4.7 Article

Ultrasonication and thermosonication blanching treatments of carrot at varying frequencies: Effects on peroxidase inactivation mechanisms and quality characterization evaluation

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 343, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128524

关键词

Thermosonication; Carrot; Peroxidase inactivation; POD-related gene expression; Electron paramagnetic resonance spectra; Ultrastructure

资金

  1. Key Research and Development Program of Jiangsu Province [BE2018368]
  2. National Key Research and Development Program of China (Key Item for Intelligent Agricultural Machinery) [2018YFDO700100]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study found that thermosonication treatment had the most significant effect on carrot peroxidase inactivation, substantially increasing the total carotenoid content. Color analysis parameters C* and Delta E were maximized, while the whiteness index was minimized in thermosonicated samples.
The effects of ultrasonication (US) and thermosonication (TS) blanching at varying frequencies on the carrot peroxidase (POD) inactivation and potential mechanisms were studied. The physicochemical properties were evaluated. Hot water (HW) blanching was used as control. Thermosonication decreased the POD activity to a greater extent, with a dual-frequency of 22/40 kHz showing the most significant effect. The POD-related gene expression was down-regulated by TS, which was contrary to the thermally treated samples. Electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) spectra revealed that ultrasound-induced radicals from water sonolysis might involve in the POD inactivation. Thermosonication substantially increased the total carotenoid content (TCC). The color analysis showed that thermosonicated samples with a dual-frequency (22/40 kHz) exhibited the maximum values of C* and Delta E, and the minimum value of the whiteness index (WI). The micrographs verified the alterations in TCC and relative electrolyte leakage (REL) of carrot treated by HW, US, and TS.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据