See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/229345746

Impregnation properties of some fruit at vacuum pressure

Article  in  Journal of Food Engineering · March 2003

DOI: 10.1016/S0260-8774(02)00155-3

CITATIONS READS

77 275

5 authors, including:

Hugo Mújica Paz Aurora Valdez-Fragoso

Tecnológico de Monterrey Tecnológico de Monterrey
49 PUBLICATIONS   698 CITATIONS    47 PUBLICATIONS   654 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Aurelio López-Malo Enrique Palou

Universidad de las Americas Puebla Universidad de las Americas Puebla
186 PUBLICATIONS   3,881 CITATIONS    121 PUBLICATIONS   2,735 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Problem solving learning environments for critical thinking View project

Natural antimicrobials View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Hugo Mújica Paz on 23 August 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314
www.elsevier.com/locate/jfoodeng

Impregnation properties of some fruits at vacuum pressure

ujica-Paz a, A. Valdez-Fragoso a, A. L
H. M opez-Malo b, E. Palou b, J. Welti-Chanes b,*

a
Secretarıa de Investigaci
on y Postgrado, Universidad Aut
onoma de Chihuahua, Ciudad Universitaria s/n, Chihuahua, Chih. 31170, Mexico
b
Departamento de Ingenierıa Quımica y Alimentos, Universidad de las Am
ericas-Puebla, Sta. Catarina Martir, Cholula, Puebla. 72820, Mexico
Received 1 May 2000; received in revised form 17 September 2001; accepted 9 February 2002

Abstract
The effects of vacuum pressure and its application time on the volume of isotonic solution (IS) impregnated in slices of mango,
apple, papaya, banana, peach, melon, and mamey were studied using response surface methodology. Fruits were subjected to
vacuum impregnation (VI) treatments using sucrose IS. VI times between 3 and 45 min and vacuum pressures (VP) between 135 and
674 mbar were applied. Second order polynomials were developed to estimate the volume of IS impregnated in each fruit
(R2 P 0:870). VP had a significant effect (p 6 0:10) on the volume of IS impregnated in fruit slices of all the studied fruits. The
impregnation also depended significantly (p 6 0:10) on the VI time, except for apple. Under the studied conditions, the effective
porosity values of the fruits varied from 0.016 for mamey to 0.330 for apple.
Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Vacuum impregnation; Osmotic dehydration; Effective porosity; Fruits

1. Introduction been performed to determine the effect of these factors

Solute impregnation has an important role in many
food industry processes where liquid and solid phases
are in contact (i.e. pickles, osmotic dehydration, salting).
Active compounds, antimicrobials, or solutes with a
particular role can be incorporated through impregna-
tion, to increase product shelflife and/or sensory and
nutritional characteristics.
Impregnation processes traditionally have been car-
ried out at atmospheric pressure. However, several au-
thors have focused on vacuum impregnation (VI) of
foods as an innovative alternative (Fito, Andres, Chir-
alt, & Pardo, 1996; Guerrero, 1996; Martınez-Monz o,
Martınez-Navarrete, Chiralt, & Fito, 1998; Salvatori,
1997; Salvatori, Andres, Chiralt, & Fito, 1998). VI
consists in the application of a reduced pressure to a
solid–liquid system, followed by restoration of atmo-
spheric pressure (Fito, 1994). The active compound is
thus incorporated into the food by the impregnation of
the liquid in which it is dissolved. The quantity of liquid
impregnated in the food structure during VI, and con-
sequently of the solute, depends mainly on vacuum
pressure (VP) and its application time. Few studies have
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +52-2-229-2005; fax: +52-2-229-2009.
E-mail address: jwelti@mail.udlap.mx (J. Welti-Chanes).
0260-8774/02/$ - see front matter Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 2 6 0 - 8 7 7 4 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 1 5 5 - 3
on the quantity of solution impregnated, and most of
the VI studies have been carried out using short vacuum
application times (5–15 min) (Guerrero, 1996; Salvatori,
1997; Sousa, 1996).
VI allows a more rapid and controlled impregnation
of desired solutes in foods. It has been applied to min-
imally processed fruits (Tapia de Daza, Alzamora, &
Welti-Chanes, 1996; Tapia de Daza, L opez-Malo,
Consuegra, Corte, & Welti Chanes, 1999), intermediate
moisture products (Tapia de Daza et al., 1996), and in
crioprotective processes (Fito et al., 1996; Martınez-
Monz o et al., 1998). However, to achieve a better and
efficient impregnation, it is required to know the effec-
tive porosity of the food in order to predict the theo-
retical maximum solution that can be impregnated.
Knowledge of the impregnation behavior of the food
under diverse VI conditions is essential to design some
preservation processes.
The present work focuses on the evaluation of im-
pregnation characteristics of mango, apple, papaya,
banana, peach, melon, and mamey. The objectives of
this study were: (1) to determine the effects of the VP
and impregnation time on the volume of isotonic solu-
tion (IS) impregnated in the tissue of the fruits, and (2)
to calculate the effective porosity of the fruits at different
VI conditions.
308 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314

Nomenclature

b0 , b1 , b2 constant and linear regression coefficients of x1 time in coded level

Eq. (3) x2 vacuum pressure in coded level
b12 , b11 , b22 cross-product and quadratic regression X0 intercept, from plot X versus (1  1=r) (m3
coefficients of Eq. (3) liquid/m3 fruit)
Mf final mass of the fruit (kg) y the measured response variable, X
Mi initial mass of the fruit (kg) ee effective porosity of the fruit, slope Eq. (4)
r ratio of atmospheric pressure to work pres- (m3 internal gas/m3 initial fruit)
sure (mbar/mbar) er total or real porosity of the fruit (m3 internal
V0 initial volume of the fruit slices (m3 ) gas/m3 fruit)
VPt transition vacuum pressure from plot X ver- qa apparent density of the fruit (kg/m3 )
sus (1  1=r) (mbar) qr real density of the fruit puree (kg/m3 )
X volume of the fruit impregnated by an ex- qs density of the isotonic solution (kg/m3 )
ternal liquid (m3 liquid/m3 fruit)

2. Materials and methods 2.3. Vacuum impregnation treatments

2.1. Sample preparation for impregnation treatments
Batches of mango (Manguifera indica var. ‘‘manila’’),
apple (Malus sylvestris, Mill var. golden delicious), pa-
paya (Carica papaya var. ‘‘maradol’’), banana (Musa
paradisiaca var. ‘‘macho’’), peach (Prunus persica var.
‘‘criollo’’), melon (Cucumis melo var. ‘‘reticulado’’) and
mamey (Pouteria sapota L.) were used. The edible por-
tion of various fruits of each batch was cut into
3:5
2:5
1:2 cm slices. Four slices of each type of fruit
were randomly selected for impregnation treatments.
2.2. Physico-chemical properties of fresh fruits
Five fruits of each batch were randomly selected.
They were peeled, cut and homogenized with a mixer.
Samples of puree were taken to carry out analyses.
Moisture, titrable acidity and reducing sugars contents
were determined according to AOAC (1984) methods
22.013, 22.008, 31.034, 31.036, respectively. Soluble
solids (°Brix) were measured with an Atago Hand re-
fractometer (ATAGO, Co. Osaka, Japan). Water ac-
tivity was determined with a Decagon CX-1 hygrometer
(Decagon Devices Inc., Pullman, Washington); the pH
with a Beckman pH-meter. Apparent density ðqa Þ was
measured in fruit pieces, and real density ðqr Þ in fruit
purees, using the picnometer method (Salvatori, 1997).
All determinations were made in triplicate for each fruit.
Total or real porosity ðer Þ of the fruit was calculated
using apparent and real densities according to the
equation
The VI with IS was performed at 25 °C in vacuum
desiccators. Commercial sucrose was used to prepare the
IS of a water activity equal to that of each fresh fruit. As
mentioned in Section 2.1, four slices of each fresh fruit
were employed for impregnation treatments. They were
measured, weighed, and submerged in the IS for a pre-
determined time and VP, according to the experimental
design, followed by 25 min at atmospheric pressure. The
fruit/syrup ratio used was 1/10. After impregnation
treatments, the IS which adhered to the surface of the
slices was eliminated with filter paper; then, the fruit
slices were weighed. Experiments were run in triplicate.
The volume of the fruit impregnated with the IS (X) was
determined as reported by Salvatori (1997)
Mf  Mi
X ¼ ð2Þ
q s V0
2.4. Experimental design and statistical analysis
A central composite design was used to determine the
effect of the VP and impregnation time on the quantity
of the sucrose IS impregnated in the fruit tissue. Ex-
perimental conditions are presented in Table 1. For each
of the experimental points, after the impregnation pro-
cess, a 25 min relaxation period at atmospheric pressure
Table 1
Coded and real values of the independent variables in a central com-
posite design

q  qa Coded value 1.41 1 0 1 1.41

er ¼ r ð1Þ
qa Impregnation 3 9 24 39 45
Ripeness index was calculated using the soluble solids to time (min)
VP (mbar) 135 213 404 593 674
acidity ratio.
 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314 309

was applied. The experimental design allows to establish
a second order polynomial by
y ¼ b0 þ b1 x1 þ b2 x2 þ b12 x1 x2 þ b11 x21 þ b22 x22
The statistical analysis was performed using Design
Expert V.5.0.3 (1996) to obtain the coefficients of the
polynomial, the error probabilities (p), and the ex-
plained variability percentage (R2 ), which allows the
evaluation of the global fitting of the model to the ex-
perimental values of independent variables.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Experimental results
Physico-chemical properties for the studied fruits are
presented in Table 2. The reported values are the means
of three observations. The compositional results are
within the range reported for each fruit variety (Favier,
Ireland-Ripert, Toque, & Feinberg, 1995; Hulme, 1970).
The ripeness index corresponded to fruits with a firm
texture and good organoleptic characteristics (Primo-
Yufera, 1982). Total or real porosity (er ) constitutes a
measure of the empty spaces in the fruit tissue, and
represents the maximum space that could be impreg-
nated with an IS. The er value was large for apple
(0.273), medium for mango (0.152) and melon (0.133),
and small for the other fruits (0.016–0.058). Salvatori
(1997) reported er values of 0.080 for ‘‘Catherine’’ peach,
and 0.043 for melon. Salvatori et al. (1998) reported er
values of 0.216–0.238 for other apple varieties, 0.099 for
‘‘Tommy Atkins’’ mango, and 0.0260 for ‘‘Miraflores’’
peach. The differences between apparent and real den-
sities of each fruit showed the differences in porosity
among the studied fruits.
Table 3 presents the experimental results of the av-
erage volume of fruit impregnated (X) with sucrose IS.
The X values of apple varied between 0.081 and 0.341,
ð3Þ and between 0.013 and 0.079 for the other studied fruits.
Salvatori (1997) and Guerrero (1996) reported X values
of 0.135 and 0.273 for apples, respectively, under rather
different experimental conditions. The X values of the
‘‘Macho’’ banana in this study were lower than those
reported by Guerrero (1996) (0.039–0.053), and lower
than the value reported by Sousa (1996) for ‘‘Giant
cavendish’’ banana (0.050); both were determined at
short VI times. The results of X for ‘‘Manila’’ mango
were similar to those reported for ‘‘Ataulfo’’ mango by
Guerrero (1996) (0.012–0.025), but they were lower than
the X value of 0.14 for ‘‘Tommy Atkins’’ mango re-
ported by Salvatori (1997). The results of this study and
the reported values reveal that er and X vary widely
among fruits as well as between varieties.
3.2. Statistical analysis
The analysis of variance showed that the second or-
der models are well adjusted to the experimental data
for all the studied fruits (p 6 0:05) (Table 4). The values
of R2 indicated that more than 90% of behavior varia-
tion could be explained by the fitted models, except for
banana, whose fitted model accounted for 87.0% of
the variation in the experimental data. These results
indicated that the models were sufficiently accurate for
predicting the volume of each fruit impregnated with an
IS (X), for any combination of independent variable
values within the ranges studied. Statistical analysis in
Table 4 presents the significance of the regression coef-
ficients of the model at p 6 0:10. The models were used
to generate response surfaces so that the effects of in-
dependent variables were easily visualized.

Table 2
Physico-chemical properties of the fruits
Property Mango Apple Papaya Banana Peach Melon Mamey
Moisture contenta 84.1  0.7 88.9  0.8 92.8  0.5 77.7  0.7 84.9  0.6 94.4  0.8 74.5  0.9
Soluble solidsb 16.1  0.3 14.6  0.2 9.3  0.2 22.1  0.2 14.6  0.2 13.6  0.2 34.0  0.1
aw 0.988  0.001 0.991  0.002 0.993  0.002 0.980  0.001 0.996  0.002 0.993  0.001 0.971  0.001
Acidityc 1.37  0.01 0.32  0.006 0.18  0.004 0.61  0.01 0.39  0.01 0.38  0.00 0.13  0.00
Reducing sugarsd 3.2  0.05 9.5  0.2 6.1  0.04 12.6  0.03 2.5  0.09 2.9  0.04 7.7  0.05
pH 3.0  0.0 3.9  0.0 5.3  0.0 4.3  0.0 4.6  0.0 6.7  0.0 5.3  0.0
Apparent densitye 0.918  0.01 0.764  0.03 0.968  0.03 1.027  0.02 0.996  0.02 0.899  0.00 1.121  0.01
Real densitye 1.082  0.02 1.051  0.02 1.028  0.02 1.044  0.02 1.044  0.01 1.043  0.03 1.161  0.02
Real porosityf 0.152  0.001 0.273  0.011 0.058  0.003 0.016  0.003 0.046  0.002 0.133  0.006 0.034  0.008
Ripeness indexg 11.7 45.6 52.5 35.9 39.4 35.6 261.5
a
g water/g sample
100.
b
°Brix.
c
g acid/g sample
100, expressed as, malic acid for apple, mamey, and banana, and as citric acid for mango, papaya, melon, and peach.
d
g glucose/g sample
100.
e
kg/m3 .
f
%.
g
°Brix/acidity.
310 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314

Table 3
Experimental mean values of the volume of fruit impregnated with a sucrose IS (X)
Factors Response, X (m3 liquid/m3 fruit)
Time (min) Vacuum Mango Apple Papaya Banana Peach Melon Mamey
(mbar)
3 404 0.013 0.200 0.042 0.026 0.022 0.026 0.023
9 214 0.014 0.165 0.035 0.023 0.024 0.026 0.031
9 593 0.015 0.303 0.051 0.032 0.034 0.052 0.024
24 135 0.016 0.081 0.026 0.012 0.034 0.016 0.028
24 404 0.020 0.214 0.046 0.032 0.038 0.049 0.033
24 404 0.021 0.219 0.047 0.029 0.038 0.046 0.036
24 404 0.021 0.208 0.044 0.029 0.040 0.042 0.032
24 674 0.016 0.341 0.061 0.034 0.038 0.079 0.026
39 214 0.019 0.168 0.039 0.027 0.038 0.025 0.034
39 593 0.022 0.303 0.059 0.033 0.041 0.057 0.034
45 404 0.025 0.218 0.050 0.031 0.032 0.036 0.040

Table 4
Analysis of variance for volume of the fruit impregnated by a sucrose IS (X), using coded variables (x1 : impregnation time; x2 : vacuum pressure)
Source SS df MS F pðF Þ
Model for mango: y ¼ 0.020 þ 0.0036x1 þ 0.00043x2 þ 0.00065x1 x2  0.00088x21  0.0022x22 (R2 ¼ 0.950)
Model 1:4
104 5 2:5
105 19.3 0.003
Residual 6:9
106 5 1:3
106
Model for apple: y ¼ 0.210 þ 0.0035x1 þ 0.08x2  0.0007x1 x2 þ 0.0038x21 þ 0.0048x22 (R2 ¼ 0.954)
Model 0.05 5 0.01 20.9 0.002
Residual 2:4
103 5 4:9
104
Model for papaya: y ¼ 0.046 þ 0.0028x1 þ 0.0106x2 þ 0.0010x1 x2 þ 0.0004x21  0.0008x22 (R2 ¼ 0.966)
Model 9:7
104 5 1:9
104 28.7 0.001
Residual 3:3
105 5 6:8
106
Model for banana: y ¼ 0.030 þ 0.0014x1 þ 0.0058x2  0.0008x1 x2  0.00002x21  0.0027x22 (R2 ¼ 0.870)
Model 3:4
104 5 6:9
105 6.5 0.03
Residual 5:3
105 5 1
105
Model for peach: y ¼ 0.0385 þ 0.0045x1 þ 0.0022x2  0.0019x1 x2  0.0051x12  0.0005x22 (R2 ¼ 0.933)
Model 3:6
104 5 7:3
105 14.1 0.005
Residual 2:6
105 5 5:2
106
Model for melon: y ¼ 0.0455 þ 0.0023x1 þ 0.0183x2 þ 0.0014x1 x2  0.0071x12 þ 0.0013x22 (R2 ¼ 0.955)
Model 3
103 5 6:1
104 21.2 0.002
Residual 1:4
104 5 2:9
105
Model for mamey: y ¼ 0.0336 þ 0.0046x1  0.0015x2 þ 0.0017x1 x2  0.0006x21  0.003x22 (R2 ¼ 0.906)
Model 2:5
104 5 5:1
105 9.6 0.01
Residual 2:6
105 5 5:2
106
The bold character indicates that the corresponding parameters have a significant effect on y (p < 0:1).

3.3. Response surfaces
The response surfaces given in Figs. 1 and 2 show
that the VI time had a linear effect on the X for papaya,
mango, and mamey. A quadratic effect of the VI time on
the X for peach and melon is clearly observed (Fig. 1b
and d); X values increase over the 3–25 min range of the
VI time, and then decrease for longer VI times. How-
ever, Salvatori (1997) reported that the VI time was not
significant on the X for mango and peach, at a VI time
ranging from 5 to 15 min. The VI time did not influence
the values of X in apple (Fig. 1a) and banana (Fig. 2b)
(p > 0:10). Therefore, VI can be applied for short times,
to obtain maximum occupation of the empty spaces in
the apple and banana tissue by the IS.
Fig. 1 illustrates that, within the evaluated VI time
range, increasing the VP linearly increased the X values
in apple, peach, papaya, and melon. So, there is a
greater impregnation of the IS at higher VP levels. In the
case of mango, banana and mamey (Fig. 2), an increase
of VP causes an increase of X up to certain limit, beyond
which X slightly decreases in mango and mamey. Such
decrease suggests that the high VP levels could cause an
irreversible deformation of the tissue, which reduces the
 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314
Fig. 1. Effect of the VP and application time on volume of fruit occupied by IS (X): (a) apple, (b) peach, (c) papaya, and (d) melon.
free volume available for impregnation (Andres, 1995;
Fito et al., 1996).
3.4. Effective porosity (ee ) determination
In order to estimate the effective porosity (ee ) of the
studied fruits, and compare it to those found in the lit-
erature, X values were predicted by the models presented
in Table 4. A VP range of 135–674 mbar, 10 min of VI
and 25 min of relaxation were chosen, which are ex-
perimental conditions close to the reported in other VI
studies (Guerrero, 1996; Salvatori, 1997; Sousa, 1996).
Predicted values of X were plotted against (1  1=r) for
apple (Fig. 3) and mango, mamey, papaya, peach,
melon, and banana (Fig. 4). Then, ee of the fruits was
determined, according to the model proposed by Fito
and Pastor (1994)
X ¼ ee ð1  1=rÞ
This model does not take into account the effect of
capillary pressure, which means that the regression line
has an intercept X0 ¼ 0, and its slope is referred to as the
effective porosity, ee .
311
Regression parameters of Eq. (4) are presented in
Table 5. A linear increase of X as a function of (1  1=r)
is observed in apple (Fig. 3), melon and papaya (Fig. 4).
The slope of these graphs show that the effective po-
rosity of apple (ee ¼ 0:336) is higher than that of melon
(ee ¼ 0:071) and papaya (ee ¼ 0:042). The linearity of
the graphs could indicate that there is not permanent
deformation phenomena during the impregnation pro-
cess, although capillary phenomena may be present,
since X0 6¼ 0 (Fito & Pastor, 1994). A similar behavior
was noticed by Tapia de Daza et al. (1999) in ‘‘Ama-
meyada’’ papaya, which presented an ee ¼ 0:03. The
calculated ee value for apple ðee ¼ 0:336Þ was higher
than the values reported by Salvatori (1997) (ee ¼ 0:21)
and Guerrero (1996) (ee ¼ 0:20).
In the case of banana, peach, mamey, and mango, a
linear increasing, followed by a declining trend, was
observed in the X versus (1  1=r) graphs (Fig. 4). Such
ð4Þ
declining trend was observed at a transition VP (VPt )
around 400 mbar (Table 5) and VI time of 10 min. These
operating conditions probably caused an irreversible
deformation of the porous structure, which decreased
the free volume available for impregnation, resulting in
312 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314

Fig. 3. Estimated apple volume fraction impregnated by an IS (X)

versus (1  1=r) (VI time: 10 min; relaxation time: 25 min).

Fig. 4. Estimated melon, papaya, banana, peach, mamey and mango

volume fraction impregnated by an IS (X) versus (1  1=r) (VI time: 10
min; relaxation time: 25 min).

Table 5
Regression parameters of the theoretical relation between X and
(1  1=r) for different fruits (vacuum time: 10 min; relaxation time: 25
min)
Fruit ee a X0 b R2 VPt c
Apple 0.336 0.046 0.998
Melon 0.071 0.002 0.997
Papaya 0.042 0.022 0.996
Banana 0.048 0.006 0.995 385
Peach 0.018 0.020 0.998 393
Mamey 0.016 0.024 0.971 350
Mango 0.016 0.010 0.974 387
Fig. 2. Effect of the VP and application time on volume of fruit oc- a
cupied by IS (X): (a) mango, (b) banana, and (c) mamey. Slope of Eq. (4) (effective porosity, ee ).
b
Intercept of Eq. (4).
c
Transition VP (mbar).
the deviation from positive to negative slope of the
curves in Fig. 4. The negative values of ee do not cor-
respond to real values, but rather to a combined effect of impregnation. However, due to capillary effects or
a structure loss and/or native liquid loss which may arise structural modifications, the free volume is not com-
from high VP effect. pletely filled (Andres, 1995).
A comparison of the real porosity values (er ) and the Additional calculations were performed to obtain a
effective porosity (ee ) of the studied fruits (Tables 2 and second set of ee values over 5–45 min of VI time. The
5) exhibits that er > ee in melon, papaya, peach, and predicted ee values are presented in Table 6. It is ob-
mango, which indicates there is still free volume for served that ee values of banana and peach tend to de-
 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314 313

Table 6
Effect of the VI time on effective porosity (ee ) of fruits
Time (min) Mangoa Appleb Papayab Bananaa Peacha Melonb Mameya
5 0.015 0.337 0.040 0.048 0.020 0.069 0.014
10 0.016 0.336 0.042 0.045 0.018 0.071 0.016
15 0.017 0.335 0.044 0.044 0.016 0.073 0.017
25 0.019 0.333 0.046 0.042 0.012 0.077 0.021
35 0.021 0.331 0.049 0.040 0.007 0.080 0.018
45 0.022 0.329 0.052 0.037 0.005 0.085 0.021
a
VP level over 135–400 mbar.
b
VP level over 135–674 mbar.

crease with the VI time (in the range of 135–400 mbar).
However, even in a wider VP range (135–674 mbar), ee
of apple do not show VI time dependence. In the case of
mango, papaya, melon, and mamey, ee increases with VI
time. These results are significant in that they show the
influence of VI time on ee values; such influence has not
been observed in porosity determinations carried out
during short VI times (Guerrero, 1996; Salvatori et al.,
1998; Sousa, 1996). Therefore, the VI time should be
taken into account when applying the method proposed
by Fito and Pastor (1994), as the VI time certainly plays
an important role on ee values.
The differences found among fruits regarding levels of
X, ee , and response to vacuum application can be ex-
plained as a function of the mechanisms broadly treated
by Fito and collaborators in diverse works (Fito, 1994;
Fito et al., 1996; Fito & Chiralt, 2000; Fito & Pastor,
1994). But it is important to have in mind that VI of a
porous product consists mainly of exchanging the in-
ternal gas or liquid occluded in open pores by an ex-
ternal liquid phase due to the action of hydrodynamic
mechanisms promoted by pressure changes. VI opera-
tion is performed in two stages once the product is
submerged in the impregnation liquid: vacuum appli-
cation and restoration of the atmospheric pressure.
Thus, besides the properties of the fluid to impregnate
and time and level of vacuum application, the values of
X and consequently of ee , are influenced by the number
and diameter of pores as well as the mechanical prop-
erties of the matrix. For these reasons, fruits as apple
not only present the higher levels of effective porosity,
but also their response to vacuum application is linear,
which means that the solid matrix suffers minor defor-
mations due to pressure changes. Papaya and melon,
which have a lower porosity than apple, also present less
mechanical deformation problems. On the contrary, the
structure of banana, peach, mamey, and mango present
deformation when increasing the vacuum level, reducing
or increasing in this way the impregnation capacity.
4. Conclusions
Vacuum pressure level and its application time had
an important effect on the impregnation of ISs in the
studied fruits. The polynomial models developed al-
lowed determining operating conditions in which a
greater impregnation of ISs may be achieved. These
conditions could be useful to accomplish maximum in-
corporation of crioprotective compounds, antimicrobi-
als or aw depressors, applying VI processes. It should be
kept in mind that at long VI times, deformation of the
fruit tissue may occur at high VP.
Acknowledgements
The authors want to acknowledge financial support
from Universidad de las Americas-Puebla, European
Union (Science and Technology for Development Pro-
ject), and Sistema de Investigaci
on Ignacio Zaragoza of
CONACYT (Mexico), as well as the commentaries and
recommendations of Dr. Pedro Fito.
References
Andres, A. (1995). Impregnaci on a vacıo en alimentos porosos.
Aplicacion al salado de quesos. Ph.D. Thesis. Universidad
Politecnica de Valencia, Spain.
AOAC. (1984). Official methods of analysis (14th ed.). Washington,
DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
Design Expert. (1996). Stat-Ease Corporation, Minneapolis.
Favier, J. C., Ireland-Ripert, J., Toque, C., & Feinberg, M. (1995).
Repertoire general des aliments. Technique et Documentation..
Fito, P. (1994). Modeling of vacuum osmotic dehydration of food.
Journal of Food Engineering, 22, 313–328.
Fito, P., Andres, A., Chiralt, A., & Pardo, P. (1996). Coupling of
hydrodynamic mechanism and deformation–relaxation phenomena
during vacuum treatments in solid porous food liquid systems.
Journal of Food Engineering, 27, 229–240.
Fito, P., & Chiralt, A. (2000). Vacuum impregnation of plant tissues.
In S. M. Alzamora, M. S. Tapia, & A. L opez-Malo (Eds.),
Minimally processed fruits and vegetables. Fundamental aspects and
applications (pp. 189–204). Gaithersburg, Marylland: Aspen Pub-
lishers Inc.
Fito, P., & Pastor, R. (1994). On some non-diffusional mechanism
occurring during vacuum osmotic dehydration. Journal of Food
Science, 21, 513–519.
Guerrero, Z. J. M. (1996). Estudio del mecanismo hidrodinamico en
algunas frutas, y el calculo de su porosidad efectiva. M.Sc. Thesis.
Universidad de las Americas-Puebla. Mexico.
Hulme, A. C. (1970). The biochemistry of fruits and their products.
London: Academic Press.
314 H. Mujica-Paz et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 56 (2003) 307–314
Martınez-Monz o, J., Martınez-Navarrete, N., Chiralt, A., & Fito, P.
(1998). Mechanical and structural changes in apple (var. Granny
Smith) due to vacuum impregnation with cryoprotectants. Journal
of Food Science, 63(3), 499–503.
Primo-Y ufera, E. (1982). Quımica Agrıcola III Alimentos. Spain:
Editorial Alhambra, SA.
Salvatori, D. (1997). Deshidrataci on osm otica de frutas: cambios
composicionales y estructurales a temperaturas moderadas. Ph.D.
Thesis. Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Spain.
Salvatori, D., Andres, A., Chiralt, A., & Fito, P. (1998). The response
of some properties of fruits to vacuum impregnation. Journal of
Food Processing and Preservation, 21, 59–73.
View publication stats
Sousa, R. (1996). Aplicaci
on de la impregnaci
on y de la deshidrataci
on
osmotica al desarrollo de productos de banana (Musa acuminata
var. Cavendish). Ph.D. Thesis. Universidad Politecnica de Valencia,
Spain.
Tapia de Daza, M. S., Alzamora, S. M., & Welti-Chanes, J. (1996).
Combination of preservation factors applied to minimal processing
of foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 36, 629–
659.
Tapia de Daza, M. S., L opez-Malo, A., Consuegra, R., Corte, P., &
Welti Chanes, J. (1999). Minimally processed papaya by vacuum
osmotic dehydration (VOD) techniques. Food Science and Tech-
nology International, 5, 43–52.