Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Journal of Food Engineering

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

Effect of chemical and physical pretreatments on the convective drying

of cape gooseberry fruits (Physalis peruviana)
J.E. Vásquez-Parra, C.I. Ochoa-Martínez ⇑, M. Bustos-Parra
School of Food Engineering, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia

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

Article history: Drying of cape gooseberry fruits is a slow process because of the low permeability to moisture of the
Received 9 December 2012 fruit’s waxy skin. In this work, the effect of chemical pretreatments (sunflower oil/K2CO3 or olive oil/
Received in revised form 16 June 2013 K2CO3 at 28 °C, and NaOH/olive oil at 96 °C) and physical pretreatments (blanching) to break down the
Accepted 19 June 2013
waxy surface and accelerate moisture diffusion during drying, was assessed. Drying was carried out at
Available online 2 July 2013
60 °C and 2 m/s air velocity for 10 h. The lowest moisture content (0.27 kg water/kg db), the highest vita-
min C content (0.36 mg/g), and the greatest rehydration capacity (1.89) were obtained in fruits pretreated
Keywords:
with olive oil (9.48%) and K2CO3 (4.74%). However, the greatest changes in color (DE = 15.05) and chroma
Drying
Cape gooseberry
(DC = 9.03) were also associated to fruits pretreated with olive oil and K2CO3. The effective diffusivity of
Goldenberry water during drying was 7.37  1011 m2/s in pretreated samples compared with 6.611011 m2/s for
Pretreatment untreated samples.
Oils Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Cape gooseberries (Physalis peruviana) are popular fruits known
for their organoleptic properties (flavor, odor, and color), nutri-
tional value (vitamins A and C, potassium, phosphorous, and cal-
cium), and health benefits (Erkaya et al., 2012; Ramadan, 2011;
Puente et al., 2011). Three types of cape gooseberries originating
from Colombia, Kenya, and South Africa are cultivated worldwide.
Colombia is the world’s largest producer and exporter of this fruit,
followed by South Africa. The Colombian cape gooseberry fruit is
smaller in size (average weight is ca. 5 g), with vivid color and high
sugar content. From 2005 to 2008, Colombia exported 6305 tons of
fresh cape gooseberries, mainly to The Netherlands, Germany,
Great Britain, Belgium, and Sweden. Although cape gooseberries
are generally commercialized as fresh products, the fruits are also
used in sauces, syrups, and marmalades (Puente et al., 2011), or
dehydrated (similarly to grape raisins) for use in bakeries, cock-
tails, snacks, and cereal breakfast.
Drying is one of the most commonly used preservation methods
for fruits and vegetables, as longer shelf life is accomplished by
reducing bacterial growth and the final product volume and weight
is reduced, lowering transportation costs (Prabhanjan et al., 1995).
Solar drying is the cheapest method for drying whole fruits and
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: School of Food Engineering, Universidad del
Valle, A.A. 25360, Cali, Colombia. Tel.: +57 2 3212482; fax: +57 2 3212392.
E-mail addresses: joenvapa08@hotmail.com (J.E. Vásquez-Parra), claudia.
ochoa@correounivalle.edu.co (C.I. Ochoa-Martínez), manbusto@gmail.com
(M. Bustos-Parra).
vegetables. However, the long drying time and the risk of contam-
ination and spoilage due to exposure to an open environment are
major drawbacks associated to this method. Freeze drying can pro-
duce high quality products but is comparatively expensive and has
limited application in the drying of fruits. Hot air dryers are com-
monly used by the food industrial as they provide relatively fast,
uniform, and sanitary drying (Doymaz, 2010).
The drying of cape gooseberry fruits is limited by an external
waxy layer similar to that of grapes, that hinders water mass trans-
fer and reduces the drying rate. Chemical and physical pretreat-
ments were suggested by several authors to improve the drying
rate of whole fruits with waxy skins, e.g., grapes, cherries, plums,
apricots, blueberries, and tomatoes (Alvarez et al., 1994; Alzamora
et al., 1996; Carranza-Concha et al., 2012; Cinquanta et al., 2002; Di
Matteo et al., 2000; Doymaz and Pala, 2002; Doymaz, 2007; Pan-
gavhane et al., 1999; Piga et al., 2004; Shi et al., 1997). Even though
a large number of authors investigated the drying of whole fruits
with waxy skins, no reports exist on the drying of cape gooseberry
fruits pretreated with dipping solutions.
Pangavhane et al. (1999) found that the chemical dipping before
drying reduced the drying time and improved color, flavor, and
nutritional quality of the final product. Most commonly used
chemical pretreatment for drying whole fruits involve the dipping
of fresh fruits in dispersions of olive oil and potassium carbonate
(K2CO3), or a combination of fatty acid ethyl esters (e.g., ethyl ole-
ate) and K2CO3. Both constituents produce a synergistic reaction
that modifies the skin’s waxy structure, promoting a reduction of
the internal resistance to water diffusion (Christensen and Peacock,
1997). By using chemical dipping before drying, Doymaz and Pala

0260-8774/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.06.037
 J.E. Vásquez-Parra et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654
(2002) reduced the drying time of grapes from 48 h in control
without pretreatments to 22 h. Although Di Matteo et al. (2000) in-
creased the drying rate when using only ethyl oleate as chemical
dipping, most studies have concluded that improved drying rates
are achieved only when both components are added to the dipping
solution. Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) was also used as chemical pre-
treatment to improve dying rates (Shi et al., 1997; Pangavhane
et al., 1999; Tarhan, 2007; Dev et al., 2008; Carranza-Concha
et al., 2012). However, fruit products pretreated with NaOH exhib-
ited lower organoleptic quality properties relative to samples pre-
treated with oils and K2CO3 (Pangavhane et al., 1999). Shi et al.
(1997) found that NaOH (at concentrations below 7%) combined
with ethyl oleate produced less damage to the skin and improved
water mass transfer vs. fruits pretreated with NaOH only.
Blanching, skin puncturing, and surface abrasion are common
physical treatments, prior to the drying process. Blanching can be
carried out at high temperatures and short times (HTST) or at
low temperatures and long times (LTLT). The beneficial effects of
blanching depend on how the process is carried out (Lewicki,
2006).
The aim of this research was to evaluate the effect of chemical
and physical pretreatments commonly used before the drying of
fruits that have a waxy skin, on the rate of moisture loss, and the
physical and nutritional properties (color, vitamin C, and rehydra-
tion capacity) of cape gooseberry fruits (P. peruviana) subjected to
forced convection drying. The effect of pretreatment type, oil con-
centration and type, and immersion time was also evaluated.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Samples
Whole cape gooseberries with 19.17 + 1.35 mm average diame-
ter and weighing 4.42 + 1.19 g were used throughout the experi-
ments. Fruits were purchased in a local grocery store. The initial
moisture content was determined using a vacuum oven set at
70 °C for 6 h as described in AOAC method 934.06 (AOAC, 1990).
One hundred grams of fresh cape gooseberry fruits (ca. 20 fruits)
were used in each treatment. The fruits were rinsed in distilled
water and dried using paper towels before all experimental
procedures.
2.2. Pretreatments
Table 1 shows all chemical dipping and physical pretreatments
evaluated in these experiments. The fruit:solution ratio was ca.
1:2.7 (g/g) in all cases, and solutions were freshly prepared for each
treatment condition. To evaluate the effect of oil type, oil concen-
tration and immersion time, chemical pretreatments with oil and
K2CO3 (P1–P4) were carried out. In these pretreatments, the fruit
samples were dipped in solutions under constant temperature
(28 °C) and continuous stirring using a laboratory stirrer (Bochem
Instrumente GmbH, Germany) set at 288 rpm for 60 min (except
treatment P4 where samples were dipped for 20 min). To evaluate
Table 1
Dipping solutions description.
Treatment Solution
P1 Sunflower oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%)
P2 Olive oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%)
P3 Olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%)
P4 Olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%)
P5 Control
P6 Distilled water
P7 NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%)
649
the effect of chemical solution, chemical pretreatments with NaOH
and olive oil plus blanching (P7) were done. A physical pretreat-
ment (blanching) was also evaluated (P6). In the blanching pre-
treatment (P6 and P7), the samples were dipped at 96 °C during
15 s without agitation. After pretreatments, samples were dried
with absorbent paper. Each treatment was carried out in duplicate.
2.3. Drying
Forced convection drying was done using a tray dryer (model
UOP8, Armfield, Hampshire, England). The samples were spread
on a perforated tray suspended from a digital balance (OhausÒ
Adventurer™, USA; accuracy ±0.1 g). The samples were dried for
10 h and weight was recorded at 6 min intervals in the first
30 min of drying, at 10 min intervals from 30 to 120 min of drying,
at 15 min intervals from 2 to 4 h of drying, and at 30 min intervals
in the final 4–10 h dying period. Air temperature (60 °C) and speed
(2 m/s) were kept constant throughout the drying process. The rel-
ative humidity of the environment varied between 68% and 70%
during all experiments.
2.4. Response variables
The effect of chemical and physical pretreatment on the convec-
tive drying behavior of cape gooseberry fruits was evaluated by
measuring the moisture content of fruits throughout the drying
process (kg water/kg dry mass), together with the color (L, a,
b), vitamin C content (mg/g), and rehydration capacity of the dried
fruits.
2.4.1. Drying curves
The moisture content at several time intervals was calculated
assuming that the mass loss was only due to water loss during dry-
ing, using the following equation:
M 0 X 0  ðM0  MðtÞ Þ
X ðtÞ ¼ ð1Þ
MðtÞ
where X(t) is the moisture content (wb) at time t, Xo is the initial
moisture content (wb), Mo is the initial weight of the sample (g),
and M(t) is the weight of the sample (g) at time t.
The drying rate (R) was calculated as the derivative of X(t) over
time, following the equation:
dX ðtÞ
R¼ ð2Þ
dt
A graph of drying rate vs. moisture content (wb) was used to deter-
mine drying behavior.
2.4.2. Calculation of the effective moisture diffusivity
The effective diffusivity of water Deff (m2/s) is an important ki-
netic parameter associated to water transport from the drying
material to the surroundings (Barbosa-Cánovas and Vega-Mercado,
2000). Assuming a constant, one dimensional effective water diffu-
sivity, the following analytic solution of Fick’s second law for a
sphere is obtained (Crank, 1964):
 2 2 
X ðtÞ  X e 6 X
1
1 n p Deff t
¼ 2 exp  ð3Þ
X0  Xe p n¼1 n2 R2
where Deff is the effective diffusivity of water (m2/s), Xe is the equi-
librium moisture (wb), R is the radius of the sample (m), and n is a
positive integer which is large enough (n = 5) for Eq. (3) to converge.
Eq. (3) is valid when assuming constant moisture on the surface
of the drying material and uniform initial moisture distribution,
according to the following initial and boundary conditions
(Crank, 1964):
650 J.E. Vásquez-Parra et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654

X ðtÞ ¼ X 0 for t ¼ 0 and 0 < r < R 3. Results and discussion

dX=dr ¼ 0 for r ¼ 0 and t > 0
X ðtÞ ¼ X e for r ¼ R and t > 0 3.1. Moisture content

The initial moisture content of the fruit samples was

2.4.3. Color 80.08 + 1.33% (wb). Fig. 1 shows that higher moisture losses were
Color was determined for fresh and dried samples using a color- obtained when drying cape gooseberries pretreated using chemical
imeter (HunterLab ColorFlex, USA) based on the CIE Lab system (P1, P2, P3, P4), physical (P6), or combined methods (P7), relative
with D65 illumination and 10° angle. Parameters L (black–white), to the untreated fruits (P5). The kinetic behavior showed that after
a (green–red), and b (blue–yellow) were measured in triplicate. 10 h of drying, the largest water loss occurred in fruits from pre-
Color differences (DE) and chroma differences (DC) were deter- treatments P1, P2, and P7 (ca. 73% water loss), followed by P6
mined by using Eqs. (4)–(10); zero subscript refers to the initial (ca. 69% water loss). The final moisture content was ca. 21.5%
parameters (Ibarz, 1989). (wb) for fruits dried after pretreatments P1, P2, and P7, ca. 24.7%
(wb) for P6, and ca. 33.9% (wb) for untreated cape gooseberries
2  2 ð1=2Þ (P5). Fruits dried without pretreatments (P5) exhibited the highest
DE ¼ ½ðDL Þ þ ðDa Þ2 þ ðDb Þ  ð4Þ
final moisture content (52.9% wb). Vega-Gálvez et al. (2012) ob-
tained final moisture content of ca. 33% (db) after drying cape
DC  ¼ C   C 0 ð5Þ
gooseberry fruits at 60 °C for 12.6 h without pretreatment, which
agrees with the value obtained in this work by extrapolating the
DL ¼ L  L0 ð6Þ
data for treatment P5. On the other hand, only 9.5 h were required
to obtain a similar final moisture value in fruits dried after pre-
Da ¼ a  a0 ð7Þ treatments P1, P2, P6 and P7. These results confirm that the expo-
sure of cape gooseberries to a dipping pretreatment increase water
  
Db ¼ b  b 0 ð8Þ loss rate during drying, similarly to other fruits including apricots,
cherries and grapes (Doymaz, 2004a, 2007; Doymaz and Pala,
 2 ð1=2Þ 2002; Pangavhane et al., 1999).
C 0 ¼ ½ða0 Þ2 þ ðb0 Þ  ð9Þ
As follows from Fig. 1 and the analysis of variance, the type of
oil in solution (sunflower oil, P1; olive oil, P2) did not significantly
 2 ð1=2Þ
C  ¼ ½ða Þ2 þ ðb Þ  ð10Þ affect the kinetics of cape gooseberry fruit drying, and the final
moisture content was the same after 10 h of drying (0.27 g
water/g db). In addition, P2 and P3 curves revealed that water re-
2.4.4. Vitamin C content moval increased when a larger concentration of olive oil was used.
Vitamin C content (mg/g) was measured in both fresh the dried However, increasing the dipping time did not have a significant ef-
cape gooseberry fruits. Procedures 1.16981.0001 and 1.16970.0001 fect on the final moisture content of the fruits (P3 and P4). No sig-
Ò
suggested by the manufacturer were used (Reflectoquant ascorbic nificant differences were found when comparing between high
Ò
acid test for reflectometer RQflex , Merck KGaA, Germany, 2006). temperature–short time (HTST; 96 °C for 15 s) dipping pretreat-
The contents of ascorbic acid, the main biologically active form ments (water, P6; water + NaOH + olive oil, P7). Price et al. (2000)
of vitamin C (Valente et al., 2011) was determined by means of found that the crystalline to amorphous phase change occurring
the following expression: in the waxy cuticle of fruits exposed to high temperature, resulted
in increased skin water permeability. During plums drying, Tarhan
ðDEÞðVÞ
aa ¼ ð11Þ (2007) found that the positive effect of high dipping temperature
1000P was improved when adding NaOH; however, no evidence for this
where aa is ascorbic acid content (mg/g), DE is the value recorded in increase in mass transfer was found in the present work, probably
the reflectometer (mg/l), V is the volume of oxalic acid employed in
the test (ml), and P is the sample weight (g).
4.0

2.4.5. Rehydration capacity 3.5

The rehydration capacity (RC) of fruits was determined at the
3.0
end of drying. After 10 h of drying, three dehydrated cape goose-
X (kg water/kg db)

berries without fissures were selected and soaked in distilled water 2.5
at a 1:5 ratio of fruit to distilled water (w/w). Rehydration was car-
ried out at 25 °C for 14 h. Rehydration capacity was calculated as 2.0
follows (Funebo et al., 2000; Doymaz, 2010): 1.5
Weight of rehydrated sample 1.0
RC ¼ ð12Þ
Weight of dried sample
0.5

0.0
2.5. Statistical analysis 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time (h)
Analysis of variance was done using MINITAB 16 software
(Minitab, Inc., USA). Multiple comparisons for the mean were done Fig. 1. Evolution of moisture content of pretreated sample during air drying at 60 °C
using Tukey’s test (a = 0.05). Additionally, Microsoft Excel 2007 and 2 m/s [P1: sunflower oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P2: olive
oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P3: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%),
SOLVER tool was used for the calculation of the diffusion coeffi- t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P4: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 20 min, T: 28 °C; P5:
cient (Deff), by computing the first five terms in the infinite series control, P6: distilled water, t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C; P7: NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%),
given in Eq. (3). t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C].
 J.E. Vásquez-Parra et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654 651

due to the lower dipping temperature used by that author (60 °C) 1.0
or to the specific characteristics of the plum’s skin.
The maximum standard deviation in moisture content was 0.8

R (kg water/kg db -h)

0.094 g water/g db so error bars in Fig. 1 were omitted for clarity.
The analysis of variance indicated significant effect of the various
0.6
pretreatments on the final moisture content of cape gooseberry
fruits after drying (P < 0.05). Multiple comparisons among means
0.4
were done via Tukey’s test and results are shown in Table 2. The
value of Ta indicated that the moisture content of fruits dried after
pretreatments P1, P2, P6, and P7 was significantly different from 0.2
that of fruits dried after pretreatments P3, P4, and P5.
Fig. 2 shows the drying rate curves of cape gooseberries after 0.0
each pretreatment. Note that the maximum drying rates occurred 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0
for pretreatments P1 and P2, followed by P6 and P7, whereas the X (kg water/kg db)
minimum drying rates were exhibited by the untreated fruits.
Fig. 2. Drying rate (R) as a function of moisture content for pretreated gooseberry
Moreover, the entire drying process occurred under the falling rate fruits during air drying at 60 °C and 2 m/s [P1: sunflower oil (9.48%) + K2CO3
period (no constant rate period was found). This can be explained (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P2: olive oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C;
by the loss of fruit firmness, subsequent shrinkage (see photo- P3: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P4: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3
graphic evidence below), and reduction in water concentration. (4.74%), t: 20 min, T: 28 °C; P5: control, P6: distilled water, t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C; P7:
NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%), t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C].
Barbosa-Cánovas and Vega-Mercado (2000) also mentioned the
reduction in fruit porosity as a potential reason for a drying rate
reduction. Sample P5 (untreated fruits) showed a very low and Table 3
approximately constant drying rate regardless of moisture content, Final moisture content (Xf), water activity (aw), and diffusion coefficient (Deff) of cape
probably due to the skin’s low water permeability, as previously gooseberry fruits dried after chemical and physical pretreatments.
discussed. Xf (kg water/kg db) Xf (kg water/kg wb) aw Deff  1011 (m2/s)
Using the parameters for the BET equation obtained by Cortés
P1 0.274 0.215ª 0.5828 7.42
et al. (2012) for the sorption isotherm of cape gooseberry fruits P2 0.272 0.214ª 0.5812 7.37
at 60 °C, the water activity of the final samples was calculated P3 0.635 0.388b 0.8083 7.15
and is shown in Table 3. Results indicated that further drying P4 0.643 0.391b 0.8104 7.08
would be needed to reduce the water activity to levels were the P5 1.125 0.529c 0.8900 6.61
P6 0.328 0.247ª 0.6448 7.28
growth of spoilage microorganism is prevented (<0.5). By taking P7 0.282 0.220ª 0.5938 7.34
into account the low drying rates shown in Fig. 2 during 10 h of
drying, only pretreatments P1, P2, P6 and P7 would be feasible pro- P1: sunflower oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P2: olive oil
(9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P3: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t:
cessing options. 60 min, T: 28 °C; P4: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 20 min, T: 28 °C; P5:
control, P6: distilled water, t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C; P7: NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%),
t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C. Means followed by the same letter are not significantly dif-
3.2. Effective moisture diffusivity ferent using Tukey’s test (alpha = 0.05).

To calculate the effective water diffusivity, the equilibrium
moisture content was experimentally determined as 0.15 g wa-
ter/g db after 16 h of drying. Vega-Gálvez et al. (2012) estimated
an equilibrium moisture content of 0.12 g water/g db after drying
cape gooseberries at 60 °C, from a desorption isotherm modeled
by means of the GAB equation. A similar value of equilibrium mois-
ture was obtained by means of the BET equation by Cortés et al.
(2012). Values of the effective water diffusivity varied between
6.61  1011 and 7.42  1011 m2/s, within the range exhibited
by most food materials (1011 to 109 m2/s; Madamba et al.,
1996). Table 3 shows that all pretreatments but P5, increased
water diffusivity in cape gooseberries. Abdelhaq and Labuza
(1987) obtained water diffusivity values from 1 to 3  1011 m2/s
during the drying of apricots at temperature ranging from 50 °C
to 80 °C, Doymaz (2004b) obtained values from 2.17 to
Table 2
Tukey’s paired multiple comparison test for the effect of pretreatments on the
moisture content of cape gooseberry fruits after drying.
2.40  1010 m2/s in plums, and Doymaz (2006) obtained values
from 3.82  1010 to 1.28  109 m2/s in black grapes.
Chemical pretreatments using potassium carbonate and olive or
sunflower oils (e.g., P1, P2, P3, and P4) modify the cuticle of the
fruit, resulting in a synergistic increase of water permeability.
According to Christensen and Peacock (1997), fatty acids modify
the primary structure the external waxy layer of fruits, reducing
the surface tension. Upon further skin penetration, these fatty acids
interact with soluble waxes and establish hydrophilic connections
or ‘‘water paths’’ between the fruit’s surface and water-rich paren-
chymal cells. This phenomenon creates a continuum of water from
within the fruit, through the cuticle membrane, to the surface,
facilitating water flow. For its part, K2CO3 neutralizes free fatty
acids present on or within the skin (e.g., waxes), turning them into
potassium salts. In the case of thermal pretreatments (e.g., P6 and
P7), high temperature causes loss of turgidity and affect the perme-
ability of the plant tissue due to damage of cell membrane struc-
tures (Christensen and Peacock, 1997; Dev et al., 2008).

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 3.3. Color
P1 0.00
P2 0.00 0.00
Color changes were inversely proportional to the final moisture
P3 0.36 0.37 0.00 content (Table 3). Observed color changes (Table 4) could be attrib-
P4 0.37 0.37 0.01 0.00 uted to both the pretreatments and the final moisture content of
P5 0.85 0.85 0.49 0.48 0.00 the fruit, as all fruits were evaluated after a fixed drying time
P6 0.06 0.06 0.31 0.31 0.79 0.00
(10 h). Treatments with lower moisture content showed greater
P7 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.36 0.84 0.05 0.00
color change (except treatment P6), which was attributed to either
Value of Ta > 0.18 indicate that pretreatments are significantly different. higher concentration of pigments due to moisture loss or the
652 J.E. Vásquez-Parra et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654

Table 4 moisture content (non-enzymatic reactions are accelerated at

Color evaluation (CIELab system) of cape gooseberry fruits dried after chemical and low moisture).
physical pretreatments.
Although fruits from P6 (96 °C for 15 s) also exhibited a low
Treatment Parameters moisture content at the end of the drying process, no significant
L a b DE  DC differences were found between fruit from P6 and P5. The lack of
Fresh 36.81 16.71 37.47 – –
differences was probably explained by the inhibition of enzymatic
browning due to PPO inactivation in fruits subjected to HTST pre-
treatments. On the other hand, fruits from pretreatment P7 (HTST
and NaOH/oil) also exhibited significant color loss, probably due to
P1 27.54 17.37 28.21 13.13a 7.89a the damage or degradation of the chromoplasts present in the
fruit’s skin (Shi et al., 1997) or the damaging effect of the oil.
Chroma (C) represents color saturation varying from dull colors
P2 26.46 17.56 26.74 15.05b 9.02a
(low chroma values) to vivid colors (high chroma values) (Ergunes
and Tarhan, 2006). The variation of chroma (DC) was negative in
fruit from almost all pretreatments, indicating that the drying pro-
cess and use of pretreatments resulted in dehydrated fruit exhibit-
P3 26.58 17.61 31.58 11.84ac 4.87b ing duller colors. The ANOVA showed significant differences in the
variation of chroma among fruits due to the various pretreatments.
Fruits from pretreatment P1 and P2 were significantly different in
P4 26.17 17.69 34.96 10.98cd 1.85c
variation of chroma vs. fruits from the other pretreatments, and
fruit dried after pretreatment P3 and P7 were significantly differ-
ent from fruits dried after pretreatments P4, P5, and P6. This differ-
ence in chroma, saturation, or color intensity was evident when
P5 32.16 17.26 39.86 5.66e 2.44d observing the images shown in Table 4. The visual appearance of
the fruits confirmed that the dull to vivid color followed the pro-
gression P1 and P2 < P3 and P7 < P6 and P4.
Fruits dried after pretreatment P5 showed greater C value than
P6 28.43 17.03 35.22 8.71ef 1.90c
that of fresh samples. As follows from Table 4, L, b values de-
creased (darker and less yellowness) and a values increased (more
redish) after treatments, also indicating browning reactions (Shi
P7 29.54 19.24 31.29 9.98df 4.27b et al., 1997; Ergunes and Tarhan, 2006). Overall, samples subjected
to HTST blanching (96 °C for 15 s) underwent the least color dam-
age as compared to all other pretreatments, which agreed with the
reports by Badifu et al. (1995) and Piga et al. (2004) as cited by
P1: sunflower oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P2: olive oil Lewicki (2006).
(9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P3: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t:
60 min, T: 28 °C; P4: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 20 min, T: 28 °C; P5:
control, P6: distilled water, t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C; P7: NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%), 3.4. Vitamin C content
t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C. Means followed by the same letter are not significantly dif-
ferent using Tukey’s test (alpha = 0.05).
The vitamin C content of fresh samples was 0.4 ± 0.04 mg/g
(2.004 mg/g db), in agreement with previous reports indicating
non-enzymatic (Maillard) browning initiated after cell breakdown vitamin C content in cape gooseberry fruits ranging from 0.33 to
and promoted by high temperature during drying (Christensen and 0.68 mg/g (Vasco et al., 2008; NRC, 1989; Ramadan, 2011; Valente
Peacock, 1997). Cape gooseberry fruits contain 15% soluble solids, et al., 2011). Fig. 3 shows the vitamin C content of cape gooseber-
mainly sucrose and fructose (Ramadan, 2011). ries after drying (dry basis). Pretreatments P1, P2, P3, and P4
High levels of phenolic compounds were reported for the cape
gooseberry fruit by Ramadan (2011) and enzymatic browning
(i.e., the action of polyphenol oxidase (PPO) over phenolic com-
pounds in presence of oxygen) could also explain the browning
of fruits after drying. By comparing treatments that had a similar
final moisture content, it was found that fruits blanched before
drying (P6 and P7) exhibited lighter color (lower L values) that
fruits pretreated at 28 °C (P1 and P2). This observation was in
agreement with Christensen and Peacock (1997) and Ergunes and
Tarhan (2006) who found that heating fruits to 88–98 °C for 2–
3 min deactivated the enzyme polyphenol oxidase resulting in bet-
ter carotenoids retention.
A significant difference was found in the color difference (DE)
of dried fruits due to pretreatments (P < 0.05). The Tukey test
showed that DE of fruits from pretreatment P5 (control) was sig-
nificantly lower than DE of fruit from P1, P2, P3, P4, and P7. The oil Fig. 3. Effect of chemical and physical pretreatments on the vitamin C content of
used in treatments P1–P4, and P7 probably contributed to intensi- cape gooseberry fruits after air drying at 60 °C and 2 m/s [P1: sunflower oil
fying the concentration of carotenoids responsible for the colora- (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P2: olive oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t:
tion of these fruits by forming a protective layer on the surface 60 min, T: 28 °C; P3: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P4: olive
oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 20 min, T: 28 °C; P5: control, P6: distilled water, t:
of the fruits. Fruits from P5 (untreated controls) were also less af-
0.25 min, T: 96 °C; P7: NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%), t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C; means
fected by non-enzymatic reactions due to their higher final followed by the same letter are not significantly different].
 J.E. Vásquez-Parra et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654
Fig. 4. Effect of chemical and physical pretreatments on the rehydration capacity of
cape gooseberry fruits after air drying at 60 °C and 2 m/s [P1: sunflower oil
(9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t:60 min, T: 28 °C; P2: olive oil (9.48%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t:
60 min, T: 28 °C; P3: olive oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 60 min, T: 28 °C; P4: olive
oil (0.47%) + K2CO3 (4.74%), t: 20 min, T: 28 °C; P5: control, P6: distilled water, t:
0.25 min, T: 96 °C; P7: NaOH (1.5%) + olive oil (4.74%), t: 0.25 min, T: 96 °C; means
followed by the same letter are not significantly different].
carried out at low temperatures (28 °C) exhibited the lowest loss of
vitamin C of fruits after drying vs. pretreatments P6 and P7, carried
out at 96 °C. Pretreatments P6 and P7 caused additional vitamin
decay during drying due to the thermo-sensitivity of vitamin C,
being the pretreatments that retained the least amount of vitamin
C (13%), whereas the exposure of cape gooseberries to pretreat-
ment P2 yielded 23% retention vitamin C. For drying raisins, Car-
ranza-Concha et al. (2012) also found higher losses of ascorbic
acid when using a pretreatment with NaOH at 95 °C.
Control samples (no pretreatment, P5) showed low vitamin C
losses when compared to the pretreated fruits. According to Car-
ranza-Concha et al. (2012), the lack of major changes in the skin
of control samples protected ascorbic acid from the effects of oxy-
gen during drying. However, since then final moisture content of
control samples was comparatively high after 10 h drying, longer
drying times would be required, resulting in further vitamin C
losses.
The analysis of variance revealed significant differences in the
mean values of vitamin C content of dried cape gooseberry due
to pretreatments (P < 0.05). The ascorbic acid contents of cape
gooseberries for pretreatments P6 and P7 was different from that
for P1, P2, P3 and P4, and P2 was different from all pretreatments.
The large final content of vitamin C in fruits dried after pretreat-
ment P2 compared to P1 (only difference being the type of oil),
was probably explained by the low content of vitamin E (tocoph-
erol) in olive oil (216.8 mg/kg) vs. sunflower oil (634.4 mg/kg)
(Tuberoso et al., 2007). Antioxidants protect each other and en-
hance resistance to oxidation. In vitro studies showed that vitamin
E can regenerate by donating free radicals to vitamin C (Attorri
et al., 2010; Lewis, 2004) and these results merit further studies
on the use of specific oils as pretreatments to improve dying kinet-
ics and quality of dried fruits.
3.5. Rehydration capacity
Fig. 4 shows the effect of pretreatments on the rehydration
capacity of dried cape gooseberry fruits. All pretreatments in-
creased the rehydration capacity of cape gooseberries dried for
10 h. The highest rehydration capacity was found in fruits dried
after pretreatment P2 (1.89) and P1 (1.81), while the lowest was
found in P3 (1.11) and P5 (1.09). According to Doymaz (2008)
and Doymaz and Ismail (2011), alkaline ethyl oleate pretreatments
yield structurally compact products after drying, with improved
water retention. Pangavhane et al. (1999), found that treatments
with hot dipping solutions (e.g., P6 and P7) cause ruptures and per-
forations in the waxy cuticle that increase the drying rate, but re-
duce the water retention capacity in the rehydration process. The
653
other treatments (P3, P4, and P5) possibly maintained the waxy
layer, thus blocking the transfer of water to the interior of the
sample.
ANOVA established the existence of a significant difference in
mean values of the rehydration capacity of cape gooseberry fruits
among pretreatments after drying (P < 0.05). Cape gooseberries
dried after pretreatments P1 and P2 had significantly improved
water absorption capacity vs. fruits from other pretreatments. Re-
sults showed that pretreatments of cape gooseberry fruits with oil
at high concentrations (9.48%) for 1 h allowed improved water
absorption after drying. No significant differences were found be-
tween dried fruits from pretreatments P1 and P2. Although pre-
treatment P6 resulted in good color retention, its rehydration
capacity was low.
4. Conclusions
All dipping pretreatments studied significantly reduced the
moisture content of dried cape gooseberries relative to the un-
treated fruits. Pretreatments with oil (9.48%) and K2CO3 (4.74%)
at 28 °C and pretreatments with distilled water or NaOH/oil at
96 °C exhibited the highest moisture losses. The type of oil and
the time of dipping had no significant effect on the moisture loss,
whereas the concentration of oil significantly affected moisture
loss. Although treatments with distilled water or NaOH/oil at
96 °C showed high moisture losses and low change in color, the
loss of vitamin C was the largest and the fruit’s rehydration capac-
ity was comparatively low.
Pretreatment with a solution of olive oil (9.48%) and K2CO3
(4.74%) was the best option considering the most measured re-
sponse variables. The effective diffusivity of water during drying
is larger for cape gooseberries exposed to chemical or physical pre-
treatment relative to untreated fruits.
References
Abdelhaq, E.H., Labuza, T.P., 1987. Air drying characteristics of apricots. Journal of
Food Science 52, 342–345.
Alvarez, C.A., Aguerre, R., Gomez, S., Vidales, S., Alzamora, S.M., Gerschenson, L.N.,
1994. Effect of blanching and glucose dipping pre-treatment on air-drying
behavior of strawberries. In: Argaiz, A., Lopez-Malo, A., Palou, E., Corte, P. (Eds.),
Symposium on the Properties of Water. Proceedings of the Poster Session,
Universidad de los Américas, Mexico, pp. 11–14.
Alzamora, S.M., Greschenson, L.M., Vidales, S.L., Nieto, A., 1996. Structural changes
in the minimal processing of fruits; some effects of blanching and sugar
impregnation. In: Fito, P., Ortega-Rodriguez, E., Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V. (Eds.),
Food Engineering 2000. Chapman & Hall, New York, pp. 117–139.
AOAC, 1990. Official Methods of Analysis of the Association of Official Agricultural
Chemists, 13th ed. Washington, DC.
Attorri, L., Di Biase, A., Di Benedetto, R., Rigato, P., Di Virgilio, A., Salvati, S., 2010.
Micronutrient-enriched rapeseed oils reduce cardiovascular disease risk factors
in rats fed a high-fat diet. Atherosclerosis 213, 422–428.
Badifu, G.I.O., Akpapunam, M.A., Mgbemere, V.M., 1995. The fate of beta-carotene in
processed leaves of fluted pumpkin (Telfairia occidentalis Hook f.); a popular
vegetable in Nigerian diet. Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 48, 141–147.
Barbosa-Cánovas, G., Vega-Mercado, H., 2000. Deshidratación de alimentos.
Editorial Acribia S.A, Zaragoza (España).
Carranza-Concha, J., Benlloch, M., Camacho, M.M., Martínez-Navarrete, N., 2012.
Effects of drying and pretreatment on the nutritional and functional quality of
raisins. Food and Bioproducts Processing 90, 243–248.
Christensen, L.P., Peacock, W.L., 1997. The raisin drying process. Harvesting and
Drying Raisin Grapes (Chapter 27).
Cinquanta, L., Di Matteo, M., Esti, M., 2002. Physical pretreatment of plums (Prunus
domestica) Part 2. Effect on the quality characteristics of different prune
cultivars. Food Chemistry 79, 233–238.
Cortés, F.B., Betancourt, A., Rojano, B., López, V., Arenas, E., 2012. Sorption
thermodynamics properties evaluation of the cape gooseberry (Physalis
peruviana L.). Biotecnología en el sector agropecuario y agroindustrial 10 (1),
32–41 (in Spanish).
Crank, J., 1964. The Mathematics of Diffusion. University Press, Oxford.
Dev, S.R.S., Padmini, T., Adedeji, A., Gariépy, Y., Raghavan, G.S.V., 2008. A
comparative study on the effect of chemical, microwave, and pulsed electric
pretreatments on convective drying and quality of raisins. Drying Technology
26, 1238–1243.
654 J.E. Vásquez-Parra et al. / Journal of Food Engineering 119 (2013) 648–654
Di Matteo, M., Cinquanta, L., Galiero, G., Crescitelli, S., 2000. Effect of a novel
physical pretreatment process on the drying kinetics of seedless grapes. Journal
of Food Engineering 46, 83–89.
Doymaz, I., 2004a. Effect of pre-treatments using potassium metabisulphide and
alkaline ethyl oleate on the drying kinetics of apricots. Biosystems Engineering
89, 281–287.
Doymaz, I., 2004b. Effect of dipping treatment on air drying of plums. Journal of
Food Engineering 64, 465–470.
Doymaz, I., 2006. Drying kinetics of black grapes treated with different solutions.
Journal of Food Engineering 76, 212–217.
Doymaz, I., 2007. Influence of pretreatment solution on the drying of sour cherry.
Journal of Food Engineering 78, 591–596.
Doymaz, I., 2008. Convective drying kinetics of strawberry. Chemical Engineering
and Processing 47, 914–919.
Doymaz, I., 2010. Effect of citric acid and blanching pre-treatments on drying and
rehydration of Amasya red apples. Food and Bioproducts Processing 88, 124–
132.
Doymaz, I., Ismail, O., 2011. Drying characteristics of sweet cherry. Food and
Bioproducts Processing 89, 31–38.
Doymaz, I., Pala, M., 2002. The effects of dipping pretreatments on air-drying rates
of the seedless grapes. Journal of Food Engineering 52, 413–417.
Ergunes, G., Tarhan, S., 2006. Color retention of red pepers by chemical
pretreatments during greenhouse and open sun drying. Journal of Food
Engineering 76, 446–452.
Erkaya, T., Daðdemir, E., Engül, M., 2012. Influence of cape gooseberry (Physalis
peruviana L.) addition on the chemical and sensory characteristics and mineral
concentrations of ice cream. Food Research International 45, 331–335.
Funebo, T., Ahrné, L., Kidman, S., Langton, M., Skjöldebrand, C., 2000. Microwave
heat treatment of apple before air dehydration – effects on physical properties
and microstructure. Journal of Food Engineering 46, 173–182.
Ibarz, A., 1989. El color como parámetro de caracterización de alimentos. Theknos
112, 48–52.
Lewicki, P., 2006. Design of hot air drying for better foods. Review. Trends in Food
Science & Technology 17, 153–163.
Lewis, G.R.J., 2004. Should doctors discourage nutritional supplementation? A
cardiovascular perspective. Heart Lung and Circulation 13, 245–251.
Madamba, P.S., Griscoll, R.H., Buckle, K.A., 1996. The thin-layer drying
characteristics of garlic slices. Journal of Food Engineering 29, 75–97.
Merck KGaA, 2006. Ascorbic acid in milk powder. Reflectometric determination
after reaction with molybdophosphoric acid to phosphomolybdenum blue.
Catalogs 1169810001 and 1169700001, 64271 Darmstadt, Germany.
NRC (National Research Council), 1989. Goldenberry (Cape Gooseberry). Lost Crops
of the Incas: Little-Known Plants of the Andes With Promise for Worldwide
Cultivation. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp. 240–251.
Pangavhane, D., Sawhney, R., Sarsavadia, P., 1999. Effect of various dipping
pretreatment on drying kinetics of Thompson seedless grapes. Journal of Food
Engineering 39, 211–216.
Piga, A., Poiana, M., Pinna, I., Agabbio, M., Mincione, A., 2004. Drying performance of
five Italian apricot cultivars. Sciences des Aliments 24, 247–259.
Prabhanjan, D.G., Ramaswamy, H.S., Raghavan, G.S.V., 1995. Microwave assisted
convective air drying of thin layer carrots. Journal of Food Engineering 25, 283–
293.
Price, W., Sabarez, H., Storey, R., Back, P., 2000. Role of the waxi skin layer in
moisture loss during dehydration of prunes. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry 48, 4193–4198.
Puente, L.A., Pinto-Muñoz, C.A., Castro, E.S., Cortés, M., 2011. Physalis peruviana
Linnaeus, the multiple properties of a highly functional fruit: a review. Food
Research International 44, 1733–1740.
Ramadan, M.F., 2011. Bioactive phytochemicals, nutritional value, and functional
properties of cape gooseberry (Physalis peruviana): an overview. Food Research
International 44, 1830–1836.
Shi, J., Le Maguer, M., Wang, S., Liptay, A., 1997. Application of osmotic treatment in
tomato processing – effect of skin treatments on mass transfer in osmotic
dehydration of tomatoes. Food Research International 30, 669–674.
Tarhan, S., 2007. Selection of chemical and thermal pretreatment combination for
plum drying at low and moderate drying air temperatures. Journal of Food
Engineering 79, 255–260.
Tuberoso, C.I.G., Kowalczyk, A., Sarritzu, E., Cabras, P., 2007. Determination of
antioxidant compounds and antioxidant activity in commercial oilseeds for
food use. Food Chemistry 103, 1494–1501.
Valente, A., Gonçalves Albuquerque, T., Sanches-Silva, A., Costa, H.S., 2011. Ascorbic
acid content in exotic fruits: a contribution to produce quality data for food
composition databases. Food Research International 44, 2237–2242.
Vasco, C., Ruales, J., Kamal-Eldin, A., 2008. Total phenolic compounds and
antioxidant capacities of major fruits from Ecuador. Food Chemistry 111,
816–823.
Vega-Gálvez, A., Puente-Díaz, L., Lemus-Mondaca, R., Miranda, M., Torres, M.J., 2012.
Mathematical modeling of thin-layer drying kinetics of cape gooseberry
(Physalis peruviana L.). Journal of Food Processing and Preservation. http://
dx.doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.12024.