Thermosonication processing of quince (<i>Cydonia Oblonga</i>) juice: Effects on total phenolics, ascorbic acid, antioxidant capacity, color and sensory properties

Yıkmış, Seydi; Aksu, Harun; Çöl, Başak Gökçe; Alpaslan, Mehmet

doi:10.1590/1413-7054201943019919

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Food Science and Technology • Ciênc. agrotec. 43 • 2019 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-7054201943019919 copy

Thermosonication processing of quince (Cydonia Oblonga) juice: Effects on total phenolics, ascorbic acid, antioxidant capacity, color and sensory properties

Processamento de termosonicação do suco de quince (Cydonia Oblonga): Efeitos nos fenólicos totais, ácido ascórbico, capacidade antioxidante, cor e propriedades sensoriais

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Quince (Cydonia oblonga) is an important fruit for the juice industry because of its nutritional properties that support health. In this study, the aim was to optimize the bioactive components (total phenolic content, ascorbic acid and total antioxidant capacity) and color values (L *, a * and b *) using thermosonication treatment, which is a mild ultrasound treatment, on quince juice. Sensory evaluation was also performed with optimization parameters. For this purpose, thermosonication treatment was completed at different temperatures (30, 35, 40, 45 and 50 °C), different amplitudes (40%, 45%, 50%, 55% and 60%) and at different times (2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 min). At the end of the thermosonication treatment, the optimization values for quince juice were 38.7 °C, 5.6 minutes and 50.9 amplitude. Total phenolic content was 591.15 mg GAE/L, ascorbic acid 3.78 mg/100 mL, DPPH 0.214 mg TEAC/mL and CUPRAC 0.149 mg TEAC/mL. Total phenolic and total antioxidant levels were higher in quince juice treated with thermosonication than in fresh quince juice. Thermosonication treatment decreased the amount of ascorbic acid. Thermosonation treatments applied to quince juices were successful in general microbiological evaluation. In sensory evaluation by panelists, the thermosonicated sample was found to be the most admired. As a result, quince juice treated with thermosonication is considered promising to improve bioactive components compared to thermal pasteurization.

Index terms:
Non-thermal; ultrasound; pasteurization.

Editora da Universidade Federal de Lavras Editora da UFLA, Caixa Postal 3037 - 37200-900 - Lavras - MG - Brasil, Telefone: 35 3829-1115 - Lavras - MG - Brazil
E-mail: revista.ca.editora@ufla.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] ^*Corresponding author: syikmis@nku.edu.tr

Sample	Encoded Independent Variables			Dependent Variables
Sample	Temperature (X₁)	Time (X₂)	Amplitude (X₃)	Total phenolic content (mg GAE/L)	Ascorbic acid content (mg/100 mL)	DPPH (mg TEAC/mL)	CUPRAC (mg TEAC/mL)	L*	a*	b*
PW				479.71	2.86	0.160	0.116	42.46	15.8	25.1
C				538.14	3.92	0.186	0.127	44.19	16.54	26.45
1	1.68 (50)	0 (6)	0 (50)	560.76	3.14	0.197	0.138	43.90	15.86	21.51
2	1 (45)	-1 (4)	1 (55)	564.02	3.05	0.205	0.141	45.79	17.74	23.10
3	-1 (35)	1 (8)	1 (55)	551.27	3.88	0.201	0.141	44.85	17.59	27.82
4	-1 (35)	-1 (4)	-1 (45)	608.64	3.79	0.208	0.150	43.42	17.81	24.34
5	1 (45)	1 (8)	-1 (45)	546.23	3.42	0.181	0.147	42.18	16.57	26.32
6	1 (45)	1 (8)	1 (55)	609.61	3.84	0.207	0.146	44.44	16.34	23.63
7	1 (45)	-1 (4)	-1 (45)	557.14	3.53	0.215	0.137	44.68	16.62	27.13
8	0 (40)	0 (6)	0 (50)	585.42	3.72	0.214	0.148	46.95	17.08	27.86
9	-1 (35)	1 (8)	--1 (45)	558.42	3.27	0.191	0.147	44.82	17.37	25.49
10	-1 (35)	-1 (4)	1 (55)	562.17	3.60	0.190	0.148	42.25	19.31	25.76
11	0 (40)	0 (6)	0 (50)	588.01	3.80	0.216	0.148	46.74	17.29	28.19
12	0 (40)	0 (6)	0 (50)	591.32	3.79	0.215	0.150	46.37	17.43	27.98
13	0 (40)	0 (6)	0 (50)	593.54	3.78	0.216	0.150	47.06	17.15	28.12
14	0 (40)	0 (6)	-1.68 (40)	553.53	3.60	0.197	0.146	43.42	16.68	26.63
15	0 (40)	-1.68 (2)	0 (50)	560.65	3.46	0.196	0.142	43.28	19.03	26.35
16	0 (40)	0 (6)	1.68 (60)	584.47	3.75	0.208	0.144	44.55	18.26	24.85
17	-1.68 (30)	0 (6)	0 (50)	553.58	3.55	0.187	0.147	43.08	17.83	22.93
18	0 (40)	0 (6)	0 (50)	594.17	3.77	0.214	0.149	46.65	17.31	27.96
19	0 (40)	0 (6)	0 (50)	596.51	3.76	0.214	0.149	46.62	17.21	28.03
20	0 (40)	1.68 (10)	0 (50)	557.94	3.62	0.172	0.145	43.30	17.05	27.66

Source	DF	TPC (mg GAE/L)		Ascorbic acid content (mg/100 mL)		DPPH (mg TEAC/mL)		CUPRAC (mg TEAC/mL)		L*		a*		b*
Source	DF	F	P	F	P	F	P	F	P	F	P	F	P	F	P
Model	9	29.81	0.000	92.36	0.000	352.08	0.000	68.96	0.000	71.34	0.000	94.11	0.000	171.33	0.000
Linear	3	5.28	0.019	55.48	0.000	253.02	0.000	54.13	0.000	8.74	0.004	226.19	0.000	44.31	0.000
X₁	1	0.1	0.755	116.7	0.000	132.28	0.000	133.65	0.000	9.51	0.012	310.79	0.000	44.41	0.000
X₂	1	2.23	0.167	27.63	0.000	527.02	0.000	14.84	0.003	0.03	0.866	232.62	0.000	37.13	0.000
X₃	1	13.52	0.004	22.11	0.001	99.75	0.000	13.91	0.004	16.68	0.002	135.15	0.000	51.4	0.000
Square	3	34.89	0.000	89.88	0.000	584.36	0.000	77.7	0.000	157.01	0.000	34.19	0.000	367.74	0.000
X₁ ²	1	61.24	0.000	240.4	0.000	739.22	0.000	157	0.000	234.61	0.000	15.78	0.003	1059.24	0.000
X₂ ²	1	57.18	0.000	73.73	0.000	1350.41	0.000	106.27	0.000	263.39	0.000	65.62	0.000	38.48	0.000
X₃ ²	1	27.9	0.000	14.72	0.003	212.26	0.000	60.44	0.000	170.54	0.000	5.48	0.041	173.38	0.000
2-Way Interaction	3	49.27	0.000	131.72	0.000	218.85	0.000	75.05	0.000	48.26	0.000	21.95	0.000	101.95	0.000
X₁*X₂	1	40.25	0.000	84.34	0.000	25.86	0.000	159.3	0.000	101.97	0.000	4.09	0.071	29.36	0.000
X₁*X₃	1	67.29	0.000	23.84	0.001	24.12	0.001	38.3	0.000	33.66	0.000	5.59	0.040	264.28	0.000
X₂*X₃	1	40.26	0.000	286.99	0.000	606.58	0.000	27.54	0.000	9.14	0.013	56.16	0.000	12.2	0.006
Error	10
Lack-of-Fit	5	2.54	0.164	2.36	0.184	1.67	0.294	0.66	0.668	1.47	0.341	0.98	0.511	6.44	0.031
Pure Error	5
Total	19
R²		96.41%		98.81%		99.69		98.41%		98.47%		98.83%		99.36%
Adj R²		93.17%		97.74%		99.40%		96.99%		97.09%		97.78%		98.78%

Analysis	TPC (mg GAE/l)	Ascorbic acid content (mg/100 mL)	DPPH (mg TEAC/mL)	CUPRAC (mg TEAC/mL)	L*	a*	b*
TPC (mg GAE/l)	1	0.641*	0.821*	0.810*	0.583*	0.284	0.154
Ascorbic acid content (mg/100 mL)	0.641*	1	0.533*	0.501*	0.382	0.234	0.526*
DPPH (mg TEAC/mL)	0.821*	0.533*	1	0.585	0.786*	0.194	0.281
CUPRAC (mg TEAC/mL)	0.810*	0.501*	0.585*	1	0.364	0.451*	0.230
L*	0.583*	0.382	0.786*	0.364	1	-0.042	0.470*
a*	0.284	0.234	0.194	0.451*	-0.042	1	0.085
b*	0.154	0.526*	0.281	0.230	0.470*	0.085	1

Response	Fit	SE Fit	95% CI	95% PI
Total Phenolic Content (mg GAE/L)	591.15	2.11	(586.45; 595.85)	(578.36; 603.94)
Ascorbic acid content (mg/100 mL)	3.78	0.014	(3.7488; 3.8113)	(3.6950; 3.8650)
DPPH (mg TEAC/mL)	0.214	0.00042	(0.213514; 0.215364)	(0.211923; 0.216955)
CUPRAC (mg TEAC/mL)	0.149	0.00027	(0.148549; 0.149769)	(0.147500; 0.150818)
L*	46.47	0.109	(46.230; 46.714)	(45.814; 47.131)
a*	17.57	0.0491	(17.4561; 17.6748)	(17.2681; 17.8627)
b*	27.83	0.09	(27.6322; 28.0334)	(27.2872; 28.3784)
Variable	Setting
Temperature (X₁) (° C)	38.7
Time (X₂) (min.)	5.6
Amplitude (X₃) (%)	50.9

Sample	Microbiological analysis
Sample	Total Enterobacteria count (log CFU/ml)	Total aerobic plate count (log CFU/ml)	Yeast and mould count (log CFU/ml)
C	ND	2.14±0.04^a	<1
PQ	ND	ND	ND
UQ	ND	ND	ND

Independent variable	Factor levels
Independent variable	(-1.68)	(-1)	0	(+1)	(+1.68)
Temperature (X₁) (°C)	30	35	40	45	50
Time (X₁) (min.)	2	4	6	8	10
Amplitude (X₃) (%)	40	45	50	55	60

Sample	Sensory feature
Sample	Texture (viscosity)	Taste	Aroma	Color	Overall acceptability
C	7.4±0.84^a	7.0±0.47^a	7.1±0.74^a	7.4±0.70^a	7.6±0.52^a
PQ	7.4±0.52^a	7.2±0.42^a	6.9±0.32^a	7.3±0.48^a	7.4±0.84^a
UQ	7.9±0.74^a	7.9±0.57^b	7.4±0.70^a	7.5±0.53^a	7.8±0.63^a