Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
DOI 10.1007/s12393-010-9015-3
Applications of Pulsed Electric Field Treatments
for the Enhancement of Mass Transfer from Vegetable Tissue
Francesco Donsı̀ • Giovanna Ferrari •
Gianpiero Pataro
Received: 29 January 2010 / Accepted: 2 March 2010 / Published online: 18 March 2010
 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010
Abstract In the last decades, several non-thermal tech-
nologies have been proposed as alternative to the tradi-
tional ones to improve the competitiveness of the food
industry. The key to success was identified in offering to
food industries the opportunity to improve food quality, to
introduce new foods in the market, and to optimize the
processing procedures while reducing energy costs. Pulsed
electric fields (PEF) showed the potential to be one of the
most promising novel technologies to reach these objec-
tives. The application of PEF as a pretreatment of perme-
abilization of vegetable and animal tissue to enhance the
efficiency of mass transfer of water or of valuable com-
pounds from biological matrices demonstrated its effi-
ciency in drying, extraction, and diffusion processes. This
article reviews the basic mechanisms of electroporation of
plant tissues, discusses the methods of detection of elec-
trically induced cell damage, and analyses the influence of
process parameters on the efficiency of the treatment.
Furthermore, this article focuses on the applications of
PEF, its advantages, and energy costs in different fields of
food processing, such as juice expression, drying, and
extraction, with special emphasis on the relevance of PEF
to the winemaking industry.
Keywords Pulsed electric field (PEF) 
Cell permeabilization  Biological tissue 
Complex impedance  Mass transfer
F. Donsı̀  G. Ferrari (&)  G. Pataro
Department of Chemical and Food Engineering, University
of Salerno, Salerno, Italy
e-mail: gferrari@unisa.it
G. Ferrari
ProdAl scarl, Centre of Competence on Agro-Food Productions,
University of Salerno, Salerno, Italy
Introduction
Over the last 50 years, Pulsed electric field (PEF) tech-
nology has stimulated intensive research as a non-thermal
treatment, in particular with the primary aim of attaining
microbial inactivation [19, 50, 58, 105, 128, 129].
The focus of PEF applications and related studies has
recently concentrated on the permeabilization of cell
membranes, with the aim of enhancing mass transfer from
the inner part of the cells. In fact, in animal and plant cells,
which are larger in size than bacterial cells, permeabiliza-
tion of the membrane is easier to attain, normally requiring
lower electric field intensities, which is reflected in lower
energy consumption [68].
Thanks to the reduction of the resistances to mass
transfer due to the induced permeabilization of plant cells,
PEF technology can be used as a pretreatment to increase
the yield in the production of fruit juices, to accelerate the
transfer of water during drying operations as well as
enhance the extraction of valuable compounds (such as
antioxidants, colorants or flavors) from the inner parts of
the cells [29, 30, 69, 122].
This paper intends to summarize the applications of PEF
as a pretreatment to mass transfer enhancement, high-
lighting the potentially achievable results as a function of
the intensity of the treatment (energy required and electric
field applied) in order to give the reader a perspective of
the impact of the technology in product development and
process intensification.
Basic Consideration and Mechanism
Electroporation is a physical method of cell (animal or
plant) membrane permeabilization caused by externally
123
110
Fig. 1 Biological cell in an
electric field E. Electroporated
area is represented with a
dashed line. Ec: critical electric
field strength
ELECTRODE
CELL
CYTOPLASM
MEMBRANE MEDIUM
applied short and intense electric pulses, widely used in
several fields such as biotechnology and medicine for the
introduction of different molecules into the cell, electro-
fusion, water treatment, and food processing for steriliza-
tion, as well as enhancing the efficiency of the pressing,
extraction, drying, and diffusion processes.
The exact mechanisms of electroporation are not yet
fully understood. Several theories [32, 65, 87, 119, 132,
134] based on the experiments carried out on model sys-
tems such as liposomes, planar bilayers, and phospholipid
vesicles have been proposed in order to explain the
mechanism of the reversible electroporation and/or the
electrical membrane breakdown. All of these theories have
their relative advantages and disadvantages, but one com-
mon feature of great importance is the fact that the mem-
brane plays a role in amplifying the applied electric field,
as the conductivity of intact membrane is several orders of
magnitude lower than the conductivities of extra cellular
medium and cell cytoplasm [124].
Hence, when the biological cell is exposed to an external
electric field E, the transmembrane potential increases as a
result of the charging process at the membrane interfaces.
In Fig. 1, the simple case of a sphere shaped biological cell
is considered. The potential differences um can be
approximated by Eq. (1) which is derived from solving
Maxwell’s equation in spherical coordinates assuming
several simplifying restrictions [86]:
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
E<Ec
r
+ θ -
E>Ec
+ -
REVERSIBLE
PORES
E>>Ec
+ -
IRREVERSIBLE
um ¼ 1:5rcell E cos ðhÞ ð1Þ
where, rcell is the radius, and h is the angle between the site
on the cell membrane where um is measured and the
direction of the vector E.
The highest drop of potential occurs at the cell poles
(h = 0, p) and decreases to 0 at h = ±p/2. Due to the
membrane thickness h (&5 nm) being very thin when
compared to a plant cell radius (&100 lm), a selective
concentration of the electric field on the membrane occurs,
creating a transmembrane electric field, Em = um/h, which
is about 105 times higher than the applied field strength
[123, 124].
If a critical value of the field strength Ec is exceeded, a
critical transmembrane potential can be induced (typically
0.2–1.0 V for most cell membranes) that leads to the forma-
tion of reversible or irreversible pores in the membrane [133].
The occurrence of reversible or irreversible permeabi-
lization of the cell membrane depends on the intensity of
the external electric fields as well as the number of pulses
applied [68].
When the electric field applied reaches values close to
the critical value Ec or when few pulses are applied,
reversible permeabilization occurs allowing the cell
membrane to recover its structure and functionality. On the
contrary, when more intense PEF treatment is applied,
irreversible electroporation takes place, resulting in cell
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
membrane disintegration as well as loss of cell viability
[132].
According to Eq. (1), the critical transmembrane
potential is attained with the external electric field
decreasing with the cell radius. Due to cell being rather
large in plant tissue (&100 lm) when compared to
microbial cells (&1–10 lm), the electric field strength
required for elecroplasmolysis in plant cells (0.5–5 kV/cm)
[66] is lower than that required for inactivation microor-
ganisms (10–50 kV/cm) [19].
Overall, the electroporation process consists of different
phases [64, 123] including:
– charging and polarization of the membranes (charging
time of &1 ls);
– temporal destabilization and creation of pores (reported
as occurring on time scales of 10 ns);
– expansion of the pores radii and aggregation of
different pores (in a time range of hundred of micro-
seconds to milliseconds, lasting throughout the duration
of pulses);
– resealing of the pores which takes place after electric
pulse application (lasting seconds to hours).
The first phase of electroporation (pore formation),
which is the cell membrane response to the induced
threshold membrane potential, is related to short-lived
transient pore formation, which does not contribute to
molecular transport. Molecular transport across the per-
meabilized cell membrane associated with electroporation
is observed from the pore formation phase until membrane
resealing is completed [64].
Therefore, in the electropermeabilization effect on bio-
logical membranes, the induction and development of the
pores after treatment is a dynamic and not an instantaneous
process [14].
Detection and Characterization of Cell Disintegration
in Vegetable Tissue
The first studies on the degree of cell permeabilization
were based on quantifying the release of intracellular
metabolites (i.e. pigments) from plant-cultured cells after
electroporation induced by the application of PEF [30, 36].
The irreversible permeabilization of the cells in vege-
table tissue was demonstrated, for the first time on potato
tissue (exposed to PEF treatment), determining the release
of the intracellular liquid from the treated tissue using a
centrifugal method. A liquid leakage from the tissue of
PEF-treated samples was detected while no-release occur-
red from the control samples. This leakage was therefore
interpreted as a consequence of the cellular damage by the
electrical pulses inside the cells of the tissue [12].
111
However, in order to obtain a quantitative measure of
the induced cell damage degree P, defined as the ratio of
the damaged cells and the total number of cells, several
methods have been defined. The direct estimation of the
damage degree can be carried out through the microscopic
observation of the PEF-treated tissue [44]. However, the
procedure is not simple and is ambiguous [123].
Therefore, experimental techniques based on the eval-
uation of the indicators that macroscopically registers the
complex changes at the membrane level in real biological
systems have been introduced.
For example, the value of P could be estimated from
diffusion coefficient measurements in the PEF-treated
biological materials [62, 75]:
P  ðD  Di Þ=ðDd  Di Þ ð2Þ
where D is the measured apparent diffusion coefficient
with the subscript i and d referring to the values for intact
and totally destroyed material, respectively.
Unfortunately, diffusion techniques are not only indirect
and invasive for biological objects, but they may also have
an impact on the structure of the tissue. Furthermore, also
the validity of the Eq. (2) is still controversial [75, 121].
Measurements of the changes in the electrophysical
properties such as complex impedance of untreated and
treated biological systems have been suggested as a simple
and more reliable method to obtaining a measurement of
the extent of damaged cells [14].
Biological cells have insulated membranes (the plasma
membrane and the tonoplast) that are responsible for the
characteristic alternating current frequency dependence on
the sample’s impedance. According to Angersbach et al.
[13], the electrical behavior of a single intact plant cell is
equivalent to an ohmic-capacitive circuit in which insu-
lated cell membranes can be assumed to be a capacitor
connected in parallel to a resistor, while the conductive
liquid on both sides of the membranes can be introduced to
this circuit as two additional resistors. Hence, the electro-
physical properties of cell systems, as characterized by the
Maxwell–Wagner polarization effect at intact membrane
interfaces, can be determined on the basis of impedance
measurements in a frequency range between 1 and
100 MHz, which is called b-dispersion [14].
The impedance-frequency spectra of intact and treated
samples are typically determined with an impedance mea-
surement equipment in which a sample, placed between two
parallel plate cylindrical electrodes, is exposed to a sinu-
soidal or wave voltage signal of alternative polarity with a
fixed amplitude (typically between 1 and 5 V peak to peak)
and frequency (f) in the range of 3–50 MHz. However, the
range of characteristic low and high frequencies used
depends on the cell size in relation to the conductivity of cell
liquid and neighboring fluids, as shown in Table 1 [14].
123
112 Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130

Table 1 Characteristic low and high frequency values for different 10000
biological material (a) intact
intacttissue
tissue
1.61.6
kV/cm
kV/cm--11 kJ/kg
kJ/kg
1.61.6
kV/cm
kV/cm--5kJ/kg
5kJ/kg
Biological material Low High
frequency frequency 1000
(kHz)a (MHz)a

|Z| (Ohm)
Large cells 100
Animal muscle tissue B3 C15
Fish tissue (mackerel or salmon) B3 C3
Plant cells (apple, potato, or B5 C5 10 (a)
paprika)
1e+2 1e+3 1e+4 1e+5 1e+6 1e+7
Small cells
Frequency (Hz)
Yeast cells (S. cerevisiae) B50 C25
a 0
The indicated frequencies should be used as the preferred frequency (b) intact
intacttissue
tissue
bands [14] 1.61.6
kV/cm
kV/cm--1kJ/kg
1kJ/kg
-10 1.6 kV/cm --5kJ/kg
1.6 kV/cm 5kJ/kg

-20
Electrical impedance is determined as the ratio of the
voltage drop across the sample and the current crossing it -30

φ
during the test. The complex impedance Z(jx) is expressed -40
according to Eq. (3):
-50
Z ðjxÞ ¼ jZ ðjxÞj  ej/ ð3Þ
-60
(b)
where j is the imaginary unit, x = 2pf is the angular fre- -70
quency, jZ ðjxÞj is the absolute value of the complex 1e+2 1e+3 1e+4 1e+5 1e+6 1e+7

impedance, and u the phase angle between voltage across
the sample and the current through it.
As the complex impedance Z(jx) depends on the
geometry of the electrode system, the specific conductivity
r(x) can be used instead [69, 71, 101]. For the plate
electrode system, it has been calculated according to
equation:
ls
rðxÞ ¼
As jZ ðjxÞj
where ls is the length of the sample, and As is the area
perpendicular to the electric field.
The results of numerous experiments indicate that the
impedance or conductivity–frequency spectra of intact and
processed plant tissue in a range between 1 and 50 MHz
can typically be divided into characteristic zones [13].
Figure 2(a) shows a typical frequency-impedance spec-
tra for artichoke bracts and the transition from an intact to
ruptured state in the frequency range of the measured
current of 100 Hz to 10 MHz [22].
The results show that the absolute value of the imped-
ance of the intact biological tissue is strongly frequency
dependent. This is because in the low frequency field the
cell membrane acts as a capacitor preventing the flow of
the electric current in the intracellular medium (ohmic-
capacitive behavior). Upon increasing the frequency, the
cell membrane becomes less and less resistant to the cur-
rent flow in the intracellular liquid. At very high frequency
values, the membrane is totally shorted out, and the abso-
lute value of the complex impedance is representative of
Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 2 Frequency dependency of the absolute value of complex
impedance |Z| (a) and phase angle u (b) before and after PEF
treatments of different intensities [22]
the contribution of both extra and intracellular medium
(pure ohmic behavior). Thus, the tissue permeabilization
induced by an external stress such as PEF treatment, is
ð4Þ detectable in the low frequencies range. In the high fre-
quency range, because the cell membrane does not show
any resistance to the current flow, there is practically no
difference between the impedance of intact cells and cells
with ruptured membranes [22, 90].
However, the typical electrical behavior of intact and
processed plant tissue can be also analyzed in terms of
frequency-phase angle spectra [22, 90, 101, 102]. Fig-
ure 2(b) shows a typical frequency-phase angle spectra for
artichoke bracts and the transition from intact to ruptured
state in the frequency range of the measured current of
100 Hz to 10 MHz.
According to the ohmic-capacitive behavior of intact
biological tissue, a negative value of the phase angle is
detected. In particular, at characteristic low and high fre-
quencies, the imaginary component of the cell impedance
is equal to zero [13, 14]. Hence, the phase angle between
voltage and current approach to 0 that is typical of a pure
ohmic behavior.
At medium frequencies, the influence of the capacitive
current through the cell membranes on the phase angle is
quite high, and a minimum value of the phase angle is

123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130 113

Table 2 Typical frequency value of minimum phase angle for dif- This method has proved to be a useful tool for the
ferent biological material determination of the status of cellular materials as well as
Biological material Frequency (kHz)a Reference the optimization of various processes regarding minimizing
cell damage, monitoring the improvement of mass transfer,
Apple 50 [102]
or for the evaluation of various biochemical synthesis
Carrots 100 [102] reactions in living systems [13, 14].
Artichoke 110 [22] Unfortunately, there exists no exact relation between the
Sugar beet 50 [101] disintegration index Zp and damage degree P, though it
Pinot noir grapes 100 [102] may be reasonably approximated by the empirical Archie’s
Alicante grapes 400 [102] equation [16]:
Muskateller mash 300 [102]
Zp  P m ð7Þ
Riesling mash 700 [102]
a
The indicated frequencies can be considered constant during the where exponent m falls within the range of 1.8–2.5 for
permeabilization phase biological tissue, such as apple, carrot, and potato [71].

detected. As reported in Table 2, the minimum phase angle

Monitoring of Cell Damage in the Industrial
varies with the type of plant material.
Environment
While the electroporation progresses, the capacitances
of the cell membranes become more and more shortened,
The methods described above, based on the measurements
and the increase of the phase angle can be taken as a
of impedance at two frequencies (low and high frequency)
measure for the degree of electroporation. If all cells are
and on the phase angle criterion, are both reported as
opened completely, the phase angle approaches zero in the
reliable indicators for monitoring the extent of cell mem-
ideal case [90, 102].
brane disintegration [13, 14, 22, 71, 90, 101, 102].
In order to quantify the cellular degree of permeabili-
However, according to Sack et al. [102], the method
zation, a coefficient Zp, the cell disintegration index, has
based on the impedance measurement at the characteristic
been defined on the basis of the measurement of the elec-
low and high frequency works fine for small arrangements,
trical complex conductivity of intact and permeabilized
where the inductivities of the leads can be neglected. For a
tissue in the low (&1–5 kHz) and high (3–50 MHz) fre-
measurement in an industrial flow where large electrode
quency ranges [13]:

distances have to be used, the influence of the inductance
rih =rth rtl  ril cannot be neglected. It forms a resonant circuit together
Zp ¼ ð5Þ
rih  ril with stray capacitances. Furthermore, as the measurement
device needs a time of 1–2 s to apply the two frequencies
where ril ; rtl are the electrical conductivity of untreated and
one after the other, the sample material changes during the
treated material, in a low frequency field, respectively, and
two measurements, resulting in a measurement fault if the
rih ; rth are the electrical conductivity of untreated and
material is heterogeneous. A simultaneous application of
treated samples in a high frequency field, respectively.
the two measurement frequencies would be technically
The disintegration index characterizes the proportion of
possible, but the measurement device would be more
damaged (permeabilized) cells within the plant product
complex.
[69]. It is the average cell disintegration characteristic in
On the other hand, particularly for measurements in an
the sample and describes the transition of a cell from an
industrial environment, the measurement of the phase angle
intact to ruptured state [3]. For intact cells, Zp = 0; for total
at only one medium frequency overcomes the mentioned
cell disintegration, Zp = 1.
disadvantages of the measurement at two frequencies: at a
Another cell disintegration index Zp was proposed by
measurement frequency (Table 2), where the phase angle
Lebovka et al. [71] according to the definition of Rogov
has a minimum, the influence of stray inductance is quite
and Gorbatov [99]:
small. Furthermore, as the phase angle between two elec-
r  ri
Zp ¼ ð6Þ tric signals can be easily determined by a time measure-
rd  ri ment between the two zero crossings and because the
where r is the measured electrical conductivity value at measurement can be carried out at a single frequency, the
low frequencies (1–5 kHz), and the subscripts ‘i’ and ‘d’ measurement device can be set up quite simply.
refer to the conductivities of intact and totally destroyed As reported in Table 2, the frequency of the minimum
material, respectively. As in the previous case, Zp = 0 for phase angle depends on the type of material. Therefore, an
intact tissue and Zp = 1 for totally disintegrated material. adaptation of the frequency to the treated material is of

123
114
advantage for the treatment of different type of material
with one electroporation device.
The adjustment of the applied energy for an optimum
operation can then be based on both the measurement at the
output of the reactor to keep the degree of cell disinte-
gration constant and additionally on the measurement of
the untreated material to determine the initial degree of
denaturation [101, 102].
Influence of PEF-Process Parameters
According to electroporation theory, the extent of cell
membrane damage of biological material is mainly influ-
enced by the electric treatment conditions. Typically, as
well as electric field strength E, pulse width sp and number
of pulses np (or treatment time t ¼ sp  np ) are reported as
the most important electric pulses parameters affecting the
electroporation process.
In general, increasing the intensity of these parameters
enhances the degree of membrane permeabilization even if
beyond a certain value a saturation level of the disinte-
gration index is generally reached [71].
For example, the disintegration index of potato tissue
was found markedly increased by increasing either field
strength or the number of pulses [15, 66, 69].
The effect of the applied field strength (between 0.1 and
0.4 kV/cm) and pulse width (between 10 and 1,000 ls) on
the efficiency of disintegration of apple tissue by pulsed
electric fields (PEF) has been also studied [34]. The char-
acteristic damage time s, estimated as a time when the
saturation disintegration index Zp attains one-half of a
maximal value, i.e. Zp = 0.5 [71], decreased with the
increasing of the field strength and pulse width. In partic-
ular, longer pulses were more effective, and their effect
was particularly pronounced at room temperature and
moderate electric fields (E = 0.1 kV/cm).
However, Knorr and Angersbach [69], utilizing the dis-
integration index for the quantification of cell permeabiliza-
tion of potato tissue, found that, at a fixed number of pulses,
the application of variable electric field strength and pulse
width, but constant electrical energy per pulse W, resulted in
the same degree of cell disintegration. Thus, the authors
suggested that the specific energy per pulse can be considered
a suitable process parameter for the optimization of mem-
brane permeabilization as well as for PEF-process develop-
ment.For exponential decay pulses, W can be calculated by:
2
kEmax sp
W¼ ½kJ=ðkg  pulseÞ ð8Þ
q
where Emax is the peak electric field strength (kV/m), r is
the electrical conductivity (S/m), sp is the pulse width (s),
and q is the density of the product (kg/m3).
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
The relationship between W and cell permeabilization
was evaluated systematically by examining the variation of
specific energy input per pulse (from 2.5 to 22,000 J/kg)
and the number of pulses (np = 1–200; pulse repetition,
1 Hz). The treatment-induced Zp increased continuously
with the pulse energy as well as with the pulse numbers.
Theoretically, the total cell permeabilization of plant tissue
was obtained by applying either one very high energy pulse
or a large number of pulses of low energy per pulse [69].
Based on these results and due to its integrated char-
acter, total specific energy input WT, defined as WT ¼
W  np (in kJ/kg), should be used, next to field strength, as a
suitable treatment intensity parameter in order to compare
the results obtained using different electric pulse protocols
and PEF devices. In addition, the use of the energy input
required to achieve for a given matrix complete cell dis-
integration also provides an indication of the operational
costs.
A criterion for energy optimization, based on the rela-
tionship between the characteristic damage time s and the
electric field intensity E, has been proposed by Lebovka
et al. [71].
According to Eq. (8), the energy input during the treat-
ment time t = s(E) can be characterized by the product
s(E)E2. The s(E) decreases by increasing the electric field
intensity E, and the product of s(E)E2 goes through a mini-
mum. Criteria of energy optimization require a minimum of
this product. This minimum corresponds to the minimum
power consumption for material treatment during charac-
teristic time t = s(E). A further increase of E results in a
progressive increase of the optimization product s(E)E2 and
energy input but gives no additional increase in conductivity
disintegration index Zp. An optimal value of the electric field
intensity Eopt & 400 V/cm, which results in maximal
material disintegration at the minimal energy input, was
estimated for apple, carrot, and potato tissue. Based on this
value, the characteristic time s was estimated as 2 9 10-3 s
for apple, 7 9 10-4 s for carrot, and 2 9 10-4 s for potato,
and the energy consumption decreased in the same order:
apple ? carrot ? potato [71].
Impact of Pulsed Electric Field on Juice Expression
Pretreatments that cause plasmolysis, cellular damage, or
permeabilization of plant cells can be used to enhance the
efficiency of hydraulic pressing, which is widely used in
the food industry [110, 111], as well as to increase the yield
in the production of fruit juices and vegetable oils [29, 30,
42, 69].
Traditional methods used to obtain raw material plas-
molysis include heating, osmotic dehydration or freezing
dehydration, alkaline breakage, and enzymatic treatment
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130 115

Table 3 Summary of the applications of PEF treatment to vegetable tissue expression

Tissue E (kV/cm) Energy (kJ/kg) Expression method Main effects of PEF treatment Reference

Alfalfa 1.25–2.5 4–6 40 bar Increased of extractable protein by 57% and mineral [48]
extraction by 73%
Apple 0.1–0.5 – 3 bar intermediate PEF Enhancement of juice yield and improvement of quality [25]
by simultaneous application of PEF and pressure
0.5 – 5 bar intermediate PEF Higher juice yield than non-treated and thermally [72]
pretreated samples
1–5 1.1–27 250 bar Increase of juice yield from 2 to 8%, whereas enzymatic [106]
mash treatment resulted in a 4% growth
0.25–0.4 – 5 bar intermediate PEF Permeation of cell membranes and increase of portion [93]
of juice from internal pores of particles
Carrot 2.6 – 100 bar Increase of juice yield from 30 to 50% (depending on [70]
grating size) for untreated samples to 70% after PEF
0.25–1 5–10 5 bar intermediate Increase of juice yield from 51 to 67% after PEF, higher [52]
PEF ? washing content of b-carotene
0.25–0.4 – 5 bar intermediate PEF Enhancement of juice yield and improvement of [93]
qualitative characteristics of the juice
Pepper 1.7 15 100 bar Juice yield 10% higher than control (comparable to [3, 4]
enzyme treatments); 60% increase of b-carotene in the
juice (compared to 44% for enzyme)
Potato 0.3 – 5 bar intermediate PEF Highest juice yield for PEF application to the pre- [73]
compressed samples
0.1–0.7 – 15–30 bar Increase of yield with increased PEF intensity [31]
Sugar beet 1.2–2.5 – 20–50 bar Increase of the solid concentration twofold in the [43]
obtained juice
Up to 300 2–10 32 bar Same juice yield of thermal denaturation at 72 C [108, 109]
(174 kJ/kg), but with significantly lower energy
consumption
0.5 – 5 bar intermediate PEF Highest yield for intermediate PEF application [94]
0.6 5 5 bar intermediate Synergetic effect of ohmic heating and PEF: promotion [91]
PEF ? ohmic heating of 85% of juice extraction from coarse cuts
– 2–3.6 5–15 bar intermediate Yield increase from 30 to 80% after PEF and to 97% [61]
PEF ? washing after PEF ? washing, higher purity

[7, 18, 97, 120]. For many years, PEF treatment was pro-
posed for cellular material plasmolysis, known as electro-
plasmolysis, and applied in order to obtain the
intensification of juice yield production as well as improve
product quality [83, 89, 107]. However, pioneering appli-
cations, due to the high intensity of the electric field
applied, suffered from an uncontrolled increase in food
temperature and product quality deterioration [25].
Recently, effective permeabilization of cellular mem-
branes has been demonstrated to be possible at a moderate
pulsed electric field intensity [13, 20, 21, 69, 70], and since
then numerous applications of PEF treatment to juice
expression enhancement were proposed, which are sum-
marized in Table 3. The efficiency of PEF treatment was
demonstrated for juice expression from alfalfa [48], from
apple mash [25, 72, 93, 106], from carrot gratings [52, 70,
93], from peppers [4], from potatoes [31, 73], and from
sugar beet [43, 61, 91, 94, 108, 109].
The PEF-assisted expression of fruit juices has been
shown to increase yields to similar values that are reached
using commercial enzymes, but in a faster continuous
process, where products are more similar to freshly pressed
products [43]. Further developments have shown the
advantages of applying the PEF simultaneously to pressing,
due to the dependency of the PEF treatment on the uniform
and tight packing of raw materials between electrodes and
removal of excess liquid for the extracellular volume at the
initial steps of compression [25].
Sugar Beets
Sugar beet expression by PEF with the application of
electric fields of 1.2–2.5 kV/cm upon pressing at 20–50 bar
at room temperature led to a twofold increase of the solid
concentration in the obtained juice, in comparison with
traditional methods [43]. Improved yield constituted a

123
116
sufficient driving force for the development of pilot systems,
such as the test device Karlsruher Elektroporations Anlage
(KEA), which consisted of a 300 kV Marx generator oper-
ating at 10 Hz and delivering its pulses to a cylindrical
reaction chamber, large enough to treat entire sugar beets in a
continuous stream, with axially and azimuthally distributed
electrodes. KEA was used to demonstrate the advantages of
PEF treatment for the production of sugar from beets com-
pared with conventional techniques. The same juice yield
was obtained for both thermal denaturation treatment at
72 C and PEF treatment, but with a significantly lower
energy consumption (174 kJ/kg for thermal denaturation vs.
2–10 kJ/kg for PEF treatment) [109].
Further developments have led to a semi-industrial
device for sugar beet pretreatment, with a maximum
electric field strength of 300 kV/cm with microsecond
pulse lengths, 1 kJ stored energy, and a repetition rate of
20 Hz [108].
Process development instead has showed the advantages
of PEF treatment simultaneously to pressing. The first
experiments were conducted in lab-scale, using a laboratory
filter-press cell connected to a PEF treatment system. The
application of PEF to non-pressurized cake resulted in an
increase of energy consumption and a higher applied voltage.
The PEF treatment of excessively pressurized cakes delayed
the juice expression, while the best results were obtained
when the sugar beet tissue was treated with PEF at 1.5–5 bars
[28, 94]. In particular, it was observed that an electric field
intensity of 0.5 kV/cm and duration of PEF application
0.03–0.05 s were the optimal treatment conditions [94].
On lab-scale, it has also been demonstrated that the
combination of PEF with a moderate heat treatment
(50 C), delivered to the sugar beets by ohmic heating is
also possible. The combination of ohmic heating (60 V/cm,
50 Hz) and PEF treatment (0.6 kV/cm, 0.04 s) leads to a
synergetic effect, with an 85% enhancement of juice
extraction, due to the combination of the electropermea-
bilization of cell membranes and the thermal softening of
tissues [91].
The results obtained by simultaneous PEF and pressing
were validated in a pilot-scale multi-plate and frame
pressing equipment (pressure of 5–15 bar and particles
filling up to 15 kg) for the PEF-assisted cold pressing of
sugar beet cossettes. The juice yield enhancement depen-
ded on the energy delivered by PEF, with the efficiency
steeply increasing to an energy input of about 2 kJ/kg, and
leveled off beyond 3.6 kJ/kg [61].
Apples
Pioneering studies have showed that PEF treatment was
able to enhance juice expression from apple mash simi-
larly to heating [83] as well as increase yield from 67 to
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
73% in comparison with cellulases enzyme [20], with the
advantages of lower energy and better quality juice. The
PEF field applied between 0.05 and 0.4 kV/cm for
instance required an energy consumption comprised
between 0.06 and 0.7 kJ/kg [89], while the reduction in
the required amount of enzyme produced a clearer color
juice [20].
A more intense PEF treatment of apple mash, at an
electric field from 1 to 5 kV/cm and specific energy
ranging from 1 to 27 kJ/kg before pressing, resulted in an
increased juice yields from 2 to 8%, whereas enzymatic
treatment induced a 4% growth. In addition, sugar, malic
acid, and pectin contents as well as the antioxidant capacity
of the juices were not affected [106]. On the other hand,
milder PEF treatment (0.5 kV/cm for 10-2 s, pulse dura-
tion of 10 ls) required the combination with moderate
heating of apple mash (50 C for 10 min) in order to cause
softening of the tissue. The PEF treatment also increased
the juice yield for non-thermally pretreated samples, but
the enhancement was significantly higher in combination
with thermal pretreatment [72].
In the case of apples, the simultaneous application of
PEF (0.1 to 0.5 kV/cm, pulse duration of 100 ls) and
pressing (3 bar) showed that the highest juice yield when
compared to untreated samples can be achieved at the
lowest applied electric field if PEF is applied when the
pressure in the system reaches a constant value [25].
Since the simultaneous pressure and PEF treatment
application promotes the damage of defective cells,
enhances diffusion migration of moisture, and depresses
the cell resealing processes [25], the expressed juice can
significantly change during pressing. A first portion of the
juice can be associated with the juice exhausted from
cells during the cutting of the plant tissue. The second
portion, that can instead be associated to juice expressed
from the internal pores of sliced particles [93, 110, 111],
is significantly enhanced by PEF due to the permeation of
the cell membranes, with this portion being significantly
clearer and less cloudy than the PEF-untreated samples
[93].
Carrots
Juice expression from carrots appears to be highly depen-
dent on carrot mash particle size, giving upon pressing at
100 bar, a higher juice yield for 3 mm (30%) size than for
1.5 mm (50%). Nevertheless, PEF-assisted carrot juice
expression resulted independent on size, giving a yield of
about 70% for the application of 50 pulses at 2.6 kV/cm
[70]. In addition, a higher availability of b-carotene was
measured in comparison with juice produced by traditional
methods [70].
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
Combined pressing and moderate PEF treatment (0.25–
0.4 kV/cm) was able to enhance the juice yields from
carrots as well as regulate the qualitative characteristics of
the juice expressed from the soft plant tissue [93]. PEF
treatments of a moderate electric field strength (0.25–1 kV/
cm) coupled with the application of constant pressure
(5 bar) and intermediate washing steps, showed that PEF
increased the juice yield and Brix, but the effects were
noticeable mainly for larger slices with a small degree of
initial damage. Specific energy was comprised between 5
and 10 kJ/kg [52].
Other Vegetable Tissue
Juice expression from mechanically comminuted Paprika
at a pressure of 10 MPa for 4 min was enhanced by either
PEF pretreatment application (electric field strength =
1.7 kV/cm and specific energy = 15 kJ/kg) or by using a
pectolytic enzyme. PEF and enzyme treatments resulted in
an approximate 10% juice yield increase, with comparable
quality. In relation to color, and in particular redness,
which is one of the main characteristics of Paprika, PEF
induced higher a* values than enzymes (?18 vs ?15.5),
with the amount of b-carotene extracted being higher for
PEF (60 vs. 44%) [3, 4].
Juice yield obtained from the compression of potato
tissue was increased when increasing PEF intensity (elec-
tric field strength from 0.13 to 0.68 kV/cm) and decreased
deformation rates. For example, the compressive force was
reduced by a factor of 5 when pressing potatoes pretreated
with an electric field strength of 0.68 kV/cm and duration
of 1 ms, at a relative deformation of 0.5 and a deformation
rate of 0.1 mm/min [31]. The efficiency of PEF is even
higher when treatment is applied to pre-compressed sam-
ples. Since in the uncompressed samples, there is a lot of
external air, the efficiency of the PEF application is greatly
reduced, and due to the reduction of sample thickness
(approximately to half-size), lower voltages are required in
the PEF pretreatment case in order to reach the required
electric field [73].
Alfalfa juice concentrate is widely used as a supplement
in some health food products and can therefore be con-
sidered a nutraceutical or functional food [48]. A PEF
treatment from 1.25 to 2.5 kV/cm, followed by pressing at
40 bar for 2 min resulted in an increase of the extracted
protein (57%) as well as minerals (73%) in comparison
with untreated samples [49]. Furthermore, since no sig-
nificant variation in the quantities of extracted juice was
observed once the maximum damage degree was reached,
higher electric fields required lower energy. For instance,
the same level of damage degree, and therefore the same
juice yield, was achieved at 1.25 kV/cm, using 150 kJ/kg
and at 2.5 kV/cm, using 110 kJ/kg [48, 49].
117
Impact of Pulsed Electric Fields on Extraction
and Recovery of Valuable Compounds
The electroporation of plant cells can be used to enhance
the extraction of intracellular metabolites of commercial
interest, such as pigments, antioxidants, or flavors, due to
the permeabilization not only of the cell membrane [29, 30,
42, 69], but also of vacuoles [44], where some metabolites
are contained.
Different applications have been proposed for PEF-
assisted extraction and recovery of valuable compounds,
which are summarized in Table 4. In addition to the
extraction of sugar from sugar beet [38, 39, 60, 74, 79,
109], PEF has been used to enhance the recovery of soluble
substances from apple tissue [59], from carrots [40], and
chicory [76], polyphenols and antioxidants from artichoke
bracts [22] and from fennel [37], betulin from mushrooms
[126], betanine from red beetroot [46, 78], and oil from
rapeseed [53] and seed maize [54]. Some applications of
PEF were also proposed for the recovery of polysaccha-
rides from frog tissue [125] as well as of dissoluble calcium
from bones [127].
Betanine
Red beetroot is one of the main sources of betanines,
natural colorants used to enhance the redness of different
food products [114]. Betanines are usually recovered
through the aqueous extraction of shredded beetroots, with
a yield of 45–70% [78]. Since the amount of compounds
released during solid–liquid extraction depends on the
degree of cell disintegration, mechanical fragmentation,
heating, pressing or a combination of several solvents in
the extraction medium are often used. However, these
processes may affect the color stability of betanines, which
is sensitive to pH, temperature, light, and oxygen [55].
In contrast, the use of PEF allows high degree of cell
permeabilization with minimal thermal stresses. Two main
approaches have been proposed, both consisting in deliv-
ering a moderate amount of energy to the beetroot tissue
(between 2.5 and 7 kJ/kg), but using a different electric
field intensity. For instance, 270 monopolar rectangular
pulses of 10 ls duration at 1 kV/cm field strength (specific
energy = 7 kJ/kg) enhanced the release of 90% of total red
coloring and ionic content after 1 h aqueous extraction in
comparison with less than 5% of the untreated sample [46].
Treatments of higher electric field intensity (7 kV/cm)
and shorter pulse duration (2 ls) resulted in release of 90%
of the total betanine in McIlvaine buffer (pH 3.5) after
300 min with a fivefold increase in comparison with the
control [78]. In this case, the specific energy delivered to
the beetroot was lower (2.5 kJ/kg) due to the fact that
betanine extraction was no longer dependent on pulse
123
118 Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130

Table 4 Summary of the applications of PEF treatment to extraction of valuable compounds from vegetable and non-vegetable cells
Tissue Extracted E (kV/cm) Energy Extraction method Main effects of PEF Reference
compound (kJ/k) treatment

Apple Soluble \1 10–70 Water Significant increase of the [59]

substances T: 20–75 C diffusion coefficient
Large excess
Artichoke Polyphenols 0.75–1.5 1–5 McIlvaine buffer (pH 2.8) Threefold increase of polyphenols [22]
T: 30 C extraction over 5 h,
L:S = 20 Optimal conditions at 1.5 kV/cm,
1 kJ/kg
Carrot Soluble 0.67 – Water Maximum yield obtained upon [40]
substances T: 18–35 C tissue preheating at 50 C and
mild PEF treatment (300 V/cm–
L:S = 3 Centrifugal
30 pulses)
Chicory Soluble 0.1–0.6 \10 Water At 40 C, 5 times higher yield than [76]
substances T: 20–60 C control. Smaller differences at
higher T
L:S = 3
Fennel Antioxidants 0.6 5–40 Water Yield increase from 60 to 98% for [37]
T: 20, 60–90 C. coarse gratings
L:S = 2
Inonotus obl iquus Betulin 10–70 – Ethanol solution Betulin yield increased by 20% [126]
(35–100%) and the extracting time was
Room T much shorter for 2 pulses at
40 kV/cm
L:S = 5–30
Rapeseed Oil 5–7 42–84 Hexane Slight increase in oil recovery, but [53]
room T increase of functional food
ingredients
L:S = 20
Red Beetroot Betanine 1 7 Water ? 0.25 M mannitol Release of about 90% of total red [46]
Room T coloring after 60 min compared
to \ 5% of the control
L:S = 1
7 2.5 McIlvaine buffer (pH 3.5) Fivefold quicker release of 90% of [78]
T: 30 C total betanine than non-PEF-
treated samples
L:S = 0.25
Maize Oil 0.6–7.3 0.6–90 Hexane Increased yield of phytosterols [54]
room T (32%) and of the isoflavonoids
genistein and daidzein (20–21%)
L:S = 20
Sugar Beet Sugar 0.2–0.8 0.5–24 Water circulating at Significant enhancement of soluble [60]
3.3 g/min on 20 g transfer from 150 V/cm to 500
Room T V/cm before stable value
0.2–1.2 6–7 Water Increase in yield from 5 to 30% [38]
Room T
L:S = 1
*15 0.75 Hot water Sugar extraction at much lower [109]
temperatures (\70 C), with
higher purity (no thermal
denaturation of cell walls)
0.7–0.9 5–6 Water Under centrifugation, 90% release [39]
room T after 100 min, compared to
300 min of untreated
L/S = 3
Centrifugal (150–9,6609g)
0.1 – Water Complete release after 1 h at [74]
T = 20–60 C 40 C, in comparison to 50%
of the untreated
L:S = 3

123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
Table 4 continued
Tissue Extracted E (kV/cm) Energy
compound (kJ/k)
1–7 3.7
Rana temporaria Poly-saccharide 20 – KOH solution
Bone Dissoluble calcium 0–70 – Citric acid solution (0–2%) Yield 20 times higher than control, [127]
number at higher field strengths ([5 kV/cm), and appar-
ently a higher degree of permeabilization can be obtained,
even when fewer pulses were applied [78]. Moreover, the
combination of PEF at 7 kV/cm and pressing at 14 bar
shortened the extraction time by 18-fold [78].
Oil
PEF treatment has also been proposed to enhance the
extraction of oil from harder tissues, such as maize, olives,
and soybeans [54] as well as rapeseed [53]. In order for
PEF treatment to be effective for such vegetable tissues, a
long pulse duration (of the order of 100 ls) and high
specific energy (up to 90 kJ/kg) are required, and in any
case, the enhancement of oil yield is only marginal, while a
more substantial variation of the functional components
was observed [53, 54]. For instance, a mild application of
PEF (0.6 kV/cm) on maize germs, increased oil yield by
7%, in comparison with an 8% increase induced by freeze-
thawing with a significantly higher energy expenditure.
Additionally, the composition profile of extracted oil
resulted in the enrichement of phytosterols (up to 30%) as
well as isoflavonoids. Genistein and daidzein in soybeans
increased by 20% after PEF treatment in comparison with
the untreated samples [54].
Rapeseed is the most important oilseed in Europe, due to
it being used for the industrial applications of biodiesel
[53]. Nevertheless, there are also numerous food applica-
tions, due to its high content of essential linolenic acid (x-3
fatty acid) and of monounsaturated fatty acids, polyphe-
nols, phytosterols as well as tocopherols, which gives
rapeseed oil an excellent nutritive value. PEF treatment of
intensity 5–7 kV/cm and 42–84 kJ/kg induced irreversible
permeabilization. Nevertheless, after hexane extraction for
2 h at room temperature, only a slight increase in oil
recovery was observed [53]. On the other hand, antioxidant
capacity increased by about 10% due to the increased
polyphenol contents [53].
119
Extraction method Main effects of PEF Reference
treatment
Water Maximum yield compared to [79]
T: 20, 40, 70 C untreated increased by 7 at 20 C
and 1.6 times at 40 C
L:S = 5
55% higher extraction yield, less [125]
Room T impurities
room T 9 than boiling, 3 than microwave
L:S = 40
Sugar
Aqueous extraction is the standard method to recover sugar
from beets. It is usually performed in industry by an
immersion of beet cuts (cossettes) in hot water (70–75 C).
This leads to an alteration of the cell tissue and loss of
pectin into the juice, which consequently needs compli-
cated purification. The application of PEF ensures a non-
thermal permeabilization of the cellular membrane that
allows extraction at lower temperatures [38].
A patent was filed in 1999 to protect a method for
treating sugar beets with an electric field, followed by
extraction or pressing [42]. Later, a pilot-scale electropo-
rator was developed, using a Marx generator, capable of
achieving appreciable energy savings since the treated
beets could be extracted at much lower temperatures, for
instance below 70 C, with the same sugar extraction, but
higher purity since thermal denaturation of the cell walls is
prevented [109].
The application of moderate PEF (\1 kV/cm) as pre-
treatment to the laboratory scale solid–liquid extraction of
sugar from sugar beets showed that a minimal value of
0.15 kV/cm is required in order to obtain a measurable
enhancement of soluble transfer, with a stable value
increase being reached above 0.5 kV/cm [60]. Moreover,
increasing the number of pulses at 0.94 kV/cm from 100 to
250 increased the yield of solute from 15 to nearly 30%
after 8 h, while a further increase up to 1,000 did not affect
the yield of solute [38]. In all cases, the specific energy
requirements were below 10 kJ/kg, and the energy input
was found to be almost the same (5–6 kJ/kg) for different
shapes and sizes, such as disks (30 mm diameter and 8.5
thickness) as well as 1.5 mm thick gratings [39]. Electric
field intensity can be further reduced when PEF treatment
is applied in combination with thermal plasmolysis at
moderate temperature. PEF treatment accelerated the dif-
fusion process, which, to be completed in 1 h, required
mild heating at 40 C, while for untreated sample heating
123
120
at 70 C was required. In addition, in comparison with
untreated samples, no loss of solution purity is induced by
PEF at comparable extraction temperatures, but purity is
measurably increased at comparable yields, since lower
extraction temperatures are required for PEF-treated sam-
ples [74].
A kinetics investigation of PEF-assisted sucrose
extraction showed that the efficiency of the solid–liquid
extraction is independent of frequency, pulse width, and
shape at 7 kV/cm, with it being influenced by the electric
field strength applied as well as the temperature of the
extracting medium. The application of 20 pulses at 7 kV/
cm (3.9 kJ/kg) increased the maximum yield by 7 and 1.6
times, compared to non-PEF-treated samples, at 20 and
40 C, respectively, while on the other hand, reduced the
extraction temperature for 80% of sucrose in 60 min, from
70 to 40 C [79].
Soluble Matter
The extraction of soluble substances of different kinds has
been enhanced through PEF, in combination with a low
thermal treatment, from apple slices [59], from carrots [40]
as well as from chicory [76]. In the case of carrots, tissue
preheating (30–50 C) contributed additionally to the
effectiveness of PEF treatment, due to tissue softening and
changes in the cell membrane fluidity. For instance, pre-
heating at 50 C allowed cell electroporation at low PEF
intensity (0.3 kV/cm) and short treatment time (30 pulses)
[40, 41]. In the case of chicory, treatments at a low electric
field intensity (0.4–0.6 kV/cm) and with moderate electric
energy consumption (\10 kJ/kg) induced a high level of
tissue disintegration even at room temperature. Complete
solute extraction (measured in Brix) was obtained even at
room temperatures (20 or 30 C) within 3 h, while for
untreated samples at least extraction at 60 C was required
[76].
The effect of grating size (thickness varying from 0.1 to
1.8 mm) was investigated for fennel. The PEF treatment
(up to 0.6 kV/cm, pulse duration of 100 ls and up to 50
pulses) was more effective for coarse gratings than for thin
gratings, in terms of juice yield and purity. In fact, while
the extraction rate was faster for smaller gratings of
untreated fennel, extraction from PEF-treated sample
occurred with the same rate, independent of grating size.
Furthermore, extracts obtained from coarse gratings treated
by PEF contained more vitamins C and E than extracts
obtained by thermal extraction. On the other hand, in order
to reach maximum yield, energy required depended on
grating size and reached values as high as 40 kJ/kg for
largest size [37].
Polysaccharides from Rana temporaria chensinensis
David, a Chinese frog [125], and dissoluble calcium from
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
bones [127] were recovered with the aid of PEF in a
continuous system. For example, compared to the con-
ventional extraction in KOH solution, PEF at 20 kV/cm
and an overall pulse duration of 6 ls increased the
extraction yield of polysaccharides from Rana temporaria
by 55% and improved extract purity [125]. Similarly, dis-
soluble calcium was recovered from bones by PEF-assisted
extraction in citric acid solution (1.25%), with a maximum
yield with an electric field of 70 kV/cm and 12 pulses. The
calcium extraction was increased with a greater pulse
number and higher electric field intensity. In comparison
with traditional extraction methods, such as boiling and
microwave, the extraction time by PEF was shortened, and
the content of dissoluble calcium by PEF was 20 times
faster than untreated sample, 9 times than boiled, and 3
times than microwaved [127].
Antioxidants
Over the last few years, the market-driven development of
foods with not only nutritive functions but also health
benefits has focused interest on bioactive compounds, such
as polyphenols (anthocyanins, tannins, catechins, and
flavones), which can modulate biochemical reactions as
well as the organism’s defenses, with beneficial effects on
human health, due to the antioxidant, anti-inflammatory,
anti-tumor properties as well as contributing to the pre-
vention of heart diseases [56, 57].
Since bioactive compounds are in general intracellular
metabolites produced by vegetables or animals, a key issue
is represented by their extraction under mild conditions, in
order to preserve their activity.
One of the first attempts to recover bioactive compounds
consisted of the application of PEF (0 to 1.6 kV/cm, 0 to 30
pulses) to Chenopodium rubrum and Morinda citrifolia
cells. Depending on the treatment intensity, up to 85% of
the total amaranthin content and 6% of total content of
anthraquinones of the cells were released. However, cells
were killed at release values higher than 16 and 2%,
respectively [36].
More recently, PEF-assisted extraction of betulin from
Inonotus Obliquus (white rot fungus) was conducted by
applying exponentially decaying bipolar pulses with a
pulse duration of 2 ls at 10–70 kV/cm, in a continuous
device. In comparison with conventional method, betulin
extraction by PEF was effective at 2 pulses at 40 kV/cm,
with betulin yield increased by 20% and shorter extraction
times [126].
PEF treatment was also applied to induce an irreversible
disintegration on the cellular membrane of raspberry cells
for the extraction of anthocyanins. The extraction rate was
linearly correlated to the number of pulses of PEF [82], but
increasing intensity degraded Cyanidin-3-glucoside, the
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
control
PEF 0.75kV/cm 0.5kJ/kg
concentration (mg/g bracts)
1.5 PEF 1.5kV/cm 5kJ/kg
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0 0.5
time (h)
Fig. 3 Effect of PEF treatments of different intensity on total
polyphenols release [22]
major anthocyanins in raspberry, into chalcone [130, 131].
Nevertheless, in general, only a marginal reduction of
bioactives, such as flavonoids, anthocyanins, carotenoids,
and vitamin, were reported to be induced by PEF [112].
The involucral bracts of artichokes are a valuable by-
products of artichoke processing, rich in polyphenolic
compounds. A PEF pretreatment (applied electric field of
1.5 kV/cm for 500 pulses of the duration of 10 ls each),
which required an energy consumption of 5 kJ/kg
enhanced the extraction yield in water of 150% as well as
the rate of release. Milder pre-treatment conditions
(0.75 kV/cm for 500 pulses of the duration of 10 ls each)
required less energy (1 kJ/kg) but gave a yield increase of
only 30% with respect to untreated samples. Typical
extraction curves are reported in Fig. 3. Extraction
enhancement was correlated to tissue permeabilization
(reported in Fig. 2) by the measurable increase of con-
ductivity in the low frequency range of the treated tissue
[22].
Another field of intensive research of PEF application to
enhance the extraction of antioxidants is represented by
polyphenols release from grape skins in winemaking. This
topic will be discussed in details in the following
paragraph.
Impact of Pulsed Electric Fields on Winemaking
Grapes contain large amounts of different phenolic com-
pounds, especially located in the skin, that are only par-
tially extracted during traditional winemaking processes,
due to the resistances to mass transfer of the cell walls and
cytoplasmatic membranes. In red wine, the main phenolic
compounds are anthocyanins, responsible for the color of
red wine, tannins and their polymers that instead give the
bitterness and astringency to the wines [84]. In addition,
the presence of phenolic compounds is also responsible of
121
the beneficial health properties of the wine, as undoubtedly
highlighted by recent studies in vitro and in vivo on their
antioxidant and free radical-scavenging properties [47, 88].
The phenolic content and composition of wines depends
on the initial content in grapes, which is a function of
variety and cultivation factors [63], but also on the wine-
making techniques [84]. For instance, increasing fermen-
tation temperature, thermovinification, must or grape
freezing, saignée as well as use of maceration enzymes can
enhance the extraction of phenolic compounds through the
1.0 12.0 24.0 degradation or permeabilization of the grape skin cells [85,
100]. Nevertheless, permeabilization techniques suffer
from some drawbacks, such as higher energy costs and a
lower stability of valuable compound at higher temperature
(thermovinification), or the introduction of extraneous
compounds and general worsening of the wine quality
[113].
On the other hand, traditional techniques for increasing
phenolic content of wines include the extension of the
maceration times beyond the time required for fermenta-
tion, up to 3 or 4 weeks [23] but are limited by three- to
fourfold longer maceration times.
Therefore, PEF treatment may represent a viable option
for enhancing the extraction of phenolic compounds from
skin cells during the maceration steps, without altering
wine quality and with moderate energy consumption. An
initial confirmation of this concept was reported for PEF-
assisted juice expression from blue grapes, which resulted
in the increase of anthocyanin concentration [67]. Also
when applied to white grapes (Muscadelle, Sauvignon and
Semillon) prior or simultaneously to pressing (5 bar), PEF
resulted beneficial not only in the increase of juice yield
from 50 to 80% after 45 min of pressing, but also in the
significant improvement of juice quality. Optimum treat-
ment conditions required an energy input of 20 kJ/kg at
electric field strength 0.75 kV/cm [92]. Similar mild con-
ditions (15 kJ/kg at electric field strength 0.4 kV/cm) were
used for the permeabilization of another white grape, such
as Chardonnay variety. The PEF pre-treatment resulted in
the increase of juice yield from 67 to 75%, in the elevation
of the content of polyphenols (more than 15%) as well as a
reduction of turbidity [51]. When PEF-treated grape skins
of Chardonnay grapes are subjected to aqueous extraction
at ambient temperature, the quantity of extracted poly-
phenols was increased by about 10%, in comparison with
untreated grapes [27].
In comparison with other non-thermal technologies, the
effect of PEF treatment at 3 kV/cm was comparable with
High Hydrostatic Pressure at 600 MPa for 1 h and Ultra-
sounds at 35 kHz and 70 C also for 1 h, in terms of the
extraction of bioactive substances such as anthocyanins
from grape by-products. In fact, the measured enhancement
of total phenolic content was of 50% with respect to
123
122 Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130

untreated samples for all pretreatments. Nevertheless, the
application of PEF increased the antioxidant activity of the
extracts fourfold, while High Hydrostatic Pressure only
threefold and Ultrasounds less than twofold. In addition,
PEF treatment time was ultra-short (\1 s) in comparison
with the other non-thermal technologies (1 h) [33].
As an alternative to thermovinification, PEF treatment
was applied to Pinot Noir mash. Complete opening of the
cells required an applied electric field strength of approx-
imately 40 kV/cm and a specific energy higher than
35 kJ/kg [102, 104], which was considerably lower than
thermovinification and induced similar polyphenolic con-
tent [103].
From a technological prospective, great interest has
been recently given to the application of PEF for the per-
meabilization of the grape skins prior to maceration. The
enhancement of the rate of release of phenolic compounds
during maceration offers several advantages. In the case of
red wines obtained from grapes poor in polyphenols, it can
avoid blending with other grape varieties richer in phenolic
compounds, or use of enzymes. Moreover, it can signifi-
cantly reduce the maceration times. Finally, a richer
polyphenolic content can potentially develop a fresher taste
and intense color also after aging. Table 5 reports the main
treatment conditions, the grape varieties treated as well as
the fractional enhancement of the color intensity, antho-
cyanins content, and total polyphenolic content induced by
PEF on fresh wine, as resulting from primary fermentation
and maceration stage, in comparison with the control wine.
The results are reported as fractional enhancements, due to
the strong differences in the absolute content of the three
parameters reported in the different wines. Table 5 shows
that for a total energy delivered of less than 10 kJ/kg,
polyphenolic release strongly depends on the grape variety.
In addition, color intensity, anthocyanins, and polyphenols
content are not affected in the same way by PEF treatment.
For Tempranillo, electroporation at 10 kV/cm of the
grape skin caused an increase after 96 h of maceration of
the color intensity, anthocyanin content as well as total
polyphenolic index with respect to the control during all
the vinification process. Furthermore, PEF did not affect
the ratio between the components of the red wine color (tint
and yellow, red, and blue components) and the other wine
characteristics of the wine such as alcohol content, total
acidity, pH, reducing sugar concentration, and volatile
acidity [81].
A similar PEF treatment (2–10 kV/cm and 0.4–6.7 kJ/
kg) was applied to three different Spanish grape varieties:
Garnacha, Mazuelo, and Graciano. The evolution during
maceration of color intensity, anthocyanins, and total
polyphenols showed that the efficiency of the treatment
depended on the grape variety. When compared to the
control, PEF treatment was more effective in Mazuelo than
in Garnacha and Graciano varieties, as shown in Table 5
[77]. The higher efficiency observed for Mazuelo was
explained in terms of worse extractability of the phenolic
compounds from Mazuelo grapes than from the other two
grape varieties, suggesting that PEF treatment could be
more useful when the extraction of phenolic compounds
from the grape skins is more difficult [77]. These findings
were also confirmed for Italian varieties of Aglianico,
Piedirosso, and Nebbiolo. PEF treatment resulted in a
significant increase, especially of the total polyphenolic
content, only for Aglianico, while for the other two vari-
eties, only an increase in color intensity was observed.
Remarkably, when considering the absolute value, the total

Table 5 PEF treatment conditions and fractional increase of color intensity, anthocyanin content, and polyphenolic content on fresh wine after
maceration
Grape variety E (kV/ Pulse duration Total energy (kJ/ Enhancement with respect to control Reference
cm) (ls) kg)
Color intensity Anthocyanins Total polyphenols
(%) (%) (%)

Tempranillo 10 3 6.7 23 26 24 [81]

Garnacha 10 3 6.7 29 24 16 [77]
Graciano 2 3 0.4 19 18 14 [77]
Mazuelo 10 3 6.7 62 39 36 [77]
Cabernet 5 3 2.1 48 43 45 [80]
Sauvignon
Cabernet 5 3 3.67 35 28 15 [96]
Sauvignon
Cabernet 5 3 3.67 38 18 25 [95]
Sauvignon
Aglianico 3 10 10 10 29 100 [35]
Piedirosso 3 10 10 33 -3 -9 [35]
Nebbiolo 3 10 10 33 5 -2 [35]

123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
polyphenolic content in the control wine is 1.1 g/l G.A.E.
(Gallic Acid Equivalent) for Aglianico, 10.1 g/l G.A.E. for
Piedirosso, and 12.6 g/l G.A.E. for Nebbiolo. Hence, it is
evident that maximum PEF efficiency was obtained in the
case of difficult polyphenolic release [35].
In the vinification of Cabernet Sauvignon grapes, PEF
treatment (5 kV/cm, 2.1 kJ/kg) in a continuous system of
the grape pomace produced wines richer in color intensity,
total polyphenols, anthocyanins, and tannins and showed
better visual characteristics. In particular, the HPLC anth-
ocyanic profiles of PEF wines were similar to those of
control wine, suggesting that the permeabilization of the
cell membranes of pomace did not produce a selective
effect on any anthocyanin. Furthermore, the maximum
polyphenols release was already reached after 72 h,
reducing the maceration time of Cabernet Sauvignon grapes
from 268 h of the untreated grapes [80]. PEF treatment
resulted more effective also of commercial enzymatic
preparations. For instance, after 3 months of storage, color
intensity, anthocyanic content, and total polyphenol index
were 28, 26, and 11%, respectively, higher in PEF-wine
than in control wine. In contrast, enzymatic preparations
increased at most color intensity by 5%, anthocyanic con-
tent by 11%, and total polyphenol index by 3%, in com-
parison with the control wine [96].
Over 12 months of aging in bottles, red wine from
Cabernet Sauvignon grapes treated by PEF (5 kV/cm and
3.67 kJ/kg) exhibited a higher polyphenolic concentration
and color intensity. Furthermore, no significant differences
from control wine in the content of monomeric anthocya-
nins and quality parameters were recorded. However, the
content of flavan-3-ols, flavonols and hydroxycinnamic
acids and derivatives was higher in PEF-treated wine [95].
Impact of Pulsed Electric Field on Drying
The permeabilization of vegetable tissues caused by PEF
treatment induces an increase in the mass and heat transfer
rates between the cells and their surroundings, which can
be also exploited in order to enhance the efficiency of the
drying process [68]. In particular, in the applications pro-
posed and summarized in Table 6, PEF was configured as a
pretreatment of the drying process, in order to either
enhance the drying rates or to obtain a higher quality
product in terms of structure or solid content. The effect of
PEF pretreatment was only marginal in enhancing mass
transfer in both air drying and osmotic dehydration of
apples [11, 17, 115, 116]. However, it has been shown to be
significantly more effective for osmotic dehydration of
carrots [8–10, 98], peppers [2, 5, 6], mangos [118], and
strawberries [117] and air drying of potatoes [12, 17, 75].
123
Apples
The permeabilization of the cell membrane can be obtained
by means of non-thermal processes, which can stress the
cells while preventing their thermal denaturation. The
comparison of High Hydrostatic Pressure (400 MPa for
10 min at 25 C) and PEF (20 exponential decay pulses of
duration 800 ls and field strength of 1.4 kV/cm) with
thermal treatments (blanching at 60 C for 5 min) showed
that all the pretreatments comparably increased the water
loss from apple slices during osmotic dehydration (under
the conditions described in Table 6). Nevertheless, the
solids gain of PEF-treated samples was similar to untreated
samples, and lower than in the other samples [115]. While
thermal denaturation degrades the overall structure of the
apple tissue, damaging cellular membrane constituents
such as pectin, PEF treatment probably causes these cel-
lular constituents to shrink and to stick to the internal
structure of the apple tissue [59], with the consequence of a
better diffusion of the small molecules (i.e. water) and only
a slight improvement of the diffusivity of the larger mol-
ecules. In another work, it was shown that, while cell
membrane permeabilization, measured through the con-
ductivity index, generally increased with increasing field
strength and pulse number, higher water loss and solids
gain were obtained for the application of 20 pulses at the
intermediate electric field 1.0 kV/cm (1 kJ/kg), while a
lower rate of mass transfer was observed for the same
pulses at 0.5 kV/cm (0.25 kJ/kg) and 2 kV/cm (4 kJ/kg).
Differently from the data reported above, shorter pulse
duration was used (400 ls) in this case [116]. Notwith-
standing the marginal effect on the osmotic dehydration
rate, non-thermal pretreatments can measurably reduce the
degradation of vitamin C, making the application of PEF
especially advantageous when moisture reduction and
minimal alteration in product taste are desired due to
minimal sugar uptake [115]. The application of PEF similar
in intensity (0.9 kV/cm and pulse duration of 100 ls) but
with higher specific energy input (13.5 kJ/kg), under dif-
ferent osmotic dehydration conditions (see Table 6) was
indicated to be optimal in order to increase the rate of water
loss and solid gain, and the solid content in apple samples
was studied [11].
The application of a PEF treatment with energy values
of about 10 kJ/kg was found to be required in order to
increase the porosity of apple tissue and reach the maxi-
mum conductive permeabilization index, using a moderate
electric field strength (1 kV/cm) and pulse duration of
300 ls. Interestingly, the sizes of the induced pores were
smaller than the average sizes of pores in the untreated
samples, and of the characteristic dimension of the tissue
cell wall thickness, suggesting that PEF treatment affects
123
124 Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130

Table 6 Summary of the applications of PEF treatment to vegetable tissue drying

Tissue E (kV/cm) Energy Drying Main effects of PEF treatment Reference
(kJ/kg)

Apple 1.4 3 Osmotic dehydration: Moisture reduction and minimal alteration in [115]
50Brix sucrose product taste due to minimal sugar uptake
T: 40 C, L:S = 25
0.5–2 0.6–9.6 Osmotic dehydration: Cell membrane permeabilization increased with [116]
50Brix sucrose, increasing field strength and pulse number, but
higher water loss and solids gain only at
T: 40 C, L:S = 25
1.0 kV/cm
0.75–1.5 – Convective air oven: No effect on drying rates and diffusion [17]
T: 70 C coefficients, only porosity and structure
changed measurably
0.9 13.5 Osmotic dehydration: Faster drying rates: decrease of sugar [11]
45Brix sucrose concentration in the osmotic solution and
higher solid content in apple samples
Ambient T, L:S = 3
Carrot 0.2–1.6 0.04–2.25 Osmotic dehydration: Accelerated mass transfer of moisture and solute [98]
50Brix sucrose, diffusion due to increased cell membrane
permeabilization
T:40 C, L:S = 25
0.6 19 Centrifugal osmotic dehydration: PEF enhances both water loss and solid gain [8]
65%NaCl/sucrose, during osmotic dehydration
T: 20 C, L/S = 3
0.6 19 Centrifugal osmotic dehydration: PEF treatment and salt addition enhanced the [9]
45–65Brix NaCl ? sucrose, osmotic dehydration kinetics
T: 20 C, L:S = 3
0.6 19 Centrifugal osmotic dehydration: Reduction of air drying time: minimal time [10]
65Brix sucrose, required to dehydrate until 10% residual water
is reduced from 260 min (120 min of osmotic
T: 40 C, L/S = 3
dehydration and 140 min of drying at 60 C) to
Air drying at 40–60 C, Qair: 6 m3/ 230 min
h
Mango 1–3 3.6 Osmotic dehydration: Increased water loss during osmotic dehydration [118]
50Brix sucrose, while minimizing solid gain (minimal
alteration in product taste)
T: 40 C, L/S = 25
Pepper 0.5–2.5 1–15 Osmotic dehydration Increasing field strength resulted in increase in [5]
25Brix water loss from 36 to 50%
NaCl/sucrose,
T: 25–55 C, L/S = 25
1–2 4–16 Osmotic dehydration: Enhanced rate of transfer: increase in water loss [6]
50Brix sucrose or of 11–25% and 2–5% in solids gain, depending
on treatment
25Brix
NaCl/sucrose,
T: 30 C, L/S = 10
1–2 1–25 Osmotic dehydration: Enhanced drying rates significantly only in initial [2]
25Brix stages, but in the final drying stages the rate
was faster in the untreated samples.
NaCl/sucrose,
Measurable cell membrane permeabilization
T: 30 C, L/S = 10 Fluidized bed only up to 30 pulses.
air drying:
T: 60 C, vair: 1 m/s

123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
Table 6 continued
Tissue E (kV/cm) Energy Drying
(kJ/kg)
Potato 0.9–2 4–16 Fluidized bed drying
T: 55–70 C,
vair: 2 m/s
0.75–1.5 – Convective oven drying:
T: 70 C
0.1–1.5 – Convective oven drying:
T: 30–70 C
Strawberry 12 100 Osmotic dehydration:
50Brix sucrose/glucose/salt
T: 40 C, L/S = 10
not only plasmalemma membranes but also the cell wall
integrity of samples [26].
Further studies have showed that for PEF treatments
with an electric field strength between 0.1 and 0.4 kV/cm, a
higher disintegration efficiency, measured both by con-
ductive permeabilization index and textural relaxation
analysis, was obtained for larger pulse durations (10, 100
and 1,000 ls) for the same PEF treatment time. Interest-
ingly, the final texture of the tissue was different for the
same value of permeabilization obtained with different
PEF protocols [34]. Notwithstanding the induced structural
variations, with the compressive strength of apples reduced
between 20 and 50% after treatment, due to increased
porosity and particle density and decreased bulk density,
the drying rates in a convective air oven at 70 C and water
diffusion coefficients of apples were observed not to be
affected by PEF treatment (5–60 pulses of duration 100–
300 ls at 0.75–1.5 kV/cm) [17].
Potatoes
Apparently, the PEF treatment of potatoes had opposite
effects, enhancing the drying rate and with minor changes
the textural properties. For instance, the same PEF treat-
ment (5–120 pulses of duration 100 ls at 0.75–1.5 kV/cm),
that did not work for apples, succeeded in enhancing the air
drying rate of potatoes in a convective oven at 70 C. The
diffusion coefficients increased by up to 40% after 5 pulses,
but they were not affected by a further increase in the
number of pulses (up to 120) [17].
Improved mass transfer rates were also observed dur-
ing fluidized bed drying (conditions reported in Table 6)
due to a PEF treatment (0.35–3 kV/cm, 6.4–16.2 kJ/kg),
yielding dehydrated products of comparable quality to
traditionally processed products [12]. The mass transfer
125
Main effects of PEF treatment Reference
Improved mass transfer rates during fluidized [12]
bed drying
Diffusion coefficients increased by up to 40%, [17]
but no further effect observed increasing the
pulses from 5 to 120 did not affect the diffusion
coefficient
Increase of drying rate with moderate treatment [75]
(0.3–0.4 kV/cm), or decrease of drying T to
20 C
Increase of solid gain of 50–62%, water loss [117]
enhanced by vacuum, use of a salt-sucrose mix
or PEF
enhancement was correlated to the increase in the
permeability of the potato tissue [12]. In order to reach
maximum permeabilization, an energy input of 10 kJ/kg
was sufficient, even in a single pulse [69]. Provided that a
sufficient input energy is delivered, also moderate electric
field strengths (0.3–0.4 kV/cm) can have a significant
effect on the drying of potato tissue. In particular, the
water diffusion coefficient was shown to be a function of
the conductivity disintegration index for convective dry-
ing from 30 to 70 C [75]. High drying rates could also
be obtained by pre-treating the potatoes through freeze-
thawing, but at the cost of a significantly higher energy
expenditure, or by thermal plasmolysis, with the risk of
undesirable changes in product quality. Instead, the mass
transfer enhancement promoted by the PEF treatment of
potato tissue could also reduce drying temperature,
especially for the drying of thermal sensitive products
[75].
While some authors reported that PEF treatment did not
affect the compressive strength of potatoes [17], others
measured changes in the viscoelastic properties of potato
tissue that were ascribed to loss of turgor [45].
Carrots
In the case of carrots, accelerated mass transfer of moisture
and solute diffusion during osmotic dehydration after PEF
treatment were attributed to increased cell membrane per-
meabilization [98]. Applied energy of 2.25 kJ/kg increased
the cell wall permeability (the cell disintegration index rose
to 0.84), which resulted in increased mass transfer rates
during osmotic dehydration [98]. On the other hand, cell
permeabilization caused softening of the dehydrated
product [98] as well as a decrease in the firmness of the
rehydrated product [8].
123
126
The PEF-assisted osmotic dehydration of carrots
(detailed in Table 6), under centrifugation (2,4009g),
stirring (250 rpm) and with salt addition to the sucrose
solution (NaCl/sucrose solutions 0%/65%, 5%/60% and
15%/50%) also caused the enhancement of the drying
kinetics [9]. In particular, when PEF-assisted centrifugal
osmotic dehydration was combined with conventional air
drying, the air drying time was significantly reduced [10].
In both cases, the PEF treatment consisted of the applica-
tion of a total energy of 19 kJ/kg by pulses of 100 ls
duration with an electric field intensity 0.6 kV/cm. The
PEF treatment, followed by osmotic dehydration in a
sucrose solution of 65% (w/w) at 40 C under 2,4009g for
120 min, reduced the following air drying time at 60 C to
10% residual moisture from 140 to 110 min [10].
Peppers
The use of PEF (up to 2.5 kV/cm and 15 kJ/kg) was
evaluated as a pretreatment to the osmotic dehydration of
bell peppers at 35 C, in comparison with the osmotic
dehydration conducted at higher temperatures (45 and
55 C). While a similar increase of water loss was induced
by higher temperatures as well as PEF (from 30 to 50%),
increasing the temperature decreased vitamin C concen-
tration and carotenoids content more than PEF. The results
obtained at field strength 2.5 kV/cm were comparable, and
in some cases better than those at an elevated temperature
of 55 C, suggesting that a high intensity electric field
could be an attractive alternative to conventional thermal
processing [5]. Under similar PEF conditions, the water
loss was increased by 11–25% and solids gain of 2–5%
when compared to the untreated samples in the two
osmotic solutions (50Brix sucrose or 25Brix NaCl/
sucrose), due to the irreversible permeabilization within the
cell membrane of cellular materials as well as the initiation
and growth of the pores [6].
Notwithstanding the induced cell permeabilization,
which increased with field strength and higher pulse
number, PEF treatment (1–2 kV/cm, 400 ls duration and
energy from 1 to 25 kJ/kg) was not effective as a pre-
treatment to air drying at 60 C in a fluidized bed dryer (air
velocity of 1 m2/s). Pre-treating pepper with PEF enhanced
initial drying rates significantly, but in the final drying
stages, the mass transfer rate of water was faster in the
untreated sample [2].
Other Vegetable Tissues
The development of a method for the in situ visualization
of changes related to electropermeabilization of plant tissue
(onion epidermis), through staining with neutral red and a
camera connected to a stereomicroscope, set a threshold
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
level of a field strength of 0.35 kV/cm in order to achieve
significant cell permeabilization. In addition, the final
conductivity increase has been observed as being directly
proportional to the number of permeabilized cells [44].
Hence, the combination of the characteristic treatment time
of the conductive disintegration index with the total energy
consumption was used to experimentally determine the
optimal electric field strength for the tissue permeabiliza-
tion of different vegetables, such as aubergine, pear,
banana, apple, potato, carrot, and cucumber. It resulted that
the optimal electric field strength depends on the type of
tissue and is higher for cells having developed a secondary
cell wall, such as aubergine (0.5–0.6 kV/cm), pear and
banana (0.9–1.1 kV/cm), while for apple, potato, carrot,
and cucumber, the optimal electric field strength value was
found to be in the range 0.2–0.4 kV/cm [24].
Notwithstanding the considerations reported above on
the dependence of the mass transfer on tissue permeabili-
zation, the comparison of different permeabilization
methods, such as PEF (1–3 kV/cm and 10–100 pulses),
High Hydrostatic Pressure, supercritical CO2, and freezing
in the osmotic dehydration of mangos [118] and straw-
berries [117], showed that while water loss can be quite
well correlated to the permeabilization achieved, indepen-
dent of the method applied, solid gain was instead affected
by the pretreatment. For instance, significant differences
were observed for mangos in the solids gained at similar
permeabilization values, to an extent that it was claimed
that the type of pretreatment had a greater influence on the
solids gained than the extent of cell membrane permeabi-
lization. In particular, PEF treatment increased water loss
while minimized solids gain, thus causing a minimal
alteration in the product taste, yielding to products of
acceptable color as the same fresh mangos [118]. In the
case of strawberries, solid gain was higher than untreated
samples of 96–270% for the prefrozen treatment, 40–160%
for High Hydrostatic Pressure and 50–62% for PEF [117].
The drying rates of okra were also significantly influ-
enced by the different pretreatments. The control samples
had the lowest coefficient of diffusivity while samples
pretreated with PEF at maximum energy input (4 kV/cm)
had the highest coefficient [1].
Conclusions and Future Perspectives
PEF technology is likely to support many different appli-
cations in the food industry, directed at enhancing process
intensification and/or delivering new products to the mar-
ket. In spite of the high potential of this technology, not all
the possible applications have been exploited yet, due to
the lack of detailed knowledge about the mechanisms of
electroporation and pore resealing.
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
This technology, through the induction of membrane
permeabilization of the cells, offers the potential to effec-
tively enhance mass transfer from vegetable and animal
cells, opening the doors to significant energy savings in
drying, to increased yields in juice expression, to the
recovery of valuable cell metabolites, with functional
properties, or even to the functionalization of foods. For
instance, the PEF treatment of the grape pomaces during
vinification, can significantly increase the polyphenolic
content of the wine, thus improving not only the quality
parameters (i.e. color, odor, taste…) but also the beneficial
health properties (i.e. antioxidant activity). Furthermore,
PEF treatments can also be applied to enhance mass
transfer into the food matrices, by permeabilization of the
cell membranes and enhanced infusion of functional
compounds or antimicrobials into foods, minimally altering
their organoleptic attributes.
Data reported in this review show that the energy
required by most applications is of about 10 kJ/kg of raw
material, suggesting that PEF pretreatments can represent
an economically viable option to other thermal or chemical
permeabilization techniques. However, further research
and development activities are still required for the opti-
mization of PEF technology in process intensification,
especially in the development of industrial-scale genera-
tors, capable to provide the required electric field.
References
1. Adedeji AA, Gachovska TK, Ngadi MO, Raghavan GSV (2008)
Effect of pretreatments on drying characteristics of okra. Dry
Technol 26:1251–1256
2. Ade-Omowaye BIO, Talens P, Angersbach A, Knorr D (2003)
Kinetics of osmotic dehydration of red bell peppers as influ-
enced by pulsed electric field pretreatment. Food Res Int
36:475–483
3. Ade-Omowaye BIO, Angersbach A, Eshtiaghi NM, Knorr D
(2001) Impact of high intensity electric field pulses on cell
permeabilisation and as pre-processing step in coconut pro-
cessing. Innov Food Sci Emerg 1:203–209
4. Ade-Omowaye BIO, Angersbach A, Taiwo KA, Knorr D (2001)
The use of pulsed electric fields in producing juice from paprika
(Capsicum annuum L.). J Food Process Pres 25:353–365
5. Ade-Omowaye BIO, Rastogi NK, Angersbach A, Knorr D
(2002) Osmotic dehydration of bell peppers: influence of high
intensity electric field pulses and elevated temperature treat-
ment. J Food Eng 54:35–43
6. Ade-Omowaye BIO, Rastogi NK, Angersbach A, Knorr D
(2003) Combined effects of pulsed electric field pre-treatment
and partial osmotic dehydration on air drying behaviour of red
bell pepper. J Food Eng 60:89–98
7. Aguilera JM, Stanley DW, Baker KM (2000) New dimensions
in microstructure of food products. Trends Food Sci Tech 11:
3–9
8. Amami E, Fersi A, Khezami L, Vorobiev E, Kechaou N (2007)
Centrifugal osmotic dehydration and rehydration of carrot tissue
127
pre-treated by pulsed electric field. Lwt-Food Sci Technol
40:1156–1166
9. Amami E, Fersi A, Vorobiev E, Kechaou N (2007) Osmotic
dehydration of carrot tissue enhanced by pulsed electric field,
salt and centrifugal force. J Food Eng 83:605–613
10. Amami E, Khezami L, Vorobiev E, Kechaou N (2008) Effect of
pulsed electric field and osmotic dehydration pretreatment on
the convective drying of carrot tissue. Dry Technol 26:231–238
11. Amami E, Vorobiev E, Kechaou N (2005) Effect of pulsed
electric field on the osmotic dehydration and mass transfer
kinetics of apple tissue. Dry Technol 23:581–595
12. Angersbach A, Knorr D (1997) High intensity electric field
pulses as pretreatment for affecting dehydration characteristics
and rehydration properties of potato cubes. Nahrung-Food
41:194–200
13. Angersbach A, Heinz V, Knorr D (1999) Electrophysiological
model of intact and processed plant tissues: cell disintegration
criteria. Biotechnol Progr 15:753–762
14. Angersbach A, Heinz V, Knorr D (2002) Evaluation of process-
induced dimensional changes in the membrane structure of
biological cells using impedance measurement. Biotechnol Prog
18:597–603
15. Angersbach A, Heinz V, Knorr D (1997) Effects of pulsed
electric fields on cell membranes in real food systems. Innov
Food Sci Emerg (IFSET) 1:135–149
16. Archie GE (1942) The electrical resistivity log as an aid in
determining some reservoir characteristics. Transactions of
AIME 146:54–62
17. Arevalo P, Ngadi MO, Bazhal MI, Raghavan GSV (2004)
Impact of pulsed electric fields on the dehydration and physical
properties of apple and potato slices. Dry Technol 22:1233–
1246
18. Barbosa-Canovas GV, Vega-Mercado H (1996) Dehydration of
foods. Chapman & Hall, New York
19. Barbosa-Canovas GV, Gongora-Nieto MM, Pothakamury UR,
Swanson BG (1999) Preservation of foods with pulsed electric
fields. In: Taylor SL (ed) Food science and technology.
Academic Press, San Diego
20. Barsotti L, Cheftel JC (1999) Food processing by pulsed electric
fields. II. Biological aspects. Food Rev Int 15:181–213
21. Barsotti L, Merle P, Cheftel JC (1999) Food processing by
pulsed electric fields. I. Physical aspects. Food Rev Int 15:
163–180
22. Battipaglia G, De Vito F, Donsı̀ F, Ferrari G, Pataro G (2009)
Enhancement of polyphenols extraction from involucral bracts
of artichokes. In: Vorobiev E, Lebovka N, Van Hecke E, Lan-
oisellé J-L (eds) BFE 2009, international conference on bio and
food electrotechnologies. Université de Technologie de Com-
piègne, Compiègne, France, pp 40–44
23. Bautista-Ortin AB, Martinez-Cutillas A, Ros-Garcia JM, Lopez-
Roca JM, Gomez-Plaza E (2005) Improving colour extraction
and stability in red wines: the use of maceration enzymes and
enological tannins. Int J of Food Sci Tech 40:867–878
24. Bazhal M, Lebovka N, Vorobiev E (2003) Optimisation of
pulsed electric field strength for electroplasmolysis of vegetable
tissues. Biosyst Eng 86:339–345
25. Bazhal MI, Lebovka NI, Vorobiev E (2001) Pulsed electric field
treatment of apple tissue during compression for juice extrac-
tion. J Food Eng 50:129–139
26. Bazhal MI, Ngadi MO, Raghavan VGS (2003) Influence of
pulsed electroplasmolysis on the porous structure of apple tis-
sue. Biosyst Eng 86:51–57
27. Boussetta N, Lebovka N, Vorobiev E, Adenier H, Bedel-Clou-
tour C, Lanoiselle JL (2009) Electrically assisted extraction of
soluble matter from chardonnay grape skins for polyphenol
recovery. J Agr Food Chem 57:1491–1497
123
128
28. Bouzrara H, Vorobiev E (2001) Non-thermal pressing and
washing of fresh sugarbeet cossettes combined with a pulsed
electrical field. Zuckerindustrie 126:463–466
29. Bouzrara H, Vorobiev E (2003) Solid-liquid expression of cel-
lular materials enhanced by pulsed electric field. Chem Eng
Process 42:249–257
30. Brodelius PE, Funk C, Shillito RD (1988) Permeabilization of
cultivated plant cells by electroporation for release of intracel-
lularly stored secondary products. Plant Cell Rep 7:186–188
31. Chalermchat Y, Dejmek P (2005) Effect of pulsed electric field
pretreatment on solid-liquid expression from potato tissue.
J Food Eng 71:164–169
32. Chang DC (1992) Structure and dynamics of electric field–
induced membrane pores as revealed by rapid-freezing electron
microscopy. In: Chang DC, Chassy BM, Saunders JA, Sowers
AE (eds) Guide to electroporation and electrofusion. Academic
Press, California, pp 9–28
33. Corrales M, Toepfl S, Butz P, Knorr D, Tauscher B (2008)
Extraction of anthocyanins from grape by-products assisted by
ultrasonics, high hydrostatic pressure or pulsed electric fields: a
comparison. Innov Food Sci Emerg 9:85–91
34. De Vito F, Ferrari G, Lebovka NI, Shynkaryk NV, Vorobiev E
(2008) Pulse duration and efficiency of soft cellular tissue dis-
integration by pulsed electric fields. Food Bioprocess Tech
1:307–313
35. Donsı̀ F, Ferrari G, Pataro G (in preparation) Effect of grape
variety on PEF-assisted vinification
36. Dörnenburg H, Knorr D (1993) Cellular permeabilization of
cultured plant tissues by high electric field pulses of ultra high
pressure for the recovery of secondary metabolites. Food Bio-
technol 7:35–48
37. El-Belghiti K, Moubarik A, Vorobiev E (2008) Aqueous
extraction of solutes from fennel (Foeniculum vulgare) assisted
by pulsed electric field. J Food Process Eng 31:548–563
38. El-Belghiti K, Vorobiev E (2004) Mass transfer of sugar from
beets enhanced by pulsed electric field. Food Bioprod Process
82:226–230
39. El-Belghiti K, Rabhi Z, Vorobiev E (2005) Effect of centrifugal
force on the aqueous extraction of solute from sugar beet tissue
pretreated by a pulsed electric field. J Food Process Eng 28:
346–358
40. El-Belghiti K, Rabhi Z, Vorobiev E (2007) Effect of process
parameters on solute centrifugal extraction from electroper-
meabilized carrot gratings. Food Bioprod Process 85:24–28
41. El-Belghiti K, Vorobiev E (2005) Modelling of solute aqueous
extraction from carrots subjected to a pulsed electric field
pre-treatment. Biosyst Eng 90:289–294
42. Eshtiaghi M, Knorr D (1999) Method for treating sugar beet.
PCT/FR99/01368
43. Eshtiaghi MN, Knorr D (2002) High electric field pulse pre-
treatment: potential for sugar beet processing. J Food Eng
52:265–272
44. Fincan M, Dejmek P (2002) In situ visualization of the effect of
a pulsed electric field on plant tissue. J Food Eng 55:223–230
45. Fincan M, Dejmek P (2003) Effect of osmotic pretreatment and
pulsed electric field on the viscoelastic properties of potato tis-
sue. J Food Eng 59:169–175
46. Fincan M, De Vito F, Dejmek P (2004) Pulsed electric field
treatment for solid-liquid extraction of red beetroot pigment.
J Food Eng 64:381–388
47. Frankel EN, Kanner J, German JB, Parks E, Kinsella JE (1993)
Inhibition of oxidation of human low-density-lipoprotein by
phenolic substances in red wine. Lancet 341:454–457
48. Gachovska TK, Adedeji AA, Ngadi MO (2009) Influence of
pulsed electric field energy on the damage degree in alfalfa
tissue. J Food Eng 95:558–563
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
49. Gachovska TK, Ngadi MO, Raghvan GSV (2006) Pulsed elec-
tric field assisted juice extraction from alfalfa. Canadian Biosyst
Eng 48:3.33–3.37
50. Grahl T, Märkl H (1996) Killing of microorganisms by pulsed
electric fields. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 45:148–157
51. Grimi N, Lebovka NI, Vorobiev E, Vaxelaire J (2009) Effect of
a pulsed electric field treatment on expression behavior and juice
quality of chardonnay grape. Food Biophys 4:191–198
52. Grimi N, Praporscic I, Lebovka N, Vorobiev E (2007) Selective
extraction from carrot slices by pressing and washing enhanced
by pulsed electric fields. Sep Purif Technol 58:267–273
53. Guderjan M, Elez-Martinez P, Knorr D (2007) Application of
pulsed electric fields at oil yield and content of functional food
ingredients at the production of rapeseed oil. Innov Food Sci
Emerg 8:55–62
54. Guderjan M, Toepfl S, Angersbach A, Knorr D (2005) Impact of
pulsed electric field treatment on the recovery and quality of
plant oils. J Food Eng 67:281–287
55. Han D, Kim SJ, Kim SH, Kim DM (1998) Repeated regenera-
tion of degraded red beet juice pigments in the presence of
antioxidants. J Food Sci 63:69–72
56. Hasler CM (2000) The changing face of functional foods. J Am
Coll Nutr 19:499S–506S
57. Hasler CM (2002) Functional foods: benefits, concerns and
challenges-a position paper from the American Council on
Science and Health. J Nutr 132:3772–3781
58. Heinz V, Toepfl S, Knorr D (2003) Impact of temperature on
lethality and energy efficiency of apple juice pasteurization by
pulsed electric fields treatment. Innov Food Sci Emerg 4:167–175
59. Jemai AB, Vorobiev E (2002) Effect of moderate electric field
pulses on the diffusion coefficient of soluble substances from
apple slices. Int J Food Sci Tech 37:73–86
60. Jemai AB, Vorobiev E (2003) Enhanced leaching from sugar
beet cossettes by pulsed electric field. J Food Eng 59:405–412
61. Jemai AB, Vorobiev E (2006) Pulsed electric field assisted
pressing of sugar beet slices: towards a novel process of cold
juice extraction. Biosyst Eng 93:57–68
62. Jemai AB, Vorobiev E (2001) Enhancement of the diffusion
characteristics of apple slices due to moderate electric field
pulses (MEFP). In: Welti-Chanes J, Barbosa-Canovas GV,
Aguilera JM (eds) Proceedings of the 8th International Congress
on Engineering and Food, vol II. ICEF 8, Puebla City, México,
pp 1504–1508
63. Jones GV, Davis RE (2000) Climate influences on grapevine
phenology, grape composition, and wine production and quality
for Bordeaux, France. Ame J Enol Viticult 51:249–261
64. Kandušer M, Miklavčič D (2008) Electroporation in biological
cell and tissue: an overview. In: Vorobiev E, Lebovka NI (eds)
Electrotechonologies for extraction from food plants and bio-
material. Springer, New York, pp 1–37
65. Kinosita K, Hibino M, Itoh H, Shigemori M, Hirano K, Kirino Y,
Hayakaawa T (1992) Events of membrane electroporation visu-
alized on a time scale from microsecond to second. In: Chang DC,
Chassy BM, Saunders JA, Sowers AE (eds) Guide to electropor-
ation and Electrofusion. Academic Press, California, pp 47–62
66. Knorr D (1999) Novel approaches in food-processing technol-
ogy: new technologies for preserving foods and modifying
function. Curr Opin Biotech 10:485–491
67. Knorr D (2003) Impact of non-thermal processing on plant
metabolites. J Food Eng 56:131–134
68. Knorr D, Angersbach A, Eshtiaghi MN, Heinz V, Dong-Un Lee
DU (2001) Processing concepts based on high intensity electric
field pulses. Trends Food Sci Technol 12:129–135
69. Knorr D, Angersbach A (1998) Impact of high-intensity elec-
trical field pulses on plant membrane permeabilization. Trends
Food Sci Technol 9:185–191
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
70. Knorr D, Geulen M, Grahl T, Sitzmann W (1994) Food appli-
cation of high-electric-field pulses. Trends Food Sci Technol
5:71–75
71. Lebovka NI, Bazhal MI, Vorobiev E (2002) Estimation of
characteristic damage time of food materials in pulsed-electric
fields. J Food Eng 54:337–346
72. Lebovka NI, Praporscic I, Vorobiev E (2004) Combined treat-
ment of apples by pulsed electric fields and by heating at
moderate temperature. J Food Eng 65:211–217
73. Lebovka NI, Praporscic L, Vorobiev E (2003) Enhanced
expression of juice from soft vegetable tissues by pulsed electric
fields: consolidation stages analysis. J Food Eng 59:309–317
74. Lebovka NI, Shynkaryk MV, El-Belghiti K, Benjelloun H,
Vorobiev E (2007) Plasmolysis of sugarbeet: pulsed electric
fields and thermal treatment. J Food Eng 80:639–644
75. Lebovka NI, Shynkaryk NV, Vorobiev E (2007) Pulsed electric
field enhanced drying of potato tissue. J Food Eng 78:606–613
76. Loginova KV, Shynkaryk MV, Lebovka NI, Vorobiev E (2010)
Acceleration of soluble matter extraction from chicory with
pulsed electric fields. J Food Eng 96:374–379
77. Lopez N, Puertolas E, Condon S, Alvarez I, Raso J (2008)
Effects of pulsed electric fields on the extraction of phenolic
compounds during the fermentation of must of Tempranillo
grapes. Innov Food Sci Emerg 9:477–482
78. Lopez N, Puertolas E, Condon S, Raso J, Alvarez I (2009)
Enhancement of the extraction of betanine from red beetroot by
pulsed electric fields. J Food Eng 90:60–66
79. Lopez N, Puertolas E, Condon S, Raso J, Alvarez I (2009)
Enhancement of the solid-liquid extraction of sucrose from
sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) by pulsed electric fields. Lwt-Food
Sci Technol 42:1674–1680
80. Lopez N, Puertolas E, Hernandez-Orte P, Alvarez I, Raso J
(2009) Effect of a pulsed electric field treatment on the antho-
cyanins composition and other quality parameters of Cabernet
Sauvignon freshly fermented model wines obtained after dif-
ferent maceration times. Lwt-Food Sci Technol 42:1225–1231
81. Lopez N, Puertolas E, Condon S, Alvarez I, Raso J (2008)
Application of pulsed electric fields for improving the macera-
tion process during vinification of red wine: influence of grape
variety. Eur Food Res Technol 227:1099–1107
82. Luo W, Zhang R, Wang L, Chen J, Guan Z, Liao X, Mo, M
(2008) Effects of PEF-assisted extraction of anthocyanin in red
raspberry. Annual report—conference on electrical insulation
and dielectric phenomena, CEIDP. Québec City, Canada: IEEE
83. Mclellan MR, Kime RL, Lind LR (1991) Electroplasmolysis and
other treatments to improve apple juice yield. J Sci Food Agr
57:303–306
84. Monagas M, Bartolome B, Gomez-Cordoves C (2005) Updated
knowledge about the presence of phenolic compounds in wine.
Crit Rev Food Sci 45:85–118
85. Moreno-Arribas MV, Polo MC (2005) Winemaking biochem-
istry and microbiology: current knowledge and future trends.
Crit Rev Food Sci 45:265–286
86. Neumann E (1996) Gene delivery by membrane electroporation.
In: Lynchm PT, Davey MR (eds) Electrical manipulation of
cells. Chapman and Hall, New York, pp 157–184
87. Neumann E, Sprafke A, Boldt E, Wolf H (1992) Biophysical
considerations of membrane electroporation. In: Chang D,
Chassy B, Saunders J, Sowers A (eds) Guide to electroporation
and electrofusion. Academic Press, California, pp 77–90
88. Nichenametla SN, Taruscio TG, Barney DL, Exon JH (2006) A
review of the effects and mechanisms of polyphenolics in can-
cer. Crit Rev Food Sci 46:161–183
89. Papchenko AY, Bologa MK, Berzoi SE, Paukov JN, Chebanu
VG, Rudkovskaya GV (1988) Electroplasmolyzer for processing
vegetable stock
129
90. Pataro G, Donsı̀ G, Ferrari G (2009) The effect of conventional
and ohmic heating on the permeability of cell membrane in
vegetables tissue. In: Vorobiev E, Lebovka N, Van Hecke E,
Lanoisellé J-L (eds) BFE 2009, international conference on bio
and food electrotechnologies. Université de Technologie de
Compiègne, Compiègne, France, pp 246–250
91. Praporscic I, Ghnimi S, Vorobiev E (2005) Enhancement of
pressing of sugar beet cuts by combined ohmic heating and
pulsed electric field treatment. J Food Process Pres 29:378–389
92. Praporscic I, Lebovka N, Vorobiev E, Mietton-Peuchot M
(2007) Pulsed electric field enhanced expression and juice
quality of white grapes. Sep Purif Technol 52:520–526
93. Praporscic I, Shynkaryk MV, Lebovka NI, Vorobiev E (2007)
Analysis of juice colour and dry matter content during pulsed
electric field enhanced expression of soft plant tissues. J Food
Eng 79:662–670
94. Praporscic L, Muravetchi V, Vorobiev E (2004) Constant rate
expressing of juice from biological tissue enhanced by pulsed
electric field. Dry Technol 22:2395–2408
95. Puertolas E, Saldana G, Condon S, Alvarez I, Raso J (2010)
Evolution of polyphenolic compounds in red wine from Cab-
ernet Sauvignon grapes processed by pulsed electric fields dur-
ing aging in bottle. Food Chem 119:1063–1070
96. Puertolas E, Saldana G, Condon S, Alvarez I, Raso J (2009) A
comparison of the effect of macerating enzymes and pulsed
electric fields technology on phenolic content and color of red
wine. J Food Sci 74:C647–C652
97. Rao MA, Lund DB (1986) Kinetics of thermal softening of
food—a review. J Food Process Pres 10:311–329
98. Rastogi NK, Eshtiaghi MN, Knorr D (1999) Accelerated mass
transfer during osmotic dehydration of high intensity electrical
field pulse pretreated carrots. J Food Sci 64:1020–1023
99. Rogov IA, Gorbatov AV (1974) Physical methods of food
treatment. Pischevaya promyshlennost, Moscow (in Russian)
100. Sacchi KL, Bisson LF, Adams DO (2005) A review of the effect
of winemaking techniques on phenolic extraction in red wines.
Am J Enol Viticult 56:197–206
101. Sack M, Bluhm H (2008) New measurement methods for an
industrial scale electroporation facility for sugar beets. IEEE
Trans Ind Appl 44(4):1074–1083
102. Sack M, Eing C, Stangle R, Wolf A, Muller G, Sigler J, Stu-
kenbrock L (2009) Electric measurement of the electroporation
efficiency of mash from wine grapes. IEEE T Dielect El In
16:1329–1337
103. Sack M, Chr Eing, Frey W, Chr Schultheiss, Bluhm H,
Attmann F, Stängle R, Wolf A, Müller G (2009) Research on
electroporation devices in industrial scale at Forschungszen-
trum Karlsruhe and cooperation partners. In: Vorobiev E,
Lebovka N, Van Hecke E, Lanoisellé J-L (eds) BFE 2009,
International Conference on Bio and Food Electrotechnologies.
Université de Technologie de Compiègne, Compiègne, France,
pp 265–270
104. Sack M, Müller G (2008) Optimisation of an electroporation
device for mash. In: 11th International conference on optimi-
zation of electrical and electronic equipment (OPTIM ‘08), 2008
Brasov, R. Transilvania University of Brasov
105. Sale AJH, Hamilton WA (1967) Effects of high electric fields on
microorganisms I. Killing of bacteria and yeast. Biochim Bio-
phys Acta 148:781–788
106. Schilling S, Alber T, Toepfl S, Neidhart S, Knorr D, Schieber A,
Carle R (2007) Effects of pulsed electric field treatment of apple
mash on juice yield and quality attributes of apple juices. Innov
Food Sci Emerg 8:127–134
107. Schlegov JA, Koval NP, Furer LA, Zargarian SY, Skimbov AA,
Belik VG, Zharik BN, Papchenko AY, Ryabinsky FG, Sergeev
AS (1986) Electroplasmolyzer for processing vegetable stock
123
130
108. Schultheiss C, Bluhm HJ, Mayer HG, Sack M, Kern M (2004)
Principle of electroporation and development of industrial
devices. Zuckerindustrie 129:40–44
109. Schultheiss C, Bluhm H, Mayer HG, Kern M, Michelberger T,
Witte G (2002) Processing of sugar beets with pulsed-electric
fields. IEEE T Plasma Sci 30:1547–1551
110. Schwartzberg HG (1983) Expression-related properties. In: Pe-
leg M, Bagley EB (eds) Physical properties of food. AVI Publ.
Comp. Inc, Westport
111. Schwartzberg HG (1997) Expression of fluid from biological
solids. Sep Purif Methods 26:1–213
112. Soliva-Fortuny R, Balasa A, Knorr D, Martin-Belloso O (2009)
Effects of pulsed electric fields on bioactive compounds in
foods: a review. Trends Food Sci Technol 20:544–556
113. Spranger MI, Climaco MC, Sun BS, Eiriz N, Fortunato C, Nunes
A, Leandro MC, Avelar ML, Belchior AP (2004) Differentiation
of red winemaking technologies by phenolic and volatile com-
position. Anal Chim Acta 513:151–161
114. Stintzing FC, Carle R (2007) Betalains—emerging prospects for
food scientists. Trends Food Sci Technol 18:514–525
115. Taiwo KA, Angersbach A, Ade-Omowaye BIO, Knorr D (2001)
Effects of pretreatments on the diffusion kinetics and some
quality parameters of osmotically dehydrated apple slices. J Agr
Food Chem 49:2804–2811
116. Taiwo KA, Angersbach A, Knorr D (2003) Effects of pulsed
electric field on quality factors and mass transfer during osmotic
dehydration of apples. J Food Process Eng 26:31–48
117. Taiwo KA, Eshtiaghi MN, Ade-Omowaye BIO, Knorr D (2003)
Osmotic dehydration of strawberry halves: influence of osmotic
agents and pretreatment methods on mass transfer and product
characteristics. Int J Food Sci Tech 38:693–707
118. Tedjo W, Taiwo KA, Eshtiaghi MN, Knorr D (2002) Compar-
ison of pretreatment methods on water and solid diffusion
kinetics of osmotically dehydrated mangos. J Food Eng 53:
133–142
119. Tsong TY (1991) Minireview. Electroporation of cell mem-
branes. Biophys J 60:297–306
120. Tsuruta T, Ishimoto Y, Masuoka T (1998) Effects of glycerol on
intracellular ice formation and dehydration of onion epidermis.
In: Diller KR (ed) Biotransport: heat and mass transfer in living
systems
121. Vorobiev E, Jemai AB, Bouzrara H, Lebovka NI, Bazhal MI
(2005) Pulsed electric field assisted extraction of juice from food
plants. In: Barbosa-Canovas G, Tapia MS, Cano MP (eds) Novel
food processing technologies. CRC, New York, pp 105–130
123
Food Eng Rev (2010) 2:109–130
122. Vorobiev E, Lebovka NI (2006) Extraction of intercellular
components by pulsed electric fields. In: Raso J, Heinz H (eds)
Pulsed electric field technology for the food industry. Funda-
mentals and applications. Springer, New York, pp 153–194
123. Vorobiev E, Lebovka NI (2008) Pulsed-electric-fields-induced
effects in plant tissues: fundamental aspects and perspectives of
applications. In: Vorobiev E, Lebovka NI (eds) Electrotecho-
nologies for extraction from food plants and biomaterial.
Springer, New York, pp 39–82
124. Weaver JC, Chizmadzhev Yu A (1996) Theory of electropora-
tion: a review. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 41:135–160
125. Yin YG, Han YZ, Han Y (2006) Pulsed electric field extraction
of polysaccharide from Rana temporaria chensinensis David. Int
J Pharm 312:33–36
126. Yin YG, Cui YR, Ding HW (2008) Optimization of betulin
extraction process from inonotus obliquus with pulsed electric
fields. Innov Food Sci Emerg 9:306–310
127. Yin YG, He GD (2008) A fast high-intensity pulsed electric
fields (PEF)-assisted extraction of dissoluble calcium from bone.
Sep Purif Technol 61:148–152
128. Zhang QH, Monsalve-Gonzalez A, Barbosa-Cánovas GV,
Swanson BG (1994) Inactivation of S. cerevisiae in apple juice
by square-wave and exponential-decay pulsed electric fields.
J Food Process Eng 17:469–478
129. Zhang Q, Chang FJ, Barbosa-Canovas GV, Swanson BG (1994)
Inactivation of microorganisms in a semisolid model food using
high voltage pulsed electric fields. Lwt-Food Sci Technol 27:
538–543
130. Zhang Y, Hu XS, Chen F, Wu JH, Liao XJ, Wang ZF (2008)
Stability and colour characteristics of PEF-treated cyanidin-3-
glucoside during storage. Food Chem 106:669–676
131. Zhang Y, Liao XJ, Ni YY, Wu JH, Hu XS, Wang Z, Chen F
(2007) Kinetic analysis of the degradation and its color change
of cyanidin-3-glucoside exposed to pulsed electric field. Eur
Food Res Technol 224:597–603
132. Zimmermann U (1986) Electrical breakdown, electropermeabi-
lization and electrofusion. Rev Physiol Biochem Pharmacol
105:175–256
133. Zimmermann U, Neil GA (1996) Electromanipulation of cells.
CRC Press, Boca Raton pp. 1 ± 106
134. Zimmermann U, Pilwat G, Riemann F (1974) Dielectric
breakdown of cell membranes. Biophys J 14:881–899