Introduction: Chocolate is made of cocoa mass and sugar suspended in a cocoa butter matrix (Konar et al., 2016). Cocoa butter of chocolate, the lipid portions of chocolate, preserve the probiotic bacteria that promote health benefits (Possemiers et al., 2010) Consequently, the potentiality of using chocolate matrix as a carrier/encapsulant of probiotic is not unexpected. Probiotics are the live microorganisms that, when administered in adequate amounts, provide health benefits to consumers (Tsuda et al., 2010). Probiotic efficacy can be enhanced when these microorganisms are integrated into the diet, as interactions with food components can protect microbial cells as they pass through the gastrointestinal tract (Vindeola et al., 2011). The confectionery sector, particularly the chocolate industry, is currently undergoing dynamic changes, influenced by the growing demand for functional chocolates that may help customers improve their health (Orkaz et al., 2020). Chocolate is admired all over the world and its popularity seems to be mainly due to its ability to trigger happy things in the human brain and stimulate positive emotions. Notably, milk chocolate, in particular, is known to be a source of a variety of physiologically active compounds with significant antioxidant activity, such as flavonoids and polyphenols (Todorovic et al., 2015). Material and methods: Bifidobacterium bifidum were grown in 18 mL MRS broth, supplemented with 0. 05% L-cysteine hydrochloride (Sigma, Sydney, Australia) MMRS (Modified MRS) to provide an anaerobic environment, at 37 °, C for 48 h under anaerobic conditions using the Gas Pak system (Anaerocult A, Darmstadt, Merck, Germany). The cultures were transferred into 180 mL MMRS for B. bifidum and incubated under the same conditions. The cultures were then reactivated by transferring 3–, 4 times in MRS broth and the cells were separated by centrifuging at 1500 g for 15 min at 25 °, C (Eppendorf Centrifuge, 5810R, Hamburg, Germany) and washed twice with sterile 0. 1% peptone solution. The final cell concentration was adjusted to 1. 0 * 10 9 Cfu ⁄, mL (Zomorodi et al., 2010). Preparation of the microencapsulated solution: The whey protein isolated micro-coating solution was prepared according to Tellioghlu harsa & cabuk (2015) method with some modifications. Thus, first a solution of 8% whey protein isolate was prepared and for protein denaturation, it was heated at 80 °,C for 30 minutes and then cooled to ambient temperature. To prepare the alginate coating solution, first a 2% alginate solution was prepared in sterile distilled water and after sterilization (at 121 °,C for 15 minutes) it was cooled. Microencapsulation of microorganisms: The extrusion technique was used to microencapsulate bacteria. After washing, the cultures were suspended in 5 mL of sterile 0. 1% peptone solution and mixed with 20 mL of 2% (w⁄,v) sodium alginate solution and 20 mL of 8 % (w⁄,v) whey protein concentrate solution sterilized at 121 °, C for 15 min. The cell suspension was injected through a 0. 11mm needle into sterile 0. 05 M CaCl2 (Merck, Germany). The beads were allowed to stand for 30 min for jellification, and then rinsed with, and subsequently kept in, sterile 0. 1% peptone solution at 4 °, C. After filtering from sterile filter paper, the seeds were transferred to sterile plates and placed in the freeze dryer for 2 days at-65 °,C for drying, and after drying under sterile conditions, they were powdered. Preparation of probiotic-chocolates the probiotic milk chocolate was made according to Md Zakirul Islam et al (2022) approach, with some formulation adjustments. To inoculate probiotics, the pellet (10 9 CFU/gr) was added to the chocolate mass at 36–, 37 ◦, C, followed by 10 min of tempering at 34 ◦, C. Plain milk chocolate (without probiotics) was considered as a control. All the above procedures were performed in sterile conditions. Physicochemical analysis Changes in the physicochemical properties of the probiotic milk chocolate during 60 days of storage at 4 ◦, C were monitored and compared to the control milk chocolate. The viscosity of both probiotic and control chocolates was measured according to Foong et al. (2013) at 0, 15, 30 and 60 days of storage using a Brookfield LVDV-II + viscometer (Brookfield Engineering Laboratories, Inc., Middleborough, MA, USA) attached with a LV-4 spindle. The chocolates were incubated at 38 ◦, C for 1 h prior to measuring their viscosity. Sufficient time was allowed to ensure five rotations before viscosity was recorded. The pH of probiotic and control chocolates was measured at 0, 7, 30 and 60 days of storage by a digital pH meter (Metrohm, Germany). Water activity was determined for each chocolate sample at 0, 7, 30, and 60 days of storage using a Water Activity Meter (AQUALAB CX-2, Decagon Devices, Washington, USA) at 25 ±,0. 1 ◦, C. Prior to every measurement. Sensory evaluation: In terms of appearance, color, flavor, texture, and overall acceptability, sensory qualities of control and probiotic-supplemented chocolates were assessed (Lalicic-Petronijevic et al., 2015). Results and discussion: Evaluation of survival of Bifidobacterium bifidum: Bacterial count results for microencapsulated probiotic chocolate decreased from 7. 33 Cfu/gr on the first day to 6. 15 Cfu/gr on the 30th day and to 4. 69 Cfu/gr on the 60th day, indicating that the microencapsulated probiotic chocolate retained its probiotic properties until the 30th day (P<0. 05). Bacterial count results for probiotic chocolate decreased from 6. 48 logcfu/gr to 6. 33 logcfu/gr on the 15th day and to 3. 5 logcfu/gr on the 60th day, indicating that the microencapsulated probiotic chocolate retained its probiotic properties until the 15th day. The results showed that microencapsulated probiotic chocolate has a higher water activity than plain chocolate, but not enough to cause probiotic bacteria activity in it (P<0. 05). Investigation of acidity changes: The results indicate that the acidity changes for the control sample after 60 days of storage are 1. 14 (in terms of oleic acid percentage). This value starts from 0. 89 on the first day for microencapsulated probiotic chocolate and reaches 0. 95 (in terms of oleic acid percentage) after 60 days of storage, which is not similar to the acidity changes for the unencapsulated sample, which means the trend of acidity changes is not too different for each of the samples. Probiotics remain in the incubator phase in the chocolate-based environment, so no activity occurs that produces lactic acid products that affect acidity. Investigation of pH changes: The pH values during the storage period for the probiotic chocolate samples show an almost constant trend. Investigation of moisture changes: The results showed that the moisture content of the microencapsulated probiotic chocolate is higher than probiotic chocolate and control chocolate, which is due to the high moisture content of microencapsulated chocolate compared to the control type is probably due to the presence of hygroscopic substances such as whey protein in the bacterial coatings, which have a high ability to absorb moisture and increase the amount of moisture. Investigation of texture hardness changes: Based on the results of texture hardness measurements, the highest hardness was observed in microencapsulated probiotic chocolate (after 60 days) and the lowest hardness was observed in plain chocolate (after 1 day), which could be due to the effects of the materials used to microencapsulation. Investigation of viscosity and yield value changes of chocolate: In this study the results of viscosity measurements show that its ability to absorb high moisture, the viscosity and yield value of the microencapsulated probiotic chocolate sample is higher than probiotic and control chocolate. Sensory evaluation: results show that the probiotic chocolate containing Bifidobacterium bifidum is not significantly different from the microencapsulated type, by the method of sodium alginate-whey protein gel formation, and also the control sample which indicates that the addition of probiotics to chocolate or microencapsulation of probiotic bacteria did not have a significant effect on the desirability and organoleptic properties of chocolate. Conclusion: There were not seen significant negative effects on physicochemical, rheological and sensory properties of probiotic chocolate, probiotic chocolate and microencapsulated probiotic during the storage time and therefore there is no need to change the technological and device conditions and also purchase additional equipment for probiotic chocolate production.