This article was downloaded by: [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities]

On: 04 October 2013, At: 04:05

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Drying Technology: An International Journal

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ldrt20

Application of Ultrasound and Ultrasound-Assisted

Osmotic Dehydration in Drying of Fruits
a b
Fabiano A. N. Fernandes & Sueli Rodrigues
a
Universidade Federal do Ceará, Departamento de Engenharia Química, Campus do Pici,
Fortaleza CE, Brazil
b
Universidade Federal do Ceará, Departamento de Tecnologia dos Alimentos, Campus do
Pici Caixa Postal, Fortaleza CE, Brazil
Published online: 16 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Fabiano A. N. Fernandes & Sueli Rodrigues (2008) Application of Ultrasound and Ultrasound-
Assisted Osmotic Dehydration in Drying of Fruits, Drying Technology: An International Journal, 26:12, 1509-1516, DOI:
10.1080/07373930802412256

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07373930802412256

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Drying Technology, 26: 1509–1516, 2008
Copyright # 2008 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0737-3937 print/1532-2300 online
DOI: 10.1080/07373930802412256
Application of Ultrasound and Ultrasound-Assisted Osmotic
Dehydration in Drying of Fruits
Fabiano A. N. Fernandes1 and Sueli Rodrigues2
1
Universidade Federal do Cear
a, Departamento de Engenharia Quı́mica, Campus do Pici, Fortaleza
CE, Brazil
2
Universidade Federal do Cear
a, Departamento de Tecnologia dos Alimentos, Campus do Pici, Caixa
Postal, Fortaleza CE, Brazil
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013
This work examines the influence of ultrasonic and ultrasonic
assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatments on the dehydration of
eight fruits (banana, genipap, jambo, melon, papaya, pineapple,
pinha, and sapota). An overview of the effects of ultrasound appli-
cation on water loss, sugar gain, and effective diffusivity of water
during the dehydration process is presented. The results showed sig-
nificant differences for water loss and sugar gain among the fruits
that were studied, which were analyzed based on the changes
observed on the tissue structure of the fruit. The results also showed
that the effective diffusivity of water in the fruit increased after
application of ultrasound reducing air-drying time.
Keywords Drying; Effective diffusivity; Fruit; Image analysis;
Osmotic dehydration; Sugar gain; Tissue changes;
Ultrasound; Water loss
INTRODUCTION
Drying is the most common method of food preser-
vation. Conventional air-drying is a simultaneous heat
and mass transfer process, accompanied by phase
change.[1] Air drying is generally carried out at mild tem-
peratures (between 40 to 70
C) to reduce the degradation
of the fruit. The process takes from 8 to 24 h depending
on the fruit that is being processed, its initial moisture con-
tent, the desired final moisture content, and the tempera-
ture used in the process. Temperature is maintained by
direct heating of the air passing through the samples, mak-
ing the air-drying process heat intensive and expensive.
A pretreatment can be employed to reduce air-drying time.
One of pretreatments that can be used to reduce air-
drying time is ultrasound application. The use of ultra-
sound within the food industry has been growing and, in
recent years, many applications of ultrasonic energy have
Correspondence: Fabiano A. N. Fernandes, Universidade
Federal do Ceara, Departamento de Engenharia Quı́mica,
Campus do Pici, Bloco 709, 60455-760, Fortaleza CE, Brazil;
E-mail: fabiano@ufc.br
1509
been investigated concerning the use of ultrasound to
directly affect the process or product.
Power ultrasound can produce chemical, mechanical, or
physical changes on the processes or products where it is
applied.[2] These changes have been used to improve sur-
face cleaning, catalyse chemical reactions, enhance drying
and filtration, and accelerate the extraction of some com-
pounds from plants, fruits, and vegetables.
When low-frequency power ultrasound is applied, ultra-
sonic waves travel through the solid medium, causing a rapid
series of alternative compressions and expansions, in a simi-
lar way to a sponge when it is squeezed and released repeat-
edly (sponge effect).[3] The sonication also causes cavitation
in a liquid medium, which consists in the formation of bub-
bles in the liquid that can explosively collapse and generate
localized pressure and temperature increase.[4,5] The rate of
cavitation or alternate compressions and expansions
depends on the frequency of the ultrasonic waves.
The mechanical and physical effects of acoustic waves
can be used to enhance many processes where mass transfer
takes place, drying included. The forces involved by the
sponge effect caused by ultrasonic waves can create micro-
scopic channels that may ease moisture removal. These
microscopic channels can be used by water molecules as
a preferential pathway to diffuse toward the surface of
the fruit, increasing its effective water diffusivity. The ultra-
sonic waves also reduce the diffusion boundary layer and
increase the convective mass transfer in the sample.[3,6,7]
In addition, the cavitations produced by ultrasound are
beneficial for the removal of moisture strongly attached.
Over the past three years our group has studied the
effects of ultrasound application on several fruits and we
have observed that the effects of ultrasound application
differ for each fruit. In this article, an overview of the
effects of ultrasound application in the dehydration of
eight fruits (banana, genipap, jambo, melon, papaya, pine-
apple, pinha, and sapota) is presented.
 1510 FERNANDES AND RODRIGUES
APPLICATION OF ULTRASOUND IN DRYING
PROCESSES
The ultrasound pretreatment procedure is simple to
carry out. It consists os the immersion of the fruit in water
or in an osmotic solution to which ultrasound is applied.
The pretreatment can be carried out at ambient tempera-
ture, reducing the probability of food degradation.[2]
Preparation of Samples
Fruit samples were cut to obtain cubes, cylinders, or
triangular-shaped slices, depending on the fruit that was
studied. Melons and papayas were cut into cubes. Genipaps,
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013
jambos, sapotas, and pineapples were cut into triangular-
shaped slices (cut into eighths). Bananas were cut into cylin-
ders. Moisture content was determined by heating in a
drying oven at 105
C for 48 h, according to AOAC method
(AOAC, 1990).[8] The initial soluble solids content of the
fruit (
Brix) was determined by refractometry.
Ultrasound Application
The samples were immersed in distilled water or in an
osmotic solution and were subjected to ultrasonic waves
during a period of 10 to 45 min. The process was carried
out placing the samples in an ultrasonic bath. Ultrasound
should be applied for at least 10 min, because the effect
of ultrasound showed to be insignificant at lower times.
The changes caused by ultrasonic waves on the effective
water diffusivity became slight after 20 min and after
30–45 min the changes were insignificant.[9,10]
The osmotic solution was prepared by mixing food-
grade sucrose with distilled water. Most studies were
carried out with osmotic solutions ranging from 25 to
70
Brix. The dissolution of sugars in water became difficult
above 50
Brix and fast dissolution was only achieved
through heating (to 50
C) and vigorous stirring of the
osmotic solution, which was set aside until it cooled to
ambient temperature.
The water-to-fruit ratio was maintained between 3:1 and
4:1 (weight basis), which is preferred because the volume of
the vessel (or ultrasonic bath) can be small. Higher water-
to-fruit ratios require larger vessels and more powerful
ultrasonic equipment.
The pretreatment was carried out under ambient
temperature, because higher temperatures did not show
to enhance the effects of ultrasound application.[5] The
frequency of the ultrasonic waves was 25 kHz and the
intensity was 4000 W=m2.
Weight Reduction, Water Loss, and Sugar Gain during
the Pretreatment
The performance of the pretreatment was evaluated
analyzing the parameters weight reduction (WR), water
loss (WL), and sugar gain (SG), which were calculated
according to Eqs. (1) to (3).
wi  wf
WRð%Þ ¼  100 ð1Þ
wi
ðwi  Xi  wf  Xf Þ
WLð%Þ ¼  100 ð2Þ
wi
where Xi is the initial fruit moisture on wet basis (g water=g),
Xf is the final fruit moisture on wet basis (g water=g), wi
is the initial mass of the fruit (g), and wf is the final mass
of the fruit (g).
The calculation of the sugar gain based on the initial
weight of the samples may be misleading because it gener-
ally results in a small value (up to 10% in most cases). A
fast analysis of the sugar gain, in this case, may be inter-
preted as a reduced amount of sugar has been incorporated
by the fruit, whereas in some cases the amount of sugar in
the dried sample has doubled or even tripled, having a
direct impact on the sensory characteristics of the fruit
and on the calories associated to it. In this work, the sugar
gain was calculated based on the initial weight of soluble
solids to evaluate the gain of soluble solids by the sample.
½wf  ð1  Xsf Þ  wi  ð1  Xsi Þ
SGð%Þ ¼  100 ð3Þ
wi  ð1  Xsi Þ
where Xsi is the initial soluble solids content of the fruit
(g solid=g), and Xsf is the final soluble solids content of
the fruit (g solid=g).
Water loss during the ultrasonic pretreatment was calcu-
lated based on the moisture content of the pretreated fruit,
which was determined by heating in a drying oven at 105
C
for 48 h, according to AOAC method.[8] Sugar gain during
the process was calculated based on the soluble solids con-
tent of the fruit and on the soluble solids content of the
liquid medium, which were directly determined by refrac-
tometry.
Air Drying
At the end of the pretreatment, the dehydrated samples
were drained, blotted with absorbent paper to remove the
excess solution, and transferred to a forced circulating
air-drying oven. Air drying was carried out at 60
C.
Air drying was modeled assuming diffusion-controlled
mass transfer with liquid flowing within the fruit conform-
ing to Fick’s second law of diffusion. The equation used to
model the falling-rate period is a simplification of Fick’s
second law considering long drying times.[11]
dH 2p

¼  2  D  H  Heq ð4Þ
dt d
Air drying time can be reduced if the initial moisture
content (H0) of the fruit is reduced or if the effective water
diffusivity (D) of the fruit is increased. Pretreatments can
be used to reduce the initial water content of the fruit or
 OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION OF FRUITS 1511

to modify the tissue structure of the fruit in a way that the
effective water diffusivity increases.[12–14]
Reproducibility of Data
Experiments with identical operating conditions have
been conducted to test the repeatability of the water loss
data, sugar gain data, and moisture data during the
pretreatment and the air-drying step. The percentage of
reproducibility was calculated based on Eq. (5).
P1  P2
 100% ð5Þ
P1
where P presents the parameters WL, SG, and H (moisture
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013
continuous squeeze and release of the tissue of the fruit,
on a microscopic level, have expelled water to the liquid
medium, despite the osmotic pressure gradient that tends
to transfer water to the fruit. The gain of water was not sig-
nificant and, except for genipaps, it was lower than 10%.
Genipaps presented a water gain of 14.9%.
Sugar gain was negative for all fruits, indicating that the
fruit lost soluble solids to the liquid medium. This result
was expected because of the concentration gradient of
soluble solids between the fruit and the liquid medium that
favors the mass transfer of soluble solids from the fruit to
the liquid medium.
The loss of soluble solids for each fruit was very differ-

content) and subscripts 1 and 2 present two consecutive ent, ranging from 1.5 to 52.9%. Fruits with high initial
data with similar drying conditions. Results obtained from moisture content lost more soluble solids to the liquid
the experiments have shown that we were able to reproduce medium than fruits with low initial moisture content
WL, SG, and H within 2.5 to 4.2%, 1.0 to 6.5%, and 6.5 (Table 2). This behavior is explained by the diffusion of
to 9.0%, respectively. soluble solids in water. Fruits with high initial moisture
content may ease the diffusion of soluble solids toward
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION the liquid medium. The exception was pinha, which rapidly
Ultrasound application can be carried out using distilled lost soluble solids to the liquid medium because of the low
water or an osmotic solution as the liquid medium. The cohesion between the cells in its tissue structure.
choice of liquid medium has a great influence on the pro- The loss of soluble solids was also influence by the
cess, leading to different behaviors regarding water loss effects of ultrasound on the tissue structure of the fruit.
and sugar gain. The tissue structure of melons was very sensitive to ultra-
sound application and several microscopic channels
Distilled Water as the Liquid Medium appeared in the tissue structure.[15] These microscopic
Each fruit presented a different behavior when ultra- channels eased the diffusion of water and soluble solids
sound was applied. Melons and pineapples lost water to in and out of the fruit. The number, length, and width of
the liquid medium during the pretreatment. Papayas, sapo- the microscopic channels affects the mass transfer between
tas, genipaps, and bananas gained water (Table 1). the fruit and the liquid medium.
The concentration gradient of soluble solids between the Short microscopic channels were formed in papayas.
fruit and the liquid medium should result in the gain of Consequently, the overall mass transfer did not increase
water by the fruit during the pretreatment. Most fruit pre- and only a small quantity of soluble solids (1.5%) was
sented such behavior, except for melons and pineapples. transferred to the liquid medium. Few microscopic chan-
These latter fruits presented high moisture content (90% nels were formed in pineapples, but they were long, increas-
for melons and 83% for pineapples) and were significantly ing the overall mass transfer. Consequently, the sugar loss
affected by the sponge effect of ultrasonic waves. The in pineapples was high (18.9%) (Fig. 1).
Microscopic channels were formed in all fruits during
ultrasound application. The time required to form long
TABLE 1
Water loss and sugar gain of fruits subjected for 30 min to
ultrasound pretreatment
Sugar Water
Fruit gain (%) loss (%)
Banana (Musa spp.) 21.3 7.2
Genipap (Genipa americana L.) 8.2 14.9
Jambo (Syzygium malaccense L.) 17.0 14.7
Melon (Cucumis melo L.) 52.2 þ5.5
Papaya (Carica papaya L.) 1.5 5.7
Pineapple (Ananas comosus L.) 18.9 þ3.1
Pinha (Annona squamosa L.) 52.9 þ18.7 FIG. 1. Photomicrographs of pineapples (A) and papaya (B) cubes
subjected to ultrasound pretreatment. Arrows indicate the cell interspaces
Sapota (Achras sapota L.) 3.8 6.6 and microscopic channels. Magnification of 380  .
 1512 FERNANDES AND RODRIGUES

channels, which increases the mass transfer rate, depended

on the fruit. Microscopic channels were formed by elonga-
tion of cells in melons, which was a fast process. In other
fruits, like in pineapples, microscopic channels were
formed by disruption of cells, which required more time
to occur. In the latter case, an increase in sugar loss was
observed after a certain time (20 min for pineapples) as
shown in Fig. 2.
Studies on osmotic dehydration showed that melons
gained up to 185% of sugar after 180 min in osmotic sol-
ution (55Brix, 65C), pineapples gained up to 120% of
sugar after 180 min in osmotic solution (70Brix, 30C),
and bananas gained up to 220% of sugar after 240 min in
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013

osmotic solution (70Brix, 60C).[16–20] As such, the ultra-

sonic treatment is an interesting process to produce dried
fruits with low sugar content, because during ultrasound
FIG. 2. Evolution of sugar loss during ultrasound application using pretreatment the fruit lost sugar, whereas under osmotic
distilled water as liquid medium. dehydration the uptake of sugar was very high.
The effect of the ultrasonic pretreatment was mainly
observed during the air-drying stage where a significant
increase in effective water diffusivity was observed. Effec-
TABLE 2
tive water diffusivity was affected by ultrasound appli-
Initial soluble solids content and moisture of fruits
cation in some fruits, but no effect was observed in
subjected to ultrasound pretreatment
pineapples (Table 3). The ultrasonic pretreatment had a
Soluble positive effect on drying because the increase in the effec-
solids Moisture tive water diffusivity resulted in shorter air-drying time if
content (g water= compared to the fresh fruit with no pretreatment (Fig. 3).
Fruit (Brix) g fruit) Greater changes in effective water diffusivity during the
Banana (Musa spp.) 27.0 0.73 air-drying process were found for melons pretreated for
Genipap (Genipa americana L.) 24.9 0.75 30 min under ultrasonic waves (6.97  10 9 m2
s 1). The
Jambo (Syzygium malaccense L.) 12.7 0.82 effective water diffusivity was 39.4% higher than the diffusiv-
Melon (Cucumis melo L.) 9.6 0.90 ity of the fresh fruit (5.00  10 9 m2
s 1) and 35.9% higher
Papaya (Carica papaya L.) 11.7 0.88 than the diffusivity of osmo-dehydrated melons (5.13  10 9
Pineapple (Ananas comosus L.) 16.8 0.83 m2
s 1). This higher effective water diffusivity observed for
Pinha (Annona squamosa L.) 35.4 0.64 melons may be related to the changes in the tissue structure
Sapota (Achras sapota L.) 30.0 0.70 and the high moisture content of the fruit, which might have
facilitated the formation of microchannels.

TABLE 3
Effective water diffusivity of fruits submitted to ultrasound pretreatment
Effective diffusivity
Effective diffusivity of the of the fruit treated in
Fruit fresh fruit (m2=s) ultrasound for 30 min (m2=s)
9 9
Banana (Musa spp.) 1.28  10 1.41  10
8 8
Genipap (Genipa americana L.) 1.41  10 1.56  10
11 10
Jambo (Syzygium malaccense L.) 6.52  10 2.97  10
9 9
Melon (Cucumis melo L.) 5.00  10 6.97  10
9 9
Papaya (Carica papaya L.) 5.90  10 5.76  10
10 10
Pineapple (Ananas comosus L.) 4.97  10 4.89  10
10 9
Pinha (Annona squamosa L.) 8.87  10 4.41  10
9 9
Sapota (Achras sapota L.) 7.31  10 7.12  10
 OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION OF FRUITS
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013
FIG. 3. Development of the moisture content during air drying as a
function of processing time for fresh bananas (no pretreatment) and for
bananas submitted to 30 min of ultrasound pretreatment.
Bananas were also positively influenced by the ultra-
sonic treatment. The effective water diffusivity during the
air-drying process increased after the bananas where pre-
treated for 20 min under ultrasonic waves (1.47  109
m2  s1). Pretreating bananas using osmotic dehydration
resulted in an effective water diffusivity of 1.37  109
m2  s1. Both values were higher than the diffusivity
obtained for the fresh fruit (1.28  109 m2  s1) during
air drying.[18] The effective water diffusivity after appli-
cation of ultrasound was 14.8% higher than the diffusivity
of the fresh fruit and 7.3% higher than the diffusivity of the
osmo-dehydrated bananas. The increase observed in the
effective water diffusivity for bananas was lower than for
melons. The result may be influenced by the higher density
and the lower moisture content of bananas, which may
result in the formation of fewer microchannels or in the
formation of microchannels only near the surface of the
fruit. This hypothesis still has to be checked by micro-
photograph analysis.
Phenomenological mathematical models of the ultra-
sonic process should consider the mass transfer coefficient
and the changes on the mass transfer coefficient caused by
the formation of microscopic channels. No phenomeno-
logical mathematical model that describes the changes in
effective water diffusivity as a function of the time spent
in ultrasound are described in the literature and further
studies on modeling the ultrasonic process still need to be
carried out to develop a model that considers the changes
on the fruit tissue structure and their consequences.
However, empirical correlations can be obtained from
experimental data. The effective water diffusivity for
bananas, sapotas, and papayas can be correlated by
Eqs. (5)–(7):
1513

D ¼ 7:69  0:0085  tU þ 0:0073  t2U

 0:000205  t3U  108 ð5Þ

9
D ¼ 4:57  0:00274  t2:5 3
U þ 0:000470  tU  10 ð6Þ
D ¼ ð5:61  0:0050  tU þ 0:287  expðtU ÞÞ  109 ð7Þ
where D is the effective water diffusivity (m2=s) and tU is
the time spent under ultrasonic pretreatment (min).
Tests with two different ultrasound frequencies (25 and
40 kHz) were carried out using two different ultrasonic
baths. Tests were carried out with melons and pineapples
and the results did not show any statistical difference.
The values observed for melons and pineapples were within
the standard error of the experiments.
Osmotic Solution as the Liquid Medium
A higher water loss was observed when an osmotic solu-
tion was used as the liquid medium (ultrasound-assisted
osmotic dehydration), if compared to the ultrasound pre-
treatment using distilled water as the liquid medium.
Table 4 shows the results for ultrasound assisted osmotic
dehydration.
Pineapple lost between 5.1 and 8.3% of its initial water
content when immersed in an osmotic solution of 35
Brix
and lost between 9.8 and 14.2% of its initial water content
when immersed in an osmotic solution of 70
Brix (Table 4).
Rastogi and Niranjan,[17] Rastogi and Raghavarao,[21] and
Parkojo et al.[16] have studied the osmotic dehydration of
pineapples without application of ultrasound. Their results
showed that pineapple lost 14% of water when immersed in
an osmotic solution of 40
Brix at 30
C and 32% of water
when immersed in an osmotic solution of 70
Brix at
30
C, after 30 min of treatment.
Pineapple gained soluble solids during ultrasound-assisted
osmotic dehydration. An increase by 13.5% of sugar in pine-
apple was observed when the fruit was immersed in an
osmotic solution of 35
Brix and an increase by 34.1% was
observed when immersed in an osmotic solution of 70
Brix.
The gain of sugars occurred because of the sugar concen-
tration gradient (osmotic pressure) between the fruit and
the osmotic solution, which favored the mass transfer of
sugar from the osmotic solution to the fruit and the mass
transfer of water from the fruit to the osmotic solution. Data
reported in the literature shows that pineapple gained 10% of
soluble solids when immersed for 30 min in an osmotic
solution of 40
Brix at 30
C and 35% of soluble solids when
immersed for the same period in an osmotic solution of
70
Brix at 30
C.[16,17,21]
Sapotas presented an expressive water loss when the
fruit was immersed in an osmotic solution of 70
Brix, a
condition that resulted in the highest water loss after
 1514 FERNANDES AND RODRIGUES

TABLE 4
Sugar gain and water loss for fruit subjected to ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration for 30 min
Fruit Sugar content (
Brix) Sugar gain (%) Water loss (%)
Jambo 25 26.4 14.5
Papaya 35 27.9 3.2
Pineapple 35 13.5 8.3
Pineapple 70 34.1 14.1
Sapota 35 8.1 2.4
Sapota 70 10.0 13.2

30 min under ultrasound application (13.2%). However, the size of these sugars molecules and because of the
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013

the ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration did not show
significant difference at lower soluble solids content
(35
Brix) if compared to the pretreatment carried out using
distilled water as the liquid medium. This low water loss
may be related to the starch content of the fruit
(16  5%, dry basis), since a high amount of starch favors
water uptake, behavior that has been reported previously
for vegetables with high starch content such as potatoes.[22]
The results regarding sugar gain were very interesting.
After 10 min under ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehy-
dration, sapotas lost 12.1 and 11.2% of their soluble solid
to the osmotic solution, respectively, for osmotic solutions
of 35 and 70
Brix. The pretreatment carried out with an
osmotic solution of 35
Brix showed a slight reduction in
sugar loss after 30 min, whereas when the pretreatment
was carried out with an osmotic solution of 70
Brix the
fruit showed a sugar gain of 10.0% after 30 min under
ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration.
The behavior observed for sapotas might be explained
by the physical-chemical composition of the fruit. Sapotas
have approximately 25  5% of glucose, 19  4% of
fructose, 25  5% of sucrose, 12  2% of tannins, and
16  5% of starch (dry basis).[23,24] The fruit is grainy,
porous, and absorbs liquid readily because of its high
starch content.[23] The sponge effect of ultrasound might,
at first, expel small sugar molecules such as glucose and
fructose, which may leave the fruit more easily because of
porosity of the fruit. The low concentration of fructose
and glucose in the osmotic solution contributes to the rapid
loss of sugars at the beginning of the pretreatment. Large
sucrose molecules have lower diffusivity and diffuse
through the fruit only when high sucrose concentration
(70
Brix) is applied. It should also be noticed that sapotas
contain high amounts of sucrose and a reasonable osmotic
pressure is only achieved when a high sucrose concen-
tration is applied.
The effect of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration
on the effective water diffusivity also differed among fruits
(Table 5). The effective water diffusivity increased in
papayas when compared to the effective water diffusivity
in fresh papayas. This increase was mainly caused by the
breakdown of cells observed when an osmotic solution
was used, creating an easier path for water to diffuse
toward the surface of the fruit. The same effect was
observed for pineapples subjected to the process using an
osmotic solution of 70
Brix. Figure 4 shows micrographs
of the tissue structure of pineapples and papayas subjected
to ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration, where the
breakdown of cells can be observed.
When a low degree of cell breakdown was observed in
the osmotic treatment, the effective water diffusivity was
lower than the water diffusivity of the fresh fruit. This
behavior was observed for sapotas and pineapples sub-
jected to ultrasonic waves immersed in an osmotic solution

TABLE 5
Water effective diffusivity for fruit subjected to ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration for 30 min
Effective diffusivity
Osmotic solution Effective diffusivity of the fruit treated
Fruit sugar content (
Brix) of the fresh fruit (m2=s) in ultrasound for 30 min (m2=s)
Jambo 25 6.52  1011 3.90  1010
Papaya 35 5.00  109 7.32  109
Pineapple 35 5.90  109 4.80  1010
Pineapple 70 5.90  109 7.10  109
Sapota 35 7.31  109 4.86  109
Sapota 70 7.31  109 5.72  109
 OSMOTIC DEHYDRATION OF FRUITS
FIG. 4. Photomicrographs of pineapples (A) and papaya (B) cubes
subjected to ultrasound assisted osmotic dehydration pretreatment,
showing a high degree of cell breakdown. Magnification of 380 .
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013
of 35
Brix. In this case, the sugar incorporated by the fruit
created an extra resistance for water to diffuse toward the
fruit surface, which was not compensated by the micro-
scopic channels that might have become saturated with
sucrose molecules.
The influence of the ultrasonic intensity in water and dry
matter transport on a system constituted by apple and
sucrose solution was studied by Carcel et al.[25] Apple slices
were immersed in a 30
Brix sucrose solution at 30
C. Three
types of treatments were carried out: static, with agitation,
and with ultrasound application. After 45-min treatment,
the water losses and the increase of dry matter were signifi-
cantly higher in samples treated under ultrasound appli-
cation than in samples without application of ultrasound,
which were consistent with the findings reported in this
work. In a similar study, Simal et al.[5] found that the water
diffusivity in apples subjected to ultrasound application
was higher than the water diffusivity of the fresh fruit.
The values reported by Simal et al.[5] for apples were simi-
lar to the values reported for pineapples and jambo in this
work. Ultrasonic treatments increased by 117% the water
diffusivity in apples, which was slightly higher than the
findings of this work. Stojanovic and Silva[26] have con-
cluded that long osmoconcentration (12 h) of blueberries
can be reduced to 3 h with the application of high-
frequency ultrasound with similar results. The findings of
Stojanovic and Silva[26] also support the findings of this
work that showed that the application of ultrasound helps
reducing the processing time of the osmotic dehydration
and air-drying processes.
Cost-Effectiveness
An ultrasonic bath consumes about 11  1 kJ=min of
operation per kilogram of fruit, if a fruit-to–osmotic
solution ratio of 1:4 is applied. This value may change
depending on the density and shape of the fruit. Fruits with
higher density will require less power per kilogram of fruit.
To process 1 kg of papaya, an ultrasonic bath requires
11.1 kJ=min of operation. This value required per kilogram
of fruit is higher than that required by a circulating oven
or a tray dryer, which requires 4.5 kJ=min of operation.
1515
The higher power consumption of the ultrasonic process
is compensated by the reduction in the air-drying time.
Calculating the total energetic cost at the best operation
conditions, the fresh fruit will require 314 min to reduce
its moisture content by 95% and will consume 1397 kJ=kg
kg of fruit; and the ultrasonic process using distilled water
as the liquid medium will require 20 min of ultrasound
and 244 min of air drying, consuming 1308 kJ=kg of
fruit. On the other hand, the use of ultrasonic-assisted
osmotic dehydration will require 30 min of ultrasound
and 279 min of air drying, consuming 1574 kJ=kg of fruit.
The latter result is higher because of the lower value of
the effective diffusivity of water, which increases the
required air-drying time. If the cost of energy is assumed
to be US$0.306=kWh (cost of electrical power in Brazil in
June of 2008) the cost of the ultrasonic process would stand
at US$0.119=kg. The cost of using the air-drying process
without pretreatment of the fruit would cost US$0.134=kg.
kg. The results show that the ultrasonic process is economi-
cally viable, being 11% less expensive than the air-drying
process to dry papaya.
To process 1 kg of banana, the ultrasonic process will
require 11.0 kJ=min of operation. The energy consumption
of a circulating oven or a tray dryer will be approximately
8.1 kJ=min of operation per kilogram of banana. Calculat-
ing the total energetic cost at the best operation conditions,
the fresh fruit will require 839 min to reduce its moisture
content by 95% and will consume 6796 kJ=kg of fruit;
and the ultrasonic process using distilled water as the liquid
medium will require 20 min of ultrasound and 733 min of
air drying, consuming 6157 kJ=kg of fruit. If the cost of
energy is again assumed to be US$0.306=kWh, the cost
of the ultrasonic process would stand at US$0.523=kg.
The cost of using the air-drying process without pretreat-
ment of the fruit would be US$0.577=kg. The results show
that the ultrasonic process is economically viable, being
9.3% less expensive than the air-drying process to dry
banana.
The ultrasonic process is cost-effective for several fruits
because of the lower energy consumption during the air-
drying step. The ultrasonic process will not be cost-
effective when the effective water diffusivity in the fresh
fruit and in the fruit treated with ultrasound are similar.
It is important to notice that these values were calcu-
lated based on small-scale equipment and that lower
operating costs may be expected for large-scale production.
Most ultrasonic baths present an efficiency of 60–80%
while converting electrical power into ultrasonic power.
A future increase in the efficiency of these equipments
may further reduce the cost of the process.
CONCLUSIONS
Ultrasonic processes are still under development and
more studies are required to fully comprehend the effects
 1516 FERNANDES AND RODRIGUES
of ultrasound on the fruit tissue and on the sensory charac-
teristics of the fruit, such as texture, adhesiveness, and
others. Recent studies have shown a good potential of
ultrasonic treatments.
Fruits pretreated with ultrasonic waves have presented
significant loss of sugars when the process was carried
out using distilled water as the liquid medium. This process
can be applied to produce dried fruits with low sugar con-
tent, which might be used in the production of foodstuffs
with reduced calories.
The application of the ultrasound pretreatment increased
the water diffusivity of the fruit in most cases. This phenom-
enon may occur because of the formation of microchannels
Downloaded by [University of Minnesota Libraries, Twin Cities] at 04:05 04 October 2013
during the application of ultrasound. This phenomenon still
has to be further studied to understand how the microchan-
nels are formed and how the cell membrane and the tissue
structure change during the process. The increase in the
effective water diffusivity at the air-drying stage makes the
use of ultrasound an interesting technique that can be used
complementary to classical air drying.
The use of ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration
increased the water loss and sugar gain during the process.
The effect of the ultrasound-assisted osmotic dehydration
on the effective water diffusivity depended on the degree
of breakdown of cells in the fruit tissue.
The ultrasonic treatment is cost-effective when the ultra-
sonic process is able to increase the effective diffusivity of
water in the fruit. Further studies should be carried out
to evaluate the effect of ultrasound on the microbial
activity of the dried fruit.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank Dr. Marisa Narciso Fernandes from
Universidade Federal de São Carlos for allowing the use
of the microscopy system and Dr. Maria Izabel Gallão
from Universidade Federal do Cear a for the help with
the preparation of the laminas.
REFERENCES
1. Barbanti, D.; Mastrocola, D.; Severine, C. Drying of plums. A
comparison among twelve cultivars. Sciences des Aliments 1994, 14,
61–73.
2. Mason, T.J. Power ultrasound in food processing—The way forward.
In Ultrasounds in Food Processing; Povey, M.J.W.; Mason, T.J., Eds.;
Blackie Academic and Professional: Glasgow, 1998; 104–124.
3. Fuente-Blanco, S.; Sarabia, E.R.F.; Acosta-Aparicio, V.M.; Blanco-
Blanco, A.; Gallego-Juarez, J.A. Food drying process by power ultra-
sound. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 2006, 44, e523–e527.
4. Wan, P.J.; Muanda, M.W.; Covey, J.E. Ultrasonic vs. nonultrasonic
hydrogenation in a batch reactor. Journal of American Organics
Chemical Society 1992, 69, 876–879.
5. Simal, S.; Benedito, J.; Sanchez, E.S.; Rosell
o, C. Use of ultrasound to
increase mass transport rate during osmotic dehydration. Journal of
Food Engineering 1998, 36, 323–336.
6. Tarleton, E.S. The role of field-assisted techniques in solid=liquid
separation. Filtration Separation 1992, 3, 246–253.
7. Tarleton, E.S.; Wakeman, R.J. Ultrasonically assisted separation
process. In Ultrasounds in Food Processing; Povey, M.J.W.; Mason,
T.J., Eds.; Blackie Academic and Professional: Glasgow, 1998;
193–218.
8. AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis; Association of Official Analyti-
cal Chemists: Washington, DC, 1990.
9. Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S. Ultrasound as pre-treatment for
drying of fruits: Dehydration of banana. Journal of Food Engineering
2007, 82, 207–214.
10. Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S. Use of ultrasound as pretreatment
for dehydration of melons. Drying Technology 2007, 25, 1791–1796.
11. Perry, R.H.; Green, D.W. Perry’s Chemical Engineer’s Handbook;
McGraw Hill: New York, 1999.
12. Cao, H.; Zhang, M.; Mujumdar, A.S.; Du, W.H.; Sun, J.C. Optimiza-
tion of osmotic dehydration of kiwifruit. Drying Technology 2006, 24,
89–94.
13. Pan, Y.K.; Zhao, L.J.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, G.; Mujumdar, A.S. Osmotic
dehydration pre-treatment in drying of fruits and vegetables. Drying
Technology 2003, 21, 1104–1114.
14. Madamba, P.S.; Lopez, R.I. Optimization of the osmotic dehydration
of mango (Mangifera indica L.) slices. Drying Technology 2002, 20,
1227–1242.
15. Fernandes, F.A.N.; Gallão, M.I.; Rodrigues, S. Effect of osmotic
dehydration and ultrasound pre-treatment on cell structure: Melon
dehydration. LWT – Food Science and Technology 2008, 41, 604–610.
16. Parjoko; Rahman, M.S.; Buckle, K.A.; Perera, C.O. Osmotic dehy-
dration kinetics of pineapple wedges using palm sugar. LWT – Food
Science and Technology 1996, 29, 452–459.
17. Rastogi, N.K.; Niranjan, K. Enhanced mass transfer during osmotic
dehydration of high pressure treated pineapple. Journal of Food
Science 1998, 63, 508–511.
18. Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S.; Gaspareto, O.C.P.; Oliveira, E.L.
Optimization of osmotic dehydration of bananas followed by air-
drying. Journal of Food Engineering 2006, 77, 188–193.
19. Teles, U.M.; Fernandes, F.A.N.; Rodrigues, S.; Lima, A.S.; Maia,
G.A.; Figueiredo, R.W. Optimization of osmotic dehydration of
melons followed by air-drying. International Journal of Food Science
and Technology 2006, 41, 674–680.
20. Rodrigues, S.; Fernandes, F.A.N. Dehydration of melons in a ternary
system followed by air-drying. Journal of Food Engineering 2007, 80,
678–687.
21. Rastogi, N.K.; Raghavarao, K.S.M.S. Mass transfer during
osmotic dehydration of pineapple: Considering Fickian diffusion in
cubical configuration. LWT – Food Science and Technology 2004,
37, 43–47.
22. Witrowa-Rajchert, D.; Lewicki, P.P. Rehydration properties of dried
plant tissues. International Journal of Food Science and Technology
2006, 41, 1040–1046.
23. Morton, J.F. Sapodilla. In Fruits of Warm Climates; Morton, J.F.,
Ed.; Creative Resources Systems: Miami, FL, 1987; 393–398.
24. Brito, E.S.; Narain, N. Physical and chemical characteristics of sapota
fruit at different stages of maturation. Pesquisa Agropecuaria
Brasileira 2002, 37, 567–572.
25. Carcel, J.A.; Benedito, J.; Rossell o, C.; Mulet, A. Influence of
ultrasound intensity on mass transfer in apple immersed in a sucrose
solution. Journal of Food Engineering 2007, 78, 472–479.
26. Stojanovic, J.; Silva, J.L. Influence of osmoconcentration, continuous
high-frequency ultrasound and dehydration on properties and micro-
structure of rabbiteye blueberries. Drying Technology 2006, 24,
165–171.