Display options
Cite
Li Y, Padilla-Zakour OI. High Pressure Processing vs. Thermal Pasteurization of Whole Concord Grape Puree: Effect on Nutritional Value, Quality Parameters and Refrigerated Shelf Life. Foods. 2021;10(11)doi: 10.3390/foods10112608.
Li, Y., & Padilla-Zakour, O. I. (2021). High Pressure Processing vs. Thermal Pasteurization of Whole Concord Grape Puree: Effect on Nutritional Value, Quality Parameters and Refrigerated Shelf Life. Foods (Basel, Switzerland), 10(11), . https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112608
Li, Yuanyuan, and Padilla-Zakour, Olga I. "High Pressure Processing vs. Thermal Pasteurization of Whole Concord Grape Puree: Effect on Nutritional Value, Quality Parameters and Refrigerated Shelf Life." Foods (Basel, Switzerland) vol. 10,11 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10112608
Li Y, Padilla-Zakour OI. High Pressure Processing vs. Thermal Pasteurization of Whole Concord Grape Puree: Effect on Nutritional Value, Quality Parameters and Refrigerated Shelf Life. Foods. 2021 Oct 28;10(11). doi: 10.3390/foods10112608. PMID: 34828888; PMCID: PMC8620349.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Foods. 2021 Oct 28;10(11). doi: 10.3390/foods10112608.

High Pressure Processing vs. Thermal Pasteurization of Whole Concord Grape Puree: Effect on Nutritional Value, Quality Parameters and Refrigerated Shelf Life.

Foods (Basel, Switzerland)

Yuanyuan Li, Olga I Padilla-Zakour

Affiliations

  1. Department of Food Science, Cornell University, Stocking Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.

PMID: 34828888 PMCID: PMC8620349 DOI: 10.3390/foods10112608

Abstract

High-pressure processing (HPP) is utilized for food preservation as it can ensure product safety at low temperatures, meeting consumers' demand for fresh-like and minimally processed products. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of HPP (600 MPa, 3 min, 5 °C) and pasteurization by heat treatment (HT, 63 °C, 3 min) on the production of a novel whole Concord grape puree product (with skin and seeds, no waste), and the shelf-life of the puree under refrigerated storage (4 °C). Microbial load, physicochemical properties, phenolic content and antioxidant activity, composition and sensorial attributes of puree samples were evaluated. HPP- and HT-treated purees were microbiologically stable for at least 4 months under refrigeration, with less microbial growth and longer shelf life for HPP samples. HPP and HT samples had similar levels of phenolic contents and antioxidant activities throughout the 4-month refrigerated storage period, even though HPP retained >75% PPO and POD enzyme activities while those of HT were less than 25%. Inclusion of seeds in the puree product significantly increased the fiber, protein, total fatty acid, and linoleic acid contents. Sensory results showed that HPP-treated puree retained more fresh-like grape attributes, had better consistency, and showed significantly higher ratings in consumer overall liking, product ranking, and purchase intent than the HT puree (

Keywords: Concord grape; antioxidant activity; high-pressure processing; microbial inactivation; nutritional value; physicochemical properties; sensorial attributes

References

  1. Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 Nov;92(5):1052-9 - PubMed
  2. J Food Sci. 2010 Sep;75(7):R121-30 - PubMed
  3. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 1981;15(1):49-127 - PubMed
  4. Food Chem. 2011 Sep 15;128(2):391-9 - PubMed
  5. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2014;54(1):24-63 - PubMed
  6. Atherosclerosis. 2007 Jan;190(1):135-42 - PubMed
  7. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2002;42(6):627-45 - PubMed
  8. Am J Clin Nutr. 2002 Dec;76(6):1367-74 - PubMed
  9. J Agric Food Chem. 2003 Dec 3;51(25):7280-6 - PubMed
  10. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2010 May;50(5):369-89 - PubMed
  11. Cancer Res. 2007 Jun 15;67(12):5976-82 - PubMed
  12. Int J Food Microbiol. 2021 Feb 2;339:109034 - PubMed
  13. Nutrients. 2014 Jan 21;6(1):391-415 - PubMed
  14. J Agric Food Chem. 2000 Feb;48(2):220-30 - PubMed
  15. J Agric Food Chem. 2006 Feb 22;54(4):1151-7 - PubMed
  16. Free Radic Biol Med. 1999 May;26(9-10):1231-7 - PubMed
  17. Food Microbiol. 2017 May;63:199-204 - PubMed
  18. Cardiovasc Res. 2007 Jan 15;73(2):404-13 - PubMed
  19. Int Immunopharmacol. 2005 Jul;5(7-8):1247-57 - PubMed
  20. Biofactors. 2004;22(1-4):145-7 - PubMed
  21. J AOAC Int. 2005 Sep-Oct;88(5):1269-78 - PubMed
  22. Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Oct 15;12(20 Pt 1):6194-202 - PubMed
  23. J Anim Sci. 2007 Jun;85(6):1511-21 - PubMed
  24. Z Lebensm Unters Forsch. 1995;200(1):3-13 - PubMed
  25. J Nutr. 2009 Sep;139(9):1813S-7S - PubMed
  26. Mutat Res. 2009 Feb 10;661(1-2):25-34 - PubMed
  27. J Agric Food Chem. 2000 Feb;48(2):140-6 - PubMed
  28. Carcinogenesis. 2007 Jul;28(7):1478-84 - PubMed
  29. J Agric Food Chem. 2012 Jun 13;60(23):5736-42 - PubMed
  30. Am J Hypertens. 2014 Jan;27(1):38-45 - PubMed
  31. Nutrition. 2006 Mar;22(3):295-302 - PubMed
  32. Br J Nutr. 2010 Mar;103(5):730-4 - PubMed
  33. J Sci Food Agric. 2017 Aug;97(10):3166-3172 - PubMed
  34. J Nutr. 2009 Sep;139(9):1788S-93S - PubMed
  35. Adv Food Res Suppl. 1969;1:1-261 - PubMed
  36. Antioxidants (Basel). 2015 Nov 19;4(4):737-49 - PubMed
  37. Neurotox Res. 2009 Jan;15(1):3-14 - PubMed
  38. Food Chem. 2018 Sep 15;260:115-123 - PubMed
  39. Annu Rev Nutr. 2004;24:597-615 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support