Assessment of pretreatment methods

and osmotic dehydration for cranberries

P.S. Sunjka and G.S.V. Raghavan

Department of Bioresource Engineering, McGill University, Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Quebec, Canada H9X 3V9

Sunjka, P.S. and Raghavan, G.S.V. 2004. Assessment of dipping of a product into a chemical solution (normally alkaline
pretreatment methods and osmotic dehydration for cranberries. or acid solution of oleate esters) of a specific concentration for
Canadian Biosystems Engineering/Le génie des biosystèmes au a specific amount of time. Mechanical pretreatment consists of
Canada 46: 3.35-3.40. In this research, different drying pretreatment skin abrasion, puncturing, or cutting the product into smaller
methods were tested on cranberry fruit (Vaccinium macrocarpon). pieces.
Mechanical and chemical pretreatments were examined, as well as
osmotic dehydration. Two types of assessed mechanical pretreatments One of the most useful pretreatments for drying of fruit is
were cutting the berries in halves and into quarters and chemical osmotic dehydration (Beaudry 2001). Osmotic dehydration is
pretreatment consisted of testing different temperatures of chemical the incomplete removal of water from a food product by means
agent and dipping times for cranberries. Osmotic dehydration involved of an osmotic agent (usually either sugar or salt solution). The
evaluation of different osmotic agents, their concentrations, and main advantage of this process is its influence on the principal
different times of osmotic dehydration. There were three observed drying method, shortening of the drying process, resulting in
parameters: mass gain, solids gain, and moisture loss. The mechanical lower energy requirements. Considering that heat is not applied
pretreatment that showed the best results for observed parameters was in this stage, osmotic dehydration offers higher retention of
cutting the berries into quarters, but chemical pretreatment showed no initial food characteristics, such as colour, aroma, nutritional
significant difference. Time and concentration of osmotic agent
constituents, and flavour compounds (Beaudry 2001).
significantly promoted the moisture removal and sugar uptake.
Keywords: cranberry, drying pretreatment, moisture loss, osmotic Skin pretreatment
dehydration.
Chemical pretreatment involves immersion of the product in
Dans cette étude, différentes méthodes de prétraitement pour le alkaline or acid solutions of oleate esters prior to drying.
séchage de la canneberge (Vaccinium macrocarpon) ont été évaluées. Alkaline dipping facilitates drying by forming fine cracks on
À savoir, la méthode mécanique, la méthode chimique et la méthode fruit surface (Salunkhe et al. 1991), and dipping in oleate esters
de déshydratation osmotique. En ce qui concerne la méthode causes wax platelets on the fruit skin to dissociate, helping the
mécanique, deux types de prétraitements ont été utilisés : le découpage removal of moisture (Venkatachalapathy 1998).
en deux ou en quatre des canneberges. La méthode chimique consistait
à optimiser température des agents chimiques et la durée d’immersion It was determined by Ponting and McBean (1970) that, for
des canneberges. La méthode de déshydratation osmotique impliquait fruits with a waxy surface layer, the most effective treatment is
l’évaluation des différents agents osmotiques, des concentrations, ainsi with ethyl esters of fatty acids, especially oleic acid. Saravacos
que des durées du prétraitement. Les paramètres utilisés pour comparer et al. (1988) and Tulasidas et al. (1994) used ethyl oleate (EO)
les méthodes étaient: le gain de masse du fruit, le gain des solides as a pretreatment, and found that it can improve the drying rate
solubles, et la perte d’eau. Les meilleurs résultats ont été obtenus avec with only a minor effect on product quality. Venkatachalapathy
le prétraitement mécanique avec découpage des baies en quatre (1998) used an alkaline solution of 2% EO and 0.5% sodium
quartiers. Le prétraitement chimique n’a montré aucune avantage sur hydroxide (NaOH) as a pretreatment for strawberries and
les baies non traitées. Le temps et la concentration de l’agent blueberries. Beaudry (2001) tested different concentrations and
osmotique avaient accentué l’élimination d’eau et d’accumulation de time periods of dipping for cranberries and concluded that these
sucre dans les baies. have no significant influence on subsequent osmotic
dehydration.
INTRODUCTION Mechanical pretreatment might replace or complement
chemical pretreatment, mainly because consumers hesitate to
Drying of fruits and vegetables is one of the most time and
buy chemically treated fruits, and it has a profound effect on the
energy consuming processes in the modern food industry. To
later drying process. Mechanical pretreatment consists of
reduce the processing time, thus facilitating and accelerating the peeling, surface abrasion, and cutting in various shapes, such as
dehydration process, a number of obstacles must be overcome. halves, cylinders, and cubes. A number of researchers (Shi and
The main problem in this food preservation method is the outer Maupoey 1993; Jia et al. 1993; Kiranoudis et al. 1997) used
layer of a particular commodity, the skin. The skin impedes some kind of mechanical treatment to accelerate mass transfer
water transport from the interior of a food product to its surface, in subsequent processing. There are several methods that can be
slowing the drying process. applied (Beaudry 2001), puncture the skin by a needle, cut the
There are two main methods to reduce the effects of skin berry in halves or quarters, and abrade the skin surface. All
resistance and promote water transport, chemical and these mechanical pretreatments are used to increase the "active"
mechanical pretreatments. Chemical pretreatment involves skin surface where water can penetrate.

Volume 46 2004 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 3.35

 Mechanical pretreatment of cranberries was also recorded by tissues. Then, for all chemical pretreatment method
Yongsawatdigul and Gunasekaran (1996), where they cut combinations, the mechanical pretreatment (cut in quarters) and
cranberries in halves. Beaudry (2001) examined different skin the osmotic dehydration method (24 hours, room temperature,
pretreatment techniques on cranberries, cutting into halves, HFCS with 1:1 and 2:1 concentrations) were followed in order
abrading the surface of the skin and puncturing of the skin by a to maintain other process conditions constant.
needle, and demonstrated that cutting in half is the best possible After 24 hours, the cranberries were rinsed of HFCS syrup,
method to attain moisture loss. wiped with tissues, and air-dried (placed on a table) for 15-20
Osmotic dehydration minutes to remove surface moisture. At that moment, mass was
recorded and the final moisture content was determined by
Quality and processing costs are the two most important factors
placing cranberries in an oven set at 70°C, until sample mass
when choosing a food preservation method. Economic factors
became constant (modified AOAC standard, Boland 1984).
and quality improvement have primarily motivated application
of the osmosis principle. Drying of high moisture fruit, such as Mechanical pretreatment Upon evaluation of optimal
cranberries, is time and energy consuming because such fruit is chemical pretreatment (pretreatment that offers the highest
difficult to dry in one step. Osmotic dehydration is a moisture loss in subsequent osmotic dehydration), two
preservation method that offers a high quality product by means mechanical pretreatments were compared to the standard (no
of water removal without phase change. Osmotically dehydrated mechanical pretreatment). The pretreatments were cutting the
fruits have a good retention of flavour, aroma, and high berries in halves and in quarters with a stainless steel knife. All
nutritional content because osmotic dehydration has low other parameters were the same, no chemical pretreatment,
influence on mineral content and vitamin loss; it preserves osmotic dehydration as described above (24 hours, room
organoleptic properties (Barbosa-Cánovas and Vega-Mercado temperature, HFCS with 1:1 and 2:1 concentrations). All
1996). experiments were performed four times.
During osmotic dehydration, a two-way counter-flow of Osmotic dehydration
mass exchange takes place (Lenart 1996). There is water
diffusion from the sample to a surrounding hypertonic solution Once optimal chemical and mechanical pretreatments were
and an opposite stream of osmotic substances (sugar, salt, etc.) determined, different factors of osmotic dehydration were
that enters the fruit. tested. These factors and their levels were:
Water removes water-soluble substances such as • Type of sugar agent (crystal sucrose, HFCS)
saccharides, organic acids, vitamins, etc. However, this loss is • Concentration of sugar agent (mass ratio of fruit to
not significant, except for a minor deficit in nutritive value and sucrose 1:1, 2:1, 3:1, and 4:1; mass ratio of fruit to HFCS
a small change in organoleptic properties (Lenart 1996). 1:1 and 2:1)
The objectives of the present study were to estimate optimal • Time of osmotic dehydration (12, 24, 36, and 48 h)
conditions for the chemical and mechanical skin pretreatment of Sugar agents were commercially available special fine
cranberries, as well as the different conditions of osmotic granulated sugar and HFCS (Invertose 2655, at 77±1°Brix). All
dehydration prior to drying. tests were performed four times at ambient temperature
(23±1°C). All other parameters remained constant during the
MATERIALS and METHODS experiment, no chemical pretreatment and cranberries cut in
Each test was performed on thawed cranberries (Vaccinium quarters.
macrocarpon) of the Stevens cultivar. These cranberries were After a defined time of dehydration, cranberries were
cultivated and harvested from sandy and organic soils in the removed from the sugar solution and rinsed under warm tap
Montérégie region in Quebec. Prior to each experiment, the water (approximately 40°C), gently wiped with a soft tissue, and
cranberries were thawed by immersion in water at room left for 15-20 minutes in ambient air in order to remove surface
temperature (23±1°C) for one hour before being used for tests. moisture. Mass at that moment was recorded, the cranberries
Chemical and mechanical pretreatment were placed in an oven at 70°C until their mass became
constant, and then the mass was recorded again.
Chemical pretreatment Chemical pretreatment was tested for
multiple variables, such as time of immersion and the Quality evaluation
temperature of the particular chemical applied. Tests were Numerous quality parameters were monitored during this
performed using a solution of 2% EO and 0.5% NaOH (mass experiment:
basis) in distilled water. This concentration of EO and NaOH • Initial (88±1%) and final moisture contents
was recommended by Beaudry (2001). Liquid EO was • Initial (6±1.0ºBx for sample and 77±0.5ºBx for HFCS)
previously kept in a freezer at -20°C, and granular NaOH at and final sugar content in °Brix for sample and HFCS
ambient temperature.
• Mass loss
After thawing, cranberries were wiped with soft tissues and
immersed in a prepared alkaline EO solution for a specific time • Solids gain
and at a specific temperature. Two levels of dipping time were • Moisture loss
tested, 60 and 180 seconds, and three temperatures of solution, Initial and final sugar content in °Brix of samples and HFCS
ambient (23±1°C), 45±1°C, and 65±1°C. All experiments were solutions were determined with a handheld refractometer
performed four times. Afterwards, cranberries were rinsed with (Fisherbrand by Fisher Scientific, Nepean, ON). The fruits were
warm tap water (approximately 40°C) and wiped again with pressed in order to obtain one drop of juice, used for measuring.

3.36 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU CANADA SUNJIKA and RAGHAVAN

Table 1. Average change in sugar and moisture content for chemically treated and osmotically dehydrated cranberries
under the same conditions (HFCS, 24 h, mass ratio 2:1, room temperature).

Chemical pretreatment Sugar (°Brix) Moisture (%, wb)

Temperature Time Cranberries HFCS

Initial Final
(°C) (s) Initial Final Initial Final

60 6.0 47.5 b 77.0 69.4 b 88.0 46.6 b

23
180 6.0 48.3 b 77.0 63.5 88.0 45.9 b

60 6.0 39.0 c 77.0 73.5 a 88.0 50.7 a

45
180 6.0 54.2 a 77.0 67.5 b,c 88.0 48.9 a

60 6.0 52.1 a,b 77.0 64.3 d,c 88.0 45.2 b,c

65
180 6.0 54.5 a 77.0 66.6 d,c 88.0 44.7 b,c

Standard
6.0 52.3 a,b 77.0 66.4 d,c 88.0 43.5c
(no chemical pretreatment)

Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different.

Mass loss, solids gain, and moisture loss were calculated RESULTS and DISCUSSION
using Eqs. 1 to 3, respectively (Beaudry 2001):
Chemical and mechanical pre-treatment
m fin − mini Chemical pre-treatment Chemically pretreated cranberries
m gain = × 100 (1)
mini showed similar results to the standard sample (no chemical
pretreatment) for the majority of observed parameters. There
was some significance for some of the parameters, but the
msfin − msin standard gave better results in solids gain and moisture loss
s gain = × 100 (2) values. Thus, it can be concluded that chemical pretreatment has
mini no significant influence on improving water transfer during
osmotic dehydration of cranberries.
In Table 1, average soluble sugar contents in ºBrix of HFCS
M ini − M fin and cranberries at the start and at the end of experiment, as well
Wloss = × 100 (3) as the initial and final moisture contents of cranberries for each
M ini
method are presented. It can be observed from Table 1, that it is
where: possible to obtain with appropriate osmotic dehydration
mgain = mass gain (%), treatment almost 50% of moisture loss from 88% of initial
mfin = total mass after osmosis (g), moisture to 44.7% of final moisture in the method with 65°C
mini = initial mass before osmosis (g), and 180 s. But, the most important parameters for determination
sgain = solids gain (%), of effectiveness for the aforementioned methods are the three
msfin = mass solids after osmosis (g), parameters: mass gain, solids gain, and moisture loss. Their
msin = mass solids before osmosis (g), change can be seen in Table 2.
Wloss = moisture loss (%), Higher moisture loss for standard (50.6%) than for any of
Mini = initial moisture content (%, wb), and the chemically treated samples was not statistically significant,
Mfin = final moisture content (%, wb). and this study confirmed the results from similar experiments by
Beaudry (2001); chemical pretreatment has no significant
Equations 1 to 3 provide a quantitative description of influence on quantitative parameters that describe water
component transfer under osmotic dehydration. exchange between osmotic agent and fruit. The majority of
parameters had similar results as the standard sample (no
Experimental design chemical pretreatment). Therefore, in further experiments within
All experiments were performed in four replicates in order to this study, chemical treatment was not used.
assure better analysis of the statistical data. The data were Mechanical pretreatment The purpose of this method was to
subjected to the analysis of variance (ANOVA) and to Duncan's increase the available surface for water to depart from a
multiple range tests for pairwise comparison of each variable. produce. There are several methods of mechanical pretreatment,
Differences were determined as significant or non-significant at but only two were tested here, cutting into halves and cutting
a significance level of 0.05 in all cases. into quarters with a stainless steel knife. These methods were
compared with the standard (whole berries, with intact skin).

Volume 46 2004 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 3.37

Table 2. Change in mass gain, solids gain, and moisture loss of cranberries parameters. All other conditions were
treated with different chemical methods and osmotically dehydrated identical: no chemical pretreatment,
under similar conditions. osmotic dehydration in HFCS (sugar
to fruit mass ratio 2:1) for 24 hours at
Chemical pretreatment Parameters observed room temperature (23ºC).
The initial and final Brix degree of
Temperature Time Mass gain Solids gain Moisture loss cranberries and HFCS, as well as
(°C) (s) (%) (%) (%) moisture content of cranberries can be
seen in Table 3. No change was
60 7.0 a 32.9 c 47.1 b,c noticed to the standard, meaning that
23
180 5.6 a 45.1 a,b 47.8 a,b no mass transfer had occurred. Cutting
into quarters showed significant
60 9.0 a 41.7 a,b 42.4 d difference when compared to cutting
45
180 17.5 b 48.1 a,b 44.5 c,d into halves for all three parameters.
60 4.5 a 45.3 a,b 48.6 a,b Table 4 confirms that mechanical
65 pretreatment has significant influence
180 14.5 b 51.3 a 46.7 b,c
on water transfer, and that cranberries
Standard (no chemical cut in quarters have maximum "active"
5.2 a 47.8 a,b 50.6 a surface for water and sugar exchange.
pretreatment)
This method offers the highest mass
Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different. gain, the highest solids (sugar) gain,
and most importantly, the highest
moisture loss; over 50% of the initial
Table 3. Average change in sugar content and moisture content for moisture was removed in osmotic
mechanically treated and osmotically dehydrated cranberries dehydration, reducing initial moisture
under the same conditions. content from 88% to a final 43.4%.
The parameter "solids gain" is
Sugar (° Brix) Moisture (%, wb) especially important for sour fruits
such as cranberries, because their tart
Mechanical pretreatment Cranberries HFCS taste is an obstacle for fresh
Initial Final consumption; they have to be
Initial Final Initial Final
processed, or, as in this case,
Cutting into halves 6.0 32.5 b 77.0 58.0 c 88.0 59.8 a sweetened. Its values can be found in
Cutting into quarters 6.0 52.3 a 77.0 66.4 b 88.0 43.5 c Tables 2, 4, and 7.
Standard (whole berries) 6.0 6.0 c 77.0 77.0 a 88.0 88.0 a Mechanical pretreatment results
confirmed previous studies from
Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different. Beaudry (2001) and Venkatachal-
apathy (1998) that this method is very
important and can have a big influence
Table 4. Change in mass loss, solids gain, and moisture loss of cranberries in subsequent drying, both from fruit
treated with different mechanical methods and osmotically dehydrated quality and process economics points
under the same conditions. of view. Two tested levels, cutting
into halves and into quarters,
Parameters observed demonstrated significant difference
Mechanical pretreatment and thus mechanical pretreatment of
Mass gain (%) Solids gain (%) Moisture loss (%) cutting into quarters was used in
subsequent experiments within this
Cutting into halves -4.2 a 27.4 b 31.8 b
study.
Cutting into quarters 5.2 b 47.8 a 50.6 a
Standard (whole berries) 0.0 a 0.0 c 0.0 c Osmotic dehydration

Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different. Osmotic dehydration time Time of
osmotic dehydration had a significant
effect on observed parameters
(Table 5 and Fig. 1).
The reason why only two methods were tested here is Time has a significant effect on solids gain (sugar uptake)
because a similar study was performed by Beaudry (2001), and and moisture loss; while for the mass gain, time has no effect.
it was determined that cutting into halves has significant However, considering that moisture loss is the most significant
difference compared to skin surface abrasion and puncturing the parameter of these three, and that osmotic dehydration for 24
skin with a needle. Therefore, cutting of the berry into halves hours had the highest percentage of moisture loss, this time of
was tested against cutting into quarters, for the same observed 24 hours is recommended for subsequent experiments.

3.38 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU CANADA SUNJIKA and RAGHAVAN

Table 5. Average change in sugar content and moisture content for There is also another very important
cranberries at different times of osmotic dehydration (HFCS 2:1) factor to consider: with respect to quality,
samples subjected to longer duration (>24 h)
Sugar (° Brix) Moisture (%, wb) became darker which was visible by the
Time of osmotic naked eye, and emitted an unpleasant odour,
dehydration Cranberries HFCS but the samples treated for 24 hours did not
(h) Initial Final
Initial Final Initial Final
show these changes.
Osmotic agent type and its concentration
12 6.0 42.6 b 77.0 61.6 c 88.0 53.6 a
24 6.0 52.3 a 77.0 66.4 a 88.0 43.5 c Table 6 shows initial and final average values
36 6.0 50.2 a 77.0 63.1 b 88.0 45.8 b of Brix content for cranberries and HFCS
48 6.0 54.7 a 77.0 64.1 b 88.0 41.4 d (where applicable), as well as moisture
content.
Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different.
The noticeable advantages of HFCS as an
osmotic agent over granular sucrose can be
seen in Table 7. Significantly higher moisture
loss and solids (sugar) gain for HFCS are a
considerable advantage of this osmotic agent.
There are many reasons that can explain this,
such as higher mobility of viscous liquid
HFCS compared to solid crystals of granular
sugar. Another reason may also be that the
essential component in granular sugar is
sucrose (disaccharide) and in HFCS, fructose
(monosaccharide). The size of a molecule
may also have an influence on the
permeability and mobility of the molecule.
This is confirmed in works of Karathanos and
Kostaropoulos (1995) and Lerici et al.
(1985). In both studies the advantage of
monosaccharide (glucose or fructose, respec-
tively) against disaccharide (sucrose in both
experiments) was proven. Argaiz et al. (1994)
determined that glucose, which has low
molecular weight, has a more profound effect
Fig. 1. Average change in mass gain, solids gain, and moisture loss in time on water activity depression than polysac-
for osmotic dehydration during dehydration with HFCS, 2:1 mass charides (sucrose, maltodextrines) at identical
ratio HFCS to fruit. Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters moisture content. Contreras and Smyrl (1981)
are not significantly different. concluded that the solid uptake is inversely
correlated with the size of the
molecule of the osmotic agent.
Table 6. Average change in sugar content and moisture content for cranberries with Mass ratio of agent to fruit also
different osmotic agent and its concentration during treatment of 24 hours. had significant influence on
osmotic dehydration. As expected,
Osmotic agent Sugar (° Brix) Moisture (%, wb)
higher ratio offered higher moisture
Cranberries HFCS removal and higher sugar uptake
Type Mass ratio Initial Final for HFCS, but this was not the case
Initial Final Initial Final with sucrose. Higher ratio of sugar
to fruit caused unanticipated
1:1 6.0 35.0 c NA NA 88.0 51.9 c results; lower moisture loss and
2:1 6.0 36.0 c NA NA 88.0 52.5 c higher mass loss. One possible
Sucrose
3:1 6.0 23.5 d NA NA 88.0 58.9 b reason for this phenomenon could
4:1 6.0 23.2 d NA NA 88.0 64.3 a be a totally different mass transport
mechanism occurring for granular
1:1 6.0 43.5 b 77.0 52.5 b 88.0 52.4 c sugar to cranberries when com-
HFCS
2:1 6.0 52.3 a 77.0 66.4 a 88.0 43.5 d pared to the mechanism occurring
during mass exchange between
Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different.
liquid HFCS and cranberries.

Volume 46 2004 CANADIAN BIOSYSTEMS ENGINEERING 3.39

Table 7. Average values of mass gain, solids gain, and moisture loss for osmotically Boland, F.E. 1984. Fruits and
dehydrated cranberries using different osmotic agent type and concentration. fruit product. In AOAC
Official Methods of Analysis,
Osmotic agent Parameters observed ed. W. Horwitz, 413-418.
Washington, DC: AOAC.
Type Mass ratio Mass gain (%) Solids gain (%) Moisture loss (%)
Contreras, J.E. and T.C. Smyrl.
1:1 -15.7 c 28.7 c 41.0 b 1981. An evaluation of
2:1 -9.2 c 31.2 c 40.4 b osmotic concentration of
Sucrose apple ring using corn syrup
3:1 -25.4 b 18.8 d 33.1 c
solids solutions. Canadian
4:1 -47.7 a 6.7 e 26.9 d
Institute of Food Science and
1:1 3.0 d 37.0 b 40.4 b Technology 14: 310-315.
HFCS Jia, X., S. Clements and P. Jolly.
2:1 5.2 d 47.8 a 50.6 a
1993. Study of heat pump
Duncan groupings: Means with the same letters are not significantly different. assisted microwave drying.
Drying Technology 11(7):
Osmotic dehydration, as the most influential pretreatment on 1583-1616.
the water removal process, needs to be tested in more detail. Karathanos, V.T. and A.E. Kostaropoulos. 1995. Air-drying
Three factors (duration of process, agent type, and kinetics of osmotically dehydrated fruits. Drying
concentration) were tested with multiple levels. All three Technology 13(5-7): 1503-1521.
aspects had significant effects on the osmotic dehydration Kiranoudis, C.T., E. Tsami and Z.B. Maroulis. 1997.
process at a significance level of 0.05. One combination can be Microwave vacuum drying kinetics of some fruits. Drying
selected as optimal based on observed parameters, osmotic Technology 15(10): 2421-2440.
dehydration for 24 hours, HFCS as osmotic agent, and
concentration of 2:1 (mass ratio of HFCS to fruit). Lenart, A. 1996. Osmo-convective drying of fruits and
vegetables: Technology and application. Drying Technology
CONCLUSIONS 14(2): 391-413.
Lerici, C.R., G. Pinnavaia, M. Dalla Rosa and L. Bartolucci.
Different methods of pretreatment can have significant 1985. Osmotic dehydration of fruit: Influence of osmotic
influence on subsequent drying processes. In this research, agents on drying behaviour and product quality. Journal of
several techniques of pretreatment with various levels were Food Science 50: 1217-1219.
tested one against another. The effect of different pretreatments
can be summarised as: Ponting, J.D. and D.M. McBean. 1970. Temperature and
dipping treatment effects on drying rates and drying times of
1. Chemical pretreatment parameters (time and temperature grapes, prunes, and other waxy fruits. Food Technology 24:
of reaction) had no significant influence on mass 1403-1406.
transfer.
Salunkhe, D.K., H.R. Bolin and N.R. Reddy. 1991. Storage,
2. Mechanical pretreatment showed substantial increase in Processing, and Nutritional Quality of Fruits and
moisture loss and sugar uptake, because the "active" Vegetables, Volume II: Processed Fruits and Vegetables,
surface area for mass transfer is greater. 2nd edition. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
3. All three factors of osmotic dehydration (process Saravacos, G.D., S.N. Marousis and G.S. Raouzeos. 1988.
duration, agent type, and concentration of sugar solution) Effect of ethyl oleate on the rate of air drying of foods.
showed significant influence. Journal of Food Engineering 7: 263-270.
Shi, X.Q. and P.F. Maupoey. 1993. Vacuum osmotic
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
dehydration of fruits. Drying Technology 11(6): 1429-1442.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the Natural Sciences and Tulasidas, T.N., G.S.V. Raghavan, T. Kudra, Y. Gariepy and C.
Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) for their Akyel. 1994. Microwave drying of grapes in a single mode
financial support and Dr. Valérie Orsat and Mr. Timothy John resonant cavity with pulsed power. ASAE Paper No 94-
Rennie for their practical assistance. 6547. St. Jospeh, MI: ASAE.
Venkatachalapathy, K. 1998. Combined osmotic and
REFERENCES
microwave drying of strawberries and blueberries.
Argaiz, A., A. López-Malo, E. Palou, and J. Welti. 1994. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis. Montreal, QC: Department of
Osmotic dehydration of papaya with corn syrup solids. Agricultural and Biosystems Engineering, McGill
Drying Technology 12(7): 1709-1725. University.
Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V. and H. Vega-Mercado. 1996. Yongsawatdigul, J. and S. Gunasekaran. 1996. Microwave-
Dehydration of Foods. New York, NY: Chapman & Hall. vacuum drying of cranberries: Part I. Energy use and
Beaudry, C. 2001. Evaluation of drying methods on osmotically efficiency. Journal of Food Processing and Preservation
dehydrated cranberries. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis. Montreal, 20: 121-143.
QC: Department of Agricultural and Biosystems
Engineering, McGill University.

3.40 LE GÉNIE DES BIOSYSTÈMES AU CANADA SUNJIKA and RAGHAVAN