food Sci Technol. 1995; 28(1):25-30.
10. Bukhari SAA, Pathak V, Bhat ZF, Ahmed SR. Effect of ambient storage on the quality characteristics of Kaladhi -an acid coagulated milk product. Am J Food Technol. 2012? Doi: 10.3923/ajft.
11. Caliskan O, Polat AA. Phytochemical and antioxidant properties of selected fig (Ficus carica L.) accessions from the eastern Mediterranean region of Turkey. Sci Hortic. 2011; 128(4):473-478.
12. Chaudhary V, Bishnoi S, Argade A. Development and characterization of aloe vera juice incorporated burfi. J Pharma Innov. 2019; 8(5):407-411.
13. Chawla R, Singh AK, Patil GR. Shelf-life enhancement of functional doda burfi (Indian milk cake) with biopreservatives application. Int J Res Sci Technol. 2015; 5(2):26-40.
14. D'Ambrosio C, Arena S, Salzano AM, Renzone G, Ledda L, Scaloni A. A proteomic characterization of water buffalo milk fractions describing PTM of major species and the identification of minor components involved in nutrient delivery and defense against pathogens. Proteomics. 2008;8(17):3657-3666.
15. Daifas DP, Smith JP, Austin JG. Growth and toxin production by Clostridium botulinum in English style crumpets packaged under modified atmosphere. J Food Prot. 1999; 62:347-355.
16. Das DP, Kumar S, Kumar A. Effects of incorporation of refined vegetable oil and vege-salt on quality characteristics of milk nugget: a novel dairy product. Indian Vet J. 2015;92(4):11-15.
17. Devi D. Studies on the development and quality evaluation of flaxseed incorporated camel and buffalo milk nuggets [M.V.Sc. thesis]. Bikaner: RAJUVAS; 2018.
18. Dua S, Bhardwaj A, Goyal M, Gupta RK, Goyal D. Preparation and evaluation of ghee residue fortified burfi. J Anim Feed Sci Technol. 2018; 5(1):102-110.
19. El-Hatmi H, Girardet JM, Gaillard JL, Yahyaoui MH, Attia H. Characterisation of whey proteins of camel (Camelus dromedarius) milk and colostrum. Small Rumin Res. 2007; 70(2-3):267-271.
20. Ercisli S, Agar G, Yildirim N, Esitken A, Sengul M. Physicochemical characteristics of some fig cultivars (Ficus carica L.) grown in Turkey. Sci Hortic. 2012; 138:55-61.
21. Gorachiya PR. Development and evaluation of naturally flavoured whey beverages from camel and buffalo milk [M.V.Sc. thesis]. Bikaner: RAJUVAS; 2017.
22. Goyal SK, Srinivasan RA. Role of Maillard reaction in flavour development in khoa products. Indian J Dairy Sci. 1989; 42:181-185.
23. IS 5402:1969. Methods for bacteriological examination of foods -General methods. New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards; 1969.
24. IS 5403:1969. Method for yeast and mould count of foodstuffs. New Delhi: Bureau of Indian Standards; 1969.
25. Kamble DK. Standardization of techniques for production of fig burfi [Ph.D. thesis]. Rahuri: M.P.K.V.; 2010.
26. Konuspayeva G, Faye B, Loiseau G. The composition of camel milk: a meta-analysis of the literature data. J Food Compos Anal. 2009; 22(2):95-101.
27. Kumar M. Up-gradation of khoa production and preservation technologies. Smriddhi J Phys Sci Eng Technol. 2013; 3:1-6.
28. Kumar A, Verma P, Kishor K, Tiwari S, Morya S, Srivastava N, et al. Studies on quality parameters of burfi prepared by blending pineapple pulp. Adv Agric. 2016; 1-7.
29. Lahankar PR. Utilization of green peas (Pisum sativum) in preparation of burfi [M.Sc. thesis]. Parbhani: VNMKV; 2017.
30. Magjeed NA. Corrective effect of milk camel on some cancer biomarkers in blood of rats intoxicated with aflatoxin B1. J Saudi Chem Soc. 2005;9(2):253-263.
31. Mawa S, Husain K, Jantan I. Ficus carica L. (Moraceae), phytochemistry, traditional uses and biological activities. Evid Based Complement Alternat Med. 2013. doi:10.1155/2013/974256.
32. Mete SN, Sadawarte SK. Effect of different levels of khajoor (Phoenix dactylifera L.) on quality characteristics of burfi. J Food Sci Technol. 2017;4(1):35-42.
33. Navale SA, Shirsat VG, Sontakke AT. Study on physico-chemical and sensory characteristics of wood apple burfi. J Dairying Foods Home Sci. 2014; 33(1):57-62.
34. O'Brien J. Heat-induced changes in lactose: isomerization, degradation, Maillard browning. In: Hudson BJF, editor. Food proteins and lipids. New York: Plenum Press; 1997.
35. Oliveira AP, Silva LR, Andrade PB, Valentao P, Lopes R, Ferreres F, et al. Volatile profiling of fig (Ficus carica L.) cultivars and food preparations by HSSPME/GC-MS. Food Chem. 2022;127(3):1393-1399.
36. Pal MA, Jadhav AD, Moghe P, Maniyar P. Evaluation of burfi prepared using bottle gourd and carrot with buffalo milk khoa. Int J Chem Stud. 2018;6(5):12191223.
37. Pereira C, Serrano M, Palmeira-de-Oliveira A, PaivaMartins F. Phenolic composition and antioxidant potential of fig (Ficus carica L.) fruit and leaves: current state of knowledge. Int J Mol Sci. 2017; 18:128.
38. Prajapat A. Development and quality evaluation of spices incorporated camel and goat milk paneer [M.V.Sc. thesis]. Bikaner: RAJUVAS; 2019.
39. Quideau S, Deffieux D, Douat-Casassus C, Pouységu L. Plant polyphenols: chemical properties, biological activities, and synthesis. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2011; 50(3):586-621.
40. Reddy CR. Process modification of production of khoa based sweets [Ph.D. thesis]. Kurukshetra: Kurukshetra University; 1985.
41. Sachdeva S, Rajorhia GS. Technology and characteristics of burfi manufactured at different solids levels. Indian J Dairy Sci. 1982; 35(2):107-113.
42. Salami M, Moosavi-Movahedi AA, Ehsani MR, Yousefi R, Haertlé T, Chobert JM, et al. Improvement of the antibacterial and antioxidant activities of camel and bovine whey proteins by limited proteolysis. J Agric Food Chem. 2009; 58(6):3297-3302.
43. Sarkar S, Sahadeva RC, Singh SK. Influence of preservatives on microbiological changes in cow milk burfi. Indian J Dairy Sci. 2002; 55(3):148-153.
44. Shrivas AA, Pinto SV, Patel SM, Balakrishnan S. Effect of storage on composition, physico-chemical, rheology, sensory and microbiological quality of Indian cookie Rava Burfi. J Appl Nat Sci. 2018; 10(1):88-97.
45. Singh J. Studies on the development and quality evaluation of camel and buffalo milk based khoa burfi blended with watermelon seeds [M.V.Sc. thesis]. Bikaner: RAJUVAS; 2020.
46. Slatnar A, Klancar U, Stampar F, Veberic R. Effect of drying of figs (Ficus carica L.) on the contents of sugars, organic acids and phenolic compounds. J Agric Food Chem. 2011; 59(21):11696-11702.
47. Snedecor GW, Cochran WG. Statistical methods. 8th ed. Iowa: Iowa State University Press; 1994.
48. Solomon A, Golubowicz S, Yablowicz Z, Grossman S, Bergman M, Gottlieb HE, et al. Antioxidant activities and anthocyanin content of fresh fruits of common fig (Ficus carica L.). J Agric Food Chem. 2006; 54(20):7717-7723.
49. Tak T. Studies on development and quality evaluation of camel and buffalo milk based yoghurt [M.V.Sc. thesis]. Bikaner: RAJUVAS; 2017.
50. Vaja BK. Preparation and quality evaluation of gulabjamun from sweet cream buttermilk khoa [M.V.Sc. thesis]. Anand: AAU; 2012.
51. Vasava BD, Parmar SC, Patel RS, Patel HG. Effect of storage on physico-chemical, sensory and microbiological quality of gluten-free gulabjamun. J Food Sci Technol. 2018; 55(6):2232-2241.
52. Veberic R, Jakopic J, Stampar F, Schmitzer V. European elderberry (Sambucus nigra L.) rich in sugars, organic acids, anthocyanins and selected polyphenols. Food Chem. 2008; 114(2):511-515.
53. WHO. Healthy diet. World Health Organization Fact Sheet [Internet]. 2023 [cited 2026 May 28]. Available from: WHO Healthy Diet Fact Sheet 55. 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(5):582-585.