Figure 1.
Changes of SG during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution as the impregnating liquid.
Figure 1.
Changes of SG during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution as the impregnating liquid.
Figure 2.
Changes of SG during impregnation of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using apple-pear juice as the impregnating liquid.
Figure 2.
Changes of SG during impregnation of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using apple-pear juice as the impregnating liquid.
Figure 3.
Changes of SG during impregnation of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using distilled water as the impregnating liquid.
Figure 3.
Changes of SG during impregnation of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using distilled water as the impregnating liquid.
Figure 4.
Polyphenol content during vacuum impregnation of apples conducted using apple-pear juice (J), citric acid solution (C), and distilled water (DW) as impregnating liquids. Values followed by different letters (A, B, C…) were significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 4.
Polyphenol content during vacuum impregnation of apples conducted using apple-pear juice (J), citric acid solution (C), and distilled water (DW) as impregnating liquids. Values followed by different letters (A, B, C…) were significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 5.
ABTS+ antioxidant activity of apples impregnated using vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa and apple-pear juice (J), citric acid solution (C), and distilled water (DW) as impregnating liquids. Values followed by different letters (A, B, C…) were significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 5.
ABTS+ antioxidant activity of apples impregnated using vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa and apple-pear juice (J), citric acid solution (C), and distilled water (DW) as impregnating liquids. Values followed by different letters (A, B, C…) were significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 6.
FRAP antioxidant activity of apples impregnated using vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa and apple-pear juice (J), citric acid solution (C), and distilled water (DW) as impregnating liquids. Values followed by different letters (A, B, C…) were significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Figure 6.
FRAP antioxidant activity of apples impregnated using vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa and apple-pear juice (J), citric acid solution (C), and distilled water (DW) as impregnating liquids. Values followed by different letters (A, B, C…) were significantly different (p < 0.05) according to Tukey’s test.
Table 1.
Mass variation (MV) during vacuum impregnation (VI) of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution (C), apple-pear juice (J), and distilled water (DW) as the impregnating liquids.
Table 1.
Mass variation (MV) during vacuum impregnation (VI) of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution (C), apple-pear juice (J), and distilled water (DW) as the impregnating liquids.
Impregnation Liquid | Time (s) | Vacuum Level (kPa) |
---|
4 | 6 | 8 |
---|
C | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 1.087 ± 0.007 D | 1.153 ± 0.012 E,F | 1.262 ± 0.012 D,E |
20 | 1.095 ± 0.008 D | 1.162 ± 0.016 F | 1.297 ± 0.012 E |
30 | 1.099 ± 0.009 D | 1.183 ± 0.019 F | 1.292 ± 0.013 E |
40 | 1.099 ± 0.010 D | 1.163 ± 0.014 F | 1.294 ± 0.015 E |
60 | 1.108 ± 0.011 D | 1.176 ± 0.020 F | 1.300 ± 0.014 E |
80 | 1.122 ± 0.008 D,E | 1.163 ± 0.018 F | 1.300 ± 0.011 E |
J | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 1.027 ± 0.005 B | 1.031 ± 0.002 B | 1.041 ± 0.005 B,C |
20 | 1.016 ± 0.004 A | 1.035 ± 0.004 B | 1.020 ± 0.005 A |
30 | 1.016 ± 0.005 A | 1.033 ± 0.003 B | 1.034 ± 0.004 B |
40 | 1.009 ± 0.003 A | 1.042 ± 0.004 B,C | 1.045 ± 0.004 C |
60 | 1.018 ± 0.004 A | 1.040 ± 0.004 B,C | 1.046 ± 0.005 C |
80 | - | 1.025 ± 0.004 A,B | - |
DW | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 1.104 ± 0.009 D | 1.119 ± 0.015 D | 1.138 ± 0.014 E |
20 | 1.113 ± 0.011 D | 1.099 ± 0.022 D | 1.094 ± 0.012 D |
30 | 1.122 ± 0.010 D | 1.062 ± 0.012 C | 1.110 ± 0.011 D |
40 | 1.102 ± 0.007 D | 1.052 ± 0.010 C | 1.086 ± 0.010 D |
60 | 1.107 ± 0.009 D | 1.098 ± 0.017 D | 1.078 ± 0.008 C,D |
80 | 1.087 ± 0.011 D | 1.093 ± 0.013 D | 1.085 ± 0.011 D |
Table 2.
Dry mass variation (DMV) during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution (C), apple-pear juice (J), and distilled water (DW) as the impregnating liquids.
Table 2.
Dry mass variation (DMV) during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution (C), apple-pear juice (J), and distilled water (DW) as the impregnating liquids.
Impregnation Liquid | Time (s) | Vacuum Level (kPa) |
---|
| 4 | 6 | 8 |
---|
C | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 0.944 ± 0.020 F | 0.993 ± 0.017 F | 1.005 ± 0.022 F,G |
20 | 0.930 ± 0.022 F | 0.977 ± 0.021 F | 0.958 ± 0.018 F |
30 | 0.864 ± 0.019 E | 0.951 ± 0.017 F | 0.903 ± 0.023 E,F |
40 | 0.818 ± 0.015 D | 0.863 ± 0.025 E | 0.900 ± 0.019 E,F |
60 | 0.746 ± 0.011 C,D | 0.732 ± 0.011 C,D | 0.885± 0.021 E |
80 | 0.723 ± 0.008 C | 0.815 ± 0.017 D | 0.786 ± 0.017 D |
J | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 1.012 ± 0.019 F,G | 1.081 ± 0.024 G,H | 1.065 ± 0.028 G |
20 | 1.061 ± 0.019 G | 1.095 ± 0.023 G,H | 1.068 ± 0.033 G |
30 | 1.074 ± 0.020 G | 1.108 ± 0.019 H | 1.148 ± 0.026 I |
40 | 1.079 ± 0.015 G | 1.105 ± 0.022 H | 1.158 ± 0.027 I |
60 | 1.089 ± 0.019 G | 1.152 ± 0.023 I | 1.161 ± 0.025 I |
80 | - | 1.160 ± 0.029 I | - |
DW | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
10 | 0.455 ± 0.006 A | 0.581 ± 0.011 B,C | 0.512 ± 0.007 B |
20 | 0.710 ± 0.011 C | 0.679 ± 0.013 C | 0.555 ± 0.006 B |
30 | 0.713 ± 0.009 C | 0.679 ± 0.015 C | 0.562 ± 0.008 B |
40 | 0.716 ± 0.08 C | 0.693 ± 0.016 C | 0.569 ± 0.006 B |
60 | 0.785 ± 0.020 D | 0.714 ± 0.012 C | 0.715 ± 0.011 C |
80 | 0.810 ± 0.022 D | 0.764 ± 0.014 C | 0.743 ± 0.009 C,D |
Table 3.
Model coefficients and statistical factors in mathematical models fitting the experimental data of solid gain (SG) changes during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution as the impregnating liquid.
Table 3.
Model coefficients and statistical factors in mathematical models fitting the experimental data of solid gain (SG) changes during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using citric acid solution as the impregnating liquid.
Mathematical Model | Coefficient | Vacuum Level [kPa] |
---|
4 | 6 | 8 |
---|
Peleg | a | −219.1333 | −36.2405 | −12.3447 |
b | 8.4564 | 7.2476 | 6.3128 |
RSME | 0.6679 | 0.7783 | 0.9904 |
| 0.000451 | 0.000551 | 0.000026 |
CRV | 38.9 | 38.9 | 23.6 |
R2 | 0.7786 | 0.8521 | 0.9936 |
Kevin-Voight | a | −0.0898 | −0.1272 | −0.1412 |
b | 23.0830 | 9.1691 | 9.9627 |
RSME | 0.0779 | 0.0796 | 0.0998 |
| 0.000398 | 0.000508 | 0.000005 |
CRV | 5.6 | 12.1 | 8.9 |
R2 | 0.8049 | 0.8638 | 0.9988 |
Burger | a | −3.1239 | −0.2255 | −0.1404 |
b | 213.6435 | 20.4573 | 9.8616 |
c | −0.0113 | −0.0014 | 0.0001 |
RSME | 0.7944 | 0.7955 | 0.9976 |
| 0.000279 | 0.000509 | 0.000007 |
CRV | 42.0 | 40.0 | 27.5 |
R2 | 0.8972 | 0.8977 | 0.9988 |
Table 4.
Statistical factors in mathematical models fitting the experimental data of SG changes during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using apple-pear juice as the impregnating liquid.
Table 4.
Statistical factors in mathematical models fitting the experimental data of SG changes during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using apple-pear juice as the impregnating liquid.
Mathematical Model | Coefficient | Vacuum Level [kPa] |
---|
4 | 6 | 8 |
---|
Peleg | a | 94.7765 | 88.1274 | 62.4510 |
b | 19.8800 | 6.8219 | 4.4803 |
RSME | 0.9724 | 0.9293 | 0.9849 |
| 0.000003 | 0.000107 | 0.000113 |
CRV | 45.7 | 48.2 | 39.1 |
R2 | 0.9834 | 0.9528 | 0.9910 |
Kevin-Voight | a | 0.0368 | 0.1237 | 0.1581 |
b | 25.4490 | 15.8917 | 28.9365 |
RSME | 0.0969 | 0.0879 | 0.0984 |
| 0.000004 | 0.000238 | 0.000118 |
CRV | 2.4 | 7.0 | 2.6 |
R2 | 0.9781 | 0.9193 | 0.9903 |
Burger | a | 0.0157 | 0.0652 | 0.1198 |
b | 9.2438 | 1.2598 | 16.4327 |
c | 0.0003 | 0.0009 | 0.0003 |
RSME | 0.9733 | 0.9799 | 0.9766 |
| 0.000003 | 0.000005 | 0.000005 |
CRV | 26.6 | 43.8 | 28.5 |
R2 | 0.9893 | 0.9900 | 0.9906 |
Table 5.
Statistical factors in mathematical models fitting the experimental data of SG changes during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using distilled water as the impregnating liquid.
Table 5.
Statistical factors in mathematical models fitting the experimental data of SG changes during VI of apples at varied vacuum pressures of 4, 6, and 8 kPa using distilled water as the impregnating liquid.
Mathematical Model | Coefficient | Vacuum Level [kPa] |
---|
4 | 6 | 8 |
---|
Peleg | a | −1315.1964 | −330.0180 | −110.3170 |
b | −0.4957 | −1.3744 | −3.1288 |
RSME | 0.0142 | 0.0545 | 0.0473 |
| 0.005756 | 0.006651 | 0.001980 |
CRV | 60.3 | 69.1 | 38.8 |
R2 | 0.7664 | 0.6814 | 0.7935 |
Kevin-Voight | a | −0.9334 | −0.3738 | −0.2266 |
b | 222.4920 | 124.4170 | 26.9840 |
RSME | 0.0142 | 0.0546 | 0.0453 |
| 0.002298 | 0.002340 | 0.002900 |
CRV | 60.3 | 68.9 | 35.3 |
R2 | 0.7664 | 0.6827 | 0.8105 |
Burger | a | −0.0348 | −0.0209 | −4.2633 |
b | 322.9368 | 217.0000 | 177.4677 |
c | −0.0006 | −0.0024 | −0.0169 |
RSME | 0.0159 | 0.0618 | 0.0478 |
| 0.009879 | 0.009997 | 0.008988 |
CRV | 67.4 | 78.2 | 37.2 |
R2 | 0.7664 | 0.6736 | 0.8313 |
Equation 1 | a | 0.0041 | 0.0138 | 0.0169 |
b | −0.0536 | −0.1670 | −0.2169 |
c | 26.3255 | 24.1722 | 15.0000 |
d | 5.2663 | 3.3950 | 1.5217 |
RSME | 0.0071 | 0.0182 | 0.0166 |
| 0.00010 | 0.00056 | 0.00013 |
CRV | 14.3 | 14.7 | 12.6 |
R2 | 0.9650 | 0.9788 | 0.9845 |