{"title":"Determination and Comparison of Aspartame Level in Low Calorie Table Top Sweeteners by Ultraviolet Visible Spectroscopy","authors":"Narjis Naz, Subreena Altaf","doi":"10.6000/1927-5129.2018.14.30","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The analysis of aspartame was done in table top sweeteners using Ultraviolet visible Spectroscopy. The method is based on the formation of manganate ion (MnO 4 2- ) when potassium permanganate oxidizes aspartame. The analysis was carried out at a fixed wavelength of 600nm exactly after 48 minutes of sample preparation using 1mL of 0.01M KMnO 4 and 2mL of 1.0M NaOH. A linear calibration graph was obtained with the regression coefficient of 0.9999 and the percentage recovery was in the range of 92.7-101.6%. The Relative standard deviation for the method was found to be 1.03%.","PeriodicalId":30712,"journal":{"name":"BJ Kines National Journal of Basic Applied Sciences","volume":"65 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BJ Kines National Journal of Basic Applied Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6000/1927-5129.2018.14.30","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
The analysis of aspartame was done in table top sweeteners using Ultraviolet visible Spectroscopy. The method is based on the formation of manganate ion (MnO 4 2- ) when potassium permanganate oxidizes aspartame. The analysis was carried out at a fixed wavelength of 600nm exactly after 48 minutes of sample preparation using 1mL of 0.01M KMnO 4 and 2mL of 1.0M NaOH. A linear calibration graph was obtained with the regression coefficient of 0.9999 and the percentage recovery was in the range of 92.7-101.6%. The Relative standard deviation for the method was found to be 1.03%.