Coconut Sugar Chemical Analysis and Nutritional PR

Review
Coconut Sugar: Chemical Analysis and Nutritional Profile;

Health Impacts; Safety and Quality Control; Food
Industry Applications
Ariana Saraiva 1, Conrado Carrascosa 1,*, Fernando Ramos 2,3, Dele Raheem 4, Maria Lopes 2,3 and
António Raposo 5,*
1 Department of Animal Pathology and Production, Bromatology and Food Technology, Faculty of
Veterinary, Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Trasmontaña s/n, 35413 Arucas, Spain
2 Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra, Azinhaga de Santa Comba, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
3 Associated Laboratory for Green Chemistry (LAQV) of the Network of Chemistry and Technology
(REQUIMTE), Rua D. Manuel II, Apartado 55142, 4051-401 Porto, Portugal

4 Northern Institute for Environmental and Minority Law (NIEM), Arctic Centre, University of Lapland,
96101 Rovaniemi, Finland

5 CBIOS (Research Center for Biosciences and Health Technologies), Universidade Lusófona de
Humanidades e Tecnologias, Campo Grande 376, 1749-024 Lisboa, Portugal

* Correspondence: [email protected] (C.C.); [email protected] (A.R.)
Abstract: Consumers often wish to substitute refined sugar with alternative sweeteners, such as
coconut sugar, given growing interest in healthy eating and the public’s negative perception of
excess sugar intake. Coconut sugar is a healthier, sweetener option than the majority of other sugars
that are commercially available. Sap is collected from trees to be transported, stored, and evaporated
during processing, which are labor- and resource-intensive operations. Consequently, the cost of
production is higher than it is for cane sugar. Given its high nutritional value and low glycemic
index, people are willing to pay higher prices for it. However, one barrier is ignorance of its health
Citation: Saraiva, A.; Carrascosa, C.;
benefits. This review examines and deals in-depth with the most significant features of coconut
Ramos, F.; Raheem, D.; Lopes, M.;
Raposo, A. Coconut Sugar: Chemical
sugar chemical analyses to focus on several analytical methodologies given the increasing demand
Analysis and Nutritional Profile; for naturally derived sweeteners in the last 10 years. A deeper understanding of the quality control,
Health Impacts; Safety and Quality safety, health effects, nutritional profile, and sustainability issues corresponding to coconut sugar
Control; Food Industry is necessary to effectively implement them in the food industry.
Applications. Int. J. Environ. Res.
Public Health 2023, 20, 3671. Keywords: alternative sweeteners; coconut sugar; chemical analysis; health impacts; nutrition; food
https://doi.org/10.3390/ industry
ijerph20043671
Academic Editor: Paul B.

Tchounwou
1. Introduction
Received: 6 January 2023
Revised: 10 February 2023
In south/south-eastern Asian cuisine, coconut sugar is a popular sweetener [1] and is
Accepted: 15 February 2023 made of phloem sap from coconut palm tree (Cocos nucifera L.) blossoms [2]. Workers
Published: 19 February 2023 collect sap by scaling palm trees and use sickles to chop off unopened inflorescences. For
8–12 h, oozing sap is collected with bamboo or plastic containers. Lime is occasionally
added to the sap to stop it from fermenting [3,4]. Next, the sap is heated on open flames
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
and regularly shaken for it to thicken and crystallize [1]. During the production method,
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. sugar color can range from light to dark brown. Finally, sugar is hand-selected and sieved
This article is an open access article to produce fine-grained produce [5].
distributed under the terms and One inflorescence is typically produced by each coconut palm tree once a month.
conditions of the Creative Commons Approximately 1.5 L of sap is harvested twice a day (morning and evening) from all the
Attribution (CC BY) license inflorescences. Based on the approximate 15 g of sugar per 100 g sugar content of
(https://creativecommons.org/license fresh coconut sap, boiling sap allows 200 g of sugar per inflorescence to be produced daily
s/by/4.0/). [3,4].
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 3671. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043671 www.mdpi.com/journal/ijerph
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 3671 2 of 25
Even at early ages, coconut palm trees can be utilized for sap collection purposes.
Every time phloem sap is tapped and harvested, 1–2 mm of spadix must be cut away.
Spadix can be diminished to a stump by repeating this technique. Following this
procedure, a single spadix can be tapped for 40–45 days. Coconut palm trees can be tapped
for a 20-year period [1,3].
Due to the growing interest that the public is showing in healthy diet and the
negative public perception of excess sugar use, consumers frequently attempt to
substitute refined sugars for alternative sweeteners like coconut sugar [6]. Traders
highlight coconut sugar’s traditional small-farmer producers, organic palm tree growth
in mixed farming with other crops, lower glycemic index (GI), and low fructose content
than regular refined beet sugar or cane [7]. Coconut sugar has a premium price that
consumers are willing to pay. One kilogram (kg) might cost something between €15 and
€46. In contrast, the price of a kg of traditionally refined sugar was only €0.88 in 2021 [8].
Customers today are increasingly more aware of natural ingredients. Consumers’
growing emphasis on naturalness has had a significant impact on the food industry [9,10].
Consumers in most nations often reject the food products that they do not perceive as
natural. The demand for sweeteners made from natural sources has skyrocketed in recent
decades [11].
In light of the above, the present review investigates the health effects and nutritional
profile linked with consuming coconut sugar, its potential food industry applications and
sustainability issues, and its primary safety–quality parameters, plus a chemical analysis
of its major components.
2. Chemical Analysis
Food attributes like color, consistency, texture, flavor, and smell are extremely
relevant for consumers and, consequently, for industry. In coconut sugar and syrup, these
characteristics derive from the quality of the sap from which they are produced and the
chemical reactions that occur during the heating process, namely non-enzymatic
browning via caramelization and Maillard reactions (MR) [12]. The latter involves a highly
complex reaction between reducing sugars and amino acids, and has major effects on
coconut sugar and syrup properties, including their nutritional and functional value,
color, aroma, and flavor [12–15]. Regarding flavor, the characteristics of MR products may
vary from a pleasant flowery aroma to a burnt aroma in accordance with the sugar and
amino acid compositions of the food matrix and the involved reaction pathways [13–16].
MR products, such as acrylamide and 5-hydroxymethylfurfural, have been directly linked
with the degree of coconut sugar browning, and high levels of these products can lead to
toxic health effects [13–17]. In this context, it is worth noting the study by Phaenon et al.
[18] in which the level of acrylamide was determined in both coconut sap and coconut
syrup, and, while in the first case this compound was not detected, the reported levels in
the latter were of 867 µ g/kg. Many MR products exhibit beneficial biological functions,
such as potent antioxidant activity [13]. As a matter of fact, the coconut sugar and syrup
production process generates hundreds of distinct MR products that are more or less
desirable [19]. Bearing this in mind, it is easy to understand that coconut sugar and syrup
are much more than merely a concentrated sugar solution, and the study of their chemical
composition, which is fundamental to improve their nutritional and functional properties
and to guarantee consumer safety, is a complex and demanding task.
Several research works have been conducted to evaluate the physico-chemical,
microbiological, and antioxidant characteristics of coconut sap, sugar, and syrup. Some of
the most important ones are presented in Table 1 and focus on the analytical techniques
used and the main outcomes. Color determination, pH, and total soluble solids are some
of the analyses routinely performed in coconut sap, sugar, and syrup. However, despite
being fundamental for the quality control of these products, they provide limited means
for more specific quality profile analyses and, hence, the need for more advanced
analytical techniques arises.
Coconut sugar and syrup contain well over 100 different types of compounds,
including carbohydrates, free amino acids, proteins, minerals, vitamins, aromatic
compounds, and phenolics. Table 2 provides an overview of some of the most recent
studies carried out to assess the inorganic and organic compositions of coconut sap, sugar,
and syrup. Atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) is the most commonly followed
technique reported for mineral analyses. The main issue in determining mineral
composition is the accurate quantification of these elements in a complex matrix, like that
of coconut sugar or syrup, which has other components and at much higher levels (e.g.,
sugars), while dealing with the problem of interferences from mineral elements other than
that being measured [20]. AAS is a technique with good detection limits. It is relatively
simple to perform and incurs low to moderate acquisition and operation costs. It allows
only a limited number of elements to be analyzed [19]. Other techniques like ICP-MS
(inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry) require costlier equipment and greater
proficiency to operate, but stand out for having better detection limits and allow the
quantification of many elements at ultra-trace concentrations in large numbers of samples.
Therefore, they should be increasingly used [20]. For studying organic constituents, the
non-volatile ones are analyzed mainly by high-performance and ultrahigh liquid
chromatography (HPLC/UHPLC) coupled to different detectors (e.g., refractive index
(RI), mass spectrometry (MS), UV-Vis), while volatile ones are determined mostly by GC–
MS (gas chromatography coupled to mass spectroscopy) (e.g., [21–23]). Indeed, coupling
a chromatography system (e.g., UHPLC/HPLC or GC) to a mass spectrometer is one of
the most powerful ways to identify and quantify compounds because this analytical
strategy provides two different types of data per run analysis: (i) retention time and (ii)
mass spectral pattern (molecular ion and fragmentation), for each separated compound.
This information can be used to make comparisons to appropriate reference standards or
literature data [24].
As part of quality control, another critical aspect is the need to develop swift and
accurate analytical methods for fraud detection. Like honey, agave syrup, and maple
syrup, coconut sugar and syrup are prone to adulteration via the addition of less
expensive exogenous sugars, such as cane sugar, beet sugar and corn sugar. In fact, the
addition of a minor quantity of cane sugar, i.e., less than 5% w/v, to coconut sugar for
“seed” purposes and to accelerate its crystallization is common and well-accepted in the
industry [25]. The risk of fraud is a major issue given the important economic advantage
of adding an extra amount of cane sugar or another inexpensive sugar [25]. Some of the
most relevant analytical approaches recently proposed to combat this problem are
presented in Table 3. Technologies like NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) and IRMS
(isotope ratio mass spectrometry) are noteworthy, as shown by the results obtained with
the studies of Bachmann et al. [26] or Rogers et al. [25], respectively. NMR is a non-
destructive technique that provides fast results and requires easy sample preparation.
However, it implies using a large amount of sample to obtain an adequate signal [27].
IRMS, however, requires a considerably smaller amount of sample than in NMR analyses
and displays 0.2‰ precision on the δ-scale [28]. One important limitation of IRMS is the
fact that it only provides the global δ13C values of the analyte [28]. Specifically, in the
coconut sugar and syrup adulteration context, applying the IRMS tool involves a
significant disadvantage because, although it is highly successful for detecting the
addition of cane and corn sugar to coconut sugar and syrup, it does not allow the detection
of beet sugar addition [18,29]. This is because coconut is a C3 plant-like beet, while cane
and corn are C4 plants. The 13C/12C ratio of C3 plants is lower than that of C4 plants, and
it is on this difference that the IRMS technique is based because it is impossible to detect
admixtures of beet sugar with coconut sugar [29] Notwithstanding, both IRMS and NMR
have a high potential, and their combined approach could shed considerable light on the
food fraud and adulteration issue. Energy-dispersive X-Ray fluorescence (ED-XRF) is an
alternative tool with a very high potential for detecting coconut sugar adulterations with
both cane and beet sugars, as evidenced by Zdiniakova and Calle [29]. ED-XRF offers the
excellent advantage of requiring almost no sample preparation and can be performed with
portable devices, but has relatively high quantification limits [29,30]. That said, from an
analytical point of view and despite important advances, there is still a lot of work to be
done to gain fast and eco-friendly methods that can be performed with portable devices
and used by both consumers and producers quickly to easily detect adulterations.
In addition to food fraud, another aspect that cannot be neglected is food safety.
Coconut sugar and syrup undoubtedly provide consumers with important nutritional
and functional benefits when produced from high-quality sap that is properly collected,
preserved, and processed, i.e., following good manufacturing practices (GMP). However,
employing sap of inferior quality and its processing under unhygienic conditions are real
problems that deserve our utmost attention because they pose the risk of contamination
by insects and microorganisms (see Table 4). In this context, the dire need to carry out
studies to determine the risk of other contaminants occurring is noteworthy. Research
work on contaminants from food processing (acrylamide), agrochemicals (e.g., pesticide
residues), heavy metals (e.g., mercury, lead, arsenic, cadmium, etc.), microorganism
toxins (e.g., mycotoxins), and cleaning agents (e.g., detergents) or disinfectants
(quaternary ammonium, detergents) has been increasingly performed in other natural
sweeteners and sugar products, but is still almost nonexistent for coconut sugar and
syrup.
Table 1. Physico-chemical, microbiological, and antioxidant characteristics of coconut sap, sugar,

and syrup.
Studies
Samples
Methodology Analytical Details Principal Outcomes Ref.
No. Kind Origin
Physico-
Chemical
Parameters
The authors assessed the color attributes of the sap collected
by (1) the traditional approach using a lime-coated clay pot;
Coconut sap
A panel of 50 (2) a novel “coconut-sap chiller method”. It was designed to
(collected by India
2* Sensory analysis evaluators used a 5- collect fresh non-fermented sap free of foreign matter. The [21]
two different (Kasaragod)
point hedonic scale. coconut sap collected by the traditional method was found to
methods)
be oyster white, while that collected by the new method was
golden brown.
Outcomes were
Coconut
included in the The authors investigated processing coconut sap in syrup by
syrup
Malaysia CIELAB system: L* alternative processes compared to the conventional open heat
3* (produced by Colorimetry [22]
(Jelai) (lightness/darkness); a* evaporation technique. The L* parameter ranged from 23.84 to
three different
(redness/greenness); b* 35.61, a* from 2.31 to 3.746, and b* from 17.71 to 23.30.
methods)
(yellowness/blueness).
Color A descriptive test was
carried out according
Indonesia, to the official German
Coconut Philippines, methodology. For this
107 * Sensory analysis The most expensive coconut sugars were light brown. [17]
sugar and unknown purpose, a panel made
origin up of 18 trained
evaluators was
selected.
Outcomes were
The color of both coconut sugar and coconut syrup was
included in the
Coconut evaluated for 6 months. For coconut sugar, the L* parameter
Philippines CIELAB system: L*
6* sugar and Colorimetry ranged from 53.38 to 63.50, a* from 7.50 to 9.08, and b* from [31]
(Makati) (lightness/darkness); a*
coconut syrup 24.02 to 28.28. For coconut syrup, L* ranged from 17.87 to
(redness/greenness); b*
19.96, a* from 7.72 to 8.26, and b* from 1.44 to 1.67.
(yellowness/blueness).
A descriptive test was
carried out according
Indonesia,
to the official German The more expensive products, i.e., those that were light
Consistency Coconut Philippines,
107 * Sensory analysis methodology. To do brown, were characterized as fine powders, while the cheaper [6]
and texture sugar and unknown
so, a panel made up of ones were described as being coarse-grained.
origin
18 trained evaluators
was selected.
The sap collected by the traditional method had a fetid smell,

which was not detected in the sap collected by a novel
Coconut sap “coconut-sap chiller method” that the authors put forward. It
A panel made up of 50
(collected by India is noteworthy in the traditional method that the collection
2* Sensory analysis evaluators used a 5- [21]
two different (Kasaragod) system is open. This allows the emission of volatile molecules
point hedonic scale.
methods) by sap to attract insects like bees, which leads to sap
contamination. As the method developed by the authors is a
closed system, this contamination does not occur.
Smell
applied in accordance
Indonesia, with the official
In cheaper coconut sugars, i.e., those with a darker color, the
Coconut Philippines, German methodology.
107 * Sensory analysis sweet aroma predominated, while the caramel aroma was [6]
sugar and unknown For this purpose, a
particularly dominant in the expensive products.
origin panel made up of 18
trained evaluators was
selected.
Coconut sap A panel was made up
The flavor of the sap obtained by a novel “coconut-sap chiller
(collected by India of 50 evaluators who
2* Sensory analysis method” was sweet and delicious, but that traditionally [21]
two different (Kasaragod) used a 5-point hedonic
collected had a foul astringent aftertaste.
methods) scale.
Flavor carried out according
Indonesia,
to the official German The coconut sugar flavor was described as mainly sweet. For
Coconut Philippines,
107 * Sensory analysis methodology. A panel the expensive products, i.e., those lighter in color, malty and [6]
sugar and unknown
made up of 18 trained caramel attributes were added.
origin
evaluators was
selected.
The pH of the coconut sap collected by the traditional method
Coconut sap
was <6, whereas the sap collected by a new “coconut-sap
(collected by India
2* pH meter NR ** chiller method” had a pH of 7–8. The sap collected by the [21]
two different (Kasaragod)
novel method was fresh and non-fermented, but the
methods)
traditionally collected sap was partially fermented.
Coconut sap
(with and
without Kemloko The pH levels of the fresh coconut sap, both with and without
pH 2* NR ** NR ** [32]
preservative, (Indonesia) added preservative/s, were 4.26 and 4.68, respectively.
i.e., limestone
solution)
The pH levels in coconut sugar and coconut syrup were
Coconut evaluated over 6 months and ranged from 5.11 to 5.79 for the
Philippines
6* sugar and pH meter NR ** former, and from 4.28 to 4.45 for the latter. It should be noted [31]
(Makati)
coconut syrup that pH levels lowered in both products over time, which may
be related to microbiological contamination.
The soluble solids content was higher in the sap collected by a
new “coconut-sap chiller method” proposed by the authors
(15.5–18 a) compared to that determined in the sap collected
Coconut sap A refractometer
by the conventional procedure (13–14 a). This might be owing
(collected by India measured both total
2* Refractometry to the metabolization of sugars in sap by the microorganisms [21]
two different (Kasaragod) soluble solids and Brix
found in it, which were detected in much larger numbers in
methods) values.
Density the conventionally collected sap.
a—Values expressed as °Brix.
A refractometer
Coconut Brix was evaluated over 6 months for coconut sugar and
Philippines measured both total
6* sugar and Refractometry syrup, and ranged from 97.6 to 98.9 for the former and from [31]
(Makati) soluble solids and Brix
coconut syrup 79.6 to 80.3 for the latter.
values.
The analysis of the microbiome of the fresh and fermented
A culture-independent
coconut sap revealed that the former presented a considerably
metagenomic
larger number of bacterial species than the latter. In contrast,
methodology suitable
the fresh sap showed lower fungi and yeast diversity than the
for bacterial and
fermented sap. The fresh coconut sap displayed an abundance
fungal microbiome
Microbiologi Coconut sap of Leuconostoc spp., followed by akin proportions of
India Metagenomic determinations with
cal 2* (fresh and 12- Acetobacter sp., Fructobacillus sp., and Gluconobacter sp. The [33]
(Kasaragod) analysis 16S rRNA and ITS
parameters h fermented) fermented coconut sap exhibited a substantial increase in
amplicon sequencing,
Gluconobacter sp. with a marked reduction in Leuconostoc spp.
respectively, was used
Regarding fungi and yeast occurrence, the fresh sap showed a
to perform the analysis
predominance of species of the Saccharomyces genera and of
of the fresh and
Hanseniaspora. The fermented sap showed abundance for
fermented coconut sap.
Cortinarius saturatus and Hanseniaspora guilliermondii.
Coconut sap FRAP (ferric-reducing According to the FRAP assay, the values of the conventionally
Antioxidant India
3* (collected by Colorimetry antioxidant power) collected coconut sap, the coconut sap obtained by a novel [21]
potential (Kasaragod)
two different assay. “coconut-sap chiller method” and the coconut sugar
methods) and generated from the latter were respectively 8.34 a, 14.8 a, and
coconut sugar 22.9 a
a —Values are expressed as mg of AEAC (ascorbic acid

equivalent antioxidant capacity)
The DPPH (2,2-
Diphenyl-1- The DPPH free radical inhibition percentage and ORAC
Thailand
picrylhydrazyl) radical values ranged between 25.7–87.37 a and 740.7–3815.6 b,
(Samut
Coconut scavenging activity respectively.
2* Songkhram Colorimetry [34]
sugar assay.
and
The ORAC (oxygen —Values shown as %;
a
Phetchaburi)
radical antioxidant b—Values shown as mg of trolox equivalents (TE)/100 g.
capacity) assay.
* Total number of samples analyzed in the study; ** NR—Not reported.
Table 2. Chemical analyses of the organic and inorganic constituents of coconut sap, sugar, and
syrup.
Studies
Samples
Methodology Analytical Details Principal Outcomes Ref.
No. Kind Origin
The mineral levels in coconut sugar samples fell
Sample preparation: within the ranges of 101.77–128.95 a (K), 85.32–
Coconut sugar was incinerated 94.66 a (Cl), 7.96–16.28 a (Mg), 12.68–15.87 a (Si),
until ash was obtained. 8.33–14.57 a (P), 5.58–13.17 a (S), 8.05–11.65 a (Na),
9* Coconut sugar Ivory Coast Spectrometry [35]
Sample processing: 1.23–2.19 a (Cu), and 1.73–2.09 a (Fe). Traces—1.04
The coconut sugar ash analysis a (Br) and 0.17 a (Zn).
was performed by (SEM).

a—Values expressed as mg/100 g.
The predominant minerals were K (960.87 a), Na

Sample preparation: (183.21 a) and Mg (22.91 a). The levels of Fe (1.36 a), Ca
FAAS (flame atomic
Malaysia Coconut sap was first diluted (0.42 a), Zn (0.338 a), Mn (0.105 a) and Cu (0.065 a)
1* Coconut sap absorption [36]
(Jelai) (10×), then filtered and further were also determined.
Inorganic spectrophotometry)
analyzed.
constituent a—Values expressed as mg/L.
s
The mineral composition of both coconut sugar
and coconut syrup was evaluated for 6 months.
For coconut sugar, the K, Na, and Fe ranges were
954–1075 a, 99–112 a, and 0.5–0.6 a, respectively.
The Ca and Zn levels remained constant over
Coconut sugar Atomic absorption
Philippines time and were 8 and 0.1 a, respectively. For
6* and coconut spectrophotometry NR ** [31]
(Makati) coconut syrup, the levels of K varied between
syrup (AAS)
609–632 a, Na between 110–126 a, Ca between 1–2
a, and Zn between 0.1–0.2 a. The Fe levels were 0.4
a at the three different measurement times.
a —Values expressed as mg/100 g.

Organic
constituent
s
Non
volatiles
The total free amino acids content of the sap
Amino acids profile: attained conventionally, the sap obtained from a
Sample preparation: “new coconut-sap chiller method”, and the sugar
Samples were hydrolyzed in a produced from the latter was, respectively 0.413 a,
Ninhydrin method vacuum using hydrochloric 1.03 a, and 3.05 b. The following amino acids were
(for free amino acids acid, 6 M. Then, hydrolysates quantified in the coconut sap obtained by the
quantification) were dried (also in a vacuum) traditional method: (i) glutamic acid (359 c); (ii)
UHPLC-TQD-MS/MS after neutralization. They were aspartic acid (83.7 c); (iii) serine (60.5 c); (iv)
Coconut sap
(ultrahigh dissolved in a known volume alanine (16.2 c); (v) threonine (13.7 c); (vi) proline
(collected by
Amino India performance liquid of the mobile phase, filtered (13.1 c); (vii) arginine (11.9 c); (viii) lysine (7.81 c);
3* two different [21]
acids (Kasaragod) chromatography (0.2 µ m), and finally injected (ix) valine (6.48 c); (x) citrulline (6.38 c); (xi)
methods) and
coupled to tandem into the analytical system. methionine (5.90 c); (xii) phenylalanine (2.14 c);
coconut sugar
quadrupole mass Column: (xiii) asparagine (0.86 c); (xiv) leucine (0.64 c); (xv)
spectrometry) for the Waters UPLC BEH-C18 histidine (0.42 c); (xvi) tyrosine (0.29 c); (xvii)
amino acids profile column (2.1 × 50 mm; 1.7 μm), tryptophan (0.01 c). For the sap acquired by the
analysis protected by a Waters novel method, amino acids and respective levels
Vanguard BEH C-18 guard were as follows: (i) glutamic acid (626 c); (ii)
column (1.7 μm). aspartic acid (118 c); (iii) serine (58.1 c); (iv)
Mobile phase: arginine (17.3 c); (v) alanine (15.1 c); (vi) proline
(14.6 c); (vii) threonine (12.2 c); (viii) methionine
0.1% formic acid in water- (6.28 c); (ix) valine (6.10 c); (x) citrulline (6.07 c);
methanol: water (1:1) with (xi) lysine (5.93 c); (xii) phenylalanine (2.56 c);
0.1% formic acid. (xiii) asparagine (2.41 c); (xiv) histidine (0.65 c);
(xv) leucine (0.56 c); (xvi) tyrosine (0.16 c); (xvii)
tryptophan (0.01 c). In turn, sugar contained (i)
glutamic acid (394 d); (ii) aspartic acid (131 d); (iii)
proline (112 d); (iv) alanine (84.5 d); (v) serine (78.0
d); (vi) lysine (64.5 d); (vii) threonine (59.1 d); (viii)
arginine (53.7 d); (ix) valine (50.9 d); (x)

phenylalanine (50.7 d); (xi) tyrosine (26.0 d); (xii)
leucine (21.8 d); xiii) methionine (19.6 d); (xiv)
histidine (5.83 d); (xv) citrulline (5.79 d); (xvi)
asparagine (4.25 d); (xvii) 3,4-dihydroxy-
phenylalanine (0.76 d); (xviii) tryptophan (0.18 d).
—Values appear as g/100 mL;

a
b—Values appear as g/100 g;
c—Values appear as mg/100 mL.
d—Values appear as mg/100 g
The authors investigated the processing of

coconut sap in syrup by alternative process
Sample preparation: techniques compared to the conventional open
Coconut syrup samples were heat evaporation technique. The fructose,
HPLC-RID (high- diluted (10×), filtered (0.45 glucose. and sucrose levels respectively ranged
Coconut syrup performance liquid µ m), and further analyzed. between 18.27–35.07 a, 21.38–23.71 a, and 7.35–
(produced by Malaysia chromatography Column: 25.67 a. The coconut syrup obtained by the rotary
3* [22]
three different (Jelai) coupled with Merck LiChroCART® Single evaporation technique displayed larger quantities
methods) refractive index bond NH2 column (250 × 4.6 of glucose and fructose, but a smaller quantity of
detection) mm; 5 µ m). sucrose, than that produced by the other
Mobile phase: techniques. The total sugar content for all the
Acetonitrile-water (80:20, v/v). analyzed samples was between 64.89–65.66 a.
a—Values expressed as %.
Sample preparation:
Coconut sap was diluted,
HPLC-RID (high- (10×), filtered (0.45 µ m), and
Three sugars (sucrose, fructose, glucose) were
performance liquid further analyzed.
detected in coconut sap. Their respective values
Malaysia chromatography Column:
1* Coconut sap were 6.91 a, 3.48 a, and 2.53 a. [36]
(Jelai) coupled with Merck LiChroCART® Single
refractive index bond NH2 column (250 × 4.6 a—Values expressed as %.
detection) mm; 5 µ m).
Carbohydra Mobile phase:
tes Acetonitrile-water (80:20, v/v).
The total sugars content of the sap acquired
traditionally, the sap obtained following a new
Phenol–sulphuric “coconut-sap chiller method”, and the sugar
acid method (for total produced from the latter was 9.20 a, 16.2 a, and
Coconut sap
sugars content 91.8 b, respectively. For the reducing sugars
(collected by
India determination) content, the reported values were 1.24 a for the
3* two different NR ** [37]
(Kasaragod) Nelson-Somogyi’s sap obtained conventionally, 0.68 a for the sap
methods) and
method (for reducing collected by the novel approach, and 4.69 b for
coconut sugar
sugars content sugar.
quantification)
a—Values shown as g/100 mL;
b—Values shown as g/100 g.
The sugar composition of both coconut sugar and

coconut syrup was evaluated for 6 months. For
coconut sugar, the sucrose, glucose, fructose, and
mannose levels ranged between 83.18–90.50 a,
Coconut sugar GC–MS (gas
Philippines 9.40–11.45 a, 2.89–3.69 a, and 0.51–3.90 a,
6* and coconut chromatography- NR ** [38]
(Makati) respectively. For coconut syrup, they varied
syrup mass spectrometry)
between 35.85–38.96 a, 10.74–14.03 a, 15.39–15.57 a,
and 3.91–5.35 a, respectively.
a—Values expressed in mg/100 g.
Coconut sap Sample preparation: For the fresh sap to which no preservative was
(with and HPLC-RID (high- For each sample, 1 g was added, lower sucrose content (1.76 a) and higher
without performance liquid weighed, and then dissolved fructose (5.76 a) and glucose (4.46 a) contents were
preservative, Kemloko chromatography in 100 mL of distilled water. found compared to the sap with the preservative
4* [32]
i.e., limestone (Indonesia) coupled with The mixture was filtered, and whose sucrose, fructose and glucose levels were
solution) and refractive index the solution was injected into 5.76 a, 3.23 a, and 2.25 a, respectively. For coconut
coconut sugar detection) the HPLC. system. sugar, the sucrose content of that prepared with
(with and Column: fresh coconut sap, but without adding a
without Aminex HPX-87C. preservative, was lower (49.41 a) than that of

preservative) Mobile phase: coconut sugar produced with the fresh coconut
Water. sap to which a preservative was added (49.41 vs.
57.05 a). Their glucose (15.90 a) and fructose (14.15
a) levels were higher than those of the coconut
sugar prepared from the fresh coconut sap to

which a preservative was added; that is, glucose
6.97 a and fructose 5.45 a.
a—Values expressed in %.
The total phenolics content of the sap acquired

traditionally, the sap obtained by a novel
“coconut-sap chiller method”, and the sugar
produced from the latter was 14.8 a, 21.7 a, and
47.2 b, respectively. The following phenolic
compounds were quantified in the coconut sap
obtained by the traditional method: (i) vanillic
acid (2.92 c); (ii) syringic acid (1.80 c); (iii) trans-
cinnamic acid (0.636 c); (iv) p-hydroxy benzoic
acid (0.308 c); (v) ferulic acid (0.302 c); (vi)
protocatechuic acid (0.182 c); (vii) 2,4-dihydroxy
benzoic acid (0.126 c); (viii) gentisic acid (0.104 c);
(ix) gallic acid (0.073 c); (x) o-coumaric acid (0.064
c); (xi) rutin (0.043 c); (xii) caffeic acid (0.042 c);
Phenolic profile: (xiii) salicylic acid (0.040 c); (xiv) umbelliferone

Sample preparation: (0.030 c); (xv) p-coumaric acid (0.008 c). Regarding
The extraction of the the sap collected by the new method, the
Folin’s Ciocalteu
individual phenolics was identified phenolics were as follows: (i) vanillic
method (for total
performed with 80% aqueous acid (3.54 c); (ii) trans-cinnamic acid (2.40 c); (iii) p-
phenolic content
methanol (v/v). Thereafter, hydroxy benzoic acid (0.963 c); (iv) syringic acid
determination
filtering the extracted sample (0.707 c); (v) salicylic acid (0.477 c); (vi) ferulic acid
purposes)
Coconut sap was performed (0.2 μm). This (0.246 c); (vii) catechin (0.157 c); (viii) quercetin
Ultrahigh
(collected by sample was injected into the (0.156 c); (ix) hesperetin (0.116 c); (x) myricetin
India performance liquid
Phenolics 3* two different analytical system. (0.105 c); (xi) caffeic acid (0.103 c); (xii) rutin (0.078 [21]
(Kasaragod) chromatography
methods) and Column: c); (xiii) protocatechuic acid (0.065 c); (xiv) o-
coupled with
coconut sugar Waters UPLC BEH-C18 coumaric acid (0.062 c); (xv) umbelliferone (0.056
UHPLC-TQD-MS/MS
column (2.1 × 50 mm; 1.7 μm) c); (xvi) gallic acid (0.044 c); (xvii) p-coumaric acid
(tandem quadrupole
protected by a Waters (0.030 c); (xviii) gentisic acid (0.026 c); (xix) 2,4-
mass spectrometry)
Vanguard BEH C-18 guard dihydroxy benzoic acid (0.015 c). In sugar: (i)
for the phenolic
column (1.7 μm). vanillic acid (12.8 d); (ii) benzoic acid (9.41 d); (iii)
profile analysis
Mobile phase: trans-cinnamic acid (4.25 d); (iv) catechin (2.37 d);
0.1% formic acid in water (v) p-hydroxy syringic acid (1.96 d); (vi) p-
0.2% formic acid in methanol coumaric acid (1.27 d); (vii) ferulic acid (0.908 d);
(viii) o-coumaric acid (0.706 d); (ix) salicylic acid
(0.653 d); (x) myricetin (0.390 d); (xi) hesperetin
(0.327 d); (xii) quercetin (0.313 d); (xiii) apigenin
(0.230 d); (xiv) protocatechuic acid (0.224 d); (xv)
gallic acid (0.203 d); (xvi) rutin (0.192 d); (xvii)
gentisic acid (0.111 d); (xviii) caffeic acid (0.109 d);
(xix) umbelliferone (0.078 d); (xx) 2,4-dihydroxy
benzoic acid (0.037 d).
a —Values are mg of gallic acid equivalents

(GAE)/100 mL;
b—Values are mg of GAE/100 g;
c—Values are mg/100 mL;
d—Values are mg/100 g.
Sample preparation:
Coconut sap was diluted (10x),
HPLC/UV-Vis (high- filtered, and further analyzed. Vitamins C, B1, B2, B3, B4, and B10 were all
performance liquid Column: detected in coconut sap. Their levels were 116.19
Malaysia chromatography Agilent Poroshell 120 EC a, 4.33 a, 0.084 a, 1.88 a, 0.53 a, and 0.33 a,
1* Coconut sap [36]
(Jelai) coupled with column (100 × 4.6 mm; 4 μm). respectively.
ultraviolet-visible Mobile phase:
detection) Potassium dihydrogen a—Values expressed as µ g/mL.
Vitamins
phosphate buffer (pH 3.4, 50
mM).
6-Dichlorophenol- Sample preparation: The following vitamins were detected and
Coconut sap
indophenol (DCPIP) Water-soluble vitamins: quantified in the coconut sap obtained by the
(collected by
India method for vitamin C Samples were extracted with traditional method: (i) vitamin C—16.3 a; (ii) B1—
3* two different [21]
(Kasaragod) level measurements 10 mM ammonium 0.021 c; (iii) B3—11.4 c; (iv) B5—1.64 c; (v) B6—1.32
methods) and
(ultrahigh acetate:methanol 50:50 (v/v) c; (vi) B7—0.095 c; (vii) B9—0.031 c; (viii) D2—
coconut sugar
performance liquid that contained 0.1% 0.028 c; (ix) D3—0.062 c; (x) E—2.94 c; (xi) K1—
chromatography butylhydroxytoluene and 0.601 c; (xii) K2—0.428 c. For the sap collected by a
coupled to tandem centrifuged. Next, the new “coconut-sap chiller method”, the vitamins
quadrupole mass supernatant was (0.2 μm) and their respective levels were as follows: (i)
spectrometry) for the filtered and injected into the vitamin C—19.6 a; (ii) B1—0.068 c; (iii) B3—14.9 c;
quantification of analytical system. (iv) B5—3.99 c; (v) B6—2.35 c; (vi) B7—0.073 c; (vii)
other vitamins Fat-soluble vitamins: B9—0.036 c; (viii) D2—0.074 c; (ix) D3—0.056 c; (x)
The residue from the E—7.20 c; (xi) K1—1.73 c; (xii) K2—0.771 c. Sugar
previously described contained (i) vitamin C—3.98 b; (ii) B1—14.3 d; (iii)
extraction (please refer to B2—0.248 d; (iv) B3—34.7 d; (v) B5—2.53 d; (vi)
“water-soluble vitamins”) was B6—101 d; (vii) B7—2.51 d; (viii) B9—0.260 d; (ix)
re-extracted with ethyl acetate D2—0.171 d; (x) D3—0.256 d; (xi) E—19.6 d; (xii)
that contained 0.1% K1—7.35 d; (xiii) K2—5.57 d.
butylhydroxytoluene,
centrifuged and filtered (0.2 a—Values are given as mg/100 mL;
μm) before being injected into b—Values are given as mg/100 g;
the analytical system. c—Values are given as µ g/100 mL;
Column: d—Values are given as µ g/100 g.
Waters UPLC BEH-C18

column (2.1 × 50 mm; 1.7 μm)
protected by a Waters
Vanguard BEH C-18 guard
column (1.7 μm).
Mobile phase:
Water-soluble vitamins:
0.1% formic acid in water-
acetonitrile.
Fat-soluble vitamins:
Acetonitrile—0.2% formic acid
in methanol.
Vitamin C levels in both coconut sugar and
coconut syrup were evaluated over 6 months and
Coconut sugar 2,6-
Philippines ranged from 16 to 44 a for the former, and from 19
6* and coconut Dichloroindophenol NR ** [31]
(Makati) to 30 a for the latter.
syrup titrimetric method
a —Values expressed as mg/100 g.
Volatiles
The following 21 compounds were identified in
the fresh coconut sap: (i) palmitic acid (2024 a); (ii)
palmitoleic acid (1042 a); (iii) ethyl lactate (560 a);
(iv) phenyl ethyl alcohol (357 a); (v) 3-hydroxy-2-
pentanone (236 a); (vi) tetradecane (167 a); (vii)
farnesol (125.5 a); (viii) 2-methyl tetrahydrofuran
(105 a); (ix) tetradecanone (104.5 a); (x)
tetradecanoic acid (94.0 a); (xi) nonanoic acid (84.8
a); (xii) dodecane (74.3 a); (xiii) dodecanoic acid
Isolated volatiles: (52.6 a); (xiv) hexanoic acid (49.8 a); (xv)
Volatile compounds were pentadecane (48.4 a); (xvi) 2-hydroxy-3-pentanone
isolated by the SDE (45.6 a); xvii) nerolidol (44.9 a); (xviii) hexadecane
Aliphatic/ar
(simultaneous distillation- (37.2 a); (xix) 1-hexanol (27.3 a); (xx) hexadecanone
omatic
extraction) method with a (25.9 a); (xxi) tridecanone (24.5 a). For the clarified
hydrocarbon
Likens-Nikerson apparatus. coconut sap, 13 compounds were identified,
s, ketones,
Coconut sap The extractive solvent was which were as follows: (i) palmitic acid (342 a); (ii)
aldehydes, GC–MS (gas
(fresh, India dichloromethane. ethyl lactate (300 a); (iii) phenyl ethyl alcohol (195
alcohols, 3* chromatography- [12]
clarified, and (Mandakalli) GC–MS: a); (iv) palmitoleic acid (141 a); (v) 3-hydroxy-2-
esters, fatty mass spectrometry)
fermented) Column: pentanone (75.9 a); (vi) hexanoic acid (54.7 a); (vii)
acids,
Supelco-fused silica column tetradecane (46.9 a); (viii) 2-methyl
furans,
SPB-1 (30 m × 0.32 mm; 0.25 tetrahydrofuran (45.4 a); (ix) dodecane (30.5 a); (x)
pyrazines,
µ m) coated with polydimethyl 1-hexanol (24.8 a); (xi) pentadecane (21.8 a); (xii)
pyrans and
siloxane. hexadecane (16.4 a); (xiii) 2-hydroxy-3-pentanone
sulfur-
Gas carrier: (14.0 a). In the fermented coconut sap, 11
containing
Helium. compounds were identified, namely as follows:
compounds.
(i) palmitoleic acid (14,603 a); (ii) isoamylalcohol
(7467 a); (iii) ethyl lactate (4636 a); (iv) phenyl
ethyl alcohol (4189 a); (v) palmitic acid (2421 a);
(vi) dodecanoic acid (1084 a); (vii) ethyl caprate
(797 a); (viii) ethyldodecanoate (709 a); (ix)
tetradecanoic acid (597 a); (x) ethyl caprylate (503
a); (xi) farnesol (224 a).
a—Values expressed as µ g/L.
Isolated volatiles: Five volatiles were isolated in the fresh coconut

Coconut sap, Indonesia Gas
6* Volatile compounds were sap: (i) 2-butanol (60.26–68.37 a); (ii) acetic acid [37]
coconut syrup (Blitar) chromatography—
isolated by a simultaneous (25.83–30.43 a); (iii) 2-methylcyclohexane (0.66–
and coconut mass spectrometry distillation–extraction (SDE) 6.39 a); (iv) cyclohexyloctane (1.81–4.23 a); (v) 1,4
sugar (GC–MS) method using a Likens– dimethyl-6,1-butyl acetate (0.91–1.11 a). For
Nikerson apparatus. coconut syrup, the following occurred: (i) 2-
The extractive solvent was butanol (45.35–51.02 a); (ii) acetic acid (24.56–6.47
diethylether. a); (iii) dodecanoic acid (0.34–21.59 a); (iv) 2-furan
GC–MS: (1.97–6.73 a); (v) cyclohexane (3.56–4.41 a); (vi) 1,4

Column: dimethyl-6,1-butyl acetate (0.40–10.26 a); (vii) 4,6
CBP-5 column (50 m). dimethyl-5-cyclo-hexo pyrimidine (0–2.25 a); (viii)
Gas carrier: 2,3 dimethylpirazine (0–0.77 a). Finally for
Helium. coconut sugar, the following compounds were
identified: (i) acetic acid (21.54–35.05 a); (ii) 2-
butanol (29.98–31.23 a); (iii) 1,4 dimethyl-6,1-butyl
acetate (1.7–15.50 a); (iv) N,N dimethyl 2-
(diphenylmetoxi)-ethylamine (9.31–13.26 a); (v)
cyclohexyloctane (0.0–17.01 a); (vi) dodecanoic
acid (0.0–12.41 a); (vii) methylpyrazine (1.46–1.81
a).
a—Values expressed as %.
Isolated volatiles:
Volatile compounds were The following volatile compounds were
extracted three times with identified in coconut sugar: (i) acetic acid a; (ii)
diethyl ether. The combined 2,3-pentanedione; (iii) acetoin; (iv) 2,5-dimethyl
extract was left to concentrate pyrazine; (v) 2,3-butanedione; (vi) methional;
in a Vigreux column. Then, the (vii) furfural; (viii) 5-methyl furfural; (ix) 2-
concentrated extract was furanmethanol; (x) 4-methyl-5H-furan-2-one; (xi)
subjected to high vacuum 5-methyl-2-furan methanol; (xii) benzylalcohol;
distillation and then (xiii) maltol [3-Hydroxy-2-methyl- 4H-pyran-4-
GC–MS (gas concentrated, first in a Vigreux one]; (xiv) Furaneol® [2,5-dimethyl-4- hydroxy-
chromatography- column and finally in a 3(2H)-furanone]; (xv) vanillin [4-Hydroxy-3-
Thailand mass spectrometry) nitrogen flow. methoxybenzaldehyde].
1* Coconut sugar [38]
(Samutsongkhram) GGO (gas GC–MS: The sweet, roasted, burnt, nutty, smoky, and
chromatography- Column: caramel notes of coconut sugar were attributed
olfactometry) Restek Stabilwax column (30 mostly to pyrazine, furan, and pyran derivatives
m × 0.25 mm; 0.25 µ m) and an being present. Benzyl alcohol and vanillin also
Agilent DB-5MS column (30 m introduce sweet notes. In addition, acetoin, 2,3-
× 0.25 mm; 0.25 µ m). pentanedione and 2,3-butanedione were found to
Gas carrier: be responsible for the buttery, cheesy, and
Helium. creamy aromas.
Descriptive sensory analysis:
The sensory evaluation panel a—Major component identified; values not
included nine properly trained reported.

evaluators.
Isolated volatiles:
Volatile compounds were
extracted by SPME (solid- The identified volatile compounds were as
phase microextraction). follows: (i) 2,3-diethyl-5-methyl pyrazine; (ii) 2,3-
GC–MS (gas
Thailand GC–MS: dimethyl pyrazine; (iii) 2,5- dimethyl pyrazine;
2* Coconut sugar chromatography– [12]
(Ampawa) Column: (iv) 2-ethyl-3,5-dimethyl pyrazine; (v) 2-methyl
mass spectrometry)
An Agilent DB-625 capillary pyrazine; (vi) ethyl pyrazine; (vii) 5-methyl
column (30 m × 0.25 mm). furfural; (viii) furfural.
Gas carrier:
Helium.
The detected volatile components comprised the
following: (i) ethanol (9.48–52.21 a); (ii) 4-
methanol (19.58–27.85 a); (iii) acetaldehyde
(<0.01–16.33 a); (iv) 2-furanmethanol (<0.01–13.54
Isolated volatiles: a); (v) acetic acid (<0.01–11.98 a); (vi) 1-hydroxy-2-
Volatile compounds were propanone (<0.01–10.24 a); (vii) acetone (2.63–9.98

isolated by means of a); (viii) 2-ethyl-3,6-dimethyl pyrazine (<0.01–6.46
headspace gas a); (ix) 2-propanol (2.29–4.37 a); (x) hexanoic acid
chromatography. (<0.01–2.93 a); (xi) 3-methyl hexanal (<0.01–2.35 a);

Thailand (Samut GC–MS (gas
GC–MS: (xii) 2-furaldehyde (<0.01–1.48 a); (xiii) hydroxy-2-
2* Coconut sugar Songkhram and chromatography– [34]
Column: butanone (0.0–1.10 a); (xiv) butanoic acid (<0.01–
Phetchaburi) mass spectrometry)
An Agilent DB wax-fused 1.01 a); (xv) 2-methyl propanal (0–0.91 a); (xvi) 3-
silica capillary column (60 m × (methylthio)-propanal (<0.01 a); (xvii) 2,3-
0.25 mm; 0.25 µ m). butanedione (<0.01 a); (xviii) 2-methyl-3-buten-2-
Gas carrier: ol (<0.01 a); (xix) 2-methyl-1-propanol (<0.01 a);
Helium. (xx) 2-ethyl-5-methyl pyrazine (<0.01 a); (xxi) 3-
methyl-butanol (<0.01 a); (xxii) 2-acetylfuran
(<0.01 a).
a —Values expressed as %.
Table 3. Detecting adulterants in coconut sap, sugar, and syrup.

Works
Adulterants Samples
Methodology Analytical Details Principal Outcomes Refs.
No. Kind Origin
1H NMR:
Sample preparation:
To identify polar minor metabolites,
500 mg of every sugar sample were
dissolved in 1 mL of deuterium oxide
to be vortexed. Then, a 600 μL aliquot
was placed inside an NMR tube to be
analyzed. To study the non-polar
extracts, 1 mL of chloroform-d was
Pyroglutamic acid has
added to 500 mg of all the coconut
been identified as a unique
1H NMR (proton nuclear
sugars. Then, suspensions were
marker for coconut sugar.
vortexed and centrifuged. Finally, a
magnetic resonance). Additionally, coconut
600-μL aliquot of the supernatant was
ULPC-Q-TOF-MS sugars exhibited
placed inside an NMR tube.
(ultraperformance liquid substantially higher levels
Coconut Analysis:
21 * NR ** chromatography quadrupole of acetic, formic, lactic, and [26]
sugar Spectra were recorded at 300 K.
time-of-flight mass succinic acids than both
UPLC-Q-TOF-MS:
spectrometry). cane and beet sugars.
Sample preparation:
MRA (multivariate regression Trans-aconitic acid was
Of each sample, 1 g was dissolved in
analysis). shown to be a marker for
20 mL of water and the solution was
cane sugar, as was betaine
filtered (0.20 μm). A 2-μL aliquot of
for beet sugar.
this filtrate was diluted (10x) to be
Cane and beet
then injected into the analytical
sugar
system.
Column:
Waters HSS T3 C-18 column.
Mobile phase:
15 mM acetic acid, 10 mM
tributylamine, 5% (v/v) methanol-2-
propanol.
Sample preparation:
First, samples were ground, and
This research work
pellets were prepared. To do so, 5 g
established the mass
of sugar needed to be mixed with 1 g
fractions of Br, Ca, Cl, Cu,
of wax.
Fe, K, P, Rb, S, and Sr in
Energy-dispersive X-ray fluorescence:
Energy-dispersive X-ray the coconut, cane, and beet
Indonesia and The irradiation time (s) was 200 for
Coconut fluorescence sugar samples. On
11 * unknown Ca, Cl, Cu, Fe, K, P, and S, and 500 for [13,20,30]
sugar Soft independent modeling of average, all the
origin Br, Rb, and Sr.
class analogies (SIMCA) aforementioned elements
Analytical parameters:
had significantly bigger
LOQ *** (mg/Kg): 1.7 Br; 118.4 Ca; 78
mass fractions in coconut
Cl; 1.2 Cu; 4.6 Fe; 566 K; 171 P; 4.2 Rb;
sugars than in cane and
1.19 Sr.
beet sugars.
Precision (%): 22 Br; 3.5 Ca; 2 Cl; 10.5
Cu; 6.5 Fe; 3 K; 6 P; 5 Rb; 8 Sr.
Sample preparation:
First, 300 mg of all the coconut sugar
The genuine coconut sugar
samples were dissolved in 5 mL of
exhibited an average δ13C
deionized water in centrifuge tubes.
value of −25.6‰ ± 0.4‰.
Tubes were then immersed in warm
More positive δ13C values
water inside an ultrasonic bath (15
(>−24.8‰) indicate the
min). Then, solutions were (0.45 μm)
addition of C4 sugar, i.e.,
filtered and a 10-µ L aliquot was
cane or corn sugar/syrup.
Cane and corn Coconut Indonesia δ13C IRMS (stable carbon isotope transferred to tin capsules, which
109 * More negative δ13C values [25]
sugar sugar (Central Java) ratio mass spectrometry). were dried at 40 °C. Finally, capsules
(<−26.4‰) should be
were crimped and subjected to
related to the use of
double encapsulation prior to the
additives. On the whole,
analysis.
the authors propose a
Carbon isotope analysis:
maximum acceptable δ13C
An isotope ratio mass spectrometer
value of −24.1‰ for
interfaced with an elemental analyzer
authentic coconut sugars.
(EA-IRMS) in the continuous flow
mode for δ13C measured isotopes.
* Total number of samples analyzed in the study; ** NR—Not reported; *** LOQ—Limit of
quantification.
Table 4. Detecting contaminants in coconut sap, sugar, and syrup.

Works
Contaminants Samples
Methodology Analytical Details Principal Outcomes Refs.
No. Kind Origin
The United Kingdom food safety authorities
have reported the occurrence of insect
Insects NR ** Coconut sugar NR ** NR ** NR ** [39]
fragments (500–800) in coconut sugar
commercialized in the country.
Microbial analysis:
The employed culture
media were Nutrient agar,
Martin Rose Bengal agar,
Sabouraud Dextrose agar,
and KenKnight &
Munaiers agar,
The conventionally collected coconut sap
respectively, for bacteria,
exhibited an extremely large number of
fungi, yeasts, and
bacteria and yeasts. In contrast, the sap
Coconut sap actinomycetes. Differing
Serial dilution, plus, collected by a new “coconut-sap chiller
(collected by India sample dilutions were
2* the spread plating method” had a significantly lower level of [21]
two different (Kasaragod) plated in the respective
method microorganisms. The predominant
methods) medium and incubated at
populations were bacteria, namely those of
28 °C. Bacteria and yeast
the genus Bacillus. No actinomycetes growth
colonies were scored as
was observed in either sample.
colony-forming units
(CFU)/mL of sap after a
24-h incubation period,
fungi/yeasts after 48–72 h,
and those of
actinomycetes after 1
week.
Microorganisms Coconut sap Microbial analysis:
(with and The procedure was
The microbial counts of sap with and without
without performed in accordance
a preservative were, respectively, “not
preservative, with the “Indonesian
countable/g” and 1.2 × 102 colony-forming
i.e., limestone Kemloko National Standard for
4* Total plate count units (CFU)/g. The microbial counts of [32]
solution) and (Indonesia) Microbe Contamination
coconut sugar both with and without a
coconut sugar Test (Method 01-2897-
preservative were, respectively, 1.2 × 102
(with and 1992)”. The employed
CFU/g and 3.6 × 102 CFU/g.
without culture medium was
preservative) Nutrient agar.
Microbial analysis:
Coconut sugar exceeded the allowable limits
An aerobic plate count
for Salmonella sp. (/25 g; microorganism
was performed based on
should not be detected) and coliform counts
FDA-BAM-3; the coliform
(should be <10 colony-forming units
Counts of: count was conducted
(CFU)/g). The values of the aerobic plate
Coconut sugar Aerobic plates. based on FDA-BAM-4; the
Philippines count, and the fungal and yeast counts,
6* and coconut Coliforms. mould and yeast count [31]
(Makati) complied with legislation, i.e., they were
syrup Moulds/yeasts. was performed in
below 10 CFU/g. With coconut syrup, the
Salmonella sp. accordance with FDA-
Salmonella sp. and coliform count values were
BAM-18; the Salmonella sp.
in accordance with the stipulated criteria. The
count was carried out
aerobic plate count exceeded the defined
following the FDA-BAM-5
limit (<10–< 250 CFU/g).
procedure.
3. Food Industry Applications and Sustainability Issues

For the application of coconut sugar in food and beverage industries, it is important
to gain an understanding of the sap from which the sugar is processed. Coconut sap is a
nutritious fluid enriched with sugars, calcium, phosphorous, iron minerals, and vitamins
such as B complex and C [39,40]. It contains important phenolic compounds such as
antioxidants and can be categorized as a low glycemic index (GI 35) food [40]. The
nutritional composition of coconut sap is further described in Section 5.
Coconut sugar is made from the watery coconut sap found inside palm trees. It is
prepared by concentrating inflorescence sap, which is popularly known as ‘neera’ in
Kerala, India [23], and it is obtained by tapping the unopened coconut spadix. Coconut
sugar is brown and contains 2–3% moisture. As this sugar is plant-based, natural, and
minimally processed, it can be readily applied in many vegan diets as a healthier option
[14,41].
The variation in coconut sugar manufacturing processes is extremely varied
according to local, traditional, and indigenous knowledge [4]. These factors account for
the vast variations in the appearance, taste, and flavor of the different coconut sugar types
that can be found on the market [42].
Coconut sap is produced from palm trees all year-round and there is no specific
season for tapping the spathe, however, the amount of sap produced from the trees
changes with the season [40]. In the traditional method, the sap trickling from the cut
surface is collected in an open earthen pot or bamboo sac, which is placed at the top of the
palm for at least 8–12 h. Lime is then coated on the inner surface of the pot to prevent
fermentation [43]. The sap collected by this method is oyster white in colour and emanates
a strong odour with contamination from insects, ants, pollen, and dust particles [3]. The
coco-sap chiller developed by Central Plantation Crops Research Institute (CPCRI) in
India has helped to improve the quality of unfermented coconut sap, reduced the
processing time, eliminated contaminants like ants, other insects, pollen, and dust
particles, and enabled better product diversification and market perspectives [3]. A
comparison of total sugars, reducing sugar, free amino acid, total flavonoids, and ferric
reducing antioxidant power from coconut sap collected traditionally and those from coco-
sap chillers are presented in Section 5. Similarly, a comparison of the water-soluble
vitamins and fat-soluble vitamins is presented in table for the employed processing
methods.
The Asian and Pacific Coconut Community describes how local operations are
performed by small-scale cottage industries with coconut sap to yield molded coconut
sugar. The traditional operation starts by collecting coconut sap from palms, which this is
normally carried out twice a day, morning and evening [44]. The obtained coconut sap is
then filtered through muslin cloth to remove ants, insects, and any other polluting
elements. The filtered sap is placed inside cooking vessels. Sap concentrates by
evaporating water to increase the sap concentration. This is achieved by boiling the
filtered sap in cooking vessels for 3 h at 100–110 °C [44]. The resulting material then turns
into a thick liquid. Upon boiling, foam forms that should be eliminated from vessels [44].
The usual procedure is to add a few drops of cooking oil or grated coconut to the resulting
mash to prevent foam from excessively forming.
This mash is heated for another hour and is occasionally stirred. To prevent sugars
from caramelizing, the must be heated slowly [7]. When the mash is very thick and
suitable for molding, cooking vessels are lifted from stoves and cooled to 60 °C. The cooled
mash is poured inside clean half coconut shells or bamboo vessels to be cooled and to set
[45].
The processing technique influences nutritional and health benefits, as described in
the previous section. To ensure product quality, the collected sap is tested for its acidity.
This is crucial because, if sap is fermented, it is not suitable for brown coconut sugar
manufacturing purposes.
Given its high sucrose content, during its storage, coconut sugar displays caking
properties. So, it is essential to add an anticaking agent like tricalcium phosphate (TCP)
for it to remain stable during food applications. TCP covers the coconut sugar powder
surface and its hygroscopicity significantly diminishes, which improves its flowability
[45].
Processing coconut sap into sugar syrup has been investigated following several
alternative processing techniques. The coconut sugar syrup obtained from the rotary
evaporation method has a better nutritional value than the microwave heating and open
heating methods [22]. The non-enzymatic browning that results from Maillard reactions
(MR) is enhanced when cooking sap at higher temperatures for a long period, which gives
the preferred dark-colored coconut sugar as an ingredient, but only for traditional dishes
[46]. Rotary evaporation is fast and gentle and performed at a lower temperature. All this
results in evaporation with less thermal decomposition [47–49]. The rotary evaporation
method is the alternative processing method that the sugar processing industry applies to
produce coconut sugar. It operates in a 250-mbar vacuum at 60°C. It results in improved
physico-chemical qualities, minimum input energy, and shorter processing times [43].
The employed processing method influences the antioxidant properties and vitamin
contents of coconut sugar syrup. It allows coconut sugar production in a minimum time
period, but with high vitamin and antioxidant contents [50]. The coconut sugar syrup
produced by at 60 °C rotary evaporator (RE-60) shows significantly lower antioxidant
activities (DPPPH, ABTS, FRAP, and TPC) values (p ≤ 0.05) than that generated by other
techniques (open-heat evaporation, microwave, etc.). What this suggests is that the
coconut sugar syrup that is produced at a lower temperature (60 °C) in vacuum exhibits
significantly different and lesser antioxidant activities than all the other samples
generated by distinct evaporation techniques [11,45].
Employing coconut sugar syrup with vast amounts of antioxidants is a promising
food production ingredient. Former research works have observed how coconut sugar
with larger quantities of vitamins and minerals and that perform more antioxidant
activities can be used as an alternative natural sugar with improved chemical properties
[3,51].
The work by Saputro [52] reveals the use of low-glycaemic-index (GI) sugar, such as
(coconut sugar), to produce plain chocolate. They demonstrated that it was more
nutritious as a sugar containing more anti-carcinogenic compounds, antioxidants, and
minerals than commercial chocolates made with sugarcane sugar or sugar palm.
Moreover, if coconut sugar can be employed as an ingredient, it is able to generate more
antioxidant activity if food is processed at high temperatures. Very important compounds
such as pyroglutamic acid or hydroxymethylfurfural (HMF) form when heated [53].
Coconut blossom sugar is organic with a caramel aroma and has been the target of
adulteration and fraud [6,26]. A recent study identified minor metabolites, such as
chemical markers for coconut blossom sugar, by profiling these metabolites, which helped
to detect adulterations in products. Bachmann et al. [26] were unable to detect HMF in all
the samples. However, pyroglutamic acid was employed at a comparatively high
concentration, which exceeded other unambiguous metabolites in coconut sugar like
inositol or shikimic acid in coconut sugar [26]. Henceforth, HMF is an apparently suitable
marker metabolite for coconut sugar. The distinct metabolic profiles of coconut blossom
sugar can be better investigated and identified by combining LC-MS and NMR [54].
Coconut sap as a natural non-alcoholic beverage has high demand as an instant thirst
quencher. In India, tapping coconut sap has improved the income of farmers and
generated employment. Export of the sap is extensively carried out to countries like
Canada, South Korea, USA, Norway, France, Japan, Australia, and the Middle East [55].
Coconut water and juice from coconut sap are commercially canned as beverages in
Thailand and exported as ‘functional food‘ with health benefits (see Figure 1). These
beverages are flavoured with tropical fruits such as watermelon and pineapple. Globally,
the beverages industry was forecasted to reach $1.9 trillion in 2021 and continue to grow
at a compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) of 3% [56].
Figure 1. Coconut sap as beverages, bought from a local ethnic shop in Rovaniemi, Finland. (Photo
credit: © Dele Raheem, July 2022).
Numerous organic food and drink firms increasingly employ natural alternative
sweeteners such as coconut sugar to substitute refined sugars. Coconut sugar is employed
thanks to its ecological credentials and nutritional properties. It has many widespread
applications in food and beverage industries to prepare bakery products like chocolate
(plain chocolate and drinking chocolate), cake, cookies, and brownies. It can be added to
juice, tea, or any beverage as a sweetener, and can be employed as a seasoning agent.
Adding coconut sugar to several food applications as a healthy option is well justified
because it contains important nutrients like vitamins E and C, minerals like zinc, iron,
potassium, and phosphorus, and phytonutrients like anthocyanidins, flavonoids,
polyphenols, and antioxidants [3,20,35]. This kind of sugar also contains a significant
amount of inulin (4.7 g 100 g−1), required for generating short-chain fatty acids like acetate,
butyrate, and propionate [15].
The sugar obtained from the sap of palm trees, which includes coconut sap, is utilized
mainly in desserts, sweet soy sauce, and beverages, and also in many other traditional
foods. This is especially due to its appreciated and accepted taste, color, and flavor when
producing drinks and foods [57–60]. Apriyantono [61] indicated that using palm sugar as
a soybean sauce sweetener strongly impacts soy sauce flavor because over 70 volatile
compounds are present. Employing palm sugar as a potential natural sweetener also
impacts cookies’ color, textural properties, and flavor [62], which lends this sugar to being
a potential natural sweetener.
Pure sucrose is the most widely used sugar as food sweetener. However, coconut
sugar is reported to offer health benefits thanks to its lower GI value. The GI values
previously obtained from coconut sugar [63,64] are below the GI values for pure sucrose,
i.e., refined cane sugar [65]. Pure sucrose is the most commonly employed sugar as food
sweetener. During baking operations, and as another research work reveals, palm sap
sugar-sweetened bread has a lower GI value than cane sugar-sweetened bread [66].
Moreover, Ref. [66] report that the palm sugars–corn starch mixture brings about a slow
digestion rate and, consequently, lower GI values than those made with refined cane
sugars. Coconut sugar displays good quality and possesses a high nutritive value if it is
processed from hygienic non-fermented sap; however, if poor-quality neera is employed,
its crystallization involves having to add several additives and chemicals (e.g., starch and
gluten, and adding sugars from C4 plants, palm, or coconut oil). During the
manufacturing process, coconut quarters are added to avoid overboiling sap [1].
Regarding sustainability and traceability issues, organic certification comes over as a
quality standard that helps to increase coconut sugar’s credibility in the European market.
In most cases, coconut sugar exporters are from developing countries. They should
consider not only certification, but also natural and organic trends [7]. Consumers will
also show an interest in the story behind sustainable production. Export traders can
advertise that small farmers traditionally produce coconut blossom sugar, palm trees
organically grow mixed with other crops, and sugar has very low fructose contents and
lower GI values than traditional refined beet or cane sugar [7].
As the interest in climate change is growing, individual and planetary healthy
coconut-based ecosystems offer excellent possibilities to enhance carbon sequestration
with crop combinations that involve a range of plants, which include vine, food crops,
tubers, and tree crops. For climate-change adaptation intentions, annual intercrops
planted under coconuts can be managed to achieve optimum benefits for the whole
system. A holistic approach that focuses on the whole system’s overall productivity and
sustainability, and not on palms alone, is necessary to make coconut-based
agroecosystems resilient to climate change [67]. The demand for natural products is
expected to grow, and employing alternative sweeteners, such as coconut syrup and
sugar, will increase.
4. Safety and Quality Conditions for Control of Palm Sap Sugar Products
Both palm sap sugar (PSS) and sweet sap are alternative sweeteners prepared from
the sap and nectar tapped from the flowers of several palm tree species. For example,
palmyra palm (Borassus flabellifer), nipa palm (Nypa fruticans Wurmb), sugar palm (Arenga
pinnata) and coconut palm (Cocos nucifera). They have the potential to be incorporated into
food products as substitutes for sucrose [67]. This sweet sap can be consumed fresh,
processed as sugar or syrup, or be fermented as vinegar or an alcohol beverage [68]. This
sugar is commonly used in many traditional foods in southeast and southern Asia, and
plays a vital role in the color-flavor development of distinct food products [57–59]. One
major palm sugar exporting country is Indonesia. Based on the most recent data, the
exports of products made with palm sugar or coconut sap came to 36.5 thousand tons,
valued at US$49.3 million in 2019 [69]. These products destined for export must comply
with the food legislation of the country of destination, such as, the European countries
(EFSA) or United States (FDA).
The world’s PSS business is expected to reach a total of 1.7 billion dollars in 2027, and
is currently 630 million dollars [70]. This increase might be due to its potential to be
incorporated into food products as a substitute for sucrose [71]. This product is often
employed in many traditional foods in Asia, where it plays an important role in the color–
flavor development of different food products [57–59]. Unlike other natural sweeteners,
its production is located in a limited number of countries or in a certain geographical area;
for example, agave is produced mainly in Mexico and maple syrup in Canada and the
USA. However, PSS is produced in southeast and southern Asia, and the mainly
producing countries are the Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia.
Around the world, there are more than 3000 different types of palm trees, but only
five are economically important. They offer good sugar palm production yields for any of
its different products. They are as follows: date palm (Phoenix dactylifera), betel nut palm
(Areca catechu), African oil palm (Elaeis guineensis), coconut (Cocos nucifera), and pejibaye
(Bactris gasipaes) [72]. Other authors include more palm species [73], such as the following:
• Coconut palm sugar (Cocos nucifera). It grows in coastal tropical regions of the Indian
and Pacific oceans. This sugar is generated from blossoms and is often known as
coconut blossom sugar.
• Date palm has two varieties (Phoenix sylvestris and Phoenix dactylifera). They can be
found in Asia and the Middle East, respectively. Date palms are grown mostly for
their fruit: dates.
• Palmyra palm (Borassus genus). It grows in the African continent and in Asia and New
Guinea. It is used for making hats, hatching, writing materials, and some food
products. Obviously, its wood is employed. Palm sugar is generated from the sap
(called ‘toddy’) of tree flowers.
• Nipa palm (Nypa fruticans). It is found in tropical and coastal regions of the Pacific
and Indian Oceans. It lies particularity in its favored biome: mangroves. It is the only
palm tree that partially grows underwater. Its tap is rich in sugar, and it is employed
to produce palm sugar.
• Sugar palm (Arenga pinnata) is native to tropical and coastal regions in Asia. It is
grown mostly in Indonesia and China. The sap used to generate palm sugar is called
‘gur’ and ‘gula aren’ in India and Indonesia, respectively.
Nevertheless, other authors acknowledge 40 palm species, the tapping of which is
either destructive or non-destructive. Non-destructive exploitation with, for instance,
Phoenix canariensis on the Canary Islands (Spain) results in sustainable harvests during
palms’ lifetime [68].
Special attention is paid to harvest the sap tapping of Phoenix canariensis for its sugary
sap on the La Gomera Isle (Canary Islands). It is one of the most relevant cases of
sustainable native flora use. It supplies one of the best-known ethnobotany examples on
the Canary Islands and is not only a major tourist attraction for visitors, but also an
important local farming activity [68].
PSS is produced with the sap/nectar that is tapped from the flowers of several palm
tree species. Knowledge about the physico-chemical properties of this sugar should be
known if a high-quality product is to be obtained. PSS’ physico-chemical characteristics
are affected by its raw materials (sap/nectar) and processing techniques [37,52,73].
Further, the form that sugars come in (syrup, coarse/powder, solid) also determines its
properties. Coconut sap, the natural and sweet exudate from tapped unopened coconut
spathes or inflorescences (Cocos nucifera Lin.), is one of the major primary coconut pro-
ducts used for many food uses. It can be processed as natural and nutritious food
products, such as coconut granulated brown sugar, concentrate, juice, and vinegar.
Processes involve easy-to-follow procedures that require a few simple tools and
equipment.
Coconut sap juice is a healthy pasteurized beverage, and coconut sap concentrate is
a thick, free-flowing syrup. Both can be considered functional foods for consumers and
the food industry.
The inflorescence in good stands of coconut trees can produce an average of 2 L of
sap per tree a day [74]. An average yield of 1 kg of sugar can be obtained from four coconut
trees every day.
Under adequate production conditions, coconut trees’ inflorescence can produce a
mean yield of 2 L of sap per tree every day. So, the yield of four coconut trees per day can
produce 1 kg of sugar. However, as both the sugar content and production of sap depend
on trees’ location and their variety, nutrition, the season, tapping time, and the system,
these conditioning factors also can impact organoleptic and microbiological
characteristics.
Some authors have followed different preservation techniques for bottling palm sap;
although all probes failed, these authors consider it crucial to understand the biochemical
composition, fermentation chemistry, and existing preservation methods [75].
Transforming coconut sap into sugar granules is simple and requires basic
equipment, hence, it is appropriate for and best adapted to farms or medium-sized
enterprises. It is a good source of immediate income for coconut farmers, and demand is
growing on both local and international markets [76].
Engineering the palm sugar production process poses several problems if sap is not
immediately cooked after it is removed from palm trees, which results in a lower pH. A
drop in pH impacts the produced palm sugar’s quality. To obtain a higher product
conversion factor value, engineering the production process by adding plant extracts to
prevent “gait” is feasible [74], and the palm sugar packaging design is more appealing
and varied. Packaging is designed by prioritizing practical, economical, and hygienic

aspects, without burdening producers in production terms and consumers in price terms.
One alternative for PSS with a high quality (soluble solids content 16 degrees brix and pH
4.7) has been presented with the addition of some preservatives such as citric acid (0.09%)
and nisin (10 ppm) [76]. The quality standard in the Philippines includes quality norms to
not only produce PSS, but also to obtain a product of standardized quality and well-
defined organoleptic and microbiological parameters.
Coconut Sap Sugar Production in the Philippines

General considerations: farm-level technology to produce a high-value production
product from coconut inflorescence sap (see Table 5). It is simple, farm-level technology
that involves a natural heat evaporation process that converts liquid sap into a solid form
of sugar granules without having to resort to complicated and costly machinery or
equipment (Figure 2).
Table 5. Reference values for palm sap sugar products. Adapted from Ref. [74].
Physico-Chemical Properties Reference Values

Color light yellow to dark brown
Odor free of burnt odor
Taste free of burnt taste
Moisture Content (%) <4.0
Glucose Content 2.8–3
Fructose Content 1.0–4.0
Sucrose 78.0–89.0
Ash <2.4
Microbiological properties
Salmonella Negative
E. coli Negative
Coliform count <10 ufc/g
Total Plate Count <10 ufc/g
Molds and Yeasts <10 ufc/g
Figure 2. Recommendations for coconut sap sugar production in the Philippines. Adapted from
Refs. [17,70,74,77].
5. Nutritional Profile and Health Impacts

Despite its expensive price, coconut sugar is considered by several authors to be one
of the greatest natural sweeteners as it offers a number of health advantages [14]. Tables
6–8 list the biochemical properties, vitamins, and other nutritional components of the
sugar obtained from coconut inflorescence sap.
Vitamins C and E, minerals including zinc, iron, potassium, and phosphorus, and
phytonutrients like antioxidants, flavonoids, anthocyanidins, and polyphenols, are all
present in coconut sugar [21]. Additionally, inulin comes in a substantial quantity (4.7 g,
100 g−1) in coconut sap sugar. It is necessary for the synthesis of short-chain fatty acids
acetate, butyrate, and propionate [31]. Coconut sugar and syrup (the latter contains
dietary fiber and fermentable inulin) are truly promising functional foods and are
converted into short-chain fatty acids [31]. As coconut sugar has a sweetening potential
that is comparable to saccharose, it is utilized as an alternative sweetener for making
confections, drinks, pastries, and other gastronomic delicacies [78]. According to Trinidad
et al. [63], coconut sugar has a low GI that falls within the 35–54 range per serving. Low
GI diets lower the likelihood of developing certain chronic diseases like type II diabetes.
Compared to other sugars, coconut sugar has nutritional superiority. When cane, palm,
and coconut sugars, sorbitol, and other sweeteners are blended with wheat flour, sorbitol
possesses the best starch digestibility—with an almost identical digestibility for palm or
coconut sugars [66]
Compared to the majority of other commercially available sugars, coconut sugar is
certainly a healthy sweetener. It is processed by evaporating sap—which requires
considerable labor and resources when collected from trees—that is then transported,
stored, and processed. Therefore, the manufacture cost is higher than for cane sugar.
People are willing to pay high prices for it given its nutritional value and low GI.
However, one bottleneck is the lack of knowledge about its health advantages. Natural
coconut sugar and other biproducts are produced hygienically as a result of scientific
developments in sap collecting and processing, which have occurred in some major
producing nations, including India, in the last few years [14].
Table 6. Coconut inflorescence sap obtained with a Cocosap chiller (conventional method) and
coconut sugar were studied for their biochemical components and ferric-reducing antioxidant
power [14].
Coconut Inflorescence Sap
Biochemical Traditionally Collected Coconut Inflorescence Sap
Obtained by the Cocosap
Characteristics Sap (100 mL) Sugar (100 g)
Chiller Method (100 mL)
Total sugars (g) 16.20 ± 0.33 9.20 ± 0.97 91.8 ± 1.01
Reducing sugars (g) 0.68 ± 0.01 1.24 ± 0.87 4.69 ± 4.60
Free amino acids (g) 1.03 ± 0.10 0.413 ± 0.09 3.05 ± 0.07
Total phenolic content (mg
21.7 ± 0.48 14.8 ± 1.03 3.05 ± 0.07
gallic acid equivalent)
Total flavonoids (mg
0.817 ± 0.19 0.177 ± 0.02 4.76 ± 1.21
catechin equivalent)
Ferric-reducing antioxidant
power (mg of ascorbic acid 14.8 ± 0.21 8.34 ± 0.83 22.9 ± 4.12
equivalent)
Table 7. Vitamin composition of coconut inflorescence sap obtained with a Cocosap chiller
(conventional method) and coconut sugar [14].
Coconut Inflorescence Sap Traditionally
Coconut Inflorescence Sap
Biochemical Characteristics Obtained by the Cocosap Collected Sap (100
Sugar (100 g)
Chiller Method (100 mL) mL)
Water-soluble vitamins
Vitamin C (mg) 19.6 ± 0.95 16.3 ± 0.76 3.98 ± 1.12
Thiamine (µ g) 0.07 ± 0.02 0.02 ± 0.00 14.3 ± 1.16
Niacin (µ g) 14.9 ± 2.80 11.4 ± 0.7 34.7 ± 2.1
Pyridoxine (µ g) 2.35 ± 0.01 1.32 ± 0.12 101 ± 0.3

Pantothenic acid (µ g) 3.99 ± 0.08 1.64 ± 0.11 2.53 ± 0.2
Biotin (µ g) 0.07 ± 0.01 0.09 ± 0.01 2.51 ± 0.7
Folic acid (µ g) 0.036 ± 0.01 0.031 ± 0.00 0.26 ± 0.07
Riboflavin (µ g) - - 0.25 ± 0.02
Fat-soluble vitamins
Cholecalciferol (µ g) 0.056 ± 0.00 0.062 ± 0.00 0.256 ± 0.02
Ergocalciferol (µ g) 0.074 ± 0.01 0.028 ± 0.00 0.171 ± 0.02
Tocopherol (µ g) 7.20 ± 0.93 2.94 ± 0.46 19.6 ± 3.5
Vitamin K1 (µ g) 1.73 ± 0.19 0.601 ± 0.09 7.35 ± 0.95
Vitamin K2 (µ g) 0.771 ± 0.12 0.428 ± 0.12 5.57 ± 0.61
Table 8. Nutritional profile of coconut sugar made from inflorescence sap on a double-jacketed
cooker and a modified conventional processing technique. (The results should be interpreted in light
of the biochemical characteristics of coconut sugar, as listed in Tables 6 and 7).
Biochemical Components Content

Protein (g/100 g) 2.6
Dietary fiber (g/100 g) 3.1
Electrolytes (mg/100 g)
Sodium 568
Potassium 1002
Microminerals (mg/100 g)
Iron 2.2
Zinc 2.1
Essential amino acids (mg/100 g)
Valine 40.68
Threonine 45.81
Leucine 16.01
Lysine 136.5
Methionine 54.55
Histidine 3.48
Phenylalanine 57.66
Tyrosine 5.68
6. Conclusions
The global drive toward better individual and environmental health warrants the
need for better knowledge about what we produce and consume. Sweeteners are
important food ingredients to formulate edible food products, and for health and
sustainability. This review summarizes the micro- and macrocomponents isolated from
coconut sugar, sap, and syrup, the chemical components of these natural sugars, and their
physico-chemical, microbiological, and antioxidant characteristics. A better
understanding of these components reveals the health-giving properties of coconut as a
plant-based sugar, despite the associated costs of taking coconut-based foods to
consumers. Hence, it is important that food industries respond to the demand of health-
conscious consumers by incorporating coconut sugar, sap, and syrup into food products.
Some shortcomings in this review, which can be addressed in the future, are the need to
consider personal dietary preference of coconut sugar in food products, sustainability
issues by more rigorous studies, and to study the role of coconut trees and carbon sinks,
including life cycle assessments (LCAs).
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; methodology, A.S.,
C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; software, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; validation, A.S., C.C.,
D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; formal analysis, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; investigation, A.S.,
C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; resources, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; data curation, A.S.,
C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; writing—original draft preparation, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and
A.R.; writing—review and editing, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; visualization, A.S., C.C.,
D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; supervision, A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R.; project administration,
A.S., C.C., D.R., F.R., M.L. and A.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of
the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: The authors are very grateful to their families and friends for all the support
they provided.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Levang, P. Le Cocotier Est Aussi Une Plante Sucrière. Oléagineux 1988, 43, 159–164.
2. BAFPS 76:2010; Bureau of Agriculture and Fisheries Product Standards Philippine National Standard for Coconut Sap Sugar—
Grading and Classification. Pinoyentre: Quezon City, Philippines, 2022.
3. Hebbar, K.B.; Arivalagan, M.; Manikantan, M.R.; Mathew, A.C.; Thamban, C.; Thomas, G.V.; Chowdappa, P. Coconut
Inflorescence Sap and Its Value Addition as Sugar–Collection Techniques, Yield, Properties and Market Perspective. Curr. Sci.
2015, 109, 1411–1417.
4. Dalibard, C. Overall View on the Tradition of Tapping Palm Trees and Prospects for Animal Production. Livest. Res. Rural. Dev.
1999, 11, 5.
5. PCA. Coconut Processing Technologies—Coconut Sap Sugar. In Philippine Coconut Authority Leaflet; Philippine Coconut
Authority: Quezon City, Philippine, 2015;
6. Wrage, J.; Burmester, S.; Kuballa, J.; Rohn, S. LWT—Food Science and Technology Coconut Sugar (Cocos nucifera L.): Production
Process, Chemical Characterization, and Sensory Properties. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 112, 108227.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2019.05.125.
7. Exporting Palm Sugar to Europe? Centre for the Promotion of Imports from developing countries (Netherlands). Available
online: (accessed on 30 June 2022). https://www.cbi.eu/market-information/honey-sweeteners/palm-sugar/palm-sugar-europe
8. Meliany, B.S.; Sahara, S.; Probokawuryan, M.; Ahmad, F.S. COVID-19 Pandemic and Volatility of Sugar Price at Regional Level
in Indonesia for The Period August 2018-August 2021. Jurnal Manajemen dan Agribisnis. 2022, doi:10.17358/jma.19.2.229.
9. Román, S.; Sánchez-Siles, L.M.; Siegrist, M. The Importance of Food Naturalness for Consumers: Results of a Systematic Review.
Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 17, 6285.
10. Saraiva, A.; Carrascosa, C.; Raheem, D.; Ramos, F.; Raposo, A. Natural Sweeteners: The Relevance of Food Naturalness for
Consumers, Food Security Aspects, Sustainability and Health Impacts. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 6285.
11. Philippe, R.N.; De Mey, M.; Anderson, J.; Ajikumar, P.K. Biotechnological Production of Natural Zero-Calorie Sweeteners. Sugar
Tech 2014, 26, 155–161.
12. Rakphon, A.; Srijesadaruk, V. Effect of Thermal Processing on Physical, Chemical Properties and Volatile Compounds of
Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) Sugar. In Proceedings of the 4th International Postgraduate Symposium on Food, Agriculture and
Biotechnology (IPSFAB); Maha Sarakham, Thailand, 2017; pp. 80–91.
13. Asikin, Y.; Kamiya, A.; Mizu, M.; Takara, K.; Tamaki, H.; Wada, K. Changes in the Physicochemical Characteristics, Including
Flavour Components and Maillard Reaction Products, of Non-Centrifugal Cane Brown Sugar during Storage. Food Chem. 2014,
149, 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.10.089.
14. Hebbar, K.B.; Ramesh, S.V.; Ghosh, D.K.; Beegum, P.P.; Pandiselvam, R.; Manikantan, M.R.; Mathew, A.C. Coconut Sugar-a
Potential Storehouse of Nutritive Metabolites, Novel Bio-Products and Prospects. Sugar Tech 2022, 24, 841–856.
15. Apriyantono, A.; Aristyani, A.; Nurhayati; Lidya, Y.; Budiyanto, S.; Soekarto, S.T. Rate of Browning Reaction during Preparation
of Coconut and Palm Sugar. Int. Congr. Ser. 2002, 1245, 275–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0531-513100882-8.
16. Lopes, M.; Cavaleiro, C.; Ramos, F. Sodium Reduction in Bread: A Role for Glasswort (Salicornia Ramosissima J. Woods). Compr.
Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2017, 16, 1056–1071. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12277.
17. Giovanelli, G.; Cappa, C. 5-Hydroxymethylfurfural Formation in Bread as a Function of Heat Treatment Intensity: Correlations
with Browning Indices. Foods 2021, 10, 417. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10020417.
18. Phaeon, N.; Chapanya, P.; Mueangmontri, R.; Pattamasuwan, A.; Lipan, L.; Carbonell-Barrachina, Á .A.; Sriroth, K.; Nitayapat,
N. Acrylamide in non-centrifugal Sugars and Syrups. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2021, 101, 4561–4569. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.11098.
19. Hemmler, D.; Roullier-Gall, C.; Marshall, J.W.; Rychlik, M.; Taylor, A.J.; Schmitt-Kopplin, P. Evolution of Complex Maillard
Chemical Reactions, Resolved in Time. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 3227. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-03691-z.
20. Yeung, V.; Miller, D.D.; Rutzke, M.A. Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy, Atomic Emission Spectroscopy, and Inductively
Coupled Plasma-Mass Spectrometry. In Food Analysis; Nielsen, S.S., Ed.; Springer: Boston, MA, USA, 2017; pp. 129–150.
21. Hebbar, K.B.; Arivalagan, M.; Pavithra, K.C.; Roy, T.K.; Gopal, M.; Shivashankara, K.S.; Chowdappa, P. Nutritional Profiling of
Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) Inflorescence Sap Collected Using Novel Coco-Sap Chiller Method and Its Value Added Products.
J. Food Meas. Charact. 2020, 14, 2703–2712. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-020-00516-y.
22. Asghar, M.T.; Yusof, Y.A.; Mokhtar, M.N.; Yaacob, M.E.; Ghazali, H.M.; Varith, J.; Chang, L.S.; Manaf, Y.N. Processing of
Coconut Sap into Sugar Syrup Using Rotary Evaporation, Microwave, and Open-Heat Evaporation Techniques. J. Sci. Food
Agric. 2020, 100, 4012–4019. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.10446.
23. Borse, B.B.; Rao, L.J.M.; Ramalakshmi, K.; Raghavan, B. Chemical Composition of Volatiles from Coconut Sap (Neera) and Effect
of Processing. Food Chem. 2007, 101, 877–880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.02.026.
24. Smith, R.W. Mass Spectrometry. In Encyclopedia of Forensic Sciences; Siegel, J., Saukko, P., Eds.; Academic Press: Waltham, MA,
USA, 2013; pp. 603–608.
25. Rogers, K.M.; Phillips, A.; Fitzgerald, J.; Rogers, P.; Ferguson, C.; Cooper, J.; Yuan, Y. Authentication of Indonesian Coconut
Sugar Using Stable Carbon Isotopes. Food Anal. Methods 2021, 14, 1250–1255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-021-01967-9.
26. Bachmann, R.; Horns, A.L.; Paasch, N.; Schrieck, R.; Weidner, M.; Fransson, I.; Schrör, J.P. Minor Metabolites as Chemical
Marker for the Differentiation of Cane, Beet and Coconut Blossom Sugar. From Profiling towards Identification of Adulterations.
Food Control 2022, 135, 108832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.108832.
27. Meenu, M.; Cai, Q.; Xu, B. A Critical Review on Analytical Techniques to Detect Adulteration of Extra Virgin Olive Oil. Trends
Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 91, 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2019.07.045.
28. Gilbert, A.; Hattori, R.; Silvestre, V.; Wasano, N.; Akoka, S.; Hirano, S.; Yamada, K.; Yoshida, N.; Remaud, G.S. Comparison of
IRMS and NMR Spectrometry for the Determination of Intramolecular 13C Isotope Composition: Application to Ethanol.
Talanta 2012, 99, 1035–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2012.05.023.
29. Ghidotti, M.; Papoci, S.; Dumitrascu, C.; Zdiniakova, T.; Fiamegos, Y.; Gutiñas, M.B.C. ED-XRF as Screening Tool to Help
Customs Laboratories in Their Fight against Fraud. State-of-the-Art. Talanta Open 2021, 3, 100040.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talo.2021.100040.
30. Zdiniakova, T.; Calle, M.B. Feasibility Study about the Use of Element Profiles Determined by ED-XRF as Screening Method to
Authenticate Coconut Sugar Commercially Available. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2020, 246, 2101–2109.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-020-03559-z.
31. Trinidad, T.; Mallillin, A.; Avena, E.; Rodriguez, R.; Borlagdan, M.; Cid, K.B.; Biona, K. Coconut Sap Sugar and Syrup: A
Promising Functional Food/Ingredient. Acta Manila. Ser. A 2015, 63, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.53603/actamanil.63.2015.wgey3066.
32. Somawiharja, Y.; Wonohadidjojo, D.M.; Kartikawati, M.; Suniati, F.R.T.; Purnomo, H. Indigenous Technology of Tapping,
Collecting and Processing of Coconut (Cocos Nucifera) Sap and Its Quality in Blitar Regency, East Java, Indonesia. Food Res.
2018, 2, 398–403. https://doi.org/10.26656/fr.2017.2.075.
33. Gopal, M.; Shil, S.; Gupta, A.; Hebbar, K.B.; Arivalagan, M. Metagenomic Investigation Uncovers Presence of Probiotic-Type
Microbiome in Kalparasa® (Fresh Unfermented Coconut Inflorescence Sap). Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 662783.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.662783.
34. Weerawatanakorn, M.; Asikin, Y.; Kamchonemenukool, S.; Tamaki, H.; Takara, K.; Wada, K. Physicochemical, Antioxidant,
Volatile Component, and Mass Spectrometry-Based Electronic Nose Analyses Differentiated Unrefined Non-Centrifugal Cane,
Palm, and Coconut Sugars. J. Food Meas. Charact. 2021, 15, 1563–1577. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-020-00749-x.
35. Joelle, O.D.; Konan, K.; Louis, J. Mineral Composition of Table Sugars from the Sap of the Inflorescences of 03 Coconut (Cocos
nucifera L.) Cultivars in Ivory Coast. J. Chem. Biol. Phys. Sci. 2021, 11, 82–90. https://doi.org/10.24214/jcbps.a.11.1.08290.
36. Asghar, M.T.; Yusof, Y.A.; Mokhtar, M.N.; Ya’acob, M.E.; Ghazali, H.M.; Chang, L.S.; Manaf, Y.N. Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.)
Sap as a Potential Source of Sugar: Antioxidant and Nutritional Properties. Food Sci. Nutr. 2020, 8, 1777–1787.
https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1191.
37. Purnomo, H. Volatile Components of Coconut Fresh Sap, Sap Syrup and Coconut Sugar. ASEAN Food J. 2007, 14, 45–49.
38. Kabir, M.A.; Lorjaroenphon, Y. Identification of Aroma Compounds in Coconut Sugar. In Proceedings of the 52nd Kasetsart
University Annual Conference; Bangkok, Thailand, 4–7 February 2014; pp. 239–246.
39. European Commission (EC). Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed (RASFF)-Portal Database; European Commission (EC): Brussels,
Luxembourg, 2022.
40. Sarma, C.; Mummaleti, G.; Sivanandham, V.; Kalakandan, S.; Rawson, A.; Anandharaj, A. Anthology of Palm Sap: The Global
Status, Nutritional Composition, Health Benefits & Value Added Products. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 119, 530–549.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TIFS.2021.12.002.
41. Abdullah, W.G.; Rianse, U.; Iswandi, R.M.; Taridala, S.A.A.; Rianse, I.S.; Zulfikar, Z.L.; Baka, L.R.; Cahyono, A.L.A.E.; Widayati,
W.; Baka, W.K. Potency of Natural Sweetener: Brown Sugar. Adv. Environ. Biol. 2014, 8, 374–385.
42. Ghosh Postharvest, D.K. Product Diversification and Value Addition in Coconut. In Value Addition of Horticultural Crops: Recent
Trends and Future Directions; Sharangi, A., Datta, S., Ed.; Springer: New Delhi, India, 2015; pp. 125–165.
43. Grimwood, B.; Ashman, F. Coconut Palm Products, Their Processing in Developing Countries; FAO: Rome, Italy, 1975.
44. Punchihewa, P.G.; Arancon, R.N. COCONUT: Post-Harvest Operations; Asian and Pacific Coconut Community: Roma, Italy,
1999;.
45. Swain, S.; Din, M.; Ram, C.; Gangaiah, B. Post Harvest Processing and Value Addition in Coconut, Arecanut and Spices in Island;
ResearchGate: Berlin, Germany, 2016; pp. 152–157.
46. Nurhadi, B.; Sukri, N.; Saputra, R.A.; Wandhani, F.I.; Nurlita, A.I. Physical Characteristics of Amorphous and Crystalline
Coconut Sugar Powder with the Addition of Tricalcium Phosphate (TCP) as an Anticaking Agent. Int. J. Food Sci. 2020, 2020,
5320173. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/5320173.
47. Asghar, M.T.; Yusof, Y.A.; Noriznan, M.; Yaacob, M.E.; Mohd Ghazali, H.; Chang, L.S.; Manaf, Y.N. Effect of Processing Method
on Vitamin Profile, Antioxidant Properties and Total Phenolic Content of Coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) Sugar Syrup. Int. J. Food
Sci. Technol. 2020, 55, 2762–2770. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijfs.14529.
48. Chatterjee, S.; Sugilal, G.; Prabhu, S. v Heat Transfer in a Partially Filled Rotary Evaporator. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2019, 142, 407–421.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2019.04.033.
49. Labrotovap. What Is a Rotary Evaporator? Available online: https://labrotovap.com/what-is-a-rotary-evaporator/ (accessed on
25 December 2022).
50. Karseno, E.; Yanto, T.; Setyowati, R.; Haryanti, P. Effect of PH and Temperature on Browning Intensity of Coconut Sugar and
Its Antioxidant Activity. Food Res. 2018, 2, 32–38.
51. Beegum, P.P.; Nair, J.P.; Manikantan, M.R.; Pandiselvam, R.; Shill, S.; Neenu, S.; Hebbar, K.B. Effect of Coconut Milk, Tender
Coconut and Coconut Sugar on the Physico-Chemical and Sensory Attributes in Ice Cream. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2022, 59, 2605–
2616.
52. Saputro, A.D.; van de Walle, D.; Dewettinck, K. Palm Sap Sugar: A Review. Sugar Tech 2019, 21, 862–867.
https://doi.org/10.1007/S12355-019-00743-8.
53. Qiu, J.; Vuist, J.-E.; Boom, R.M.; Schutyser, M.A.I. Formation and Degradation Kinetics of Organic Acids during Heating and
Drying of Concentrated Tomato Juice. LWT—Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 87, 112–121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2017.08.081.
54. Nagana Gowda, G.A.; Raftery, D. Can NMR Solve Some Significant Challenges in Metabolomics? J. Magn. Reson. 2015, 260, 144–
160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmr.2015.07.014.
55. Sudha, R.; Niral, V.; Hebbar, K.B.; Samsudeen, K. Coconut Inflorescence Sap. Curr. Sci. 2019, 116, 1809–1817.
56. BusinessWire $1.9 Trillion Growth Opportunities in the Global Beverage Market, 2017–2022 Featuring Anheuser-Busch InBev
NV, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Inc., Diageo Plc, and Heineken Holding NV—Research and Markets. Available online:
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20140335252A1/en (accessed on 25 December 2022).
57. Ho, C.W.; Aida, W.M.W.; Maskat, M.Y.; Osman, H. Changes in Volatile Compounds of Palm Sap (Arenga Pinnata) during the
Heating Process for Production of Palm Sugar. Food Chem. 2007, 102, 1156–1162.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FOODCHEM.2006.07.004.
58. Arcieri, L. Organic Sweetener. U.S. Patent Application No. 20140335252A1, 14 November 2014.
59. Hori, K.; Purboyo, R.B.R.A. Iron Content of Palm Sugar and Its Chemical Forms in Indonesia. J. Consum. Stud. Home Econ. 1991,
15, 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1470-6431.1991.tb00667.x.
60. Tomomatsu, A.; Itoh, T.; Wijaya, H.; Nasution, Z.; Kumendong, J.; Matsuyama, A. Chemical Constituents of Sugar-Containing
Sap and Brown Sugar from Palm in Indonesia. Jpn. J. Trop. Agr. 1996, 40, 175–181.
61. Apriyantono, A.; Wiratma, H.E.; Husain, L.; Nurhayati, M.; Lie, N.L.; Puspitasari-Nienaber Judoamidjojo, S.; Budiyanto, H.S.
Analysis of Volatiles of Kecap Manis (a Typical Indonesian Soy Sauce); In Flavour Science; Taylor, A.J., Mottram, D.S., Ed.; The
Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, UK, 1996.
62. Suwansri, S.; Ratanatriwong, P.; Thanasukarn, P. Development of Crystallized Palm-Syrup Sugar as a Natural Sweetener. Asian
J. Food Agro-Ind. 2009, 5, 311–314.
63. Trinidad, T.P.; Mallillin, A.C.; Sagum, R.S.; Encabo, R.R. Glycemic Index of Commonly Consumed Carbohydrate Foods in the
Philippines. J. Funct. Foods 2010, 2, 271–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2010.10.002.
64. Waldrop, M.E.; Ross, C.F. Sweetener Blend Optimization by Using Mixture Design Methodology and the Electronic Tongue. J.
Food Sci. 2014, 79, S1782–S1794. https://doi.org/10.1111/1750-3841.12575.
65. Foster-Powell, K.; Miller, J.B. International Tables of Glycemic Index. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 1995, 62, 871S–890S.
https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/62.4.871S.
66. Srikaeo, K.; Thongta, R. Effects of Sugarcane, Palm Sugar, Coconut Sugar and Sorbitol on Starch Digestibility and
Physicochemical Properties of Wheat Based Foods. Int. Food Res. J. 2015, 22, 923.
67. Saputro, A.D.; van de Walle, D.; Dewettinck, K. Physicochemical Properties of Coarse Palm Sap Sugars as Natural Alternative
Sweetener. Food Biosci. 2020, 38, 100780. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2020.100780.
68. Francisco Ortega, J.; Zona, S. Sweet Sap from Palms, a Source of Beverages, Alcohol, Vinegar, Syrup, and Sugar. Vieraea Folia
Sci. Biol. Canar. 2013, 41, 91–113. https://doi.org/10.31939/vieraea.2013.41.07.
69. Scopus—Document Details—Chemical Constituents of Sugar-Containing Sap and Brown Sugar from Palm in Indonesia.
Available online: https://www.scopus.com/record/display.uri?eid=2-s2.0-1542288679&origin=inward (accessed on 19
December 2022).
70. Palm Sugar Market Growth, Size, Share, Trends and Forecast to 2027. Available online:
https://www.marketdataforecast.com/market-reports/palm-sugar-market (accessed on 19 December 2022).
71. Kaur, G.; Tridib, ; Goswami, K. Physical and Sensory Characteristics of Low Sugar Dairy Dessert (Rasgulla) Developed at
Different Level Coconut Sap Syrup. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 58, 343–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-020-04547-7.
72. Exporting Palm Sugar from Cambodia to Europe. EuroCham Cambodia Registered Office Phnom Penh, Cambodia. 2022.
https://www.eurocham-
cambodia.org/images/pages/Digital%20Exporting%20Palm%20Sugar%20from%20Cambodia%20to%20Europe.pdf (accessed
on 25 December 2022).
73. Phaichamnan, M.; Posri, W.; Meenune, M. Quality Profile of Palm Sugar Concentrate Produced in Songkhla Province, Thailand.
Int. Food Res. J. 2010, 17, 425–432.
74. Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development. Providing Science Solutions for
a Vibrant Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Coconut Sap Sugar Production Module; PCARRD: Los Baños, Philippine,
(accessed on 25 December 2022).
75. Hebbar, K.B.; Pandiselvam, R.; Manikantan, M.R.; Arivalagan, M.; Beegum, S.; Chowdappa, P. Palm Sap—Quality Profiles,
Fermentation Chemistry, and Preservation Methods. Sugar Tech 2018, 20, 621–634.
76. Ramalakshmi, K.; Ramesh, M.N.; Raghavan, B. Preservation of Coconut Sap Involves Acidulant, e.g., Citric Acid and
Preservative, e.g., Nisin to Solution 2004.
https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/65/7e/c0/8f7109fd42b3b4/US20040191375A1.pdf (accessed on 25 December 2022).
77. Eggleston, G.; Aita, G.; Triplett, A. Circular Sustainability of Sugarcane: Natural, Nutritious, and Functional Unrefined
Sweeteners That Meet New Consumer Demands. Sugar Tech 2021, 23, 964–973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12355-021-00994-4.
78. Okoma, D.M.J.; Konan, K.J.L.; Assa, R.R. Vitamin and Osidic Composition of Table Sugars from the Inflorescences Sap of 03
Coconut Cultivars (Cocos nucifera L.) in Ivory Coast. Food Nutr. Sci. 2020, 11, 1117.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury
to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Coconut Sugar Chemical Analysis and Nutritional PR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coconut Sugar Chemical Analysis and Nutritional PR

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Coconut Sugar Chemical Analysis and Nutritional PR

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Review

Coconut Sugar: Chemical Analysis and Nutritional Profile;

(REQUIMTE), Rua D. Manuel II, Apartado 55142, 4051-401 Porto, Portugal

96101 Rovaniemi, Finland

Humanidades e Tecnologias, Campo Grande 376, 1749-024 Lisboa, Portugal

Academic Editor: Paul B.

Table 1. Physico-chemical, microbiological, and antioxidant characteristics of coconut sap, sugar,

The sap collected by the traditional method had a fetid smell,

a—Values expressed as °Brix.

a —Values are expressed as mg of AEAC (ascorbic acid

was performed by (SEM).

The predominant minerals were K (960.87 a), Na

a at the three different measurement times.

a —Values expressed as mg/100 g.

arginine (53.7 d); (ix) valine (50.9 d); (x)

—Values appear as g/100 mL;

b—Values appear as g/100 g;

c—Values appear as mg/100 mL.

d—Values appear as mg/100 g

The authors investigated the processing of

b—Values shown as g/100 g.

The sugar composition of both coconut sugar and

a—Values expressed in mg/100 g.

without Aminex HPX-87C. preservative, was lower (49.41 a) than that of

sugar prepared from the fresh coconut sap to

The total phenolics content of the sap acquired

Phenolic profile: (xiii) salicylic acid (0.040 c); (xiv) umbelliferone

a —Values are mg of gallic acid equivalents

c—Values are mg/100 mL;

d—Values are mg/100 g.

μm) before being injected into b—Values are given as mg/100 g;

the analytical system. c—Values are given as µ g/100 mL;

Column: d—Values are given as µ g/100 g.

Waters UPLC BEH-C18

a—Values expressed as µ g/L.

Isolated volatiles: Five volatiles were isolated in the fresh coconut

GC–MS: (1.97–6.73 a); (v) cyclohexane (3.56–4.41 a); (vi) 1,4

included nine properly trained reported.

Volatile compounds were propanone (<0.01–10.24 a); (vii) acetone (2.63–9.98

chromatography. (<0.01–2.93 a); (xi) 3-methyl hexanal (<0.01–2.35 a);

* Total number of samples analyzed in the study; ** NR—Not reported.

Table 3. Detecting adulterants in coconut sap, sugar, and syrup.

Table 4. Detecting contaminants in coconut sap, sugar, and syrup.

3. Food Industry Applications and Sustainability Issues

and varied. Packaging is designed by prioritizing practical, economical, and hygienic

Coconut Sap Sugar Production in the Philippines

Physico-Chemical Properties Reference Values

5. Nutritional Profile and Health Impacts

Pyridoxine (µ g) 2.35 ± 0.01 1.32 ± 0.12 101 ± 0.3

Biochemical Components Content

You might also like