Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Food Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jfoodeng

Review

Supercritical drying of food products: An insightful review

Kosana Pravallika, Snehasis Chakraborty *, Rekha S. Singhal
Department of Food Engineering and Technology, Institute of Chemical Technology, Matunga, Mumbai - 400 019, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Supercritical drying (SCD) has emerged as an alternative technology to conventional drying technologies. SCD
Supercritical drying addresses the challenges faced by food markets by providing high nutrient retention and superior quality
Supercritical fluids products that resemble original products. Supercritical carbon dioxide (SCCO2) is a widely used solvent that
Microbial inactivation
solubilizes water in the sample and gets separated during decompression. Cosolvent (ethanol) is used prior to the
Enzyme stability
Quality attributes
application of supercritical fluid to increase the drying efficiency of the SCD process. Examples include spices, a
Shelf life few fruits and vegetables, and other bioactive edibles/gels. This paper provides a detailed discussion on the SCD
operational assembly, the mechanism of mass transfer phenomena, and factors affecting SCD. The effect of SCD
on various physicochemical and sensory attributes, rehydration capacity, and shelf life of SC dried samples.
Finally, the challenges and future scope of SCD have been summarized. This review delivers comprehensive and
updated information on advancements in SCD for food products.

1. Introduction
Drying is one of the oldest preservation technologies employed in
food processing and preservation of many predominant agricultural
products such as cereals, pulses, fruits, and vegetables. It extends the
shelf life by lowering the water activity and thus inhibiting the growth of
microorganisms. Inadequate drying of the product may decrease shelf
life due to quality degradation and pose food safety risks. Besides the
shelf life extension, drying should retain the original texture, color,
flavor, and nutritional content of the food product (Djekic et al., 2018).
Furthermore, drying reduces the product’s weight and volume, which
aids in better storage and transportation (Lee et al., 2011). Consumer
awareness of the health benefits of food products has propelled a de­
mand for products with high nutrient retention and better organoleptic
properties (Batiha et al., 2021). However, there are several limitations to
employing conventional drying when the product is rich in thermo­
sensitive compounds (Lee et al., 2011). Sun drying has limitations of
longer drying time and non-uniform drying rate. Industrial dryers are
primarily convective, where hot air or gases are used as the heat transfer
medium (Moses et al., 2014). Contact drying (around 105–150 ◦ C) and
air drying (typically 65–85 ◦ C) are mainly preferred due to their low cost
and ease of operation. Due to the application of high temperatures, these
may damage color, texture, and other sensory properties. It involves the
phase transition and mass movement of water that develops capillary
forces, which may disrupt the microstructure (Lee et al., 2011; Vetralla
et al., 2018). Microwave drying enhances the drying rate but causes
excessive dehydration of the product due to improper heat and mass
transfer control. Other thermal drying techniques, such as spray drying,
employ high temperatures (approx100–210 ◦ C) during processing
(Suravanichnirachorn et al., 2018). The quality of spray-dried powders
is highly dependent on spray drying operating parameters such as inlet
temperature, feed flow rate, atomizer speed, type of carrier, and carrier
concentration. It might lead to the loss of heat-sensitive compounds (e.
g., emulsions and fruit powders) (Santhalakshmy et al., 2015). To
overcome the heat damage, an alternative is to remove water by
freeze-drying in which the water is frozen, followed by sublimation of
the ice to a vapor phase by manipulating pressure and temperature. It is
not commercially economical because of its high cost of operation, low
production capacity and yield. Vacuum drying is similar to that of
freeze-drying which involves the whole process except the freezing stage
(e.g., fruits, vegetables, high-quality juice powders). Vacuum drying
could disrupt the structure of the food product (Vetralla et al., 2018).
Supercritical drying (SCD) is one of the emerging technologies that
can remove water from the food at a state above the critical conditions of
the solvent used without disturbing the structure of the product. SCD
develops a product with high physicochemical stability similar to its
original nature with better microbial, enzymatic, and shelf stability
(Moses et al., 2014). The process time of SCD is very less due to the

* Corresponding author. Food Engineering and Technology Department, Institute of Chemical Technology, Matunga (E), Mumbai, India - 400 019.
E-mail addresses: fet21k.pravallika@pg.ictmumbai.edu.in (K. Pravallika), sc.chakraborty@ictmumbai.edu.in, snehasisftbe@gmail.com (S. Chakraborty),
rsinghal7@rediffmail.com, rs.singhal@ictmumbai.edu.in (R.S. Singhal).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2022.111375
Received 27 August 2022; Received in revised form 6 November 2022; Accepted 6 December 2022
Available online 7 December 2022
0260-8774/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
K. Pravallika et al.
involvement of both temperature and pressure, and the cost of operation
is also lower compared to advanced drying technologies such as spray
drying, vacuum drying, and freeze-drying. Hence it presents many ad­
vantages over conventional drying techniques (Lopes et al., 2018). In the
SCD process, the solvents used are termed as supercritical fluids (SCF)
that solubilize the water in the sample and further SCF-water mixture
gets separated due to decompression (Benali et al., 2014). In the early
1980s, supercritical fluids have been employed primarily for the
extraction process in the food industry. The process of supercritical fluid
extraction (SCFE) and supercritical drying (SCD) is the same, but the
results are different. For example, the former process involves extracting
desired components from the sample (such as bioactive from fruit
pomace or oil from seed cake), whereas the latter involves removing
water from the sample that gives a product similar to other drying
techniques. High-quality fruits and vegetables, spices, and meat prod­
ucts have been generally preferred to be dried using SCD.
In the last couple of decades, researchers have been exploring the
applications of SCD on various food products such as apples (Djekic
et al., 2018; Lee et al., 2011; Vetralla et al., 2018; Zambon et al., 2021),
carrots (Brown et al., 2008), coriander (Bourdoux et al., 2018; Michelino
et al., 2018; Zambon et al., 2018), chicken breast (Morbiato et al., 2019),
basil (Bušić et al., 2014), and red bell pepper (Zambon et al., 2020). A
few reviews are available on a brief description of SCD (Benali et al.,
2014; Bourdoux et al., 2018) and the application of SCFs as a drying aid
and its effect on a few foods ( Nautiyal, 2016). The detailed effect of SCF
pasteurization on the mechanism of microbial and enzymatic inactiva­
tion in various foods has been summarized in few literatures (Spi­
limbergo et al., 2018; Ferrentino and Spilimbergo, 2011; Zambon et al.,
Fig. 1. Schematic showing (a) sequential steps of supercritical drying (SCD) (Zambon et al., 2021): (b) mechanism of water removal from food matrix by SCD
(Chakraborty et al., 2020): (c) comparison of SCF and cosolvent + SCF in moisture removal during SCD (Vetralla et al., 2018).
2
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
2018). However, a complete and consolidated review of the operation of
SCD, the mechanism of moisture removal, and its effect on various
quality attributes and shelf life of food products have not been under­
taken till date. Hence, the objective of the review is to collate the
updated literature on the process and operational assembly of SCD,
factors affecting SCD, the effect of SCD on microbial and enzymatic
inactivation in various solid foods, and the effect of SCD on various at­
tributes (physicochemical, rehydration capacity, bioactive, sensory at­
tributes), and the shelf life of the product.
2. Materials and methods
Due to the fact that supercritical drying technology is still in its in­
fancy, there aren’t many articles on it. The first step was to search the
articles using the keyword “supercritical drying of foods.” Roughly 25
papers were found. Writing a review article based on very few publi­
cations and drawing conclusions is exceedingly challenging. Hence the
keyword was modified to “supercritical drying and supercritical,” and
all the publications that were then available were either related to su­
percritical fluid extraction or had a drying background in pharmaceu­
tics. This paper covers research and review articles from the last 15
years, from 2007 to 2022.
3. Supercritical drying as a technology
3.1. Process of supercritical drying and its assembly
Supercritical drying is the process of removal of water from the
K. Pravallika et al.
product using SCF and cosolvent by manipulating temperature and
pressure for predetermined time. As depicted in Fig. 1a, SCD occurs in
following steps: a) solubilization of cosolvent into the sample, b) pres­
surizing the cosolvent mixed sample with supercritical solvent, and c)
then finally depressurizing to remove water along with cosolvent and
solvent. A set of solid foods such as carrots, apples, coriander, red bell
pepper, and chicken breast have been dried using SCD.
As shown in Fig. 2, the drying assembly of SCD is different from the
conventional drying process. Typically, an SCD assembly consists of a
drying chamber, solvent feed cylinder, desiccator tube, heat exchanger
(condenser, cooler, and heater), pressure gauge, test flow meter, and
cosolvent feed cylinder (HPLC). The food sample such as carrot (90%
moistened, cylindrical pieces of 25 mm height and 4 mm diameter) is
positioned in a stainless-steel mesh sample holder and placed at the
centre of the drying vessel, which is well equipped with a temperature
and pressure controlling device. An HPLC pump supplies the precise
amount of cosolvent (6% ethanol) (Brown et al., 2008). It requires an
extra processing time of 30 min for the complete dissolution of water in
cosolvent. After 30 min, the solvent (mostly CO2) is supplied from the
cylinder through a desiccator tube and cooled to a liquid state for proper
flow, and then compressed to the desired pressure (20 MPa). The pres­
surized solvent is preheated to the desired temperature (40–60 ◦ C) with
the help of a heat exchanger. Once the necessary temperature and
pressure are established, the micrometering valve opens, and subse­
quently, SCF is fed to the drying chamber with a constant flow rate of
~2 L/min at STP. A backpressure regulator valve maintains constant
pressure throughout the process. Due to the pressure exerted by the SCF
flushing, the cosolvent-water mixture oozes out of the sample, owing to
its high solubility in a short contact time. The flow rate is continuously
controlled and monitored by a wet test flow meter throughout the
process. The SCF gets saturated due to the constant cosolvent-water
mixture pushing out of solid food matrices. After 10 min of SCF flush­
ing, the micrometering escape valve opens, and SCF moves out at a
depressurization rate of 0.4 MPa/min by maintaining a constant tem­
perature (typically isothermal depressurization). It expands and leads to
two phases: solvent-rich vapor phase and cosolvent-rich liquid phase.
The solvent-rich phase is collected and cooled below its critical tem­
perature to convert to liquid using a heat exchanger, allowing it to use
for a few more cycles. The process is performed till the cosolvent in the
pores of the sample gets removed completely (Benali et al., 2014). The
water in cosolvent is removed by passing it through solid water adsor­
bents or by bubbling through liquid desiccants (Zambon et al., 2021).
Finally, the dried sample is collected from the drying chamber after the
Fig. 2. Schematic depiction of SCD apparatus (Brown et al., 2008).
3
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
pressure is completely reduced to 1 atm (Wang et al., 2021 Zheng et al.,
2010; Brown et al., 2008; Vetralla et al., 2018).
3.2. Solvents and cosolvents used in supercritical drying
Supercritical fluids have piqued the interest of researchers due to
their exceptional properties such as high diffusion rate (10 times greater
than gas), low viscosity (10–100 times lower than liquid), low surface
tension, higher density than gas and liquids, making SCF a good solvent
(Girotra et al., 2013)). SCF can permeate through the cell membranes
and penetrate deep into the sample, and dissolve water. Many solvents
such as carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen, ammonia, and freon have been
used as supercritical solvents. Among all the SCFs, CO2 is highly
preferred in food applications over other solvents since other solvents
and cosolvents have a negative impact on consumer health and on the
environment (Table 1) (Brunner, 2005). The supercritical nature of CO2
is depicted in Fig. 3. CO2 is specified as a generally recognized as safe
(GRAS) solvent by the USFDA and fulfils all the ideal properties of SCF
(Corzzini et al., 2017). With low critical parameters (31.25 ◦ C/7.38
MPa), the generation of SCCO2 becomes easier and makes it suitable for
drying without damaging the structure of the sample (Harrison, 2020;
Nowacka et al., 2021). Additionally, it is naturally abundant, inexpen­
sive, non-flammable, and can also be recycled easily without causing
global warming (Zheng et al., 2010). CO2 has a dipole moment of zero;
hence it is considered as a non-polar solvent and limits the solubility of
polar compounds, but the slight polarity is because of the quadrupole
moment that allows the CO2 to dissolve a few polar compounds at high
pressure.
An additional agent called cosolvent is used before SCF to improve
the drying efficiency by increasing the solubility of polar solutes and
decreasing the processing time (Nowacka et al., 2021). Organic solvents
such as alcohols (ethanol and methanol), ketones (acetone), and
aliphatic alkanes are employed as supercritical cosolvents in the SCD
process (Table 1) (Zheng et al., 2010). Among these, ethanol is
GRAS-compliant and is an excellent cosolvent for usage in the food
sector. Ethanol is highly preferred for making SCF to dissolve polar
compounds such as water due to the hydrogen and dipole interactions
between ethanol and SCF (Vatai et al., 2009). Acetone is highly flam­
mable because of its low flash point of – 20 ◦ C, due to which a small
quantity in the air leads to explosions and fire accidents. Methanol is
considered toxic, especially in the food processing sector (Şahin et al.,
2018).
K. Pravallika et al. Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375

Table 1
Characteristic properties of some important solvents and cosolvents used in supercritical drying of food products.
Supercritical Critical temperature Critical pressure Characteristic property Limitations References
fluid (◦ C) (MPa)

Carbon dioxide 31.25 7.38 ▪Non-toxic ▪The low solubility of polar compounds Harrison (2020)
▪Does not impart taste or color
▪Recyclable
▪Easily accessible
▪Low critical temperature and pressure
Nitrogen − 147 3.35 ▪Moisture carrier at very high ▪Very low critical temperature Benali et al.
temperatures (2014)
Ammonia 132 11.28 ▪Good solvent because of low critical ▪Caustic and dangerous ▪ Distinct odor Zheng et al.
conditions (pungent smell) (2010)
▪High polarity
Nitric oxide 36.15 7.285 ▪The dipolar moment is similar to CO2 ▪Has an anesthetic effect Benali et al.
▪Causes oxidation (2014)
Freon 27 3.5–4.0 ▪Low critical temperature and pressure ▪Highly explosive Khaw et al.
▪Easy accessibility ▪Causes global warming (2017)
▪Not used in food applications ▪Causes organ damage
Water 374.15 22.06 ▪High polarity ▪High critical temperature Benali et al.
▪Accessible ▪Powerful oxidizer (2014)
Ethanol 243 6.3 ▪Solubilizes both polar and non-polar ▪High critical temperature Harrison (2020)
substances ▪Persistence of residue in the final product
▪Highly explosive

Fig. 3. Pressure and temperature relationship of a pure substance (Brown et al., 2008). Tc, Pc: critical temperature and pressure and Ttp, Ptp: triple point temperature
and triple point pressure.

3.3. Overview of mass transfer phenomena during SCD
Subjecting the food samples to SCD involves mass transfer opera­
tions. Water can be found in the food sample as free water (squeezed out
with external force), bound water (tightly bound with other components
such as protein, fat, vitamins, pectin, etc.), and entrapped water (typi­
cally present as free water in the innermost layer such as in a matrix and
is removed as free water on cutting/squeezing) (Lewicki, 2004). Free
and entrapped water can be removed easily compared to bound water.
When flushed with a jet of cosolvent at a supercritical state, it primarily
dissolves the free water present in the sample, then moves into deeper
layers and dissolves the entrapped water, and then the bound water.
Water molecules detach from the active sites of the cell components and
diffuse out through multiple layers of the food sample (Chakraborty
et al., 2020). When the stream of SCF is flushed onto the sample, the
concentration gradient of cosolvent between the surface of the sample
and the SCF stream becomes high. Hence, there is a very high convective
mass flux of the cosolvent from the sample into the SCF stream. SCF
diffuses deep towards the core of the sample (Fig. 1b). The diffusion
mechanism of pores follows Knudsen and molecular diffusion. The pores
inside the food samples are in the range of mesopores or micropores.
Molecular diffusion governs the diffusion in mesopores as the size of the
pore is larger than the mean free path of cosolvent/solvent molecules.
Knudsen diffusion governs the diffusion in micropores as the size of the
pore is lower than the mean free path of the cosolvent/solvent mole­
cules. Hence, molecules during diffusion collide with the walls of the
pores rather than the other molecules, which is well significant in the
micropores. The cosolvent expands due to the dissolution of SCF into
cosolvent, which causes syneresis of the cosolvent along with water from
the sample. As the drying continues, the concentration of cosolvent
between the sample and SCF stream decreases with time, and eventually
leads to the complete replacement of all the liquid by SCF. The flow
direction of solvent and cosolvent is also very important. Downflow,
up-flow, and horizontal flow are typically three flow directions. Up-flow
and horizontal flow take a longer drying time as it is very difficult to
push the cosolvent by the low-density solvent. Hence, downflow is more
effective due to pushing out of cosolvent immediately by passing
high-pressure SCF without a back mixing (Derossi et al., 2008). It is
extremely difficult to develop kinetic modeling based on these few
studies conducted on wide variability of food categories.
3.4. Selective dissolution of water by SCF and cosolvent
The food sample is a complex mixture of different nutrients and
bioactives. Hence, the removal of water-soluble nutrients and bioactives
along with water with the application of SCF is undesirable. Hence
before its application, it is important to know the reaction between food
with SCF. The solubility of water is predicted to be 1.8–2.45 mg/g at

4
K. Pravallika et al.
40 ◦ C/10 MPa and the solubility of CO2 in water is 5.1 g CO2/100 g
water at 37 ◦ C/10 MPa (Wrona et al., 2017). The extractability of any
compound depends on the presence of specific groups in the structure, as
well as their polarity and molecular weight. Previous studies have
revealed that low molecular weight (<250 MW) organic compounds
such as esters, aldehydes, ethers, ketones, lactones, and epoxides exhibit
excellent solubility in SCCO2 and are favored by low pressures (7.5–10
MPa). Moderately polar compounds with a molecular weight of
250–400, such as terpenes, sesquiterpenes, and other benzene derivates,
are moderately soluble in SCCO2 under high-pressure conditions. The
polar compounds of molecular weight ≥400 that include carboxylic acid
and hydroxyl groups such as sugars, tannins, proteins, carotenoids, an­
thocyanins, tocopherols, B-complex vitamins, and waxes are barely
soluble in SCCO2 (Şahin et al., 2018). The solubility of high molecular
weight compounds decreases with an increase in the pressure of the
process. The diffusion rate of the high molecular weight compound from
the internal portion of the sample is lower due to the resistance offered
by pores (Uwineza and Waśkiewicz, 2020).
Additionally, mass transfer resistance created by the sample’s
permeability of the cell wall and membrane also affects the water
extractability. The cell wall is permeable, while the cell membrane is
highly selectively permeable to polar compounds, which controls the
movement of solute molecules (Phisut, 2012). Since CO2 and ethanol
can penetrate through the cell wall and membrane because of their
non-polar nature, the polar solutes present in the sample cannot move
out of the cell membrane. Even though water is a polar solute, the
membrane allows water from high potential (internal portion) to low
potential (outside the sample) to equalize the gradient. The processing
conditions such as temperature, pressure, flow rate, and other parame­
ters modify the permeability of the membrane that limits the diffusion of
other polar solutes (Phisut, 2012; Thorat et al., 2012). These few liter­
ature reports suggest that the loss of polar solutes from the sample along
with the water during drying can be controlled.
3.5. Factors affecting the efficacy of supercritical drying
The efficacy of the SCD process depends upon the process tempera­
ture and pressure, which affect the density of the solvent, type and
concentration of solvent and cosolvent, and the size of the sample. Since
research has been carried out on various categories of foods such as
carrots, apples, red bell pepper, and basil leaves, among many others,
which are different in moisture content, morphological structure,
texture, and composition, it is difficult to come up with a general
conclusion. But these are the major factors, and their effect is significant
in foods. Hence, these have to be optimized/controlled while designing
the treatment condition for better results.
3.5.1. Process temperature
The process temperature is one of the most critical factors that in­
fluence the SCD process. The viscosity and surface tension of the SCF
decreases on increasing the temperature of the process, which facilitates
the penetration of SCF into the sample (Asafu-Adjaye et al., 2021).
Furthermore, the diffusivity and solubilizing power of SCF increase at an
elevated temperature (Nowacka et al., 2021; Wason et al., 2021). Brown
et al. (2008) conducted supercritical drying on carrot slices. They found
that an increase in the process temperature of the SCD (40–60 ◦ C)
elevated the drying rate. The SCF penetrated deep into the sample due to
decreased viscosity and enabled the solubilization of more water in SCF.
3.5.2. Pressure
Pressure is also a critical factor in influencing the physical properties
of SCF. A minimal change in the pressure has drastic modifications to the
product in a few cases. The higher the pressure created by the SCF, the
more is the oozing out of the water and cosolvent from the sample. In
this case, a change in pressure is more effective than a change in tem­
perature (Lee et al., 2011). Brown et al. (2008) found that an increase in
5
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
pressure increases the solubility of water in compressed SCCO2. When
the carrot slices were subjected to 40 ◦ C/20 MPa/90 min, the moisture
content was reduced to 50% of the initial moisture content. When basil
leaves were dried using CO2 at 40 ◦ C/8–10 MPa/2 h, it gave a product
with 5.4–5.7% moisture content (Bušić et al., 2014).
3.5.3. Solvent flow rate
The flow rate of the solvent regulates the diffusivity flux of solute
transfer into the solvent in a supercritical state. The increased velocity of
the solvent helps in deeper penetration of the solvent and induces mass
transfer by forced convection (Nowacka et al., 2021). However, the
residence time is negatively affected, and the term dilution factor (flow
rate to the solvent volume) comes into discussion. The dilution rate
should be minimum to dissolve the water from the sample. Hence, the
flow rate should be optimized in a certain way for effective moisture
removal. It should be controlled for a better drying process. For instance,
the drying time was reduced from 300 min to 210 min by maintaining a
flow rate of 2 L/min with 6% ethanol as a cosolvent in carrots (Brown
et al., 2008).
3.5.4. Cosolvent
Cosolvent plays a crucial role in increasing the drying efficiency of
SCD. The rate of removal of moisture from the sample increases with an
increase in the concentration of ethanol up to the optimum range. As
shown in Fig. 1c, when the carrot slices were subjected to SCD for 90
min, the moisture removal by SCCO2 was 50% of the initial moisture of
the sample. While the samples treated with ethanol did not show any
effect on the sample’s moisture content for the first 30 min because the
ethanol mixed with the water and settled in the pores of the sample. The
ethanol and water mixture spills out of carrot pores by the pressure
created by SCCO2. Further, the moisture content became much lower
than in the SCCO2-treated sample (Brown et al., 2008). Vetralla et al.
(2018) studied the effects of SCD conducted at 35 ◦ C/0.001 MPa on
apple slices using SCCO2 and ethanol-SCCO2. They concluded that the
pre-treatment of the sample with ethanol could further decrease the
drying time of SCD. Treatment of the sample solely with SCCO2 for 120
min decreased moisture to 18.5 ± 1.5%, while the pre-treatment with
ethanol for 40 min followed by flushing with SCCO2 for 10 min reduced
it to 11.6 ± 2.5%. No further decrease in moisture content was observed
when the pre-treatment time of ethanol and SCCO2 was increased from
50 to 80 min and 10–40 min, respectively. The shrinkage was more in
ethanol-SCCO2, and it also had a broader pore size than SCCO2 dried and
control apple slices. This is because of the involvement of specific
physical and chemical interactions between the cosolvent and the water
due to strong hydrogen bonding and dipole-dipole interactions.
Furthermore, the SCCO2 could reduce moisture content by 80%, indi­
cating that SCD is suitable for drying apples. However, the addition of
cosolvent increases the drying rate and reduces the dehydration time
(Lee et al., 2011).
3.5.5. Sample size
The sample size is also an essential factor influencing the drying rate
and drying time. Lee et al. (2016) conducted a study on the drying ki­
netics of low and high sample sizes of wet okara. Surprisingly, high
sample size material (>1000 g) was found to have a linear relationship
between drying time and the rate of moisture removal, which indicated
a constant drying rate period. In the case of a lower sample size (<500
g), the moisture remained in the sample (approached 30%) and the
drying rate decreased with time, which indicated a falling rate drying
period. Lee et al. (2016) treated the wet okara samples of different
sample sizes at 40 ◦ C/10.3 MPa for 10–40 min. They found the water
uptake efficiency of SCCO2 was higher (36.9%) in a larger sample size of
okara (>1000 g) (0.625 mg water/g CO2) than in a smaller sample size
(18.6%) of okara (<500 g) (0.315 mg water/g CO2). The passage of only
a fraction of SCCO2 through the matrix of the low sample size wet okara
could be the possible reason.
K. Pravallika et al.
4. Impact of SCD on various attributes of food products
In the last decade, the effect of SCD has been evaluated on the
product characteristics of a few food products. These include the impact
of SCD on physicochemical properties, microbial stability, enzyme sta­
bility, organoleptic properties, and shelf life of the product.
4.1. Physicochemical properties and bioactive compounds
The physicochemical properties such as moisture content, shrinkage,
micropore size, structure, density, non-enzymatic browning (NEB),
bioactive compounds (carotenoids, ascorbic acid, total phenolic content,
and total flavonoid content) are fundamental and crucial in meeting
consumer demands and maintaining the product’s shelf life. The
changes in these properties after SCD are product specific. Very limited
information is available on its application in food products, which is
summarized in Table 2. Brown et al. (2008) found that 50 ◦ C/20 MPa/2
L/min followed by depressurizing to 0.4 MPa/min reduced to half the
moisture in carrots in 90 min. SCD of carrots enabled the retention of
their original structure and shape far better than air-dried carrots which
had undergone shrinkage. Samples dried using modified SCD showed
fewer dense structures and better rehydration than air-dried ones. They
also studied agar gels (2% agar w/v) dried using SCCO2 at 50 ◦ C/20
MPa/180 min, reducing moisture to 0.1%. Treatment of red bell pepper
at 60 ◦ C/12 MPa/100 kg/h showed no significant changes in texture or
shape compared to freeze drying. Similar results were obtained at
40 ◦ C/14 MPa/160 kg/h/16 h in red bell pepper (Zambon et al., 2020).
In one report, aerogels were produced from 5, 6 & 7% barley β-glucans
and dried with different techniques such as freeze drying, air drying, and
ethanol-SCCO2 drying (Comin et al., 2012). The SCD sample had a lower
density than air-dried samples and a more consistent structure than
freeze-dried samples. There was no significant effect of the concentra­
tion of β-glucans on density and surface area.
Braeuer et al. (2017) conducted a study on the SCD of mango and
persimmon at 40 ◦ C/10 MPa/300 min reduced the water activity to
0.026 and 0.124, respectively. They found slight variations in the
carotenoid content, which could be due to the dissolution of non-polar
carotenoids in SCCO2. Bušić et al. (2014) conducted a comparative
study on freeze drying, air drying, and SCD (40 ◦ C/10 MPa/1000 L/h/3
h) on the antioxidant and bioactive properties of basil leaves. They
concluded that SCD was on par with freeze drying in retaining chloro­
phyll, total phenols, flavonoids, and antioxidants in basil leaves. The
betacyanins, betaxanthins, and polyphenols in beetroot are reported to
be degraded by 58%, 32%, and 30%, respectively, after SCD at 55 ◦ C/60
MPa/30 min (Marszałek et al., 2017). There is not much evidence on the
effect of SCD on physicochemical properties, although extensive in­
vestigations are required in this area.
4.2. Rehydration capacity
Rehydration capacity is the essential parameter of dried products, as
they are to be rehydrated for consumption. During SCD, water gets
removed and thus reduces the possibility of engaging the sample with
water molecules through hydrogen bonding. It helps to form strong
sample molecule-molecule interactions and intermolecular polymeric
junctions, resulting in a strong solid microstructure and superior rehy­
dration capacity (Plazzotta et al., 2019). A few studies on rehydration
profiles of supercritical dried (SCD) products are discussed in Table 3. In
all the previous studies, it was observed that the uptake of water by the
samples was greatly higher during the initial period, but gradually
slowed down (Morbiato et al., 2019; Brown et al., 2008). The rapid rise
in the initial rehydration rate was due to the filling of intercellular
spaces and polymeric junctions. As the absorption proceeds, the rehy­
dration rate declines. Pure SCCO2 and EtOH–SCCO2 treated carrot pieces
were rehydrated at 50 ◦ C for 5 min didn’t show any difference in
moisture content initially as the rehydration rate was rapid in both the
6
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
samples, but after 40 min, the rehydration rate was higher in
ethanol-treated SCCO2 dried carrot pieces (Brown et al., 2008). Brown
et al. (2008) also found that samples dried using ethanol-treated SCD
showed fewer dense structures and better rehydration capacity. The
processing pressure and temperature of SCD did not significantly affect
the rehydration capacity. The rehydration process of SC dried samples is
irreversible, as the moisture content of control samples is lower than the
moisture content of the rehydrated sample. The reason might be the
structural rigidity of SC-dried samples due to the removal of only water
without disturbing the pore structure and might be due to the larger
pores of SC-dried samples. The rehydration capacity is reported to show
hysteresis due to the rupture of cells and structure disruption that occurs
during drying. The evidence from these few studies indicates that SCD
results in products with superior rehydration capacity compared to
other drying technologies.
Data corresponding to changes in the moisture content of dried
samples during rehydration have been quantified in terms of rehydra­
tion ratio (RR), which is the ratio of the weight of the fresh sample to the
weight of the dried sample. Three semi-empirical models are commonly
used to describe the rehydration kinetics, viz., exponential, Peleg model,
and Weibull model, which are summarized in Table 4. These are
developed to know the effect of the porous microstructure of the dried
sample on the quality of rehydration (Marques et al., 2009). These
models have various parameters which have been analyzed by using
non-linear regression analysis.
The exponential model is given by a semi-empirical equation (Eq.
(1)):
( )
RR = RRe (RRe − 1)exp − K3 tk4 (1)
Whereas RR is the rehydration ratio, RRe is the saturation rehydration
ratio, K3 is the kinetic constant (min− 1), and K4 is a dimensionless
constant. The value K4 = 1, and the exponential model leads to first-
order kinetic expression (Eq. (2)).
RR = RRe (RRe − 1)exp(− K3 t) (2)
This model explains the water absorption during the rehydration
process in various fruits and vegetables (Krokida and Marinos-Kouris,
2003).
The semi-empirical model proposed by Peleg is described by 2 pa­
rameters in a non-exponential equation (Eq. (3)). Peleg model estimates
the moisture content of the sample on a dry basis of the sample as:
1 t
RR = RRe − + (3)
K2 K1 + K2 t
Where t indicates the time in minutes, K1 is the Peleg kinetic constant
with a dimension of time, and K2 is the Peleg capacity constant, which is
dimensionless. It is related to the equilibrium moisture content Xeq as
given in Eq. (4) as follows (Inyang et al., 2018):
1
Xeq = Xo + (4)
K2
Peleg’s equation has been found to adequately describe the rehy­
dration kinetics of morel and potato cubes (García-Pascual et al., 2006;
SalimiHizaji et al., 2010).
The Weibull model has been employed to greatly predict the rehy­
dration ratio of food systems that have some variability, such as the
varied rehydration rate with respect to time in freeze-dried tomatoes
(Lopez-Quiroga et al., 2019). It can be expressed by two parameters: α,
scale parameter (dimensionless), which is the inverse of the rate, and β,
shape factor with a dimension of time (Eq. (5)) (Inyang et al., 2018).
[ ( )β ]
t
RR = RRe (1 − RRe )exp − (5)
α
The selection of the model for validating experimental data depends
upon the statistical criteria such as coefficient of determination (R2),
 K. Pravallika et al.
Table 2
Influence of supercritical drying on the physiochemical properties and bioactive compounds of food products.
Food Matrix Treatment conditions Max changes in physiochemical properties Max changes in sensitive bioactive compounds Other key observations Reference

Strawberry 40 ◦ C, 13.3 MPa for 420 min at >92% weight loss aW was <0.34 •100% retention of vitamin C •SCD can be used as sustainable green drying Zambon et al.
19 kg/h •95% retention of total anthocyanin content technology (2022b)
•76% retention of TFC
Strawberry 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa for 360 min 98% moisture removal Zambon et al.
slices 90% weight loss (2022a)
Red bell 40–50 C, 10–14 MPa, with
◦
Reduced the water activity to 0.262 at 50 ◦ C, 12 MPa •Better retention of texture, shape, and rehydration Zambon et al.
pepper 80–220 kg/h for 6/16 h with 100 kg/h at 6 h and at 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa, at 100 kg/h ratio (2020)
for 16 h
Apple pieces 35 ◦ C, 10 MPa, for 125 min Moisture content reduced to 18% •The shrinkage was more in ethanol SCCO2 and also Vetralla et al.
35 ◦ C, 10 MPa, for 50 min (40 Moisture content reduced to 11% had a wide pore size than raw and SCCO2 dried apple (2018)
min in Ethanol + SCCO2 for slices
10min
Coriander 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa, for 90 min 83% loss of moisture •SCD acts as both drying and microbial inactivation Zambon et al.
7

leaves Water activity reduced to 0.42 technique (2018)

Red pepper 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa for 16 h at a 100 90% loss of moisture •Increased TFC (20–40 to 880 mg/100 g) and •High retention of ascorbic acid and phenols than Vetralla et al.
kg/h flow ascorbic acid content (64–220 to 1163.20 mg/ fresh red pepper (2018)
100 g)
Beetroot 55 ◦ C, 60 MPa for 30 min •70%, 68%, and 42% retention of TPC, Marszałek et al.
betaxanthins, and betacyanins, respectively (2017)
a) Mango 40 C, 10 MPa for 300 min
◦
a) 71% weight loss (aW = 0.124) •Carotenoid content decreased due to Braeuer et al.
b) Persimmon b) 84% weight loss (aW = 0.026) solubilization along with water (2017)
Basil leaves 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa, for 120 min 94% reduction in moisture content •93% retention of ascorbic acid •SCCO2 can be used as an alternate technique for Bušić et al.
•44% retention of TPC & TFC freeze-drying (2014)
•72% retention of chlorophyll
Apple slabs 45 ◦ C, 25 MPa Moisture content reduced to 1.5% •Better rehydration capacity, Wide pore distribution, Lee et al.
55 ◦ C, 25 MPa Moisture content reduced to 1.5% Caramelization of sugar (Burnt smell) (2011)
Carrot slices 50 ◦ C, 20 MPa for 150 min Increased moisture loss with increasing pressure and •Better rehydration ratio, shape, and less shrinkage Brown et al.
temperature (2008)

Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375

TPC: Total phenolic content; TFC: Total flavonoid content; SCCO2: Supercritical CO2.
K. Pravallika et al. Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375

Table 3
Influence of supercritical drying (SCD) on the rehydration capacity of food products.
Food Matrix Treatment conditions Drying rate Rehydration profile Key observations Reference

Chicken breast Rehydration: 30 C, 1:50 (w/v)

◦
Morbiato
for 15 min et al. (2019)
a) SCCO2 40 C, 10 MPa for 420 min
◦
Moisture removed ▪RC of 1.360 after 15 min ▪Micropore structure is significant in
was 70.9% aW: the combination method.
0.508
b) SCCO2 + High SCCO2: 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa for 420 min + Moisture removed ▪RC of 1.457 after 15 min ▪Greater retention of the original
power ultrasound HPU: 10 W for 300 min was 75.1% aW: <0.2 structure
c) Oven drying 75 ◦ C for 420 min Moisture removed ▪RC of 1.324 after 15 min ▪Poor rehydration, high degree of
was 74.4% aW: shrinkage,
0.453 ▪Case hardening is also the major
limitation
Carrot pieces Rehydration: 50 ◦ C or 80 ◦ C for Brown et al.
40 min (2008)
a) Modified SCCO2 Pre-treatment with 6% Ethanol at Moisture reduced to ▪Instant and high rehydration ▪Low density and porous structure
50 ◦ C for 40 min and with SCCO2 for 11% rate ▪Greater retention of original
10 min structure and shape

b) Pure SCCO2 50 ◦ C, 20 MPa for 150 min Moisture reduced to ▪Low porosity and less RC ▪Color loss was there, but it is
18% compared to ethanol-treated completely reversible after
sample rehydration
c) Air drying 40,50,60 ◦ C ▪Very poor retention capacity
▪A high degree of shrinkage with low
porosity
▪Destruction of interconnections
among the spaces of porous structure

SCD: Supercritical drying; SCF: Supercritical fluids; HPU: High-pressure ultra-sonication; SCCO2: Supercritical CO2; RC: Rehydration capacity.

4.3. Microbial and enzyme inactivation

Table 4
Modeling for rehydration kinetics for supercritical dehydrated products (Inyang
The efficiency of supercritical fluid to inactivate microbes and en­
et al., 2018; Marques et al., 2009).
zymes has been reported previously (Spilimbergo et al., 2018; Fer­
Model Equation Description rentino and Spilimbergo, 2011). A brief description is discussed for a
Peleg model
RR = RRe −
1
+
RR is the rehydration ratio, RRe is the better understanding of microbial and enzymatic inactivation (Fig. 4a
K2 saturation rehydration ratio, and k1 and and b). It occurs in a series of sequential steps (Hart et al., 2021; Lopes
t k2 are the Peleg constants.
K1 + K2 t et al., 2018; Ribeiro et al., 2020). Initially, the flushed cosolvent and SCF
First-order RR = RRe (RRe − 1) K3 is kinetic constant with dimension of solubilize in the external cell medium, which in turn reduces the
kinetics exp( − K3 t) time (min− 1) extracellular pH. In addition, the cosolvent may cause the desiccation of
model
cells. The diffusion of CO2 into the cell decreases the intracellular pH.
Weibull model RR = RRe (1 − RRe ) α is the scale parameter, and β is the shape
factor
The primary enzyme system becomes compromised at a modified pH;
[ ( t )β ]
exp − the enzymes unfold & denature and lose their capability to participate in
α
metabolic activities (Hart et al., 2021) (Fig. 4b). The metabolism
disturbance is due to CO2 and HCO3 – ion formation. The balance of
standard error of estimation (SEE), and mean relative percent deviation intracellular electrolytes is disturbed due to the binding of CO2− 3 with
(MRD) to predict the rehydration kinetics of dried food samples (Mar­ Ca2+ & Mg2+ binding proteins and inorganic electrolytes. Therefore, the
ques et al., 2009). SEE and MRD are expressed in Eqs (6) and (7) as phospholipids and hydrophobic compounds of cell walls and mem­
follows: branes become solubilized. Since the metabolism of microbes is
(∑( )2 )0.5 completely disturbed, they lose their viability. The extent of microbial
RRn,exp − RRn,cal inactivation after SCD of various commodities is summarized in Table 5.
SEE = (6)
df The microbial reduction is more when high moisture is present in food
(Bourdoux et al., 2018). As a result, more work is needed to back up the
⃒ ⃒
100 ∑ ⃒RRn,exp − RRn,cal ⃒ claim that a more substantial biocide effect was observed at higher water
MRD = (7) activity. One may maintain a lower rate of drying at the beginning of the
N RRn,exp
drying process to ensure that the water activity is high, which helps
Here RRn,exp is the experimental rehydration ratio, RRn,cal is the increase the inactivation of microbes (Liu et al., 2018). Zambon et al.
theoretical rehydration ratio, N is the number of data obtained, and df is (2021) conducted a study on apple slices at 40 ◦ C/10 MPa/10 min and
the number of degrees of freedom of the regression model (number of then depressurized for 20 min reduced E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella
data points – number of constants in the model). Higher R2 values and typhimurium SL 1344, and Listeria monocytogenes from 5.56, 5.63, and
lower SEE and MRD values of the model indicate it fits the experimental 7.41 log CFU/g to 1 log CFU/g, respectively. The increase in the number
data. MRD values < 10% are indicative of the best fit for many practical of depressurization steps led to higher microbial and enzyme inactiva­
purposes (Marques et al., 2009). The prediction models have not yet tion due to the sudden difference in pressure (Wimmer and Zarevúcka,
been applied to the rehydration kinetics of supercritical dried samples. 2010). SCD of coriander at 35 ◦ C/8 MPa/150 min reduced the aerobic
Hence, no kinetic modeling has been developed for supercritical dried mesophiles, yeasts & molds, and Enterobacteriaceae by 2.80, 5.03, and
samples, indicating a need for more research in this area for the vali­ 4.61 log cycles, respectively, and was far better than freeze drying,
dation of the data. which showed 1.23, 0.87, and 0.97 log cycles reduction, respectively.
The mesophilic spores did not reduce significantly after SCD (0.11 log
cycle reduction). The log reduction of Salmonella, E. coli O157:H7, and

8
K. Pravallika et al.
Fig. 4. A schematic diagram showing the possible mechanism of (a) microbial and (b) enzyme inactivation during the supercritical drying process.
L. monocytogenes was 5.29, 5.69 and 5.55, respectively (Bourdoux et al.,
2018). A similar trend was observed in coriander by Michelino et al.
(2018). Additional research is needed to assess its potential to inactivate
various microorganisms and their species.
Enzymes are biological catalysts, which are mostly proteins. The
enzyme activity is reduced by increasing CO2 pressure (Hart et al., 2021)
and is shown to be completely lost at pressures above 30 MPa (Rezaei
et al., 2007). There are possibilities for the formation of carbamates by
the reaction of CO2 with the amino group of the enzyme or protein. A
recent study performed by Zambon et al. (2022b) on strawberries
indicated complete inactivation of PPO and POD under treatment con­
ditions of 40 ◦ C/13.3 MPa/420 min at a 19 kg/h flow rate. No other
information is available on the effect of SCD on the inactivation of en­
zymes. No general assumptions can be drawn on this aspect due to the
scarcity of available information. Hence, more research efforts on mi­
crobial and enzyme inactivation by SCD are obligatory.
4.4. Organoleptic properties
The parameters considered for the evaluation of organoleptic prop­
erties vary significantly for different products. Tomic et al. (2019)
evaluated the change in sensory properties and secondary metabolites in
SCCO2 dried ‘Elstar’ apple cuts and snacks stored at room temperature
9
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
for a year. SCCO2 dried apples packed in nitrogen-flushed alumi­
nium-polyethylene bags maintained good sensory acceptability and
nutritional quality. Tomic et al. (2020) conducted a comparative study
on supercritical dried (40 ◦ C/10 MPa/14 h), freeze-dried
(− 25 ◦ C/0.00002 MPa/48 h), and fried (160 ◦ C for 3.5 min) beetroot
for sensory analysis and overall acceptability. They found that SCD
without precooking had exceptional sensory and overall acceptability.
However, an economic justification is necessary for large-scale com­
mercial use. The SCD samples can achieve better sensory, quality, and
consumer approval than freeze-drying and fried samples. A similar study
on carrots was conducted by Brown et al. (2008), which corroborated
the same trend. At 40 ◦ C/14 MPa/160 kg/h/16 h, red bell pepper had
lower levels of hardness and cohesiveness than freeze-dried samples and
air-dried samples. The SC dried red bell pepper was accepted by >60%
of the sensory-tested consumers. During storage, the samples lost their
sweet pepper flavor and developed a hay-like odor (Zambon et al.,
2020).
4.5. Color profile
Color is one of the most important factors that draw the attention of
customers at first glance. Conventional drying has adverse effects on
retaining the color of the dried samples. Therefore, it is essential to know
K. Pravallika et al. Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375

Table 5 Table 6
Influence of SCD on the microbial decontamination of food products. Influence of supercritical drying on the color profile of food products.
Food Matrix Treatment Target Max log References Food Treatment Max changes in Key observations References
conditions microorganism reduction Matrix conditions color profile
obtained
Red bell 40 ◦ C, 14 MPa ▪Orange color ▪The loss of Zambon
Strawberry 40 ◦ C, 13.3 [1]E. coli O157:H7 [1] >6 Zambon pepper with 160 kg/h (red color loss) carotene due to et al.
MPa for 420 [2] Salmonella Sps [2] >6 et al. its lipophilic (2020)
min at 19 kg/h [3] Listeria [3] >5 (2022b) nature and
monocytogenes dissolution in
Strawberry 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa [1] E. coli O157: [1] 5 Zambon SCCO2
slices for 360 min H7 et al. Apple 35 ◦ C, 10 MPa ▪No overall ▪An increase in Vetralla
[2] Salmonella Sps [2] 5 (2022a) for 125 min change in the L*, a*, and b* et al.
[3] Listeria [3] 5 35 ◦ C, 10 MPa color values were (2018)
monocytogenes for 50 min observed only in
Apple slices 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa [1] Listeria [1] 6.41 Zambon (40 min in SCCO2 dried
for 10 min monocytogenes et al. ethanol + apples.
[2] Salmonella. [2] 4.42 (2021) 10min in
Typhimurium SCCO2)
[3] E. coli O157: [3] 4.56 Coriander US + SCD ▪The original ▪L * and a* value Michelino
H7 40 W, 40 ◦ C, color was increased, b* et al.
Chicken [a] SCD [1.a] Mesophilic [1.a] >6 Morbiato 10 MPa for 90 maintained value decreased, (2018)
breast 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa bacteria et al. min and a slight
for 420 min [2.a] Salmonella [2.a] >7 (2019) change in overall
[b] US + SCD enterica color.
HPU: 10 W for [3.a] Yeast and [3.a] 3.88 Basil 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa ▪Better ▪Lower L * and Bušić et al.
300 min molds leaves for 180 min at retention of b* and higher a* (2014)
SCCO2: 40 ◦ C, [1.b] Mesophilic [1.b] >6 1000 L/h green color value than
10 MPa for bacteria compared to frozen and fresh
420 min [2.b] Salmonella [2.b] >7 air-dried basil leaves
enterica sample (wilted
[3.b] Yeast and [3.b] 3.88 and browned)
molds ▪Darker in
Coriander 35 C, 8 MPa
◦
[1] E. coli O157: [1] 5.29 Bourdoux color compared
for 150 min H7 et al. to fresh Basil
[2] Salmonella sps. [2] 5.69 (2018) leaves
[3] Aerobic [3] 2.80 Carrot 40–60 ◦ C, 20 ▪Pale in color ▪The color of the Brown
mesophiles MPa for 30 than raw carrot rehydrated et al.
[4] Mesophilic [4] 0.11 min after drying sample was like (2008)
spores 6% Ethanol, that of the raw
[5] [5] 4.61 40–60 ◦ C, 20 sample,
Enterobacteriaceae MPa for 30 indicating that
[6] Yeasts and [6] >5.0 min no loss of
molds β-carotene
Coriander [a] SCD [1.a] Mesophilic [1.a] 3.63 Michelino
40 ◦ C, 10 MPa bacteria et al. SCF: supercritical fluids; SCD: supercritical drying; US: ultrasonication;.
for 90 min [2.a] Mesophilic [2.a] 0.2 (2018)
[b] US + SCD spores deposition of some of the carotenes within a specific area of the sample
40 W, 40 ◦ C, [3.a] Yeast and [3.a] 3.57
(Brown et al., 2008). This contrasts with the study by Zambon et al.
10 MPa for 90 molds
min [1.b] Mesophilic [1.b] 4.8 (2020), who showed that the color of red bell peppers treated at
bacteria 40 ◦ C/14 MPa/160 kg/h was lost due to the dissolution of carotene in
[2.b] Mesophilic [2.b] 1.7 SCCO2 when compared to freeze drying. SCD of basil leaves at 40 ◦ C/10
spores
MPa/1000 L/h/3 h has shown a loss of Mg+2, which was responsible for
[3.b] Yeast and [3.b] 3.57
molds
the drastic loss of color, which changed from greenish blue to greenish
Coriander 40 ◦ C, 10 MPa [1] Mesophilic [1] 4 Zambon yellow (Bušić et al., 2014). It is observed that the color of a few products
leaves for 150 min bacteria et al. is affected to a greater extent by SCD due to its non-polar nature. In­
[2] Mesophilic [2] <1 (2018) vestigations on the impact of SCD on color and its mechanism need
spores
attention from researchers.
[3] Yeast and [3] >5
molds
4.6. Shelf life
SCF: supercritical fluids; SCD: supercritical drying; US: ultrasonication; Ethanol.

Shelf life studies are carried out on food products to project the end-
the effect of SCD on the color of products and subsequently arrive at
of-life span and to indicate the ‘best before’ dates for consumer safety
optimum processing and storage conditions. A summary of the studies
and awareness. SCD products have a comparatively higher shelf life than
exploring the changes in color profile in the SCD samples is presented in
those dried using various other drying techniques. Literature on these
Table 6. Sometimes, SCD may lead to color loss due to the high solubility
aspects is scant, and these have been summarized in Table 7. Djekic et al.
of pigments and volatiles in SCF. When treated with SCCO2 (50 ◦ C/20
(2018) studied the effects of SCD, air drying, and freeze drying on apples
MPa/150 min) and ethanol-SCCO2 (6% ethanol (40 min) + 50 ◦ C/20
for six months under ambient conditions and measured different quality
MPa/10 min), the color of SCD carrot slices became pale compared to
parameters (texture, color, and sensory properties). Apples dried by SCD
air-dried and control. This is because of the higher solubility of carot­
showed the highest consumer acceptability at the beginning of the
enoids in SCCO2, which might get lost on SCD. However, the color was
study. After six months, the SCD and freeze-dried apples packed in
similar to the original samples on rehydration which suggests a mini­
nitrogen-flushed polyethylene-covered aluminium showed no signifi­
mum loss of carotenoids during the SCD process. The air-dried sample
cant color, texture, or sensory changes. Both processes yielded almost
was darker due to enzymatic browning, damaged cell structure, and the
similar results. When apples were treated with SCD at 50 ◦ C/12.5

10
K. Pravallika et al.
Table 7
Changes in quality attributes during storage of supercritical dried food products.
Food Treatment Packaging material Organoleptic properties
Matrix conditions analyzed
Apple cuts/ 50 ◦ C, 12.5 Aluminium-
snacks MPa for 16 h polyethylene bags
flushed with N2
Apple 50 ◦ C, 12.5 Aluminium- Good product springiness
(Elstar) MPa for 16 h polyethylene bags with better water activity
flushed with N2 and nutrient retention
Coriander a) SCD An aluminium bag
40 ◦ C, 10 MPa filled with 100% N2
for 90 min
b) US + SCD
40 W, 40 ◦ C,
10 MPa for 90
min
SCF: Supercritical fluids; SCD: Supercritical drying; US: Ultrasonication.
MPa/16 h and freeze-dried at − 25 ◦ C/0.00002MPa/24 h, the shelf life of
SC-dried apples was extended to one year under refrigerated storage
conditions (4 ◦ C). The average flavonoid content was similar for both
samples during the storage period. The total quality index was best for
SCD-dried apples than freeze-dried samples, with scores of 0.39 and
0.44, respectively (Tomic et al., 2020).
The loss of triterpenes, dihydrochalcones, hydroxycinnamic acid,
flavanols, and proanthocyanins is more significant in SCD apple slices
during the storage period than in the freeze-dried sample. This study
opined that freeze drying is superior in preserving the secondary me­
tabolites than SCD; however, lower concentrations of bioactives were
reported after SCD treatment at 50 ◦ C. By keeping the SCD process
temperature below 45 ◦ C, higher retention of bioactive components can
be maintained with nutritional quality similar to the freeze-dried
product (Tomic et al., 2019). Nevertheless, additional studies on
different process conditions should be performed to confirm this
hypothesis.
5. Economic and environmental aspects of SCD
There are speculations on the cost of SCD because of its higher in­
vestment cost than other conventional drying techniques which are
currently used commercially. There are only 2 to 3 articles on the eco­
nomics of SCD; based on the information available, this section is con­
structed. SCD installation depends on the equipment, instrumentation,
and automation. A typical SCD process includes drying reactor vessels,
liquid CO2 reservoirs, and a pumping facility at a set pressure. A heat
exchanger is required to bring the desired temperature of SCF and
maintain the temperature of the system. In addition, piping, valves,
instruments, and other safe automation and operation services will add
to the initial investment cost. The flow rate of solvent, Q, is directly
proportional to the volume of the extractors (VT); this indicates that the
investment cost for SCD increases by its capacity. This relationship in­
dicates that an increase in the volume of the drying chamber or flow rate
of the SCF decreases the cost of the SCD process exponentially. It can be
applied from a pilot scale of 0.5 L capacity to a commercial scale of 500 L
capacity. Nevertheless, it underestimates the prices of small or pilot
scales and overestimates the prices of commercial units, which are likely
to be lower by this rule.
SCD can be performed in both batch and continuous processes
(workforce costs reduced). The continuous process of SCD can be
decreased to one-third of the batch process in terms of solvent con­
sumption. In contrast, there is a prominent increase in the price when
the cosolvent-mediated SCD process is employed with a different
implementation of the ethanol reservoir. The variable cost of the SCD
11
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
Storage Max changes in the Key observations Reference
conditions key property after
(Shelf-life) shelf-life
12 months High sensory and ▪High preservation of Tomic et al.
nutritional quality flavanols (2019)
6 months The color was ▪Flavor and aroma were Djekic et al.
changed to greyish changed with hay odor (2018)
brown ▪Increased chewiness with
loss of crispiness and
flexibility
▪Increased oxidation
10 days at The original color ▪ Microbial growth Michelino
30 ◦ C was maintained. was minimum; water et al. (2018)
loss was consistent
gathers both energy requirements and fluid costs. The energy utility is
comparatively less expensive because the heat is generated through
steam or hot water using fuel or gas for installation in small and
medium-scale industries. Electrical heating can also be used but is
limited to small-scale sectors (Lázár and Fábián, 2016). The consump­
tion of CO2 is a significant factor in estimating the variable cost. In the
SCD process, depressurization may cause loss of CO2 and organic
cosolvent. Hence, recompression may compensate for the CO2 loss on a
commercial scale. Further recycling of CO2 is another cost-saving option
(Lázár and Fábián, 2016). In most studies, the processing time of the
complete SCD process varies from 30 min to 7 h based on the food type.
The sanitation process of SCD equipment is also essential, but it is
consistently underestimated in the cost estimation. Therefore, it is
crucial to include the cleaning issue at the beginning of the process.
From the product perspective, high-value products such as spices and
condiments, meat products, and aerogels are being treated with SCD,
which has a high market value. Hence, retention of its originality is
highly expected, and previous literature does indicate that SCD fulfils
this requirement. The limitations of supercritical technology are the
higher installation cost and maintenance due to the involvement of both
temperature and pressure, the use of cosolvent reservoirs, and the
establishment and maintenance of predetermined processing conditions.
Hence, the cost of supercritical-based processes is relatively higher than
other conventional methods.
The characteristics of the SCD process that relate to environmental
impact are sustainability, reduced water requirements for cleaning and
processing, decreased effluent burden, and reduced energy use. As it is
carried out in a totally closed system, no additional facility is needed for
discharged wastewater or exhaust gases. It does not involve the release
of processed, harmful substances such as heavy metals, halogenated
carbons, acrylamide, or polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, unlike other
drying processes. Without harming the environment, the SCF used in the
SCD process is recycled and put to other uses. It is expected that SCD
could reduce pollution and contribute substantially to improving envi­
ronmental sustainability in the forthcoming coming decades.
6. Challenges and future scope
SCD has been carried out on only a few foods, such as apples, carrots,
beetroot, coriander, red bell pepper, and chicken breast. Even though a
few researchers have worked on the microbial inactivation of SCD, there
is a scarcity of complete information on the inactivation induced by the
SCD process. Most of the studies have focused on a few bacterial species,
yeasts, and molds species, which cannot be extrapolated to destroy all
kinds of microorganisms. Hence, research should focus on a broader
K. Pravallika et al.
range of foods and microorganisms for a specific strain because of
changes in the specificity of the microorganisms to different SCD
treatment conditions, as is the case with other drying techniques. One of
the major challenges during the SCD process is the loss of other polar
soluble compounds along with water. There is no validated study in this
regard and whether modifying the SCD conditions can control the loss of
polar compounds and specifically remove water.
It is essential to study SCD in combination with different cosolvents
to maintain the product’s structure and gather information to under­
stand the mechanisms of different foods and phase behavior before
coming to general assumptions. It is imperative to understand the drying
kinetics of SCD, the effect of temperature and pressure combinations,
and the processing time on different food components. These are
generally performed as batch types, although continuous processes are
also possible. A few moderate-cost drying techniques such as SCD fall
between these two extremes. More information is required for further
evaluation on the delivery of high quality with good overall accept­
ability, microbial safety, enzyme inhibition, physicochemical changes,
bioactive compounds, and other quality changes during shelf life studies
of the food to ensure that the food is safe for consumption.
7. Conclusion
Supercritical drying (SCD) has emerged as a sustainable and prom­
ising technique for food commodities such as spices, seafood, a few fruits
and vegetables, and other semisolids such as agar gels and barley
β-glucan gels. The SCD process removes water from foods using SCF
without crossing the liquid-vapor boundary layer while maintaining
combined critical temperature and pressure conditions. The combina­
tion of CO2 and ethanol in a supercritical state is being used to improve
drying efficiency as these are non-toxic, accessible, affordable, and eco-
friendly. Retention of physical, chemical, microbial, and sensory prop­
erties of food commodities is very high in SCD-treated samples. It pre­
serves thermally sensitive components of the food to the maximum
while retaining the microstructure of the products. SCF can be recycled
and reused for other drying cycles without polluting the environment. In
a few food products, SCD does not guarantee color retention, which is
essential in most foods. There is a chance to widen the range of products
and microbes. More focus on the bioactive, microbial, and enzyme
inactivation and shelf life of supercritical dried foods is needed. There is
scope for research in determining the drying and rehydration kinetics,
computational fluid dynamics, and modeling of the SCD process, which
is essential to design a process at the commercial level.
Author contributions
Sourcing literature, drafting the original article, preparing the fig­
ures, preparing the tables: Kosana Pravallika; Design of review outline,
supervising the research, reviewing and revising the manuscript, editing
the manuscript: Snehasis Chakraborty; The conception of the idea,
design of review outline, reviewing and revising the manuscript: Rekha
S. Singhal.
Ethical approval
This work does not contain any studies with human participants or
animals performed by any of the authors.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
12
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
Data availability
No data was used for the research described in the article.
Acknowledgments
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References
Asafu-Adjaye, O., Via, B., Sastri, B., Banerjee, S., 2021. Mechanism of dewatering porous
structures with supercritical carbon dioxide. Case Studies in Chemical and
Environmental Engineering 4, 100128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cscee.2021.100
128.
Batiha, G.E.S., Hussein, D.E., Algammal, A.M., George, T.T., Jeandet, P., Al-Snafi, A.E.,
Cruz-Martins, N., 2021. Application of natural antimicrobials in food preservation:
recent views. Food Control 126, 108066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodcont.2021.108066.
Benali, M., Canada, N.R., Boumghar, Y., 2014. Energy aspects in drying. Handbook of
Industrial Drying, July 1107–1130. https://doi.org/10.1201/b17208-68.
Bourdoux, S., Rajkovic, A., De Sutter, S., Vermeulen, A., Spilimbergo, S., Zambon, A.,
Hofland, G., Uyttendaele, M., Devlieghere, F., 2018. Inactivation of Salmonella,
Listeria monocytogenes, and Escherichia coli O157:H7 inoculated on coriander by
freeze-drying and supercritical CO2 drying. Innovat. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 47,
180–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ifset.2018.02.007.
Braeuer, A.S., Schuster, J.J., Gebrekidan, M.T., Bahr, L., Michelino, F., Zambon, A.,
Spilimbergo, S., 2017. In situ Raman analysis of CO2-assisted drying of fruit slices.
Foods 6 (5), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods6050037.
Brown, Z.K., Fryer, P.J., Norton, I.T., Bakalis, S., Bridson, R.H., 2008. Drying of foods
using supercritical carbon dioxide — investigations with carrot. Innovat. Food Sci.
Emerg. Technol. 9 (3), 280–289. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IFSET.2007.07.003.
Brunner, G., 2005. Supercritical fluids: technology and application to food processing.
J. Food Eng. 67 (1–2), 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JFOODENG.2004.05.060.
Bušić, A., Vojvodić, A., Komes, D., Akkermans, C., Belščak-Cvitanović, A., Stolk, M.,
Hofland, G., 2014. Comparative evaluation of CO2 drying as an alternative drying
technique of basil (Ocimum basilicum L.) - the effect on bioactive and sensory
properties. Food Res. Int. 64, 34–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodres.2014.06.013.
Chakraborty, S., Shaik, L., Gokhale, J.S., 2020. Subcritical Water: an Innovative
Processing Technology. Innovative Food Processing Technologies: A Comprehensive
Review. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-100596-5.22966-1.
Comin, L.M., Temelli, F., Saldaña, M.D.A., 2012. Barley beta-glucan aerogels via
supercritical CO2 drying. Food Res. Int. 48 (2), 442–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodres.2012.05.002.
Corzzini, S.C.S., Barros, H.D.F.Q., Grimaldi, R., Cabral, F.A., 2017. Extraction of edible
avocado oil using supercritical CO2 and a CO2/ethanol mixture as solvents. J. Food
Eng. 194, 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2016.09.004.
Derossi, A., De Pilli, T., Severini, C., McCarthy, M.J., 2008. Mass transfer during osmotic
dehydration of apples. J. Food Eng. 86 (4), 519–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jfoodeng.2007.11.007.
Djekic, I., Tomic, N., Bourdoux, S., Spilimbergo, S., Smigic, N., Udovicki, B., Hofland, G.,
Devlieghere, F., Rajkovic, A., 2018. Comparison of three types of drying
(supercritical CO2, air, and freeze) on the quality of dried apple – quality index
approach. Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 94 (November 2017), 64–72. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.lwt.2018.04.029.
Ferrentino, G., Spilimbergo, S., 2011. High-pressure carbon dioxide pasteurization of
solid foods: current knowledge and future outlooks. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 22
(8), 427–441. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tifs.2011.04.009.
García-Pascual, P., Sanjuán, N., Melis, R., Mulet, A., 2006. Morchella esculenta (morel)
rehydration process modelling. J. Food Eng. 72 (4), 346–353.
Girotra, P., Singh, S.K., Nagpal, K., 2013. Supercritical fluid technology: A promising
approach in pharmaceutical research. Pharmaceutical Development and Technology
18 (1), 22–38. https://doi.org/10.3109/10837450.2012.726998.
Harrison, R., 2020. Fluids and the field. Elements 16 (6), , 367. https://doi.org/10.2138/
GSELEMENTS.16.6.430.
Hart, A., Anumudu, C., Onyeaka, H., Miri, T., 2021. Application of supercritical fluid
carbon dioxide in improving food shelf life and safety by inactivating spores: a
review. Journal of Food Science and Technology. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s13197-021-05022-7.
Inyang, U.E., Oboh, I.O., Etuk, B.R., 2018. Kinetic Models for drying techniques—food
materials. Adv. Chem. Eng. Sci. 8 (2), 27–48. https://doi.org/10.4236/
aces.2018.82003.
Khaw, K.Y., Parat, M.O., Shaw, P.N., Falconer, J.R., 2017. Solvent supercritical fluid
technologies to extract bioactive compounds from natural sources: a review.
Molecules 22 (7). https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22071186.
Krokida, M.K., Marinos-Kouris, D., 2003. Rehydration kinetics of dehydrated products.
J. Food Eng. 57 (1), 1–7.
Lázár, I., Fábián, I., 2016. A continuous extraction and pumpless supercritical CO2 drying
system for laboratory-scale aerogel production. Gels 2 (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/
gels2040026.
K. Pravallika et al.
Lee, B.S., Choi, Y.H., Lee, W.Y., 2011. Drying characteristics of apple slabs after pre-
treatment with supercritical CO2. Journal of Food Science and Nutrition 16 (3),
261–266. https://doi.org/10.3746/jfn.2011.16.3.261.
Lee, L.Y., Lin, Y., Wang, C.-H., 2016. Study of the supercritical drying of wet okara. July
1–7. In: http://www.itekcmsonline.com/rps2prod/set2016/usb-proceedings/html/
P207.xml.
Lewicki, P.P., 2004. Water as the determinant of food engineering properties. A review.
J. Food Eng. 61 (4), 483–495. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(03)00219-X.
Liu, S., Ozturk, S., Xu, J., Kong, F., Gray, P., Zhu, M.J., Tang, J., 2018. Microbial
validation of radio frequency pasteurization of wheat flour by inoculated pack
studies. J. Food Eng. 217, 68–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2017.08.013.
Lopes, R.P., Mota, M.J., Gomes, A.M., Delgadillo, I., Saraiva, J.A., 2018. Application of
high pressure with homogenization, temperature, carbon dioxide, and cold plasma
for the inactivation of bacterial spores: a review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 17
(3), 532–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12311.
Lopez-Quiroga, E., Prosapio, V., Fryer, P.J., Norton, I.T., Bakalis, S., 2019. A model-based
study of rehydration kinetics in freeze-dried tomatoes. Energy Proc. 161, 75–82.
Marszałek, K., Krzyżanowska, J., Woźniak, Ł., Skąpska, S., 2017. Kinetic modelling of
polyphenol oxidase, peroxidase, pectin esterase, polygalacturonase, degradation of
the main pigments and polyphenols in beetroot juice during high pressure carbon
dioxide treatment. Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 85, 412–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.lwt.2016.11.018.
Marques, L.G., Prado, M.M., Freire, J.T., 2009. Rehydration characteristics of freeze-
dried tropical fruits. LWT–Food Sci. Technol. 42 (7), 1232–1237.
Michelino, F., Zambon, A., Vizzotto, M.T., Cozzi, S., Spilimbergo, S., 2018. High power
ultrasound combined with supercritical carbon dioxide for the drying and microbial
inactivation of coriander. J. CO2 Util. 24, 516–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.
JCOU.2018.02.010.
Morbiato, G., Zambon, A., Toffoletto, M., Poloniato, G., Dall’Acqua, S., de Bernard, M.,
Spilimbergo, S., 2019. Supercritical carbon dioxide combined with high power
ultrasound as innovate drying process for chicken breast. J. Supercrit. Fluids 147,
24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SUPFLU.2019.02.004.
Moses, J.A., Norton, T., Alagusundaram, K., Tiwari, B.K., 2014. Novel drying techniques
for the food industry. Food Eng. Rev. 6 (3), 43–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-
014-9078-7.
Nautiyal, O.H., 2016. Food processing by supercritical carbon dioxide-Review. EC
Chemistry 2, 111–135.
Nowacka, M., Dadan, M., Janowicz, M., Wiktor, A., Witrowa-Rajchert, D., Mandal, R.,
Pratap-Singh, A., Janiszewska-Turak, E., 2021. Effect of nonthermal treatments on
selected natural food pigments and colour changes in plant material. Compr. Rev.
Food Sci. Food Saf. 20 (5), 5097–5144. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12824.
Phisut, N., 2012. Spray drying technique of fruit juice powder: some factors influencing
the properties of product. International Food Research Journal 19 (1), 7–18.
Plazzotta, S., Calligaris, S., Manzocco, L., 2019. Structure of oleogels from κ-carrageenan
templates as affected by supercritical-CO2 -drying, freeze-drying and lettuce-filler
addition. Food Hydrocolloids 96 (March), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
foodhyd.2019.05.008.
Rezaei, K., Temelli, F., Jenab, E., 2007. Effects of pressure and temperature on enzymatic
reactions in supercritical fluids. Biotechnol. Adv. 25 (3), 272–280. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.biotechadv.2006.12.002.
Ribeiro, N., Soares, G.C., Santos-Rosales, V., Concheiro, A., Alvarez-Lorenzo, C., García-
González, C.A., Oliveira, A.L., 2020. A new era for sterilization based on supercritical
CO2 technology. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part B 108 (2), 399–428. https://doi.org/
10.1002/jbm.b.34398.
Şahin, İ., Özbakır, Y., İnönü, Z., Ulker, Z., Erkey, C., 2018. Kinetics of supercritical drying
of gels. Gels 4 (1). https://doi.org/10.3390/gels4010003.
SalimiHizaji, A., Maghsoudlou, Y., Jafari, S.M., 2010. Application of Peleg model to
study effect of water temperature and storage time on rehydration kinetics of air
dried potato cubes. Lat. Am. Appl. Res. 40 (2), 131–136.
Santhalakshmy, S., Bosco, S.J.D., Francis, S., Sabeena, M., 2015. Effect of inlet
temperature on physicochemical properties of spray-dried jamun fruit juice powder.
Powder Technol. 274, 37–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.powtec.2015.01.016.
13
Journal of Food Engineering 343 (2023) 111375
Spilimbergo, S., Matthews, M.A., Cinquemani, C., 2018. Supercritical Fluid
Pasteurization and Food Safety. In: Proctor, A. (Ed.), Alternatives to Conventional
Food Processing. Royal Society of Chemistry, UK, pp. 153–195.
Suravanichnirachorn, W., Haruthaithanasan, V., Suwonsichon, S., Sukatta, U.,
Maneeboon, T., Chantrapornchai, W., 2018. Effect of carrier type and concentration
on the properties, anthocyanins and antioxidant activity of freeze-dried mao
[Antidesmabunius L. Spreng] powders. Agriculture and Natural Resources 52 (4),
354–360. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anres.2018.09.011.
Thorat, I.D., Mohapatra, D., Sutar, R.F., Kapdi, S.S., Jagtap, DipaliD., 2012.
Mathematical modeling and experimental study on thin layer vacuum drying of
ginger (Zingiber officinale R.) slices. Food Bioprocess Technol. 5, 1379–1383.
Tomic, N., Djekic, I., Hofland, G., Smigic, N., Udovicki, B., Rajkovic, A., 2020.
Comparison of supercritical CO2-drying, freeze-drying and frying on sensory
properties of beetroot. Foods 9 (9). https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9091201.
Tomic, N., Djekic, I., Zambon, A., Spilimbergo, S., Bourdoux, S., Holtze, E., Hofland, G.,
Sut, S., Dall’Acqua, S., Smigic, N., Udovicki, B., Rajkovic, A., 2019. Challenging
chemical and quality changes of supercritical CO2 dried apple during long-term
storage. Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 110, 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
lwt.2019.04.083.
Uwineza, P.A., Waśkiewicz, A., 2020. Recent advances in supercritical fluid extraction of
natural bioactive compounds from natural plant materials. Molecules 25 (17).
https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules25173847.
Vatai, T., Škerget, M., Knez, Ž., 2009. Extraction of phenolic compounds from elder berry
and different grape marc varieties using organic solvents and/or supercritical carbon
dioxide. J. Food Eng. 90 (2), 246–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jfoodeng.2008.06.028.
Vetralla, M., Ferrentino, G., Zambon, A., Spilimbergo, S., 2018. A study about the effects
of supercritical carbon dioxide drying on apple pieces. ETP International Journal of
Food Engineering 4 (3), 186–190. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijfe.4.3.186-190.
Wang, W., Rao, L., Wu, X., Wang, Y., Zhao, L., Liao, X., 2021. Supercritical Carbon
Dioxide Applications in Food Processing. Food Engineering Reviews 13 (3),
570–591. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-020-09270-9.
Wason, S., Verma, T., Subbiah, J., 2021. Validation of process technologies for enhancing
the safety of low-moisture foods: a review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 20 (5),
4950–4992. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12800.
Wimmer, Z., Zarevúcka, M., 2010. A review on the effects of supercritical carbon dioxide
on enzyme activity. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 11 (1), 233–253. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijms11010233.
Wrona, O., Rafińska, K., Możeński, C., Buszewski, B., 2017. Supercritical fluid extraction
of bioactive compounds from plant materials. Journal of AOAC International, 100
(6), 1624-1635. https://doi.org/10.5740/jaoacint.17-0232.
Zambon, A., Facco, P., Morbiato, G., Toffoletto, M., Poloniato, G., Sut, S., Andrigo, P.,
Dall’Acqua, S., de Bernard, M., Spilimbergo, S., 2022b. Promoting the preservation
of strawberry by supercritical CO2 drying. Food Chemistry, 397(October 2021),
133789. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.133789.
Zambon, A., Bourdoux, S., Pantano, M.F., Pugno, N.M., Boldrin, F., Hofland, G.,
Rajkovic, A., Devlieghere, F., Spilimbergo, S., 2021. Supercritical CO2 for the drying
and microbial inactivation of apple’s slices. Dry. Technol. 39 (2), 259–267. https://
doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2019.1676774.
Zambon, A., Michelino, F., Bourdoux, S., Devlieghere, F., Sut, S., Dall’Acqua, S.,
Rajkovic, A., Spilimbergo, S., 2018. Microbial inactivation efficiency of supercritical
CO2 drying process. Dry. Technol. 36 (16), 2016–2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/
07373937.2018.1433683.
Zambon, A., Tomic, N., Djekic, I., Hofland, G., Rajkovic, A., Spilimbergo, S., 2020.
Supercritical CO2 drying of red bell Pepper. Food Bioprocess Technol. 13 (5),
753–763. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11947-020-02432-x.
Zambon, A., Zulli, R., Boldrin, F., Spilimbergo, S., 2022a. Microbial inactivation and
drying of strawberry slices by supercritical CO2. J. Supercrit. Fluids 180, 105430.
https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SUPFLU.2021.105430.
Zheng, S., Hu, X., Ibrahim, A.R., Tang, D., Tan, Y., Li, J., 2010. Supercritical fluid drying:
classification and applications. Recent Pat. Chem. Eng. 3 (3), 230–244. https://doi.
org/10.2174/1874478811003030230.