Dehghannya2016 RB M

This article was downloaded by: [FU Berlin]
On: 09 July 2015, At: 14:12

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: 5 Howick Place,
London, SW1P 1WG
International Journal of Food Properties

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ljfp20
Click for updates
Shrinkage of Mirabelle Plum during Hot Air Drying as
Influenced by Ultrasound-Assisted Osmotic Dehydration
a a a
Jalal Dehghannya , Rasoul Gorbani & Babak Ghanbarzadeh
a
Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz 51666-16471, Iran
Accepted author version posted online: 09 Jul 2015.
To cite this article: Jalal Dehghannya, Rasoul Gorbani & Babak Ghanbarzadeh (2015): Shrinkage of Mirabelle Plum during
Hot Air Drying as Influenced by Ultrasound-Assisted Osmotic Dehydration, International Journal of Food Properties, DOI:
10.1080/10942912.2015.1055362
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2015.1055362
Disclaimer: This is a version of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service
to authors and researchers we are providing this version of the accepted manuscript (AM). Copyediting,
typesetting, and review of the resulting proof will be undertaken on this manuscript before final publication of
the Version of Record (VoR). During production and pre-press, errors may be discovered which could affect the
content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal relate to this version also.
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Shrinkage of Mirabelle Plum during Hot Air Drying
as Influenced by Ultrasound-Assisted Osmotic
Dehydration
Jalal Dehghannyaa,*, Rasoul Gorbania and Babak Ghanbarzadeha
t
P P P P P
ip
a
P Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Tabriz, Tabriz 51666-16471, Iran
P
*
Corresponding author: E-mail address: J_dehghannya@tabrizu.ac.ir (J. Dehghannya)
cr
P P
ABSTRACT
us
Downloaded by [FU Berlin] at 14:12 09 July 2015
Convective drying in hot air is still the most popular method applied to reduce the moisture
an
content of fruits and vegetables. Conventional hot-air drying of Mirabelle plum is considered to
be a slow and energy intensive process. This is due to the fact that the waxy skin of Mirabelle
M
plum has low permeability to moisture, a fact which results in high shrinkage. The aim of this
study was to investigate the effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment on

ed
shrinkage of Mirabelle plum as a function of moisture content with the end goal of optimizing
operating conditions that minimize shrinkage of the produce during drying. Results showed that
6T 6T 6T 6T
pt
application of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration led to a significant (p < 0.05) decrease in

6T 6T 6T 6T
shrinkage (from 76.41 to 64.05%). A linear relation between moisture loss and shrinkage was
ce
observed. Results indicated that shrinkage may be easily estimated from changes in moisture
Ac
content, and independent of the drying rate. Inversely, determination of shrinkage would provide
an indirect indication of moisture content.
Keywords: Air drying; Mirabelle plum; Ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration; Moisture
content; Shrinkage
1
INTRODUCTION
Convective drying in hot air is still the most popular method applied to reduce the moisture
content of fruits and vegetables. However, this method has several disadvantages and limitations;
t
ip
for instance, it requires relatively long times and high temperatures, which cause degradation of
important nutritional substances as well as color alteration. Another disadvantage is shrinkage,
cr
which results from tissue collapse caused by volume reduction, and is due to the loss of moisture
us
as well as the presence of internal forces.[1]
an
Shrinkage is important not only for quantification of the quality of dehydrated foodstuffs but also
in the characterization of textural properties of materials.[2,3] It is known that mass transfer rate is
M
affected by shrinkage of the product and volume changes are dependent of several factors such
as geometry, drying method and experimental conditions. Physical properties such as bulk
ed
density and porosity change and transport properties like thermal and mass coefficient of
diffusion are related to changes in material shrinkage during dehydration.[4-7] Major shrinkage
pt
can indicate structural damage because it implies the collapse of the tissue’s structural
organization.[8] During drying, shrinkage is rarely negligible. Furthermore, it is necessary to take

ce
it into account when predicting moisture content profiles in the material undergoing
dehydration.[9,10] Values of the effective diffusivities estimated while taking shrinkage into
Ac
consideration were smaller than those obtained without considering this phenomenon.[7]
Therefore, any attempt to characterize drying behavior must inevitably address physical
parameters- such as shrinkage- of the material.[11] Attempts have been made to describe
shrinkage of different products undergoing different drying processes and conditions.[12]
2
Among various fruits and vegetables, conventional hot-air drying of Mirabelle plum is
considered to be a slow and energy intensive process. This is because its waxy skin has low
permeability to moisture,[13], a fact which results in high shrinkage. Skin of this fruit consists of
an underlying amorphous wax layer adjacent to the cuticle proper, together with crystalline
t
granules of wax protruding from the surface.[14] Therefore, any pretreatment for plum drying
ip
processes which decreases shrinkage by reducing drying time through reducing the initial
cr
moisture content and preserves the prune (dried plum) quality is of considerable interest.[15]
us
Various pretreatments such as blanching, freezing, piercing, abrasion and chemical additives
have been used to increase moisture transport from the plum surface. Methodologies such as
an
ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration have also been implemented in a few studies as an
alternative pretreatment to increase moisture transport from the plum surface.[16-18] Reduction of
M
drying time and, consequently, processing costs have been reported at the experimental scale
after research was conducted on several fruits and vegetables. Osmotic dehydration pretreatment
ed
partially removes water from fruits or vegetables immersed in a hypertonic solution.[19,20]
Regarding low mass transfer rate during osmotic treatment, ultrasound can be used to improve
pt
mass transfer rate and dehydration time.[18] Ultrasonic waves can bring about a very rapid series
ce
of alternative compressions and expansions, similar to what a sponge does when it is squeezed
and released repeatedly. Forces involved in this mechanical mechanism create microscopic
Ac
channels that may ease moisture removal. In addition, ultrasound produces cavitation, which can
be beneficial for removal of the moisture that is strongly attached to the solid.[21,22]
Analysis of the relationship among process factors and shrinkage during drying could provide a
solid base to optimize drying process.[16] Analyses of various experimental data have revealed
3
that shrinkage of food materials during drying could be represented only as a function of
moisture content without any considerable dependency on inert material, air temperature and
velocity or sample length.[11] To our knowledge, there has been no study in the literature devoted
to investigation of the effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration as a pretreatment on
t
ip
shrinkage of Mirabelle plum during hot-air drying. Therefore, the aim of this study was to
investigate the effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment on shrinkage of
cr
Mirabelle plum as a function of moisture content searching for optimal operating conditions
us
(sonication time, concentration of osmotic solution and immersion time in the osmotic solution)
that help minimize shrinkage of the produce during drying.
MATERIALS AND METHODS

an
M
Preparation of the Samples
ed
Mirabelle plums (Prunus domestica subsp. syriaca) were purchased from a local garden. They
pt
were sorted visually based on a relative standard of maturity, shape, size and color. Such a
sorting stage was intended to select similar plums to be used in every experiment and to discard
ce
ripe and damaged samples. Before experiments, plums were washed with tap water and were
dried with a filter paper. Moisture content was gravimetrically measured by drying samples in an
Ac
oven at 105ºC to reach constant weight.[16] The average initial moisture content of the plums was
4.54 g water/g dry matter.
4
Ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment
Pretreatments were structured in combinations of two ultrasonication times (both at 40 kHz): 10
and 30 min; two osmotic solution concentrations: 50 and 70% sucrose in water (% w/w) and four
t
immersion times in osmotic solution: 60, 120, 180 and 240 min. No pretreatment (neither
ip
ultrasonic nor osmotic treatment) was applied to control samples (Table 1). Results of kinetics
cr
studies were obtained before these ultrasonication times were chosen. Results showed that
us
effects of ultrasound pretreatment started to influence the drying process after 10 min. After 30
min, changes inferred in the drying process became insignificant.[21]
an
Ultrasonic pretreatments were carried out using an ultrasonic bath (AS ONE Corporation, US-
4R, Japan, capacity: 9.5 L, dimensions: 36.5 (height) × 30.5 (width) × 26.2 (depth) cm;
M
oscillating frequency: 28 and 40 kHz, high frequency output: 160 W) without mechanical
agitation. The bath was operated at a frequency of 40 kHz. Water temperature inside the
ed
ultrasonic bath was maintained constant at 25ºC. Temperature increase during the experiments
was not significant (less than 2°C) after 30 min of ultrasonic treatment.
pt
In each ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment trial, an experimental set of plum

ce
samples were immersed in four separate beakers (one for each immersion time in osmotic
Ac
solution: 60, 120, 180 and 240 min) filled with osmotic pretreatment solution and were then
placed in the ultrasonic bath for 10 and 30 min. Experiments were carried out in separate beakers
to avoid interference between samples and runs. Osmotic solutions were prepared through
mixing food-grade sucrose with distilled water until concentrations (% w/w sucrose in water) of
5
50 and 70% were obtained. The weight ratio between fruit and the osmotic solution was 1:4. This
ratio was used to avoid dilution effects.[17,21]
After completion of the ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment for the intended
time (10 and 30 min), all the beakers were removed from the ultrasonic bath and the remaining
t
ip
time for osmotic dehydration pretreatment was passed under ambient temperature (25°C) and
cr
without mechanical agitation. Total immersion times of the samples in osmotic solutions were
60, 120, 180 and 240 min, considering both the time with and without ultrasound. After reaching
us
the desired time, samples were removed from the beakers, washed with distilled water and
blotted with absorbent paper to remove excess solution on the surface. All experiments were
carried out in duplicate.

an
M
Hot-air Drying
ed
After the completion of the osmotic dehydration pretreatment, samples were placed in Petri
dishes in a single-layer arrangement and were dried in a pilot plant hot-air drier (UOP 8 Tray
pt
dryer, Armfield, UK). Air temperature in the drier was set at 80ºC.[23] Cross-flow air moved from
side to side of the dryer at 1.4 m/s, flowing parallel to the drying surface of the samples.
ce
Moisture loss was recorded at 30 min interval by a digital balance of 0.01 g accuracy. Drying
Ac
process continued until an average moisture content of 0.57 g water/g dry matter was obtained.
6
Determination of Shrinkage
Shrinkage represents a relative or reduced dimensional change of volume and is represented
by:[24]
t
ip
 V 
S = 1 − t  ×100
 V0 
cr
where S is the shrinkage (%), V t is the apparent volume of the sample at a certain degree of
us
dryness after time t and V 0 is the apparent volume of the raw sample. Toluene displacement
method was used to measure the volume of the samples gravimetrically.[25,26] Based on this
an
method, samples were transferred into a flask half filled with toluene after being weighed
M
precisely. The flask was then filled with toluene, the level of solvent being carefully adjusted to
ensure consistency, and was weighed. Sample volume (V) was calculated using:[25]
ed
M sf
V = Vf −
ρs
pt
M sf = M t +s − M f − M
ce
where V f is the volume of the flask; M sf is weight of toluene added to fill the flask; M t+s is the
Ac
weight of the flask plus the sample and the solvent; M f is the weight of the flask; M is the weight
of the sample; and ρ s is the density of toluene (0.87 g/cm3 at 20ºC).
7
Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis
A 2×2×4 factorial experiment in a randomized complete block design with two replicates was
used to study the effects of ultrasonication time, osmotic solution concentration and immersion
t
time in osmotic solution on shrinkage as a response variable until an average moisture content of
ip
0.57 g water/g dry matter was obtained. Independent variables were ultrasonication time at two
cr
levels: 10 and 30 min; osmotic solution concentration at two levels: 50 and 70% (w/w); and
us
immersion time in osmotic solution at four levels: 60, 120, 180 and 240 min. For control
samples, no pretreatment [ultrasonication time (0 min), osmotic solution concentration (0%) or
an
immersion time in osmotic solution (0 min)] was utilized. Values in the analysis of variance
(ANOVA) table were calculated using the Proc GLM Model procedure of SAS (SAS Software v.
M
9.1, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). Significant differences within pretreatments were
determined at p < 0.05 (95% confidence level). Duncan's multiple range test was employed to
ed
compare means where significant differences occurred within the pretreatment combinations in
terms of shrinkage response.

pt
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

ce
Table 2 presents drying time, moisture content and shrinkage during hot-air drying of control and
Ac
pretreated Mirabelle plum samples as influenced by ultrasonication time, osmotic solution
concentration and immersion time in osmotic solution. Drying continued until reaching an
average moisture content of 0.57 g water/g dry matter. Shrinkage rate decreased along with
decrease in moisture contents of all the samples (Table 2). This can be deduced from the small
8
gradients of shrinkage between two different moisture contents when reaching the end of the
process. This observation can be related to a higher effective moisture diffusivity,[27] case-
hardening of the surface and the fixation of the volume of the sample[25,28] at the earlier stage of
the drying process.[9] This observation is in agreement with the results of Niamnuy et al.[29] who
t
ip
noticed that faster drying rate induced extensive cellular shrinkage.
cr
The highest shrinkage was observed in the control sample (Table 2a). Generally, the shrinkage of
the pretreated samples was significantly (p < 0.05) decreased by increasing ultrasonication time
us
from 10 to 30 min at different immersion times (60, 120, 180 and 240 min) in osmotic solutions
(Table 2). Shrinkage of the pretreated samples was also decreased by increasing osmotic solution
an
concentration from 50 to 70% at different immersion times in osmotic solutions; however, this
M
decrease was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). This could be due to the stronger influence of
ultrasonication time compared to the concentration of the osmotic solution. In accordance with
the results obtained in this study, Koc et al.[9] also reported that the extent of shrinkage is
ed
generally higher for air drying than for osmotic dehydration. With respect to the solution
pt
concentration, a smaller moisture content, and a consequently higher shrinkage were observed
for samples with lower osmotic solution concentrations. This is due to the formation of a dense
ce
layer of solutes in the surface of the fruit when concentrated solutions are used. This layer makes
transfers between the fruit and the solution more difficult.[30] Fante et al.[30] also observed lower
Ac
shrinkage values by increasing sucrose solution concentration during plum drying. However,
Nowacka et al.[24] and Schössler et al.[26] observed that ultrasound treatment had no significant
effect (p > 0.05) on product shrinkage.
9
At constant ultrasonication time and osmotic solution concentration, increasing immersion time
from 60 to 240 min decreased the shrinkage. Many aspects of cell structure are affected during
osmotic dehydration of fruits, such as alteration (deformation) of cell walls, splitting of the
middle lamella, lysis of membranes (plasmalemma and tonoplast) and tissue shrinkage.[31]
t
ip
During osmotic dehydration, plasmolysis is also accompanied by a loss in the turgor pressure,
pectin solublization and solute uptake in the cells.[32] These tissue changes, which strongly alter
cr
the cellular compartmentalization, wall matrix and membrane permeability, could greatly
us
influence the transport properties of the product during processing.[31] Because of the complex
situation in the microstructure of plant tissue, the phenomena observed during osmotic
an
dehydration cannot always be explained just in terms of osmotic processes in which cell
membranes act as a semipermeable barrier and allow the passage of water. Disruption of cell
M
membranes during osmotic dehydration puts an end to the osmotic mechanism and from then on,
diffusion, capillarity or free convection become the mechanisms that control the mass transfer as
ed
the process advances.[4] This, in turn, could lead to a higher moisture diffusivity, lower drying
time and lower shrinkage.

pt
On the other hand, Rodriguez et al.[33] studied the effect of ultrasound on the microstructure of
ce
apple tissue during drying by means of scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Microphotographs
of fresh and dried apples showed that during drying, one of the most important phenomena is cell
Ac
shrinkage, which leads to a major modification in the structure of the product and allows the
release of water. Through microstructural analysis, it was observed that ultrasound application
disrupted the cellular structure and resulted in pores which were larger than those in fresh
10
samples. This fact could improve the drying rate by making an easier water pathway, [33] which,
in turn, could lead to higher moisture diffusivity, lower drying time and lower shrinkage.
Fernandes et al.[21] demonstrated that osmotic and ultrasound pretreatments increased moisture
diffusion of melons through different effects. Ultrasonic waves created microscopic channels in
t
ip
the fruit; water could use these microscopic channels as an easier pathway to diffuse towards the
cr
surface of the fruit.[34] Fernandes et al.[21] verified in microscopic images that micro-channels
were formed by the elongation and flattering of cells in some regions of the melons submitted to
us
ultrasound. Besides, authors argued that no cell breakdown was observed in the samples. On the
other hand, osmotic dehydration increased moisture diffusion by breaking down parts of the cell
an
walls and therefore reducing the resistance for water to diffuse through the cells. In a similar
study, Garcia-Noguera et al.,[17] in experiments with strawberries, showed that increasing the
M
time of ultrasound pretreatment reduced moisture content of the samples and consequently
ed
resulted in reduction of air-drying time. This result may be due to higher creation of microscopic
channels in higher ultrasonication time (30 min).

pt
Table 2 shows that different samples needed various drying times to reach an average moisture
ce
content of 0.57 g water/g dry matter. Mirabelle plums treated with ultrasound for 30 min and
dehydrated at osmotic solution concentration of 70% for 240 min (U30-B70-T240), prior to
Ac
drying, were found to have the lowest shrinkage (64.1%) compared to control (76.4%). Thus,
processing conditions in terms of ultrasonication time, osmotic solution concentration and
immersion time in osmotic solution can be optimized to reduce shrinkage to a minimum, if it is
desired from an industrial point of view.
11
Fig. 1 shows the relationship between shrinkage and moisture content of all treated samples
shown in Table 2 (a, b, c and d). As can be seen from Fig. 1, a uniform behavior was observed
between shrinkage and moisture content; such behavior is essentially independent of each set of
experimental conditions and suggests a linear relation between moisture loss by the samples and
t
ip
shrinkage. The fundamental equation of shrinkage during drying is normally developed on the
basis of the hypothesis that variation of the volume of the product corresponds to the volume of
cr
the evaporated water.[35] A linear relationship between shrinkage and moisture content during
us
drying of various fruits and vegetables, during the whole process or at least in part of it is
reported in several works using different drying procedures. Results indicate that shrinkage may
an
be easily estimated from changes in moisture content of the sample, and independent of the
drying rate. Inversely, determination of shrinkage would give an indirect indication of moisture
M
content of the product.[4] It has also been noted that if development of pores during drying is not
negligible, a linear model may not be adequate to model the shrinkage behavior. This is the case
ed
for drying at higher temperatures or lower moisture contents.[36] Dissa et al.[5] stated that
although experimental shrinkage curves were not strictly linear, they could be fitted by the
pt
fundamental linear model. In addition, analysis of the experimental data by Souraki et al.[7]
ce
revealed that the shrinkage of apple could be represented only as a linear function of water loss
without any considerable dependency on the osmotic solution temperature and concentration.
Ac
Similar results were also obtained by Koc et al.[9] and Schössler et al.[26] for different fruits and
vegetables. However, Panyawong and Devahastin[12] and Yan et al.[25] found the relationship
between the degree of shrinkage and the moisture content to be more or less of a second-order in
12
nature at every tested condition. Shrinkage modelling by Aversa et al.[37] also revealed a non-
linear dependence of eggplant sample volume on the food's moisture content.
CONCLUSION
t
ip
Shrinkage of pretreated plum samples was decreased by increasing ultrasonication time from 10
cr
to 30 min and osmotic solution concentration from 50 to 70% at different immersion times (60,
120, 180 and 240 min) in osmotic solutions. At constant ultrasonication time and osmotic
us
solution concentration, increasing immersion time from 60 to 240 min decreased the shrinkage.
an
Ultrasonication time, osmotic solution concentration and immersion time in osmotic solution all
had a significant effect (p < 0.05) on shrinkage of the samples. Mirabelle plums treated with
M
ultrasound for 30 min and dehydrated at osmotic solution concentration of 70% for 240 min
(U30-B70-T240), prior to drying, were found to have the lowest shrinkage (64.1%) compared to
ed
control (76.4%). Thus, processing conditions in terms of ultrasonication time, osmotic solution
concentration and immersion time in osmotic solution can be optimized to reduce shrinkage to a
pt
minimum, in case it is desired from an industrial point of view.

ce
REFERENCES
1. Figiel, A., Drying kinetics and quality of beetroots dehydrated by combination of convective
Ac
and vacuum-microwave methods, Journal of Food Engineering, 2010, 98, 461-470.
2. Mavroudis, N. E., Gekas, V. and Sjoholm, I., Osmotic dehydration of apples. Shrinkage
phenomena and the significance of initial structure on mass transfer rates, Journal of Food
Engineering, 1998, 38, 101-123.
13
3. Joardder, M. U. H., Brown, R. J., Kumar, C. and Karim, M. A., Effect of cell wall properties
on porosity and shrinkage of dried apple, International Journal of Food Properties, 2015. DOI:
10.1080/10942912.2014.980945.
4. Moreira, R. and Sereno, A. M., Evaluation of mass transfer coefficients and volumetric
t
ip
shrinkage during osmotic dehydration of apple using sucrose solutions in static and non-static
conditions, Journal of Food Engineering, 2003, 57, 25-31.
cr
5. Dissa, A. O., Desmorieux, H., Bathiebo, J. and Koulidiati, J., Convective drying
us
characteristics of Amelie mango (Mangifera Indica L. cv. ‘Amelie’) with correction for
shrinkage, Journal of Food Engineering, 2008, 88, 429-437.

an
6. López-Ortiz, A., Rodríguez-Ramírez, J. and Méndez-Lagunas, L. L., Effects of drying air
M
temperature on the structural properties of garlic evaluated during drying, International Journal
of Food Properties, 2013, 16, 1516-1529.

ed
7. Souraki, B. A., Ghavami, M. and Tondro, H., Correction of moisture and sucrose effective
diffusivities for shrinkage during osmotic dehydration of apple in sucrose solution, Food and
pt
Bioproducts Processing, 2014, 92, 1-8.

ce
8. Ferrando, M. and Spiess, W. E. L., Mass transfer in strawberry tissue during osmotic treatment
II: Structure-function relationships, Journal of Food Science, 2003, 68(4), 1356-1364.

Ac
9. Koc, B., Eren, I. and Ertekin, F. K., Modelling bulk density, porosity and shrinkage of quince
during drying: The effect of drying method, Journal of Food Engineering, 2008, 85, 340-349.
10. Guiné, R. P. F., Barroca, M. J. and Silva, V., Mass transfer properties of pears for different
drying methods, International Journal of Food Properties, 2013, 16, 251-262.
14
11. Souraki, B. A. and Mowla, D., Axial and radial moisture diffusivity in cylindrical fresh green
beans in a fluidized bed dryer with energy carrier: Modeling with and without shrinkage, Journal
of Food Engineering, 2008, 88, 9-19.
12. Panyawong, S. and Devahastin, S., Determination of deformation of a food product
t
ip
undergoing different drying methods and conditions via evolution of a shape factor, Journal of
Food Engineering, 2007, 78, 151-161.
cr
13. Tarhan, S., Selection of chemical and thermal pretreatment combination for plum drying at
us
low and moderate drying air temperatures, Journal of Food Engineering, 2007, 79, 255-260.
an
14. Di Matteo, M., Cinquanta, L., Galiero, G. and Crescitelli, S., Physical pre-treatment of plums
(Prunus domestica). Part 1. Modelling the kinetics of drying, Food Chemistry, 2002, 79, 227-
M
232.
15. Di Matteo, M., Cinquanta, L., Galiero, G. and Crescitelli, S., A mathematical model of mass
ed
transfer in spherical geometry: plum (Prunus domestica) drying, Journal of Food Engineering,
2003, 58, 183-192.

pt
16. Deng, Y. and Zhao, Y., Effect of pulsed vacuum and ultrasound osmopretreatments on glass
ce
transition temperature, texture, microstructure and calcium penetration of dried apples (Fuji),
LWT - Food Science and Technology, 2008, 41, 1575-1585.

Ac
17. Garcia-Noguera, J., Oliveira, F. I. P., Gallao, M. I., Weller, C. L., Rodrigues, S. and
Fernandes, F. A. N., Ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration of strawberries: Effect of
pretreatment time and ultrasonic frequency, Drying Technology: An International Journal, 2010,
28, 294-303.
15
18. Shamaei, S., Emam-Djomeh, Z. and Moini, S., Ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration of
cranberries: Effect of finish drying methods and ultrasonic frequency on textural properties,
Journal of Texture Studies, 2012, 43, 133-141.
19. Dehghannya, J., Emam-Djomeh, Z., Sotudeh-Gharebagh, R. and Ngadi, M., Osmotic
t
ip
dehydration of apple slices with carboxy-methyl cellulose coating, Drying Technology: An
International Journal, 2006, 24(1), 45-50.
cr
20. Emam-Djomeh, Z., Dehghannya, J. and Gharabagh, R. S., Assessment of osmotic process in
us
combination with coating on effective diffusivities during drying of apple slices, Drying
Technology: An International Journal, 2006, 24(9), 1159-1164.

an
21. Fernandes, F. A. N., Gallao, M. I. and Rodrigues, S., Effect of osmotic dehydration and
M
ultrasound pre-treatment on cell structure: Melon dehydration, LWT - Food Science and
Technology, 2008, 41, 604-610.

ed
22. Lucio-Juárez, J. S., Moscosa-Santillán, M., González-García, R., Grajales-Lagunes, A. and
Ruiz-Cabrera, M. A., Ultrasonic assisted pre-treatment method for enhancing mass transfer
pt
during the air-drying of Habanero chili pepper (Capsicum chinense), International Journal of
ce
Food Properties, 2013, 16, 867-881.
23. Menges, H. O. and Ertekin, C., Thin layer drying model for treated and untreated Stanley
Ac
plums, Energy Conversion and Management, 2006, 47, 2337-2348.
24. Nowacka, M., Wiktor, A., Sledz, M., Jurek, N. and Witrowa-Rajchert, D., Drying of
ultrasound pretreated apple and its selected physical properties, Journal of Food Engineering,
2012, 113, 427-433.
16
25. Yan, Z., Sousa-Gallagher, M. J. and Oliveira, F. A. R., Shrinkage and porosity of banana,
pineapple and mango slices during air-drying, Journal of Food Engineering, 2008, 84, 430-440.
26. Schössler, K., Jäger, H. and Knorr, D., Effect of continuous and intermittent ultrasound on
drying time and effective diffusivity during convective drying of apple and red bell pepper,
t
ip
Journal of Food Engineering, 2012, 108, 103-110.
cr
27. Jambrak, A. R., Mason, T. J., Paniwnyk, L. and Lelas, V., Accelerated drying of button
mushrooms, Brussels sprouts and cauliflower by applying power ultrasound and its rehydration
us
properties, Journal of Food Engineering, 2007, 81, 88-97.
an
28. Khraisheh, M. A. M., Mcminn, W. A. M. and Magee, T. R. A., Quality and structural
changes in starchy foods during microwave and convective drying, Food Research International,
M
2004, 37, 497-503.
29. Niamnuy, C., Devahastin, S. and Soponronnarit, S., Some recent advances in microstructural
ed
modification and monitoring of foods during drying: A review, Journal of Food Engineering,
2014, 123, 148-156.

pt
30. Fante, C., Corre, J., Natividade, M., Lima, J. and Lima, L., Drying of plums (Prunus sp, c.v
ce
Gulfblaze) treated with KCl in the field and subjected to pulsed vacuum osmotic dehydration,
International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2011, 46, 1080-1085.

Ac
31. Nieto, A. B., Salvatori, D. M., Castro, M. A. and Alzamora, S. M., Structural changes in
apple tissue during glucose and sucrose osmotic dehydration: shrinkage, porosity, density and
microscopic features, Journal of Food Engineering, 2004, 61, 269-278.
17
32. Akbarian, M., Ghanbarzadeh, B., Sowti, M. and Dehghannya, J., Effects of pectin-CMC-
based coating and osmotic dehydration pretreatments on microstructure and texture of the hot-air
dried quince slices, Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, 2014. DOI:
10.1111/jfpp.12229.
t
ip
33. Rodríguez, Ó., Santacatalina, J. V., Simal, S., Garcia-Perez, J. V., Femenia, A. and Rosselló,
C., Influence of power ultrasound application on drying kinetics of apple and its antioxidant and
cr
microstructural properties, Journal of Food Engineering, 2014, 129, 21-29.
us
34. Azoubel, P. M., Baima, M. d. A. M., Amorim, M. d. R. and Oliveira, S. S. B., Effect of
ultrasound on banana cv Pacovan drying kinetics, Journal of Food Engineering, 2010, 97, 194-
198.
an
M
35. Talla, A., Puiggali, J.-R., Jomaa, W. and Jannot, Y., Shrinkage and density evolution during
drying of tropical fruits: application to banana, Journal of Food Engineering, 2004, 64, 103-109.
ed
36. Devahastin, S. and Niamnuy, C., Modelling quality changes of fruits and vegetables during
drying: a review, International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2010, 45, 1755-1767.
pt
37. Aversa, M., Curcio, S., Calabrò, V. and Iorio, G., Measurement of the water diffusion
ce
coefficient, apparent density changes and shrinkage during the drying of eggplant (solanum
melongena), International Journal of Food Properties, 2011, 14, 523-537.

Ac
18
Table 1. Abbreviations utilized for different treatments
Abbreviation U* B** T***
Control 0 0 0
t
ip
U10-B50-T60 10 50 60
cr
U10-B70-T60 10 70 60
us
U30-B50-T60 30 50 60
U30-B70-T60
U10-B50-T120
an 30
10
70
50
60
120
M
U10-B70-T120 10 70 120
ed
U30-B50-T120 30 50 120
pt
U30-B70-T120 30 70 120
ce
U10-B50-T180 10 50 180
U10-B70-T180 10 70 180
Ac
U30-B50-T180 30 50 180
U30-B70-T180 30 70 180
19
U10-B50-T240 10 50 240
U10-B70-T240 10 70 240
U30-B50-T240 30 50 240
t
ip
U30-B70-T240 30 70 240
cr
*
P U: Ultrasonication time at 40 kHz (min)
P
us
**
P B: Osmotic solution concentration (Brix) [Sucrose in water (% w/w)]
P
***
P T: Immersion time (min)
P
an
M
ed
pt
ce
Ac
20
Table 2. Drying time, moisture content (MC) and shrinkage of different samples (Table 1) until
reaching an average moisture content of 0.57 g water/g dry matter pretreated at four immersion
times in osmotic solution: a) 60 min; b) 120 min; c) 180 min and d) 240 min.
a)
t
Treatment Time (min) MC (g water/g dry matter) Shrinkage (%)
ip
0 4.54 ± 0.06 0.00ν ± 0.00
cr
120 2.96 ± 0.04 22.18ζηθι ± 2.22
us
240 2.03 ± 0.12 45.71uvwxy ± 5.96

Control
360
an 1.41 ± 0.07 65.52fghijkl ± 2.44
M
480 0.96 ± 0.09 75.49a ± 5.43
625 0.57 ± 0.01 76.41a ± 1.36

ed
0 4.50 ± 0.04 0.00ν ± 0.00

pt
130 2.88 ± 0.10 20.89ηθικ ± 1.71

ce
230 2.11 ± 0.09 44.02vwxy ± 2.10

U10-B50-T60
Ac
350 1.42 ± 0.07 63.12hijklmn ± 2.75
480 0.90 ± 0.04 73.95abcd ± 4.18
565 0.60 ± 0.03 76.05a ± 1.42
21
0 3.98 ± 0.03 0.00ν ± 0.00
70 2.85 ± 0.06 17.33θικλμ ± 1.88
150 2.08 ± 0.06 35.76zαβγδ ± 4.28
t
U30-B50-T60
ip
250 1.40 ± 0.03 52.16qrstu ± 0.55
cr
350 0.91 ± 0.03 63.44hijklmn ± 3.26
us
68.99abcdefghij ± 3.74
500 0.55 ± 0.00
0 an
4.41 ± 0.06 0.00ν ± 0.00
120 2.88 ± 0.02 18.78θικλ ± 1.57

M
210 2.11 ± 0.00 40.55xyzα ± 0.01
ed
U10-B70-T60
330 1.42 ± 0.01 58.89lmnopq ± 0.98
pt
460 0.89 ± 0.00 70.24abcdefghi ± 2.47

ce
590 0.57 ± 0.03 75.21a ± 3.24
0.00ν ± 0.00
Ac
0 3.80 ± 0.14
U30-B70-T60 80 2.86 ± 0.04 14.33κλμ ± 4.25
170 2.06 ± 0.05 32.50βγδε ± 3.76
22
280 1.39 ± 0.08 48.49stuvw ± 0.85
390 0.90 ± 0.05 60.76klmnop ± 4.75
525 0.56 ± 0.01 67.55bcdefghijk ± 0.93
t
ip
cr
b)
us
0
an 4.45 ± 0.04 0.00ν ± 0.00
M
110 2.91 ± 0.01 22.12ζηθι ± 4.37
210 2.09 ± 0.02 44.30vwxy ± 2.40

ed
U10-B50-T120
320 1.43 ± 0.05 62.42jklmno ± 1.33
pt
440 0.90 ± 0.08 73.29abcde ± 4.84

ce
565 0.57 ± 0.02 74.99ab ± 4.35

Ac
0 3.84 ± 0.06 0.00ν ± 0.00
U30-B50-T120 70 2.87 ± 0.05 13.28λμ ± 1.74
140 2.11 ± 0.07 33.53αβγδε ± 3.47
23
250 1.39 ± 0.01 50.94rstuv ± 6.58
350 0.92 ± 0.06 62.52jklmno ± 5.18
490 0.55 ± 0.01 66.69defghijk ± 2.58
t
ip
0 4.34 ± 0.04 0.00ν ± 0.00
cr
120 2.94 ± 0.02 18.62θικλ ± 1.76
us
40.57xyzα ± 2.26
220 2.12 ± 0.08

U10-B70-T120
340 an
1.42 ± 0.01 58.79lmnopq ± 6.10
460 0.91 ± 0.01 69.88abcdefghij ± 1.51

M
580 0.59 ± 0.01 73.27abcde ± 2.07
ed
0 3.63 ± 0.04 0.00ν ± 0.00

pt
50 2.90 ± 0.16 13.14λμ ± 0.28

ce
140 2.06 ± 0.12 27.68εζη ± 0.13

U30-B70-T120
240 1.42 ± 0.11 42.81wxyz ± 1.97
Ac
360 0.89 ± 0.04 56.71nopqr ± 2.41
495 0.55 ± 0.01 65.54fghijkl ± 0.20
24
c)
0 4.37 ± 0.07 0.00ν ± 0.00
t
ip
90 2.86 ± 0.01 23.04ζηθ ± 2.22
cr
180 2.11 ± 0.01 46.74tuvwx ± 4.34
us
U10-B50-T180
290 1.43 ± 0.01 64.49hijklm ± 5.16
410 an 0.90 ± 0.02 73.18abcde ± 1.63
545 0.57 ± 0.01 74.38abc ± 2.81

M
0 3.72 ± 0.03 0.00ν ± 0.00
ed
50 2.91 ± 0.01 15.16ικλμ ± 1.62

pt
130 2.10 ± 0.04 34.25αβγδε ± 2.45

U30-B50-T180
ce
230 1.40 ± 0.01 51.23rstuv ± 2.80

Ac
340 0.90 ± 0.01 62.20jklmno ± 0.46
490 0.56 ± 0.00 66.15efghijkl ± 2.61
U10-B70-T180 0 4.20 ± 0.28 0.00ν ± 0.00
25
120 2.86 ± 0.13 17.92θικλμ ± 3.00
210 2.12 ± 0.14 36.91zαβγ ± 2.79
330 1.42 ± 0.06 55.26opqrs ± 2.55
t
ip
450 0.91 ± 0.02 67.07cdefghijk ± 2.91
cr
565 0.61 ± 0.00 72.18abcdefg ± 2.46
us
0.00ν ± 0.00
0 3.41 ± 0.04
40 an 2.94 ± 0.11 13.90κλμ ± 1.43
U30-B70-T180 130 2.12 ± 0.07 31.44γδε ± 6.45

M
240 1.38 ± 0.01 47.37tuvwx ± 3.24
ed
350 0.91 ± 0.05 59.00lmnopq ± 2.50

pt
505 0.56 ± 0.01 64.72ghijkl ± 3.32

ce
Ac
d)
U10-B50-T240 0 4.27 ± 0.02 0.00ν ± 0.00
26
90 2.91 ± 0.08 19.40θικλ ± 5.08
190 2.14 ± 0.08 39.33yzαβ ± 8.71
310 1.41 ± 0.06 57.08mnopqr ± 2.81
t
ip
430 0.90 ± 0.03 69.00abcdefghij ± 3.69
cr
560 0.59 ± 0.02 72.42abcdef ± 0.18
us
0.00ν ± 0.00
0 3.54 ± 0.07
40 an
2.96 ± 0.07 17.95θικλμ ± 3.56
130 2.07 ± 0.13 36.77zαβγ ± 0.06

M
U30-B50-T240
240 1.39 ± 0.11 53.05qrst ± 0.18
ed
350 0.92 ± 0.10 62.90ijklmn ± 1.06

pt
490 0.60 ± 0.04 65.77efghijkl ± 7.50

ce
0 4.14 ± 0.03 0.00ν ± 0.00
15.95θικλμ ± 0.73
Ac
120 2.90 ± 0.06

U10-B70-T240
220 2.09 ± 0.00 35.77zαβγδ ± 1.35
340 1.41 ± 0.01 53.55pqrst ± 2.30
27
470 0.91 ± 0.06 65.90efghijkl ± 4.60
590 0.59 ± 0.03 70.77abcdefgh ± 5.23
0 3.37 ± 0.05 0.00ν ± 0.00
t
ip
40 2.88 ± 0.03 11.13μ ± 2.20
cr
130 2.06 ± 0.00 28.77δεζ ± 7.85
us
44.52vwxy ± 2.26
U30-B70-T240 240 1.39 ± 0.01
350 an
0.92 ± 0.00 57.00mnopqr ± 5.55
500 0.54 ± 0.01 64.05hijklmn ± 1.19

M
ed
pt
ce
Ac
28
Ac
ce
pt
ed
29
M
an
us
cr
ip
t

Dehghannya2016 RB M

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dehghannya2016 RB M

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [FU Berlin]

On: 09 July 2015, At: 14:12

International Journal of Food Properties

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10942912.2015.1055362

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

study was to investigate the effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment on

application of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration led to a significant (p < 0.05) decrease in

an indirect indication of moisture content.

Keywords: Air drying; Mirabelle plum; Ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration; Moisture

important nutritional substances as well as color alteration. Another disadvantage is shrinkage,

organization.[8] During drying, shrinkage is rarely negligible. Furthermore, it is necessary to take

shrinkage of different products undergoing different drying processes and conditions.[12]

partially removes water from fruits or vegetables immersed in a hypertonic solution.[19,20]

to investigation of the effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration as a pretreatment on

investigate the effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment on shrinkage of

that help minimize shrinkage of the produce during drying.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

4.54 g water/g dry matter.

Pretreatments were structured in combinations of two ultrasonication times (both at 40 kHz): 10

min, changes inferred in the drying process became insignificant.[21]

In each ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment trial, an experimental set of plum

ratio was used to avoid dilution effects.[17,21]

carried out in duplicate.

Shrinkage represents a relative or reduced dimensional change of volume and is represented

of the sample; and ρ s is the density of toluene (0.87 g/cm3 at 20ºC).

samples, no pretreatment [ultrasonication time (0 min), osmotic solution concentration (0%) or

terms of shrinkage response.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

pretreated Mirabelle plum samples as influenced by ultrasonication time, osmotic solution

effect (p > 0.05) on product shrinkage.

time and lower shrinkage.

channels in higher ultrasonication time (30 min).

processing conditions in terms of ultrasonication time, osmotic solution concentration and

immersion time in osmotic solution can be optimized to reduce shrinkage to a minimum, if it is

desired from an industrial point of view.

linear dependence of eggplant sample volume on the food's moisture content.

minimum, in case it is desired from an industrial point of view.

and vacuum-microwave methods, Journal of Food Engineering, 2010, 98, 461-470.

Engineering, 1998, 38, 101-123.

conditions, Journal of Food Engineering, 2003, 57, 25-31.

shrinkage, Journal of Food Engineering, 2008, 88, 429-437.

of Food Properties, 2013, 16, 1516-1529.

Bioproducts Processing, 2014, 92, 1-8.

II: Structure-function relationships, Journal of Food Science, 2003, 68(4), 1356-1364.

drying methods, International Journal of Food Properties, 2013, 16, 251-262.

of Food Engineering, 2008, 88, 9-19.

12. Panyawong, S. and Devahastin, S., Determination of deformation of a food product

Food Engineering, 2007, 78, 151-161.

2003, 58, 183-192.

LWT - Food Science and Technology, 2008, 41, 1575-1585.

Fernandes, F. A. N., Ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration of strawberries: Effect of

Journal of Texture Studies, 2012, 43, 133-141.

International Journal, 2006, 24(1), 45-50.

Technology: An International Journal, 2006, 24(9), 1159-1164.

Technology, 2008, 41, 604-610.

22. Lucio-Juárez, J. S., Moscosa-Santillán, M., González-García, R., Grajales-Lagunes, A. and

Food Properties, 2013, 16, 867-881.

plums, Energy Conversion and Management, 2006, 47, 2337-2348.

2012, 113, 427-433.

properties, Journal of Food Engineering, 2007, 81, 88-97.

2014, 123, 148-156.

International Journal of Food Science and Technology, 2011, 46, 1080-1085.

microscopic features, Journal of Food Engineering, 2004, 61, 269-278.

Abbreviation U* B T*