Chemical and sensory comparison of fresh and dried lulo (Solanum quitoense Lam.) fruit aroma

Diana Paola Forero, Carlos Eduardo Orrego, Devin Grant Peterson, Coralia Osorio

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

34 Scopus citations

Abstract

The odour-active volatile compounds of lulo fruit (Solanum quitoense Lam.) were isolated by solvent extraction followed by solvent-assisted flavour evaporation (SAFE). GC-O and GCMS analyses as well as quantitation by internal standard method showed that (Z)-3-hexenal, ethyl butanoate, 3-sulphanylhexyl acetate, and ethyl hexanoate were key aroma compounds in this fruit. Other odorants with relevance because their contribution (high OAVs) to the overall aroma were 4-hydroxy-2,5-dimethyl-3(2H)-furanone, methyl benzoate, (E)-2-hexenal, and hexanal. Lulo fruit pulp in presence of maltodextrin DE-20 was dried by using four different types of drying methods: hot air-drying (HD), spray drying (SD), lyophilisation (LD), and ultrasonic convective hot air-drying (HUD). LD sample exhibited the highest sensory rank (lulo-like) in comparison with fresh fruit pulp. Hot-air drying processes (HD and HUD) changed adversely the aroma of lulo fruit pulp.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)85-91
Number of pages7
JournalFood Chemistry
Volume169
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 15 2015

Keywords

  • Lyophilisation
  • Odour-active volatiles
  • Solanum quitoense Lam
  • Spray-drying
  • Ultrasonic convective drying

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Chemical and sensory comparison of fresh and dried lulo (Solanum quitoense Lam.) fruit aroma'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this