| Literature DB >> 24471098 |
In Guk Hwang1, Young Jee Shin1, Seongeung Lee2, Junsoo Lee2, Seon Mi Yoo1.
Abstract
We investigated the effect of various cooking methods (boiling, steaming, stir-frying, and roasting) and three cooking times (5, 10, and 15 min) on the antioxidant properties of red pepper. Raw and cooked peppers were measured for proximate composition, ascorbic acid (AsA) content, total carotenoid content (TCC), total polyphenol content (TP), and 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and 2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid) (ABTS) radical scavenging activities. Results showed that the proximate composition, AsA content, TCC, TP, and antioxidant activities were significantly (p<0.05) affected by the cooking procedure; the loss rate varied among individual compounds. Boiling and steaming significantly reduced AsA content (24.3~66.5%), TP (13.9~ 54.9%), and antioxidant activity (21.7~60.5%) in red pepper, while stir-frying and roasting slightly reduced AsA content (2.7~25.9%), TP (1.8~4.9%), and antioxidant activity (4.9~17.9%). The highest loss was observed after boiling, followed by steaming, roasting, and stir-frying. Stir-frying and roasting better preserved AsA content, TCC, TP, and antioxidant activity. In conclusion, dry-heat cooking methods such as stir-frying and roasting may be preferred to retain the nutrient compositions and antioxidant properties of red pepper.Entities:
Keywords: antioxidant activity; ascorbic acid; cooking; red pepper
Year: 2012 PMID: 24471098 PMCID: PMC3866734 DOI: 10.3746/pnf.2012.17.4.286
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Prev Nutr Food Sci ISSN: 2287-1098
Effects of different cooking methods and cooking times on the proximate composition of red pepper
| Cooking methods | Protein | Fat | Ash | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| g/100 g fresh weight basis | ||||
| Raw | 1.63 ± 0.05f | 0.61 ± 0.06a | 1.12 ± 0.05e | |
|
| ||||
| Boiling | 5 min | 1.33 ± 0.02c | 0.56 ± 0.06ab | 0.65 ± 0.03b |
| 10 min | 1.18 ± 0.06b | 0.50 ± 0.04a | 0.54 ± 0.06b | |
| 15 min | 1.01 ± 0.11a | 0.49 ± 0.05a | 0.42 ± 0.05a | |
|
| ||||
| Steaming | 5 min | 1.56 ± 0.07ef | 0.61 ± 0.02ab | 1.05 ± 0.05cde |
| 10 min | 1.44 ± 0.04cde | 0.58 ± 0.04ab | 0.96 ± 0.04cd | |
| 15 min | 1.40 ± 0.07cd | 0.57 ± 0.03ab | 0.93 ± 0.03c | |
|
| ||||
| Stir-frying | 5 min | 1.62 ± 0.05f | 2.20 ± 0.02c | 1.15 ± 0.05e |
| 10 min | 1.63 ± 0.02f | 2.21 ± 0.06c | 1.13 ± 0.04e | |
| 15 min | 1.62 ± 0.07f | 2.17 ± 0.09c | 1.15 ± 0.07e | |
|
| ||||
| Roasting | 5 min | 1.55 ± 0.07ef | 0.60 ± 0.04ab | 1.11 ± 0.06e |
| 10 min | 1.53 ± 0.04def | 0.62 ± 0.08ab | 1.10 ± 0.09e | |
| 15 min | 1.47 ± 0.06cde | 0.63 ± 0.06ab | 1.08 ± 0.07de | |
Values with different superscripts in a column indicate significant difference (p<0.05) by Duncan’s multiple range test.
Fig. 1Effects of different cooking methods and cooking times on the ascorbic acid contents of red pepper (■ 5 min cooking; 10 min cooking; □ 15 min cooking). 1)Values with different letters on the bars are significantly different (p<0.05) by Dun-can’s multiple range tests.
Fig. 2Effects of different cooking methods and cooking times on the total carotenoid contents of red pepper (■ 5 min cooking; 10 min cooking; □ 15 min cooking). 1)Values with different letters on the bars are significantly different (p<0.05) by Duncan’s multiple range tests.
Fig. 3Effects of different cooking methods and cooking times on the total polyphenol contents of red pepper (■ 5 min cooking; 10 min cooking; □ 15 min cooking). 1)Values with different letters on the bars are significantly different (p<0.05) by Duncan’s multiple range tests.
Fig. 4Effects of different cooking methods and cooking times on the DPPH radical scavenging activity of red pepper (■ 5 min cooking; 10 min cooking; □ 15 min cooking). 1)Values with different letters on the bars are significantly different (p<0.05) by Duncan’s multiple range tests.
Fig. 5Effects of different cooking methods and cooking times on the ABTS radical scavenging activity of red pepper (■ 5 min cooking; 10 min cooking; □ 15 min cooking). 1)Values with different letters on the bars are significantly different (p<0.05) by Duncan’s multiple range tests.