Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11
PULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSED ELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRIC
PULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSED ELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRIC
FIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELD PROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSING
Valente B. Alvarez
Food industries Center
Department of food Science and
Technology
V.B. Alvarez/PEF/10-2007
PULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSED ELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRIC
PULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSED ELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRIC FIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELD
PROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSING
• Contents
– Principle
– Processing
parameters
– Applications and
effects
PulsePulsePulsePulsePulsePulsePulsePulse electricelectricelectricelectricelectricelectricelectricelectric
PulsePulsePulsePulsePulsePulsePulsePulse electricelectricelectricelectricelectricelectricelectricelectric fieldfieldfieldfieldfieldfieldfieldfield (PEF)(PEF)(PEF)(PEF)(PEF)(PEF)(PEF)(PEF)
basicbasicbasicbasicbasicbasicbasicbasic principleprincipleprincipleprincipleprincipleprincipleprincipleprinciple
• Application of short burst of high voltage
(approx. 20-80 kV/cm) to foods placed
between two electrodes
– pulses applied at ambient or refrigerated
temperatures for short treatment time of
seconds or less
– Square wave, bipolar, oscillatory pulses or
of exponentially decaying waves
– Aseptic packaging and refrigerated storage
after treatment
• Nonthermal method of food preservation
PEFPEF PrinciplePrinciple Mechanism of inactivation • Non-thermal inactivation of microorganisms that results from
PEFPEF PrinciplePrinciple
Mechanism of inactivation
• Non-thermal inactivation
of microorganisms that
results from the
permeabilization or
electroporation of the cell
membrane
Celula
Desbalance
Osmotico
• Depends on electric field
intensity, pulse duration,
and number of pulses.
Hinchamiento
Ruptura de la
Membrana
CriticalCritical processprocess parametersparameters PROCESS RELATED • PRODUCT RELATED – Electric field strength
CriticalCritical processprocess parametersparameters
PROCESS RELATED
• PRODUCT RELATED
– Electric field strength
– Electrical conductivity
– Total treatment time
– pH
– Pulse width
– Water activity (a w )
– Pulse polarity
– Treatment temperature
– Pulsed shape (Square
wave, exponential
decay, oscillatory
pulses)
– Flow rate
MicrobiologicalMicrobiological resistanceresistance – Bacteria > Yeasts – Gram (+) > Gram (-) – Bacterial
MicrobiologicalMicrobiological resistanceresistance
– Bacteria > Yeasts
– Gram (+) > Gram (-)
– Bacterial spores & Mold ascospores > Vegetative
cells
– Stationary or Lag growth phase > Logarithmic
phase
Pulse electric field (PEF) Microbiology • Log phase cells are more sensitive than stationary phase
Pulse electric field (PEF)
Microbiology
• Log phase cells are more sensitive
than stationary phase cells
• Spores are not inactivated
(Mertens & Knorr, 1992; Gould, 2001)
PulsePulse ElectricElectric FieldField (PEF)(PEF) ProcessProcess ConditionsConditions Intrinsic and extrinsic factors
PulsePulse ElectricElectric FieldField (PEF)(PEF)
ProcessProcess ConditionsConditions
Intrinsic and extrinsic factors
influencing effectiveness:
• More inactivation with rising
temperatures
• Low ionic strength favors inactivation
• Reduction in pH increase
inactivation
(Qin et al., 1994; Jayaram et al., 1992)
PEFPEF processprocess conditionsconditions • Resistivity in general decreases as temperature increases •
PEFPEF processprocess conditionsconditions
• Resistivity in general decreases as
temperature increases
• Resistivity decreases as ionic strength
increases
– Hulsheger and Niemann (1980) found the same level of E.
coli inactivation in buffers of NaCl, Na 2 S 2 O 3 , NaH 2 PO 4,
• The bactericidal effect of PEF is generally
inversely proportional to the ionic
strength of the material treated
– Wouters and Smelt, 1997
PEF:PEF: lessless thermalthermal damagedamage toto foodsfoods FLAVOR • Cranberry juice treated with PEF was not
PEF:PEF: lessless thermalthermal damagedamage toto
foodsfoods
FLAVOR
• Cranberry juice treated with PEF was not
distinguishable from raw juice, although heat
treated juice was.
• Apple cider treated with PEF had no
detectable flavor differences from untreated
product when fresh
• Orange juice PEF treated at 65 o C was preferred
over heat pasteurized product, but not over
untreated product
PEF:PEF: lessless thermalthermal damagedamage toto foodsfoods COLOR • Cranberry juice retained more anthocyanin
PEF:PEF: lessless thermalthermal damagedamage toto
foodsfoods
COLOR
• Cranberry juice retained more
anthocyanin pigments after PEF
processing than after heat treatment
• Tomato salsa processed with PEF
retained a brighter red color than heat
processed product
• No significant color differences were
seen in orange juice or in apple cider
PEF:PEF: lessless thermalthermal damagedamage toto foodsfoods NUTRITIONAL COMPONENTS • Vitamin C loss was more
PEF:PEF: lessless thermalthermal damagedamage toto
foodsfoods
NUTRITIONAL COMPONENTS
• Vitamin C loss was more significant in heat
treated orange juice than in PEF treated juice
PROTEIN COAGULATION
• Coagulation in the treatment chamber leads to
reduced flow, non-uniform or over- treatment
and eventually plugging of the chamber.
ComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparison
ComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparisonComparison betweenbetweenbetweenbetweenbetweenbetweenbetweenbetween thermalthermalthermalthermalthermalthermalthermalthermal
processingprocessingprocessingprocessingprocessingprocessingprocessingprocessing andandandandandandandand PEFPEFPEFPEFPEFPEFPEFPEF
ISSUEISSUE
THERMALTHERMAL
PEFPEF
• Mode of operation Batch/continuous
Primarily continuous
• Process in Package
Yes
No
• Chemical changes
Many
Limited
• Physical changes
Many
None
• Enzyme Inactivation
Yes
Limited
PotentialPotentialPotentialPotential FoodFoodFoodFood ApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsApplications • Juice •
PotentialPotentialPotentialPotential FoodFoodFoodFood ApplicationsApplicationsApplicationsApplications
• Juice
• Milk
• Liquid eggs
• Soups
• Syrups, sauces
• Emulsion
• Flavor ingredients
ElectricElectric resistivityresistivity ofof variousvarious foodfood materialsmaterials Electric Conductivity Test
ElectricElectric resistivityresistivity ofof variousvarious
foodfood materialsmaterials
Electric
Conductivity
Test
Foods
resistivity
temperature
(ΩΩΩΩ-cm)
(mS/cm)
(oC)
Apple juice
Orange juice
Orange juice conc.
570
1.8
15
234
4.3
42
300
3.3
15
Tomato ketchup
42
23.8
15
Crushed tomatoes
125
8.0
50
Milk, skim
310
3.23
15
Milk, raw
230
4.4
20
Yogurt
169
5.9
23
Egg whites
Liquid whole egg
155
6.5
15
170
5.9
21
Zhang, et al., 1994
TheThe importanceimportance ofof pHpH inin PEFPEF formulationsformulations • High acid foods are more successfully
TheThe importanceimportance ofof pHpH inin PEFPEF
formulationsformulations
• High acid foods are more
successfully treated with PEF
– Vegetative organisms are more effectively
treated at lower pH
– product is a high acid or acidified food (pH
<4.5)
PEFPEF AdvantagesAdvantages && disadvantagesdisadvantages • High quality fresh-like liquid foods •
PEFPEF AdvantagesAdvantages && disadvantagesdisadvantages
• High quality fresh-like
liquid foods
• Limitations due to the
difficulty of inactivating
• Improve flavor, nutritional
value, and Shelf life
endospores and low
conductivity caused by
solids in foods.
• Foods retain their fresh
aroma, taste, and
appearance
• Regulatory requirements
developing
• Energy efficient process
compare to thermal
processing
• Difficult to incorporate
necessary equipment into
most production areas
(Ramaswamy, 2003)
CombinationCombination processesprocesses • PEF may offer synergistic effect with – Ultrasound – Temperature –
CombinationCombination processesprocesses
• PEF may offer synergistic effect with
– Ultrasound
– Temperature
– Chemical & additives
• e.g. Bacteriocin
– High pressure
• Sequential or simultaneous
PEF Work at OSU • Raw & UHT skim milk were PEF processed – 0.3
PEF Work at OSU
• Raw & UHT skim milk were PEF
processed
– 0.3 to 3.0 log reduction of P.
fluorescens, L. lactis and B. cereus
and of total m.o.’s in raw skim milk
– No changes in protein, total solids,
color, pH, particle size, and density
due to PEF effects
– Overall effectiveness of PEF vs.
Pasteurization (73 o C for 30s)
(Alvarez et al., 2003)
MicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobial
MicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobialMicrobial InactivationInactivationInactivationInactivationInactivationInactivationInactivationInactivation ofofofofofofofof
PulsedPulsedPulsedPulsedPulsedPulsedPulsedPulsed ElectricElectricElectricElectricElectricElectricElectricElectric FieldFieldFieldFieldFieldFieldFieldField TreatedTreatedTreatedTreatedTreatedTreatedTreatedTreated MilkMilkMilkMilkMilkMilkMilkMilk
Treatment Time (µs)
P. fluorescens
L. lactis
B.cereus
Microorganisms in
Raw Skim Milk
47
94
141
188
0
0
-1
-0.5
-2
-1
-1.5
-3
-2
-4
-2.5
-5
-3
-3.5
-6
P.fluorescens
L. lactis
B. cereus
Microorganisms in Raw Skim Milk
Pasteurization
PEF
Source: Michalac, Alvarez
,
2003
Log reductions, N/No (cfu mL-1)
Log reduction, N/No (cfu mL-1)
PULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSED ELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRIC
PULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSEDPULSED ELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRICELECTRIC FIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELDFIELD
PROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSINGPROCESSING
• Summary
– Principle
– Processing
parameters
– Applications and
effects
ReferencesReferences (PEF)(PEF) • Bendicho, S., Barbosa-canovas, G.V., and Martin, O. 2002. Milk processing by high
ReferencesReferences (PEF)(PEF)
• Bendicho, S., Barbosa-canovas, G.V., and Martin, O.
2002. Milk processing by high intensity pulsed
electric fields. Trends in Food Science & Technology,
13, 195-204.
• Michalac, S., Alvarez, V. B., Ji, T., and Zhang, Q.
2003. Inactivation of Selected Microorganisms and
Properties of Pulsed Electric Field Processed Milk. J.
Food Proc. and Preservation. 27 (2). 137-151.
• Ramaswamy, R., Jin, T., Balasubramaniam, V.M.,
and Zhang, H. 2005. Pulsed electric field processing.
Factsheet for food processors (FSE 2-05), The Ohio
State University, Columbus, OH, U.S.A.
(http://ohioline.osu.edu/fse-fact/0002.html)
• Wouters, P.C., Alvarez, I., and Raso, J. 2001.
Critical factors determining inactivation kinetics by
pulsed electric field food processing. Trends in Food
Science & Technology, 12, 112-121.