## 3 Results and Discussion
### Microrheological Parameters During Fermentation Process
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & **EI 24 h (* \(\times\)10\({}^{-2}\))** & **EI 48 h (* \(\times\)10\({}^{-2}\))** & **EI 5 days (* \(\times\)10\({}^{-2}\))** \\ \hline CM + 0\% CSF & 0.0751 \(\pm\) 0.009 & 0.0742 \(\pm\) 0.0075 & 0.0917 \(\pm\) 0.0064 \\ CM + 0.25\% CSF & 0.171 \(\pm\) 0.021 * & 0.174 \(\pm\) 0.013 ** & 0.176 \(\pm\) 0.041 * \\ CM + 0.5\% CSF & 0.272 \(\pm\) 0.014 ** & 0.261 \(\pm\) 0.101 & 0.268 \(\pm\) 0.042 * \\ CM + 0.75\% CSF & 0.721 \(\pm\) 0.11 ** & 0.694 \(\pm\) 0.096 ** & 0.525 \(\pm\) 0.012 ** \\ CM + 1\% CSF & 1.31 \(\pm\) 0.014 ** & 1.27 \(\pm\) 0.17 ** & 1.03 \(\pm\) 0.094 ** \\ AM + 0\% CSF & 0.0898 \(\pm\) 0.003 & 0.0797 \(\pm\) 0.002 & - \\ AM + 0.25\% CSF & 0.19 \(\pm\) 0.014 ** & 0.155 \(\pm\) 0.021 * & 0.171 \(\pm\) 0.019 \\ AM + 0.5\% CSF & 0.274 \(\pm\) 0.036 ** & 0.285 \(\pm\) 0.023 ** & 0.414 \(\pm\) 0.034 \\ AM + 0.75\% CSF & 0.457 \(\pm\) 0.014 ** & 0.474 \(\pm\) 0.110 * & 0.402 \(\pm\) 0.028 \\ AM + 1\% CSF & 0.824 \(\pm\) 0.098 ** & 0.720 \(\pm\) 0.025 ** & 0.658 \(\pm\) 0.017 \\ SM + 0\% CSF & 0.0232 \(\pm\) 0.003 & 0.0681 \(\pm\) 0.008 & 0.0683 \(\pm\) 0.009 ** \\ SM + 0.25\% CSF & 0.741 \(\pm\) 0.041 ** & 0.217 \(\pm\) 0.0054 ** & 0.211 \(\pm\) 0.0055 ** \\ SM + 0.5\% CSF & 0.884 \(\pm\) 0.11 ** & 0.985 \(\pm\) 0.087 ** & 0.983 \(\pm\) 0.036 ** \\ SM + 0.75\% CSF & 1.56 \(\pm\) 0.025 ** & 1.72 \(\pm\) 0.019 ** & 1.74 \(\pm\) 0.029 ** \\ SM + 1\% CSF & 2.53 \(\pm\) 0.102 ** & 2.52 \(\pm\) 0.072 ** & 2.46 \(\pm\) 0.078 ** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: EI (nm\({}^{-2}\)) values obtained at the end of fermentation and after 24h, 48h and 5 days of storage at 4 \({}^{\circ}\)C. The results are the mean of three experiments \(\pm\) standard deviation. (* \(p<\) 0.05; ** \(p<\) 0.001 of milk-based yogurt-like structure with respect to the same storage time of samples without CSF). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Sample** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**MVI 24 h**} & **MVI 48 h** & **MVI 5 days** \\  & **(*10\({}^{-4}\) nm\({}^{-2}\).s)** & **(*10\({}^{-4}\) nm\({}^{-2}\).s)** & **(*10\({}^{-4}\) nm\({}^{-2}\).s)** \\ \hline CM + 0\% CSF & 0.0920 \(\pm\) 0.0054 & 0.0716 \(\pm\) 0.003 & 0.0702 \(\pm\) 0.012  
of the samples. Probably, the carob seed flour induces the formation of a three-dimensional network able to support the yogurt structures and prevent destabilization phenomena such as sedimentation, coalescence or phase separation. In the case of soy-milk-derived yogurt-like structure, without and with 0.25% carob seed flour, MVI values decreased during storage time, thus demonstrating that the samples without and with the lowest concentration of carob seed flour (0.25% _w/w_) were not stable. On the contrary, MVI and EI values increased after 5 days of storage for the samples containing 0.5%, 0.75%, 1% of carob seed flour; these amounts were able to increase the MVI of the samples during storage time. For coconut-milk-based yogurt-like products, the obtained results are similar to those obtained for almond-milk-based yogurt-like products. In Table 4, EI values are reported. In accordance with previously reported findings in a research work of [PERSON] and collaborators, the addition of carob seed flour increased the elastic properties of the sample [35]. In fact, the obtained results suggest that EI values increased as the amount of carob seed flour increased, independently of used vegetal milk. Probably, as previously hypothesized for the MVI values, the increase of the EI values was also due to the viscoelastic properties possessed by caroubins [21]. The carob seed flour-free samples showed the lowest EI values, thus confirming, once again, that the elastic properties of the samples were to be attributed to the presence of caroubins.