4.7 Article

Effects of magnetization with neodymium magnets treatment on blueberry wine ageing

期刊

FOOD BIOSCIENCE
卷 51, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.fbio.2022.102332

关键词

Magnetization; Wine ageing; Blueberry wine; Wine quality; Antioxidants

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The feasibility of magnetization treatment using neodymium magnets for blueberry wine aging was studied. Two magnetization aging devices with different operating modes were used to treat new blueberry wine. The magnetization treatment resulted in faster changes in the basic characteristics of the wine and improved the phenolic substances, antioxidant capacity, and sensory properties of the wine. The M1 mode had a greater positive influence on these properties compared to the M2 mode.
The feasibility of magnetization treatment, using neodymium magnets, for blueberry wine ageing was investi-gated. Two magnetization ageing devices with different operating modes (M1, circulation between two tanks; M2, single-tank circulation) were used to treat new blueberry wine. Changes in the basic characteristics, phenolic substances, antioxidant capacity, and sensory properties were evaluated. The magnetization treatment induced a faster change in the basic characteristics of the wine compared to that of the control. The magnetized blueberry wine showed higher total phenol content, antioxidant capacity, and more volatile compounds. Sensory evalu-ation showed that the quality of blueberry wine was improved during magnetization ageing. Moreover, the positive influence of the M1 mode on the aforementioned properties was greater than that of the M2 mode. However, when the treatment time was more than 8 weeks, the antioxidant capacity, color, and sensory eval-uation of the magnetized blueberry wine were worse than those of the control. These results proved that magnetization treatment could significantly accelerate the early ageing process of blueberry wine. The effect of M1 on the ageing process was better than M2.

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