Drum-drying of mango peel and characterization of different varieties

Troiani, Caetano A. L.; Pacheco, Maria T. B.; Ferrari, Cristhiane C.; Germer, Silvia P. M.

doi:10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v26n7p547-554

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista Brasileira de Engenharia Agrícola e Ambiental

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Articles • Rev. bras. eng. agríc. ambient. 26 (7) • July 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1807-1929/agriambi.v26n7p547-554 copy

Drum-drying of mango peel and characterization of different varieties¹ 1 Research developed at Instituto de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Centro de Tecnologia de Frutas e Hortaliças, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Secagem de cascas de manga em cilindro rotativo e caracterização de diferentes variedades

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

HIGHLIGHTS:

The Palmer mango showed higher nutrient concentration, besides lower moisture content and reducing sugar content in peels.

The drum-drying process influenced variables related to the drying efficiency and non-enzymatic browning of mango peels.

The drum-drying process did not affect nutrient concentration and the yellow color of the mango peels.

ABSTRACT

Mango peel, a by-product of the mango pulp industry, is rich in nutrients but with high moisture content. Drying is indicated to stabilize the residue and use of a drum-dryer is a little studied alternative. The present study evaluated the application of this technology for mango peels, investigating the influence of process conditions. The potential of mango peels from Palmer, Haden, Keitt, and Espada Vermelha varieties was also assessed using physicochemical analyses. The results showed differences between the varieties: Palmer exhibited the lowest moisture content (73.97 g per 100 g); Keitt the highest reducing sugar content (25.06 g per 100 g d.b.); Haden the highest soluble dietary fiber content (20.85 g per 100 g d.b.); and Espada Vermelha the highest phenolic compound content (5462 mg GAE per 100 g d.b.). Palmer mango peels were dried, varying temperature (130.6/146.4 ºC) and residence time (14/28 s). The independent variables influenced mass flow rate, moisture content, and color parameter a*. The antioxidant capacity, phenolic compounds and total carotenoid content, in addition to other color parameters, were not affected. The best process conditions were determined at 138.4-146.4 ºC and 14-21 s. The flakes exhibited phenolic compound contents of 3200 mg GAE per 100 g d.b., and antioxidant capacity of 360 µmol TE g^-1 d.b. The product can be used as an ingredient in food formulations.

Key words:
byproduct; agro-industrial waste; antioxidant; phenolic compounds; physicochemical properties

Property	Mean value ± Standard deviation
Property	Palmer	Keith	Haden	Espada vermelha
Water activity	0.985 ± 0.002 b,c	0.982 ± 0.002 c	0.989 ± 0.001 a,b	0.992 ± 0.001 a
Moisture content (g per 100 g)	73.97 ± 0.42 c	75.37 ± 0.15 b	76.28 ± 0.13 a	76.51 ± 0.27 a
Total sugar content (g per 100 g d.b.)	36.70 ± 0.39 a	50.40 ± 0.74 a	53.58 ± 0.67 a	39.43 ± 2.87 a
Reducing sugar content (g per 100 g d.b.)	12.47 ± 0.38 c	25.06 ± 2.12 a	18.56 ± 2.10 b	9.35 ± 0.45 c
Vitamin C (mg per 100 g d.b.)	430.31 ± 1.05 a	156.54 ± 0.80 c	193.86 ± 1.41 b	143.47 ± 0.73 d
Total phenolic compounds (mg GAE per 100 g d.b.)	3053.14 ± 88.90 c	2620.54 ± 48.48 d	3350.04 ± 97.55 b	5462.24 ± 67.17 a
Total carotenoid content (mg per 100 g d.b.)	9.78 ± 1.01 b	15.80 ± 0.16 b	12.21 ± 0.79 b	46.34 ± 5.85 a
β-carotene content (mg per 100 g d.b.)	2.76 ± 0.13 c	6.02 ± 0.41 b	4.59 ± 0.46 b,c	26.37 ± 1.46 a
Total dietary fibers (TDF) (g per 100 g d.b.)	35.00 ± 0.27 b	32.24 ± 0.57 c	35.60 ± 0.21 b	39.43 ± 0.66 a
Soluble dietary fibers (SDF) (g per 100 g d.b.)	19.67 ± 0.27 a,b	15.45 ± 0.49 c	20.85 ± 0.09 a	19.22 ± 0.51 b
Insoluble dietary fibers (IDF) (g per 100 g d.b.)	15.33 ± 0.00 c	16.79 ± 0.09 b	14.76 ± 0.30 c	20.20 ± 0.15 a
SDF/TDF (%)	56.20	47.92	58.56	48.74
SDF/IDF (%)	128.31	92.01	141.26	95.15
Antioxidant capacity ABTS (µmol TE g^-1 d.b.)	274.94 ± 11.33 b	266.96 ± 5.13 b	301.68 ± 12.43 b	450.82 ± 6.33 a
Antioxidant capacity DPPH (µmol TE g^-1 d.b.)	276.36 ± 7.60 c	250.14 ± 8.73 d	303.23 ± 8.34 b	554.87 ± 5.18 a
Color parameter L*	43.47 ± 6.83 c	54.89 ± 4.86 b	56.60 ± 8.86 b	65.25 ± 4.07 a
Color parameter a*	15.00 ± 12.53 a	-12.00 ± 5.61 c	-0.75 ± 12.98 b	20.88 ± 5.39 a
Color parameter b*	29.18 ± 9.95 c	37.92 ± 8.66 b	36.60 ± 11.51 b	53.13 ± 2.53 a
Color parameter H*	62.26 ± 22.87 c	108.04 ± 10.82 a	87.72 ± 24.67 b	68.60 ± 5.56 c

Test	Residence time (s)	Temperature (ºC)	Moisture content (%)	a*	Mass flow rate (kg h^-1 m^-2)
1	14 (-1)	130.6 (-1)	4.40 ± 0.04	3.53 ± 0.06	5.86 ± 0.07
2	14 (-1)	146.4 (1)	2.37 ± 0.04	4.96 ± 0.44	5.81 ± 0.08
3	28 (1)	130.6 (-1)	2.26 ± 0.03	5.85 ± 0.37	4.35 ± 0.13
4	28 (1)	146.4 (1)	1.45 ± 0.04	6.49 ± 0.23	4.24 ± 0.33
5	21 (0)	138.4 (0)	2.47 ± 0.04	5.25 ± 0.21	4.44 ± 0.17
6	21 (0)	138.4 (0)	2.31 ± 0.01	4.22 ± 0.29	5.01 ± 0.10
7	21 (0)	138.4 (0)	1.99 ± 0.02	5.53 ± 0.32	5.02 ± 0.11

Dependent variable	R²	CV	F_calc	F_tab	Equation
Moisture content	0.93	17.19	12.14	6.94	$M C = 2.464 - 0.710 * T - 0.765 * t$	(4)
Color parameter a*	0.83	10.62	8.22	6.61	$a * = 5.119 + 0.963 * t$	(5)
Mass flow rate	0.88	6.59	36.17	6.61	$M F R = 4.961 - 0.770 * t$	(6)

Test	L*	b*	Hue	Vitamin C (mg per 100 g d.b.)	Total phenolic compounds (mg GAE per 100 g d.b.)	Total carotenoids	β-carotene	Antioxidant capacity (µmol TE g^-1 d.b.)
						Total carotenoids	β-carotene	ABTS	DPPH
						(mg per 100 g d.b.)		ABTS	DPPH
1	67.58 ± 0.76	45.03 ± 1.09	85.51 ± 0.13	81.04 ± 2.35	3070.52 ± 42.42	13.83 ± 0.99	7.36 ± 0.14	335.32 ± 6.25	297.31 ± 3.49
2	65.57 ± 1.30	44.94 ± 1.30	83.70 ± 0.42	84.65 ± 1.03	3193.60 ± 59.70	15.35 ± 0.96	7.89 ± 0.43	359.08 ± 11.65	300.74 ± 8.84
3	63.88 ± 1.10	47.83 ± 1.84	83.04 ± 0.23	87.08 ± 2.05	2841.72 ± 269.61	15.95 ± 0.98	7.86 ± 0.28	334.83 ± 25.48	293.61 ± 3.66
4	62.93 ± 0.92	43.80 ± 1.24	81.57 ± 0.13	85.22 ± 0.88	3154.24 ± 183.03	15.74 ± 0.09	7.33 ± 0.05	361.67 ± 21.05	306.72 ± 5.59
5	64.37 ± 0.95	44.26 ± 0.91	83.24 ± 0.21	59.30 ± 1.71	3096.17 ± 13.67	16.44 ± 0.08	7.59 ± 0.01	341.99 ± 20.10	305.17 ± 4.26
6	66.61 ± 0.62	47.26 ± 1.26	84.89 ± 0.25	93.38 ± 2.93	2931.47 ± 67.43	13.53 ± 0.71	6.98 ± 0.15	309.00 ± 4.18	286.81 ± 1.87
7	60.71 ± 1.11	42.30 ± 1.09	82.55 ± 0.32	66.40 ± 3.95	3038.87 ± 19.91	15.20 ± 0.26	7.36 ± 0.20	359.82 ± 9.26	308.66 ± 2.70

Departamento de Engenharia Agrícola - UFCG Unidade Acadêmica de Engenharia Agrícola, UFCG, Av. Aprígio Veloso 882, Bodocongó, Bloco CM, 1º andar, CEP 58429-140, Campina Grande, PB, Brasil, Tel. +55 83 2101 1056 - Campina Grande - PB - Brazil
E-mail: revistagriambi@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] * Corresponding author - E-mail: criscaferrari@gmail.com

Brasil

Brasil

Drum-drying of mango peel and characterization of different varieties1 1 Research developed at Instituto de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Centro de Tecnologia de Frutas e Hortaliças, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Secagem de cascas de manga em cilindro rotativo e caracterização de diferentes variedades

HIGHLIGHTS:

ABSTRACT

Drum-drying of mango peel and characterization of different varieties¹ 1 Research developed at Instituto de Tecnologia de Alimentos, Centro de Tecnologia de Frutas e Hortaliças, Campinas, SP, Brazil