Texture improvement of processed carrots by modifying pectin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heat sterilization of fruits and vegetables is accompanied by a pronounced texture loss, mainly due to beta-eliminative depolymerization of the cell wall pectin resulting in reduced intercellular adhesion. Food technologists are trying to minimize this texture loss. On the one hand, they focus on optimizing the existing thermal methods. On the other hand, they search for novel, less degradative processing technologies. High pressure processing has shown potential and is currently successfully applied on a commercial scale for pasteurization. To explore the potential of high pressure sterilization, the effect of combined high pressure/high temperature (HP/HT) processing on the texture of carrots and on the related pectin components was compared with that of high temperature treated samples. Carrot disks (Daucus carota var. Yukon) were subjected to three different treatments (80 °C-0.1 MPa, 100 °C-0.1 MPa, 80 °C-600 MPa). Subsequently, the residual hardness and microstructure were investigated. The pectin, isolated as alcohol insoluble residue, was fractionated into water (WSP), chelator (CSP) and sodium carbonate (NSP) soluble pectin. Thermal treatments at 0.1 MPa caused enormous tissue softening. This was marked by reduced cell-cell adhesion and an increase in WSP paralleled by a decrease in CSP and NSP. These results confirm that an extensive solubilization and/or degradation of pectin occurs during thermal processing. In contrast, HP/HT treated carrots showed minimal softening and negligible changes in intercellular adhesion. This was accompanied by a significant lower degree of methyl esterification of the pectin, dissimilar pectin fractions ratios and minor inter-conversions in the pectin fractions during treatment, indicating less solubilization. These results suggest an inhibition of the beta-elimination at HP/HT. So, there was a clear difference between pectin in HP/HT and thermally processed carrots; HP/HT treated carrots showing pronounced texture preservation. Concerning the quality parameter texture, high pressure sterilization offers an interesting alternative for heat sterilization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".