| Literature DB >> 32724587 |
Negar Yarahmadi1, Mohammad Hojjatoleslamy1, Leila Sedaghat Boroujeni1.
Abstract
The effect of different drying procedures on the quality characteristics of Pistacia atlantica subsp. kurdica is addressed in this work. Using five different drying methods include microwave, oven (40 and 60°C), sun, and shade, P. atlantica were dried. The variations in moisture content, drying rate, major components of essential oil, and texture property were assessed at the start and at the end points of the drying process. Comparison of the drying methods indicated that microwave drying to be most effective in lowering moisture content, while the shade drying had the lowest rate among methods. In the case of microwave, the dried seeds had highest brittleness, while the highest score for the penetration force was observed in oven 40°C. Regarding major elements of the essential oil (α-pinene, α-terpinen-4-ol, myrcene, β-ocimene, β-caryophyllene, and limonene), there were no significant differences between the five drying techniques, nor compared to the fresh sample. To model the drying process, six thin-layer drying kinetic models were chosen. It was found that the Midilli-Kucuk model was the most suitable for explaining the drying curve of oven 40 and 60°C, microwave, and sun methods; Wang and Singh model was excellent to explain thin-layer shade drying behavior of the P. atlantica seeds. In conclusion, in this study, an opportunity is represented to apply the most effective procedures to decrease the drying period and to achieve a product with appropriate safety and quality features.Entities:
Keywords: Pistacia atlantica; drying; mathematical modeling; microwave; moisture
Year: 2020 PMID: 32724587 PMCID: PMC7382125 DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.1582
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Nutr ISSN: 2048-7177 Impact factor: 2.863
Mathematical models applied to drying curves of P. atlantica samples
| Model name | Equation |
|---|---|
| Newton | MR = exp (− |
| Page | MR = exp (− |
| Henderson | MR = a exp (− |
| Logarithmic | MR = a exp (− |
| Wang and Singh | MR = 1 + at + bt2 |
| Midilli–Kucuk | MR = a exp (− |
MR, dimensionless moisture ratio; a, b, c, and n, empirical coefficients in thin‐layer drying kinetic models; k, drying rate constant (1/s).
Figure 1Changes in moisture content of Pistacia atlantica seeds under drying: (a) microwave, (b) sun, (c) oven (40°C), (d) oven (60°C), and (e) shade
Figure 2Drying rate of Pistacia atlantica seeds under drying: (a) microwave, (b) sun, (c) oven (40°C), (d) oven (60°C), and (e) shade
The effects of different drying methods (include sun, shade, oven, and microwave) on major compounds in the essential oil of the Pistacia atlantica seeds
| Method | Quantity (%) | Major components | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β‐Caryophyllene | α‐Terpine‐4‐ol | β‐Ocimene | Limonene | Myrcene | α‐Pinene | ||
| Fresh | 0.216a | 1.415b | 5.34a | 3.325a | 8.835a | 10.235a | 46.045a |
| Sun | 0.126b | 3.4ab | 4.015a | 2.01a | 0.05b | 11.215a | 0.126 b |
| Microwave | 0.09c | 3.175ab | 2.285a | 2.665a | 0.605b | 13.025a | 0.09c |
| Oven 40°C) | 0.208a | 2.1b | 3.485a | 2.175a | 0.96b | 9.185a | 22.195a |
| Oven 60°C) | 0.168a | 2.97ab | 2.095a | 1.8a | 1.095b | 9.555a | 0.168ab |
| Shade | 0.105c | 4.115a | 5.81a | 4.2a | 1.55b | 15.285a | 0.105c |
In each row, different letters mean significant differences p < .05 according to the least significant difference test (LSD).
Figure 3Penetration force means values for different drying methods
Results of statistical analysis on the modeling of drying methods for P. atlantica seeds
| Mathematical models | Drying methods | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oven (40°C) | Oven (60°C) | Sun | Microwave | Shade | ||
| Wang and Singh | a | −0.033 | −0.082 | −0.073 | −0.079 | −0.014 |
| b | −0.0003 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.002 | 0.0004 | |
|
| .9968 | .963 | .8689 | .9922 | .9961 | |
| RMSE | 0.018 | 0.063 | 0.127 | 0.028 | 0.019 | |
| Logarithmic | a | 111 | 1.11 | 0.937 | 1.07 | – |
| c | −110 | −0.061 | 0.071 | −0.021 | – | |
| k | 0.0003 | 0.095 | .174 | .095 | – | |
|
| .9951 | .9654 | 0.9918 | 0.9895 | – | |
| RMSE | 0.023 | 0.064 | 0.035 | 0.034 | – | |
| Henderson–Pabis | a | 1.08 | 1.06 | 0.99 | 1.054 | – |
| k | 0.075 | 0.107 | 0.137 | 0.099 | – | |
|
| 0.9576 | 0.9637 | 0.967 | 0.9892 | – | |
| RMSE | 0.074 | 0.062 | 0.064 | 0.032 | – | |
| Page | k | 0.017 | 0.016 | 0.27 | 0.055 | 0.137 |
|
| 1.58 | 2.27 | 0.69 | 1.25 | 1.046 | |
|
| .9957 | .9784 | .9743 | .9941 | .9865 | |
| RMSE | 0.0212 | 0.048 | 0.056 | 0.024 | 0.035 | |
| Newton | k | 0.063 | 0.093 | 0.137 | 0.0911 | – |
|
| .9507 | .9536 | .9673 | .9826 | – | |
| RMSE | 0.087 | 0.067 | 0.059 | 0.039 | – | |
| Midilli–Kucuk | a | 0.986 | 0.978 | 1 | 0.99 | – |
| b | −0.057 | −0.285 | 0.0025 | 0.003 | – | |
| k | −0.037 | −0.256 | 0.079 | 0.039 | – | |
|
| 0.711 | 0.643 | 1.32 | 1.45 | – | |
|
| .9969 | .9788 | .9977 | .9995 | – | |
| RMSE | 0.02 | 0.053 | 0.02 | 0.008 | – | |
Abbreviations: R 2, coefficient of determination; RMSE, root mean square error.
Chemical composition of Pistacia Atlantica essential oil
| Components | RI | RI (ref) |
|---|---|---|
| β‐Caryophyllene | 1,418 | 1,412 |
| α‐Terpine−4‐ol | 1,046 | 1,056 |
| β‐Ocimene | 1,040 | 1,036 |
| Limonene | 1,031 | 1,028.24 |
| Myrcene | 991 | 991 |
| α‐Pinene | 939 | 939 |
Abbreviations: RI, Retention index calculation using a temperature program according to n‐alkanes. RI (ref), Retention index described by Sedaghat Boroujeni et al. tr, traces (%<.01).