Drying Technology

An International Journal

ISSN: 0737-3937 (Print) 1532-2300 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ldrt20

Evaluation of the combined effect of osmotic and

Refractance Window drying on the drying kinetics,
physical, and phytochemical properties of beet

Carolina Calderón-Chiu, Cecilia Eugenia Martínez-Sánchez, Jesús Rodríguez-

Miranda, José Manuel Juárez-Barrientos, Roselis Carmona-García & Erasmo
Herman-Lara

To cite this article: Carolina Calderón-Chiu, Cecilia Eugenia Martínez-Sánchez, Jesús Rodríguez-
Miranda, José Manuel Juárez-Barrientos, Roselis Carmona-García & Erasmo Herman-Lara
(2019): Evaluation of the combined effect of osmotic and Refractance Window drying on the
drying kinetics, physical, and phytochemical properties of beet, Drying Technology, DOI:
10.1080/07373937.2019.1655439

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2019.1655439

Published online: 20 Aug 2019.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 9

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=ldrt20
DRYING TECHNOLOGY
https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2019.1655439

Evaluation of the combined effect of osmotic and Refractance Window

drying on the drying kinetics, physical, and phytochemical properties
of beet

n-Chiua , Cecilia Eugenia Mart
ınez-S
ancheza , Jesu
Carolina Caldero
s Rodr
ıguez-Mirandaa ,
Jos

e Manuel Ju
arez-Barrientos b
, Roselis Carmona-Garc
ıaa
, and Erasmo Herman-Laraa
Depto. de Ingenier
ıa Qu
ımica y Bioqu
ımica, Tecnolo
gico Nacional de M
exico/Instituto Tecnol
ogico de Tuxtepec, Tuxtepec, Oax,
a

M
exico; bDepto. de Ciencias Agropecuarias, Universidad del Papaloapan, Loma Bonita, Oax, M
exico

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

The effect of osmotic dehydration (OD) with different sucrose concentrations and tempera- Received 23 March 2019
tures was studied in combination with drying by Refractance WindowTM (RW) in beet slices Revised 7 August 2019
with thicknesses of 1 and 5 mm. The color, texture, total polyphenol content (TPC), total fla- Accepted 8 August 2019
vonoid content (TFC), and antioxidant capacity (AC) of the beet with OD, RW, and OD-RW
KEYWORDS
combined drying were evaluated. The best results of water loss (WL) and solid gain (SG) Osmotic dehydration;
with OD were obtained with 65% sucrose solution at 60
C. OD partially reduced the water Refractance WindowTM;
content of the slices, decreasing the drying time with RW at 85
C. However, the retention drying kinetics;
of qualities such as color, texture, TPC, TFC, and AC in beet was obtained with combined physicochemical properties
drying by OD-RW at 60
C under OD conditions of 65% sucrose at 45
C. These conditions
afforded a stable product retaining its physical and chemical properties.

Introduction solutions, is based on the natural and nondestructive

Beet (Beta vulgaris L.) has a high content of natural
pigments, such as betalains, that have beneficial effects
on health through their antioxidant activity [1] and is
rich in other valuable compounds, such as polyphe-
nols, flavonoids, carotenoids, betacyanins, glycine
betaine, saponins, and folates. Hence, beet ingestion
may have cancer preventive effects as long as these
valuable compounds are preserved. However, fresh
beet is susceptible to spoilage due to its high moisture
content, making it a highly perishable food. Drying is
a preservation method that ensures the microbial
safety of biological products.[2] However, conventional
drying uses high temperatures and long dehydration
times, leading to various undesirable changes in the
physical characteristics of products (e.g., in texture,
color, shrinkage and deformation, and crack develop-
ment), as well as reductions in sensory, nutritional,
and chemical properties that can decrease consumer
acceptance.[3] Osmotic dehydration (OD) is used as a
pretreatment to remove a portion of the water from a
food. This method, involving the elimination of water
from plant tissues by immersion in hypertonic
phenomenon of osmosis through membranes.[4] It is
effective even at room temperature and useful in the
conservation of the nutritional, sensory and functional
properties of foods. Generally, foods pretreated with
OD are further dried by convective drying, freeze-dry-
ing or microwave drying.[5] However, new technolo-
gies such as drying by Refractance WindowTM (RW)
could be more effective in foods pretreated by OD.[6]
When RW is used, the material to be dried, generally
in the form of pulp, juice or slices, is placed on a
plastic film with special refractance characteristics
(MylarTM film). The film floats on the surface of the
hot water so the thermal energy for the evaporation
of the moisture in the food is transferred from the
hot water to the wet material mainly by infrared radi-
ation. RW technology uses high temperatures, short
times, and high thermal efficiency all at low cost to
provide dehydrated products of better quality.[7]
Currently, there is no information on the combination
of OD-RW drying of food, especially for foods such
as beet that have thermosensitive components.
Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate

CONTACT Erasmo Herman-Lara erasmo_hl@hotmail.com Depto. de Ingenier
ıa Qu
ımica y Bioqu
ımica, Tecnol

ogico Nacional de M
exico/Instituto
Tecnol
ogico de Tuxtepec, Av. Dr. V
ıctor Bravo Ahuja s/n, Tuxtepec, Oax, CP 68350, M
exico.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/ldrt.
ß 2019 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2

C. CALDERON-CHIU ET AL.

this type of combined drying process on the physical Table 1. Experimental conditions for obtaining osmotic dehy-
and chemical properties of beet. dration kinetics in fresh beet.
Slice Sucrose Temperature
Treatment thickness (mm) concentration (%) (
C)
Materials and methods T1 1 35 30
T2 1 35 45
Beets with commercial maturity were obtained from the T3 1 35 60
T4 1 50 30
local market in the city of Tuxtepec in Oaxaca State, T5 1 50 45
Mexico. Samples were selected to be uniform in color, T6 1 50 60
T7 1 65 30
shape, and size, and then they were washed and cut into T8 1 65 45
3.5-cm diameter slices with thicknesses of 1 and 5 mm. T9 1 65 60
T10 5 35 30
T11 5 35 45
T12 5 35 60
Osmotic dehydration T13 5 50 30
T14 5 50 45
Sucrose solutions at 35, 50 and 65% were used at temper- T15 5 50 60
atures of 30, 45 and 60
C with a product:solution ratio T16 5 65 30
T17 5 65 45
of 1:15 (w/v). Table 1 shows the experimental conditions T18 5 65 60
for the OD of beet slices 1- and 5-mm thick. A heating Note: The treatments were performed in duplicate.
plate (Thermo Scientific Cimares, SP131325, USA) was
used for heating and stirring. A 2.5-L crystallizer contain- The experimental and predicted data were analyzed
ing the osmotic solution was placed over the heating
based on their determination coefficient (R2).
plate with an external temperature controller (Johnson B
Controls Inc., A419, USA). The samples were immersed WL o SG ¼ eðAtÞ (3)
and removed from the solution at different time intervals
where, A and B are constants of Page’s model, and t
until equilibrium was reached, and the excess solution
is the OD time in minutes.
was removed with absorbent paper. The moisture content
was determined with the 925.09 method[8] using an oven
(Binder, ED 115, Germany). Water loss (WL) and solid Refractance Window drying
gain (SG) were calculated with the Equations (1) and (2) The RW drying of the beet slices without and with
respectively used by Garc
ıa-Toledo et al.[9] pretreatment OD was carried out with the RW equip-
ðM0 ÞðXa:0 ÞðMt ÞðXa:t Þ ment (manufactured by Institute Tecnol
ogico de
WL ¼ x 100 (1)
M0 Tuxtepec, M
exico) as reported by Hern
andez-Santos
where, WL (g water/g fresh beet), M0 is the initial et al.[3] according to Figure 1. The water bath was
weight of the sample in g, Mt is the weight of the maintained at 70 ± 2 and 98 ± 2
C to obtain tempera-
sample at a given time in g, Xa.0 is the mass fraction tures of 60 and 85
C on the surface of the MylarTM
of initial water in g water/g dry solids, and Xa.t is the film, respectively. The initial moisture content of beet
mass fraction of water at a given time in g water/g was obtained with method No. 925.09[8] employing an
dry solids. oven (Binder, ED 115, Germany). RW drying was per-
formed using a removable MylarTM film to be con-
ðMt Þð1Xs:t ÞðM0 Þð1Xs:0 Þ
SG ¼ x 100 (2) tinually weighed. The film was held by two metal
M0 aluminum pins by the longer sides of the tray until
where, SG (g solids/g fresh beet), M0 is the initial contact with the heating water. The total weight of the
weight of the sample in g, Mt is the weight of the 1-mm thick slices was initially obtained and distrib-
sample at a given time in g, Xs.0 is the mass fraction uted in a monolayer on the surface of the MylarTM
of initial solids in g solids/g dry solids and Xs.t is the film, which was previously weighed. Weight loss of
mass fraction of solids at a given time in g solids/g the samples along with the weight of the film during
dry solids. the kinetics was recorded at regular time intervals
The experimental kinetics prediction of the WL (excess water under the film before being weighed was
and SG was performed with Page’s model (Equation 3) removed) until a constant weight was reached
because of its goodness of adjustment of experimental employing a digital balance with an accuracy of
results and their simplicity applied in various 0.001 g (Sartorius TE 4101 AG Gottingen, Germany,
foods[3,9,10] by nonlinear regression using the software 2010). The drying kinetics were obtained by plotting
MATLAB Version 7.10.0.499 (Math Works Inc., USA). the dimensionless moisture content (WÞ against time

Figure 1. Schematic description of the RW dryer.
(min). W was calculated with the Equation (4)
described by Wang et al.[11]
Xt Xe
W¼ (4)
X0  Xe
where Xt represents the moisture content at time t, Xe
the equilibrium moisture content and X0 the initial
moisture content of beet, all represented in g water/g
dry solids.
Color and texture measurements
The color was measured with a colorimeter
(UltraScan Vis, Hunter Associates Laboratory Inc.,
USA) employing a standard white filter (L ¼ 99.32,
a ¼ 0.14 and b ¼ 0.04), reference to an illumin-
ant D65 at a visual angle of 10
using EasyMatchQC
software. The CIELCH system, which uses L (lumi-
nosity), C (chromaticity), h
(hue angle), DE (total
color difference), a and b, was used. C, h
, and DE
were calculated with Equations (5)–(7) as described by
Garc
ıa-Toledo et al.[9]
C ¼ ða2 þ b2 Þ1=2 (5)
ho ¼ arctanða =b Þ (6)
DE ¼ ðDL2 þ Da2 þ Db2 Þ1=2 (7)
The texture was measured as puncture strength
(PS) using a texturometer (TA-XT plus, Stable
Microsystems Inc., UK) by penetration tests with a 2-
mm cylindrical probe (P/2N), and the maximum
penetration force in Newtons (N) was reported. The
pretest and test speed were 2 mm/s, the posttest speed
was 10 mm/s, the contact force was 0.01 N, and the
compression distances were 8 and 12 mm for slices of
1 and 5 mm, respectively.
Total polyphenols, total flavonoids contents, and
antioxidant capacity
The fresh and dried sample extracts were obtained
with the methodology described by Jiratanan and
DRYING TECHNOLOGY 3
Liu.[12] The sample was blended at the highest speed
for 5 min in a blender (Osterizer, Oster-4655,
Mexico). Five grams of sample were placed in an
Erlenmeyer flask, and an 80% acetone-water mixture
was added at a sample-solvent ratio of 1:10 (w/v) and
homogenized at 6000 rpm for 3 min using the hom-
ogenizer (Virtis, Gardiner, New York) in darkness.
The supernatant was recovered, and the solvent was
evaporated using a rotary evaporator (B€ uchi
Rotavapor R-100, Thermo Fisher Scientific, USA).
The total polyphenol content (TPC) was deter-
mined using the Folin-Ciocalteu method [13] following
the procedure described by Heimler et al.[14] To
125 mL of sample extract, 500 mL of distilled water and
125 mL of Folin-Ciocalteu reagent were added. The
mixture was allowed to stand for 6 min. Subsequently,
1.25 mL of 7% Na2CO3 solution and 1 mL of distilled
water were added. The mixture was allowed to stand
for 90 min in the dark at room temperature and the
absorbance at 760 nm was read using a spectropho-
tometer (Cary 60 UV Vis, Agilent Technologies Inc.,
Italy). The aforementioned procedure was also per-
formed using distilled water as blank. TPC was
expressed as equivalent micrograms of gallic acid
(GAE) per g of dry solids (mg GAE/g dry solids). A
calibration curve with gallic acid at concentrations of
20–500 mg/mL was used. The total flavonoid content
(TFC) of the sample was performed using the proced-
ure described by Heimler et al.[14] At 250 mL of sam-
ple extract, 75 mL of 5% NaNO2 solution, 150 mL of
freshly prepared solution of 10% AlCl3 and 500 mL of
1 M NaOH were added. The volume was adjusted to
2.5 mL with deionized water and allowed to stand for
5 min. The absorbance at 510 nm was read. The afore-
mentioned procedure was also performed using dis-
tilled water as blank. The TFC was expressed as
equivalent micrograms of catechin (CE) per g of dry
solids (mg CE/g dry solids). A calibration curve with
catechin at concentration of 20–500 mg/mL was used.
The in vitro antioxidant capacity was spectrophoto-
metrically evaluated as the DPPHþ scavenging activity
4

C. CALDERON-CHIU ET AL.
Figure 2. Experimental and simulated kinetics of osmotic dehydration for water loss (WL): (a) 35, (b) 50, and (c) 65% of sucrose at
different temperatures and thicknesses.
according to the method developed by Brand-
Williams et al.[15] and described by Ala~
no
n et al.[16]
with modifications. 100 lL of dilutions of extracts
were added to 2.9 mL 0.06 mM of DPPHþ methanolic
solution. The samples were vortexed for 15 s and
allowed to stand for 30 min at room temperature.
Subsequently the absorbance was read at 515 nm. A
reference blank containing 100 mL of methanol and
2.9 mL of DPPHþ solution was used. The antioxidant
capacity (AC) is expressed as the % inhibition of the
extract and was calculated with Equation (8), where
ASample is the absorbance of the sample and ABlank is
the absorbance of the blank.
% Inhibition of the extract
  (8)
¼ 1ðASample =ABlank Þ X 100
Statistical analysis
The results were analyzed using analysis of variance
(ANOVA), and a Fisher’s test was performed to deter-
mine the minimum significant difference between
means (p < 0.05) using Statistica software (StatSoft
Inc., version 10, 2011).
Results and discussion
Osmotic dehydration experimental and
simulated kinetics
The OD experimental and simulated kinetics for WL
and SG are presented in Figures 2 and 3, respectively.
They increased when the solution concentration and
temperature were increased. The WL and SG at the
beginning of the OD were controlled by the high
osmotic pressure exerted by the solution on the beet
cells as a result of the large difference in the driving
force between the food sap and the surrounding
osmotic solution. Changes in the permeability of the
cell membrane and the viscosity of the osmotic
medium favored higher water transfer at higher tem-
perature.[17] The experimental and simulated kinetics
of WL and SG showed average R2 values of 0.9851
and 0.9243, respectively, indicating an adequate
adjustment by Page’s model. The best results of WL
and SG were obtained with 65% sucrose solution at
60
C, and similar results were found by Garc
ıa-
Toledo et al.[9] for ginger. Azarpazhooh and
Ramaswamy[18] also found that increasing the concen-
tration of the osmotic solution and the temperature
 DRYING TECHNOLOGY 5

Figure 3. Experimental and simulated kinetics of osmotic dehydration for solids gain (SG): (a) 35, (b) 50, and (c) 65% of sucrose at
different temperatures and thicknesses.

increased the diffusivity of moisture towards the Refractance Window drying kinetics
osmotic solution and the solids in apple. Slices 1-mm
Figure 4 shows the RW drying kinetics of beet without
thick showed the highest WL and SG, reaching equi-
OD at 60 and 85
C, respectively. It was observed that
librium in less time than was required for the 5-mm beet drying was influenced by the drying temperature,
slices. Reducing the thickness of the slices increased reaching equilibrium at 100 and 40 min at 60 and 85
C,
the contact surface with the osmotic solution. A respectively. The difference drying time required between
superficial layer of solutes could have formed on the these drying temperatures was 60 min, represented a
5-mm thick slices, interfering with the concentration
gradient across the product-solution interface and act-
ing as a barrier for WL and SG.[17] The average initial
moisture content of fresh beet as control was 7.6281 g
water/g dry solids. The final moisture contents in
equilibrium for 1-mm slices were 6.2553 and 3.9689 g
of water/g dry solids for the treatments with 50%
sucrose at 30
C and 65% sucrose at 60
C respect-
ively, considering a final equilibrium time of 75 min.
While, the final moisture contents in equilibrium for
5-mm slices were 7.2476 and 4.7454 g water/g dry sol-
ids obtained for the treatments of 35% sucrose at
30
C and 65% sucrose at 60
C respectively, consider-
ing the same final equilibrium time of 75 min.
Because of the better results obtained with the 1-mm Figure 4. Experimental drying kinetics by Refractance Window
slices, only these slices were dried by RW. of fresh beets at different temperatures.
6

C. CALDERON-CHIU ET AL.
Figure 5. Experimental drying kinetics with Refractance Window at 60 (a, b, and c) and 85
C (d, e, and f) of 1 mm thickness fresh
beet slices with and without osmotic dehydration pretreatment at different temperatures and sucrose concentrations.
drying time of 150% more than the time required at RW
temperature of 85
C. The final moisture contents in
equilibrium for 1-mm slices with RW drying were 1.0722
and 0.4074 g of water/g dry solids at 60 and 85
C
respectively, considering a same final equilibrium time of
40 min. This behavior could be due to the energy effi-
ciency of the water used to heat the MylarTM film, which
was between 85 and 98
C depending much on the type
of food to be dried, regardless of if the food is solid,
semisolid or liquid. In addition, high heat and mass
transfer is observed in both thin film and thickness of the
sample employed.[7,19] In RW, the heat transfer occurs
via infrared radiation through a window facing the wet
material. RW produces simultaneous water evaporation
throughout the whole system; when the food dries, the
infrared radiation window closes, and the heat transfer
then occurs via conduction by evaporating the remaining
water, resulting in shorter drying times.[20] This behavior
was similar to that found by Hern
andez-Santos et al.[3]
for drying carrot slices. Similarly, for the RW drying of
tomato powder, Castoldi et al.[21] indicated that the infra-
red radiation emitted by the hot water on the MylarTM
film contributed to the increased evaporation of water in
this food. Nevertheless, Caparino et al.[22] obtained lower
drying times than those of this work when drying mango
puree. This was attributed to the fact that beet has a
more solid and complex structure than the mango mash
(semiliquid product), and there was continuous RW dry-
ing. However, the results obtained in this study demon-
strated the ability of a batch RW dryer to dehydrate
1-mm beet slices in a relatively short time.
Experimental kinetics of osmotic dehydration-
Refractance Window combined drying
Figure 5 shows the RW experimental drying kinetics
at 60 and 85
C of 1 mm thick beet slices with and
without OD. It was observed that at the beginning of
 DRYING TECHNOLOGY 7

Table 2. Color parameters of 1 and 5 mm thickness beet slices pretreated osmotically at different tem-
peratures and concentrations of sucrose.
Treatment 1 mm of thickness
L C h
DE
Control 26.78 ± 1.24a 21.13 ± 1.82a,b,c 20.05 ± 0.82a 0.00 ± 0.00
T1 24.80 ± 1.05b,c 26.42 ± 3.70d 18.69 ± 1.57a,b,c 6.57 ± 3.92a,b,c
T2 23.96 ± 0.08c,d,e 24.04 ± 1.67b,c,d 18.80 ± 0.67a,b,c 4.96 ± 1.16a,b,c
T3 22.99 ± 0.44d,e,f 18.10 ± 0.64a,e 14.84 ± 0.44d,e,f 5.35 ± 1.72a,b,c
T4 25.52 ± 0.99a,b,c 24.81 ± 3.51b,c,d 18.67 ± 1.37a,b,c 4.10 ± 2.86a,b,c
T5 24.46 ± 0.72b,c,d 20.66 ± 2.14a,b 17.63 ± 1.54a,b,c 3.68 ± 2.30a,b
T6 25.45 ± 0.44a,b,c 22.66 ± 2.72b,c,d 16.06 ± 1.06c,d,e 2.80 ± 0.47a
T7 24.48 ± 0.80b,c,d 23.38 ± 2.43b,c,d 18.47 ± 1.38a,b,c 4.48 ± 1.61a,b,c
T8 25.70 ± 1.41a,b 25.13 ± 4.97b,c,d 19.46 ± 1.54b,c 4.54 ± 2.63a,b,c
T9 22.39 ± 0.60e,f,g 16.12 ± 1.13e,f 12.44 ± 1.71f 7.17 ± 1.01a,b,c
5 mm of thickness
Treatment L C h
DE
Control 26.78 ± 1.24a 21.13 ± 1.82a,b,c 20.05 ± 0.82a 0.00 ± 0.00
T10 19.22 ± 0.96j,k 11.89 ± 0.06f,g,h,i 16.14 ± 1.07c,d,e 12.02 ± 1.59e,f
T11 20.04 ± 1.68h,i,j 14.78 ± 4.17e,f,g,h 16.66 ± 1.63b,c,d,e 9.39 ± 2.98d,e
T12 17.93 ± 1.19k 5.72 ± 2.16j 18.89 ± 5.50a,b,c 17.81 ± 2.84g
T13 19.70 ± 1.17i,j 11.46 ± 1.43g,h,i 16.45 ± 1.45b,c,d,e 12.07 ± 3.62e,f
T14 19.70 ± 0.43i,j 8.15 ± 2.11i,j 14.12 ± 2.21e,f 14.90 ± 3.86f,g
T15 21.58 ± 0.63f,g,h 14.48 ± 2.03e,f,g,h 17.85 ± 0.34a,b,c,d 8.59 ± 3.17c,d,e
T16 21.02 ± 1.89g,h,i 15.70 ± 1.07e,f,g 17.89 ± 1.05a,b,c,d 8.19 ± 1.31b,c,d,e
T17 20.08 ± 1.06h,i,j 11.25 ± 2.74h,i 17.53 ± 0.19a,b,c,d 11.99 ± 0.96e,f
T18 18.98 ± 1.07j,k 9.02 ± 4.12i,j 16.84 ± 2.53b,c,d,e 14.53 ± 6.02f,g
Note: The results are the average of three repetitions. Different letters in the same column indicate significant differ-
ence (p < 0.05).

the drying process, there was a rapid decrease in the
moisture content for samples with and without OD,
and this decline was caused by the high initial drying
speed, and the magnitude of this effect decreased as
the moisture content of the samples decreased.[23] At
high sucrose concentrations, the OD reduced the slice
moisture content, which consequently decreased the
RW drying time compared with the untreated samples
(without OD). The drying times required were 70, 60
and 40 min for 35, 50 and 65% sucrose solutions with
RW at 60
C, as shown in Figure 5(a–c), respectively.
The lowest moisture content in equilibrium was
0.0529 g of water/g dry solids for OD-RW combined
drying with OD treatment of 65% sucrose at 60
C
and final temperature of RW at 60
C, considering a
final equilibrium time of 40 min. Overall, the time
decreased as the concentration of the solution and the
temperature used during the OD increased. Slices pre-
treated with OD at 35, 50 and 65% sucrose and dried
with RW at 85
C, presented in Figure 5(d–f), showed
the same behavior. However, they presented shorter
drying times of 40, 40 and 30 min, respectively. In the
same way, the lowest equilibrium moisture content
was 0.0097 g of water/g dry solids for OD-RW com-
bined drying with OD treatment of 65% sucrose at
60
C and final temperature of RW at 85
C, consider-
ing a final equilibrium time of 30 min. This was due
to the increased RW temperature (from 60 to 85
C)
causing rapid WL at the beginning of the drying
period, favoring this decrease in drying time, which is
consistent with what was reported by Kowalski and
Łechta
nska[24] during beet osmo-convective drying.
Color changes with osmotic dehydration,
Refractance Window, and combined osmotic
dehydration-Refractance Window
The results of color parameters in beet slices with dif-
ferent thicknesses and osmotically dehydrated at dif-
ferent sucrose concentrations and temperatures are
shown in Table 2. It was observed that increasing the
concentration and temperature of the osmotic solution
decreased the L values, probably due to an increase
in the concentration gradients of pigments darkened
the product surface favored by WL. A similar trend
was found by Almeida et al.,[25] who reported that L
decreased as the temperature of the osmotic solution
increased, and this temperature change also promoted
oxidation reactions of phenolic compounds, mainly
enzymatic oxidation resulting in banana darkening.
The best results were observed in 1-mm thick slices in
the T4, T6 and T8 treatments, and these results were
not significantly different from the control (p < 0.05).
This result was related to the greater SG in these sli-
ces, possibly creating a protective effect on the pig-
ments in the beet. The results with the 5-mm slices
were significantly different from that of the control
(p < 0.05) in all treatments. The C values showed a
slight increase in the 1-mm thick slices in all treat-
ments, but the differences were not significant
8

C. CALDERON-CHIU ET AL.

Table 3. Color parameters of 1 mm thickness beet slices osmotically dehydrated and dried with
Refractance WindowTM at 60 and 85
C.
RW 60
C
Treatment L C h
DE
Control 26.78 ± 1.24a,b,c 21.13 ± 1.82a,b,c,d 20.05 ± 0.82a,b,c,d 0.00 ± 0.00
T1 25.50 ± 0.25i,j,k 11.14 ± 1.28m,n 19.11 ± 8.74a,b,c 10.27 ± 0.46f,g
T2 26.75 ± 0.22a,b 11.58 ± 2.10l,m,n 24.00 ± 6.57f,g,h 9.77 ± 2.88e,f,g
T3 25.53 ± 0.34h,i,j,k 11.05 ± 1.27m,n 22.86 ± 3.08d,e,f 10.28 ± 2.95f,g
T4 27.75 ± 0.58c,d,e 14.72 ± 3.35h,i,j,k 32.84 ± 9.66j 7.80 ± 5.38c,d,e,f,g
T5 27.59 ± 0.32b,c,d 15.28 ± 0.87h,i,j,k 23.41 ± 1.23e,f,g 6.10 ± 2.45a,b,c,d,
T6 33.58 ± 0.23g 22.19 ± 3.92b,c,d,e 15.27 ± 2.21a,b,k 8.25 ± 0.86d,e,f,g
T7 25.04 ± 0.58j,k,l,m 10.55 ± 0.55n 20.21 ± 3.63a,b,c 10.77 ± 2.41g
T8 27.23 ± 0.16a,b,c 16.74 ± 0.54g,h,i,j,k 21.79 ± 2.17c,d,e 4.65 ± 2.08a,b,c,d
T9 27.66 ± 0.46b,c,d 18.36 ± 3.00a,b,g,h,i 18.57 ± 3.61a,b,c 3.37 ± 2.40a,b
Without OD 26.73 ± 0.72a,b 16.21 ± 1.88h,i,j,k 16.82 ± 0.92a,b,c 5.19 ± 2.00a,b,c,d
RW 85
C
Treatment L C h
DE
Control 26.78 ± 1.24a,b,c 21.13 ± 1.82a,b,c,d 20.05 ± 0.82a,b,c,d 0.00 ± 0.00
T1 25.69 ± 0.13h,i,j 14.46 ± 4.14i,j,k 20.91 ± 0.99b,c,d 6.86 ± 5.95a,b,c,d
T2 24.57 ± 0.29k,l,m,n 14.26 ± 2.16j,k,l,m,n 21.01 ± 1.47b,c,d,e 7.33 ± 2.36b,c,d,e
T3 25.69 ± 0.60h,i,j 11.05 ± 1.05m,n 27.96 ± 1.45i,j 10.41 ± 1.32f,g
T4 26.49 ± 0.48a,h 13.59 ± 3.76k,l,m 26.15 ± 6.54h,i 7.81 ± 3.20c,d,e
T5 26.26 ± 0.26a,h,i 15.39 ± 0.47h,i,j 24.54 ± 2.72g,h,i 6.08 ± 2.23a,b,c,d
T6 28.71 ± 0.62e,f 18.04 ± 2.36a,g,h 19.92 ± 3.77a,b,c,d 4.19 ± 1.03a,b,c,d
T7 28.32 ± 0.31d,e 18.61 ± 2.03a,b,g 24.39 ± 3.67f,g,h,i 4.54 ± 1.89a,b,c,d
T8 25.16 ± 0.38j,k,l,m 14.77 ± 0.11h,i,k 22.28 ± 1.56d,e,f,g 6.64 ± 1.95a,b,c,d
T9 26.76 ± 0.19a,b 16.62 ± 0.86h,i,j,k 21.63 ± 6.70c,d,e,f 5.10 ± 2.26a,b,c,d
Without OD 29.38 ± 0.49f 18.49 ± 0.78a,b,g,h 18.84 ± 2.34a,b,c,d 4.09 ± 0.36a,b,c,d
Note: The results are the average of three repetitions. Different letters in the same column indicate significant differ-
ence (p < 0.05).

(p < 0.05) except with treatments T1 and T9. This
increase was probably due to the beet pigment con-
centration produced by the shorter OD time.
However, in the 5-mm slices, the leaching of pigments
was higher with longer OD times, resulting in C val-
ues significantly lower than that of the control
(p < 0.05) for all the treatments. Regarding h
, the val-
ues of this parameter decreased in all the treatments
for both thicknesses. The violet color was maintained
in the samples. The best results were obtained in the
1-mm thick slices, and the results were not signifi-
cantly different from the control (p < 0.05) in the
treatments with the osmotic solution at lower temper-
atures. The 5-mm slices had lower values of h
com-
pared to those of the 1-mm slices, indicating more
pronounced darkening as the sucrose concentration
increased. In L, C and ho, this is attributed to the
fact that because the samples are smaller, the contact
area with the osmotic solution is substantially
greater,[26] which leads to shorter exposure times with
the osmotic solution and less leaching of the pigments
contributing to the smaller losses in tone and lumi-
nosity.[27] Finally, the DE values with respect to the
control indicated that the 1-mm thick samples were
lower at almost half the value compared with the val-
ues of the 5 mm thickness. Table 3 shows the color
results of the 1-mm thick slices without OD and with
OD-RW combined drying at 60 and 85
C. During the
OD-RW combined drying, an increase in L was
observed with increasing solution concentration, indi-
cating a slight color lightening was produced by the
impregnation of sugar due to the large amount of
crystals that precipitated on the slice surface. The
treatments showed no significant difference (p < 0.05)
with respect to the control with RW at 60
C, except
for treatments T1, T3, T6, and T7. However, with RW
at 85
C, most treatments provided significantly differ-
ent results than those with the control. Samples with-
out OD did not show significant differences (p < 0.05)
relative to the control after drying with RW at 60
C.
However, the samples dried with RW at 85
C without
OD showed the opposite effect. On the other hand,
C decreased during OD-RW combined drying, sug-
gesting that the pigment concentration was influenced
by the elimination of the free water in the beet slice
combined with the Maillard reaction, resulting in a
lower saturation. These results were similar to those
reported by Stojanovic and Silva.[28] Regarding h
,
most OD-RW combined treatments involving drying
at 60 and 85
C did not cause significantly different
results (p < 0.05) relative to the control, and the sam-
ples showed a violet tone. For the samples not sub-
jected to OD, there was no significant difference
(p < 0.05) with different RW temperatures. The
increase in temperature decreased this value only with
sucrose concentrations of 50 and 60%. Despite the
variations in L, C and h
, due to the inhomogen-
eous structure of beet, the DE values indicated that
 DRYING TECHNOLOGY 9

the best results were obtained with OD-RW combined

drying at high concentrations of sucrose, where treat-
ments T8 and T9 at 60
C and T6 and T7 at 85
C of
RW presented the lowest DE values. This was attrib-
uted to the presence of sugar on the sample surface
following OD preventing oxygen transfer, reducing
enzymatic darkening.[29] Regarding beet not subjected
to OD, the DE value from the sample dried at 85
C
with RW was lower than those obtained from the
OD-RW combined drying treatments. This was attrib-
uted to the RW operation mode evaporating the water
quickly, avoiding pigment degradation due to over-
heating, which was reported by Caparino et al.,[22]
who concluded that RW produced mango powder
with a high quality comparable to that obtained by
lyophilization.

Texture changes with osmotic dehydration,

Refractance Window, and combined osmotic
dehydration-Refractance Window
The texture results based on puncture strength (PS) in
different thicknesses of beet slices following OD at
different concentrations of sucrose and temperatures
are shown in Figure 6(a). It was observed that PS after
the OD under all the treatment conditions decreased
significantly (p < 0.05) with respect to the control for
both thicknesses. This was due to the WL in the slices
because when fresh vegetables are submitted to OD,
the cell walls become distorted, presenting cytoplasmic
swelling due to the turgor loss.[30] On the other hand,
the lower SG was also a key factor since they pro-
duced low PS values, presenting decreases of 46.77
and 70.03% in the 1- and 5-mm slices, respectively,
on average. The lowest PS values were observed in
1-mm thick slices subjected OD, and no significant
differences were observed among them (p < 0.05).
However, the lowest PS values in the 5-mm thick
slices subjected to OD were at 65% sucrose at all tem-
peratures. Figure 6(b) shows the PS results for the
1-mm thick beet slices without OD and with OD-RW
combined drying at different concentrations of
sucrose and temperature and dried with RW at 60
and 85
C. The slices subjected to OD-RW combined
drying at 60
C did not show a significant difference
(p < 0.05) relative to the control regardless of the
sucrose concentration and the temperature used. The
above due was attributed to the tissue shrinkage
caused by the reduction in the internal stress and
destroyed cell walls, creating cavities and resulting in
a general loss of tissue structure and reducing the
resistance to rupture.[31] However, the slices that
Figure 6. Results of puncture strength (PS) of beet slices: (a)
osmotically dehydrated at different concentrations, tempera-
tures and thicknesses and (b) 1 mm osmotically dehydrated sli-
ces and dried with Refractance Window at 60 and 85
C.
underwent OD-RW combined drying at 85
C had a
more compact structure and showed an increase in PS
probably due to the increase in the drying tempera-
ture with RW as well as the higher WL during OD.
The amount of solid and high-speed moisture loss at
the beginning of the drying period contributed to the
crystallization, resulting in lower porosity and greater
rigidity in the structure of the beet samples. It was
observed in the OD-RW combined drying at 85
C
that as the temperature of the OD increased at any of
the tested sucrose concentrations, the PS decreased.
Therefore, the best OD-RW treatment was at 85
C
with the highest concentration of sucrose (65%) and
temperature (60
C) with OD. For the samples not
subjected to OD that were dried only with RW at 60
and 85
C, it was observed that at 60
C, there was no
significant difference (p < 0.05) with respect to the
control. However, an increase in the PS was observed
due to the increase in RW temperature at 85
C,
which is consistent with the results found by
Rodr
ıgues et al.[32] in the drying of osmotically dehy-
drated plums.
10

C. CALDERON-CHIU ET AL.

Figure 7. Results of the total polyphenols content (TPC), total flavonoids content (TFC), and antioxidant capacity (AC): a, b, and c
with osmotic dehydration in 1 and 5 mm slices and d, e, and f with osmotic dehydration-Refractance Window (OD-RW) combined
drying in 1 mm slices.

Total polyphenol content, total flavonoid content,
and antioxidant capacity with osmotic
dehydration, Refractance Window, and combined
osmotic dehydration-Refractance Window
The TPC, TFC, and AC in beet slices of different
thicknesses osmotically dehydrated with sucrose at dif-
ferent concentrations and temperatures are shown in
Figure 7(a–c). After OD, the TPC and TFC of all
treatments were significantly different from those of
the control (p < 0.05) under all operation conditions
used. The TPC and TFC after OD were lower in thin
slices than in thick slices, perhaps due to the leaching
of the bioactive compounds into the osmotic solution
caused by the larger contact surface area. At both
thicknesses, the TPC and TFC values decreased as the
OD temperature increased under all sucrose concen-
trations, and all sets of treatment conditions resulted
in significantly different (p < 0.05) values for the two
thickness employed. AC is attributed to the retention
of TPC and TFC during the OD, and the % inhibition
of fresh beet was 75.36%. After OD, the best treat-
ment in terms of AC was those using a temperature
of 30
C in all sucrose concentrations for the 5-mm
slices, in which there were no significant differences

with the control (p < 0.05). The decreases in TPC,
TFC, and AC were attributed to the increase in the
temperature, which favored cell collapse, reducing
membrane permeability and selectivity, and favoring
the leaching of these compounds into the osmotic
solution.[33] In addition, Bchir et al.[34] reported a
decrease in polyphenols and anthocyanins in pom-
egranate seeds after OD, reducing the AC. The 5-mm
thick slices showed the best results for TPC, TFC, and
AC. This may have been because during OD, the cells
of the thicker slices were less altered; therefore, less
pigment, including the antioxidant compounds,
leached from the center of the slice into the osmotic
solution. Some authors have established that the
impact of OD on the chemical properties of the final
product depends on the proportion of cells altered
and non-altered cells during the OD.[35] In agreement
with Lech et al.,[2] the bioactive potential of beet slices
subjected to OD can be affected by the distribution of
temperature within the samples of different shapes
and volumes, indicating that the retention of TPC,
TFC, and AC could depend on the sample shape and
the solution temperature. Figure 7(d–f) shows the
TPC, TFC and AC results of 1-mm thick beet slices
without OD and with OD-RW combined drying at 60
and 85
C. In the OD-RW combined drying, the TPC,
TFC and AC values decreased as the OD temperature
increased for all sucrose concentrations. Lower values
of these chemical properties were obtained with OD
(Figure 7(a–c) than with OD-RW combined drying.
These values were increased when RW was applied,
reaching values above those of the control with most
of the treatments. OD-RW combined drying treat-
ments at 60
C resulted in significantly (p < 0.05)
higher TPC and TFC values than those obtained at
85
C, except in the TPC following treatment with
50% sucrose at 60
C with OD. The best treatments in
terms of TPC and TFC with OD-RW combined dry-
ing at 60 and 85
C were with 35% sucrose at 30
C
with OD. These OD-RW combined treatments pro-
vided TPC and TFC values that are significantly dif-
ferent from those obtained when RW at 60 and 85
C
was applied without OD. Finally, the AC was mostly
increased in the combined OD-RW drying at both
temperatures of RW (60 and 85
C), with % inhibi-
tions higher than that of the control. The best
OD-RW treatments were obtained at all sucrose con-
centrations at 30 and 45
C. The AC values obtained
following OD-RW combined drying were significantly
higher (p < 0.05) than the best values obtained follow-
ing drying by RW at 60 and 85
C without OD.
According to the above, OD favored the retention of
DRYING TECHNOLOGY 11
TPC, TFC, and AC. Rodr
ıguez et al.[32] reported that
plums osmotically dehydrated with glucose and sorb-
itol, and dried with hot air at 70 and 80
C showed
higher phenol and flavonoid content than those
obtained in fresh samples, which was reflected in a
high antioxidant capacity. They attributed this
increase to the fact that polyphenols at an intermedi-
ate stage of oxidation have greater antioxidant power
and that high-temperature processes can lead to the
formation of new compounds with greater antioxidant
activity. This is essentially the case of the Maillard
reaction, whose derivative products are formed by
stronger antioxidants such as hydroxymethylfurfu-
ral,[36] which can be formed during prolonged heat
treatments. In addition, heating weakens cell walls
facilitating the extraction of antioxidant com-
pounds,[37] especially free polyphenolic compounds
since many antioxidant compounds in plant materials
are covalently bonded with insoluble polymers.
Therefore, it is suggested that heat treatment may
alter the cell wall and release antioxidant compounds,
which, in turn, increases the set of bioaccessible anti-
oxidant compounds.[38] The samples with the best val-
ues of AC without OD treatment were those dried by
RW at 60
C. This was attributed to the fact that the
low temperature prevented the degradation of antioxi-
dant compounds and that the MylarTM film allowed
the rapid transfer of heat, causing the release of phen-
olic compounds linked to the cellular matrix. Kaspar
et al.[39] mentioned that RW drying was the most
cost-effective processing for maximizing the retention
of bioactive compounds in potatoes.
Conclusions
Increasing the sucrose concentration and the tempera-
ture favored WL and SG during OD in beet samples
of both thicknesses. A decrease in the slice thickness
improved the WL and SG, allowing equilibrium to be
reached in less time. OD partially reduced the water
content of the beet slices. A shorter drying time was
required at the highest temperature with RW drying.
However, qualities such as color, texture, total content
of polyphenols and flavonoids, and antioxidant cap-
acity in beet were better retained with combined OD-
RW drying at 60
C employing OD conditions of 65%
sucrose at 45
C. These conditions afforded a stable
product that retained its physical and chemical prop-
erties. However, despite retaining with the OD-RW
combined drying the total content of polyphenols and
flavonoids is recommend studying the effect of
12

C. CALDERON-CHIU ET AL.
different thickness of particle on drying kinetics and
phytochemicals properties of the beet.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by
the authors.
Funding
The authors thank CONACyT (Mexico) for their support
throughout scholarship number 590148 granted to Carolina
Calder

on Chiu.
ORCID
Carolina Calder
on-Chiu http://orcid.org/0000-0002-
4341-5658
Cecilia Eugenia Mart
ınez-S
anchez http://orcid.org/0000-
0001-8098-9610
us Rodr
ıguez-Miranda
Jes
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-
1290-5670
Jos
e Manuel Ju
arez-Barrientos http://orcid.org/0000-
0003-4039-8028
Roselis Carmona-Garc
ıa http://orcid.org/0000-0003-
0307-1413
Erasmo Herman-Lara http://orcid.org/0000-0001-
9766-0563
References
[1] Lee, J. H.; Son, C. W.; Kim, M. Y.; Kim, M. H.; Kim,
H. R.; Kwak, E. S.; Kim, S.; Kim, M. R. Red Beet
(Beta vulgaris L.) Leaf Supplementation Improves
Antioxidant Status in C57BL/6J Mice Fed High Fat
High Cholesterol Diet. Nutr. Res. Pract. 2009, 3,
114–121. DOI: 10.4162/nrp.2009.3.2.114.
[2] Lech, K.; Figiel, A.; Wojdyło, A.; Korzeniowska, M.;
Serowik, M.; Szarycz, M. Drying Kinetics and
Bioactivity of Beetroot Slices Pretreated in
Concentrated Chokeberry Juice and Dried with
Vacuum Microwaves. Dry. Technol. 2015, 33,
1644–1653. DOI: 10.1080/07373937.2015.1075209.
[3] Hern
andez-Santos, B.; Mart
ınez-S
anchez, C. E.;
Torruco-Uco, J. G.; Rodr
ıguez-Miranda, J.; Ruiz-
L
opez, I. I.; Vajando-Anaya, E. S.; Carmona-Garc
ıa,
R.; Herman-Lara, E. Evaluation of Physical and
Chemical Properties of Carrots Dried by Refractance
Window Drying. Dry. Technol. 2016, 34, 1414–1422.
DOI: 10.1080/07373937.2015.1118705.
[4] Chauhan, O. P.; Singh, A.; Singh, A.; Raju, P. S.;
Bawa, A. S. Effects of Osmotic Agents on Colour,
Textural, Structural, Thermal, and Sensory Properties
of Apple Slices. Int. J. Food Prop. 2011, 14,
1037–1048. DOI: 10.1080/10942910903580884.
[5] Rastogi, N.; Raghavarao, K.; Niranjan, K. Recent
Developments in Osmotic Dehydration. In Emerging
Technologies for Food Processing, 2nd ed.; Da-Wen
Sun, Ed.; Elsevier: London, UK, 2014; pp 181–212.
[6] Kudra, T.; Mujumdar, A. S. Advanced Drying
Technologies. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009.
[7] Nindo, C. I.; Tang, J. Refractance Window
Dehydration Technology: A Novel Contact Drying
Method. Dry. Technol. 2007, 25, 37–48. DOI: 10.
1080/07373930601152673.
[8] AOAC. Official Methods of Analysis, 18th ed.;
Association of Official Analytical Chemists:
Washington, DC, 2005; W. Horwitz, G. W. Latimer,
Eds.; Gathersburg, MD, 2005.
[9] Garc
ıa-Toledo, J. A.; Ruiz-L
opez, I. I.; Mart
ınez-
S
anchez, C. E.; Rodr
ıguez-Miranda, J.; Carmona-
Garc
ıa, R.; Torruco-Uco, J. G.; Ochoa-Martinez,
L. A.; Herman-Lara, E. Effect of Osmotic
Dehydration on the Physical and Chemical
Properties of Mexican Ginger (Zingiber officinale var.
Grand Cayman). CyTA-J. Food 2016, 14, 27–34.
DOI: 10.1080/19476337.2015.1039068.
[10] Ruiz-L
opez, I. I.; Huerta-Mora, I. R.; Vivar-Vera,
M. A.; Mart
ınez-S
anchez, C. E.; Herman-Lara, E.
Effect of Osmotic Dehydration on Air-Drying
Characteristics of Chayote. Dry. Technol. 2010, 28,
1201–1212. DOI: 10.1080/07373937.2010.482716.
[11] Wang, R.; Zhang, M.; Mujumdar, A. S. Effect of
Osmotic Dehydration on Microwave Freeze-Drying
Characteristics and Quality of Potato Chips. Dry.
Technol. 2010, 28, 798–806. DOI: 10.1080/07373937.
2010.482700.
[12] Jiratanan, T.; Liu, R. H. Antioxidant Activity of
Processed Table Beets (Beta vulgaris var, conditiva)
and Green Beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). J. Agric.
Food Chem. 2004, 52, 2659–2670. DOI: 10.1021/
jf034861d.
[13] Singleton, V. L.; Orthofer, R.; Lamuela-Raventos,
R. M. Analysis of Total Phenols and other oxidation
Substrates and Antioxidants by Means of Folin-
Ciocalteu Reagent. Methods Enzymol. 1999, 299,
152–178.
[14] Heimler, D.; Vignolini, P.; Dini, M. G.; Romani, A.
Rapid Tests to Assess the Antioxidant Activity of
Phaseolus vulgaris L. dry Beans. J. Agric. Food Chem.
2005, 53, 3053–3056. DOI: 10.1021/jf049001r.
[15] Brand-Williams, W.; Cuvelier, M. E.; Berset, C. L.
W. T. Use of a Free Radical Method to Evaluate
Antioxidant Activity. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 1995,
28, 25–30. DOI: 10.1016/S0023-6438(95)80008-5.
[16] Ala~no
n, M. E.; Alarc
on, M.; Marchante, L.; D
ıaz-
Maroto, M. C.; P
erez-Coello, M. S. Extraction of
Natural Flavorings with Antioxidant Capacity from
Cooperage by-Products by Green Extraction
Procedure with Subcritical Fluids. Ind. Crops Prod.
2017, 103, 222–232. DOI: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.03.
050.
[17] Falade, K. O.; Igbeka, J. C.; Ayanwuyi, F. A. Kinetics
of Mass Transfer and Colour Changes during
Osmotic Dehydration of Watermelon. J. Food Eng.
2007, 80, 979–985. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.06.
033.
[18] Azarpazhooh, E.; Ramaswamy, H. S. Evaluation of
Diffusion and Azuara Models for Mass Transfer

Kinetics during Microwave-Osmotic Dehydration of
Apples under Continuous Flow Medium-Spray
Conditions. Dry. Technol. 2009, 28, 57–67. DOI: 10.
1080/07373930903430694.
[19] Nindo, C. I.; Sun, T.; Wang, S. W.; Tang, J.; Powers,
J. R. Evaluation of Drying Technologies for
Retention of Physical Quality and Antioxidants in
Asparagus (Asparagus officinalis L.). LWT Food Sci.
Technol. 2003, 36, 507–516. DOI: 10.1016/S0023-
6438(03)00046-X.
[20] Abul-Fadl, M. M.; Ghanem, T. H. Effect of
Refractance Window (RW) Drying Method on
Quality Criteria of Produced Tomato Powders as
Compared to the Convection Drying Method. World
Appl. Sci. J. 2011, 15, 953–965.
[21] Castoldi, M.; Zotarelli, M. F.; Durigon, A.; Carciofi,
B. A. M.; Laurindo, J. B. Production of Tomato
Powder by Refractance Window Drying. Dry.
Technol. 2015, 33, 1463–1473. DOI: 10.1080/
07373937.2014.989327.
[22] Caparino, O. A.; Tang, J.; Nindo, C. I.; Sablani, S. S.;
Powers, J. R.; Fellman, J. K. Effect of Drying
Methods on the Physical Properties and
Microstructures of Mango (Philippine ‘Carabao’var.)
Powder. J. Food Eng. 2012, 111, 135–148. DOI: 10.
1016/j.jfoodeng.2012.01.010.
[23] Singh, B.; Gupta, A. K. Mass Transfer Kinetics and
Determination of Effective Diffusivity during
Convective Dehydration of Pre-Osmosed Carrot
Cubes. J. Food Eng. 2007, 79, 459–470. DOI: 10.
1016/j.jfoodeng.2006.01.073.
[24] Kowalski, S. J.; Łechta
nska, J. M. Drying of Red
Beetroot after Osmotic Pretreatment: Kinetics and
Quality Considerations. Chem. Process. Eng. 2015,
36, 345–354. DOI: 10.1515/cpe-2015-0024.
[25] Almeida, J. A.; Mussi, L. P.; Oliveira, D. B.; Pereira,
N. R. Effect of Temperature and Sucrose
Concentration on the Retention of Polyphenol
Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Osmotically
Dehydrated Bananas. J. Food Process. Preserv. 2015,
39, 1061–1069. DOI: 10.1111/jfpp.12321.
[26] Lewicki, P. P.; Porzecka-Pawlak, R. Effect of Osmotic
Dewatering on Apple Tissue Structure. J. Food Eng.
2005, 66, 43–50. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.02.
032.
[27] Talens, P.; Martı
nez-Navarrete, N.; Fito, P.; Chiralt,
A. Changes in Optical and Mechanical Properties
during Osmodehydrofreezing of Kiwi Fruit. Innov.
Food Sci. Emerg. 2002, 3, 191–199. DOI: 10.1016/
S1466-8564(02)00027-9.
[28] Stojanovic, J.; Silva, J. L. Influence of Osmotic
Concentration, Continuous High Frequency
Ultrasound and Dehydration on Antioxidants,
Colour and Chemical Properties of Rabbit Eye
Blueberries. Food Chem. 2007, 101, 898–906. DOI:
10.1016/j.foodchem.2006.02.044.
DRYING TECHNOLOGY 13
[29] Mandala, I. G.; Anagnostaras, E. F.; Oikonomou,
C. K. Influence of Osmotic Dehydration Conditions
on Apple Air-Drying Kinetics and Their Quality
Characteristics. J. Food Eng. 2005, 69, 307–316. DOI:
10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.08.021.
[30] Prinzivalli, C.; Brambilla, A.; Maffi, D.; Scalzo, R. L.;
Torreggiani, D. Effect of Osmosis Time on Structure,
Texture and Pectic Composition of Strawberry
Tissue. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2006, 224, 119–127.
DOI: 10.1007/s00217-006-0298-9.
[31] Lewicki, P. P.; Jakubczyk, E. Effect of Hot Air
Temperature on Mechanical Properties of Dried
Apples. J. Food Eng. 2004, 64, 307–314. DOI: 10.
1016/j.jfoodeng.2003.10.014.
[32] Rodr
ıgues, M. M.; Rodriguez, A.; Mascheroni, R. H.
Color, Texture, Rehydration Ability and Phenolic
Compounds of Plums Partially Osmodehydrated and
Finish-Dried by Hot Air. J. Food Process. Preserv.
2015, 39, 2647–2662. DOI: 10.1111/jfpp.12515.
[33] Kucner, A.; Klewicki, R.; S
ojka, M. The Influence of
Selected Osmotic Dehydration and Pretreatment
Parameters on Dry Matter and Polyphenol Content
in Highbush Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L.)
Fruits. Food Bioprocess Technol. 2013, 6, 2031–2047.
DOI: 10.1007/s11947-012-0997-0.
[34] Bchir, B.; Besbes, S.; Attia, H.; Blecker, C. Osmotic
Dehydration of Pomegranate Seeds (Punica grana-
tum L.): Effect of Freezing Pre-Treatment. J. Food
Process. Eng. 2012, 35, 335–354. DOI: 10.1111/j.
1745-4530.2010.00591.x.
[35] Chiralt, A.; Talens, P. Physical and Chemical
Changes Induced by Osmotic Dehydration in Plant
Tissues. J. Food Eng. 2005, 67, 167–177. DOI: 10.
1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.05.055.
[36] Ahmad-Qasem, M. H.; Barrajon-Catalan, E.; Micol,
V.; C
arcel, J. A.; Garcia-Perez, J. V. Influence of Air
Temperature on Drying Kinetics and Antioxidant
Potential of Olive Pomace. J. Food Eng. 2013, 119,
516–524. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.06.027.
[37] V
asquez-Parra, J. E.; Ochoa-Mart
ınez, C. I.; Bustos-
Parra, M. Effect of Chemical and Physical
Pretreatments on the Convective Drying of Cape
Gooseberry Fruits (Physalis peruviana). J. Food Eng.
2013, 119, 648–654. DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.06.
037.
[38] Choi, Y.; Lee, S. M.; Chun, J.; Lee, H. B.; Lee, J.
Influence of Heat Treatment on the Antioxidant
Activities and Polyphenolic Compounds of Shiitake
(Lentinus edodes) Mushroom. Food Chem. 2006, 99,
381–387. DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2005.08.004.
[39] Kaspar, K. L.; Park, J. S.; Mathison, B. D.; Brown,
C. R.; Massimino, S.; Chew, B. P. Processing of
Pigmented Flesh Potatoes (Solanum tuberosum L.)
on the Retention of Bioactive Compounds. Int. J.
Food Sci. Technol. 2012, 47, 376–382. DOI: 10.1111/
j.1365-2621.2011.02850.x.