# Comparison of the Spreadability of Butter and Butter Substitutes
## 3 Results and Discussion
### Physicochemical Properties of Butter and Butter Substitutes
It is worth noting that the butter substitutes compared to the standard for butter color components \(a^{*}\), \(b^{*}\), and \(L^{*}\) gave surprisingly similar results for each component, despite the differences in chemical composition (e.g., different fats used or water content), in textural parameters (e.g., spreadability or hardness) and due to different technological processes. The calculated \(\Delta\)E* values represented the difference between the color of the test sample and the color of the standard in CIELab space and therefore expressed the magnitude of the color change but not its direction. With regard to the expression of this parameter, the samples of butter and butter substitutes were statistically significantly different in two homogeneous groups at the \(\alpha=0.05\) level. The calculated \(\Delta\)E* values for the butter and butter substitute samples ranged in excess of 5, indicating large color differences to the unaided eye of an unexperienced observer between the test butter and butter substitutes and the standard color [35; 62]. A multivariate analysis of the spreadability measurements, selected physicochemical properties, and the color components of the butter and butter substitute samples did not reveal any significant strong relationships between these parameters (Figure 2a,b). The only significant correlation found was between the \(\Delta\)E* value and b* color compound for the butter samples (correlation coefficient 0.85). [PERSON] et al. [46] also found no general relationship between the content and composition of total fat in the samples and the values of textural parameters (i.e., springiness, cohesiveness, and stringiness). Furthermore, no correlation was to be expected for the color components, since both butter and butter substitutes can be colored (while carotenes anntto, bixin, norbixin, and curcumin are permitted in butter in the EU, as are other fat- and oil emulsions) [63]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Parameter** & \(\mathbf{L^{*}}\) & \(\mathbf{a^{*}}\) & \(\mathbf{b^{*}}\) & \(\Delta\)E \\ \hline
**Butter Samples** & & & \\ \hline LMK & 85.72 \(\pm\) 0.78 a,b,c,d & \(-\)6.98 \(\pm\) 0.10 a  & 30.25 \(\pm\) 0.40 c,d  & 14.89 \(\pm\) 0.11 b,c  \\ LaME & 88.44 \(\pm\) 0.39 c,d & \(-\)7.24 \(\pm\) 0.07 a  & 31.82 \(\pm\) 0.26 c,d  & 14.94 \(\pm\) 0.10 b,c  \\ LoME & 88.13 \(\pm\) 0.59 c,d & \(-\)7.48 \(\pm\) 0.11 a  & 29.04 \(\pm\) 0.37 c  & 14.13 \(\pm\) 0.12 b  \\ MEG & 87.67 \(\pm\) 1.41 b,c,d & \(-\)6.93 \(\pm\) 0.07 a  & 31.57 \(\pm\) 0.94 c,d  & 14.81 \(\pm\) 0.17 b,c  \\ MEH & 87.50 \(\pm\) 0.57 b,c  \\ MMP & 88.69 \(\pm\) 0.19 c,d & \(-\)7.32 \(\pm\) 0.14 a  \\ PME & 87.12 \(\pm\) 0.49 a,b,c  & -7.49 \(\pm\) 0.12 a  & 33.84 \(\pm\) 0.63 c,d  & 16.51 \(\pm\) 0.44 c  \\ PrME & 89.30 \(\pm\) 0.16 d  & -7.13 \(\pm\) 0.02 a  & 33.06 \(\pm\) 0.14 f,c  & 15.32 \(\pm\) 0.06 b  \\ \hline \hline
**Butter Substitutes Samples** & & & \\ \hline FM & 83.70 \(\pm\) 1.71 a  & -7.01 \(\pm\) 0.26 a  & 25.34 \(\pm\) 0.70 b  & 14.88 \(\pm\) 0.68 b,c  \\ LuPM & 86.58 \(\pm\) 2.26 a,b,c,d & \(-\)7.24 \(\pm\) 0.16 a  & 25.55 \(\pm\) 1.26 b  & 13.90 \(\pm\) 0.48 b  \\ LaM & 87.98 \(\pm\) 0.65 a  & -5.97 \(\pm\) 0.04 a  & 30.81 \(\pm\) 0.48 c,d  \\ PaEM & 85.40 \(\pm\) 1.37 a,b  & -6.74 \(\pm\) 0.04 & 31.18 \(\pm\) 0.78 a,d [FOOTNOTE:a]Footnote a: b,c,d,e,f,g,—values in the same column and marked with the same letters are not statistically significant at the \(\alpha=0.05\) level. [ENDFOOTNOTEFigure 2: Graphs of correlation matrix showing the relationship between the spreadability, selected physicochemical properties, and the color components of butter and butter substitute samples (**a**) and butter substitute samples alone (**b**) measured at different temperatures (with a confidence level of 95.0%).