## 3 Results and Discussion
However, the rate survival of probiotic bacteria depends on the strain [54]. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Treatment** & \(\mathbf{\mu^{\text{ + }}}\)**(mPa s)** & **Moisture \(\mathbf{{}^{\text{ + }}}\)**(\%)** & **Predicted survival (\%)** & **Experimental Survival \(\mathbf{{}^{\text{ + }}}\)**(\%)** & **Student Residual** \\ \hline
**1** & \(3.21\pm 0.02\)de & \(5.68\pm 0.27\)de & \(80.89\) & \(79.54\pm 0.25\) & \(-1.18\) \\  
(6.22\pm 0.27\)c & \(5.61\pm 0.24\)c & \(86.18\) & \(83.46\pm 0.15\) & \(-0.93\) \\
**26** & & \(2.20\pm 0.12\)h & \(75.81\) & \(80.83\pm 0.11\) & \(1.50\) \\
**27** & & \(2.38\pm 0.09\)h & \(65.45\) & \(61.89\pm 1.13\) & \(-1.21\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} \({}^{\text{ + }}\)Mean values of four experiments; \({}^{\text{ + }}\)Mean values of two replicates, except in the central point where there were three replicates. Different letters in the same column indicate significant differences by [PERSON]’s one-way analysis of variance (\(p<0.05\)).  
\end{table} 
Table 2: Viscosity of encapsulating solution (\(\upmu\)), moisture content of powder, and survival of _L. rhamns_ after spray drying, and response given by the model derived from the experimental data. The survival of _L. rhamnus_ in terms of CM and FM concentration, and inlet air temperature (T) fits a linear relationship according to the following equations:  
\[\text{S}\left(\%\right) =72.80+2.64\text{ CM}-11.63\text{ T} \text{r}^{2} =0.94 \tag{2}\] \[\text{S}\left(\%\right) =73.09+2.72\text{ FM}-10.30\text{ T} \text{r}^{2} =0.85 \tag{3}\]  
Meanwhile, the survival in terms of INL and T fits a quadratic equation:  
\[\text{S}\left(\%\right) =59.33-1.44\text{ INL}-12.21\text{ T}+6.71\text{ INL}^{2}+3.70\text{ T}^{2}-2.50\text{ INL}\times\text{T} \text{r}^{2} =0.97 \tag{4}\]  
The three models have predictive capability deduced from the signal-to-noise ratio (higher than 4), the small residual value, and Student residual and the \"Lack of Fit F-value\" (not significant) are appropriate for the description of the response surface. Only inlet air temperature significantly contributed (\(p<0.05\)) to the predicted survival of the _L. rhamnus_ after drying, independent of encapsulating agent type (Table 3). The three-dimensional surface plot (Figure 1) shows that the survival of _L. rhamnus_ increased as the inlet air temperature was decreased from 130 to 90 \({}^{\circ}\)C, and the concentration of CM and FM increased from 0.0 to 0.6% (w/v) (Figure 1a), and 0.0 to 0.2% (w/v) (Figure 1b), respectively. Additionally, Figure 1c shows a minimum value for the survival of _L. rhamnus_ (50.23%) obtained to 6.5% (w/v) of INL at 130 \({}^{\circ}\)C, where drying inlet air temperature significantly (\(p<0.0001\)) influenced the response (Table 3). Figure 1: Three-dimensional surface plot for the survival of _L. rhamnus_ after spray drying. (**a**) Chia seed mucilage (CM) and drying inlet air temperature (T), (**b**) Flaxseed mucilage (FM) and drying inlet air temperature (T), (**c**) Inulin (INL) and drying inlet air temperature. Viability of the _L. rhamnosus_ encapsulated with CM or without CM (control assay, only MD) decreased gradually during the first fourteen days of storage at 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C and then remained relatively constant (Figure 2). After one day of drying, viability of the _L. rhamnosus_ encapsulated with 0.6% (w/v) of CM and dried at 90 \({}^{\circ}\)C (Figure 2c) was higher than the control (without CM, Figure 2a) and with 0.3% (w/v) of CM (Figure 2b). After 30 days, viability of the _L. rhamnosus_ (Figure 2b) encapsulated with 0.3% (w/v) of CM and dried at 90 \({}^{\circ}\)C showed an increase, which seems to be related to chain breakup; however, the reason for the apparent increase in the count under experimental conditions has not been determined [59]. After 40 days, the viability of _L.