Effect of enzymatic treatments and microfiltration on the physicochemical quality parameters of feijoa ( Acca sellowiana ) juice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helena de Oliveira Schmidt ◽  
Fernanda Camboim Rockett ◽  
Giovana Ebert ◽  
Giliani Veloso Sartori ◽  
Katia Rezzadori ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Parameters ◽  
Physicochemical Quality ◽  
Acca Sellowiana

scholarly journals Physicochemical Quality Parameters at the Reception of the Honey Packaging Process: Influence of Type of Honey, Year of Harvest, and Beekeeper

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marisol Juan-Borrás ◽  
Eva Domenech ◽  
Andrea Conchado ◽  
Isabel Escriche
Keyword(s):  
Quality Parameters ◽  
Good Practices ◽  
Packaging Process ◽  
Physicochemical Quality ◽  
Raw Honey

The aim of this paper was to evaluate the influence of the type of honey, year of collection, and the beekeeper on the main physicochemical quality parameters (hydroxymethylfurfural “HMF,” moisture, and colour), measured on reception of the raw honey. 1593 samples (11 types of honey categorized by means of pollinic analysis), provided by 98 beekeepers, from 2009 to 2013, were analyzed. Colour was the parameter most affected by the type of honey and year, whereas HMF was the least affected in both cases. The clearest honeys were found to have the greatest moisture (orange, rosemary, and lemon) and the darkest had the least moisture (lavender stoechas, eucalyptus, sunflower, honeydew and retama). Lavender, polyfloral, and thyme had intermediate values of these parameters. For moisture, most samples were in accordance with international requirements (less than 20 g/100 g). All values were below the required limit for HMF (40 mg/kg), although a few of them were abnormally high as they were raw honeys (i.e., 2% of the samples had values higher than 20 mg/kg). The fact that all the inadequate samples came from specific beekeepers highlights the importance of their role, suggesting that training in good practices is the key to guarantee honey quality before it reaches the industry.

scholarly journals Physicochemical Quality Changes in Tomatoes during Delayed Cooling and Storage in a Controlled Chamber

Agriculture ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 196
Author(s):  
Md. Shaha Nur Kabir ◽  
Mohammod Ali ◽  
Wang-Hee Lee ◽  
Seong-In Cho ◽  
Sun-Ok Chung
Keyword(s):  
Storage Period ◽  
Quality Parameters ◽  
Soluble Solids ◽  
Quality Changes ◽  
Fresh Weight ◽  
Physicochemical Quality ◽  
Highest Weight ◽  
Hue Angle ◽  
Tomato Cultivars ◽  
And Storage

The exposure of tomato fruits to unfavorable environments during the postharvest could result in severe losses along the supply chain. In this research, four tomato cultivars were stored in a controlled chamber under three levels of postharvest conditions to investigate the effects of delayed cooling on selected physicochemical quality parameters of the tomatoes. The tomato cultivars were subjected to three postharvest treatments: Immediate storage (IS) at harvest day; delayed storage (DS), leaving tomatoes without cover for one day; and under cover (DSC), separately in a greenhouse, and then stored in a controlled chamber at a temperature of 10 ± 1 °C and relative humidity of 90% ± 3%. Fresh weight, firmness, total soluble solids (TSS), and hue angle (h°) were examined over 15 days, every 5 days. Among the tomato cultivars, Cherry (7160), treated under DS showed the highest weight loss (13.01%) and firmness loss (42.14%) after 15 days of storage. Dabol (large) tomatoes treated with DS showed higher changes in TSS (°Bx) values (4.79 to 5.76). Low changes in hue angle values were found in IS-treated Cherry (7160) tomatoes at the end of the storage period. Overall quality changes were slower for all tomato cultivars treated with IS than with other treatments throughout the storage period. This study indicated the importance of reducing cooling delays to maintain the quality during the postharvest and prolong storage of harvested tomatoes.

scholarly journals Chemical and Physicochemical Quality Parameters in Carrots Dehydrated by Power Ultrasound

2010 ◽  
Vol 58 (13) ◽  
pp. 7715-7722 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Cristina Soria ◽  
Marta Corzo-Martínez ◽  
Antonia Montilla ◽  
Enrique Riera ◽  
Juliana Gamboa-Santos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Parameters ◽  
Power Ultrasound ◽  
Physicochemical Quality
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document