Ultrasound: A novel technology in processing industry

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 2




University of Horticultural Sciences, BagalkotUniversity of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot

Kittur Rani Channamma College of Horticulture, ArabhaviKittur Rani Channamma College of Horticulture, Arabhavi

Seminar ISeminar I

Ultrasound waves: A novel technology in food industry

Prathiksha HUHS15PGM575Post Harvest Technology

Prathiksha HUHS15PGM575Post Harvest Technology

Topic divisionTopic divisionIntroductionHistory Principle Types of devicesApplications :

Decontamination ExtractionPreservation

AdvantagesLimitationsConclusion


Introduction Introduction • Energy derived from sound waves• Form of energy generated by sound waves of frequencies that

are too high to be detected by human ear, i.e. above 18 kHz.

• Ultrasound can propagate in gases, liquids and solids.

Rastogi, 201104/13/17 Post harvest technology 7

• The discovery of ultrasound came with Pierre Curie in 1880.

• In the 1960s, ultrasound technology was well established and

used for cleaning in steel and plastic industries.

• Food industry: Late1960s to characterize the foods such as

meat, fats and oils, milk, bread, fruit, and sauces based on

particle size, distribution and composition.

• The discovery of ultrasound came with Pierre Curie in 1880.

• In the 1960s, ultrasound technology was well established and

used for cleaning in steel and plastic industries.

• Food industry: Late1960s to characterize the foods such as

meat, fats and oils, milk, bread, fruit, and sauces based on

particle size, distribution and composition.

Jose et al., 2014

History History

04/13/17 8Post harvest technology

• Ultrasound when propagated through a biological structure induces compressions and rarefactions of the particles and a high amount of energy is imparted.

04/13/17 9Post harvest technologyRastogi, 2011

Principle Principle At sufficiently high power, the rarefaction exceeds the attractive forces between molecules in a liquid phase, which subsequently leads to the formation of cavitation bubbles.


• In food industry, the application of ultrasound can be divided based on range of frequency:high power ultrasound (frequency 20KHz to 1MHz)low power ultrasound (frequency more than 1MHz)


Types


04/13/17 13Post harvest technology


DecontaminationDecontamination: : The free radicals, act on the cell membrane of microbes, enter the cells and break them down.


13/12/12

Objective: To study the effectiveness of thermosonication in inactivatingEscherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in mango juice

Kiang et al., 2012

Treatment detailsTreatment details

Control: Untreated juiceUltrasound treatment time:

1, 3, 5, 7, 10 minTreatment temperatures: 50°C and 60°CFrequency: 25kHz

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 16Kiang et al., 2012

% injury*

Treatmentcondition

Treatmenttime (min)

Escherichiacoli O157:H7

Salmonellaenteritidis

WithoutSonication

0 59.81a 40.64a

1 66.63b 87.10b

3 69.86b 98.17c

5 61.32b 98.43c

7 86.58c 99.78c

10 95.17d 99.93c

WithSonication

0 47.91a 38.70a

1 70.77b 79.27b

3 79.47c 97.96c

5 84.10c 99.99c99.99c

7 98.84d98.84d 99.99c99.99c

10 98.53d98.53d 99.99c99.99c


Table 1: Percent injury of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in mango juice treated with and without sonication at 50°C


Kiang et al., 2012

p<0.05


% injury*

Treatmentcondition

Treatmenttime (min)

Escherichiacoli O157:H7

Salmonellaenteritidis

WithoutSonication

0 65.31b 50.48a

1 72.49b 75.81b

3 74.81b 78.53c

5 79.14c 89.79c

7 78.23c 98.80c

WithSonication

0 64.68b 63.79b

1 71.65b 88.14c

3 75.38b 99.12d99.12d

5 99.92d99.92d 99.56d99.56d

7 99.95d99.95d 99.90d99.90d



Kiang et al., 2012

p<0.05


Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of ultrasound treatment combined

with commercial sanitizers in the decontamination step of minimally processed cherry tomatoes.

Jose and Vanetti, 2012

Treatment detailsTemperature: 22°CTime: 10 minSanitizers used:

Sodium dichloroisocyanurate (200mg/L)Hydrogen peroxide (5%)Peracetic acid (40mg/L)Chlorine dioxide (10mg/L)

Ultrasound frequency: 45 kHz

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 20Jose and Vanetti, 2012

Treatment Time(min)

Reductions log(N/No)

Sodium dichloroisocyanurate 200 mg/L

10 0.41±0.2 a

Peracetic acid 40 mg/L 10 2.73±0.6 c

Ultrasound 45 kHz 10 0.83±0.5 b



Ultrasound 45 kHz & Peracetic acid 40 mg/L

10 3.883.88±0.5±0.5 c c


Table 3: Effect of sanitization treatments in reducing the population of Salmonella typhimurium ATCC 14028 adhered on surfaces of whole cherry tomatoes.


p<0.05


Fig. 1: Number of logarithmic cycles reduced in the initial count of aerobic mesophiles ( ) and molds and yeast ( ) contaminants on cherry tomatoes sanitized using different methods. SD: Sodium dichloroisocyanurate; US: Ultrasound; HP: Hydrogen

peroxide; PAA: Peracetic acid; DC: Chlorine dioxide.


3.4

4.4


Fig. 2: Photomicrographs of Salmonella typhimurium ATCC 14028 cells adhered to the surface of cherry tomatoes after 48 h, imaged using scanning electron microscopy: non-sanitized (A), after sanitization with 40 mg/L peracetic acid (B), after sanitization with 40 mg/L peracetic acid combined with ultrasound for 10 min(C).



Objective: To summarize and synthesize the results of studies and

articles about ultrasonic processing which can be adapted to the wash water decontamination process for fruits and vegetables.

Bilek and Taurantus, 2013



Treatments Pre-cut Post-cut

TVC YMC TVC YMC

Ultrasound −US (45 kHz, 1 min) 1.3b 0.9e 0.5a 0.5c

Combined applications

Chlorinated water (200 ppm free chlorine/5 min,5 °C) + US (45 kHz, 1 min)

1.0b 0.9e 0.9b 0.8de

Ozonated water (1 ppm/5 min, 5 °C),+US (45 kHz, 1 min) 0.2a 0.5c 0.4a 0.6cd

Table 4: The effects of singular and combined decontamination treatments applied on the microbial load in pre-cut and post-cut shredded carrots (log10 CFU/g): mesophilic total viable counts (TVC) and yeast and mold counts (YMC) (summarized from Alegria et al., 2009).



p<0.05

Concentrations (ClO2 -ppm)

Apples Lettuce

ClO2 alone ClO2+ US ClO2 alone ClO2+ US

5 2.5a 3.7b 1.7a 1.7a

10 2.5a 3.9b 2.1a 2.2b

20 2.5a 3.7b 2.1a 3.0c

40 2.5a 4.2b 2.2a 3.6d


Table 5: The reduction values of different concentrations of chlorine dioxide single and combined with ultrasound (170kHz, 10 mins) on Salmonella spp. in apples and lettuce samples (summarized from Huang et al., 2006).



p<0.05


Table 6: The reduction values of different concentrations of chlorine dioxide single and combined with ultrasound (170kHz, 10 mins) on E. coli O157:H7 in apples and lettuce samples (summarized from Huang et al., 2006).

Concentrations (ClO2 -ppm)

Apples Lettuce

ClO2 alone ClO2+ US ClO2 alone ClO2+ US

5 1.7a 3.2b 1.5a 1.7a

10 1.8a 3.1b 1.7a 1.7a

20 1.8a 3.7b 1.8a 2.3b

40 2.2a 3.8b 1.9a 2.4b



p<0.05


Sanitizer

Reduction (log10 CFU/g sample)

Alonesanitizer

Sanitizer + US(21.2 kHz, 2 min)

Water 1.0a 2.1b

Chlorinated water (200 mg/L)

2.0b3.1c

Acidic electrolysed water (80 mg/L)

2.2b3.1c

Peroxyacetic acid (80 mg/L)

2.2b2.9c

Acidified sodium chlorite (200 mg/L)

3.1c 4.0d

Table 7: The reduction of E. coli O157:H7 on the surface of spinach with ultrasound (US, 21.2 kHz, 2 min) in combination with selected sanitizers (summarized from Zhou et al., 2009)



p<0.05


Treatments

Microbial counts (log10 CFU/g sample)

TVC(mesophilic)

TVC(psychrotrophic)

YMC

Control (tap water washing, without US) 3.9a 3.7a 2.7a

ClO2 (40 mg/L) + US in ClO2 solution

(40 kHz, 10 min)1.6b 1.5b 1.3b

ClO2 (40 mg/L) + US in tap water

(40 kHz, 10 min) 0.9c 0.8c 0.7c

Table 8: The microbial counts on (log10 CFU/g) plum fruit treated with combined ClO2 and ultrasound (summarized from Chen and Zhu, 2011)

TVC: total viable count.YMC: yeast and mold count.



p<0.05

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 30Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010

jhj

Treatment detailsTreatment detailsTreatment time: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 minAmplitudes: 24.4µm, 30.5µm, 42.7µm, 54.9µm and 61µmTemperature: 25°C

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 31Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010


Fig. 3: Survival curves for yeast inactivation as a function of time at varying amplitude levels of A (24.4 μm), B (30.5 μm), C (42.7 μm), D (54.9 μm), E (61.0 μm).

Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010

5.8

5.3

5

Amplitude (µm) k×10−2 β (shape factor)

24.4 3.234±0.477 1.46±0.792

30.5 3.494±0.429 1.44±0.118

42.7 5.400±0.499 2.05±0.491

54.9 5.437±0.835 3.62±1.043

61.0 6.672±0.434 4.95±0.600


Table 9: Effect of amplitude level (μm) on the inactivation rate constants (±SD) and shape factor (±SD)


p<0.05


Fig. 4: Changes in (A) inactivation rate constant (k×10−2) and (B) shape factor (β) as afunction of amplitude level (μm).

Fig. 4: Changes in (A) inactivation rate constant (k×10−2) and (B) shape factor (β) as afunction of amplitude level (μm).


6.67

3.23

1.46

4.95


Extraction: Extraction: It has been proposed as analternative to conventional

extraction, providing higher recovery of targeted compounds


Objective: To development and validate an innovative, robust, stable, reliable and efficient ultrasonic system at pilot

scale to assist supercritical CO2 extraction of oils from different substrates

Riera et al., 2009

Treatment detailsTreatment detailsAlmond

pressure: 320 bars and 280 barstemperature: 45°C

Cocoa cake pressure: 320 barstemperature: 65°C

Frequency: 20kHz

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 37Riera et al., 2009


Fig. 5: Almond-oil extraction curve at 280 bar and 45ºC with ( ) and without ( ) ultrasounds

15.5

8


Fig. 6: Almond-oil extraction curve at 320 bar and 45ºC with ( ) and without( ) ultrasound

14

8


Fig. 7: Cocoa cake-oil extraction curve at 320 bar and 65ºC with ( ) andwithout ( ) ultrasounds

16.5

12.5


Objective: To investigate the use of ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) in recovery of volatile compounds from the Cannabis sativa L. cultivar

Objective: To investigate the use of ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE) in recovery of volatile compounds from the Cannabis sativa L. cultivar

Porto et al., 2014

Treatment detailsTreatment detailsMaceration: With 70% ethanol for 3 hrsUltrasound assisted extraction

Frequency: 20kHzUAE5: 5 minUAE10: 10 minUAE15: 15 min

Temperature: 30°C

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 42Porto et al., 2014


Fig. 8: Comparison of terpenes content from Cannabis sativa inflorescences extracted using maceration (M) and ultrasound-assisted extraction for

5 (UAE5), 10 (UAE10) and 15 min (UAE15)

Porto et al., 2014

0.4

4.8

5.3


Table 10: Volatile composition of Cannabis sativa extracts obtained by maceration (M) and by ultrasound-assisted extraction for 5 (UAE5), 10 (UAE10) and 15 min (UAE15)

Porto et al., 2014

p<0.05


Nutrients: Being a non-thermal process, loss of nutrients is highly reduced.

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 46Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of ultrasound on the quality parameters: pH, TSS, acidity, ascorbic acid, total phenols and flavonoids of grapefruit juice.

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of ultrasound on the quality parameters: pH, TSS, acidity, ascorbic acid, total phenols and flavonoids of grapefruit juice.

Control: No sonicationSonication :

temperature: 20°Cfrequency: 28kHzUS30: 30 minUS60: 60 minUS90: 90 min


04/13/17 Post harvest technology 47Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013


Treatment TA (%) TSS (Brix) pH

Control 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.60 ± 0.20a 4.91 ± 0.01a

US30 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.53 ± 0.10a 4.91 ± 0.01a

US60 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.50 ± 0.10a 4.90 ± 0.01a

US90 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.50 ± 0.23a 4.90 ± 0.01a

Table 11. Effect of sonication on titratable acidity, total soluble solids and pH of grapefruit juice

Table 11. Effect of sonication on titratable acidity, total soluble solids and pH of grapefruit juice

Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013

p<0.05


Treatment Ascorbic acid(mg/100 ml)

Total phenolics

(GAE µg/g)

Total flavonoids(catechin

equivalent µg/g)

Control 27.83 ± 0.03d 757.96±0.04d 462.27 ± 0.08d

US30 31.81 ± 0.04c 769.93±0.07c 485.00 ± 0.04c

US60 35.40 ± 0.08b 814.30±0.06b 598.64 ± 0.06b

US90 35.75 ± 0.07a35.75 ± 0.07a 826.27±0.0826.27±0.08a8a

603.18 ± 0.03a603.18 ± 0.03a

Table 12: Effect of sonication on ascorbic acid, total phenols and flavonoids in grapefruit juice

Table 12: Effect of sonication on ascorbic acid, total phenols and flavonoids in grapefruit juice

Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013

p<0.05

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 50Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016

Objective: To investigate in detail the effect of ultrasound treatment on the quality of carrot juice including physicochemical parameters, bioactive compounds and microbial load

Control: No sonication

T1: Extraction and sonication for 20 min



Temperature: 25°C

Frequency: 25kHz


04/13/17 Post harvest technology 51Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016

Treatment time (min)

pH Viscosity (cP)

0 5.22 ± 0.03a 1.97 ± 0.05c

20 5.21 ± 0.04a 2.06 ± 0.04b

40 5.23 ± 0.02a 2.18 ± 0.07a

60 5.25 ± 0.03a 2.23 ± 0.08a 2.23 ± 0.08a


Table 13: Effect of ultrasound treatment on pH and viscosity of carrot juice

Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016

p<0.05


Visual color

L* a* b*

0 32.86 ± 0.06c 3.94 ± 0.05b 6.87 ± 0.04d

20 33.02 ± 0.05b 3.99 ± 0.05b 6.98 ± 0.03c

40 33.14 ± 0.03a 4.08 ± 0.03a 7.09 ± 0.06b

60 33.19 ± 33.19 ± 0.07a 0.07a

4.14 ± 0.04a 4.14 ± 0.04a 7.19 ± 0.03a 7.19 ± 0.03a


Table 14: Effect of ultrasound treatment on visual color of carrot juice


p<0.05


Total soluble solids

(°Brix)

Total sugars (g/L)

Total carotenoids

(mg/L)

Ascorbic acid (mg/L)

0 4.04 ± 0.05b 14.42 ± 0.12b 3.47 ± 0.12c 5.26 ± 0.10c

20 4.09 ± 0.06ab 14.58 ± 0.11b 3.68 ± 0.07b 5.45 ± 0.08b

40 4.12 ± 4.12 ± 0.05ab 0.05ab

14.79 ± 14.79 ± 0.09a 0.09a

3.89 ± 0.13a 3.89 ± 0.13a 5.69 ± 0.14a 5.69 ± 0.14a

60 4.19 ± 0.07a 4.19 ± 0.07a 14.82 ± 14.82 ± 0.14a 0.14a

3.94 ± 0.14a 3.94 ± 0.14a 5.67 ± 0.12a 5.67 ± 0.12a


Table 15: Effect of ultrasound treatment on total soluble solids, total sugars, total carotenoids and ascorbic acid contents of carrot juice


p<0.05



Total plate count (log CFU/ml)

Total yeast and mold counts

(log CFU/ml)

0 4.22 ± 0.21a 3.97 ± 0.15a

20 3.71 ± 0.15b 3.36 ± 0.17b

40 3.45 ± 0.10c 3.25 ± 0.11b

60 3.23 ± 0.11d 3.03 ± 0.09c

Table 16: Effect of ultrasound treatment on microbial survival in carrot juice

Table 16: Effect of ultrasound treatment on microbial survival in carrot juice

p<0.05


Objective: To study the effect of ultrasonic treatment on

physicochemical properties of juices extracted from two pomegranate parts (whole pomegranate and arils alone)

Aligourchi et al., 2013

Treatment detailsTreatment detailsUltrasonication:

Frequency: 20kHzTemperature: 25°CWave amplitudes: 50%, 75% and 100%Treatment time: 3, 6 and 9 min

Varieties: Malase Momtaze Saveh & Alak Saveh

04/13/17 Post harvest technology 57Aligourchi et al., 2013


MMSA ASA MMSW ASW

TSS (°Brix) 16.7±0.1d 17.2±0.1c 18.1±0.1b 18.9±0.1a18.9±0.1a

pH 3.56±0.01a 3.09±0.02b 3.54±0.01a 3.05±0.01b3.05±0.01b

TA (g/100mL)

0.81±0.01d 1.61±0.00b 0.93±0.01c 1.67±0.02a1.67±0.02a

TAC (mg/L) 375.5±12.9b 409.4±6.1a409.4±6.1a 338.7±3.3d 355.8±4.1c

TPC (mg/100mL) 204.6±6.9c 234.9±4.6b 278.3±11.0a 290.7±6.8a290.7±6.8a

** Total soluble solids (TSS); total titratable acidity (TA); total phenolic content (TPC); total anthocyanin pigment content (TAC)

Table 17: Main physicochemical quality parameters of untreated pomegranate juices obtained from: Malase Momtaze Saveh arils (MMSA); Alak Saveh arils

(ASA); whole Malase Momtaze Saveh pomegranate (MMSW); and whole Alak Saveh pomegranate (ASW)

Table 17: Main physicochemical quality parameters of untreated pomegranate juices obtained from: Malase Momtaze Saveh arils (MMSA); Alak Saveh arils

(ASA); whole Malase Momtaze Saveh pomegranate (MMSW); and whole Alak Saveh pomegranate (ASW)


p<0.05


Ultrasonic power

(%)T (min) TAC(mg/L) TPC

(mg/100mL)Antioxidant(mg/100mL)

β-carotene (%ALPA)

0 0 409±6ab 235±5ab 1130±67a 79±5ab

50 3 408±12ab 229±3ab 1231±44a 77±2ab

6 381±10c 229±7ab 1108±46a 76±1b

9 425±22ab 224±4b 1282±96a 77±2ab

75 3 385±5c 243±9ab 1219±39a 84±5ab

6 388±12bc 245±6ab 1243±128a 79±0ab

9 403±10bc 236±10ab 1203±90a 80±4ab

100 3 442±5a 249±10a 1220±102a 89±1a

6 400±4bc 239±7ab 1288±80a 85±1ab

9 373±8c 235±6ab 1277±44a 89±3a

Table 18: Evaluation of total anthocyanin (mg/L), total polyphenol content (mg/100 mL juice), assay of antioxidant activities based on ABTS (mg/100 mL juice) and β-carotene (%ALPA) in pomegranate juice (ASA) as a function of the ultrasonic amplitude levels and treatment times.


p<0.05


Ultrasonic power (%)

T (min) TAC(mg/L)

TPC (mg/100mL)

Antioxidant (mg/100mL)

β-carotene (%ALPA)

0 0 356±4a 291±7b 1558±109a 92±5a

50 3 361±4a 312±10ab 1524±88a 89±1a

6 354±11a 294±15ab 1569±101a 93±5a

9 347±4a 315±17ab 1438±117a 85±2a

75 3 341±9a 285±14b 1539±96a 89±2a

6 339±4a 298±10ab 1498±106a 93±0a

9 344±7a 283±15b 1442±109a 89±4a

100 3 348±15a 306±8a 1482±67a 88±3a

6 343±8a 318±13a 1511±128a 92±1a

9 335±7a340±15a

1423±74a 89±2a

Table 19: Evaluation of total anthocyanin (mg/L), total polyphenol content (mg/100 mL juice), assay of antioxidant activities based on ABTS (mg/100 mL juice) and β-carotene (%ALPA) in pomegranate juice (ASW) as a function of the ultrasonic amplitude levels and treatment times.


p<0.05

Advantages Advantages

Rapid process and high outputLow energy consumptionReduced processing costNon-thermal technologyHigher purityGreen technology


LimitationsLimitations


High initial investmentBudding technologyNarrow spectrum of applicationSkilled labour requirement

ConclusionConclusion

This technology can be effectively used in decontamination of fruits and vegetables, enhances the effectiveness of sterilizers.It improves the extraction process as well as retention of nutrients.


