| Literature DB >> 35741949 |
Pedro García-Serrano1, Manuel Brenes1, Concepción Romero1, Pedro García-García1.
Abstract
A high volume of water is needed to produce black ripe olives, which also entails a significant volume of wastewater with a high organic and inorganic contaminant charge. To reduce this problem, the reuse of KOH solutions (lyes) in a new process was studied. Once the lyes were removed from the tanks, KOH was then added for a new darkening process. Reusing the lyes up to four times gave rise to a product with similar physico-chemical and organoleptic characteristics as obtained with fresh solutions. The application of this process reduced coadjutant consumption by 32% and water by 20%, while global wastewater presented a high K content whose concentration could be valorized as a fertilizer by replacing commercial potassium nitrate.Entities:
Keywords: KOH; black olive; reuse; valorization; wastewater
Year: 2022 PMID: 35741949 PMCID: PMC9222265 DOI: 10.3390/foods11121749
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Experimental design.
Main parameter characteristics of alkaline treatments of olives.
| Reused Cycles | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
| Duration of the alkali treatment a | 3 h 15 min | 3 h 30 min | 3 h 40 min | 3 h 15 min | 3 h 10 min |
| Initial concentration of KOH solution (M) | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 | 0.75 |
| Final concentration of KOH solution (M) | 0.39 (0.01) b a c | 0.36 (0.01) b | 0.34 (0.01) bc | 0.33 (0.01) c | 0.33 (0.01) c |
| Weight increase in fruits (g/kg) | 51.7 (2.4) a | 43.0 (3.8) b | 41.3 (0.5) b | 45.8 (1.2) b | 44.7 (0.2) b |
Note: a Time to reach the pit; b Standard deviation of duplicates in parenthesis; c values in each row followed by different letters are significantly different according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05).
Physico–chemical characteristics and sensory evaluation of black ripe olives processed re-using KOH solutions at two months after packaging. Analyses were carried out at two months after packing.
| Reused Cycles | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||
| PHYSICO–CHEMICAL: | ||||||
| Superficial color (R700) | 4.11 (0.03) a b | 4.16 (0.11) a | 4.18 (0.07) a | 4.16 (0,11) a | 4.07 (0.04) a | |
| Firmness (N/100 g pitted olive) | 1385 (15) b | 1515 (23) a | 1561 (34) a | 1481 (1) a | 1518 (29) a | |
| K in flesh (mg/kg) | 1430 (36) c | 1528 (39) bc | 1582(55) b | 1648 (27) b | 1807 (27) a | |
| SENSORIAL: | ||||||
| Negative sensations | Abnormal flavor | 1.0 (0.0) c a d | 1.0 (0.0) a | 1.1 (0.1) a | 1.2 (0.1) a | 1.1 (0.1) a |
| Gustatory sensations | Salty | 5.9 (0.4) a | 5.8 (0.8) a | 6.0 (0.3) a | 5.5 (0.7) a | 6.1 (0.5) a |
| Bitter | 1.8 (0.5) a | 2.1 (0.6) a | 1.7 (0.3) a | 1.7 (0.3) a | 1.8 (0.2) a | |
| Acid | 1.2 (0.2) a | 1.3 (0.1) a | 1.3 (0.2) a | 1.4 (0.2) a | 1.4 (0.3) a | |
| Kinesthetic sensations | Hardness | 4.7 (0.4) a | 4.9 (0.3) a | 5.1 (0.4) a | 4.9 (0.3) a | 4.8 (0.3) a |
| Fibrousness | 5.0 (0.3) a | 5.1 (0.4) a | 5.1 (0.2) a | 5.3 (0.3) a | 4.9 (0.3) a | |
| Crunchiness | 4.1 (0.4) a | 4.3 (0.3) a | 4.3 (0.2) a | 4.1 (0.3) a | 4.2 (0.3) a | |
| Correct judgments in triangular test | 15 e | |||||
Note: a average and standard deviation of duplicates in parenthesis on physico–chemical parameters; b values in each row followed by different letters are significantly different according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05) on physico–chemical parameter; c Median and robust standard deviation in parenthesis (n = 8) on sensorial analysis; d In each row, median values followed by the same letter do not differ at 5% level of significance because of superimposing confidence intervals; e number of correct judgments in the 48 triangular comparisons made to detect differences in the flavor between the olives treated with the lye re-used 4 times and with fresh KOH solution (Initial).
Figure 2Potassium concentration in lyes and washing waters. Different letters on the bars for each solution (a, b, c for lye; p and o for 1st washing; x and y for 2nd washing) means significant differences according to Duncan’s multiple range test (p < 0.05).
Characteristics of the global wastewater (lye + washing waters) and its concentrate up to 10% of the initial. The pH of the concentrates was adjusted to around 5.0 units with HNO3.
| Initial Process | After 4 Reuses | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Global Wastewater | Concentrate | Global Wastewater | Concentrate | |
| Density (kg/L) | 1.01 | 1.12 | 1.02 | 1.14 |
| Total solids (g/kg) | 36.7 | 276.9 | 29.5 | 249.8 |
| Water activity(aw) | 0.992 | 0.951 | 0.991 | 0.941 |
| pH | 10.9 | 5.25 | 10.5 | 5.11 |
| Sugars (g/kg): | ||||
| Glucose | 0.6 (0.0) a | 5.6 (0.2) | 0.2 (0.0) | 1.9 (0.3) |
| Fructose | 0.4 (0.0) | 3.9 (0.3) | 0.4 (0.0) | 3.5 (0.3) |
| Mannitol | 3.6 (0.1) | 34.0 (0.8) | 6.0 (0.2) | 58.9 (1.6) |
| Acids (g/kg): | ||||
| Lactic | 0.1 (0.0) | 0.9 (0.1) | 0.1(0.0) | 1.0 (0.2) |
| Acetic | 5.2 (0.2) | 27.4 (1.4) | 4.8 (0.0) | 20.4 (0.6) |
| Ethanol (g/kg) | 1.2 (0.0) | N.D. c | 0.5 (0.0) | N.D. |
| Minerals (g/kg): | ||||
| K | 6.9 (0.8) | 58.4 (0.3) | 6.4 (0.5) | 55.4 (0.5) |
| Na | 0.5 (0.0) | 5.2 (0.3) | 0.4 (0.1) | 4.4 (0.3) |
| C | 6.6 (0.0) | 65.2 (1.0) | 6.8 (0.0) | 60.1 (1.0) |
| N | 0.2 (0.0) | 13.5 (0.2) | 0.2 (0.2) | 13.5 (0.3) |
| Phenols (mg/kg): | ||||
| Hydroxityrosol | 35 (1.0) | 340 (18) | 28 (1) | 301(56) |
| Tyrosol | 75 (2) | 704 (45) | 107 (12) | 993 (59) |
| Others b | 22 (1) | 342 (26) | 41 (1) | 457 (23) |
Note: a Average values and standard deviation in parenthesis; b Other phenols: sum of glycol, tyrosol glucoside, cafeic and p-cumaric acids; c not detected.