L'utilizzazione dei campi elettrici pulsati per l ... · Unpasteurized milk or juice Salmonella ,...
Transcript of L'utilizzazione dei campi elettrici pulsati per l ... · Unpasteurized milk or juice Salmonella ,...
Giovanna Ferrari Dipartmento di Ingegneria Industriale ProdAl Scarl – Centro di Competenza Produzioni Agro-Alimentari Università di Salerno – 84084 Fisciano (SA) [email protected] www.prodalricerche.it
L'utilizzazione dei campi elettrici pulsati per
l'inattivazione microbica e l'elettroporazione di
membrane vegetali e della luce pulsata nel
trattamento di alimenti
Milano, 7 novembre 2013
UNISA & PRODAL SCARL
•Schools buildings •Laboratories •Canteen •Dormitories •Sport facilities •Campus transportation system
The Campus is located in Fisciano,12 km from Salerno
UNISA
Primary production
First transformation
Second transformation
… n transformation
Distribution and sale
Consumer
Traceability
Input
Process 1
Process 2
Process … n
Output
Integrated supply chain
Prodal is an Applied Research Centre which is comprised of 7
research institutes (over 400 people) that deals with product
innovation and process innovation in the food industry.
The Centre operates by integrating multidisciplinary skills of the
human resources in order to support agrifood companies
throughout the supply chain.
PRODAL SCARL
At present, ProdAl partners are:
University of Salerno
University of Napoli “Federico II”
Second University of Napoli
University of Napoli “Parthenope”
University of Sannio
National Research Council
Experimental Station SSICA – Angri
PRODAL SCARL
The Board of directors, chairman Professor Giovanna Ferrari.
The Scientific Committee, advising, proposing and addressing the scientific activities of the company, chairman Professor Giorgio Donsì.
PRODAL SCARL
The Mission of ProdAl is to promote the technology transfer,
transforming the experimental development into usable
innovation.
ProdAl is devoted to satisfy the continuously monitored needs of the agri-food productive chain. The offer is divided into 4 Strategic Business Units (SBU):
SBU 1 – Applied research and innovation (core
business)
SBU 2 – Technical consulting
SBU 3 – Strategic and marketing consulting
SBU 4 – Training
PRODAL SCARL
SBU 1 - Applied research and innovation
Primary Production
Transformation
Final Product
Qualifying plant and
animal raw material
Process innovation
Food Packaging
Fingerprinting
regional typical
products
Packing
Product innovation
Recovery and exploitation of waste products
By-products
PRODAL SCARL
Innovative Technologies in use:
• PULSED ELECTRIC FIELDS
• OHMIC HEATING
• HIGH INTENSITY PULSED LIGHT
• HIGH HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE
• HIGH PRESSURE HOMOGENIZATION
• OZONIZATION
PROCESS INNOVATION
FOOD PRESERVATION
Preserving agricultural and animal products for sufficient time after harvesting and/or hunting has been one of the biggest issues since the beginning of human civilization
FOOD PROCESSING
FOOD ALTERATIONS
Biological causes Enzymes
Microorganisms
Chemical-physical causes Radiations
Heat
Change of water content
WHY PROCESSING FOOD?
CONSEQUENCES OF ALTERATION PROCESSES
Occurrence of anomalous organoleptic characteristics (color, odor, taste, texture)
Decay and loss of nutritional value
Toxicity
Reduction of commercial value
WHY PROCESSING FOOD?
UNIT OPERATIONS IN FOOD PRESERVATION
Reduction of the availability of water for microbial growth
Microbial inactivation
FOOD PROCESSING
FOODBORNE DISEASES More than 200 known diseases are transmitted through food. The causes of foodborne illness include viruses, bacteria, parasites, toxins, metals, and prions. The symptoms of foodborne illness range from mild gastroenteritis to life-threatening neurologic (ex. botulism; Clostridium botulinum), hepatic (ex. Hepatitis A), and renal syndromes (ex. E. coli O157:H7). Foodborne diseases cause about 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths in the United States each year.
WHY PROCESSING FOODS?
Known pathogens account for an estimated 14 million illnesses, 60,000 hospitalizations, and 1,800 deaths. Salmonella, Listeria, and Toxoplasma, are responsible for 1,500 deaths each year. More than 75% of these diseases are caused by known pathogens, while unknown agents account for the remaining 62 million illnesses, 265,000 hospitalizations, and 3,200 deaths. Surveillance of foodborne illness is complicated by several factors. They are frequently not reported.
WHY PROCESSING FOODS?
Although foodborne illnesses can be severe or even fatal, milder cases are often not detected through routine surveillance. Second, many pathogens transmitted through food are also spread through water or from person to person, thus obscuring the role of foodborne transmission. Finally, some proportion of foodborne illness is caused by pathogens or agents that have not yet been identified and thus cannot be diagnosed. Many of the pathogens of greatest concern today (e.g., Campylobacter jejuni, Escherichia coli O157:H7, Listeria monocytogenes, Cyclospora cayetanensis) were not recognized as causes of foodborne illness just 20 years ago.
WHY PROCESSING FOODS?
Food Items That Help in the Differential Diagnosis of Foodborne Disease
Item Commonly associated microbes*
Raw seafood Vibrio sp., Hepatitis A virus, Noroviruses (Norwalk-like viruses)
Raw eggs Salmonella
Undercooked meat or
poultry
Salmonella and Campylobacter species, STEC**, Clostridium
perfringens,
Unpasteurized milk or juice Salmonella, Campylobacter, and Yersinia species, STEC
Unpasteurized soft cheeses Salmonella, Campylobacter, Yersinia, and Listeria sp., STEC
Home-made canned goods Clostridium botulinum (botulism)
Raw hot dogs, deli meat Listeria sp.
* Commonly associated organisms, not fully comprehensive.
**STEC = Shiga toxin-producing E coli.
WHY PROCESSING FOODS?
Most Common Microbial Causes of Foodborne Disease*
Disease or agent Estimated total
cases
Percentage
of foodborne
transmission
Noroviruses (Norwalk-like viruses) 23,000,000 40
Campylobacter species 2,500,000 80
Giardia lamblia 2,000,000 10
Salmonella 1,400,000 95
Shigella 450,000 20
Cryptosporidium parvum 300,000 10
Clostridium species 250,000 100
Toxoplasma gondii 225,000 50
Staphylococcus aureus 185,000 100
Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia
coli (STEC)
110,000 85
Yersinia enterocolitica 100,000 90
Bacillus cereus 27,000 100
Cyclospora cayetanensis 16,000 90
Listeria monocytogenes 2,500 99
*Data from Mead et al[1]
Major Foodborne Microbes by Major Presenting Gastrointestinal Symptom*
Major presenting
symptom
Probable Microbes Incubation
Period
Probable food sources
Vomiting Staphylococcus aureus 1-6 hours Prepared food (eg, salads, dairy,
meat)
Bacillus cereus 1-6 hours Rice, meat
Noroviruses (Norwalk-
like viruses)
24-48 hours Shellfish, prepared food, salads,
sandwiches, fruit
Watery diarrhea Clostridium perfringens 8-16 hours Meat, poultry, gravy
Enteric viruses 10-72 hours Feces-contaminated food or water
Enterotoxigenic
Escherichia coli
1-3 days Feces- contaminated food or water
Cyclospora cayetanensis 1-11 days Imported berries, basil.
Clostridium parvum 2-28 days Vegetables, fruit, unpasteurized
milk, water
Inflammatory
diarrhea
Vibrio parahemolyticus 2-48 hours Raw shellfish
Nontyphoidal Salmonella
species
1-3 days Eggs, poultry, meat, unpasteurized
milk or juice, fresh produce
Shigella species 1-3 days Feces-contaminated food and water
Shiga toxin-producing
Escherichia coli
1-8 days Ground beef, unpasteurized milk,
and juice, raw vegetables, water
Campylobacter species 2-5 days Poultry, unpasteurized milk, water
*Modified from Centers for Disease Control.[2]
Major Foodborne Microbes That Usually Have No Gastrointestinal
Manifestations*
Major type of
presenting
symptom
Probable microbes Incubation
period Likely food sources
Neurologic Scromboid 1 minute-3
hours
Bluefin, tuna, skipjack, mackerel, marlin,
mahi mahi
Ciguatara toxin 2-6 hours Large reef fish (eg, grouper, red snapper,
amberjack, barracuda)
Clostridium
botulinum (botulism)
12-72 hours Home-canned foods, fermented fish,
herb-infused oils, bottled garlic, foods
held warm for long periods
Systemic Vibrio vulnificus 1-7 days Shellfish
Listeria
monocytogenes
(listeriosis)
2-6 weeks Deli meats, hot dogs, unpasteurized soft
cheese and milk
Hepatitic Hepatitis A 15-50 days Shellfish, foods prepared by a food-
handler
*Modified from Centers for Disease Control.[2]
UNIT OPERATIONS IN FOOD PRESERVATION
Microbial inactivation Among the preservation methods those based on thermal treatments, carried out at temperatures between 60 and 120 °C with time from few seconds to some hour, are the most traditional and accepted by regulatory authorities.
FOOD PROCESSING: MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
A pasteurization cycle includes three phases: - Heating - Holding - Cooling
Tem
peratu
re (
°C
)
Time (min)
Heating Holding Cooling
FOOD PROCESSING: MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
- Color changes
- Structural changes (loss of consistency)
- Viscosity changes
- Loss of volatiles and thermo-labile compounds (aroma, vitamins)
- Lipids oxidation
- Browning
- Structural changes (shrinkage, case hardening)
- Structure damage due to crystals growth with loss of
constituents
EFFECTS OF PROCESSING ON FOOD PRODUCTS
UNIT OPERATION IN FOOD PROCESSING
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 10 -1
10 0
10 1
10 2
10 3
t (min)
T (°C)
THERMAL DAMAGE OSMOSIS
CRIOCON-
CENTRA-
TION REVERSE
HIGH
PRESSURE EVAPO-
RATION
HTST
UHTST
OSMOSIS
PEF
NEEDS FOR INNOVATION
In the recent years not only the shelf life of foods but also the quality of processed products became important for the consumers The increasing interests of consumers towards minimal processed foods, which in turn rises the prediction of a rapid and substantial reduction of chemical additives in food processing, stimulated efforts towards the set up of low impact treatments
PROCESS INNOVATION
Development of conceptually new unit operations to perform in a more efficient way and/or
under higher quality requirements a specific stage
in a food production line
Set up new processes based on the integration in a different flow sheet of
conventional unit operations and on the integration and
optimization of their performances
ELECTRO TECHNOLOGIES
Non-thermal technology (PEF)
PULSED ELECTRIC FIELDS IN FOOD PROCESSING
PEF for microbial and enzymatic inactivation: pasteurization
PEF for vegetable tissues permeabilization to improve mass transfer, decrease processing time and increase process throughput: drying, extraction, juice expression
PEF MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
1920 Pasteurization of Milk by Electropure Process Effect: Resistive heating and formation of reactive
radicals and molecules at the electrodes
1949 Plasmolysis of Plant Materials B.L. Flaumenbaum, Odessa
1960 Patent by H. Doevenspeck Existence of a ´non-thermal´ effect on microorganisms
exposed to pulsed electric fields produced by capacitor
discharges
1967 Sale & Hamilton Microbial inactivation depending on: field strength discharge duration
size and shape of microorganisms
1980-1983 Hulsheger et al. Study on the sensitivity of different bacteria to PEF and set-up of a mathematical model (including E and t) to describe the effects of PEF on microorganisms
PEF: PIONEERING WORK
PEF treatment involves application of train of pulses of short duration and high electric field strength to a food product placed between two electrodes
FOOD
+ HV electrode
electrode
E = 5-50 kV/cm
t = 1-10 s
f = 1-1000 Hz
WT = 100-150 kJ/kg
PEF TECHNOLOGY
PEF affects the membrane of biological cells Ec = critical electric field strength
PEF TECHNOLOGY
PEF TECHNOLOGY
cos ERsfU
R
E: External Electric Field
sf: Shape Factor
The effect of PEF is localized at the membrane of biological cells
a = cell membrane with potential V'm b = membrane compression when V>> V'm (*) c = pore formation with reversible breakdown d = large area of the membrane subjected to irreversible breakdown with large pores
(Zimmermann, 1986)
(*) Critical transmembrane potential Vc ≈ 0.7-1 V for most cell membranes
ELECTRICAL FIELD STRENGTH
E= V/d
V= voltage (Volts) d= distance between the electrodes (m)
d
5 kV 0 kV
PEF TECHNOLOGY
PULSE SHAPE AND WIDTH
100%
37 %
Voltage, kV
Pulse duration
Pulse width
t, s
Square wave pulses Exponential decay pulses
Pulse width
Voltage, kV
Pulse duration
100%
t, s
t is defined as the time needed for the decay of voltage to 37% of its maximum value (Zhang et al., 1995a).
t represents the effective time of the high voltage application to the food product
PEF TECHNOLOGY
The pulse repetition frequency is defined as the number of pulses applied per unit of time. In PEF pasteurization applications the frequency interval is between 1-5000 Hz - With increasing the frequency we can reduce the processing time
- With increasing the frequency we can enhance the temperature increase of the product.
- With increasing the frequency, the costs of the power supply unit and of the switch increase
FREQUENCY
PEF TECHNOLOGY
The treatment time is the time interval during which the microorganisms are exposed to the electric field and, therefore, depends on the pulse characteristics and numbers of pulses
t=nt
The calculation of the treatment time is more accurate for square-wave than for exponential decay pulses
TREATMENT TIME
PEF TECHNOLOGY
PEF treatment is based on several charge-discharge cycles during which the energy, stored in the capacitor bank, is delivered to the product in the treatment chamber To calculate the energy Wp (J/ml), depending on pulse shape, it is necessary to consider the effective voltage and current in the treatment chamber.
PULSE ENERGY Wp
PEF TECHNOLOGY
Exponential decay pulses
Umax=voltage applied across the electrodes Imax= current in the food sample v=volume of the food sample in contact with the electrodes
Square wave pulses
u(t)=instantaneous voltage across the electrodes i(t)=instantaneous current in the food sample v=volume of the food sample in contact with the electrodes
t
pulse dttituv
W0
1kpulse RtUtIU
vW /
1 2
maxmaxmax
Effective energy of an exponential decay pulse (a) and of a pseudo square pulse (b) (Gongora-Nieto et al., 2002).
a) b)
PEF TECHNOLOGY
Total specific energy WT:
pulseT WnW
Q
fvWW
pulse
T
In a continuous process:
Q
fvn
TOTAL SPECIFIC ENERGY WT
PEF TECHNOLOGY
Pulsed Electric Field treatment
CONTROL PERMEABILIZED CELL
PULSED ELECTRIC FIELDS AND MEMBRANE PERMEABILIZATION
Microorganism
Cell membrane
Biological cells suspended in electrically conductive medium
PEF TECHNOLOGY: MECHANISM OF MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
The occurrence of sublethal injury depends on:
- microbial strain characteristics, such as cell envelope structure, growth conditions, environmental stress conditions
- process parameters such as E and t
- product parameters such as treatment medium composition
PEF TECHNOLOGY: MECHANISM OF MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
Control &
Monitoring System
High Voltage Pulse
Generator
Treatment Chamber
Treated Product
Raw Product
PEF FOOD PROCESSING UNIT: BASIC COMPONENTS
PEF TECHNOLOGY
136 nF
•Static chamber with parallel electrodes
•Exponential decay pulses
•E = 0-30 kV/cm, n = 1-512, t = 2-9 s, f = 1-5 Hz
BATCH PEF LAB UNIT
Treatment chamber
Area=2.01 cm2,
gap= 0.25 cm
PULSE GENERATOR:
Output voltage: 20 kV
Pulse shape:
exponential decay
Polarity : mono-polar
Pulse width: 1-10 s
Repetition rate: up to
400Hz
TREATMENT CHAMBER:
Geometry: parallel
plate electrodes
Flow rate: 0 to 10 l/h
CONTINUOUS FLOW PEF LAB UNIT
It is a complete system designed for the Pulsed Electric field processing of liquid foods The mains component are: HV pulse generator
Treatment chambers Fluid handling and heating system
Aseptic packaging unit
The pilot plant is provided with a highly flexible control system, allowing independent setting of applied field (0-60 kV/cm), pulse width (2-10 s), pulse repetition rate (200-1000Hz) e flow rate (50-200 l/h)
PEF PILOT PLANT
PULSER
V=50 l
V=49 l
SIMPLIFIED SCHEME
PEF PILOT PLANT
HIGH VOLTAGE
POWER SUPPLY CAPACITORS
HV OUT 220-440
V a.c.
(1.5 - 75 kW)
Transformer/Rectifier
20-60 kV dc
PFN
t
E
t
E
ON Switch (100 kV – 1 MA)
modulator
ON/OFF Switch (~1.2 kV – 1 kA )
PEF FOOD PROCESING UNIT: BASIC COMPONENTS
Pulse forming network (PFN) consists of a special arranged power supply, switch, capacitors, inductors and resistors;
PEF SYSTEM COMPONENTS
HIGH VOLTAGE PULSE GENERATOR
Co-field chamber
- Gap: 0.42 cm
- Electrode diameter: 0.32 cm
- Number of chambers: 4
- Flow rate: 50-200 l/h
TREATMENT CHAMBER
PEF SYSTEM COMPONENTS
SWITCHES
Switches releases the power stored in the capacitor bank as a high-voltage pulse through a pulse-forming network with defined pulse shape
Because pulse duration can go from few ms up to ms, the switches are designed:
to operate at high frequency, to resist the maximum voltage present across the capacitors, to transfer an electrical current of high intensity resulting primarily from the food samples electric resistivity
PEF SYSTEM COMPONENTS
The treatment chamber transfer the high voltage pulsed electric field to the food The design of treatment chamber is critical for the utilization of PEF pasteurization technology provided that it should ensure:
- a high intensity electric field
- a uniform distribution of the electric field strength
TREATMENT CHAMBER
TREATMENT CHAMBER
PEF SYSTEM COMPONENTS
Pulsed Power Treatment of Pumpable Materials Electrodes
PERPENDICULAR CO-AXIAL CO-LINEAR
Product Flow Product Flow Product Flow
FACTORS AFFECTING PEF MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
oSpecies and strain
oSize and morphology
oGrowth conditions
- Growth phase
- Growth temperature
- Growth medium composition
oElectric field strength
oTreatment time
oSpecific energy
oTemperature
oPulse characteristics
oFlow rate
opH
oWater activity
oChemical composition
oConductivity
Process parameters
Food product
characteristics
Microorganisms
characteristics
PROCESS PARAMETERS
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 50 100 150
WT, J/ml
DT
, °C
Q=16.9ml/min Q=33.9ml/min
Q=49ml/min Q=67.9ml/min
Parallel plate continuous chamber (Gap: 2.5 mm; A=2.6 cm2) Electric field strength: 18 kV/cm Pulse width: t=3.5 s Inlet temperature: 25 °C Treatment medium: Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm)
S. Cerevisiae
TEMPERATURE INCREASE WITH ENERGY INPUT
Treatment conditions: Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm); f=1Hz; t=3.11 s;
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
Treatment time, [s]
Log(
S)
E=3.3 kV/cm E=6.5 kV/cm E=8.4 kV/cmE=10.6 kV/cm E=16.0kV/cm E=22.8 kV/cmE=26.3 kV/cm E=30.9 kV/cm Control
S. cerevisiae
INFLUENCE OF PULSED ELECTRIC FIELD STRENGTH AND TREATMENT TIME
S. cerevisiae E. coli
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 50 100 150WT [J/ml]
Lo
g (
S)
E= 13,60 kV/cm E= 18,12 kV/cmE= 22,9 kV/cm E= 27,7 kV/cmControl
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
0 30 60 90 120WT, J/ml
Lo
g(S
)
E= 13,25 kV/cm E= 17,38 kV/cmE= 22,06 kV/cm E= 26,80 kV/cmControl E= 30,38 kV/cm
Parallel plate continuous chamber (Gap: 2.5 mm; A=2.6 cm2); Pulse width: t=3.5 ms , Inlet temperature: 25 °C Flow rate: 2 l/h; Treatment medium: Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm)
INFLUENCE OF PULSED ELECTRIC FIELD STRENGTH AND ENERGY INPUT
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 30 60 90 120
WT, J/ml
Lo
g(S
)
Q=16.9ml/min Q=34ml/minQ=49ml/min Q=67.9ml/minControl Q=100.6ml/min
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 30 60 90 120 150
WT, J/ml
Lo
g(S
)
Q=16.2 Q=34.7 ml/minQ=49 ml/min Q=67.9 ml/minControl
S. cerevisiae E. coli
Q, [l/h] 1 2 3 4 6
Re, [-] 83 166 250 333 499
Parallel plate continuous chamber (Gap: 2.5 mm; A=2.6 cm2) Electric field strength: 18 kV/cm Pulse width: t=3.5 s Inlet temperature: 25 °C Treatment medium: Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm)
INFLUENCE OF PRODUCT FLOW RATE
-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10
0 20 40 60 80 100
Treatment time [s]
Log
(s)
□ t=3.1 s
■ t=6,4 s
--- Control
-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Treatment time [s]
Log(
s)
f =1 Hzf =5 HzControl
Batch chamber (Gap: 2.5 mm; A=2 cm2)
Electric field strength: E=22.4 kV/cm
Pulse frequency: 1Hz; Inlet temperature: 25 °C
Treatment medium: TrizmaHCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm);
Batch chamber (Gap: 2.5 mm; A=2 cm2)
Electric field strength: E=22.4 kV/cm
Pulse width: t=3.11 s
Inlet temperature: 25 °C
Treatment medium: TrizmaHCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm);
S. cerevisiae
INFLUENCE OF PULSE WIDTH AND FREQUENCY
PRODUCT PARAMETERS
INACTIVATION OF S. cerevisiae IN FRUIT JUICES
Treatment conditions : E=22,5 kV/cm; f=1 Hz
Apple juice: Uo=6.9kV, t =3.25 s;
Pineapple juice: Uo=7.1 kV, t =2.53 ms;
Orange juice: Uo=7.5 kV, t=2.42 ms
Medium aw (1)
[-]
pH (1)
[-]
k (1)
[mS/cm]
Apple
juice
0.977 3.65 1.56
Pineapple
juice
0.986 3.74 3.34
Orange
juice
0.990 3.85 3.56
(1) Measured at T=24 °C
-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10
0 50 100 150 200Treatment time [s]
Log
(S)
Apple JuicePineapple JuiceOrange JuiceControl
At a fixed electric field strength, the lethality of the treatment increases with increasing the treatment time
S. cerevisiae cells are more resistant to PEF treatment when suspended
in apple juice than in orange juice and in pineapple juice
Medium k [mS/cm]
(at 24°C)
W
[J/ml pulse] (at 22.5 kV/cm)
WTOT
[J/ml ] (after 98 s at 22.5
kV/cm)
Apple juice 1.56 2.16 65
Pineapple juice 3.34 3.39 131
Orange juice 3.56 3.78 153
t
pulse dttEkW0
2 )(
Electrical conductivity affects microbial inactivation by PEF
(Jayaram et al, 1993; Sensoy et al., 1997; Wouters et al., 1999;
Alvarez et al., 2000; Alvarez et al., 2003)
Specific energy
The higher inactivation, observed at constant treatment time and field strength when the conductivity of foods increases can be attributed to the increase of the specific energy input
EFFECT OF PULSE ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY
Microbial resistance to PEF treatments increases as water activity
decreases (Aronsson et al., 2001; Alvarez et al., 2002)
Barbosa-Canovas et al., 2005
EFFECT OF WATER ACTIVITY
The influence of the pH on the microbial inactivation by PEF treatment is still unclear. In general, microorganisms are more resistant to any kind of stress at the optimum pH of growth (6.6-7.5). If the pH is higher or lower than the optimum value an increase of the microbial sensitivity to lethal stresses is observed
Barbosa-Canovas et al., 2005
EFFECT OF PH
MICROBIAL STRAIN CHARACTERISTICS
1
10
100
Cri
tic
al
Fie
ld S
tren
gth
[kV
/cm
]
1.0 10.0
Characteristic Cell Dimension [µm]
A
D
C
S. cerevisiae
S. senftenbergE. coli
L. monocytogenes
L. brevis
L. plantarum
B. subtilisY. enterocolitica
B
E
(Heinz et al., 2000)
Ec depends on the: type of microorganisms
size and shape
cell orientation with respect the electric field direction
characteristics of the medium
Typical values of Ec=4-14 kV/cm (Castro et al, 1993)
EFFECT OF SIZE AND SHAPE
UNEVENESS OF THE PEF TREATMENT
S. cerevisiae Treatment conditions: Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k=2
mS/cm); f=1Hz; t=3.11 ms;
At any E investigated the survival curves of S. cerevisiae cells show a
“tailing behavior”
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800
Treatment time, [s]
Log(
S)
E=3.3 kV/cm E=6.5 kV/cm E=8.4 kV/cmE=10.6 kV/cm E=16.0kV/cm E=22.8 kV/cmE=26.3 kV/cm E=30.9 kV/cm Control
INFLUENCE OF PULSED ELECTRIC FIELD STRENGTH AND TREATMENT TIME
CONTROL
PEF
E= 22.5 kV/cm
t=100 s
Pictures of PDA gel discs inoculated with S. cerevisiae
Treatment conditions: E=22.6 kV/cm; t=3.11 s; f=1 Hz.
Initial cells concentration: 1.2*107 CFU/ml
The distribution of the electric field strength in the treatment chamber is
not uniform (field fringing effects)
TREATED
surviving colonies
yeast colonies in solidified PDA
HETEROGENEITY OF PULSED ELECTRIC FIELD
n’ of pulses
(n’=2, 8 or 32)
Simulation of sample agitation
INFLUENCE OF SAMPLES AGITATION
S. cerevisiae Treatment conditions:
Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k=2 mS/cm); E=22.5 kV/cn f=1Hz; t=3.11 s; W= J/ml*pulse
INFLUENCE OF SAMPLE AGITATION
-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-10
0 400 800 1200 1600
WT, J/ml
Log
(S)
n-mix=0n-mix=32n-mix=8n-mix=2Control
Non-uniform distribution of electric field inside the
treatment chamber
L/D =0.4 (L =0.20; D =0.50 cm) L/D =2.5 (L =0.50; D =0.20 cm)
D
L
D
L
Co-field chamber: Electric field distribution
Co-field chambers have good field uniformity if the ratio L/D is sufficiently high
TREATMENT CHAMBER DESIGN CRITERIA
High voltage Pulse Generator
0-20 kV
Oscilloscope
Controller
+
HV
TIN
TOUT
MULTISTEP PROCESS
S. cerevisiae E. coli
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Nr
Lo
g(S
)
WT,R =22 J/ml
WT,R =42 J/ml
WT,R =61 J/ml
WT,R =82 J/ml
Control
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Nr
Lo
g(S
)
WT,R=22 J/ml
WT,R=42 J/ml
WT,R=61 J/ml
WT,R=82 J/ml
Control
Treatment conditions E= 18 kV/cm f= 0-100 Hz WT= 22-42-61-82 J/ml Fow rate= 2 l/h Tin =25 °C
MICROBIAL INACTIVATION IN MULTISTEP PROCESSES
It is important to take precautions in the design of the treatment chamber in order to avoid dielectric breakdown of foods All substances, solid, liquid, or gas, are able to resist a maximum electric field strength, called dielectric intensity or strength of the product Dielectric breakdown occurs when the applied electric field strength exceeds the dielectric strength The intent of food pasteurization with PEF is to induce the dielectric breakdown of the cell membrane, not the dielectric breakdown of the fluid food. The latter, termed spark-over, is not desired in PEF pasteurization
DIELECTRIC BREAKDOWN
Dielectric breakdown of foods inside the treatment chamber is observed as a spark The passage of a spark through a food is characterized by: a large electric current flow in a narrow channel a bright luminous spark the evolution of gas bubbles solid particles deriving from food decomposition the formation of pits on the electrode surfaces an impulsive pressure through the liquid with an accompanying explosive sound (Krasuchi, 1968)
DIELECTRIC BREAKDOWN
To reduce the probability of dielectric breakdown in foods, it is suggested (Zhang et al., 1995b): - using smooth electrodes surface to minimize electron emission - using round electrode edges to prevent field enhancement - optimizing the design of the treatment chamber to provide uniform electric field strength - using lower energy per pulse, short duration pulses, and/or low frequencies - degassing the product before treatments to eliminate gas bubble formation - pressuring the liquid food flowing in the treatment chamber to prevent gas bubble formation
DIELECTRIC BREAKDOWN
Advantages:
- No significant heating of the food
- Minimum energy utilization
and high energy efficiency - High retention of nutrients
and vitamins - High quality - Continuous process is possible - Low processing costs
- Application is limited to liquid products with sufficient dielectric strength and proper electrical conductivity
- Low temperature storage and cold distribution chain
- Spores and many enzymes are not sensitive to PEF and require combined methods for inactivation
- High investment costs
Disadvantages:
PEF TECHNOLOGY
SAFETY ISSUES OF THE PEF TECHNOLOGY
ELECTRODES CORROSION In PEF pasteurization the electrodes are in contact with the food product The current flowing in the electrodes consists of free electrons and in the liquid of charged particles. At the interface between electrodes and liquid electrochemical reactions occur, causing electrodes corrosion
FOOD
+ HV ANODE
CATHODE
PEF TECHNOLOGY SAFETY ISSUES
Food quality Electrochemical reactions can : - cause changes of the chemical structure of the liquids near the electrodes surface - produce toxic chemicals (mostly H2O2) - cause the release of small particles of the electrodes material in the liquid Electrodes fouling Electrode-fouling, i.e. the formation of a film of food particles on the electrodes surface, can cause: - local electric field distortion and arching - electrical breakdown in the treatment chamber - fouling or contamination of the system - reduction or stopping of the product flow
PEF TECHNOLOGY SAFETY ISSUES
Electrodes corrosion Electrodes corrosion can cause: - serious damages of the electrodes in few hours - drastic reduction of the electrodes life time
What are the variables influencing these phenomena? •Electric field strength, E
• Total specific energy input, WT
• Pulse width, t
• Pulse repetition frequency, f
• Pulse shape (exponential decay or square; mono or bipolar)
• Food characteristics (type, pH , electrical conductivity k)
• Treatment chamber configuration
• Electrodes material
PEF TECHNOLOGY SAFETY ISSUES
Migration of Fe, Cr and Ni from electrode surface into the food were taken as measures of electrode corrosion
ICP-MS (Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry)
PEF TECHNOLOGY SAFETY ISSUES
McIlvaine buffer (pH 7, k 2 mS/cm)- Stainless steel electrodes
E F F E C T
O F E
A N D
WT
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
McIlvaine : concentrazione ferro
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
2
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
McIlvaine : concentrazione cromo
0
1
2
3
4
5
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
McIlvaine : concentrazione nichel
12.50 Kv/cm
22.03 Kv/cm
31.46 Kv/cm
rif
Fe Cr
Ni
WT, J/ml WT, J/ml
WT, J/ml
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Trizma: concentrazione cromo
Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k 2 mS/cm) - Stainless steel electrodes
E F F E C T
O F E
A N D
WT
0
200 400 600 800
1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Trizma: concentrazione nichel
12.76 Kv/cm
21.72 Kv/cm
31.46 Kv/cm
rif
Legenda
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica[J]/ml
Trizma: concentrazione ferro Fe Cr
Ni
WT, J/ml WT, J/ml
WT, J/ml
McIlvaine buffer (pH 3.4 and 7)- Stainless steel electrodes
E F F E C T
O F
pH
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
confronto a ph diversi:Ni
12.71 Kv/cm K=2mS/cm ph=7
12.40 Kv/cm K=2mS/cm ph=3.4
21.25 Kv/cm K=2mS/cm ph=7
28.78 Kv/cm K=2mS/cm ph=3.4
29.79 Kv/cm K=2mS/cm ph=7
28.90 Kv/cm K=2mS/cm ph=3.4
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
confronto a diversi ph:Fe
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
confronto a ph diversi: Cr Fe Cr
Ni WT, J/ml
WT, J/ml
WT, J/ml
ANODE
CATHODE
ANODE
CATHODE
TRIZMA
McIlvaine
ELECTRODES FOULING
E F F E C T
O F E L E C T R O D E S
M A E R I A L S
McIlvaine buffer (pH 7, k 2 mS/cm) Stainless steel electrodes - Chromate electrodes surface
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Confronto elettrodi sul rilascio di ferro: McILvaine ph 7 K=2 mS cm-1
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Confronto elettrodi sul rilascio di cromo: McILvaine ph 7 K=2 mS cm-1
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Confronto elettrodi sul rilascio di nichel: McILvaine ph 7 K=2 mS cm-1
12.71 Kv/cm non cromati 12.50 Kv/cm cromati
21.25 Kv/cm non cromati 21.87 Kv/cm cromati
29.79 Kv/cm non cromati 33.04 Kv/cm cromati
Fe
Cr
Ni
WT, J/ml WT, J/ml
WT, J/ml
Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k 2 mS/cm) Stainless steel electrodes - Chromate electrodes surface E
F F E C T
O F E L E C T R O D E
M A E R I A L S
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Confronto elettrodi sul rilascio di ferro:Trizma ph 7 K=2 mS cm-1
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Confronto elettrodi sul rilascio di cromo:Trizma ph 7 K=2 mS cm-1
0
500
1000
1500
2000
0 50 100 150
ppb
energia specifica [J/ml]
Confronto elettrodi sul rilascio di nichel:Trizma ph 7 K=2 mS /cm 12.40 Kv/cm non
cromati 12.60 Kv/cm cromati
20.78 Kv/cm non cromati 21.38 Kv/cm cromati
28.90 Kv/cm non cromati 30.83 Kv/cm cromati
Fe
Cr
Ni
WT, J/ml WT, J/ml
WT, J/ml
Stainless steel electrodes - Chromate electrode surface Trizma HCl buffer (pH 7, k 2 mS/cm)
Electrodes fouling (anode)
E F F E C T
O F E L E C T R O D E S
M A E R I A L S
Stainless steel Chromate
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 30 60 90 120
Lo
g (
N/N
o)
WT, J/ml
E= 17.6 kV/cm- no Cr
E= 30.7 kV/cm - no Cr
E= 17.4 kV/cm Cr
E= 30.7 kV/cm Cr
The use of a polished chromate electrodes surface allow to: - reduce or avoid electrodes fouling
- reduce local electric field distortion
- improve PEF treatment efficiency
Microbial inactivation of S. cerevisiae E F F E C T
O F E L E C T R O D E S
M A E R I A L S
-8
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
0 30 60 90 120
Lo
g (
N/N
o)
WT, J/ml
E= 17.6 kV/cm- no Cr
E= 30.7 kV/cm - no Cr
E= 17.4 kV/cm Cr
E= 30.7 kV/cm Cr
The use of a polished chromate electrodes surface allow to: - reduce or avoid electrodes fouling
- reduce local electric field distortion
- improve PEF treatment efficiency
Microbial inactivation of S. cerevisiae E F F E C T
O F E L E C T R O D E S
M A E R I A L S
COST ESTIMATION: PEF VS. THERMAL TREATMENTS
Q=200 l/h Treatment conditions E=40 kV/cm, TIN=20-35-45-55 °C WT=100-80-60-40 kJ/kg Equipment design Type of chamber co-field Chamber volume 0,034 Number of Chambers 4 Residence time 0.0025 s Repetition >=1 kHz Load voltage 25 kV Average power 20 kW Investment ca. 200 k€ Operative costs 0.0033-0.0061 €/kg
Q=200 l/h Treatment conditions TIN=20 °C Tp=85°C; t=15 s Equipment design Plate Heat exchanger Reservoir tanks 50 l Aseptic tank 50 l Investment ca. 50 k€ Operative costs 0.0089 €/kg
ESTIMATION OF TOTAL TREATMENT COSTS
PEF Pasteurization HTST Pasteurization
TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION
Increase the robustness of switches and other components of the PEF system
Reduce the risk of dielectric breakdown in foods Prevent/reduce electrodes corrosion and electrodes fouling Set up design criteria of the treatment chambers to ensure high
intensity electric field and uniform distribution of the electric field strength
Set up mathematical models able to predict the extent of
microbial inactivation as a function of products characteristics and processing conditions
- High investments costs
- Consumer’s concerns toward novel technologies
- Regulatory approval
FACTORS LIMITING THE USE OF PEF IN THE FOOD INDUSTRY
MASS TRANSFER ENHANCEMENT BY MEANS OF ELECTROPORATION
PEF ASSISTED EXTRACTION OF NUTRACEUTICAL COMPOUNDS FROM VEGETABLE MATRICES
PEF ASSISTED VINIFICATION: STATE OF THE ART
Fundamentals of PEF treatments applied to vinification processes
Increase of juice yield and polyphenolic content and reduction of turbidity from white grapes @ low electric field (E<1 kV/cm)
Vorobiev and coworkers (UTC – France)
Increase of polyphenolic extraction during red wine vinification @ high electric field (E>1 kV/cm)
Determination of anthocyanin profile
Influence of grape variety
Evolution of polyphenolic compounds during ageing in bottles and barrels
Raso and coworkers (UniZar – Spain)
Observation of vacuole permeabilization upon PEF application
On-line impedance measurement
Müller and coworkers (KIT – Germany)
Increase of polyphenolic extraction and antioxidant activity during red wine vinification @ low electric field (E<1.5 kV/cm)
Ferrari and coworkers (UniSA – Italy)
PEF ASSISTED VINIFICATION
Repeatability of the results over two
different grape harvests
Extending its applicability to different
Italian grape varieties
Validation of the PEF-assisted vinification
Monitoring during fermentation/maceration of the must:
Color intensity
Total polyphenols and free anthocyanins
Characterization of the fresh wine:
Physicochemical properties
Antioxidant activity
Aromatic profile
Investigation of the feasibility of the PEF treatment in the red wine
vinification
Treatments
Analysis Control Enzyme 1kV 10000 p 1.5kV 1000 p 1.5kV 2500 p
Total Polyphenols (g/l) 1.6 1.9 1.8 2.1 2.2
Free Anthocians (mg/l) 477 705 522 734 839
Color Intensity 9.85 10.8 10.4 11 11.65
Glucose and fructose (g/l) 0.61 0.69 0.65 0.6 0.62
Reducing sugars (g/l) 2.1 2.1 2.3 2.2 2.2
Antioxidant power (mg/ml of ascorbic acid)
65.18 70.3 69.87 73.35 78.52
Total Acidity (g/l of tartaric acid)
11.2 11.2 11.3 11.12 11
Alcool content (% ) 11.8 11.7 11.9 12 11.8
pH 3.21 3.19 3.17 3.2 3.2
IMPEDANCE MEASUREMENT
Signal: sinusoidal Frequency: 10 Hz e 32 MHz) Max output Voltage (rms): 1-3 V Max output Current (rms): 20-60 mA
IMPEDANCE ANALYSER (1260 Solartron, UK) SAMPLE HOLDER
Measurement of the impedance (Z)-frequency spectra as the ratio of the
voltage drop across the sample and the current crossing it during the
test.
Cell disintegration index Zuntr: absolute value of complex impedance of intact tissue, Ohm
Ztr: absolute value of complex impedance of heated tissue, Ohm
Zp=0 for intact tissue; Zp=1 for totally disintegrated material
)1()1(
)1()1(
MHztrkHzuntr
kHztrkHzuntr
pZZ
ZZZ
2.5 cm
diameter
1 cm gap
VINIFICATION PROCESS
Roller-crushing
Destemming
Addition of potassium
metabisulfite (50 ppm)
Separation of skins and must
PEF treatment of grape skins
Recombination and addition of
yeast cells
(200 ppm)
Fermentation/maceration at 25 3°C
Pressing
Enzyme addition
(20 ppm)
Fresh wine
Measurable effect of PEF
pretreatment on the release
kinetics of:
Total polyphenols (in
figure)
Free anthocyanins
Color intensity
Effect of pectolytic enzyme
is measurable but lower
than PEF
EVOLUTION OF TOTAL POLYPHENOLS
Vinification of Aglianico grapes
t (days)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
To
tal po
lyp
hen
ols
(g
/L)
0
2
4
6
8
Untreated
E=1.5 kV/cm Wt=10 kJ/kg
E=3 kV/cm Wt=10 kJ/kg
E=3 kV/cm Wt=20 kJ/kg
Enzyme
t (days)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Tota
l poly
phenols
(g/L
)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
Untreated
E=0.5 kV/cm Wt=1 kJ/kg
E=1 kV/cm Wt=5 kJ/kg
E=1.5 kV/cm Wt=10 kJ/kg
E=1 kV/cm Wt=25 kJ/kg
Enzyme
Vinification of Piedirosso grapes
Neither PEF pretreatment
nor enzyme addition
significantly impacted on
polyphenolic release from
Piedirosso grapes
EVOLUTION OF TOTAL POLYPHENOLS
EFFECT OF GRAPE VARIETY
Wt (kJ/kg)
0 5 10 15 20 25
ym
ax
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Wt (kJ/kg)
0 5 10 15 20 25
Zp
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0W
t (kJ/kg)
0 5 10 15 20 25
kd
(d
-1)
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
Aglianico
Piedirosso
tky
yd exp
max
1
Electrical permeabilization does
not give an accurate indication
of mass transfer through cell
and vacuole membrane
)1()1(
)1()1(
MHztrkHzuntr
kHztrkHzuntr
pZZ
ZZZ
Enzyme PEF1 PEF2 PEF3
D a
nti
oxid
an
t acti
vit
y (
%)
-20
0
20
40
60
Enzyme PEF1 PEF2 PEF3
D c
olo
r in
ten
sit
y (
%)
-20
0
20
40
60
80
Aglianico
Piedirosso
Nebbiolo
Casavecchia
Enzyme PEF1 PEF2 PEF3
D t
ota
l p
oly
ph
en
ols
(%
)
-40
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Enzyme PEF1 PEF2 PEF3
D f
ree a
nth
ocyan
ins (
%)
-20
0
20
40
60
PEF
treatment
Treatment
conditions
Zp
Aglianico
Zp
Piedirosso
Zp
Nebbiolo
Zp Casavecchia
PEF1 1.5 kV/cm,
10 kJ/kg
48.6±1.5% 68.6±4.6% 67.7±5.9% 82.2±6.3%
PEF2 3.0 kV/cm,
10 kJ/kg
61.1±0.6% 91.2%±1.2% 82.4±1.3% 86.3±1.4%
PEF3 3.0 kV/cm,
20 kJ/kg
75.9±3% 94±1.2% 86.8±0.3% 91.3±0.1%
DATA CONSISTENCY OVER TWO DIFFERENT YEARS
Control
2008
PEF1
2008
Control
2009
PEF1
2009
PEF2
2009
PEF3
2009
Alcohol content
(v/v %) 11.8±0.1 12.0±0.1 9.1±0.1 10.1±0.1 11.3±0.1 10.5±0.1
pH 3.2±0.02 3.2±0.03 3.4±0.02 3.4±0.02 3.4±0.02 3.4±0.02
Total acidity
(g/l tartaric acid) 11.2±0.2 11.1±0.2 7.1±0.2 7.8±0.3 7.6±0.2 7.9±0.1
Colour intensity
(a.u) 9.8±0.05 11.0±0.06 6.8±0.06 8.3±0.04 7.5±0.04 7.4±0.07
Total polyphenols
(g/l) 1.6±0.02 2.1±0.03 1.1±0.01 2.1±0.02 2.2±0.02 2.4±0.03
Free anthocyanins
(mg/l) 477±7 734±12 300.7±10 352.9±15 387.2±11 395.4±15
Antioxidant activity
(mg/ml ascorbic
acid)
0.16±0.01 0.18±0.01 0.12±0.01 0.17±0.01 0.17±0.01 0.17±0.01
PEF treatment Treatment conditions
PEF1 1.5 kV/cm, 10 kJ/kg
PEF2 3.0 kV/cm, 10 kJ/kg
PEF3 3.0 kV/cm, 20 kJ/kg
PEF-wines from Aglianico grapes
Compound Composition (%)
Control PEF4 PEF5
Isoamyl alcohol (cheesy) 43.72 37.24 29.19
2-Methyl-1-butanol 9.34 12.50 10.20
Ethyl butyrate 0.11 0.10 0.08
2-Hexanol 0.30 0.27 0.28
Isohexyl alcohol 0,06 0.11 0.06
Nonyl alcohol 0,05 0.06 0.06
3-ethyl-1-butanol 0.26 0.37 0.25
1-Hexanol 3.48 4.02 3.46
Isoamyl acetate (fruity) 0.87 1.54 0.87
2-methylbutyl acetate (floral) 0.11 0.21 0.13
Heptyl alcohol 0.07 0.06 0.05
Hexanoic acid (sweaty) 0.34 0.72 0.46
Ethyl hexanoate 0.44 0.67 0.49
Ethyl isovalerate 0.40 0.47 0.28
2-Phenylethanol (rose flavor) 37.27 34.95 45.45
Ethyl succinate 0.36 0.26 0.10
Octanoic acid (cheesy) 0.48 0.76 0.67
Ethyl octanoate 0.33 0.51 0.30
Phenethyl acetate 0.32 0.32 0.27
Amyl methacrylate 0.19 0.22 0.17
Decanoic acid 0.21 0.14 0.11
Ethyl decanoate 0.08 0.09 0.04
Ethyl 2-isocyanato-2-phenylpropanoate 0.28 0.62 0.21
Tryptophol 2.82 3.29 2.09
3,4,5-Trimethoxyphenylacetic acid 0.15 0.14 0.15
Methyl 3-(indol-3-yl)propionate 0.11 0.08 0.06
Total 99.22 99.55 95.42
AROMATIC COMPOUNDS
Slight alterations
of the aromatic
profile of the
wine
PEF-wines from
Aglianico grapes
PEF
treatment
Treatment
conditions
PEF4 1.5 kV/cm,
10 kJ/kg
PEF5 1.5 kV/cm,
25 kJ/kg
IMPROVEMENT OF RED WINE VINIFICATION
4 €/ton of grapes
Unit cost: 200 €/kg Requirements: 2 g/100 kg E
nzym
e
0.7 €/ton of grapes
Energy cost: 0.12 €/kWh Requirements : 20 kJ/kg
(PEF3)
PEF
1.8 €/ton of grapes Energy cost:
0.35 €/Nm3 CH4
Requirements : 205 kJ/kg (80°C for 2 min)
Heat
High cost Addition of undesired
compounds Increase of wine
turbidity
Worsening of wine quality
High capital cost Requirement of
specialized technicians Tuning on the grape
varieties
Simple use Consolidated in the
wine industry
Good treatment for low quality wines
Improvement of the main quality parameters
Higher antioxidant activity
Cost Advantages Disadvantages
IMPROVEMENT OF RED WINE VINIFICATION
For PEF treatment ranging from E = 1.5 - 3 kV/cm and Wt = 10 - 20 kJ/kg,
Aglianico grapes were effectively permeabilized, leading to a wine with
a higher color intensity (+20%), total polyphenols (+100%) and free
anthocyanins (+30%) content as well as higher antioxidant activity
(+25%), without the addition of pectolytic enzymes.
Similar results were obtained over two harvests, confirming the
robustness and repeatability of the process.
PEF treatments need to be tuned and adapted to the biological
characteristics of the treated grapes, suggesting the need for
reliable indicators of vacuole permeabilization
PEF ASSISTED JUICE EXPRESSION FROM BLUEBERRIES
Segnale di trigger
+
HV
OSCILLOSCOPE
PG-3 Solid State Pulse Generator (ScanDinova, Sweden)
• Maximum voltage: 25 kV
• Maximum current: 500 A
• Pulse Width: 1-25 s
• Repetition frequency: 1-450 Hz
Blueberries (30g)
Electrode
Electrode
Application of Pressure
Juice collection
TRATMENT PROTOCOL Pressure
(P=0.35-1.34 bar; t=2 min)
PEF Treatment maintaining Pressure
(E=0-5 kV/cm; WT=12kJ/kg)
Pressure
(P=0.35-1.34 bar;8 min)
Juice was collected during the entire experiment
Evaluation in the resulting juice of: • total polyphenols content as mg of gallic acid equivalents (mgGA) by spectrophotometric analysis, • antioxidant activity by means of DPPH assay
PEF ASSISTED EXTRACTION OF POLYPHENOLS ARTICHOCKES BRACTS
Bracts
Head
Leaves
Stem
time (h)
0.0 0.5 1.0 12.0 24.0
concentr
ation (
mg/g
bra
cts
)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
control
PEF 0.75kV/cm 0.5kJ/kg
PEF 1.5kV/cm 5kJ/kg
Water extraction
E
PEF APPLICATIONS
Electropermeabilization of cells
Microbial inactivation Improvement of mass transfer
15-50 kV/cm; 100-150 kJ/kg 2-5 kV/cm; 6-10 kJ/kg
PEF PROCESSING ENERGY CONSUMPTION
STRATEGIES TO TRANSFER INNOVATIONS
HURDLE TECHNOLOGIES
Hurdle technology provides a framework for combining a number of
factors or milder preservation techniques to achieve an enhanced level
of product safety and stability with less severe processing conditions.
35 °C
45 °C
50 °C
55 °C
60 °C
65 °C
70 °C
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Tem
pera
ture
[°C
]
0 20 40 60 80 100
Time [s]
PEF + MODERATE HEATING
E. coli PEF Pasteurization Cycle
[Heinz, Toepfl and Knorr]
PEF + HIGH PRESSURE CARBON DIOXIDE
E<Ec
CYTOPLASM CYTOPLASM
E>Ec
CYTOPLASM
E>>Ec
PEF induces the electroporation of the cell membrane
The mass transfer of the CO2 from the outside to the inside of the electroporated cell is facilitated
The microbial inactivation rate is enhanced if compared to that of the single treatments
CO2 solubilized in the liquid matrix
CO2 solubilized in the cytoplasm
Microbial cell in contact with pressurized CO2 after PEF treatment at different conditions
PEF: 20 J/ml, 2 mS/cm
+
HPCD: 8.0 MPa for 10 minutes
6 kV/cm 9 kV/cm 12 kV/cm Effect of the electrical field strength
PEF + HIGH PRESSURE CARBON DIOXIDE
HHP Apparatus MINI FOODLAB
FPG5620
HPH Apparatus FGP7420A.275
PEF Apparatus
NOVEL TECHNOLOGIES IN COMPARISON
Reference A-PEF C-HPH A-HHP
Qua
lity s
core
s [
-]
0
2
4
6
8Antioxidant Activity
Polyphenols
PPO inactivation
Vitamin A
Vitamin C
DE
NOVEL TECHNOLOGIES IN COMPARISON
Natural compounds with high biological activity
extracted from vegetable matrices
Difficult incorporation of bioactive compounds in food matrices due to poor
solubility in aqueous phase
Polyphenols Flavonoids
Carotenoids
PUFAs
Essential oils
PEF
PEF ASSISTED EXTRACTION OF BIOACTIVE COMPOUNDS
Minimization of the impact on the organoleptic
properties of the food systems where incorporated
Increase of the biological activity through the
promotion of the mass transfer through the cell
membranes
Efficient dispersion in aqueous phase
Protection of bioactive compounds from chemical degradation
Need of efficient nanometric delivery systems
NanoTech
NanoTech
NanoTech
PEF
DESIGN OF NANODELIVERY SYSTEMS
Top-down approach
Primary emulsion
(mm size)
HSH
Secondary emulsion
(nm size)
HPH
Initial ingredients
selection
FABRICATION OF NANODELIVERY SYSTEMS
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.00.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
cream
stable O/W
stable E-O
unstable
stable W/O Em
uls
ifier (%
)
Oil (%)
Wate
r (%
)7.14236
37
0.689
1.18123
1.34120
1.25m431nm1.4
4541.72235
2.05228
FABRICATION OF NANODELIVERY SYSTEMS
PEF
INCORPORATION IN REAL FOODS
Improved infusion of nanoencapsulated bioactive
compounds into solid foods, for delivering health-
beneficial or functional properties
Improved infusion solution for more homogeneous salting
processes, therefore reducing the amount of salt needed
Reduction of allergenic power (proteins unfolding induced by PEF and
Enzymatic hydrolysis)
Combined treatments (PEF+essential oils) for enhanced
antimicrobial activity and minimized impact on quality attributes
PEF
PEF
PEF
PEF
PEF TECHNOLOGY
PULSED LIGHT TECHNOLOGY FOR MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
LP
PULSED LIGHT - HILP
- Pulsed light (PL) is considered one of the most promising non-thermal technology for rapid and effective killing of a wide variety of food pathogenic and spoilage microorganisms in foods, on food contact surface, or in thin layers of liquids (Moraru and Uesugi, 2009).
- PL treatment consists of exposing contaminated substrate to intermittent, intense short pulses of polychromatic light (100-1100 nm), emitted by a light source such as a Xenon lamp.
During PL treatment energy is stored temporarly in a capacitor and then released via Switch to the lamp filled with Xenon gas. As sequence of this, the gas ionized emitting the charachteristic light of the treatment. These are the some parameters for characterization of PL treatment. Fluence or in other words, energy dose and exposure time are the most significant ones. Also pulse width, Pulse repetition rate and peak power.
PULSED LIGHT - HILP
time
Power
PULSED LIGHT - HILP
HILP: INACTIVATION MECHANISM
The action of the PL process is attributed to the effects of the high peak power and the UV component of the broad spectrum of the flash (Rajkovic et al., 2010; Oms-Oliu et al., 2010). The lethal action of PL might be due to the coexistence of different mechanisms:
- Microbial DNA damages by thymine dimer formation (photochemical effect) (Wang et al., 2005)
Structural damages caused by the pulsing effect (photophysical effect)
Microscopic observation Krishnamurthy et al., (2008)
Protein elution (Takeshita et al., 2003)
Pulsed light
UV light
Control
Proteins
Localized overheating of microbial cells (photothermal effect) (Hiramoto 1984; Wekhof 2000; Wekhof et al., 2001)
HILP: INACTIVATION MECHANISM
There is no or very little information on sub-lethal damage to bacterial cells induced by PL treatment.
The relative importance of each mechanism depends on the energy dose (fluence), the type of microorganism as well as the food absorption characteristics.
HILP: INACTIVATION MECHANISM
- Energy dose (or fluence F, in J/cm2) experienced by the target microorganisms
- Composition of the emitted light spectrum
- Distance from the light source and position of the sample in the treatment chamber
- Substrate properties: turbidity, homogeneity, thickness, color, opacity, presence of particulate material, soluble solids content and composition
- Inoculum size
- Geometry of the treatment cell
- Number of lamps
HILP: FACTORS DETERMINING PROCESS EFFECTIVENESS
Due to the factors affecting the amount of light energy provided to the product, the
distribution of light energy may spatially vary throughout the treatment chamber as well
as within a liquid substrate leading to non-uniform treatments
(Hsu and Moraru, 2011).
Fluence decreased with increasing the distance from the lamp, in all three directions
as well as with increasing the absorption properties of the liquid substrate
Microbial inactivation and heating effects achieved at different distance and location
throughout the treatment chamber as well as within the liquid substrates are also
non-uniform
HILP: FACTORSDETERMINING PROCESS EFFECTIVENESS
Sterilization Chamber
Power Control/Module
HV Cable
Xenon Lamp
Food product
Cooling air outletCooling air inlet
Tray
Sterilization Chamber
Power Control/Module
HV Cable
Xenon Lamp
Food product
Cooling air outletCooling air inlet
Tray
COMPONENTS OF HILP EQUIPMENT
Light spectrum
SteriPulse®-XL 3000 (Xenon Corp.) Pulse width 360 s - Pulse rate 3Hz Pulse energy=1.21 J/cm2 at 1.9 cm
INTENSITA’ v.s. DISTANZA Fp vs vertical distance
EFFECT OF SPATIAL LOCATION
Tray level
n = 5 - FP = 0.70 J/cm2/pulse
n = 7 - FP = 0.51 J/cm2/pulse
n = 9 - FP = 0.37 J/cm2/pulse
n = 11 - FP = 0.271 J/cm2/pulse
Spatial locations of sample on the tray
Gram-negative ‹ Gram-positive ‹ yeast ‹ bacterial spore ‹ mold‹ virus
HILP MICROBIAL INACTIVATION
PL treatment of foods has been approved by the FDA (1996) (code 21CFR179.41).
Solid and semisolid products: Vegetables (Gómez-López et al., 2005; Izquier et al., 2011) Fruit (Marquenie et al., 2003; Bialka & Demirici, 2007, 2008b,b) Food powders seeds (Fine & Gervais, 2004; Sharma & Demirici, 2003; Jun et al., 2003) Dairy products (Dunn et al., 1991) Meat (Hierro et al., 2011) Fish (Ozer & Demirici, 2006) Honey (Hillegas & Demirici, 2003) Infant powder milk (Choi et al., 2010) Liquid foods: Fruit juices (Saurer & Moreau, 2009; Caminiti et al., 2011) Infant foods (Choi et al., 2010) Milk (Smith et al., 2002; Krishnamurthy et al., 2007)
HILP APPLICATIONS
Only very few paper deals with the processing of a liquid food in a continuous flow PL unit (Krishnamurthy et al., 2007; Caminiti et al., 2011).
FRUIT JUICES PROCESSING WITH PULSED LIGHT
Study of the lethal and sub-lethal effects of PL treatments carried out in a continuous flow system
Investigated effects: - sample heating - energy dose (F) - absorption properties (a) of two different fruit juices (apple and orange juices - type of microorganism (gram-negative, gram-positive)
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
Light spectrum
SteriPulse®-XL 3000 (Xenon Corp.) Pulse width 360 s - Pulse rate 3Hz Pulse energy=1.21 J/cm2 at 1.9 cm
Water-Ice bath
TIN
TOUT
TCH
Sterilizzation Chamber
DL
Untreated Sample
Treated Sample
Quartz Tubes
Xenon Lamp
PC
Metal box
Quartz Tubes: 1 mm i.d., 0.5 mm wall thickness
Power/Control Module
Water-Ice bath
Water-Ethylene glycol Cooling system
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
Microorganisms: E. coli (DH5-) and L. innocua (11288) Initial microbial load: Co=5*106 cfu/mL
Plates Count Method - Non-Selective agar medium (TSA) - Selective agar medium (EMB for E. coli, LSA for L. innocua) - 37°C for 24h (E.coli) or 48 h (L. innocua)
Treatment medium
pH (-)
°Brix
(-) Absorption coefficient
(cm-1)
Apple juice 3.49±0.08 10.9±0.2 13.9±0.9
Orange Juice 3.78±0.6 11.1±0.5 52.4±1.2
Flow rate (ml/min)
Re
(-)
tr (s)
n (-)
F (J/cm2)
38.4 510 0.49 1.5 1.8
27.0 358 0.70 2.1 2.5
20.8 276 0.91 2.7 3.3
17.0 226 1.11 3.3 4.0
13.4 178 1.41 4.2 5.1
12.5 166 1.51 4.5 5.5
500mL
Processing conditions
1.9 cm
PL treatment
1.21 J/cm2/pulse
Tin=10°C
Tout
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
PL treatment
Tin
Tout
HILP treatment High Fluences
Long operative times (continuous system)
Product heating Impairing of food quality
Thermal inactivation
Light absorption and/or
Lamp heating
Blower
Water-Etylene glycol cooling system
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
Time (s)
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
DT
(°C
)
0
10
20
30
40
tr=0.91s - F=3.3 J/cm2
No cooling
Cooling
Temperature rise of the juice increased with increasing running time
The presence of a cooling system limited the heating rate of the samples.
F (J/cm2)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
DT
(°C
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
Fruit juice
Air
The steady state temperatures increased gradually as the energy dose increased.
Tout,max=34°C
With cooling
Stedy-state Temperature
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
Effect of F and
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Lo
g(N
/No
)
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Lo
g(N
/No
)
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0E. coli L. innocua
Orange juice
Apple juice
Orange juice
Apple juice
The lethal effect of PL intensified upon increasing energy delivered to the juice
The PL resistance of both bacteria was greater in orange juice (=52.4 cm-1) than in apple juice (=13.9 cm-1)
The occurrence of the tailing phase could be due to shading effects due to insufficient light penetration in the depth of lower transmittance juices.
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
Orange juice
Apple juice
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Lo
g(N
/No
)
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Lo
g(N
/No
)
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
E. coli
L. innocua
L. innocua
E. coli
Orange juice Apple juice
E. coli cells (Gram-negative) show a greater susceptibility to light pulses than L. innocua (Gram-positive) due to:
Differences in structure and composition of the cell wall
Effect of bacterial strain
PULSED LIGHT PROCESSING OF FRUIT JUICES
Sublethal injuries
E. coli
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1,8 2,5 3,3 4 5,1
Lo
g1
0 c
ycl
es o
f in
act
iva
tio
n
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Apple juice
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1,8 2,5 3,3 4 5,1
Lo
g1
0 c
ycl
es o
f in
act
iva
tio
n
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Orange juice
c)
a)
L. Innocua
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1,8 2,5 3,3 4 5,5
Lo
g1
0 c
ycl
es o
f in
act
iva
tio
n
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Energy dose (J/cm2)
0 1,8 2,5 3,3 4 5,5
Lo
g1
0 c
ycl
es o
f in
act
iva
tio
n
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Orange juice
Apple juice
d)
b)
Non selective
Selective
PULSED LIGHT TECHNOLOGY TO ENHANCE THE CONTENT OF BIOCTIVE COMPOUNDS IN
VEGETABLES
Effect of UV-C and HILP on color
Brightness (L) Color intensity (C )
-12
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
7 14 21
∆L
Time (days)
Control
PL 8
UV 3
-80
-70
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
7 14 21
∆h
Time (days)
Control
PL 8
UV-3
-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
7 14 21
∆c*
Time (days)
Control
PL 8
UV3
Tendency towards red color (H, Hue)
Color changes during 21 days , of storage
Color variation during post harvest storage: h, L, c
No significant DIFFERENCE in color of treated and untreated tomatoes during storage No color changes shortly after treatments (data not shown).
PULSED LIGHT VS. UV LIGHT EFFECTS ON VEGETABLES
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Control UV1 UV2 UV3
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
4,5
5
Control UV1 UV2 UV3
initial pH=3.93
initial °Brix=5
initial pH=3.93
PL Treatments
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Control PL1 PL 2 PL 4 PL8 PL8(9) PL 4 (9)
Brix 7 days
14 days
21 days
0
0,5
1
1,5
2
2,5
3
3,5
4
4,5
5
Control PL1 PL 2 PL 4 PL8 PL8(9) PL 4 (9)
pH 7 days
14 days
21 days
UV-C Treatments
Effect of UV-C and HILP on pH and °Brix
There is no significant effect of both UV-C and PL treatment on the total soluble solids
content (°Brix) and pH
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Control PL1 PL 2 PL 4 PL8 PL8(9) PL 4 (9) UV1 UV2 UV3
Varia
tio
n o
f ly
cop
en
e c
on
ten
t
Treatments
7 Days
14 days
21 days
Lycopene content of tomatoes on the harvest day was 0.63 mg/kg FW(Fresh Weight)
Lycopene extraction
Effect of UV-C and HILP on Lycopene content
PULSED LIGHT VS. UV LIGHT EFFECTS ON VEGETABLES
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Control PL1 PL 2 PL 4 PL8 PL8(9) PL 4 (9) UV1 UV2 UV3
Varia
tio
n o
f to
tal carote
no
ids
co
nte
nt
Treatments
7 days
14 days
21 days
Effect of UV-C and HILP on Total carotenoids content
PULSED LIGHT VS. UV LIGHT EFFECTS ON VEGETABLES
Total carotenoids content in tomatoes on the harvesting day was 4.77 μg/g fresh weight
PULSED LIGHT VS. UV LIGHT EFFECTS ON VEGETABLES
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Control PL1 PL 2 PL 4 PL8 PL8(9) PL 4 (9) UV1 UV2 UV3
Po
lyp
hen
ols
co
nte
nt
(%
)
Treatments
7 days
14 days
21 days
Total polyphenols content of tomatoes on the harvesting day (t0) was 250 mg of gallic acid equivalents (GAE)/kg fresh weight.
Effect of UV-C and HILP on Total polyphenol content
PULSED LIGHT VS. UV LIGHT EFFECTS ON VEGETABLES
-20
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
Control PL1 PL 2 PL 4 PL8 PL8(9) PL 4 (9) UV1 UV2 UV3
An
tio
xid
an
t acti
vit
y (
%)
Treatments
7 days
14 days
21 days
Antioxidant activity was analyzed with the inactivation of DPPH method
Effect of UV-C and HILP on Antioxidant activity
Tomatoes on the harvesting day had 25% of inactivation of DPPH
UV-C Pulsed Light
Emission of radiation belonging to a
single band
Broader spectrum of light
The lamps contain mercury vapor The lamps do not contain mercury
Very long duration of treatment (h) Very short duration of treatment (s)
Sample heating negligible Thermal effects relatively important
Poor penetration depth High penetration depth
Low emission power High emission power
Pasteurization Process Sterilization process
UV-C vs HILP
PULSED LIGHT VS. UV LIGHT PROCESSING
NOVEL TECHNOLOGIES CAN BE USED FOR:
THE PREVENTION OF DISEASES
THE DESIGN OF PERSONALIZED NUTRITION STRATEGIES
3.000 YEARS AGO: EAT A ROOT 1000 YEARS AGO: PRAY 500 YEARS AGO: DRINK A POTION 50 YEARS AGO: TAKE A PILL
TODAY: EAT A ELECTRO-PERMEABILIZED ROOT
Doc, I’ve got
a sore throat
GRAZIE Abu, Anna, Ermelinda, Francesco, Gianpiero, Mafalda, Mariangela, Mariarenata, Maria Rosaria, Mariateresa, Mauro Maria, Mertcam, Paola, Roberta, Serena
Prodal scarl c/o Università di
Salerno
Via Ponte don Melillo
84084 Fisciano (SA)
Tel: 089-964028 Fax: 089-964168
Email: [email protected]
www.prodalricerche.it