Fig 1.
Effect of different proportions of PGA and XG on the interfacial tension measured at the coconut oil-polysaccharide solution interface.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD/SEM from three independent replicates (n = 3) for each sample. Sample designated with different lowercase letters(a, b, c and d) indicate significant difference(p<0.05) when compared between different treatment.
Fig 2.
Effect of high pressure homogenization (30 MPa and 50 MPa) and US (270 W) treatment on the apparent viscosity of o/w emulsion.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD/SEM from three independent replicates (n = 3) for each sample. Sample designated with different lowercase letters(a, b, c, d and e) indicate significant difference(p<0.05) when compared between different treatment.
Fig 3.
Average article size and particle size distribution of oil-in-water emulsions prepared by different methods.
(a) Average droplet size of o/w emulsions prepared by different methods, the pre-emulsion as a comparison. (b) Particle size distribution of 5% coconut oil o/w emulsions prepared by different methods. The contrast indicates the pre-emulsion. (c) Particle suspensions microstructure in fresh 5% coconut oil o/w emulsions prepared by different methods. 100× magnification, 30 °C temperature(a. pre-emulsions, b. 270 W US treatment, c. 30 MPa high-pressure homogenization, d. 50 MPa high-pressure homogenization). Data are expressed as mean ± SD/SEM from three independent replicates (n = 3) for each sample. sample designated with different lowercase letters(a, b, c and d) indicate significant difference(p<0.05) when compared between different treatment.
Fig 4.
Fluorescent microscopy images of coconut o/w emulsions before and after high-pressure homogenization and ultrasound treatment.
a. pre-emulsions, b. 270 W US treatment, c. 30MPa high-pressure homogenization, d. 50MPa high-pressure homogenization.
Fig 5.
EAI and ESI values of the o/w emulsions prepared by ultrasound treatment or high-pressure homogenization.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD/SEM from three independent replicates (n = 3) for each sample. sample designated with different lowercase letters(a, b, c, d and e) indicate significant difference(p<0.05) when compared between different treatment.
Fig 6.
Zeta (ζ) potential of the o/w emulsion samples prepared by different methods.
Data are expressed as mean ± SD/SEM from three independent replicates (n = 3) for each sample. sample designated with different lowercase letters(a, b, c, d and e) indicate significant difference(p<0.05) when compared between different treatment.
Fig 7.
Photographs of 5% coconut o/w emulsions made by different methods.
Emulsions were stored at room temperature for 30 days. a, high-pressure homogenization treatment, 30MPa; b, high-pressure homogenization treatment, 50MPa; c, US treatment, ultrasonic power of 270 W.