Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces

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

Surface characterization of ginger powder examined by X-ray photoelectron

spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy
Xiaoyan Zhao a,∗ , Qiang Ao b , Fangling Du a , Junqing Zhu a , Jie Liu c
a
Institute Agro-Food Science & Technology, Shandong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, No. 198, Gongyebei Road, Jinan, Shandong 250100, China
b
Institute of Neurological Disorders, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100049, China
c
Appraisal Center for Environment & Engineering, State Environment Protection Administration (SEPA), Beijing 100012, China

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The surface composition of five types of ginger powders with the particle sizes of 300, 149, 74, 37 and
Received 24 December 2009 8.34 ␮m was investigated by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS), scanning electron microscopy
Received in revised form 5 May 2010 (SEM) and various types of physical–chemical characteristics regarding material particle size distribu-
Accepted 5 May 2010
tions, discoloration and chemical composition. The results show that the color differences are greater
Available online 13 May 2010
for superfine ground ginger than for conventional comminuted ones; the values of crude fibre, neu-
tral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) decrease with decreasing ginger particle size.
Keywords:
However, no relationship with the surface fat, crude protein, ash and total solids exists. With superfine
Ginger
Superfine grinding
grinding the XPS O/C ratios of the five ginger powders were similar since the surfaces were not oxidized.
XPS Correlations were observed between the XPS N/C ratios and the high resolution XPS N 1s spectra. SEM
SEM observations revealed that the surface of ginger powder with a particle size of 300 ␮m is rougher, while
Physical and chemical characterization superfine ground powders with particle sizes of 149, 74, 37 and 8.34 ␮m are similar to each other. This
roughness difference between these surfaces correlates with the differences in their O/C ratios and the
surface morphology of five ginger powders.
© 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction cellulose (9–25%), hemicellulose (25–50%) and pectin (10–35%) [8].

Ginger (Zingiber officinale), a member of the tropical and sub-
tropical Zingiberaceae, is widely used around the world in foods as
spice, and extensively used in Traditional Chinese Medicine to treat
headaches, nausea and colds. In Chinese, Ayurvedic and Western,
ginger is also used in the treatment of arthritis, rheumatic disorders
and muscular discomfort [1–3]. Due to these properties, ginger has
gained considerable attention of as a botanical dietary supplement
in the USA and Europe in recent years, and especially for its use in
the treatment of chronic inflammatory conditions.
The organic components in ginger consist mostly of polysac-
charides, polyphenolics and proteins. A total of 115 polyphenolic
components identified in ginger includes [6]-, [4]-, [7]-, [8]-, [10]-
gingerol and [12]-shogaol, etc. [4,5]. Recent studies have showed
the functional properties of ginger protein [6,7]. The chemical con-
stituents of ginger rhizome are well known. However, very few if
any studies are available on the composition of ginger superfine
powder surface with respect to the carbohydrates. Generally, the
major carbohydrate polymers making up the primary cell walls are
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 531 83179825; fax: +86 531 88960332.
E-mail addresses: zhaoxy 2201@163.com, zhaoxiaoy@yahoo.cn (X. Zhao).
Secondary cell walls of plants contain cellulose (40–80%), hemicel-
lulose (10–40%) and lignin (5–25%), providing mechanical strength
to the tissue [8,9]. These polymeric materials are damaged by
superfine grinding to one degree or another. The damage is mainly
due to the different chemical structure of the functional groups
among the organic components of ginger.
Superfine grinding technology is a new technology, which is
a useful tool for making superfine powder with good surface
properties like dispersibility and solubility [10]. The surface of
superfine powders could undergo some changes resulting to out-
standing characteristics that bulk materials do not possess. These
characteristics include surface effect, mini-size effect, quantum
effect, macroquantum channel effect, optical property, magnetic
property, mechanical property, chemical and catalytic properties
compared to conventional particle materials. These notable charac-
teristics have led to ultra-fine powders finding many applications
in ceramics, electric materials, chemicals and papermaking fields
as well as in the pharmaceutical field [11,12]. Nowadays superfine
grinding technology has also been applied in biotechnology and
food material, but rarely. Recently, some literatures reported the
investigation of superfine ground chitin, rice straw and silk fiber
powder [13–15]. The studies suggest that the superfine grinding is a
good way to fractionate bio-materials into easily bio-converted and

0927-7765/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.colsurfb.2010.05.019
 X. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500
hydrolyzed part. However, the surface of the powders is expected
to play an essential role in the bio-material process and should cer-
tainly not be neglected. The physical properties and/or the bulk
composition of superfine ground ginger powder in relation to its
chemical properties have been investigated [16]. While very lim-
ited information is available on the effect of the superfine grinding
on the surface composition of ginger powder.
The application of X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) to
biopolymers has been recently extensively developed as many
properties of polymer materials are strongly related to surface com-
position [17,18]. XPS has been successfully applied to investigate
the surface composition of dairy powders at an elemental level
[19–21]. However, few works concern the surface composition of
ginger powders observed by XPS.
The surface composition of ginger powders was investigated by
XPS and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) in conjunction with
physical characterization measurements in order to get a better
understanding of superfine grinding behavior.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Source of ginger and milling
Fresh ginger was purchased from in the market of Laiwu, China,
were sorted, cleaned, cut into small pieces, and dried at 40 ◦ C.
Excess water was drained off being placed in a mechanical drier
till the water content reached less than 9%. The dried materials
were subjected to coarse milling using a disc-mill, and screened
through different sized sieves; finally the uniform coarse parti-
cles were ground in an HMB-701 type micronizer (Huanyatianyuan
Machinery Company, Beijing, China). The planetary rubbing mill
(power 0.75 kW) was a vertical batch type mill. Three rubbing rings
were vertically equipped with pot holders on the turntable. The
inner volume and diameter of the cylindrical shape pot were 300 ml
and 400 mm, respectively. The pot was made of wear-resistant zir-
conia, and the rubbing rings with diameter of 300 mm were also
made of the same material. The sample was mainly ground with
pressure, collision and abrasion between rubbing rings and inner
bottom of pot. The revolution speed of turntable was unfixed at
2500–2800 rpm/min.
2.2. Methods
2.2.1. Characterization of the powders
2.2.1.1. Physical properties. The particle size distributions were
measured by static light scattering (Mastersizer S, Malvern Instru-
ments Ltd., Malvern, UK) with a 5 mW He–Ne laser operating at
a wavelength of 632.8 nm with a 300F lens [22]. The distribution
was determined using a dry powder feeder attachment and the
standard optical model presentation for particles dispersed in air
was used. The discoloration of different sized ginger particles was
measured with a Minolta CM3600D Spectrocolorimeter [23]. The
total color differences (E* ) were calculated using the following
equation:
2 1/2
E ∗ = [(L∗ ) + (a∗ ) + (b∗ ) ]
2 2
(1)
where L* , a*
and b*
were the Commission Internationale de
l’Eclairage (CIE) 1976 color space coordinates L* , a* and b* relative
to a standard illuminant A against a white background. L* referred
to the lightness coordinate with value ranges from zero (black) to
100 (white). The values a* and b* were chromaticity coordinates
in the red-green axis and the yellow–blue axis, respectively. Posi-
tive a* values indicated a shift to red, and negative values indicated
a shift to green. Similarly, positive b* values indicated the yellow
color range, and negative values indicated the blue color range.
495
Each color difference reported in this paper is the average of three
measurements.
2.2.1.2. Chemical analysis. The chemical composition of the ginger
powders was analyzed using AOAC [24] method. The water content
was determined by weight loss after drying 1 g of samples of pow-
der at 105 ◦ C for 6 h. Total protein was determined by the Kjeldhal
method for quantification of nitrogen and using a conversion fac-
tor of 6.25. Ash was measured after incineration at 550 ◦ C for 6 h.
Crude fiber was determined by de-fatting the samples, separating
the residue by filtration and measuring the mass loss by burning.
Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) frac-
tions were determined sequentially by using the filter bag system
(Ankom Technology, New York). Total solid content was deter-
mined by drying the samples at 105 ◦ C up to a constant weight.
Determinations were carried out in triplicate and the results are
expressed in wt.%.
2.2.2. X-ray photoelectron analysis
XPS was performed in a PerkinElmer PHI Quantera SXM using
monochromated radiation equipped with Al K␣ (1486.6 eV). The
equipment had a hemispheric analyzer/detector (CHA). The X-ray
source was run at 2.0 kV and 20 mA. Samples were placed in a vac-
uum chamber (5.0 × 10−10 Torr) with photoelectron collection at an
angle of 45◦ to the sample film surface at room temperature. Each
spectrum was obtained under the following conditions: Ar+ scan,
1 × 1 mm2 analyzed area, 3 M CPS sensitivity, 20 nm/min sputtering
speed, 0.05 eV resolution. All core-level spectra were referenced to
the C 1s neutral carbon peak at 284.8 eV [17]. Atomic concentra-
tions were calculated from photoelectron peak areas subtracting
the Shirley background [25] and taking into account sensitivity
factors provided by the spectrometer manufacturer (PHI) [26].
2.2.3. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
Morphological characterization of ginger particles was per-
formed on images acquired using a scanning electron microscope
(SEM), Quanta 200FEG-SEM (FEI Co. Netherlands) at 150 kV accel-
erated voltage and 10–15 mm working distance. The samples were
coated with platinum of 10 nm thicknesses to make the samples
conductive.
2.2.4. Data analysis
Analysis of variance using the general linear models was con-
ducted to establish mean differences between treatment Duncan’s
multiple-range tests was used to separate means where significant
differences existed with 95% confidence limit (P ≤ 0.05). Statistical
analysis of the data was done using the SAS software (Version 8.1,
SAS Institute Inc. Cary, NC, USA, 2001).
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Characteristics of ginger powders
The size distribution of different ginger particles is shown
Table 1. After superfine grinding, Critical changes happened to the
mean size of ginger particles. The superfine powder size distribu-
tion is quite uniform. The D90 size distributions of the five ginger
particles were 300, 150, 74, 37 and 8.34 ␮m (Table 1). The chemical
constituents of ginger samples treated with superfine grinding suf-
fered degradation. As a result of this degradation, colored materials
are obtained when gingers are ultra-fine pulverized, as can be seen
in Table 2.
Table 2 gives the color coordinates (CIE L* a* b* 1976) correspond-
ing to ginger particles with different sizes, before and after being
subjected to superfine grinding. The color differences, using the
ginger powder with a particle size of 300 ␮m as reference, are also
496 X. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500

Table 1
Characteristic parameters of ginger particle distributions with different sizes.

Ginger particle size (␮m) Characteristic parameters of particlea

D10 b D50 c D75 d D90 e D(4,3) f D(3,2) g

300 8.21 ± 0.01 44.96 ± 0.01 150.49 ± 0.03 311.79 ± 0.02 107.51 ± 0.01 18.11 ± 0.01
150 6.02 ± 0.02 18.89 ± 0.01 52.48 ± 0.01 144.70 ± 0.03 35.29 ± 0.01 10.39 ± 0.02
74 5.35 ± 0.01 13.59 ± 0.02 22.90 ± 0.01 73.48 ± 0.01 20.46 ± 0.02 8.22 ± 0.02
37 3.16 ± 0.01 10.25 ± 0.01 18.13 ± 0.02 40.19 ± 0.01 18.35 ± 0.01 6.30 ± 0.01
8.34 2.91 ± 0.01 9.77 ± 0.01 13.15 ± 0.01 8.34 ± 0.02 6.48 ± 0.01 4.56 ± 0.01
a
Values are mean ± standard deviation, n = 3.
b
The particle of the equivalent diameter accounts for 10% of the total examined particle.
c
The particle of the equivalent diameter accounts for 50% of the total examined particle.
d
The particle of the equivalent diameter accounts for 75% of the total examined particle.
e
The particle of the equivalent diameter accounts for 90% of the total examined particle.
f
Mean value of examined particle volume.
g
Mean value of examined particle specific surface area.

Table 2
Color coordinates and color differences corresponding to ginger particles with different sizes.

Color parameter Ginger particle size (␮m)a

300 150 74 37 8.34

L* b 81.20 ± 0.71 83.15 ± 0.65 84.31 ± 0.63 85.06 ± 0.62 85.53 ± 0.63
a* c 0.49 ± 0.04 0.49 ± 0.10 0.58 ± 0.10 1.38 ± 0.06 1.51 ± 0.10
b* d 24.04 ± 0.26 22.26 ± 0.26 21.74 ± 0.33 20.54 ± 0.23 19.22 ± 0.26
E* e 0 2.6 3.8 5.3 6.5
a
Values are mean ± standard deviation, n = 3.
b
L* : the lightness coordinate.
c
a* : chromaticity coordinate in the red–green axis.
d
b* : chromaticity coordinate the yellow–blue axis.
e
E* : total color differences.

included. Table 2 reveals that the color differences of superfine
ground ginger are greater than conventional comminuted ones. It
is obtained that the superfine grinding can influence on the L* , a*
and b* of ginger powders. The aberration of the grinding-treated
samples increases with decreasing ginger particle size.
The chemical composition and physical properties of the pow-
ders are reported in Table 3. The fat, water, protein, ash and total
solid contents are almost constant for the five ginger powders. The
values of crude fiber, NDF and ADF decrease with decreasing ginger
particle size. In comparison with a particle size of 300 ␮m, gin-
ger powder with a particle size of 8.34 ␮m is consequently poorer
in the crude fiber, NDF and ADF. The results clearly show a sig-
nificant difference between the particle size of 300 and 8.34 ␮m
(P < 0.05) (Table 3), suggesting that the superfine grinding treat-
ment can lead to the degradation of ginger fiber. However, the fiber
content is not significantly different for over the particle sizes of
150 ␮m (P > 0.05). The NDF content of ginger with particle sizes
of 300 and 150 ␮m is not significantly different (P > 0.05). Similar
significant reduction in the NDF contents with the particle sizes
of 150 and 74 ␮m is noticed (P < 0.05). The content of ADF (19.88%)
was higher (P < 0.05) in a particle size of 300 ␮m as compared to the
particle sizes of 150, 74, 37 and 8.34 ␮m. The results indicate that
the superfine grinding can lead to the change of cell wall constitu-
tion of ginger rhizome. In comparison with coarse ginger powders,

Table 3
Chemical composition of ginger particles with different sizes.

Chemical composition (wt.%) Ginger particle size (␮m)1

300 150 74 37 8.34

Moisture 11.862 11.652 10.962 9.593 6.784

(±0.13) (±0.09) (±0.07) (±0.11) (±0.08)

Ash 8.052 7.692 7.412 7.262 7.102

(±0.12) (±0.07) (±0.05) (±0.09) (±0.10)

Protein 12.612 12.342 12.472 12.402 13.052

(±0.96) (±1.07) (±1.03) (±1.01) (±1.01)

Fat 6.082 5.502 5.482 6.012 6.142

(±0.11) (±0.09) (±0.13) (±0.11) (±0.12)

Total solids content 92.912 93.062 95.412 92.442 97.662

(±0.51) (±0.58) (±0.67) (±0.55) (±0.71)

Fiber 6.802 6.712 5.323 4.814 1.125

(±0.11) (±0.21) (±0.12) (±0.15) (±0.11)

NDF 8.862 7.793 7.253 6.254 3.875

(±0.13) (±0.23) (±0.11) (±0.20) (±0.13)

ADF 19.882 8.013 7.474 5.215 5.165

(±0.21) (±0.11) (±0.22) (±0.17) (±0.11)

(1) Values are mean ± standard deviation, n = 3. (2–5) Means with different superscripts in each line are significantly different from each other (P ≤ 0.05).
 X. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500 497

Fig. 1. XPS survey spectra obtained from ginger particles with different sizes (a: Fig. 2. XPS C 1s features obtained from ginger particles with different sizes (a:
300 ␮m; b: 149 ␮m; c: 74 ␮m; d: 37 ␮m; e: 8.34 ␮m;). 300 ␮m; b: 149 ␮m; c: 74 ␮m; d: 37 ␮m; e: 8.34 ␮m;).

the amounts of the crude fiber, NDF and ADF in ultra-fine ginger
powders are relatively lower, which implicate the disintegration of
the cellulose–hemicelluose network of ginger [15]. Regarding frac-
tion characterization, the variations of chemical composition are
attributed to fast separation of different botanical constituents of
the ginger [27].
3.2. X-ray photoelectron characteristics of ginger powder surface
An XPS survey spectrum obtained from ginger particles with
different sizes is shown in Fig. 1. The two predominant features are
the C 1s and O 1s peaks. Very small peaks of N and S are also present
in the survey spectra, but their combined concentration is under
3 at.% for all of the samples examined in this study. The content
of S element was found below 1% for the five powders (Table 4).
Consequently, the S element other than C, O and N was neglected.
Table 4 shows the peak area ratios observed for ginger powder
surface with different sizes. The ratio of the peak area of O 1s, N 1s
and C 1s, O/C and N/C, roughly reflects the ratio of the concentration
of these atoms in the ginger power surface. The compositions cal-
culated using the XPS data obtained from the samples examined in
this study (an average of three different data points collected from
three different areas) are presented in Table 4. These compositions
were calculated using the homogeneous assumption. Therefore,
they represent an average over the outermost 45 Å with the lay-
ers nearer the surface contributing more to the signal. Although
inhomogeneous elemental distributions can have a large effect on
the calculated composition [28], methods are not available yet for
calculating compositions for inhomogeneous elemental distribu-
tions on rough surfaces. Table 4 shows that the carbon percentage
decreases with decreasing powder size, while the oxygen and nitro-
gen percentage increases.
As the grinding parameters were different for the powders with
different sizes, we could suppose some differences in porosity or
specific surface area of powders. The reason is that the surface prop-
erties of superfine powders have changed after superfine milling,
which causes marked differences in chemical composition separa-
tion of the granulometric fractions [29].
The O/C atom ratios are of particular interest. This ratio is 0.29
for ginger powders with the particle sizes of 37 and 8.34 ␮m, 0.28
for ginger powders with the particle sizes of 150 and 74 ␮m. Gin-
ger powder with a particle size of 300 ␮m has a value of 0.26. No
significant differences are found among the O/C ratios of the pow-
ders with different sizes. The increase of the O/C ratio from 0.26 to
0.29 indicated that the surface of superfine ground powders was
slightly oxidized [18]. The N/C atom ratios increase with decreas-
ing ginger particle size. It is interesting to note that the N/C ratio
of superfine powder with a particle size of 8.34 ␮m is higher than

Table 4
Compositional information obtained using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy.

Ginger particle size (␮m) Ca (at.%) Ob (at.%) Nc (at.%) Sd (at.%) N/Ce O/Cf

300 77.53 20.77 1.69 0.02 0.021 0.26

150 76.49 21.58 1.81 0.02 0.023 0.28
74 76.14 22.04 1.94 0.03 0.025 0.28
37 75.87 22.05 2.09 0.04 0.027 0.29
8.34 75.44 22.08 2.48 0.06 0.033 0.29
a
Carbon atom.
b
Oxygen atom.
c
Nitrogen atom.
d
Sulfur atom.
e
The ratio of nitrogen to carbon atom.
f
The ratio of oxygen to carbon atom.
498 X. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500
Fig. 3. XPS O 1s features obtained from ginger particles with different sizes (a:
300 ␮m; b: 149 ␮m; c: 74 ␮m; d: 37 ␮m; e: 8.34 ␮m).
powders with the particle sizes of 300, 150, 74 and 37 ␮m. These
facts indicate that the surface of ultra-fine ginger powders has more
amino groups exposed [30]. The slight increase of O/C and N/C ratios
on the samples indicates that mechanical force plays a major role
in the process of superfine grinding.
The XPS C 1s features of the five samples are shown in Fig. 2.
The C 1s spectra obtained from ginger particles with different sizes
(Fig. 2) are quite similar to that reported in literatures [18,19]. The
peak shape similarity of C 1s among Fig. 2a–e indicates that the
similar distribution of oxygen is present on the powder samples
with the particle sizes of 300, 150, 74, 37 and 8.34 ␮m. The C 1s
line for ginger powders with different sizes is characterized by a
narrow peak with binding energy (BE) = 284.7 ± 0.1 V, and its line
form and position in the spectrometer chambers does not change
after superfine grinding (Fig. 2). By comparison with the powders
with the particle sizes of 74, 37 and 8.34 ␮m (Fig. 2c–e), the C 1s
spectra of the coarse ginger powders with the particle sizes of 300
and 150 ␮m (Fig. 2a and b) are narrower. The spectra shown in
Fig. 2 indicate that the superfine milling can result in gaining of
oxygenated organic species since the predominant peak becomes
broader. This is consistent with the increase observed of the O/C
ratio from 0.26 to 0.29 (Table 4). The broadening of C 1s spectra in
the ultra-fine powders may be attributed to formation of hydro-
carbons [18]. Because the O 1s peak shapes described below do
not exhibit a similar broadness, the chemical-state or charging of
surface for superfine ground ginger powders maybe change. Hydro-
carbon formation is probable through bond scission in the course
of superfine grinding. Most oxygen-containing organic compounds
including alcohols, ketones and ethers have binding energies (BEs)
between 284 and 285 eV [17]. Due to the similar BEs and the large
variety of species, it is not possible to be specific about which
oxygen-containing species form during superfine grinding.
The O 1s features corresponding to the C 1s features in Fig. 2
are shown in Fig. 3. It contains one contribution with BEs of
532.7 ± 0.1 eV. The O 1s features in Fig. 3 have similar shapes and
BEs, indicating that the oxygen-containing species on all the sam-
ples are similar. This similarity is consistent with the C 1s peak
shape similarity for all samples. The O percentage of ultra-fine
powders is slightly higher than coarse powders. Ultra-fine ginger
Fig. 4. XPS N 1s features obtained from ginger particles with different sizes (a:
300 ␮m; b: 149 ␮m; c: 74 ␮m; d: 37 ␮m; e: 8.34 ␮m).
powers could be slightly oxidized in the process of preparation,
resulting in the increase of oxygen content. Generally, the O 1s
spectra do not provide useful chemical-state information because
so many O-containing species are present which are not resolvable
by XPS due to their closely spaced BEs [17].
In contrast, ginger powders with different sizes show clear N 1s
peaks around 399.8 ± 0.1 eV. The N 1s peak shape of five samples
was similar. But the N 1s area increases with decreasing ginger
particle size (Table 4). As compared to superfine ground ginger
powders (Fig. 4c–e), the N 1s spectra shown in Fig. 4a and b obtained
from the coarse ginger powders are narrower. The broadening in
the ultra-fine powders may be due to exposure of amino groups
[30]. The reasons might be that the structure of superfine ground
ginger particles is broken down, which results in enhanced expo-
sure of amino groups. In conclusion, superfine milling favors the
appearance of proteins at the surface of the particles. We assume
that superfine powders would give a higher surface content than
coarse powders.
3.3. Microphotographs of ginger powder
SEM micrographs obtained from the surfaces examined in this
study are shown in Fig. 5. The ginger powders with the particle
sizes of 149, 74, 37 and 8.34 ␮m present a smooth surface. As far as
we can observe, the four powders appear to have a rather similar
surface by SEM. The SEM micrographs obtained from the surface
of superfine ground powders with particle sizes of 149, 74, 37 and
8.34 ␮m are similar to each other as expected based on their simi-
lar O/C ratios of 0.28 and 0.29, but the surface of powders with the
particle sizes 149 and 74 ␮m is somewhat rough (Fig. 5b and c). The
surface of ginger powder with a particle size of 300 ␮m (Fig. 5a) are
rougher than other particles (Fig. 5b–e). This roughness difference
among these surfaces correlates with the differences of their O/C
ratios. This fact suggests that the superfine pulverized treatment is
effective to change the original structure of the ginger powder sur-
face. The morphology after milling is changed considerably, which
can have a significant impact on physical–chemical properties [16].
 X. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500 499

Fig. 5. SEM micrographs obtained from ginger particles with different sizes (a: 300 ␮m; b: 149 ␮m; c: 74 ␮m; d: 37 ␮m; e: 8.34 ␮m).

4. Conclusion acterization of superfine ginger powder. Small changes on powder

It is concluded that XPS, SEM and physical characterization
analysis yields complementary and essential information to stan-
dard methods allowing a better understanding of the ultra-fine
ginger powders. The superfine grinding can destroy the cell wall
structure of ginger, which will cause the changes of surface char-
surface composition or bulk composition can totally change the
ginger particle properties. Significant differences are obtained in
the crude fiber, NDF and ADF contents, the N/C atom ratios, and
the SEM micrographs which correlate with the superfine grind-
ing behavior, while the O/C atom ratios, the shapes of the C
1s, O 1s and N 1s features are similar. Under the effect of the
500 X. Zhao et al. / Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 79 (2010) 494–500
superfine grinding, the more amino groups on the near-surface
ginger powders is exposed through bond breakage, which results
in the increase of the surface nitrogen percentage of superfine
ground powders. Improving ginger powder properties by superfine
grinding can be one way to extend the application of these high
protein content powder and low fiber. Superfine ground powders
appear here that random variations of surface composition may
be meaningful themselves, reflecting either actual variations of the
composition of the coarse powder surface induced by reorganiza-
tion of powder surface polymers upon superfine grinding. The novel
process allows the relatively complete exploitation of the ginger
rhizome.
Acknowledgments
Financial support of this work by Fund of Post-doctor Sci-
ence (Project 20080440388), National Natural Science Foundation
of China (grant no. 40701173) and Project of Agriculture Scien-
tific and Technological Achievement Transfer of China (grant no.
2009GB2C600198).
References
[1] V.N. Dedov, V.H. Tran, C.C. Duke, M. Connor, M.J. Christie, S. Mandadi, B.D.
Roufogalis, British Journal of Pharmacology 137 (6) (2002) 793–798.
[2] W.H. Wang, Z.M. Wang, Journal of China Chinese Medicine 30 (2005)
1569–1573.
[3] L.C. Tapsell, I. Hemphill, L. Cobiac, C.S. Patch, D.R. Sullivan, M. Fenech, S. Rooden-
rys, J.B. Keogh, P.M. Clifton, P.G. Williams, V.A. Fazio, K.E. Inge, Medical Journal
of Australia 185 (2006) S4–S24.
[4] S.D. Jolad, R.C. Lantz, A.M. Solyon, G.J. Chen, R.B. Bates, B.N. Timmermann, Phy-
tochemistry 65 (2004) 1937–1954.
[5] S.D. Jolad, R.C. Lantz, G.J. Chen, R.B. Bates, B.N. Timmermann, Phytochemistry
66 (2005) 1614–1635.
[6] B.M. Naveena, S.K. Mendiratta, British Poultry Science 42 (2001) 344–349.
[7] H.X. Wang, T.B. Ng, Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 336
(2005) 100–104.
[8] J. Bidlack, M. Malone, R. Benson, Proceedings of Oklahoma Academy of Sciences
72 (1992) 51–56.
[9] Plant physiology and plant cells, in: F.B. Salisbury, C.W. Ross (Eds.), Plant phys-
iology, Wadsworth Inc., Belmont, CA, 1992 (Chapter 1).
[10] K. Tkacova, N. Stevulova, Freiberger Forsclungshefte A (Partikeltechnologie)
A841 (1998) 14–25.
[11] H. Yoshizawa, E. Hiroshi, Diamond slurry or paste for superfine grinding, patent
B22F001-00, JP, 1991.
[12] L.L. Song, B.Y. Fan, S.Z. Jiang, Journal of Chinese Materia Medica 27 (1) (2002)
12–15.
[13] N.N. Win, W.F. Stevens, Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 57 (3) (2001)
334–341.
[14] S.Y. Jin, H.Z. Chen, Biochemical Engineering Journal 30 (2006) 225–230.
[15] R. Rajkhowa, L.J. Wang, X.G. Wang, Powder Technology 185 (2008) 87–95.
[16] X.Y. Zhao, Z.B. Yang, G.S. Gai, Y.F. Yang, Journal of Food Engineering 91 (2009)
217–222.
[17] G. Beamson, D. Briggs, High Resolution XPS of Organic Polymers: The Scienta
ESCA300 Database, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1992.
[18] G.N. Salaita, F.M.S. Ma, T.C. Parker, B. Gar, G.B. Hoflund, Applied Surface Science
254 (2008) 3925–3934.
[19] C. Gaiani, J.J. Ehrhardt, J. Scher, J. Hardy, S. Desobry, S. Banon, Colloids and
Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 49 (2006) 71–78.
[20] C. Gaiani, P. Schuck, J. Scher, J.J. Ehrhardt, E. Arab-Tehrany, M. Jacquot, S. Banon,
Journal of Food Engineering 94 (2009) 130–134.
[21] C. Gaiani, M. Morand, C. Sanchez, E. Arab Tehrany, M. Jacquot, P. Schuck, R.
Jeantet, J. Scher, Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces 75 (2010) 377–384.
[22] AFNOR Standard X11-666, Analyse granulométrique des poudres, Méthode par
diffraction, Paris-La-Défense, 1984, Chapter 1.
[23] M.U. de la Orden, M.C. Matías, J.M. Martínez Urreaga, Polymer Degradation and
Stability 85 (2004) 697–703.
[24] AOAC, Official Methods of Analysis, 17th ed., Association of Official Analytical
Chemists, Arlington, VA, 2000.
[25] D.A. Shirley, Physical Review B 5 (1972) 4709–4714.
[26] J.F. Moulder, W.F. Stickle, P.E. Sobol, K.D. Bomben, in: J. Chastain (Ed.), Handook
of X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy, 2nd ed., PHI, Eden Prairie, MV, 1992.
[27] N. Kobayashi, P. Guilin, J. Kobayashi, S. Hatano, Y. Itaya, S. Mori, Powder Tech-
nology 180 (2008) 272–283.
[28] G.B. Hoflund, in: J.C. Rivière, S. Myhra (Eds.), Handbook of Surface and Interface
Analysis: Methods in Problem-Solving, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY, 1998
(Chapter 4).
[29] C. Maarou, J.P. Melcion, F.B. de Monredon, D. Giboulot, M.P. Guibert, Le Guen,
Animal Feed Science and Technology 85 (2000) 61–78.
[30] S. Suzuki, B. Ying, H. Yamane, H. Tachi, K. Shimahashi, K. Ogawa, S. Kitamura,
Carbohydrate Research 342 (2007) 2490–2493.