Research Article

Development of Apple and Beetroot Blended Ready-to-Serve Drink with Enhanced Nutritional Properties

Ibrar Alam1, Majid S. Hashmi1, Mukaram Shah2, Muhammad Ayub1, Ayaz Ahmad*1, Sahib Alam3 and Zahid Alam1

1Department of Food Science & Technology, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar-Pakistan; 2Food Science & Technology section, Agriculture Research Institute, Tarnab-Pakistan; 3Department of Agricultural Chemistry & Biochemistry, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar-Pakistan.

Received | April 14 2025; Accepted | Jul 24, 2025; Published | December 08, 2025

*Correspondence | Ayaz Ahmad, Department of Food Science & Technology, The University of Agriculture, Peshawar-Pakistan. Email: [email protected]

Citation | Alam, I., M.S. Hashmi, M. Shah, M. Ayub, A. Ahmad, S. Alam and Z. Alam. 2025. Development of apple and beetroot blended ready-to-serve drink with enhanced nutritional properties. Sarhad Jurnal of Agriculture, 41(5): 92-102.

DOI | https://dx.doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2025/41.5.92.102

Keywords | RTS drink, Beetroot, Apple, Functional drink, Improved minerals, Consumers acceptability.

Copyright: 2025 by the authors. Licensee ResearchersLinks Ltd, England, UK.

This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Introduction

A notable increase has been observed in the demand for RTS drink as a result of awareness among consumers about the importance of health and nutrition (Giri et al., 2023). RTS drinks are non-fermented and non-carbonated beverage generally prepared by mixing fruit juice, sugar, water, and other additives such as preservatives and stabilizers (Rathinasamy et al., 2022). Previously, the market was dominated by synthetic and carbonated beverages laden with sugar, synthetic flavors and preserving agents, with very low nutritional profile (Tuttle, 2025; Abu-Reidah, 2020). Being the excellent source of essential nutrients such as vitamins and minerals, inclusion of fruits and vegetables in RTS is gaining popularity in modern research (Pillai et al., 2024; Sonker et al., 2018). Inclusion of fruit and vegetables in RTS preparation led to the development of unique taste with enhanced nutrition and functionality (Hemalatha et al., 2018). These fruit and vegetable based RTS are free from synthetic additives, rich in vitamins and minerals making them best choice for human consumption (Alam et al., 2025; Kumar et al., 2020).

Fruit-based drinks are known for their natural sweetness, richness of micro-nutrients, and refreshing taste (Anilakumar et al., 2017). However, combining vegetables with fruit in the preparation of drinks improve their nutritional and functional properties (Bhardwaj and Pandey, 2011). Among different fruit and vegetable, apple (Malus domestica) and beetroot (Beta vulgaris) juices can be best option for blending with enhanced sensory and nutritional characteristics (Muntean et al., 2022). Apple, mostly grown fruit of temperate region, is well-known for its natural sweetness, pleasant aroma, and high minerals content (Verma et al., 2023; Melke and Fetene, 2014). It is a good source of sugars like glucose and fructose, mineral like iron, magnesium and calcium (Akyereko et al., 2023). Apart from this apple also contain different bio-active compounds like polyphenols and phenolics in addition to various essential vitamins. These diverse group of health promoting compounds impart apple its anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, antimicrobial, anti-depressive, and anti-carcinogenic effects (Guiné et al., 2021).

Beetroot, considered as one of the most potent vegetable due to the presence of certain bio-active compounds such as betalains, flavonoids, catechins, saponins, phenolics, and alkaloids (Pandita et al., 2020). Beetroot is primarily composed of minerals like sodium, potassium, calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc and copper in addition to carbohydrates and other vitamins (Mirmiran et al., 2020). These critical components of beetroot have medicinal properties such as antioxidant, antimicrobial, antihypertension, antiviral, analgesic, antihyperglycemic, hepatoprotective, anti-progestogenic, antimigraine, anti-inflammatory, antiallergic, antithrombotic and anti-tumorigenic properties (Thiruvengadam et al., 2024; Pandita et al., 2020). Despite its rich nutritional profile, the earthy taste of beetroot juice limit direct consumption (Kardas et al., 2024). However, combining beetroot juice with fruit not only mask its earth taste but also improve minerals content, antioxidant potential, and functional properties (Paudel, 2022).

Different studies have reported the importance of fruit and vegetable juice blends in enhancing functional properties and nutritional diversity of beverages. Previous researches on RTS drink were primarily focused on conventional fruit juices or single fruit formulations and to the best of our knowledge, limited studies have explored optimized apple and beetroot juice blends for RTS beverages. Though, both apple and beetroot are regarded for their nutritional and organoleptic attributes, however, their combined effect on storage stability, physicochemical characteristics and consumers acceptability remain unexplored. Furthermore, optimum blend ratio that multiply nutritional status and organoleptic characteristics has not been evaluated systematically. Knowledge these features is critical for the development of nutritionally enriched and commercially viable RTS drink that maintain long term shelfilfe in addition to meeting consumer preferences. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate and develop RTS drink from apple and beetroot juice, specifically focusing on its composition, minerals content, storage stability, and consumers acceptability. The key objectives of the study are: to develop shelf-stable, and standardized RTS drink with optimum blend ratio of apple and beetroot juices, to evaluate the physico-chemical characteristics of the RTS drink during the storage period, and to analyze consumer acceptability of the blended RTS in terms of color, aroma and taste during the 60 days storage duration.

Materials and Methods

Raw materials collection

Firstly, uniform-sized and disease-free beetroots and apples were collected from a farm at Harichand village of district Charsadda and fruit market of Peshawar. The collected beetroots and apples were transferred to the Food Science & Technology laboratory, Agriculture Research Institute (ARI) Tarnab, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The raw materials were thoroughly washed using tap water and left to dry at 25±1oC. After drying the raw materials, peel was removed from each item, cut into slices, and blended in a juicer to get pulp. The pulp was further pressed and filtered through muslin cloth to get clear juice.

RTS preparation

The blended RTS drinks were prepared using different concentrations of beetroot and apple as follows; APBR0 = only Beetroot juice (BJ) 10% was used as control, APBR1 = Beetroot juice (BJ) 08% + Apple juice (AJ) 02%, APBR2 = Beetroot juice (BJ) 06% + Apple juice (AJ) 04%, APBR3 = Beetroot juice (BJ) 04% + Apple juice (AJ) 06%, and APBR4 = Beetroot juice (BJ) 02% + Apple juice (AJ) 08%. Other ingredients such as sugar (sucrose), citric acid as stabilizer, and sodium benzoate (preservative) were added in fixed quantity as 15%, 0.05%, and 0.1% respectively. The rest portion of all treatments was water. A total of 18.75 liters (L) of RTS for the whole research with 3 replications per treatment was prepared. After preparation the RTS was pasteurized at 85oC for 15 seconds and poured into 250 mL pre-sterilized plastic bottles and stored at 20±1oC and analyzed for physico-chemical properties and consumers acceptability at 0, 15-, 30-, 45-, and 60-days intervals.

Physico-chemical analyses

pH, Titratable acidity, Reducing and Non-reducing sugars, Total soluble solids

The pH of the blended RTS formulations was determined using a digital meter (PHS-3C, Pakistan) at 20oC as specified by AOAC, 2012. Titratable acidity was determined through potentiometric titration with 0.1N NaOH solution and reported as % (AOAC, 2012). Reducing sugars and non-reducing sugars were determined as specified earlier (AOAC, 2012) and reported as %. The TSS of each sample was determined by recording refractive index at 20oC using a refractometer (ERB-32, ERMA, Japan) as reported earlier (AOAC, 2012).

Minerals content of blended RTS

The iron, magnesium, calcium, copper, and zinc content of the blended RTS samples were analyzed using ICP-OES (Avio 220 Max, PerkinElmer, Massachusetts, USA) and UV Spectrophotometer (Specord Plus, double beam, Analytik Jena, Germany) for quantification using the method specified earlier (Musa and Parmeshwal, 2018). The samples were digested in the presence of nitric acid and diluted to known volume before analysis and final concentration of each mineral was calculated as follows:

Where,

IRs = Inst. Reading of sample (ng/mL)

IRb = Inst. Reading of blank (ng/mL)

Fv = Final volume (mL)

Vs = Volume of sample (mL)

Ascorbic acid content of blended RTS

The ascorbic acid content of blended RTS samples was measured using titration method with 2,6-dichlorophenol indophenols dye as a decolorizing agent and the results were expressed as mg/100 mL (AOAC, 2012).

Color of blended RTS

The color changes in RTS samples were measured in terms of color attributes such as L* (Lightness), a* (Redness), b* (Yellowness), and C* (Chroma) using a colorimeter (PSE-CSM 2, PCE Instruments UK Ltd., United Kingdom) colorimeter (Jahan et al., 2021).

Consumers acceptability of blended RTS

Consumers acceptability in terms of color, taste and aroma was determined using the method specified by Juarez-Enriquez et al. (2015) with slight modification. Instead of 10-point hedonic scale, 9-point hedonic scale was used (9 = extremely liked, 5 = neutral, and 1 = extremely disliked. Instead of 4 panelists, 3 panels with 5 members in each panel (all members were familiar with beetroot, mixed gender falling within age range of 24-35 years) analyzed the samples for consumers acceptability.

Statistical analysis

The obtained results were analyzed using completely randomized design (CRD) and the means were separated using least significant difference (LSD) at probability level of 5% (P≤0.05).

Results and Discussion

Changes in pH and TA of blended RTS

The pH in given treatments tend to decrease and titratable acidity tend to increase with increasing concentration of apple juice (Table 1). During the storage period, slight increase was observed in the pH and decrease in TA of all samples, however, the change was not statistically significant (p≤0.05). The lowest pH and highest TA were observed in APBR4 (3.5±0.26 and 0.47±0.03% respectively) and highest pH value and lowest TA value was observed in APBR0 (4.8±0.27 and 0.24±0.02% respectively). The decrease in pH and increase in TA by increasing apple juice and decreasing beetroot juice concentration might be due to the innate characteristic of each juice. Previously, different studies have reported pH of beetroot in the range of 6.0 to 6.3 and TA in the range of 0.014 to 0.11% (Mwaijibe and Vicent, 2025; Kale et al., 2018; Koss-Mikołajczyk et al., 2015). Similarly, pH and TA of apple juice has been reported in the ranges of 3.46 to 3.69 and 0.45 to 0.69% respectively (Lončarić et al., 2023; Wilczyński et al., 2019; Włodarska et al., 2018; Moon et al., 2006). Moreover, increase in pH can be attributed to decrease in TA due to oxidation of weak organic acids by ambient temperature and transperent packaging leading to light induced oxidation (Mwaijibe and Vicent, 2025; Tobolková et al., 2020; Kathiravan et al., 2014).

Changes in TSS, reducing and non-reducing sugars of blended RTS

The TSS, reducing and non-reducing sugars for different blended RTS is given in table 4.1. The TSS content and reducing sugars increased with decreasing beetroot juice concentration and increasing apple juice, however, non-reducing sugars showed opposite pattern and decreased with increasing apple juice concentration. During storage period, a significant (P<0.05) change in all three parameters were observed. Apple contain higher concentration of reducing sugars and lower non-reducing sugar than beetroot juice, which might be the reason for differences among different RTS blends (Table 1). These findings are aligned with the studies where the TSS of beetroot juice has been reported in the range of 7.96 to 12.5% (Mwaijibe and Vicent, 2025; Dusabumuremyi et al., 2021; Kale et al., 2018). Compared to this TSS range of apple juice has been reproted in the range of 11.9 to 13.6% (Mehdi et al., 2020; Wilczyński et al., 2019; Włodarska et al., 2018). Moreover, apple juice contains higher concentration of reducing sugars as compared to beetroot juice that contain more non-reducing sugar (Lončarić et al., 2023; Kuchi et al., 2017; Wosiacki et al., 2007). Moreover, during storage decrease in TSS was observed, and previously certain studies have observed similar changes in TSS of beetroot and apple juice during storage (Mwaijibe and Vicent, 2025; Juarez-Enriquez et al., 2015). This loss of TSS content might be due to oxidation of certain organic acids by heat and light (Tobolková et al., 2020; Kathiravan et al., 2014).

Minerals content of blended RTS

The minerals content of blended RTS formulations such as iron, magnesium, calcium, copper, and zinc are presented in Table 2. The iron content decreased from 0.085 to 0.0749 mg/100mL with increasing apple juice concentration from 0 to 8%. Similar increasing trend was observed in Magnesium, calcium, copper, and zinc. However, no significant changes were observed in mineral composition during storage. Beetroot contains 0.8 mg/100mL iron, 23 mg/100mL magnesium, 16 mg/100mL, 0.36 mg/100mL zinc, and 0.075 mg/100mL copper (Ceclu and Nistor. 2020; Wruss et al., 2015). Similarly, apple juice contains 0.34 mg/100mL iron, 7.0 mg/100mL magnesium, 4.6 mg/100mL calcium, 0.02 mg/100mL zinc and

 

Table 1: Physico-chemical properties of apple and beetroot blended ready-to-serve drink after 60 days of storage at 20±1oC

Treatments	pH	Titratable acidity (%)	Reducing sugars (%)	Non-reducing sugar (%)	Total soluble solids (%)
APBR0	4.8±0.27 a	0.24±0.02 e	1.34±0.51 e	14.67±0.85 a	16.56±0.30 e
APBR1	4.5±0.19 b	0.30±0.06 d	1.48±0.34 d	14.52±0.69 b	16.86±0.39 d
APBR2	4.2±0.31 c	0.36±0.01 c	1.56±0.11 c	14.46±0.76 c	17.00±0.42 c
APBR3	3.9±0.15 d	0.42±0.03 b	1.68±0.17 b	14.39±1.01 d	17.21±0.31 b
APBR4	3.5±0.26 e	0.47±0.03 a	1.87±0.21 a	14.22±0.98 e	17.46±0.38 a

 

The values are means ± standard deviation of three replicates. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA (P<0.05), with least significance difference (LSD) post hoc test. Different letters within the columns indicate significance difference.

0.007 mg/100mL copper (Francini et al., 2021; Henríquez et al., 2011). In this way, ABPR2 provides approximately 1% of the adult RDA for iron per serving. The higher concentration of each mineral in beetroot can be the perfect reason for higher mineral content in those samples containing higher beetroot juice (Ceclu and Nistor, 2020; Henríquez et al., 2011).

 

Ascorbic acid content of blended RTS

The ascorbic acid content of beetroot and apple juice blended RTS showed increasing trend with increasing apple juice concentration (Figure 1). Moreover, a significant decrease was also observed in ascorbic acid of all treatments during storage (p<0.05). The ascorbic acid in given treatments (APBR0 to APBR4) decreased to 0.094, 0.101, 0.108, 0.115, and 0.123 mg/100mL on day 60. Apple juice generally contains more ascorbic acid as compared to beetroot juice. Apple contains more ascorbic acid than beetroot, that might be the possible reason for high ascorbic acid in treatments having higher concentration of apple juice. Previously, in cultivated apples, ascorbic acid has been reported in the range of 1.05 to 27.85 mg/100g (Li et al., 2021; Fang et al., 2017). Similarly, different studies have reported ascorbic acid content of beetroot juice in the range of 4.20 to 10.01 mg/100mL (Theba et al., 2024; Kale et al., 2018). Dambalkar et al. (2015) observed similar decreasing trend in ascorbic acid when beetroot concentration was reduced in RTS made from beetroot, ginger and orange juice. Decrease in ascorbic acid during storage can be attributed to its susceptibility to light, heat, oxygen, enzymes and non-enzymes driven reactions (El-Dakak et al., 2017). During storage ascorbic acid is degraded into dehydroascorbic acid ultimately converting into biologically inactive compound (Yin et al., 2022). The oxidation process further intensified by elevated temperature and presence of iron and copper ions (Murekhina et al., 2022; Shen et al., 2021). Furthermore, increase in pH can also speed up ascorbic acid degradation as it is more stable in acidic conditions (Yin et al., 2022).

Color changes of blended RTS

Color changes in blended RTS in terms of L*, a*, b*, and C* are given in Figure 2. The L* and b* values

 

increased with increasing apple juice concentration among the treatments, however, a* and C* values decreased with increasing apple juice and decreasing beetroot concentration. The L* and b* values for all treatments significantly increased (P<0.05), while, the a* and C* values for all treatments significantly decreased during the storage period of 60 days. Furthermore, APBR2 stable a* (redness) likely contributed to its higher acceptability. Similar changes in color parameters were observed in several studies (Tobolková et al., 2020; Prieto-Santiago et al., 2020). Color is one of the most focused parameters for analyzing product quality as it significantly affects consumer preferences. The increase in L* values might be due to browning precipitation of unstable and suspended particles during storage (Kayın et al., 2019; Kathiravan et al., 2015; Casati et al., 2012). The decrease in a* and increase in b* values can be attributed to degradation betalains in beetroot and anthocyanins in apple juice to other compounds imparting yellow color (Tobolková et al., 2020; Knebel et al., 2018). C* value is dependent on a* and b* values and drops during storage indicating non-enzymatic browning and less saturation in the color of the drink (Fikry et al., 2023; Tobolková et al., 2020).

 

Consumers acceptability of blended RTS

The consumers acceptability of apple and beetroot blended RTS is presented in Figure 3. On day 0, APBR2 get higher score of 8.96, followed by APBR3 (8.76), APBR4 (8.61), APBR1 (6.77), and APBR0 (6.41). Throughout the storage study, these formulations showed similar decreasing consumer acceptance trend. On day 60 the score for mentioned treatments reduced to 7.82, 7.53, 7.39, 5.58, and 5.22 respectively. A significant difference was observed in overall acceptability score for all treatments. The APBR2 treatment consistently maintained higher consumer acceptability during the entire study period. Consumer acceptance of a product depends upon sensory characteristics and mostly people are used to of using apple products (Drkenda et al., 2021; Endrizzi et al., 2025). Beetroot beverage on the other hand is new to the consumers and the earthy flavor associated with beetroot negatively affects consumers preferences (Casciano et al., 2022). The result clearly expressed that 10% beetroot was not as appealing to consumers as in the 6:4 (beetroot and apple juice) concentration. Moreover, the difference in consumers acceptance may be due to varying physciochemical properties. As beetroot contains more minerals and sugar content (Mwaijibe and Vicent, 2025; Dusabumuremyi et al., 2021) while apple juice contains more ascorbic acid and reducing sugars (Loncaric et al., 2023; Li et al., 2021).

Conclusions and Recommendations

The beetroot and apple blended RTS were analyzed for physicochemical and consumers acceptability for 60 days. Overall, treatments containing higher concentration of beetroot juice showed higher pH,

 

Table 2: Minerals content of apple and beetroot blended ready-to-serve drink after 60 days of storage at 20±1oC

Minerals content (mg/100mL)
Treatments	Iron	Magnesium	Calcium	Copper	Zinc
APBR0	0.085±0.0002 a	1.970±0.001 a	1.710±0.003 a	0.0050±0.00001 a	0.0199±0.002 a
APBR1	0.082±0.0001 b	1.756±0.003 b	1.633±0.007 b	0.00493±0.00003 b	0.0197±0.007 b
APBR2	0.079±0.0003 c	1.541±0.004 c	1.555±0.002 c	0.00485±0.00004 c	0.0193±0.005 c
APBR3	0.077±0.0001 d	1.3269±0.006 d	1.477±0.008 d	0.00477±0.00001 d	0.0191±0.003 d
APBR4	0.075±0.0001 e	1.1125±0.002 e	1.399±0.004 e	0.00469±0.00005 e	0.0190±0.003 e

 

The values are means ± standard deviation of three replicates. Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA (P<0.05), with least significance difference (LSD) post hoc test. Different letters within the columns indicate significance difference.

 

total soluble solids, non-reducing sugar, and minerals content. Treatments containing higher concentration of apple juice showed higher titratable acidity, reducing sugars, and ascorbic acid content. The consumer acceptability scores, however, showed different pattern with APBR2 (6:4 Beetroot and apple juice) emerging as the most accepted treatment throughout the storage period compared to all other treatments. As clear from the physicochemical analyses results, this treatment also contains balance amount of each parameter, with low pH, non-reducing sugars, and high TA, reducing sugars and ascorbic acid. Thus, it can be concluded that beetroot and apple juice in 6:4 concentration should be used for the preparation of blended RTS. Considering the scope of this study, commercial validation should include large-scale production trials, shelf-life testing in opaque packaging to minimize ascorbic acid degradation and consumer testing with diverse demographics to confirm stability and market acceptance.

Acknowledgements

This study was conducted as a requirement for the M.Sc. (Hons) degree of the first author. No external funding was received for the completion of this research.

Novelty Statement

The study represents a novel approach to develop a functional RTS beverage by blending beetroot and apple juices in different ratios to improve both nutritional value and consumers acceptability.

Authors contributions

Ibrar Alam: Designed the study, conducted the laboratory work, analyzed the data, and wrote the manuscript.

Majid S. Hashmi: Contributed to the study design, supervised the research, and assisted in the finalization of the manuscript.

Mukaram Shah: Supervised the laboratory work and contributed to manuscript writing.

Muhammad Ayub: Supervised, reviewed and assisted in the finalization of the final draft.

Sahib Alam: Proofread the manuscript and contributed to its improvement.

Ayaz Ahmad: Assisted with data analysis and manuscript finalization.

Zahid Alam: Supported laboratory work and data compilation.

Generative AI or AI assisted technology statement

The authors declare that no generative AI or AI-assisted technology was used in the writing or editing of this manuscript.

Conflict of interests:

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest related to this work.

Reference

Abu-Reidah, I.M. 2020. Carbonated beverages. Trend. Non-alcoholic. Beverage., 1: 1-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816938-4.00001-X

Akyereko, Y.G., G.B. Yeboah, F.D. Wireko-Manu, F. Alemawor, F.C. Mills-Robertson and W. Odoom. 2023. Nutritional value and health benefits of cashew apple. J. Sci. Food. Agric. Report., 3(3): 110-118. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsf2.107

Alam, M.W., J.V. Kumar, M. Awad, P. Saravanan, N.S. Al-Sowayan, P. Rosaiah and M.S. Nivetha. 2025. Emerging Trends in Food Process Engineering: Integrating Sensing Technologies for Health, Sustainability and Consumer Preferences. J. Food Process Eng., 48(1): e70035. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.70035

Anilakumar, K.R., C. Rajendran and R.K. Sharma. 2017. Non-alcoholic beverages-market potential and opportunities. Indian Food Ind. Mag., 35(4): 15-21.

AOAC. 2012. Association of Official and Analytical Chemists. Official methods of analysis, Washington D.C.

Bhardwaj, R.L. and S. Pandey. 2011. Juice blends a way of utilization of under-utilized fruits, vegetables and spices: a review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr., 51(6): 563-570. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408391003710654

Casati, C.B., V. Sánchez, R. Baeza, N. Magnani, P. Evelson and M.C. Zamora. 2012. Relationships between colour parameters, phenolic content and sensory changes of processed blueberry, elderberry and blackcurrant commercial juices. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., 47(8): 1728-1736. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2012.03027.x

Casciano, F., H. Mayr, L. Nissen, A. Putti, F. Zoli, A. Gianotti and L. Conterno. 2022. Red beetroot fermentation with different microbial consortia to develop foods with improved aromatic features. Food., 11(19): 3055. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods11193055

Ceclu, L. and O.V. Nistor. 2020. Red beetroot: Composition and health effects A review. J. Nutr. Med. Diet Care., 6(1): 1-9.

Dambalkar, V.S., B.D. Rudrawar and V.R. Poojari. 2015. Effect on pH, TSS, acidity, ascorbic acid and sensory attributes during storage period of RTS made from beetroot, orange and ginger juice. Int. J. Food Nutr. Sci., 4(5): 99.

Drkenda, P., A. Ćulah, N. Spaho, A. Akagić and M. Hudina. 2021. How do consumers perceive sensory attributes of apple?. Food., 10(11): 2667. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112667

Dusabumuremyi, J.C., P. Rubona and M.A. Ndisanze. 2021. Effect of storage temperature on physical-chemical and microbiological characteristics of beetroot juice. INES Sci. J., 1(1): 43-52. https://doi.org/10.32677/ISJ.2021.v01.i01.005

El-Dakak, A., M. Youssef and H. Abd El-Rahman, H. 2017. Evaluation of beetroot juice blends with carrot and apple juice as healthy beverage. Bulletin of the National Nutrition Institute of the Arab Republic of Egypt., 48(1): 1-29. https://doi.org/10.21608/bnni.2017.4236

Endrizzi, I., L. Torri, M.L. Corollaro, M.L. Demattè, E. Aprea, M. Charles, F. Biasioli and F. Gasperi. 2015. A conjoint study on apple acceptability: Sensory characteristics and nutritional information. Food Qual. Prefer., 40: 39-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodqual.2014.08.007

Fang, T., Q. Zhen, L. Liao, A. Owiti, L. Zhao, S.S. Korban and Y. Han. 2017. Variation of ascorbic acid concentration in fruits of cultivated and wild apples. Food Chem., 225: 132-137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.01.014

Fikry, M., Y.A. Yusof, A.M. Al-Awaadh, S.A.H.M. Baroyi, N.S.M. Ghazali, K. Kadota, S. Mustafa, H. Abu Saad, N.N.A.K. Shah and S. Al-Ghamdi. 2023. Assessment of physical and sensory attributes of date-based energy drink treated with ultrasonication: Modelling changes during storage and predicting shelf life. Process., 11(5): 1399. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051399

Francini, A., C. Fidalgo-Illesca, A. Raffaelli anad L. Sebastiani. 2021. Phenolics and mineral elements composition in underutilized apple varieties. Hortic.,8(1): 40. https://doi.org/10.3390/horticulturae8010040

Giri, N.A., B.K. Sakhale and N.P. Nirmal. 2023. Functional beverages: an emerging trend in beverage world. Recent Front. Phytochem., 123-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-19143-5.00002-5

Guiné, R.P., M.J. Barroca, T.E. Coldea, E. Bartkiene and O. Anjos. 2021. Apple fermented products: An overview of technology, properties and health effects. Process., 9(2): 223. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr9020223

Hemalatha, R., A. Kumar, O. Prakash, A. Supriya, A.S. Chauhan and V.B. Kudachikar. 2018. Development and quality evaluation of ready to serve (RTS) beverage from cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana L.). Beverag., 4(2): 42. https://doi.org/10.3390/beverages4020042

Henríquez, C., S. Almonacid, I. Chiffelle, T. Valenzuela, M. Araya, L. Cabezas, R. Simpson and H. Speisky. 2011. Determination of antioxidant capacity, total phenolic content and mineral composition of different fruit tissue of five apple cultivars grown in Chile. Chilean J. Agric. Res., 70: 523-536. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-58392010000400001

Jahan, R., M.A.S. Polash, M.M. Karim, S.A. Juthee, M.S.A. Fakir and M.A. Hossain. 2021. Extraction, characterization and biochemical analysis of betacyanins derived from beetroot (Beta vulgaris). Res. Crop., 22(1): 216-223. https://doi.org/10.31830/2348-7542.2021.060

Juarez-Enriquez, E., L. Salmeron-Ochoa, N. Gutierrez-Mendez, H.S. Ramaswamy and E. Ortega-Rivas. 2015. Shelf-life studies on apple juice pasteurised by ultrahigh hydrostatic pressure. LWT-Food Sci. Technol., 62(1): 915-919. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2014.07.041

Kale, R.G., A.R. Sawate, R.B. Kshirsagar, B.M. Patil and R. Mane. 2018. Studies on evaluation of physical and chemical composition of beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.). Int. J. Chem. Stud., 6(2): 2977-2979.

Kardas, M., M. Rakuła, A. Kołodziejczyk and W. Staśkiewicz-Bartecka. 2024. Consumer Preferences, Sensory Evaluation and Color Analysis of Beetroot and Tomato Juices: Implications for Product Development and Marketing in Health-Promoting Beverages. Food., 13(24): 4059. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods13244059

Kathiravan, T., S. Nadanasabapathi and R. Kumar. 2014. Standardization of process condition in batch thermal pasteurization and its effect on antioxidant, pigment and microbial inactivation of Ready to Drink (RTD) beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.) juice. Int. Food Res. J., 21(4).

Kathiravan, T., S. Nadanasabapathi and R. Kumar. 2015. Pigments and antioxidant activity of optimized Ready-to-Drink (RTD) Beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.) passion fruit (Passiflora edulis var. flavicarpa) juice blend. Croatian J. Food Sci. Technol., 7(1): 9-21. https://doi.org/10.17508/CJFST.2015.7.1.01

Kayın, N., D. Atalay, T. Türken Akçay and H.S. Erge. 2019. Color stability and change in bioactive compounds of red beet juice concentrate stored at different temperatures. J. Food Sci. Technol., 56: 5097-5106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-019-03982-5

Knebel, T., P. Braun and H. Dietrich. 2018. Degradation kinetics of anthocyanins and polyphenols during storage of red apple juice produced from red-fleshed apples. European Food Res. Technol., 244: 1741-1750. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-018-3086-4

Koss-Mikołajczyk, I.B. J. Kusznierewicz, J. Namieśnik and A. Bartoszek. 2015. Juices from non-typical edible fruits as health-promoting acidity regulators for food industry. LWT-Food Sci.Technol., 64(2): 845-852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2015.06.072

Kuchi, V.S., D. Ramesh, S. Chakrabarty and R.S. Dhua. 2017. Characterization of Reducing Sugars of Red Beet (Beta vulgaris L.) during Cold Storage through Statistical Modeling. Int. J. Curr. Microbiol. App. Sci., 6(2): 285-295. https://doi.org/10.20546/ijcmas.2017.602.034

Kumar, C.S., A. Ali and A. Manickavasagan. 2020. Health benefits of substituting added sugars with fruits in developing value-added food products: a review. Int. J. Nutr. Pharmacol. Neurol. Dis., 10(3): 75-90.

Li, Y., H. Sun, J. Li, S. Qin, W. Yang, X. Ma, X. Qiao and B. Yang. 2021. Effects of genetic background and altitude on sugars, malic acid and ascorbic acid in fruits of wild and cultivated apples (Malus sp.). Food., 10(12): 2950. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10122950

Lončarić, A., I. Flanjak, T. Kovac, I. Tomac, A.M.G. Skoko, M.S. Babojelic, G. Fruk, S.Z. Zrinusic, D. Cicek, J. Babic and A. Jozinovic. 2023. Unveiling apple diversity: The quality of juice produced from old vs. commercial apple cultivars. Plant., 12(21): 3733. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants12213733

Mehboob, Z., A. Abid, A. Faiza, Z. Mahnoor, A. Shakila, S.F. Muhammad and A. Hiba. 2023. Nutritional and physio chemical analysis of commerical apple juices and natural apple juices available in Pakistan. J. Popul. Ther. Clin. Pharmacol., 30(18): 1845-1855. https://doi.org/10.53555/jptcp.v30i18.3370

Mehdi, A., A. Sohail, M. Mazahir, K.S. Abbasi, R.M. Amir, W. Ali and M. Asim. 2020. Assessment of physico-chemical and phyto-chemical properties of six apple varities cultivated in district Nagar and Hunza Gilgit Baltistan, Pakistan. Pure. Appli. Biol., 9(2): 1627-1636. https://doi.org/10.19045/bspab.2020.90171

Melke, A. and M. Fetene. 2014. Apples (Malus domestica, Borkh.) phenology in Ethiopian highlands: plant growth, blooming, fruit development and fruit quality perspectives. https://doi.org/10.9734/AJEA/2014/9783

Mirmiran, P., Z. Houshialsadat, Z. Gaeini, Z. Bahadoran and F. Azizi. 2020. Functional properties of beetroot (Beta vulgaris) in management of cardio-metabolic diseases. Nutr. Metabolis., 17: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12986-019-0421-0

Moon, K.D., P. Delaquis, P. Toivonen, S. Bach, K. Stanich and L. Harris. 2006. Destruction of Escherichia coli O157: H7 by vanillic acid in unpasteurized juice from six apple cultivars. J. Food Prot., 69(3): 542-547. https://doi.org/10.4315/0362-028X-69.3.542

Muntean, M.V., A.C. Farcas, M. Medeleanu, L.C. Salanţa and A. Borsa. 2022. A sustainable approach for the development of innovative products from fruit and vegetable by-products. Sustain., 14(17): 10862. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141710862

Murekhina, A.E., D.N. Yarullin, M.A. Sovina, P.A. Kitaev and G.A. Gamov. 2022. Copper (II)-catalyzed oxidation of ascorbic acid: Ionic strength effect and analytical use in aqueous solution. Inorgan., 10(7): 102. https://doi.org/10.3390/inorganics10070102

Musa, A.I. and L. Parmeshwal. 2018. Analysis of heavy metals and minerals in fruit juices by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry coupled with Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy. Int. J. Recent Sci. Res., 9(3): 25509-25511.

Mwaijibe, S. and V. Vicent. 2025. Effects of pasteurisation and storage conditions on folate retention and microbiological quality of beetroot juice. Food Chem. Adv., 6: 100939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.focha.2025.100939

Pandita, D., A. Pandita, R.R. Pamuru, and G.A. Nayik. 2020. Beetroot. In Antioxidants in vegetables and nuts-properties and health benefits, 45-74. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-7470-2_3

Patocka, J., K. Bhardwaj, B. Klimova, E. Nepovimova, Q. Wu, M. Landi, K. Kuca, M. Valis and W. Wu. 2020. Malus domestica: A review on nutritional features, chemical composition, traditional and medicinal value. Plant., 9(11): 1408. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants9111408

Paudel, P. 2022. Preparation of Beetroot-Ginger Ready to Serve (RTS) Juice and Study of Storage Stability at Different Storage Condition (Doctoral dissertation, Department of Food Technology Central Campus of Technology Institute of Science and Technology Tribhuvan University, Nepal 2022).

Pillai, S., S.E. Topno and V. Bahadur. 2024. Standardization, physico-chemical and organoleptic evaluation of value added ready-to-serve (RTS) beverage from starfruit. J. Exp. Agric. Int., 46(6): 661-668. https://doi.org/10.9734/jeai/2024/v46i62522

Prieto-Santiago, V., M.M. Cavia, S.R. Alonso-Torre and C. Carrillo. 2020. Relationship between color and betalain content in different thermally treated beetroot products. J. Food Sci. Technol., 57: 3305-3313. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04363-z

Rathinasamy, M., S. Ayyasamy, S. Velusamy and A. Suresh. 2022. Natural fruits based ready to serve (RTS) beverages: a review. J. Food Sci. Technol., 1-7.

Shen, J., P.T. Griffiths, S.J. Campbell, B. Utinger, M. Kalberer and S.E. Paulson. 2021. Ascorbate oxidation by iron, copper and reactive oxygen species: Review, model development and derivation of key rate constants. Sci. Report., 11(1): 7417. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-86477-8

Sonker, S., A.K. Chaudhary, A.K. Chauhan and M.A. Alsebaeai. 2018. Fortification of functional value of pineapple Ready-to-Serve (RTS) beverage by the addition of Amla and Giloy. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr., 3(1): 48-51.

Szekely, D. and M. Mate. 2022. Red beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.). In Advances in Root Vegetables Research. Intech. Open. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.106692

Theba, T., P. Nayi and A. Ravani. 2024. Beetroot-based blended juice: Process development, physico-chemical analysis and optimization of novel health drink. Food Chem. Adv., 4: 100607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.focha.2024.100607

Thiruvengadam, M., I.M. Chung, R. Samynathan, S.H. Chandar, B. Venkidasamy, T. Sarkar, M. Rebezov, O. Gorelik, M.A. Shariati and J. Simal-Gandara. 2024. A comprehensive review of beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.) bioactive components in the food and pharmaceutical industries. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr., 64(3): 708-739. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2022.2108367

Tobolková, B., M. Polovka, L. Daško, E. Belajová and J. Durec. 2020. Evaluation of qualitative changes of apple-beetroot juice during long-term storage at different temperatures. J. Food Meas. Charac., 14: 3381-3388. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-020-00592-0

Tuttle, T. 2025. Composition of energy drinks. In Energy Drinks (pp. 73-94). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-13803-4.00007-0

Verma, M.K., W.H. Raja, J.I. Mir, S. NR and V. Mehetre. 2023. Potential of temperate fruit crops in northeastern states of India. Ind. Hortic., 68(6): 30-34.

Wilczyński, K., Z. Kobus and D. Dziki. 2019. Effect of press construction on yield and quality of apple juice. Sustain., 11(13): 3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133630

Włodarska, K., I. Khmelinskii and E. Sikorska. 2018. Evaluation of quality parameters of apple juices using near-infrared spectroscopy and chemometrics. J. Spectr., 2018(1): 5191283. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5191283

Wosiacki, G., A. Nogueira, F. Frederico and R.G. Vieira. 2007. Sugar composition of depectinized apple juices. European Food Res. Technol., 28: 645-652.

Wruss, J., G. Waldenberger, S. Huemer, P. Uygun, P. Lanzerstorfer, U. Müller, O. Höglinger and J. Weghuber. 2015. Compositional characteristics of commercial beetroot products and beetroot juice prepared from seven beetroot varieties grown in Upper Austria. J. Food Comp. Anal., 42: 46-55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2015.03.005

Yin, X., K. Chen, H. Cheng, X. Chen, S. Feng, Y. Song and L. Liang. 2022. Chemical stability of ascorbic acid integrated into commercial products: A review on bioactivity and delivery technology. Antioxidan., 11(1): 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox11010153