Title of article :
Chemical and sensory comparison of fresh and dried lulo (Solanum quitoense Lam.) fruit aroma
Author/Authors :
Forero، نويسنده , , Diana Paola and Orrego، نويسنده , , Carlos Eduardo and Peterson، نويسنده , , Devin Grant and Osorio، نويسنده , , Coralia، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2015
Pages :
7
From page :
85
To page :
91
Abstract :
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.
Keywords :
Ultrasonic convective drying , Lyophilisation , Solanum quitoense Lam , Odour-active volatiles , spray-drying
Journal title :
Food Chemistry
Serial Year :
2015
Journal title :
Food Chemistry
Record number :
1979400
Link To Document :
بازگشت