Next Article in Journal
Alterations in Biochemical Characteristics, Flavor, and Microbial Community During the Storage of Suancai
Previous Article in Journal
4-Vinylguaiacol in Citri Reticulatae ‘Chachiensis’ Pericarpium Volatile Oil: A Microbial-Mediated Aging Marker Enhances Glucose Metabolism
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 14
Issue 20
10.3390/foods14203491
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Physicochemical, Sensory, and Functional Properties of Yogurt Containing Millet and Milk

by
Hui Wang
1,†,
Yingyu Zhang
2,†,
Yuxuan Han
2,
Jiaxin Hou
1,
Yingjun Zuo
1,
Yan Li
1,* and
Hua Wu
2,*
1
Beijing Engineering and Technology Research Centre of Food Additives, School of Food and Health, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China
2
School of Light Industry Science and Engineering, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Foods 2025, 14(20), 3491; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14203491
Submission received: 11 April 2025 / Revised: 7 May 2025 / Accepted: 9 May 2025 / Published: 14 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Nutraceuticals, Functional Foods, and Novel Foods)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

With growing consumer demand for functional dairy products, developing yogurts enriched with natural bioactive ingredients has become a research focus. Millet, a traditional cereal rich in polyphenols and dietary fiber, remains understudied in fermented dairy applications. This study evaluated the physicochemical properties, sensory quality, and functional activities of yogurt co-fermented with millet. Millet liquid, pre-treated through gelatinization and α-amylase liquefaction, was co-fermented with milk at addition ratios of 40% and 60% (w/w). The results indicated that millet liquid increased Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. Bulgaricus viability (8.55–8.58 log CFU/g vs. 8.26 log CFU/g in the control), improved viscosity (up to 1.0–1.6-fold higher than the control), enhanced texture properties (51–65-fold increase in springiness, 4.3–4.6-fold higher chewiness), and reduced syneresis (18.6–49.2% lower than the control). Sensory evaluation revealed superior flavor and sweetness in millet-enriched yogurt, achieving significantly higher scores than plain yogurt (p < 0.05). Functionally, the 60% millet yogurt showed 77.8% and 84.3% higher DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging capacities, respectively. Additionally, it suppressed DSS-induced inflammatory cytokine secretion in Caco-2 cells (27.2–69.7% inhibition of TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β). The improved antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activities may be attributed to polyphenol release from millet. This work highlights the potential of millet–milk co-fermentation for developing yogurts with enhanced texture, sensory appeal, and bioactive properties.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

The growing consumer demand for functional dairy products has resulted in the development of various innovative yogurt products with specific functionalities. These include the incorporation of natural functional ingredients rich in phenolic compounds, flavonoids, and anthocyanins to enhance the antioxidant, antidiabetic, anti-obesity, anti-inflammatory, antibacterial, and anticancer properties of yogurt [1,2,3,4,5].
Cereals are rich in dietary fiber and are essential in daily nutritional regimes. In recent years, an increasing number of cereal products rich in phenolic compounds and dietary fiber have been added to dairy products to improve their functionality. Several studies have found that adding wheat and rice bran to yogurt increased the probiotic count, likely attributable to the starchy, nitrogenous properties of these brans, as well as the presence of structural polysaccharides, such as β-glucan, with prebiotic characteristics [6,7,8]. Studies showed that supplementing yogurt with dietary fiber extracted from cereals, such as β-glucan, improved its texture and sensory qualities. This was attributed to the interaction between β-glucan and casein, which enhanced the protein network structure [9,10]. In addition, phenolic-rich cereals, such as rice and Tartary buckwheat, enhanced the antioxidant activity of yogurt and attenuated H2O2-induced cytotoxicity [11,12].
However, the potential of millet, a traditional cereal in many countries, such as China, India, and Afghanistan, for use in fermented dairy products remains underdeveloped [13]. Millet offers an abundance of nutritional components, including protein, starch, fats, vitamins, minerals, and a high crude fiber content [14], as well as phytochemicals, such as phenolics and carotenoids. Millet contains several crucial phenolic compounds, including a variety of phenolic acids and flavonoids with notable antioxidant capacity [15]. Millet consumption offers numerous health benefits, including a reduced risk of multiple chronic diseases, such as abnormal cholesterol metabolism, hypertension, and type 2 diabetes [16,17]. Many studies have shown that millet flour can be used as an ingredient in baked products, such as cakes and cookies, as well as a binding agent in meat products, including sausages, meatballs, and chicken patties [18,19,20,21,22].
Existing studies on grain-fortified yogurt have focused on texture improvement and probiotic activity enhancement. Based on this, this study innovatively introduced α-amylase and glucoamylase into the millet-supplemented yogurt fermentation system to optimize the glucose supply by degrading starch to promote LAB metabolism. This strategy naturally enhances the sweetness of the product
In this study, yogurt was prepared by co-fermentation of α-amylase-liquefied millet liquid (40% and 60% w/w) with milk. Furthermore, the physicochemical properties, lactic acid bacterial counts, sensory characteristics, and in vitro antioxidant activity of the millet yogurt were investigated. Cell-based in vitro models were employed to assess the effect of millet yogurt on DSS-induced inflammatory factor expression. The results of this study provide a theoretical basis and technical reference for the development of new yogurt with both nutritional and functional properties.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Whole milk powder was purchased from Fonterra Commercial Trading Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China), which was made from the milk of Holstein cows. Jingu 21 millet was obtained from Jinzhong Fengyuan Planting Professional Cooperative (Jinzhong, Shanxi, China). Jingu 21 is a high-yielding foxtail millet cultivar developed by the Shanxi Academy of Agricultural Sciences, China. In its name, “Jin” refers to Shanxi Province (abbreviated as “Jin” in Chinese) and “No. 21” denotes the breeding sequence of the variety. Food-grade α-amylase and glucoamylase were supplied by XiaSheng Biotechnology Development Co., Ltd. (Beijing, China). Yogurt starter culture YC-381, containing Streptococcus thermophilus and Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, was obtained from Chr. Hansen (Hoersholm, Denmark). Maltodextrin (food grade) was purchased from Samyang Genex (Gwangju, Republic of Korea).

2.2. Preparation of the Millet Liquid

The millet was crushed using a multi-functional pulverizer (FT-3200B, Fangtai Electric Co., Dongguan, China) and sieved through an 80-mesh stainless steel sieve (pore size: 0.177 mm, Zhentai Machinery, Xinxiang, China) to obtain millet flour. Subsequently, based on pre-optimization experiments, millet flour was mixed with distilled water at a ratio of 1:3 and soaked at 50 °C for 30 min. After gelatinization at 90 °C for 60 min, α-amylase (0.3 g/kg of millet flour) was added, and the mixture was treated at 80 °C for 90 min according to the amylase instruction manual (liquefaction stage), after which it was filtered through a 200-mesh sieve to obtain the millet flour liquid (MFL).
The millet was mixed with distilled water at a ratio of 1:3, pulped using a blender (L18-Y928S, Joyoung Bean Products Co., Ltd., Hangzhou, China), and soaked for 30 min at 50 °C. After gelatinization at 90 °C for 60 min, α-amylase (0.3 g/kg of millet) was added, and the mixture was treated at 80 °C for 90 min, filtered through an 80-mesh sieve, and then passed through a 200-mesh sieve to obtain the millet pulp liquid (MPL).

2.3. Yogurt Production

Table 1 shows the individual yogurt sample formulations. The whole milk powder was compounded in distilled water with the MFL, the MPL (40% and 60%), and maltodextrin, after which each sample was preheated to 60 °C and homogenized at 20 MPa. The mixtures were heated at 95 °C for 5 min, cooled to 40–42 °C, and inoculated with glucoamylase and a starter culture. The inoculated milk was fermented in a thermostatic incubator (LRH-250F, Shanghai Yiheng Scientific Instrument Co., Shanghai, China) at 42 °C ± 0.5 °C until reaching a pH value of 4.6. The yogurt was rapidly cooled in an ice-water bath, stirred, and cooled at 4 °C for 12 h. The yogurt samples were stored at 4 ± 1 °C for further analysis.

2.4. Physicochemical Determinations

2.4.1. Basic Composition

The total solid content of millet liquid was determined according to the AOAC method. Samples were placed in a forced-air drying oven (Model: DHG-9070A, Shanghai Yiheng Scientific Instrument Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China) and dried at 105 °C ± 1 °C for 24 ± 2 h until reaching constant weight [23]. The protein level was measured using the Kjeldahl method with a conversion factor of 5.83 for millet [24]. The soluble solids in the millet liquid were determined using a refractometer (MASTER-M, Atago, Tokyo, Japan).

2.4.2. pH and Titratable Acidity (TA)

The pH values of the yogurt samples were measured using a glass electrode pH meter (FE20, Mettler Toledo, Zurich, Switzerland), while the TA (%) was determined according to the GB 5009.239-2016 Chinese national standard [25].

2.4.3. Determination of Syneresis

Syneresis was assessed using a previously described method [26]. Here, 25 g of yogurt was centrifuged at 2900× g and 4 °C for 15 min, after which the supernatants (whey) were weighed. Syneresis was calculated using the following equation:
Syneresis   % = Weight   of   whey   ( g ) Weight   of   yogurt   ( g ) × 100

2.4.4. Textural Analysis

The texture of the yogurt was assessed using a previously described method with some modifications [27]. A 60 mL yogurt sample was placed in a 100 mL plastic container and used to assess the yogurt texture via a texture analyzer (TMS-Pro, Food Technology Corporation, Rockland, MA, USA) equipped with a 38.1 mm diameter cylindrical probe. The testing parameters included a contact force of 0.5 N, an instrument speed of 1 mm/s, a deformation percentage of 50%, and a recovery distance of 50 mm. The hardness, cohesiveness, springiness, gumminess, and chewiness of the yogurt were determined by measuring the maximum force during sample compression.

2.4.5. Determination of Viscosity

A viscometer (RVDV-II Pro, Brookfield, NY, USA) was employed to determine the viscosity at 25 °C for 60 s at 5 rpm using 63 spindles. The viscosity reading was expressed in centipoises (cP).

2.5. Enumeration of the Starter Cultures

Serial dilution and spread plating techniques were employed to determine the microbial viability in the yogurt, which was expressed as CFU/g. Enumeration was performed using MRS agar for L. bulgaricus and M17 agar for S. thermophilus. S. thermophilus was incubated for 72 h at 37 °C in aerobic conditions, while the same parameters were used for L. bulgaricus incubation in anaerobic conditions [28].

2.6. Free Phenolic Content (FPC) and Antioxidant Properties

2.6.1. Preparation of the Yogurt Extracts

The MFL, MPL, and yogurt samples were extracted using a methanol–acetonitrile solution (1:1), with a sample-to-extraction solution volume ratio of 1:4 and an ultrasonic extraction time of 10 min. The samples were frozen in a refrigerator for 1 h at −20 °C and centrifuged at 2860× g for 10 min, after which the supernatant was collected. The extracts were stored at −20 °C until analysis.

2.6.2. Determination of the FPC

The Folin–Ciocalteu method was employed to measure the FPC, and a calibration curve was established using gallic acid as a reference substance to determine polyphenols [29]. Briefly, 0.5 mL of the yogurt extract was mixed with 2.5 mL of Folin–Ciocalteu solution (0.2 mol/L) and incubated in the dark for 5 min at room temperature. Next, 2.0 mL of a 7.5% sodium carbonate solution was added, mixed well, and left to stand in the dark at room temperature for 1 h. The results were expressed as milligrams of GAE per 100 g of yogurt (mg GAE/100 g).

2.6.3. DPPH Radical Scavenging Ability

The DPPH radical scavenging ability was determined using a previously described method with slight modifications [30]. Here, 100 μL of the yogurt extract was mixed with 100 μL of a DPPH solution (0.2 mM, 95% methanol) and incubated in the dark for 30 min at 37 °C. The absorbance was measured at 517 nm, and the DPPH radical scavenging was calculated as follows:
Scavenging   rate   % = ( 1   − A sample A control ) × 100
where Asample is the absorbance of the yogurt extract and Acontrol is the absorbance of the methanol–acetonitrile solution at a 1:1 volume ratio.

2.6.4. ABTS Radical Scavenging Ability

The ABTS free radical scavenging ability of the yogurt samples was determined using a modified method described by Zhongxiang et al. [31]. First, 88.0 μL of a 140 mM potassium persulfate solution was added to 5.0 mL of a 7 mM ABTS solution and left to stand in the dark for 12–16 h at room temperature to obtain the ABTS radical stock solution. The ABTS radical stock solution was diluted with 70% ethanol so that the absorbance of the diluted ABTS radical stock solution at 734 nm was 0.6–0.7, which was set aside. Then, 3.9 mL of the diluted ABTS radical stock solution with an absorbance of 0.6–0.7 was added to 0.1 mL of the sample solution, mixed well, and reacted in the dark for 6 min at room temperature, after which the absorbance (Asample) was measured at 734 nm. Next, 0.1 mL of a methanol–acetonitrile solution at a volume ratio of 1:1 was added to 3.9 mL of the diluted ABTS radical stock solution with an absorbance of 0.6–0.7. The absorbance (Acontrol) was measured at 734 nm. The ABTS radical scavenging rate was calculated using the following formula:
Scavenging   rate   % = ( 1   − A sample A control ) × 100

2.7. Anti-Inflammatory Activity

2.7.1. Preparation of the Yogurt Supernatants

A 10 g yogurt sample was centrifuged at 4330× g for 5 min at 4 °C to prepare the yogurt supernatant. Then, the supernatants were re-centrifuged in the same conditions and stored at −80 °C until use [32].

2.7.2. Cell Culture

Human epithelial Caco-2 cells (Shanghai Fuheng Biotechnology Co., Ltd., Shanghai, China) were cultivated in Roswell Park Memorial Institute (RPMI)-1640 medium (EallBio, Beijing, China) supplemented with 15% fetal bovine serum (FBS) (Fuheng Biotechnology, Shanghai) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin (EallBio, Beijing, China) and incubated at 37 °C in a humidified chamber with 5% CO2. The cells were passaged when they reached 80% confluence.

2.7.3. Real-Time RT-PCR

Caco-2 cells (3 × 106/mL) were inoculated into the cell culture dishes for 24 h until reaching about 60–70% confluence. To induce inflammation, the Caco-2 cells were incubated for 24 h with 2% DSS in FBS-free medium. To study the effect of the millet yogurts, the cells were subsequently treated with yogurt supernatant (100 μL/mL) in FBS-free medium.
Total RNA was extracted using an RNA extraction kit (TransGen Biotech, Beijing, China) according to the instructions. A spectrophotometer was employed to determine the quality and quantity of the total RNA at an absorbance of A260/A280 nm. The cDNA (complementary DNA) was synthesized from the isolated RNA using a reverse transcription kit (Beyotime, Shanghai, China) and detected using a SYBR Green Master Mix (Toyobo, Shanghai) to determine the TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β gene expression via real-time PCR, which used β-actin as an internal reference. The target gene expression was calculated via β-actin normalization using the delta–delta Ct method [33]. The specific primer sequences used are shown in the Supplementary Table S1.

2.8. Sensory Evaluation

The sensory evaluation of the yogurt was performed using a method delineated by Li et al. [34], with some modifications. The sensory characteristics of the samples were assessed by 10 trained panelists from the School of Food and Health at Beijing Technology and Business University, who were familiar with yogurt. The panelists consisted of five males and five females aged between 18 and 30 years, with an average age of 24 years. The reviewers successively evaluated six randomly numbered yogurt samples, assessing their appearance, taste, and flavor. Definitions were established for the sensory evaluation terms and scoring criteria. A 10-point intensity scoring system (weak: 0–2, moderate: 3–6, and strong: 7–10) was adopted for each term, as detailed in Table 2. The results were presented in radar charts.

2.9. Statistical Analysis

All analyses were repeated three times, and the results were recorded as mean values ± SDs. Significance was determined via one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Duncan’s multiple range tests with a 95% confidence level (p < 0.05). SPSS 17.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) was used to compare the differences among the values at this significance level.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Characteristics of the Millet Liquid

Table 3 shows the basic nutrient components in the MFL and MPL. The crude fiber was eliminated from the millet during milling, while it was present during pulping and removed during filtration. Therefore, the concentration of the solids and the FPC in the MPL were lower than in the MFL for the same percentage of water added. Previous experiments showed that the soluble solids in the millet increased from 5% to 18.23% after liquefaction by α-amylase. Starch is the primary constituent of millet. Using amylase for gelatinized starch degradation can effectively enhance millet fluidity, promoting its application. Liu et al. found that using heat-resistant α-amylase for steaming at a temperature of 121 °C effectively degraded starch in rice bran via gelatinization and liquefaction [35].

3.2. Fermentation Characteristics of the Yogurt

Table 4 shows the fermentation characteristics of the yogurt. A pH of 4.6, which corresponds to the isoelectric point of casein, is crucial in regulating the fermentation endpoint of yogurt, while TA is an important indicator of acid production by lactic acid bacteria during fermentation. The TA of SLY and MCY was significantly higher than that of CY when the pH of the fermentation endpoint was controlled at the same level (p < 0.05), while the TA of MFY60 and MPY60 exceeded that of MCY (p < 0.05). This was mainly ascribed to higher levels of solids and proteins in the samples, which improved the buffering capacity, necessitating a higher amount of acid to achieve the same pH in the yogurt [36]. Ye et al. demonstrated that with the addition of Tartary buckwheat, the solids content increased and the yogurt titratable acidity increased significantly [11]. The elevated TA of MFY and MPY compared to MCY was attributable to the higher millet protein levels in the former, which enhanced the buffering capacity.
SLY and MCY reached higher acidity levels more rapidly than CY, suggesting faster acid production in the former. This may be related to the presence of glucose since the glucoamylase introduced during fermentation promotes the hydrolysis of small-molecule dextrins and maltodextrins in SLY and MCY, resulting in glucose release. The ability of Lactobacilli to utilize monosaccharides more efficiently than disaccharides accelerated acid production [37]. In addition, plant polyphenols may enhance lactic acid bacterial growth and acid production. Kwon [38] and Jeong et al. [39] found that adding chia seed extract or green tea reduced the yogurt fermentation time, suggesting that polyphenols were primarily responsible for this effect.
The L. bulgaricus abundance was significantly higher in SLY than in CLY (p < 0.05), while no differences were evident in the S. thermophilus content (p > 0.05), suggesting the presence of components in the millet liquid that specifically promoted L. bulgaricus growth. Although many studies have reported that various plant-derived components promote the growth of lactic acid bacteria, the effect varies depending on the plant and the lactic acid bacterial species. Mohamed Ahmed et al. demonstrated that supplementing yogurt with argel leaf extract (ALE) promoted the proliferation of L. bulgaricus and S. thermophilus, possibly due to the presence of phenolic compounds in the ALE [40]. Ye et al. also found that the addition of Tartary buckwheat to yogurt promoted the growth of L. bulgaricus and S. thermophilus [11]. However, other studies indicated that incorporating anthocyanin-rich rice or grape pomace and concentrated strawberry pulp into yogurt did not significantly influence lactic acid bacterial growth [12,41,42].

3.3. Textural Properties

The structural characteristics of the yogurt were primarily defined according to apparent viscosity, syneresis, and textural properties, such as springiness and hardness, which directly affected product quality. The stability of the yogurt curd was influenced by several factors, such as protein and total solids content, homogenization process, storage conditions, microbial activity, and acidity [26]. Figure 1 shows the apparent viscosity and syneresis of the yogurt. The apparent viscosity of SLY and MCY was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than CY, while the syneresis was substantially lower (p < 0.05), possibly due to the increase in the total solids content. The apparent viscosity of MFY60 and MPY60 displayed a significant increase (p < 0.05) while the syneresis was significantly decreased (p < 0.05) compared to MCY with the same solids content, possibly due to the presence of polyphenols and dietary fibers in the millet liquid, which yielded a stronger gel network structure. Mohamed Ahmed et al. indicated that incorporating ALE enhanced the viscosity of yogurt and reduced syneresis, likely attributable to the interaction between proteins and polyphenols. This facilitated the development of stronger three-dimensional networks and viscous gels that could retain larger amounts of whey [40]. In addition, Ramandeep [9] and Qu et al. [10] demonstrated that adding soluble dietary fiber improved yogurt viscosity and syneresis. Since the soluble dietary fiber exhibited a significant water-holding capacity, its interaction with casein resulted in highly viscous yogurt that effectively retained water and prevented whey precipitation.
Table 5 shows the effect of the millet liquid on the textural properties of the yogurt. The results showed that SLY displayed significantly more springiness and chewiness (p < 0.05) than CLY, while no statistical differences (p > 0.05) were evident in the hardness and cohesiveness. Mohamed Ahmed et al. found that the addition of ALE significantly increased the springiness of yogurt and attributed this to the interaction between the phenolic compounds in the ALE and the yogurt proteins [40]. Rose Mary reported that yogurt fortified with dietary fiber yielded higher springiness values [43]. Therefore, the improved textural properties of the yogurt, such as springiness and chewiness, may be attributed to the interaction of phenolic compounds and dietary fiber with the casein in the millet liquid, resulting in the formation of a more stable gel network structure. Polyphenols have reactive hydroxyl and carboxylic acid groups that bind to casein through non-covalent interactions (e.g., hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonding). In particular, the hydrophobic portion of polyphenols binds to the hydrophobic regions of casein and promotes cross-linking of the protein to form a denser gel network. In addition, the hydroxyl groups of polyphenols form hydrogen bonds with the polar groups (e.g., amino and carboxyl groups) of casein to enhance network strength [44]. Dietary fibers (e.g., soluble arabinoxylan) have strong water retention properties and form weak interactions (e.g., hydrophobic interactions) with casein to influence the gel network structure [9]. Thus, polyphenols and fibers directly optimize the cross-linking density and water-holding properties of the casein network through the above mechanisms, resulting in selective improvement in springiness and chewability. Studies have shown that the protein matrix in flaxseed represents the primary factor in enhancing the cohesiveness of yogurt [45]. However, the protein content of the millet liquid in the present study was insufficient to influence cohesiveness.

3.4. Sensory Analysis

Figure 2 shows the sensory evaluation results of the yogurt. In terms of taste, MCY and SLY scored significantly higher in thickness and sweet and sour taste compared to CY (p < 0.05). The enhancement in yogurt thickness with the addition of maltodextrin or millet liquid was consistent with the significant increase in apparent viscosity, which was associated with an increase in the solids content. Previous research showed that adding oat fiber improved the taste of unsweetened yogurt, with the proposed mechanism involving a higher total solids content [46]. During fermentation, the millet liquid or maltodextrin released glucose in the presence of glucoamylase, which increased the sweetness of the yogurt and improved its taste. In terms of flavor, there was no significant difference in the scores for the milk flavor of the yogurt with millet liquid compared to the control samples, but the scores for millet aroma were significantly higher. These results suggest that millet contributes a distinctive flavor profile to yogurt while maintaining the inherent milk flavor, indicating potential for improved consumer appeal. Differences in yogurt aroma are related to the formation of volatile compounds. The main volatile compounds in fermented millet beverages include benzene derivatives, hexadecanoic acid, acetic acid, sitosterol, and octadecanoic acid [47]. The formation of desirable flavors in yogurts containing cereal and milk may be related to the presence of phenolic compounds and the volatile phenolics they produce [29,48]. No significant differences were evident between the scores of the yogurt groups in terms of appearance (p > 0.05). The addition of millet liquid did not affect the color scores of the yogurt since the liquid was light beige and closely resembled the color of milk.

3.5. The FPC and Antioxidant Activity in the Yogurt

The in vitro antioxidant activity of the millet yogurt was assessed by examining the DPPH and ABTS radical scavenging capacity (Figure 3a). Compared with the CLY group, the yogurt samples with millet liquid exhibited a higher DPPH radical scavenging ability, with the MFY group surpassing the MPY group. Only the yogurt containing 60% millet liquid exhibited enhanced ABTS radical scavenging ability, with no discernible difference between the MPY and MFY groups. This suggests that the increased antioxidant capacity of blended millet yogurt depends on the quantity of added millet and the treatment applied and that it is related to the FPC. The FPC of the MY group exceeded that of the CLY group, with MY60 displaying a 40% higher level than the CLY group (Figure 3b). The elevated antioxidant activity of MFY compared to MPY may also be attributed to its superior FPC, despite the lack of substantial statistical differences. Demirci et al. investigated the effect of tomato powder on yogurt. They found that with an increase in the tomato powder content, the results of DPPH/ABTS radical scavenging ability tests were positively correlated with the FPC concentration [49]. The increased antioxidant activity of the yogurt could also be related to other antioxidants in the millet, such as carotenoids, α-tocopherol, minerals, and several polysaccharides [15,50]. These findings indicated that adding millet liquid to the yogurt enhanced the bioactive properties and antioxidant activity, consequently improving the potential health benefits.
The MFY60 and MPY60 displayed FPC levels of 46.58 mg GAE and 42.01 mg GAE, respectively (Figure 3b), both of which were lower the sum of the FPC in the 60% millet liquids (26.78 mg GAE and 24.42 mg GAE) and the CY (28.85 mg GAE). Also the results revealed that the FPC before and after fermentation was 46.71 mg GAE and 35.20 mg GAE in MFY40 and 45.13 mg GAE and 32.22 mg GAE in MPY40. Thus, the results suggest that fermentation may contribute to the conversion of free phenols to bound phenols in millet liquid. It is hypothesized that this may be related to some aggregation of milk proteins with free phenols from the millet liquid during fer-mentation.

3.6. Anti-Inflammatory Activity of the Millet Yogurt

Studies have shown that a variety of polyphenol-rich plant-derived extracts and phenolic compounds mitigate inflammation [51]. Therefore, the anti-inflammatory activity of MFY60 and MPY60 was further assessed by examining the effect of the yogurt supernatant on DSS-induced inflammatory factor expression in Caco-2 cells. The results (Figure 4) showed that 2% DSS treatment significantly increased the mRNA expression levels of TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 compared to the blank control (p < 0.05), which was substantially inhibited by the addition of all three yogurt supernatant samples (p < 0.05). The incorporation of MFY60 and MPY60 markedly downregulated TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β expression compared to MCY (p < 0.05). The addition of MFY60 yielded the most significant alleviation effect, almost reaching the level of the blank group. Elevated TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-1β levels are closely associated with various inflammatory and autoimmune diseases [52]. The addition of millet may mitigate the impact of colitis by inhibiting inflammatory cytokine expression. A recent study demonstrated that millet-derived polyphenols alleviate DSS-induced colitis through dual mechanisms: (1) enhancing intestinal barrier integrity by upregulating tight junction-associated proteins (Claudin-1, ZO-1, and Occludin) and mucin family genes (e.g., MUC2) while increasing goblet cell density to fortify the mucus layer, and (2) modulating gut microbiota homeostasis via the selective inhibition of pro-inflammatory bacterial taxa (e.g., S24-7 and Staphylococcaceae) and promoting commensal bacteria associated with anti-inflammatory responses (e.g., Lachnospiraceae and Rikenellaceae) [53].

4. Conclusions

This study shows that yogurt supplemented with millet displays superior sensory attributes and functional properties. The addition of millet liquid solids and phenolic and protein components can specifically stimulate the growth of L. bulgaricus in yogurt. This improves its viscosity and textural properties (springiness and chewiness) and decreases syneresis. Meanwhile, the yogurt with millet liquid may become popular among consumers because of the high-scored taste and aroma in comparison to the control sample. In addition, incorporating millet liquid into yogurt presents significant potential health benefits. The combined fermentation of millet liquid and yogurt enhances the DPPH and ABTS free radical scavenging capacity, exhibiting antioxidant activity. The supernatant of MY60 significantly alleviates the expression of the TNF-α, IL-1β, and IL-6 pro-inflammatory cytokines produced by cells stimulated by DSS, consequently demonstrating anti-inflammatory activity. This study provides a reference for developing functional yogurt with favorable physicochemical properties, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity, and organoleptic characteristics. Future mechanistic research can focus on using millet to improve the anti-inflammatory activity of yogurt.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/foods14203491/s1: Table S1: Primer sequences of RT-qPCR.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.L. and H.W. (Hua Wu); methodology, H.W. (Hui Wang) and Y.H.; validation, Y.Z. (Yingyu Zhang), Y.H., J.H. and Y.Z. (Yingjun Zuo); formal analysis, H.W. (Hui Wang); investigation, Y.Z. (Yingyu Zhang), Y.H., J.H. and Y.Z. (Yingjun Zuo); writing—original draft preparation, H.W. (Hui Wang) and Y.Z. (Yingyu Zhang); writing—review and editing, Y.L. and H.W. (Hua Wu). All authors have read and agreed to the published version of this manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the Key R&D Program of the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region (No. 2024BEE02022) and the earmarked fund for CARS (CARS 36).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Both millet and whole milk powder used in this study are hygienic, safe and edible. All participants were adults, and their data were anonymized. In accordance with the “Ethics Review Measures for Life Sciences and Medical Research involving Humans” promulgated by the National Health Commission of China in 2023 (Document No. 4), particularly Article 32, this research is eligible for exemption from ethical review due to the absence of any potential risks to the participants involved.

Informed Consent Statement

All participants signed an informed consent form prior to participation, and their rights and privacy were protected throughout the study in accordance with ethical guidelines, with the option to withdraw at any time.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article and Supplementary Materials; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Tami, S.H.; Aly, E.; Darwish, A.A.; Mohamed, E.S. Buffalo stirred yoghurt fortified with grape seed extract: New insights into its functional properties. Food Biosci. 2022, 47, 101752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ban, Q.F.; Sun, X.M.; Jiang, Y.Q.; Cheng, J.J.; Guo, M.R. Effect of synbiotic yogurt fortified with monk fruit extract on hepatic lipid biomarkers and metabolism in rats with type 2 diabetes. J. Dairy Sci. 2022, 105, 3758–3769. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Seregelj, V.; Pezo, L.; Sovljanski, O.; Levic, S.; Nedovic, V.; Markov, S.; Tomic, A.; Canadanovic-Brunet, J.; Vulic, J.; Saponjac, V.T.; et al. New concept of fortified yogurt formulation with encapsulated carrot waste extract. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 138, 110732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Feinisa Khairani, A.; Islami, U.; Rizky Anggun Syamsunarno, M.; Ary Lantika, U. Synbiotic Purple Sweet Potato Yogurt Ameliorate Lipid Metabolism in High Fat Diet Mice Model. Biomed. Pharmacol. J. 2020, 13, 175–184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Liqing, Q.; Min, Z.; Arun, S.M.; Lu, C. Effect of edible rose (Rosa rugosa cv. Plena) flower extract addition on the physicochemical, rheological, functional and sensory properties of set-type yogurt. Food Biosci. 2021, 43, 101249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Saber, H.; Ali Sari, A.; Ali, H.; Mostafa, K. Physicochemical and sensory attributes assessment of functional low-fat yogurt produced by incorporation of barley bran and Lactobacillus acidophilus. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 5, 875–880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Gunenc, A.; Alswiti, C.; Hosseinian, F. Wheat Bran Dietary Fiber: Promising Source of Prebiotics with Antioxidant Potential. J. Food Res. 2017, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Hasani, S.; Khodadadi, I.; Heshmati, A. Viability of Lactobacillus acidophilus in rice bran-enriched stirred yoghurt and the physicochemical and sensory characteristics of product during refrigerated storage. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 51, 2485–2492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Ramandeep, K.; Charanjit, S.R. Sensory, rheological and chemical characteristics during storage of set type full fat yoghurt fortified with barley beta-glucan. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 57, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Qu, X.Q.; Nazarenko, Y.; Yang, W.; Nie, Y.Y.; Zhang, Y.S.; Li, B. Effect of Oat β-Glucan on the Rheological Characteristics and Microstructure of Set-Type Yogurt. Molecules 2021, 26, 4752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ye, Y.; Li, P.; Zhou, J.; He, J.; Cai, J. The Improvement of Sensory and Bioactive Properties of Yogurt with the Introduction of Tartary Buckwheat. Foods 2022, 11, 1774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Anuyahong, T.; Chusak, C.; Adisakwattana, S. Incorporation of anthocyanin-rich riceberry rice in yogurts: Effect on physicochemical properties, antioxidant activity and in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. LWT 2020, 129, 109571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Bhat, S.; Nandini, C.; Srinathareddy, S.; Jayarame, G.; K, P. Proso millet (Panicum miliaceum L.)-a climate resilient crop for food and nutritional security: A Review. Environ. Conserv. J. 2019, 20, 113–124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yu, Z.; Jiaxi, C.; Zhaoxin, L.; Fengxia, L.; Xiaomei, B.; Chong, Z.; Haizhen, Z. Physicochemical and functional properties of dietary fiber from foxtail millet (Setaria italic) bran. J. Cereal Sci. 2018, 79, 456–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Jinle, X.; Meng, Z.; Apea-Bah, F.B.; Beta, T. Hydroxycinnamic acid amide (HCAA) derivatives, flavonoid C-glycosides, phenolic acids and antioxidant properties of foxtail millet. Food Chem. 2019, 295, 214–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Hou, D.Z.; Chen, J.; Ren, X.; Wang, C.; Diao, X.M.; Hu, X.S.; Zhang, Y.M.; Shen, Q. A whole foxtail millet diet reduces blood pressure in subjects with mild hypertension. J. Cereal Sci. 2018, 84, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Shahidi, F.; Chandrasekara, A. Millet grain phenolics and their role in disease risk reduction and health promotion: A review. J. Funct. Foods 2013, 5, 570–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Elavarasan, K.; Malini, M.; Ninan, G.; Ravishankar, C.N.; Dayakar, B.R. Millet flour as a potential ingredient in fish sausage for health and sustainability. Sustain. Food Technol. 2024, 2, 1088–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Naveena, B.M.; Muthukumar, M.; Sen, A.R.; Babji, Y.; Murthy, T.R.K. Quality characteristics and storage stability of chicken patties formulated with finger millet flour (Eleusine coracana). J. Muscle Foods 2006, 17, 92–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rai, S.; Kaur, A.; Singh, B. Quality characteristics of gluten free cookies prepared from different flour combinations. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 51, 785–789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Santhi, D.; Kalaikannan, A.; Natarajan, A. Characteristics and composition of emulsion-based functional low-fat chicken meat balls fortified with dietary fiber sources. J. Food Process Eng. 2020, 43, e13333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Moeini, A.; Shafafi Zenoozian, M.; Karajhiyan, H.; Elhami Rad, A.H.; Pedram Nia, A. Wheat flour substitution in production of reduced gluten pound cake using millets. Iran. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 18, 133–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Feldsine, P.; Abeyta, C.; Andrews, W.H. AOAC International methods committee guidelines for validation of qualitative and quantitative food microbiological official methods of analysis. J. AOAC Int. 2002, 85, 1187–1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 4th revision, 16th ed.; AOAC International: Rockville, MD, USA, 1998; Volume I and II.
  25. Du, H.; Yang, H.; Wang, X.; Zhu, F.; Tang, D.; Cheng, J.; Liu, X. Effects of mulberry pomace on physicochemical and textural properties of stirred-type flavored yogurt. J. Dairy Sci. 2021, 104, 12403–12414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Aleman, R.S.; Cedillos, R.; Page, R.; Olson, D.; Aryana, K. Physico-chemical, microbiological, and sensory characteristics of yogurt as affected by various ingredients. J. Dairy Sci. 2023, 106, 3868–3883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Guan, C.; Chen, X.; Zhao, R.; Yuan, Y.; Huang, X.; Su, J.; Ding, X.; Chen, X.; Huang, Y.; Gu, R. A weak post-acidification Lactobacillus helveticus UV mutant with improved textural properties. Food Sci. Nutr. 2021, 9, 469–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Kaur Sidhu, M.; Lyu, F.; Sharkie, T.P.; Ajlouni, S.; Ranadheera, C.S. Probiotic Yogurt Fortified with Chickpea Flour: Physico-Chemical Properties and Probiotic Survival during Storage and Simulated Gastrointestinal Transit. Foods 2020, 9, 1144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Abdeldaiem, A.M.; Ali, A.H.; Shah, N.; Ayyash, M.; Mousa, A.H. Physicochemical analysis, rheological properties, and sensory evaluation of yogurt drink supplemented with roasted barley powder. LWT 2023, 173, 114319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Sabeena Farvin, K.H.; Baron, C.P.; Nielsen, N.S.; Jacobsen, C. Antioxidant activity of yoghurt peptides: Part 1-in vitro assays and evaluation in ω-3 enriched milk. Food Chem. 2010, 123, 1081–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Zhongxiang, F.; Yuhuan, Z.; Yuan, L.; Guangpeng, M.; Jianchu, C.; Donghong, L.; Xingqian, Y. Phenolic compounds and antioxidant capacities of bayberry juices. Food Chem. 2009, 113, 884–888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ting, Z.; Chang Hee, J.; Wei Nee, C.; Hyojin, B.; Han Geuk, S.; Petriello, M.C.; Sung Gu, H. Moringa extract enhances the fermentative, textural, and bioactive properties of yogurt. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 101, 276–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Livak, K.J.; Schmittgen, T.D. Analysis of relative gene expression data using real-time quantitative PCR and the 2−ΔΔCT method. Methods 2001, 25, 402–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Li, H.; Zhang, L.; Jia, Y.; Yuan, Y.; Li, H.; Cui, W.; Yu, J. Application of whey protein emulsion gel microparticles as fat replacers in low-fat yogurt: Applicability of vegetable oil as the oil phase. J. Dairy Sci. 2022, 105, 9404–9416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Liu, L.; Zhang, R.; Deng, Y.; Zhang, Y.; Xiao, J.; Huang, F.; Wen, W.; Zhang, M. Fermentation and complex enzyme hydrolysis enhance total phenolics and antioxidant activity of aqueous solution from rice bran pretreated by steaming with alpha-amylase. Food Chem. 2017, 221, 636–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Shafiee, G.; Mortazavian, A.M.; Mohammadifar, M.A.; Koushki, M.R.; Mohammadi, A.; Mohammadi, R. Combined effects of dry matter content, incubation temperature and final pH of fermentation on biochemical and microbiological characteristics of probiotic fermented milk. Afr. J. Microbiol. Res. 2010, 4, 1265–1274. [Google Scholar]
  37. Tewari, H.K.; Sethi, R.P.; Sood, A.; Singh, L. Lactic acid production from paneer whey by Lactobacillus bulgaricus. J. Res. Punjab Agric. Univ. 1985, 22, 89–98. [Google Scholar]
  38. Kwon, H.C.; Bae, H.; Seo, H.G.; Han, S.G. Short communication: Chia seed extract enhances physiochemical and antioxidant properties of yogurt. J. Dairy Sci. 2019, 102, 4870–4876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Jeong, C.H.; Ryu, H.; Zhang, T.; Lee, C.H.; Seo, H.G.; Han, S.G. Green tea powder supplementation enhances fermentation and antioxidant activity of set-type yogurt. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 2018, 27, 1419–1427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Mohamed Ahmed, I.A.; Alqah, H.A.S.; Saleh, A.; Al-Juhaimi, F.Y.; Babiker, E.E.; Ghafoor, K.; Hassan, A.B.; Osman, M.A.; Fickak, A. Physicochemical quality attributes and antioxidant properties of set-type yogurt fortified with argel (Solenostemma argel Hayne) leaf extract. LWT 2021, 137, 110389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Jaster, H.; Arend, G.D.; Rezzadori, K.; Chaves, V.C.; Reginatto, F.H.; Petrus, J.C.C. Enhancement of antioxidant activity and physicochemical properties of yogurt enriched with concentrated strawberry pulp obtained by block freeze concentration. Food Res. Int. 2018, 104, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Marchiani, R.; Bertolino, M.; Belviso, S.; Giordano, M.; Ghirardello, D.; Torri, L.; Piochi, M.; Zeppa, G. Yogurt Enrichment with Grape Pomace: Effect of Grape Cultivar on Physicochemical, Microbiological and Sensory Properties. J. Food Qual. 2016, 39, 77–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Rose Mary, P.; Sarma, M.; Mukesh, K. Non-enzymatically hydrolyzed guar gum and orange peel fibre together stabilize the low-fat, set-type yogurt: A techno-functional study. Food Hydrocoll. 2022, 122, 107100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Sun, X.H.; Sarteshnizi, R.A.; Udenigwe, C.C. Recent advances in protein-polyphenol interactions focusing on structural properties related to antioxidant activities. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2022, 45, 100840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Mousavi, M.; Heshmati, A.; Garmakhany, A.D.; Vahidinia, A.; Taheri, M. Optimization of the viability of Lactobacillus acidophilus and physico-chemical, textural and sensorial characteristics of flaxseed-enriched stirred probiotic yogurt by using response surface methodology. LWT 2019, 102, 80–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Fernandez-Garcia, E.; McGregor, J.U.; Traylor, S. The addition of oat fiber and natural alternative sweeteners in the manufacture of plain yogurt. J. Dairy Sci. 1998, 81, 655–663. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Sheela, P.; UmaMaheswari, T.; Kanchana, S.; Hemalatha, G.; Vellaikumar, S. Identification of Volatile Compounds in Fermented Millet Based Beverages by Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectroscopy. Appl. Biol. Res. 2021, 23, 245–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Rodríguez, H.; Curiel, J.A.; Landete, J.M.; de las Rivas, B.; de Felipe, F.L.; Gómez-Cordovés, C.; Mancheño, J.M.; Muñoz, R. Food phenolics and lactic acid bacteria. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2009, 132, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Demirci, T.; Sert, D.; Aktaş, K.; Atik, D.S.; Öztürk Negiş, H.İ.; Akın, N. Influence of hot and cold break tomato powders on survival of probiotic L. paracasei subsp. paracasei F19, texture profile and antioxidative activity in set-type yoghurts. LWT 2020, 118, 108855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Li Zhen, Z.; Rui Hai, L. Phenolic and carotenoid profiles and antiproliferative activity of foxtail millet. Food Chem. 2015, 174, 495–501. [Google Scholar]
  51. Hannah, C.; Josiemer, M.; Simone, P.; John, S.; Martha, T. The Role of Polyphenols in Human Health and Food Systems: A Mini-Review. Front. Nutr. 2018, 5, 87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Zhao, H.Y.; Yan, R.; Zhou, X.G.; Ji, F.; Zhang, B. Hydrogen sulfide improves colonic barrier integrity in DSS-induced inflammation in Caco-2 cells and mice. Int. Immunopharmacol. 2016, 39, 121–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Yang, R.P.; Shan, S.H.; An, N.; Liu, F.M.; Cui, K.L.; Shi, J.Y.; Li, H.Q.; Li, Z.Y. Polyphenols from foxtail millet bran ameliorate DSS-induced colitis by remodeling gut microbiome. Front. Nutr. 2022, 9, 1030744. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Foods 14 03491 g001
Figure 1. Viscosity and syneresis of the control yogurt and yogurt with millet liquid. Note: Abbreviations: CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). Means with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1. Viscosity and syneresis of the control yogurt and yogurt with millet liquid. Note: Abbreviations: CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). Means with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Foods 14 03491 g001
Foods 14 03491 g002
Figure 2. Sensory evaluation of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid. Note: Abbreviations: CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt.
Figure 2. Sensory evaluation of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid. Note: Abbreviations: CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt.
Foods 14 03491 g002
Foods 14 03491 g003
Figure 3. (a) DPPH, ABTS radical scavenging activities, and (b) free phenolic content of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid. Note: Abbreviations: CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). Means with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 3. (a) DPPH, ABTS radical scavenging activities, and (b) free phenolic content of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid. Note: Abbreviations: CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). Means with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Foods 14 03491 g003
Foods 14 03491 g004
Figure 4. Effects of the yogurt with 60% filtered millet liquid on DSS-induced inflammation in Caco-2 cells. (a) TNF-α; (b) IL-6; (c) IL-1β. Note: Abbreviations: MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY 60: 60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY 60: 60% millet paste liquid yogurt. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3). The values with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 4. Effects of the yogurt with 60% filtered millet liquid on DSS-induced inflammation in Caco-2 cells. (a) TNF-α; (b) IL-6; (c) IL-1β. Note: Abbreviations: MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY 60: 60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY 60: 60% millet paste liquid yogurt. Data are presented as mean ± SD (n = 3). The values with different superscript letters are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Foods 14 03491 g004
Table 1. Formulations of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid.
Table 1. Formulations of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid.
GroupItemDistilled Water
(g)		Millet
Liquid
(g)		Whole Milk Powder
(g)		Maltodextrin
(g)		Glucoamylase
(μL)		Starter
Culture (g)
Control groups
(CLY)		Control yogurt (CY)500-62--0.05
Maltodextrin control yogurt (MCY)440-6260480.05
Sample groups
(SLY)		40% Millet flour liquid yogurt
(MFY40)		30020062-320.05
60% Millet flour liquid yogurt
(MFY60)		20030062-480.05
40% Millet paste liquid yogurt
(MPY40)		30020062-320.05
60% Millet paste liquid yogurt
(MPY60)		20030062-480.05
Table 2. Sensory evaluation scoring index and criteria of the yogurt samples.
Table 2. Sensory evaluation scoring index and criteria of the yogurt samples.
Sensory PropertyDefinition of Evaluation Terms and Scoring Criteria
0–23–67–10
AppearanceColorUneven color, dull colorUneven color, overall pale yellow or creamy whiteUniform and consistent color, overall creamy white or creamy yellow
SmoothnessThe surface is not smoothThe surface is generally smoothSmooth surface
Whey separationMassive whey separationSmall amount of whey separationNo whey separation
StickinessFragile structure, high fluidityNot loosely structure, general fluidityTight structure, low fluidity
FinenessRough structureFine structureFine and uniform structure
TasteLubricationClearly grainySlightly grainy, not lubricatedNo grainy feeling, lubricated
ThicknessVery thinGeneralMellow
Sweet and sourToo sweet or too sourModerately sweet and sour, slightly astringentSuitable sour and sweet taste
FlavorMilk flavorLight yogurt flavorModerate yogurt flavorTypical yogurt flavor
Millet aromaPoor characteristic flavor of added millet Insufficient characteristic flavor of added milletStrong characteristic flavor of added millet
Table 3. Chemical composition of filtered millet liquid.
Table 3. Chemical composition of filtered millet liquid.
ParametersTotal Solids
(g/100 g)		Protein (g/100 g)Soluble Solids (g/100 g)Free Phenol (mg GAE/100 g)
MFL21.11 ± 0.120.15 ± 0.0020.2 ± 0.2244.64 ± 2.58
MPL19.19 ± 0.120.14 ± 0.0118.23 ± 0.2040.70 ± 1.32
Note: Abbreviations: MFL: millet flour liquid; MPL: millet pulp liquid. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3).
Table 4. pH values, titrable acidity, fermentation time, and lactic acid bacteria count of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid.
Table 4. pH values, titrable acidity, fermentation time, and lactic acid bacteria count of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid.
GroupSamplepHTf (h)Titratable Acidity (%)S. thermophilus
(Log CFU/g)		L. bulgaricus
(Log CFU/g)
CLYCY4.54 ± 0.01 a4.07 ± 0.13 d0.72 ± 0.01 a8.33 ± 0.02 a8.26 ± 0.02 a
MCY4.53 ± 0.01 a3.60 ± 0.11 c0.88 ± 0.01 b8.34 ± 0.03 a8.24 ± 0.05 a
SLYMFY404.52 ± 0.01 a3.18 ± 0.11 a0.91 ± 0.01 c8.34 ± 0.02 a8.58 ± 0.03 b
MFY604.53 ± 0.01 a3.35 ± 0.06 ab0.96 ± 0.01 d8.35 ± 0.02 a8.58 ± 0.01 b
MPY404.54 ± 0.02 a3.22 ± 0.11 a0.91 ± 0.01 c8.34 ± 0.01 a8.55 ± 0.06 b
MPY604.54 ± 0.02 a3.46 ± 0.13 bc0.97 ± 0.02 d8.33 ± 0.04 a8.57 ± 0.05 b
Note: Abbreviations: CLY: control groups; SLY: sample groups; CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt; Tf: time to complete the fermentation at pH 4.6. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). Means with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Table 5. Texture characteristics of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid.
Table 5. Texture characteristics of the control yogurt and the yogurt with millet liquid.
GroupSampleHardness (N)Cohesiveness
(Ratio)		Springiness
(mm)		Gumminess
(N)		Chewiness
(mj)
CLYCY0.60 ± 0.03 a0.82 ± 0.03 a0.15 ± 0.02 a0.45 ± 0.00 a0.81 ± 0.02 a
MCY0.61 ± 0.00 a0.88 ± 0.04 a0.54 ± 0.17 a0.52 ± 0.01 bc0.30 ± 0.07 a
SLYMFY400.57 ± 0.03 a0.89 ± 0.02 a9.85 ± 0.06 b0.51 ± 0.01 b4.32 ± 0.31 b
MFY600.63 ± 0.28 a0.89 ± 0.02 a7.83 ± 0.28 c0.53 ± 0.01 cd4.40 ± 0.14 b
MPY400.61 ± 0.01 a0.83 ± 0.04 a9.68 ± 0.39 b0.51 ± 0.01 bc4.52 ± 0.11 b
MPY600.65 ± 0.02 a0.82 ± 0.04 a8.38 ± 0.87 c0.54 ± 0.01 d4.52 ± 0.43 b
Note: Abbreviations: CLY: control groups; SLY: sample groups; CY: control yogurt; MCY: maltodextrin control yogurt; MFY40/60: 40%/60% millet flour liquid yogurt; MPY40/60: 40%/60% millet paste liquid yogurt. The results are expressed as mean ± SD (n = 3). Means with different superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, H.; Zhang, Y.; Han, Y.; Hou, J.; Zuo, Y.; Li, Y.; Wu, H. The Physicochemical, Sensory, and Functional Properties of Yogurt Containing Millet and Milk. Foods 2025, 14, 3491. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14203491

AMA Style

Wang H, Zhang Y, Han Y, Hou J, Zuo Y, Li Y, Wu H. The Physicochemical, Sensory, and Functional Properties of Yogurt Containing Millet and Milk. Foods. 2025; 14(20):3491. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14203491

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Hui, Yingyu Zhang, Yuxuan Han, Jiaxin Hou, Yingjun Zuo, Yan Li, and Hua Wu. 2025. "The Physicochemical, Sensory, and Functional Properties of Yogurt Containing Millet and Milk" Foods 14, no. 20: 3491. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14203491

APA Style

Wang, H., Zhang, Y., Han, Y., Hou, J., Zuo, Y., Li, Y., & Wu, H. (2025). The Physicochemical, Sensory, and Functional Properties of Yogurt Containing Millet and Milk. Foods, 14(20), 3491. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods14203491

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop