FIELD OF THE INVENTION

[0001] The present invention relates to compositions containing hydrocolloids and a post fermenting optimizer and their use in beverages. In some embodiments, hydrocolloids and a post fermenting optimizer are incorporated into beer-type beverages. The present invention also relates to compositions containing hydrocolloids and their use in reduced calorie beer- type beverages.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

[0002] In recent years, the prices for crops such as barley and wheat have increased considerably. Since malt made from barley and wheat is used in the beer brewing industry, the price increases for barley and wheat also increase costs for the beer brewing industry. Therefore, one possibility to reduce the costs associated with the production of beer-type beverages is to reduce of the amount of malt used in producing such beverages. Beer-type beverages with a reduced amount of malt per volume of the final beverage are known in the art, e.g. as light beers. These beverages, however, often have a lower consumers' acceptance rate as they lack the mouthfeel and flavor of their regular equivalents.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

[0003] In one embodiment, the invention is a beverage comprising a post-fermenting optimizer and a hydrocolloid. The combination of a hydrocolloid, preferably pectin, more preferably sugar beet pectin, in combination with a post fermenting optimizer provides a beverage with improved flavor and mouthfeel as compared to a beverage not containing the hydrocolloid and post fermenting optimizer. In a preferred embodiment the use of a post fermenting optimizer and hydrocolloid, when added after any fermentation step, provides a reduced calorie beer-type beverage having a fuller flavor and mouthfeel which is typically associated with regular beer fully made from malt. The invention allows a reduced calorie beer-type beverage to be manufactured with a reduced need for (or without the need for) expensive malt.

[0004] In a second embodiment, the invention is a reduced calorie beer-type beverage comprising a hydrocolloid. Surprisingly, the use of relatively low levels of a hydrocolloid in a reduced calorie beer-type beverage provides a reduced calorie beer-type beverage having an improved mouthfeel typically associated with regular beer.

[0005] In a preferred embodiment, the current invention advantageously provides an inexpensive to use composition, which can reduce the amount of malt used in the production of beer-type beverages. The composition, comprising a hydrocolloid and/or post fermenting optimizer, is added after any fermenting step. The invention allows smaller quantities of malt to be used in the brewing process and while approximating the mouthfeel and flavor of a "regular" beer.

[0006] In some further aspects of the above embodiments, the foam stability of the beverage is of longer duration than the foam stability of a comparable beverage without added hydrocolloid.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

[0007] Figure 1 shows a tribological measurement of Miller Lite ^® , Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of apple pectin, Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of citrus pectin, and Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of sugar beet pectin displayed as Stribeck curves.

[0008] Figure 2 shows a rheological measurement of Budweiser ^® , Bud Light ^® , Bud Light ^® with 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% post fermenting optimizer (PFO), Bud Light ^® with 124 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO, and Bud Light ^® with 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO displayed as flow curves as a function of shear rate.

[0009] Figure 3 shows a tribological measurement of Budweiser ^® , Bud Light ^® , Bud Light ^® with 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% post fermenting optimizer (PFO), Bud Light ^® with 124 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO, and Bud Light ^® with 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO displayed as Stribeck curves. [0010] Figure 4 shows a tribological measurement of Budweiser , Bud Light , Bud Light with 1000 ppm inulin, and Bud Light ^® with 1000 ppm inulin and 0.5% post fermenting optimizer (PFO) displayed as Stribeck curves.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0011] The term "beverage", as used herein, means a drinkable composition. Beverages include, but are not limited to the following: water, carbonated water, flavored water, carbonated flavored water, milk obtained from animals, milk product derived from soy, rice, coconut or other plant material, juice derived from any fruit or any combination of fruits, juice derived from any vegetable or any combination of vegetables, sports drinks, vitamin enhanced sports drinks, high electrolyte sports drinks, highly caffeinated high energy drinks, coffee, decaffeinated coffee, tea, tea derived from fruit products, tea derived from herb products, decaffeinated tea, wine, champagne, malt liquor, rum, gin, vodka, other hard liquors, beer, reduced calorie beer-type beverages, non-alcoholic beer, and other beer-type beverages.

[0012] A "beer-type beverage", as used herein, means a beverage obtained from a cereal solution such as beer, ale, stout, lager, porter, low alcoholic beer, alcohol-free beer, kvass, rye-bread beer, shandy, malt drinks and the like. Cereal in this context refers to grains commonly used to make the beverages listed above and other similar beverages.

[0013] For the purposes of this invention, beverages with and without additives will be compared to each other. The term "comparable beverage", as used herein, means a beverage made with similar starting materials as a beverage with additives except that the additives are not included in the comparable beverage. For example, if you are comparing a sample of Bud Light ^® with added post fermenting optimizer and hydrocolloid to a sample of Bud Light ^® without either additive, the Bud Light ^® without either additive is referred to as the comparable beverage.

[0014] The term "reduced calorie beverage", as used herein, means a beverage having a reduced number of calories as compared with a full calorie counterpart. Reduced calorie beverages include, but are not limited to, beverages marketed by the Coca Cola Company under the Diet Coke, Coca Cola Zero, Diet Cherry Coke, Diet Barq's, Diet A&W, Diet Canada Dry, Diet Dr. Pepper, Diet Fanta, Diet Mello Yellow, Diet Nestea, Diet Squirt, and Vault Zero trademarks, and beverages marketed by PepsiCo under the Diet Pepsi, Pepsi One, Diet Mountain Dew, Diet Mug Root Beer, and Sierra Mist Free trademarks and beverages marketed by Ocean Spray under the Light Ruby Grapefruit Juice and Light Cran-Grape Juice Drink trademarks, and reduced calorie beer-type beverages. Those in the art will appreciate many other examples of such reduced calorie beverages.

[0015] The term "reduced calorie beer-type beverage", as used herein, means a type of beer- type beverage having fewer than 120 calories per 12 ounces. Examples of reduced calorie beer-type beverages include beers marketed as "Light" or "Lite" beers. Reduced calorie beer- type beverages include, but are not limited to, beers marketed by Anheuser-Busch under the Bud Light, Bud Ice Light, Budweiser Select, Michelob Light, Michelob Ultra, Michelob Golden Draft Light, Kirin Light, Rock Light, Busch Light, and O'Douls trademarks, and beers marketed by MillerCoors under the Coors Light, Keystone Light, Miller Lite, Miller Genuine Draft Light, MGD 64, Miller High Life Light, and Milwaukee's Best Light trademarks. Those in the art will appreciate many other examples of such reduced calorie beer-type beverages.

[0016] The term "friction reducing hydrocolloid", as used herein, means a hydrocolloid which, when added at a concentration of 100 ppm to the following reduced calorie beer-type beverage: a beer-type beverage containing 110 calories, 6.6 grams carbohydrates, and 0.9 grams protein per 12 ounces and is 4.2% alcohol by volume, marketed by Anheuser Busch, St. Louis, MO and sold under the trademark Bud Light results in at least 8% decrease in the apex of a Stribeck curve as measured by tribology as described below when compared to the apex of a comparable beverage without the hydrocolloid added.

[0017] The term "mouthfeel", as used herein, means the tactile sensations perceived at the lining of the mouth, including the tongue, gums, and teeth. "Improved mouthfeel" is a property of a beverage which causes the beverage to be assessed as having more "lubricity", without affecting the organoleptic characteristics in such a way that the beverage would be assessed as unpleasantly thick or sticky. This "improved mouthfeel" is best determined by a test panel consuming a group of beverages and rating the mouthfeel of each of the beverages in the group. The inventors, through extensive research and testing have discovered that the mouthfeel of a beverage in some aspects may be predicted through the use of a tribological device. The tribological device measures the lubrication of a low viscosity fluid such as a beer-type beverage. It has been found that the lubrication of a fluid determined as a friction factor by a tribological device can be correlated with the mouthfeel of the same fluid as measured by a test panel. The tribological device and how it is used are described herein and in PCT/EP2008/004443.

[0018] The term "foam stability", as used herein, means the duration and persistence of foam on the head of a beverage. An "improved foam stability" of a beverage according to the present invention is a property of the beverage which causes an increase in the duration of retention of foam head of the beverage as compared to a comparable beverage without a hydrocolloid added. Foam stability may be measured by the Nibem method. The Nibem method for determination of head retention is well known in the art for evaluating foam stability of beer-type beverages. The Nibem method involves measuring the collapse time of foam on the head of a beverage, and the value for measuring foam stability is known as the NIBEM value (sec).

[0019] Hydrocolloids are high molecular weight polymers which are extracted from plants, seaweed, or animal collagen, or are produced by microbial synthesis. Preferably, the hydrocolloid used is a friction reducing hydrocolloid. In other aspects of this invention, the hydrocolloids utilized are pectin, gum arabic, nOSA (n-octenyl succinic anhydride) maltodextrin, or mixtures thereof. More preferably, the hydrocolloid used in this invention comprises pectin. Pectins, well known in the art, are mixtures of polysaccharides that originate from plants and contain poly (α-D-galactopyranosyluronic acid) molecules in a partial methyl ester form and various degrees of neutralization as the major components. Pectin may be derived from any plant source including, but not limited to, citrus pulp, apple pomace, and sugar beet pulp. Even more preferably, the hydrocolloid utilized in this invention comprises citrus pectin, apple pectin, sugar beet pectin, or mixtures thereof.

[0020] Even more preferably, the hydrocolloid utilized in this invention comprises sugar beet pectin. Sugar beet pectin is a highly branched polysaccharide which exhibits low intrinsic viscosity. This attribute is believed to be beneficial for providing an acceptable mouthfeel. Additionally, when used in the present invention, sugar beet pectin has not been shown to significantly affect the flavor or generate unpleasant organoleptic impressions in a beverage.

[0021] Preferably, the hydrocolloid used in the invention comprises from 5 ppm to 1500 ppm of the final beverage composition, more preferably 10 ppm to 200 ppm, even more preferably 10 ppm to 100 ppm, even more preferably 10 ppm to 50 ppm, even more preferably 10 ppm to 20 ppm of the final beverage composition. In some aspects of the invention where particularly high lubrication is desired, the hydrocolloid preferably comprises from greater than 300 ppm to 1000 ppm of the final beverage composition, more preferably from 350 ppm to 800 ppm, even more preferably from 350 ppm to 600 ppm of the final beverage composition.

[0022] The hydrocolloid used in the present invention preferably has an intrinsic viscosity of 10-450 mL/g as measured by capillary flow viscosimetry. The pectin used in the present invention preferably has an intrinsic viscosity of 150-450 mL/g as measured by capillary flow viscosimetry.

[0023] Intrinsic viscosity is a measure of a capability of a polymer or other type of material in solution to enhance the viscosity of the solution. Intrinsic viscosity may be measured by capillary flow viscosimetry. The intrinsic viscosity at 25.00 ⁰ C was measured and calculated in 0.1M NaCl/0.02M acetate (pH 5.5, ionic strength μ=0.111), at eight different concentrations (0.002 to 0.02OgZmL) for each sample. Samples were allowed to hydrate overnight and are then filtered through a Schott glass filter (10... lOOμm). Ubbelohde viscometer (Schott-Gerate) with capillaries 532 10 (constant K = 0,01018mm2/s2) and 532 13 (constant K = 0,02917mm2/s2) were employed. 15mL of solution was filled (after 2 successive rinses) and conditioned at 25.00 ⁰ C for at least 15 minutes prior flow time measurement (in triplicate) with the ViscoClock (Schott-Gerate). Averaged flow times were then corrected using Hagenbach correction tables provided by the manufacturer. The density of the filtered solution was measured by pycnometry (1OmL capacity pycnometers) at 25.00 ⁰ C. The intrinsic viscosity [h], calculated from the classical 3 extrapolations (Huggins, Kraemer and single point) as follows:

[h] is the intercept (when concentration c=0) of the equations: Huggins h _sp /c = [h] + k'[h] ² c

Kraemer (lnh _re ι)/c = [h] + k' ' [h] ² c

Single-point [h] = {2(h _sp - lnh _re i)} ^l/2 /c General Process for Producing Post Fermenting Optimizer (Scheme 1)

be or

[0024] The post fermenting optimizers suitable for use in the present invention are preferably the ones obtained by extraction of a roasted malt. These post fermenting optimizers may be obtained through the following steps. First, roasted malt is prepared from crude grains. Next, a malt infusion is prepared by extraction of the roasted malt with a solvent. This extraction process may consist of a single extraction or multiple extractions. The malt infusion resulting from the extraction process is a post fermenting optimizer. Alternately, this malt infusion may additionally proceed through a further distillation process.

[0025] The roasted malt used in this invention can be prepared through a series of steps. First, crude grains are cleaned to yield purified grains. Next, purified grains are steeped in water to yield steeped grains. The steeped grains are next allowed to germinate to yield germinated grains. The germinated grains are dried in kiln to yield dried malt. Subsequently, the prepared dried malt is roasted, typically at a temperature of about 12O ⁰ C to 23O ⁰ C to yield roasted malt. As most beers are prepared from barley, the roasted malt is preferably roasted barley malt. Malt from other grains can, however, be prepared in a similar manner. Such grains include, but are not limited to, wheat, buckwheat, rice, sorghum, rye, maize, and oats. The malt roasting process is well known in the art. The roasting is important to tailor the color and flavor of the beer-type beverage, particularly for the preparation of dark beers. [0026] Temperatures and time of roasting may vary, depending on the flavor to be achieved in the final beverage. For example, in the case of barley, a lightly roasted malt having 200 EBC units (also referred to as ⁰ EBC or "Cara" units, EBC = European Brewery Convention) or less could be used. Alternatively, dark roasted barley malt with 1000 EBC units or more can be used. Typically, the roasted malt, such as roasted barley malt, used in the present invention has from about 100 to about 1500 EBC units. The roasted malt is then milled. The person skilled in the art is well aware how to mill a roasted malt and any type of mill known in the art can be used.

[0027] The obtained milled roasted malt is then ready for extraction with a solvent. Preferably, the solvent used is any solvent suitable for extraction of edible products. More preferably, the solvent used can be one or more components selected from the group consisting of water, propane, butane, ethyl acetate, ethanol, carbon dioxide, hexane, ethylmethylketone, methanol, 1,1,1,2-tetrafluoroethane, isopropanol, and methylene chloride. Even more preferably, the solvent used can be one or more components selected from the group consisting of water, ethanol, isopropanol, methylene chloride, and hexane. Even more preferably, the solvent used can be one or more components selected from the group consisting of water and an alcohol. Even more preferably, the solvent used can be a mixture of water and ethanol.

[0028] A solvent is then utilized for extraction of the roasted malt. The extraction process should be performed for a sufficient amount of time to allow for an efficient extraction of the desired malt constituents. The extraction process may be carried out in a single extraction or alternately with multiple extractions. Typically, the extraction is performed for about 3 to about 24 hours. For example, the extraction can be performed in 3 to 5 steps of 2 to 5 hours of extraction. After each individual extraction step the solvent is replenished and the individual extracts collected. Extraction processes which may be used include, but are not limited to, single stage extraction, semi-continuous multi-stage counter-current extraction, and continuous counter-current extraction. After the extraction or after the final extraction step, solids are separated from the combined solvent used for extraction by filtration. The solvent used for extracting is gathered in a tank. This collected extract is referred to as a malt infusion.

[0029] Typically, the amount of solvent simultaneously in contact with the roasted malt is limited. Good results can be obtained if the weight ratio of the solvent used in one extraction step to the roasted malt is between about 1 :2 and 20: 1, such as, for example, 1 : 1, 2: 1, 3:1 or 5: 1. Generally, the extraction is carried out at a temperature above room temperature, such as between 30 ⁰ C and a temperature below the boiling point of the solvent.

[0030] In a preferred alternative embodiment, a maturation step occurs on the malt infusion; this allows a natural sedimentation to occur in order to separate any insoluble materials that might still be contained in the infusion. Typically, a filtration step is then used to remove the insolubles. The maturation occurs preferably in the tank where the infusion is left for a period of time, preferably 2-5 days. It has to be noted that a physical separation of the insolubles could be done by any filtration method known in the art, for example ultra-filtration. Many types of filtration would be known by the skilled person.

[0031] The post fermenting optimizer according to the present invention may be an infusion of roasted malt in a solvent. This malt infusion could be obtained according to a method as described above. In a preferred embodiment, the infusion of roasted malt, such as roasted barley and/or wheat malt, has a dry weight from about 3 to about 10% by weight, more preferably from about 4 to about 7% by weight, even more preferably from about 5 to about 7% by weight. "Dry weight" as used in the present invention is the amount of liquid, oily or solid residuals of the infusion (or a distillate), removed quantitatively from the solvent.

[0032] Alternatively, the post fermenting optimizer according to a further aspect of the present invention may be a distillate. Typically, the distillation is performed in a still under atmospheric pressure. The raw material to be distillated is in fact the malt infusion as previously disclosed. When the solvent mixture is comprised of ethanol and water, the distillation process is preferably performed until the collected distillate shows a concentration of alcohol between about 20 and 40% by volume, more preferably between about 25 and 35% by volume. The distillation would typically be performed at a temperature from about 80 ⁰ C to about 100 ⁰ C to ensure the quality of the obtained distillate and to avoid the loss of valuable constituents, e.g. by decomposition. The obtained distillate is clear limpid liquid. If just a particular fraction of the obtainable distillate is desired, the solution obtained after a single extraction could also be separated or the distillation could be stopped earlier, depending on the particular circumstances. If necessary, the distillate could also be readjusted upwards to an alcoholic content of about 25 to 35% by volume or higher by the addition of 96% alcohol (food-grade) to the malt infusion prior to or during distillation. The person having ordinary skill in the art would appreciate that distillation can be performed with any of the solvents or solvent mixtures described above.

[0033] Post fermenting optimizers that are useful according to the present invention are for example the ones disclosed in the co-pending international application number PCT/EP2008/008654 to Cargill, Incorporated.

[0034] The post fermenting optimizers used in this invention are combined with one or more hydrocolloids in a beverage. Preferably, the post fermenting optimizers used in this invention comprise from 0.05% to 5% of the final beverage composition, more preferably 0.1% to 4%, even more preferably 0.2% to 3%, even more preferably 0.25% to 2%, even more preferably 0.3% to 1%, even more preferably 0.35% to 0.8%, even more preferably 0.4% to 0.7%, even more preferably 0.45% to 0.6%.

[0035] The combination of adding one or more hydrocolloids with a post fermenting optimizer provides a beer-type beverage with a particularly improved mouthfeel and improved flavor. This effect can be examined best when a reduced calorie beer-type beverage is compared to a reduced calorie beer-type beverage with added hydrocolloid and/or post fermenting optimizer. In the subsequent example section, this is exemplified by comparing the mouthfeel of Miller Lite ^® without additives to the mouthfeel of Miller Lite ^® with added hydrocolloid and/or post fermenting optimizer.

[0036] Adding one or more hydrocolloids to a beer-type beverage provides a beer-type beverage with improved foam stability. This effect is examined best when a reduced calorie beer-type beverage is compared to a reduced calorie beer-type beverage with added hydrocolloid. In the subsequent example section, this is exemplified by comparing the foam stabilities of reduced calorie beer-type beverages with increasing concentrations of pectin.

EXAMPLES

[0037] The present invention is further illustrated by the examples provided below. It is understood that these examples are not intended to limit the scope of the present invention in any way. Example 1: Preparation of post fermenting optimizer (malt infusion or distillate)

LA. Preparation of a malt infusion:

[0038] 400 kg barley malt grain, lightly roasted to 120 EBC units (Caral20 EBC), and milled, was filled into an extractor basket provided in an extraction apparatus. Then, the extractor was charged with 1500 liter of aqueous ethanol solution containing 31% by volume of ethanol. The solution was heated to 60 ⁰ C under stirring and kept in contact with the milled malt for at least 3 hours under recirculation. Thereafter, the solution was discharged into a cleaned tank and 800 liter of fresh extraction solution (31% vol. ethanol) was fed into the extractor. The extractor was heated again to 60 ⁰ C and kept for another at least 3 hours at 60 ⁰ C under recirculation before discharging the extraction solution. This procedure of feeding 800 liter of fresh extraction solution, keeping the solution at 60 ⁰ C under recirculation for 3 hours and discharging was repeated two more times. The discharged extraction solutions (~ 2900 liter) were combined and, after 5 days of maturation, filtered through a 1 μm mesh sieve. The obtained product had an alcohol content of about 30% by volume and a dry weight of 5 to 6%. The obtained malt infusion is a post fermenting optimizer.

1.B. Preparation of distillate from a malt infusion:

[0039] 600 kg of the lightly roasted malt infusion produced herein was filled into a 1200 liter distillation apparatus and heated under atmospheric pressure. The distillation was continued until the total recovered distillate had an alcoholic content of 30% by volume. The distillate was mixed and a 250 ml sample was taken and analyzed for its alcoholic content. The obtained distillate of a lightly roasted malt infusion was a clear limpid product with an alcohol content of about 30% by volume. The obtained distillate is a post fermenting optimizer.

[0040] Examples 2, 3, and 4 relate to the influence of hydrocolloids and/or the post fermenting optimizer on mouthfeel.

[0041] The following methods relate to examples 2, 3, and 4:

Method of obtaining rheological measurement

[0042] The capillary viscosity of the beer-type beverage solutions was determined by measuring the steady state viscosities versus shear rate (log ramp from 1 to 100 s ^"1 ) using an Anton Paar MCR-301 rheometer with concentric double gap configuration (DG-26.7). The measurements were performed at 20 ⁰ C and the sample was allowed to equilibrate for 5 minutes before starting the test. Such methods of obtaining rheological measurements are well known in the art.

Method of obtaining tribological measurement

[0043] The Stribeck curve of each beer-type beverage solution was measured in triplicate by using an insert made out of the thermoplastic elastomer HTF 1028-02 (Kraiburg PTE, Germany), which was inserted into the measurement shaft of the tribology cell and the steel plates were placed into the grooves of the sample holding well. A motor adjustment is run each time after replacing the cork (after approx. 6 runs). The strips and cork were cleaned with diluted soap, rinsed thoroughly with tap water and dried with tissue paper by blotting after each run.

[0044] The friction profile curves were run in duplicate or triplicate at random using the following conditions: temperature 20 ⁰ C, normal force 3N o non-recording pre-shear (speed 1 min ^"1 , or sliding speed 0.47 mm/sec) for 5 minutes; o recording shear (speed 1...560 min ^"1 log, or sliding speed 0.47...250 mm/sec log),

300 measuring points, for 587 seconds. Method of measuring sensory mouthfeel

[0045] A panel of 10 people was asked to compare the mouthfeel of Miller Lite ^® without any additives with the mouthfeel of Miller Lite with added hydrocolloid and/or post fermenting optimizer (PFO). Beer-type beverages were slightly below room temperature prior to testing. Experimental samples were made by adding 50 ppm of a hydrocolloid and/or 0.5% post fermenting optimizer to a Miller Lite ^® sample. Each experimental sample was labeled with a 3 digit code unknown to the panelists. Miller Lite ^® without any additives was used as the control sample.

[0046] A brief description of mouthfeel was given to the group of panelists prior to any testing. Panelists were given the control sample and one of the experimental samples at a time. Panelists were asked to sip and spit out the control sample, then sip and spit out the experimental sample. After assessing the mouthfeel of both samples, the panelists recorded whether the experimental sample had "more mouthfeel", the "same mouthfeel", or "less mouthfeel" than the control sample. This procedure was then repeated for each of the 7 experimental samples.

Example 2: Influence of pectins and/or post fermenting optimizer on the rheological, tribological. and sensory mouthfeel properties of reduced calorie beer-type beverages

[0047] Miller Lite ^® was purchased at a local liquor store. Sugar beet pectin (Cargill 64010) and citrus pectin (Cargill 64017) were obtained from Cargill, Inc. Apple pectin (#156057) was obtained from MP Biomedicals. Experimental samples were prepared using mixtures of Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of a pectin and/or 0.5% post fermenting optimizer. Miller Lite ^® , without any additives, was used as the control sample. 3 weight % aqueous stock solutions were made by dissolving the respective pectins in R.O. water and thoroughly stirring until no more clumps were evident. Using a micropipette, post fermenting optimizer and stock solutions of apple pectin, citrus pectin, and sugar beet pectin were added to Miller Lite ^® to achieve the desired concentration in 7 separate experimental samples: Miller Lite ^® with 0.5% post fermenting optimizer, Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm apple pectin, Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm citrus pectin, Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm sugar beet pectin, Miller Lite ^® with 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 50 ppm apple pectin, Miller Lite ^® with 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 50 ppm citrus pectin, and Miller Lite with 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 50 ppm sugar beet pectin.

[0048] Samples of Miller Lite and Miller Lite with 50 ppm of a pectin and/or post fermenting optimizer were examined by rheological measurements, tribological measurements and a test panel assessing the sensory mouthfeel of these compositions. All samples were at room temperature and thoroughly degassed by stirring for a sufficient period of time prior to examination by rheological and tribological measurement. The results are summarized in Table 1 below. Table 1

Tribological and test panel data for reduced calorie beer type beverages with pectin and/or post fermenting optimizer

[0049] As seen in Table 1, the addition of a pectin with or without post fermenting optimizer to a reduced calorie beer-type beverage results in a decreased maximum friction factor (a tribological measurement) as compared to the reduced calorie beer-type beverage without any additives. This data also predicts the trend that sensory mouthfeel, as determined by a test panel, is improved with the addition of a pectin and post fermenting optimizer or pectin alone to a reduced calorie beer-type beverage. Additionally, the data indicates that sensory mouthfeel in some aspects may be predicted by the use a tribological device.

Example 3: Influence of apple pectin, citrus pectin and sugar beet pectin on the tribological properties of reduced calorie beer-type beverages

[0050] Miller Lite ^® was purchased at a local liquor store. The Miller Lite ^® was thoroughly degassed by stirring for a sufficient period of time. Citrus pectin (Cargill 64017) and sugar beet pectin (Cargill 64010) were obtained from Cargill, Inc. Apple pectin (#156057) was obtained from MP Biomedicals. Experimental samples were prepared using mixtures of Miller Lite ^® and apple pectin, Miller Lite ^® and citrus pectin, and Miller Lite ^® and sugar beet pectin. Miller Lite without any additives was used as a control sample. 3 weight % aqueous stock solutions were made by dissolving the respective pectins in R. O. water and thoroughly stirring until no more clumps were evident. Using a micropipette, each pectin stock solution was added to degassed Miller Lite ^® to make the following experimental samples: 50 ppm apple pectin in Miller Lite ^® , 50 ppm citrus pectin in Miller Lite ^® , 50 ppm sugar beet pectin in Miller Lite ^® , 10 ppm apple pectin in Miller Lite , 10 ppm citrus pectin in Miller Lite , and 10 ppm sugar beet pectin in Miller Lite ^® . The resulting experimental samples along with the control sample were assessed via tribology.

[0051] Figure 1 shows a tribological measurement of Miller Lite ^® , Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of apple pectin, Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of citrus pectin, and Miller Lite ^® with 50 ppm of sugar beet pectin displayed as Stribeck curves. The apex of the Stribeck curves of the 50 ppm apple pectin in Miller Lite sample, the 50 ppm citrus pectin in Miller Lite sample, and the 50 ppm sugar beet pectin in Miller Lite ^® were lower than that of Miller Lite ^® alone. This suggests that citrus pectin, apple pectin, and sugar beet pectin at these concentrations are effective lubricants in Miller Lite ^® . At 10 ppm, it is no longer evident that pectin can significantly reduce the friction profile of Miller Lite .

Example 4: Comparison of beer-type beverages with various hydrocolloids and post fermenting optimizer

[0052] Budweiser ^® and Bud Light ^® were purchased at a local liquor store. The Budweiser ^® and Bud Light ^® were thoroughly degassed by stirring for a sufficient period of time. Experimental samples were created by spiking degassed Bud Light ^® with a post fermenting optimizer to a concentration of 0.5% and adding different levels (10-1000 ppm) of readily available hydrocolloid bulking agents. Further experimental samples were created by adding different levels (10-1000 ppm) of readily available hydrocolloid bulking agents to degassed Bud Light ^® . The bulking agents were dissolved by thorough stirring until no more clumps were evident. Budweiser ^® and Bud Light ^® without any additives were used as control samples. Bulking agents used were sugar beet pectin, inulin (Oliggo-Fiber ^® Inulin, Cargill F- 97), and barley beta fiber (Barliv™), which were obtained from Cargill, Inc. Another bulking agent used was Sunfiber ^® R, a dietary fiber additive obtained from Taiyo. The solutions were then assessed via rheology and tribology.

Rheological measurement

[0053] Figure 2 shows the viscosity profile of beer-type beverage solutions as a function of shear rate. The viscosity profile of the following experimental solutions was taken: Bud Light ^® with 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% post fermenting optimizer (PFO), Bud Light ^® with 124 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO, and Bud Light ^® with 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO. The viscosity profiles of Budweiser ^® and Bud Light ^® were also taken as control samples. Using rheology alone, distinguishing Bud Light ^® from the Bud Light ^® experimental samples with 100 ppm and 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin proved difficult. The average Newtonian viscosities obtained for Bud Light ^® with 124 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO and Bud Light with 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO were within the margin of error of the average Newtonian viscosity of Bud Light ^® alone. When a greater amount of sugar beet pectin was added to Bud Light ^® , however, as seen from the Bud Light ^® with 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin and 0.5% PFO experimental sample, it was possible to distinguish this experimental sample from Bud Light ^® alone using rheology. Additionally, it was also possible to distinguish the average Newtonian viscosity of Budweiser ^® from Bud Light ^® . A Theological measurement alone may be insufficient to access the differences in reduced calorie beer-type beverages with the addition of a post fermenting optimizer and sugar beet pectin at concentrations of 100 ppm and below from reduced calorie beer-type beverages alone.

Tribological measurements

[0054] Tribological measurements were taken of Budweiser ^® , Bud Light ^® , Bud Light ^® with added bulking agent, and 0.5% post fermenting optimizer in Bud Light with added bulking agent. When assessing the friction profile of the Bud Light ^® solutions with each bulking agent, we were able to detect differences in the friction profiles based on the concentration and the type of bulking agent added. Surprisingly, the bulking agent with the most promising results was sugar beet pectin.

[0055] Figure 3 shows the Stribeck curves of Budweiser ^® , Bud Light ^® , 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin in Bud Light ^® , 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 124 ppm sugar beet pectin in Bud Light ^® , and 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin in Bud Light ^® . As expected, the apex of the Budweiser ^® Stribeck curve is lower than the apex of the Bud Light ^® Stribeck curve. The apex of the Stribeck curves of Bud Light with added post fermenting optimizer and sugar beet pectin were, however, also lower than that of Bud Light alone. In addition, the apex of the Stribeck curve of the 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 124 ppm sugar beet pectin in Bud Light ^® solution nearly matched the apex of the Budweiser ^® Stribeck curve, and the apex of the Stribeck curve of the 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin in Bud Light solution was even lower than the apex of the Budweiser ^® Stribeck curve.. The 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and 16.3 ppm sugar beet pectin in Bud Light ^® solution also displayed a friction profile with a lower apex than Bud Light ^® alone. The friction profile of the Bud Light ^® samples with added post fermenting optimizer and sugar beet pectin was lowered at a sliding speed between 2 and 10 mm/s.

[0056] The other bulking agents tested were inulin, barley betafiber, and Sunfiber ^® R. Inulin is a group of polysaccharide products belonging to the group of non-digestible carbohydrates called fructans. The inulin used was extracted from chicory root. The friction profile as a function of sliding speed did not generate a distinctive shift of the Stribeck profile when inulin was added to Bud Light ^® (Figure 4). Even at a concentration as high as 1000 ppm, it did not affect the Stribeck curve significantly, regardless of whether the inulin was added to Bud Light ^® alone or in combination with the post fermenting optimizer.

[0057] Results similar to those using inulin where obtained when the 2 other bulking agents were used. Barley betafϊber are mixed (l,3)-β- and (l,4)-β-D-glucose linear polysaccharides and are a structural component of plant cell walls. The molecular weight is cited as around 95,000 g/mol. The friction profile as a function of sliding speed did not generate a distinctive shift of the Stribeck curve when barley betafiber was added to Bud Light ^® . Even with barley betafiber at a concentration as high as 1000 ppm, the Stribeck curve was not affected significantly.

[0058] SunFiber R, chemically known as hydrolyzed guar gum, is used as a fiber supplement in the food industry. After being partially hydrolyzed, guar gum is completely soluble in water and soft food. Being approximately 75% dietary fiber, it allows fiber to be added to a food with a minimal effect on taste and texture. The molecular weight of hydrolyzed guar gum can vary, depending on processing conditions from 15, 20, 400, and 1100 kDa. As observed with inulin and barley betafiber, the addition of SunFiber ^® R had little impact on the friction profile of Bud Light ^® , even at concentration as high as 1000 ppm.

[0059] Tribological data showed that the friction profile was improved for Bud Light ^® compositions with 0.5% post fermenting optimizer and sugar beet pectin concentrations of 1000 ppm and lower. In contrast, the same amount of the other bulking agents tested was not able to significantly influence the friction factor.

[0060] Examples 5 and 6 relate to the influence of hydrocolloids on foam stability

Example 5: Influence of sugar beet pectin at concentrations of 1-1000 ppm on foam stability of reduced calorie beer-type beverages

[0061] Bud Light ^® , Miller Lite ^® , and Miller Genuine Draft Light ^® were purchased at a local liquor store. The reduced calorie beer-type beverages were at room temperature prior to analysis. Several levels (0-1000 ppm) of sugar beet pectin were added to each sample of Bud Light ^® , Miller Lite ^® , and Miller Genuine Draft (MGD) Light ^® . A 4.5 weight % sugar beet pectin aqueous stock solution was added to each light beer sample to achieve the desired concentration. After the light beer samples were dosed with the appropriate amount of the sugar beet pectin aqueous stock solution, they were recapped and gently inverted a few times to insure an even mix. The solutions were then given a sufficient rest period to make sure the beer foam stabilized. The foam stability of each resulting solution was then measured. Six tests were run at each concentration level and an average was taken.

[0062] The foam stability of each sample was taken using the Nibem method and measured in seconds with a Nibem foam stability tester. The tests were performed at temperatures between 20.28 and 21.56°C.

[0063] Table 2 shows the foam stability of Bud Light ^® , Miller Lite ^® , and MGD Light each with increasing concentrations of sugar beet pectin.

Table 2

[0064] The foam stability of Bud Light ^® and Miller Lite ^® increased as greater concentrations of sugar beet pectin were added to each reduced calorie beer-type beverage. At a concentration of 1000 ppm sugar beet pectin, Bud Light ^® and Miller Lite ^® experienced a greater than 20% increase in foam stability when compared to Bud Light ^® and Miller Lite ^® without any added sugar beet pectin. Thus, at a concentration of greater than 300 ppm, foam stability is improved through the addition of sugar beet pectin. It is believed that Miller Genuine Draft Light ^® may use a specially produced hop or other ingredients which offset the benefit of sugar beet pectin.

Example 5: Influence of various hvdrocolloids on foam stability of light beer at concentrations of 1 to 100 ppm

[0065] Bud Light ^® and Miller Lite were purchased at a local liquor store. The reduced calorie beer-type beverages were at room temperature prior to analysis. Propylene glycol alginate (PGA) was obtained from FMC. Litesse ^® Polydextrose was obtained from Danisco. Two nOSA starches, EmCap 12670 and EmulTru 12762, were obtained from Cargill, Inc. Citrus pectin (Cargill 64017) and sugar beet pectin (Cargill 64010) were also obtained from Cargill, Inc. Apple pectin (#156057) was obtained from MP Biomedicals. Experimental samples were made by adding several levels (0-100 ppm) of the various hydrocolloids to Bud Light ^® and Miller Lite ^® . A 3 weight % hydrocolloid aqueous stock solution was added to each reduced calorie beer-type beverage sample to achieve the desired concentration. After the reduced calorie beer-type beverage samples were dosed with the appropriate amount of the hydrocolloid aqueous stock solution, they were recapped and gently inverted a few times to insure an even mix. The solutions were then given a rest period to make sure the beer foam stabilized. The foam stability of each resulting solution was then measured. Two tests were run at each concentration level and an average was taken.

[0066] The foam stability of each sample was taken using the Nibem method and measured in seconds using a Nibem foam stability tester. The tests were performed at temperatures between 18.4 and 19.6°C. [0067] Table 3 shows the foam stability of Bud Light and Miller Lite, each with increasing concentrations of various hydrocolloids.

Table 3

[0068] The pectins were shown to have a positive effect on the foam stability of beer-type beverages.