4.7 Article

Chemical and sensory comparison of fresh and dried lulo (Solanum quitoense Lam.) fruit aroma

Journal

FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 169, Issue -, Pages 85-91

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.07.111

Keywords

Solanum quitoense Lam; Odour-active volatiles; Spray-drying; Ultrasonic convective drying; Lyophilisation

Funding

  1. Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento para la Ciencia, la Tecnologia y la Innovacion, Francisco Jose de Caldas [0459 - 2013]
  2. Division de Investigacion de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia-sede Bogota, Bogota, Colombia

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The odour-active volatile compounds of lulo fruit (Solanum quitoense Lam.) were isolated by solvent extraction followed by solvent-assisted flavour evaporation (SAFE). GC-O and GCMS analyses as well as quantitation by internal standard method showed that (Z)-3-hexenal, ethyl butanoate, 3-sulphanylhexyl acetate, and ethyl hexanoate were key aroma compounds in this fruit. Other odorants with relevance because their contribution (high OAVs) to the overall aroma were 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethyl-3(2H)-furanone, methyl benzoate, (E)-2-hexenal, and hexanal. Lulo fruit pulp in presence of maltodextrin DE-20 was dried by using four different types of drying methods: hot air-drying (HD), spray drying (SD), lyophilisation (LD), and ultrasonic convective hot air-drying (HUD). LD sample exhibited the highest sensory rank (lulo-like) in comparison with fresh fruit pulp. Hot-air drying processes (HD and HUD) changed adversely the aroma of lulo fruit pulp. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available