F O O D SCIENCE A N D TECHNOLOGY
A SERIES OF MONOGRAPHS

Series Editor
Bernard S. Schweigert
University of California, Davis

Advisory Board
S. Arai
University of Tokyo, Japan
C. O . Chichester
Nutrition Foundation, Washington, D.C.
J. H. B. Christian
CSIRO, Australia
Larry Merson
University of California, Davis

Emil Mrak
University of California, Davis
Harry Nursten
University of Reading, England
Louis B. Rockland
Chapman College, Orange, California
Kent K. Stewart
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University, Blacksburg

A list of books in this series is available from the publisher on request.


Handbook of Food and

Beverage Stability
Chemical, Biochemical,
Microbiological, and Nutritional Aspects

Edited by
GEORGE CHARALAMBOUS
St. Louis, Missouri

1986
ACADEMIC PRESS, INC.
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers

Orlando
London

San Diego New York Austin

Montreal

Sydney Tokyo Toronto


C O P Y R I G H T © 1 9 8 6 BY A C A D E M I C PRESS, I N C .
A L L R I G H T S RESERVED.
N O P A R T O F T H I S P U B L I C A T I O N M A Y BE R E P R O D U C E D O R
T R A N S M I T T E D I N A N Y F O R M O R BY A N Y M E A N S , E L E C T R O N I C
OR MECHANICAL, INCLUDING PHOTOCOPY, RECORDING, O R
A N Y I N F O R M A T I O N S T O R A G E A N D R E T R I E V A L SYSTEM, W I T H O U T
PERMISSION IN WRITING FROM T H E PUBLISHER.


ACADEMIC PRESS, I N C .
Orlando, Florida 32887

United Kingdom Edition published by
ACADEMIC PRESS INC. (LONDON) LTD.
2 4 - 2 8 Oval Road, London N W 1 7 D X

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
H a n d b o o k of food a n d beverage stability.
( F o o d science a n d t e c h n o l o g y )
Includes index.
1. Food—Analysis—Handbooks, m a n u a l s , e t c . 2 . F o o d
spoilage-Handbooks, manuals, etc. 3 . Food-Shelf-life
d a t i n g - H a n d b o o k s , m a n u a l s , e t c . I. C h a r a l a m b o u s ,
George, D a t e
. I I . Series.
TX535.H34
1986
664\028
85-43102
ISBN 0 - 1 2 - 1 6 9 0 7 0 - 9 (alk. p a p e r )

PRINTED IN T H E U N I T E D STATES OF AMERICA

86 87 88 89

9 8 7 6

5 4 3 2 1



Contributors

Numbers in parentheses indicate the pages on which the authors' contributions begin.

MILTON E. BAILEY (75), Department of Food Science and Nutrition, University of
Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65211
UMBERTO BRACCO (391), Nestlé Research Laboratories, CH-1800 Vevey, Switzer­
land
RONALD J. CLARKE (685), Donnington, Chichester, Sussex P020 7PW, England
LEOPOLDO G. ENRIQUEZ (113), Department of Food Science and Technology,
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
GEORGE J. FUCK, JR. (113), Department of Food Science and Technology, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
THOMSEN J. HANSEN (423), Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences, Drexel
University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104
IAN HORMAN (391), Nestlé Research Laboratories, CH-1800 Vevey, Switzerland
JANIS B. HUBBARD (113), Department of Food Science and Technology, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
KAREL KULP (1), American Institute of Baking, Manhattan, Kansas 66502
DAVID C. LEWIS (353), Department of Environmental Toxicology, University of
California, Davis, Davis, California 95616
WILLIAM W MENZ (621), Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27104
ROBERT R. M O D (489), Southern Regional Research Center, United States Depart­
ment of Agriculture, New Orleans, Louisiana 70179
STEVEN NAGY (719), Scientific Research Department, State of Florida Department of
Citrus, Lake Alfred, Florida 33850
JOHN H. NELSON (33), Quality Assurance/Regulatory Compliance, Kraft, Inc.,
Glenview, Illinois 60025
TOSHITERU OHBA (773), National Research Institute of Brewing, Tokyo 114, Japan

ROBERT L. ORY (489), Southern Regional Research Center, United States Department
of Agriculture, New Orleans, Louisiana 70179
THOMAS M. RADKE (467), Food Science Research Center, Chapman College,
Orange, California 92666
PASCAL RIBÉREAU-GAYON (745), Institut d'OEnologie, Université de Bordeaux II,
F-33405 Talence, France
LOUIS B. ROCKLAND (467), Food Science Research Center, Chapman College,
Orange, California 92666
ix


χ

Contributors

RUSSELL L. ROUSEFF (719), Scientific Research Department, State of Florida Depart­
ment of Citrus, Lake Alfred, Florida 33850
MAKOTO SATO (773), National Research Institute of Brewing, Tokyo 114, Japan
TAKAYUKI SHIBAMOTO (353), Department of Environmental Toxicology, University
of California, Davis, Davis, California 95616
JAMES S. SWAN (801), Pentlands Scotch Whisky Research Ltd., Edinburgh EH 11
1QU, Scotland
JAMES VETTER (1), American Institute of Baking, Manhattan, Kansas 66502
TEI YAMANISHI (665), Ochanomizu University, Tokyo 167, Japan
TAMOTSU YOKOTSUKA (517), Kikkoman Corporation, 399 Noda-shi, Chiba-ken
278,Japan


Preface


A recently compiled list of world needs amenable to solution through chemistry
was submitted to leaders in the world chemical community for comment and discus­
sion. The application of chemistry to alleviate hunger was allotted high priority by
almost everyone. One way of achieving this, as the population of the world expands
and the migration to urban centers where food is not grown continues, is through an
improvement in the stability of foods and beverages. The prevention of spoilage and
thus waste in the face of dwindling resources in the food supply has long been an
objective. In many ways, however, chemistry and agriculture, also related
endeavors, have developed along parallel or independent paths.
Fortunately, chemistry—the root of all life processes—is becoming better under­
stood and more accessible. A strong synergism between the chemical, agricultural,
and related sciences is highly desirable. This handbook attempts to provide in easily
accessible detail up-to-date information relevant to the stability of foods and
beverages. Highly qualified scientists have compiled an extraordinary amount of data
on the chemical, biochemical, and microbiological stability, along with sensory
aspects, of selected foods and beverages. These data have been distilled and are
presented mostly in tabular form, with a minimum of commentary whenever
possible.
A total of 17 chapters (10 on food, 7 on beverages) by renowned experts in their
particular fields from the United States, Europe, and Japan present a wealth of food
and beverage stability information in handbook format. In particular, the chapters on
fish and shellfish, cheese, and meat are remarkable in presenting data not readily
available in an easily digestible form.
This handbook, encompassing as it does aging, shelf life, and stability—in short,
the knowledge necessary to ensure preservation of our food supply—should help to
bring about the above-mentioned synergism between chemical, agricultural, and
related sciences. It is expected to fill a need, especially through the convenience of its
tabular presentations.
The editor wishes to thank his far-flung authors for their considerable efforts in
compiling up-to-date and not always readily available information, compressing it in

tables for handbook format. He also expresses his appreciation of the publisher's
advice and assistance.

xi


CHAPTER 1

EFFECT OF AGING ON FRESHNESS OF WHITE PAN BREAD

KAREL KULP
JAMES VETTER
American Institute of Baking
Manhattan, Kansas

Tables
Figures
References

Handbook of Food and Beverage
Stability: Chemical, Biochemical,
Microbiological, and Nutritional Aspects

2
26
30

Copyright © 1986 by Academic Press, Inc.
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.
1



2

Part of staling (see
Staling above).

Flavor Deterior­
ation

Kulp and Ponte (1981).

a

Growth of microorganisms in crust or crumb
during storage.

A series of changes
that cause a decrease
in consumer acceptance
other than that result­
ing from the action of
spoilage microorgan­
isms .

Definition

Microbial Spoilage

Staling


Term Describing
Loss of Freshness
loss of

Loss of fresh bread fla­
vor and aroma. Develop­
ment of stale bread fla­
vor.

Molds (various Aspergilli, Penicillia) wild
yeasts, spore formers.

Crumb s taling: firming.
development of crumbliness, loss of flavor, and
emergence of stale fla­
vor.

Crust staling:
crispness.

Characteristics

3

Oxidative changes in fla­
vorants, migration of
flavorants from crust to
crumb.


Complexation of flavor­
ants with amylose.

Contaminated ingredients.
air, and equipment dur­
ing processing.

Rétrogradation, complexation of flavorants with
amylose and oxidative
changes.

Moisture migration from
crumb to crust.

Cause

Definitions of Changes Affecting Freshness of Bread During Storage

TABLE I


3

PHYSICAL METHODS

Both properties increase with the age of bread.

Determines compressibility of a bread crumb pel­
let; eliminates effect of loaf volume.


Emergence of an endothermic peak indicative of
starch crystallization.

Change of X-ray diffraction pattern from A to
B/V.

Cell-Wall Firmness
Measurements

Differential Thermal
Analysis

X-Ray Diffraction

A uniform square of crumb is compressed to con­
stant deformation using Baker's Compressimeter
or Instron. The required compression force in­
creases with bread age.

I.

Principle

Capacitance/Conduc­
tance

Compressibility

Method


Reference/Use

(table continues)

Zobel (1973), research.
NOTE: not usable in
bread with bacterial
α-amylase.

Axford and Collwell (1967) ,
Russell (1983).

Guy and Wren (1968),
research method.

Kay and Willhoft (1972),
research method.

AACC Method 74-10 (AACC,
1983). Most common re­
search & control method.

Methods of Determination of Freshness of Breads

TABLE II


Panel Test Evalua­
tion of Staling


Iodine Absorption

SENSORY METHODS

Bread samples rating by panel for degree of
staleness.

III.

This value decreases with bread aging; it may
be determined colorimetrically, iodometrically,
or potentiometrically.

CHEMICAL METHODS

AACC 77-30 (AACC,1983),
widely used in control
and research work.

Pelshenke and Hampel
(1962), research.

Comford et al. (1964)
widely used in re­
search.

n Equation [θ = (EL - Et)/(EL - Ες>) = exp
Avrami
(-kt )] is used to estimate the rate constant
k; 1/k = time constant of crystallization of

the system is generally reported (the higher
the value, the slower the rate); Θ is noncrys­
talline portion. E L is limiting modulus and Et,
Eo moduli at times t and 0, respectively.

Rate of Starch
Crystallization

II.

Leung et al. (1983).

Reference/Use

Measures decreases of water mobility which de­
creases with age of bread.

Principle

Nuclear Magnetic
Resonance

Method

TABLE II (Continued)


5

1. White Pan Bread


TABLE III
Theories of Bread Staling
Theory According to:

Basis

Schoch and French (1947)

Rétrogradation of starch poly­
mers. Amylose crystallizes
rapidly and produces initial
firmness. Firming during
storage is attributed to crys­
tallization of amylopectin
(Fig. 2 ) .
1

Lineback (1984)

Essentially same as Schoch s
except it emphasizes intergranular interaction (Fig. 4 ) .

Knyaginichev (1965)

Formation of structured gel,
consisting of starch, protein,
and water.

Erlander and Erlander

(1969)

Interaction of gliadin and
glutenin with starch chains.

Willhoft (1971)

Implicates gluten in addition
to starch (Fig. 5 ) .

TABLE IV
Effect of Protein Content of Flour
on Avrami Exponent (n) and Time
Constant of Bread Stored at 21 C

Bread

Flour
Protein a
Content

Avrami
Exponent

10.6

0.94

3.75


11.0

0.92

3.74

13.9

0.92

5.44

21.6

1.04

11.25

a

Time
Constant

From Kim and D'Appolonia (1977b).


6

Karel Kulp and James Vetter


TABLE V

a
Effect of Soluble and Insoluble Flour Pentosans on
Staling of Starch Gel and Bread Stored at 21°C

Starch
Avrami
Exponent

Overall
Time
Constant

Time Constant
During the First
Day of Storage

Starch (S)

0.98

3.80

3.70

S-Soluble Pen­
tosans

0.70


5.33

3.29

S-Insoluble
Pentosans

0.83

7.41

5.75

Control (C)

0.92

5.44

4.80

C-1% Soluble
Pentosans

0.73

6.53

4.23


C-1% Insoluble
Pentosans

0.77

8.54

5.88

Gels

Bread

a
From Kim and D'Appolonia (1977a).


7

White Pan Bread

TABLE VI
Effect of Flour α-Amylase on
Firmness Values (g/cm) of Breads

3
Falling Number
of Flour
(Sec.)


0

1

Day
2

3

5

37. 8
25. 0
23. 1
17. 3

43. 2
25. 3
23. 3
24. 8

27. 8
25. 0
24. 4
24. 9

27. 0
31. 5
29. 3

32. 5

SPONGE/DOUGH BREAD PROCESS
411
353
247
148

11.5
8.5
7.3
6.7

24.3
18.0
16.5
11.6

31.6
23.3
17.5
18.2

STRAIGHT DOUGH PROCESS
411
353
247
148

5.2

6.3
5.5
6.5

11.2
11.2
11.3
13.4

17.8
17.2
14.0
14.9

Falling number indicates α-amylase activity (the
higher the number, the higher the activity).
(From D'Appolonia, 1984).


8

Karel Kulp and James Vetter

TABLE VII
Effect of Formulation of White Pan Bread
on Freshness

Formula Ingredient

Crust ^

Freshness

Crumb
Freshness

Flour Protein

+

+

Sugars

+

+

Oligosaccharides

+

+

Dextrins

+

Milk Ingredients

+


-

Milk Replacers

+

+

Salt

+

+

Shortening

-

+

-

-

Water Absorption:
High
Optimum
Low


+

+

-

-

+
+
+

+
+

+

++

Enzymes :
Malt
Fungal Amylases
Bacterial Amylase
Surfactants

a
From Kulp (1979).
+ = Improves freshness retention.
+ = No effect on freshness retention.
- = Reduces freshness retention.



CFR21, 136.110 (c)(15)
CFR21, 136.110 (c)(15)
CFR 21, 136.110 (c)(15)
CFR 170'.3 (η) (1)

0.5% max b

0.5% max b

0.5% max b

GMP°

Function

Dough strengthener (very good)
Crumb softener (good)

Dough strengthener (very good)
Crumb softener (poor)

Dough strengthener (fair)
Crumb softener (good)

Dough strengthener (good)
Crumb softener (good)

Dough strengthener (none)

Crumb softener (excellent)

Dough strengthener (excellent)
Crumb softener (fair)

Dough strengthener (excellent)
Crumb softener (very good)

Dough strengthener (excellent)
Crumb softener (good)

From Dubois (1979).
^Total alone or in combination cannot exceed 0.5% based on flour,
cuse in accordance with good manufacturing practices.

Sucrose Esters

Ethoxylated mono­
glycerides

Polysorbate 60

Succinylated
monoglycerides

CFR21, 136.110 (c)(5)(ii)

No limit

Mono- and diglycerides


CFR21, 136.110 (c) (6) (ii)

CFR21, 136.110 (c)(15)

0.5% max b

No limit

CFR21, 136.110 (c)(15)

Reference

Limitation
b
0.5% max

DATA Esters

Sodium Stearoyl2-Lactylate

Calcium Stearoyl2-Lactylate

Product

FDA Regulations
Dough Strengtheners/Crumb Softeners Standardized Products

TABLE VIII



Hydrated mono-diglycerides, 20%

Succinylated monoglycerides

60% Mono-di, 40% ethoxylated
monoglycerides

Sodium stearoyl-2-lactylate

75% Hydrated mono-diglycerides,
25% Polyoxethylene Sorbitan 20

2

6

4

3

5
10.5

10.6

11.6

11.8


12.1

13.8

b
Compression
Data

V

V

V

V

V

Β

Β

Β

Β

Β

Β


V

4

4

5

6

6

10

10

10

9

9

10

7

Intensity of
c
Diffraction Lines
Β

V
Structure

29

72

30

63

28

-

e
Complexing
Index

Data from Krog (1971).

Scale, 1-10 with 10 being the most intense; B, retrograded starch structure; V, amylose com­
eplex structure.

dAfter 6 days aging.

^After 3 days aging.

"For mechanism, see Figure 3.


Control

Description of Additives

1

Bread
No.

Effect of Surfactants on X-Ray Pattern During Aging of Bread*

TABLE IX


White Pan Bread

11

TABLE X
Processing Variables Affecting Staling Rate'

Operational Steps

Crust
Freshness

Crumb ^
Freshness

Dough Mixing:

Overmixing
Optimum
Undermixing

+
-

+
-

+
-

+
+

-

+

Fermentation Time:
Short
Normal
Long
Baking Rate:
Slow
Fast

a
From Kulp (1979).

k+ = Improves freshness retention.
- = Reduces freshness retention.

TABLE XI
Effect of Storage Temperature of Bread
Firming During Storage

Temperature,

ο

F

Chorleywood Bread
Process,
.
Time Constant

Bulk Fermented,
Time Constant

30

1.44

1.39

50

1.84


1.89

70

3.28

3.68

90

5.02

5.51

110

9.0

—

130

13.5

150

23.3

—

—

a
Cornford et al. (1964).


Karel Kulp and James Vetter

12

TABLE XII
The Effect of Bread Storage on Flavor Score,
Carbonyl Content, and GLC Headspace Area

Bread
Storage, Days

Average
Panel Flavor
Score

0

1.95

Total Carbonyl
Compounds, ppm

1
2


3.55

3
4

4.50

5

Total GLC
Headspace
area, cm^

224

64.2

136

61.9

176

63.7

280

66.6


280

67.8

328

69.5

From Lorenz and Maga (1972).
TABLE XIII
Bread Carbonyl Composition, Changes During Aging"
Freshly Baked Bread
GLC
2
Area, cm
%

5-Day Old Bread
GLC
2
Area, cm
%

Fo rmal dehy de

1.2

2.5

0.1


0.2

Acetaldehyde

2.0

4.0

0.4

0.9

Acetone

2.2

4.5

0.8

1.7

Propanal

6.7

13.8

0.6


1.3

11.1

22.7

0.3

0.8

2-Butanone

5.4

11.0

6.4

14.7

2-Hexanone

4.0

8.2

29.4

67.4


Hexanal

4.3

8.9

1.0

2.4

2-Heptanone

1.7

3.4

0.5

1.1

Heptanal

0.6

1.3

Nonanal

6.9


14.2

4.1

9.5

Unknown

2.7

5.5

48.6

100.0

43.6

100.0

Butanal

From Lorenz and Maga (1972).


0
1
4


0
1
4

0
1
4

0
1
4

Control

With SSL

With
Tandem 8

With
Atmul 500

45.28
44.96
44.98
45.07

45.31
45.01
44.90

45.07

45.36
45.06
44.92
45.11

_

0.34
1.44
0.47
2.27
0.61
2.34
0.41
1.95

_

44.83
43.73
44.64
42.84
44.46
42.73
44.66
43.12

%


45.42
45.16
44.94
45.17

%

%

Without
Crust

45.22
44.82
45.65
45.23

45.33
45.02
45.22
45.19

45.36
44.81
45.34
45.17

45.28
44.95

45.31
45.18

%

Without
Crust
_

_

43.54
38.66

43.54
38.66

42.85
39.84

1.69
6.57

1.69
6.57

2.32
5.33

1.62

4.48

%

43.56
40.70

0
Moisture
Migration

%

30°C
With
Crust

Values reported are percentage point change between moisture content of bread stored
with crust intact and bread stored without crust.

a
bFrom Pisesookbunterng and D'Appolonia (1983).
cBread moisture values at zero day storage are those of breads 2 hrs. after baking.

Time
(Days)

Storage
Bread


Moisture
Migration

2°C
With
Crust

0

Storage Temperature

Migration of Moisture from Crust to Crumb*

TABLE XIV


From Pisesookbunterng et al. (1983).

315
248

124

No refreshening
Refreshened twice/before
3rd refreshening
After 3rd refreshening

6
391


180

119
345

285

432

516

277

459

No refreshening
Refreshened once/before
2nd refreshening
After 2nd refreshening

4

233
146

84

393
99


82

Before 1st refreshening
After 1st refreshening

--

Refreshening Process

Control
2°C
30°C

120

312

411

100

294

393

331
97

96


198

245

263

165

234

216

176
125

82

With SSL
2°C
30°C

Bread

Firmness Values (in g/cm)

2

0


Storage
Time
(days)

Refreshening of Bread:

TABLE XV

104

289

180

226

306

140

74
395

187

234

137
117


75

269

339

264
83

75

With
Atmul 500
2°C
30°C


White Pan Bread

15

TABLE XVI
Effect of Production Methods on Bread Softness

Crust
Freshness

Production Method

Crumb

Freshness

Continuous Mix

1

1

Sponge Dough

2

2

Liquid Ferment, 0% Flour
20% Flour
50% Flour

2.5
2
2

2.5
2
2

Straight Dough

3


3

No-Time Dough

4

4

a
From Kulp (1979).
^Lower number, softer.

TABLE XVII
Product Variables Affecting Staling Rate of
White Pan Bread

Bread

Crust
Freshness

Crumb
Freshness

Specific Volume (Higher)

4-

+


Moisture Content (Higher)

+

+

Crust Thickness (Higher)

+

a
Kulp (1979).
b
+ = Improves.
- = Reduces.


Karel Kulp and James Vetter

16
TABLE XVIII

United States Regulatory Status
of Antimicrobial Agents

Agent

CFR

Restrictions on Use


Acetic Acid

182.1005

Generally recognized as
safe as a multipurpose food
substance when used in
accordance with good manu­
facturing practices.

Propionic Acid

184.1081

Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobiaT agent and a
flavoring agent at levels
not to exceed good manufac­
turing practices in baked
goods; cheeses; confec­
tions; and frostings; gela­
tins; puddings; and fill­
ings; and jams and jellies.

Calcium Propionate

184.1221


Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent and a
flavoring agent at levels
not to exceed good manufac­
turing practices in baked
goods; cheeses; confec­
tions and frostings; gela­
tins; puddings and fill­
ings; and jams and jellies.

Sodium Propionate

184.1784

Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent and a
forming agent at levels not
to exceed good manufactur­
ing practices in baked
goods; nonalcoholic bever­
ages; cheeses; confections
and frostings; gelatins,
puddings, and fillings;
jams and jellies; meat
products; and soft candy.

(table continues)


17

1. White Pan Bread

TABLE XVIII (Continued)

b
Agent

CFR

Restrictions on Use

Sorbic Acid

182 .3089

Generally recognized as
safe as a chemical preser­
vative when used in accor­
dance with good manufac­
turing practices.

Calcium Sorbate

182,.3225


Generally recognized as
safe as a chemical preser­
vative when used in accor­
dance with good manufac­
turing practices.

Potassium Sorbate

182,,3640

Generally recognized as
safe as a chemical preser­
vative when used in accor­
dance with good manufac­
turing practices.

Sodium Sorbate

182.,3795

Generally recognized as
safe as a chemical preser­
vative when used in accor­
dance with good manufac­
turing practices.

Methyl Paraben

184. 1490


Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent at
levels not to exceed 0.1
percent in food.

Propyl Paragen

184. 167

Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent at
levels not to exceed 0.1
percent in food.

Benzoic Acid

184. 1021

Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent and as
a flavoring agent and ad­
juvant at a level not to
exceed 0.1 percent in food.
(table continues)



Karel Kulp and James Vetter

18

TABLE XVIII (Continued)

Agent

Restrictions on Use

CFR

Sodium Benzoate

184.1733

Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent and as
a flavoring agent and ad­
juvant at a level not to
exceed 0.1 percent in food.

Ethyl Alcohol

184.1293


Affirmed generally recog­
nized as safe direct food
substance when used as an
antimicrobial agent on
pizza crusts prior to final
baking at levels not to
exceed 2.0 percent by prod­
uct weight.

Regulatory status may change. Information presented is
current as of date of publication.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations:

21 CFR, Food and Drugs.


1

1. White Pan Bread

TABLE XIX
U.S. Regulatory Status of Antioxidants
Which May Be Used in Bakery Products

b
Antioxidant

CFR

Limitations


Butylated
hydroxyanisole

182 .3169

Generally recognized as safe
for use in food at a total
antioxidant level not to ex­
ceed 0.02 percent of the fat
or oil, including essential
(volatile) oil content of the
food.

Butylated
hydroxytoluene

182 .3173

Generally recognized as safe
for use in food at a total
antioxidant level not to ex­
ceed 0.02 percent of the fat
or oil, including essential
(volatile) oil content of the
food.

Propyl gallate

184 .1660


Affirmed generally recognized
as safe for use in food at a
total antioxidant level not
to exceed 0.02 percent of the
fat or oil, including essen­
tial (volatile) oil content
of the food.

Tertiary butylhydroquinone

172 .185

Food additive which may be
used alone or in combination
with BHA and/or BHT (not
propyl gallate) at a total
antioxidant level not to ex­
ceed 0.02 percent of the fat
or oil, including essential
(volatile) oil content of the
food.

Regulatory status may change. Information presented is
current as of date of publication.
U.S. Code of Federal Regulations:

21 CFR, Food and Drugs.