Raw analytical data for: Comparative nutritional analysis of yogurts derived from cow milk and soybean

Abstract Background: Yoghurt is a globally consumed fermented dairy product. Plant-based alternatives, particularly soybean yoghurt, are gaining popularity. A comprehensive comparison of their nutritional profiles is essential for informed dietary choices and product development. Methodology: Yoghurts were produced from cow milk and soybeans via fermentation with Lactobacillus bulgaricus and Streptococcus thermophilus. Proximate composition, mineral content (Ca, Mg, Na, K), vitamins (A, B-complex, C, D, E), amino acid profiles, and physicochemical properties (pH, titratable acidity, viscosity, total solids) were analyzed using standard methods including Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry, High-Performance Liquid Chromatography, and Ion-Exchange Chromatography. Results: Proximate analysis showed cow milk yoghurt had higher protein (24.28% vs 12.50%) and moisture (68.79% vs 63.80%), while soybean yoghurt had higher ash (3.66% vs 1.63%), fat (2.91% vs 1.45%), fiber (5.22% vs 0.71%), and carbohydrate (11.81% vs 2.81%). Mineral analysis revealed comparable calcium and magnesium levels, but soybean yoghurt contained significantly higher potassium (8.01 ± 0.44 vs 5.61 ± 0.89 ppm). Vitamin analysis showed soybean yoghurt was richer in vitamins D (13.23 ± 0.22 vs 4.62 ± 0.24 µg/100g) and E (26.02 ± 2.33 vs 5.46 ± 1.13 mg/100g), while cow milk yoghurt contained more vitamin B12 (20.78 ± 0.16 vs 6.46 ± 0.94 µg/100g). Amino acid profiles indicated cow milk protein had higher total amino acids (87.24 vs 57.01 g/100g protein) and superior essential amino acid balance. Physicochemical analysis showed cow milk yoghurt had higher pH (4.06 vs 3.58) and viscosity (141.20 vs 123.10 mPas.sec). Conclusion: Cow milk yoghurt excels in protein quality, vitamin B12, and physicochemical stability, while soybean yoghurt offers higher fiber, antioxidant vitamins (D and E), and potassium. These distinct nutritional profiles support the value of both products in diverse diets and highlight opportunities for targeted nutritional fortification in plant-based alternatives.