Studies on chemical composition of natural juice and wine prepared from cashew apple (Anacardium occidentale L.) and lime (Citrus aurantifolia) blend

Introduction

Cashew is one of the important plantation crops cultivated extensively in tropical regions of India, particularly in the coastal belts of Maharashtra, Goa, Karnataka and Kerala. During 2024-25, India recorded about 11.9 lakh hectares area under cashew cultivation with production of nearly 8.0 lakh tonnes and productivity around 674-680 kg ha⁻¹ (Anon., 2025a) [4] . Similarly, lime and lemon are important citrus fruits cultivated widely in tropical and subtropical regions of India. During 2024-25, lime and lemon occupied approximately 3.4 lakh hectares area with production of about 37 lakh tonnes and productivity around 10.8 t ha⁻¹ in India (Anon., 2025b) [5] . In Konkan region, utilization of cashew apple for preparation of value-added products such as wine can help reduce post-harvest losses and enhance farmer's income. Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth has played a significant role in promoting cashew research, processing technologies and value addition of underutilized fruits in the Konkan region (Anon., 2021) [3] . Cashew apple is rich in vitamin C, sugars, minerals and antioxidant compounds, which makes it suitable for preparation of different value-added products such as juice, syrup, jam and wine. However, due to its highly perishable nature, about 80-90 percent of cashew apples are lost after harvesting because of poor storage facilities, rapid spoilage and lack of processing industries (Sivagurunathan et al., 2017) [20] . Lime is another important citrus fruit widely used for its refreshing flavour, acidity and nutritional value. It is a good source of vitamin C and organic acids.

Lime fruits also face considerable post-harvest losses (20-30%) during handling, transportation and storage due to moisture loss, microbial spoilage and rind damage (Anonymous, 2002) [2] . Therefore, utilization of lime in processed products can help in reducing these losses and improving its market value. Blending cashew apple juice with lime juice for wine preparation can improve the flavour, taste and overall acceptability of the beverage. Cashew apple provides natural sweetness and fruity flavour, while lime adds pleasant acidity and refreshing citrus aroma. The blended wine also contains important nutrients and antioxidants which may provide health benefits. Preparation of cashew apple and lime blended wine not only helps in utilization of underused fruits but also reduces post-harvest losses and creates opportunities for value addition and income generation for farmers.

Materials and Methods

The experiment entitled "Studies on wine from blended juice of cashew apple (Anacardium occidentale L.) and lime (Citrus aurantifolia)" was carried out in the year 2023-2024 at the Pomology Laboratory, Fruit Processing Unit of the College of Horticulture, Dapoli and the Fruit Beverage Research Centre of Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Ratnagiri. In this experiment, the must was prepared by blending cashew apple and lime natural juice as per treatments i.e., J 1: 100 percent cashew apple juice, J 2: 95 percent cashew apple juice + 5 percent lime juice, J 3: 90 percent cashew apple juice + 10 percent lime juice, J 4: 85 percent cashew apple juice + 15 percent lime juice, J 5: 80 percent cashew apple juice + 20 percent lime juice, J 6: 75 percent cashew apple juice + 25 percent lime juice and adjusting the T.S.S. to 16 0 Brix, 20 0 Brix and 24 0 Brix. The pH of the juice was kept natural. Total soluble solids ( 0 Brix) were determined with the help of Hand refractometer (Erma Japan, 0 to 32 o Brix) and value was corrected at 20 °C with the help of temperature correction chart (A.O.A.C., 1975) [6] . The pH of the wine was determined with the help of pH meter. (Model Systronics µ pH system 361). The reducing sugars (%), total sugars (%), titratable acidity (%), ascorbic acid (mg/100ml) were estimated as per the methods suggested by Ranganna (1997) [17] . The alcohol (%) content in cashew apple and lime blended wine was determined by the method as reported by Natu et al., (1986) [15] .

Results and Discussion 1. Chemical composition of cashew apple and lime natural juice

The data regarding chemical composition of cashew apple and lime natural juice is presented in Table 1. The table clearly shows that the juice of cashew apple had a T.S.S., reducing sugar and total sugar content of 12.30ºBrix, 8.76 percent and 10.29 percent, respectively. The titratable acidity was 0.21 percent and the pH was 3.90. Furthermore, 230.43 mg/100 ml of ascorbic acid were found in the cashew apple juice. In case of lime juice, the T.S.S., reducing sugar and total sugar content were 8.05 ºBrix, 1.32 percent and 1.91 percent, respectively. The titratable acidity was 6.22 percent and the pH was 1.71. In addition, the lime fruit juice recorded 44.33 mg/100 ml of ascorbic acid. Similar finding about chemical composition of cashew apple have been recorded by Kamble (2024) [12] while studying cashew apple and aonla blended wine. In case of lime, similar finding was reported by Kurbett et al. (2023) [14] while studying quality attributes and nutrient composition of acid lime varieties.

Chemical composition of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage 2.1 T.S.S. ( 0 Brix)

The data regarding changes in T.S.S. of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 2. The T.S.S. content decreased from '0' month (5.49 0 B) to 6 months (4.57 0 B) storage, irrespective of juice and T.S.S. levels. This decrease in T.S.S. during storage may be due to micro fermentation, which converts sugars into alcohol and sugars are major part of T.S.S. Similar finding was reported by Reddy et al. (2017) [18] in aonla and grape blended wine. In case of juice levels, T.S.S. content of wine was found to be decreased from J 1 (4.44 0 B) to J 4 (4.38 0 B) and further increased from J 4 (4.38 0 B) to J 6 (4.93 0 B), irrespective of T.S.S. levels at 6 months storage. The decrease in T.S.S. from J 1 to J 4 may be due to favourable conditions (pH around 3-3.5) available for fermentation decreased from J 1 to J 4 and increase in T.S.S. from J 4 to J 6 may be due to unfavourable conditions for fermentation (low pH and high acidity). Treatment J 4 recorded lowest T.S.S. due to better fermentation of must because of favourable pH (3.27) and acidity (0.92%) of must. The lowest T.S.S recorded by J 3 (4.38 0 B) was significantly superior over others. Similar finding was reported by Balogun et al. (2021) [7] in pineapple and carrot blended wine. In case of T.S.S. levels, T.S.S. content of wine increased with increase in T.S.S. levels from T 1 (3.53 0 B) to T 3 (5.76 0 B), irrespective of juice levels. This increase in T.S.S. may be the impact of T.S.S. levels where sugar was added in increasing trend to maintain T.S.S. to 16, 20 and 24 0 B as per treatments. The yeast utilise specific amount of sugar from different T.S.S. levels for conversion into alcohol and hence left over sugars showed increasing trend with increases in T.S.S. levels. Lowest T.S.S. recorded by treatment T 1 (3.53 0 B) was significantly superior over others. Similar finding was reported by Solanke (2024) [21] in mango wine. In case of interactions, at 6 months storage lowest T.S.S. was recorded by interaction J 4 T 1 (3.07 0 B) and it was at par with J 2 T 1 (3.40 0 B) and J 3 T 1 (3.27 0 B) and significantly superior over others. The highest T.S.S. was recorded by J 5 T 3 and J 6 T 3 (5.80 0 B).

The data regarding changes in reducing suagr of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 2. The reducing sugar content in wine decreased from '0' month (0.25%) to 6 months (0.21%), irrespective of juice and T.S.S. levels. This decrease in reducing sugars during storage may be due to conversion of reducing sugars into alcohol by micro fermentation. In case of juice levels, at 6 months of storage the reducing sugar content of wine was found to be increased from J 1 (0.18%) to J 3 (0.21%) and further decreased from J 3 (0.21%) to J 4 (0.20%). Again in treatment J 4 (0.20%) to J 6 (0.23%) reducing sugar increased during storage, irrespective of T.S.S. levels. The highest reducing sugar was recorded by treatment J 6 (0.23%) during 6 months storage. The lowest reducing sugar was recorded by treatment J 1 (0.21%) at '0' month and during 6 months (0.18%) storage. Similar finding was also reported by Galande (2023) [9] in jackfruit and kokum blended wine. In case of T.S.S. levels, from data of 6 months of storage it is seen that, the reducing sugar content increased with increase in T.S.S. levels from T 1 (0.14%) to T 3 (0.31%) during storage. This increase in reducing sugars may be the impact of adjustment of T.S.S level in must by addition of sugar at 16, 20 and 24 0 B. The yeast converts specific amount of reducing sugars from different T.S.S. levels into alcohol and hence the leftover reducing sugars showed increasing trend in wine as stated in T.S.S. The lowest reducing sugars was recorded by T 1 at '0' (0.16%) and at 6 months (0.14%) of storage and it was significantly superior over others. This may be the impact of low T.S.S level were must adjusted to 16 0 B. Flory et al. (2022) [8] reported similar finding in blood fruit and aonla blended wine. In case of interactions, at 6 months storage lowest reducing sugars were recorded by interaction J 2 T 1 (0.11%) and it was at par with J 1 T 1 (0.14%), J 3 T 1 (0.14%), J 4 T 1 (0.14%), J 5 T 1 (0.13%), J 5 T 2 (0.14%), J 6 T 1 (0.15%) and significantly superior over others. The highest reducing sugars during storage was recorded by interaction J 5 T 3 (0.39%).

The data regarding changes in total sugar of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 2. The total sugar content in wine decreased from '0' month (0.34%) to 6 months (0.28%), irrespective of juice and T.S.S. levels. Total sugar content in wine decreased during storage primarily because of micro fermentation as explain under reducing sugar. Similar result have been reported by the Kadge et al. (2021) [11] in Nagpur mandarin wine. In case of juice levels, at 6 months storage total sugar content of wine decrease from treatment J 1 (0.30%) to J 5 (0.26%), then increase in total sugars in treatment J 6 (0.31%), irrespective of T.S.S. levels. The lowest total sugars were recorded by treatment J 5 (0.26%) during 6 months of storage and it was at par with J 2 (0.27%), J 3 (0.27%) and J 4 (0.27%) and significantly superior over others. The lowest total sugars recorded by treatment J 5 due to congenial condition available for fermentation, which utilize sugar, and result into low total sugar content during storage. The highest total sugar content was recorded by treatment J 6 (0.31%) during 6 months of storage. Similar finding was reported by Galande (2023) [9] in jackfruit and kokum blended wine. In case of T.S.S. levels, from data of 6 months storage it is seen that, total sugar content of wine increased with increase in T.S.S. levels from T 1 (0.16%) to T 3 (0.44%), irrespective of juice levels. This increase in total sugar may be the impact of T.S.S. levels where sugar was added in increasing trend to maintain T.S.S. to 16, 20 and 24 0 B as per treatment. The total sugar content of wine showed same increasing trend as that of T.S.S. and reducing sugars. Reasons behind increase in total sugars are same as mentioned in T.S.S. and Reducing sugars. The lowest total sugars recorded by T 1 (0.16%) at 6 months storage and it was significantly superior over others. The results correspond with Pawar (2009) [16] who studied on sapota wine. In case of interactions at 6 months storage, lowest total sugars were recorded by interaction J 3 T 1 and J 5 T 1 (0.14%) and it was at par with J 1 T 1 (0.17%), J 2 T 1 (0.18%), J 4 T 1 (0.16%), J 5 T 2 (0.19%) and J 6 T 1 (0.17%) and significantly superior over others. The highest total sugars during storage was recorded by interaction J 1 T 3 (0.50%).

The data regarding changes in titatable acidity of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 3. The titratable acidity increased from '0' month (0.81%) to 6 months (0.86%), irrespective of juice and T.S.S. levels. This increase in titratable acidity may be the impact of post-fermentation, certain microbes can metabolize various compounds in wine and turn it into acids. This leads to increase in acidity of wine during aging. Increases in titratable acidity during storage was reported by Adiyaman et al. (2019) [1] in star fruit wine In case of juice levels, at 6 months storage titratable acidity was found to be increased from J 1 (0.27%) to J 6 (1.49%). This increase in titratable acidity may be the impact of lime juice percentage in blended juice which increased from J 1 (0.0%) to J 6 (25%). The highest titratable acidity recorded by treatment J 6 (1.49%) during storage, was significantly superior over others. Similar results were reported by Flory et al. (2022) [8] in blood fruit and aonla blended wine. The titratable acidity of wine decreased with increase in T.S.S levels from T 1 (0.93%) to T 3 (0.81%). In general, decrease in acidity with increase in T.S.S. levels may be due to dilution of native acids with addition of sugars in increasing trend to maintain T.S.S levels. The highest titratable acidity recorded by T 1 (0.93%) at 6 months storage, was significantly superior over others. Similar finding was also reported by Kamble (2024) [12] in a study on cashew apple and aonla blended wine. In case of interactions at 6 months storage, highest titratable acidity was recorded by interaction J 6 T 1 (1.59%) and significantly superior over others. The lowest titratable acidity during storage was recorded by interaction J 1 T 3 (0.25%).

pH

The data regarding changes in pH of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 3. The pH decreased from '0' month (2.44) to 6 months (2.40), irrespective of juice and T.S.S. levels. This decrease in pH during storage could be due to production of acids during fermentation and acids are inversely proportional to pH. Decrease in pH of wine during storage was reported by Kamble (2024) [12] in cashew apple and aonla blended wine.. In case of juice levels, at 6 months storage pH of wine was decreased from J 1 (3.21) to J 6 (1.88), irrespective of T.S.S. levels. This decrease in pH may be due to increase in lime juice percentage from J 1 (0.0%) to J 6 (25%). The lowest pH recorded by treatment J 6 (1.88) was significantly superior over others. The decrease in pH with increase in lime juice percentage may be due to increase in acidity of wine, as acids are inversely proportional to pH. Decrease in pH with increase in acidity was also reported by Kiribhaga et al. (2021) [13] in banana wine. In case of T.S.S. levels, from pooled data of 6 months storage it is seen that, pH of wine increased from T 1 (2.37) to T 3 (2.46), irrespective of juice levels. The lowest pH recorded by T 1 (2.37) during 6 months storage was significantly superior over others. It was observed that the pH of cashew apple and lime blended wine increased with increase in T.S.S. levels. The highest pH was recorded by treatment T 3 (2.46) during 6 months of storage. Increase in pH with increase in T.S.S. levels may be due to dilution of native acids in increasing trend with increase in T.S.S. levels. Lower the acids more will be the pH. Solanke (2024) [21] reported similar finding in mango wine. In case of interactions at 6 months storage, lowest pH was recorded by interaction J 6 T 1 and J 6 T 2 (1.85) and significantly superior over others. The highest pH during storage was recorded by interaction J 1 T 3 (3.23).

The data regarding changes in ascorbic acid of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 3. The ascorbic acid decreased from '0' month (192.39 mg/100ml) to 6 months (185.78 mg/100ml). This decrease in ascorbic acid during storage may be due to oxidation of ascorbic acid by enzyme ascorbic acid oxidase as reported by Kadge et al. (2021) [11] while studying on effect of sugar sources and blended must on physico chemical and sensory evaluation of Nagpur mandarin wine In case of juice levels, at 6 months storage ascorbic acid content of wine decreased from J 1 (203.56 mg/100ml) to J 6 (164.16 mg/100ml), irrespective of T.S.S levels. Decrease in ascorbic acid from J 1 to J 6 may be due to in decrease in cashew apple juice percentage from J 1 to J 6 with increase in lime juice percentage. In case of juice levels, significantly highest ascorbic acid was reported by treatment J 1 (203.56 mg/100g) during 6 months storage. Lowest ascorbic acid was reported by treatment J 6 (164.16 mg/100ml) during 6 months storage. The present findings are in conformity with the findings of Gnoumou et al. (2022) [10] in cashew apple and papaya blended wine. In case of T.S.S. levels, from data of 6 months storage it is seen that, the ascorbic acid was found to be decreased with increase in T.S.S. levels from T 1 (188.95 mg/100 ml) to T 3 (182.56 mg/100 ml), irrespective of juice levels. Decrease in ascorbic acid with increase in T.S.S. levels may be due to addition of sugar in juice in an increasing amount to maintain different T.S.S. levels, which diluted parental ascorbic acid content of wine. The highest ascorbic acid recorded by T 1 (188.95 mg/100g) at 6 months storage was significantly superior over others. Similar finding was also reported by Sapkal (2010) [19] in mango wine. In case of interactions at 6 months storage highest ascorbic acid recorded by interaction J 1 T 1 (209.00 mg/100ml) and it was significantly superior over others. The lowest ascorbic acid during storage was recorded by J 6 T 3 (156.33 mg/100 ml).

The data regarding changes in alcohol content of cashew apple and lime blended wine during storage is presented in Table 4. The alcohol content increased from '0' month (10.51%) to 6 months (10.83%). This slightly increase in alcohol content of wine during storage may be due to micro fermentation, which leads to conversion sugars into alcohol. Similar finding was reported by Kamble (2024) [12] in cashew apple and aonla blended wine. In case of juice levels, at 6 months storage alcohol content was found to be increased with increase in juice levels from J 1 (10.62%) to J 5 (11.11%) and slightly decreased in J 6 (10.46%), irrespective of T.S.S. levels. Maximum alcohol content was recorded by treatment J 5 (11.11%) at 6 months of storage. Lowest alcohol content was recorded by treatment J 6 (10.46%) at 6 months storage. This may be due to it contain high lime juice (25%) compare to other treatments, which increases acidity and inhibits yeast activity of converting sugars into alcohol. Similar finding was reported by Pawar (2009) [16] in sapota and mango blended wine. In case of T.S.S. levels, from data of 6 months storage it is seen that, alcohol content was found to be increased with increase in T.S.S. levels from T 1 (10.51%) to T 3 (11.21%), irrespective of juice levels. This increase in alcohol content may be due to increase in T.S.S. levels of must by addition of sugars. Sugars are the main constituent of T.S.S, which were converted to alcohol by the action of yeast. Yeast produces pyruvic decarboxylase and alcohol dehydrogenase enzymes and these enzyme converts reducing sugars to ethanol. The highest alcohol content recorded by T 3 (11.21%) at 6 months storage was significantly superior over others. Increase in alcohol with increase in T.S.S. levels were also reported by Sapkal (2010) [19] in mango wine. In case of interactions at 6 months storage highest alcohol content was recorded by interaction J 5 T 3 (11.84%) and it was significantly superior over others. The lowest alcohol content during storage was recorded by J 1 T 1 (10.25%).

References

1. Adiyaman P, Kanchana S, Hemlatha G, Gopal NO. Influence of aging on nutrient retention and organoleptic characteristics of wine developed from star fruit (Averrhoa carambola L.). Emergent Life Sci Res. 2019; 5(2):17-27.
2. Anonymous. First advance estimates of horticultural crops 2024-25. Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of India; c2025b.
3. Balgoun MA, Abunni OA, Kolawole FL, Monday RMO. Physiochemical and sensory properties of blended pineapple-carrot wine. J Microbiol Biotechnol Food Sci. 2021:306-311.
4. Flory HR, Chaurasiya AK. Studies on influence of maturation on the nutrient retention and sensory evaluation of fermented beverages developed from blood fruit (Haemetocarpus validus) and aonla (Emblica officinalis). Crop Res. 2022;57(5-6):368-374.
5. Gnoumou JK, Soro D, Gnagne BG, Koffi EK. Study of the stability during aging of mixed cashew and papaya wine produced with palm wine sediment. Food Nutr Sci. 2022;13(2):181-194.
6. Kadge NR, Patil SR, Sonkamble AM. Studies on the effect of sugar sources and blended must on physico chemical and sensory evaluation of Nagpur mandarin wine. J Pharmacogn Phytochem. 2021;10(1):27062710.
7. Kamble, A. 2024. Studies on cashew apple (Anacardium occidentale L.) and aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) blended wine. M.Sc. (Hort.) Thesis (Unpublished) submitted to Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli, Dist. Ratnagiri, Maharashtra.
8. Kiribagha S, Gomez S, Josef M, Gopal S, Seeja TP. Biochemical changes of banana wine during storage. Int J Chem Stud. 2021;8(1):199-203.
9. Kurbett RF, Kashibai Khyadagi. Quality attributes and nutrient composition of acid lime varieties. Pharma Innov J. 2023;12(11):384-388.
10. Natu RB, Sawant AD, Jadhav SJ. Spectrophotometric assay of ethanol in fermented molasses and sugarcane juice. Bhartiya Sugar. 1986;11(6):41-43.
11. Reddy MC, Sreenivas KN, Manjula GS, Karan M, Ullah TH. Aonla (Emblica officinalis Gaertn.) based fermented beverages. Int J Curr Microbiol App Sci. 2017;6(10):4740-4749.
12. Sivagurunathan P, Sivasankari S, Muthukkaruppan SM. Post-harvest processing technology for cashew apple-A review. J Food Eng. 2017;194:87-98.