Ultrasound technology has various applications in the food industry including decontamination of foods through the use of cavitation bubbles generated by ultrasound to damage microbial cell membranes. Studies have shown ultrasound to be effective at reducing pathogens like E. coli and Salmonella both on its own and in combination with other sanitizers. Research is also being conducted on using ultrasound to assist with extraction of oils and other compounds from foods through applications like supercritical carbon dioxide extraction.

2. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 2

3. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 3

4. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 4

5. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 5
University of Horticultural Sciences, BagalkotUniversity of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot
Kittur Rani Channamma College of Horticulture, ArabhaviKittur Rani Channamma College of Horticulture, Arabhavi
Seminar ISeminar I
Ultrasound waves: A novel technology in food
industry
PrathikshaH
UHS15PGM575
Post Harvest Technology
PrathikshaH
UHS15PGM575
Post Harvest Technology

6. Topic divisionTopic division
Introduction
History
Principle
Types of devices
Applications :
Decontamination
Extraction
Preservation
Advantages
Limitations
Conclusion
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 6

7. IntroductionIntroduction
• Energy derived from sound waves
• Form of energy generated by sound waves of frequencies that
are too high to be detected by human ear, i.e. above 18
kHz.
• Ultrasound can propagatein gases, liquidsand solids.
Rastogi, 2011
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 7

8. • Thediscovery of ultrasound camewith Pierre Curie in 1880.
• In the 1960s, ultrasound technology was well established and
used for cleaning in steel and plastic industries.
• Food industry: Late1960s to characterize the foods such as
meat, fats and oils, milk, bread, fruit, and sauces based on
particle size, distribution and composition.
• Thediscovery of ultrasound camewith Pierre Curie in 1880.
• In the 1960s, ultrasound technology was well established and
used for cleaning in steel and plastic industries.
• Food industry: Late1960s to characterize the foods such as
meat, fats and oils, milk, bread, fruit, and sauces based on
particle size, distribution and composition.
Jose et al., 2014
HistoryHistory
04/13/17 8Post harvest technology

9. • Ultrasound when propagated through a biological structure
induces compressions and rarefactions of the particles and a
high amount of energy is imparted.
04/13/17 9Post harvest technology
Rastogi, 2011

10. PrinciplePrinciple
At sufficiently high power, the rarefaction exceeds the attractive
forces between molecules in a liquid phase, which subsequently
leads to the formation of cavitation bubbles.
04/13/17 10Post harvest technology
Rastogi, 2011

11. • In food industry, the application of ultrasound can be divided
based on range of frequency:
high power ultrasound (frequency 20KHz to 1MHz)
low power ultrasound (frequency more than 1MHz)
04/13/17 11Post harvest technology
Rastogi, 2011

12. Types
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 12

13. 04/13/17 13Post harvest technology

14. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 14
DecontaminationDecontamination:: The free
radicals, act on the cell
membrane of microbes, enter
the cells and break them
down.

15. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 15
13/12/12
Objective: To study the effectiveness of
thermosonication in inactivating
Escherichia coli O157:H7 and
Salmonella enteritidis in mango
juice
Kiang et al., 2012

16. Treatment detailsTreatment details
Control: Untreated juice
Ultrasound treatment time:
1, 3, 5, 7, 10 min
Treatment temperatures: 50°C and 60°C
Frequency: 25kHz
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 16
Kiang et al., 2012

17. % injury*
Treatment
condition
Treatment
time (min)
Escherichia
coli O157:H7
Salmonella
enteritidis
Without
Sonication
0 59.81a 40.64a
1 66.63b 87.10b
3 69.86b 98.17c
5 61.32b 98.43c
7 86.58c 99.78c
10 95.17d 99.93c
With
Sonication
0 47.91a 38.70a
1 70.77b 79.27b
3 79.47c 97.96c
5 84.10c 99.99c99.99c
7 98.84d98.84d 99.99c99.99c
10 98.53d98.53d 99.99c99.99c
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 17
Table 1: Percent injury of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in mango
juice treated with and without sonication at 50°C
Table 1: Percent injury of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in mango
juice treated with and without sonication at 50°C
Kiang et al., 2012
p<0.05

18. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 18
% injury*
Treatment
condition
Treatment
time (min)
Escherichia
coli O157:H7
Salmonella
enteritidis
Without
Sonication
0 65.31b 50.48a
1 72.49b 75.81b
3 74.81b 78.53c
5 79.14c 89.79c
7 78.23c 98.80c
With
Sonication
0 64.68b 63.79b
1 71.65b 88.14c
3 75.38b 99.12d99.12d
5 99.92d99.92d 99.56d99.56d
7 99.95d99.95d 99.90d99.90d
Table 2: Percent injury of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in mango
juice treated with and without sonication at 60°C
Table 2: Percent injury of Escherichia coli O157:H7 and Salmonella enteritidis in mango
juice treated with and without sonication at 60°C
Kiang et al., 2012
p<0.05

19. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 19
Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of
ultrasound treatment combined
with commercial sanitizers in the
decontamination step of minimally
processed cherry tomatoes.
Jose and Vanetti, 2012

20. Treatment details
Temperature: 22°C
Time: 10 min
Sanitizersused:
Sodium dichloroisocyanurate(200mg/L)
Hydrogen peroxide(5%)
Peracetic acid (40mg/L)
Chlorinedioxide(10mg/L)
Ultrasound frequency: 45 kHz
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 20
Jose and Vanetti, 2012

21. Treatment Time
(min)
Reductions log
(N/No)
Sodium dichloroisocyanurate 200
mg/L
10 0.41±0.2 a
Peracetic acid 40 mg/L 10 2.73±0.6 c
Ultrasound 45 kHz 10 0.83±0.5 b
Ultrasound 45 kHz 20 1.22±0.3 b
Ultrasound 45 kHz 30 1.73±0.4 b
Ultrasound 45 kHz & Peracetic acid
40 mg/L
10 3.883.88±0.5±0.5 cc
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 21
Table 3: Effect of sanitization treatments in reducing the population of Salmonella
typhimurium ATCC 14028 adhered on surfaces of whole cherry tomatoes.
Jose and Vanetti, 2012
p<0.05

22. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 22
Fig. 1: Number of logarithmic cycles reduced in the initial count of aerobic mesophiles ( )
and molds and yeast ( ) contaminants on cherry tomatoes sanitized using different
methods. SD: Sodium dichloroisocyanurate; US: Ultrasound; HP: Hydrogen
peroxide; PAA: Peracetic acid; DC: Chlorine dioxide.
Jose and Vanetti, 2012
3.4
4.4

23. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 23
Fig. 2: Photomicrographs of Salmonella typhimurium ATCC 14028 cells adhered to the
surface of cherry tomatoes after 48 h, imaged using scanning electron microscopy:
non-sanitized (A), after sanitization with 40 mg/L peracetic acid (B), after sanitization
with 40 mg/L peracetic acid combined with ultrasound for 10 min(C).
Jose and Vanetti, 2012

24. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 24
Objective: To summarize and synthesize
the results of studies and
articles about ultrasonic processing
which can be adapted to the wash water
decontamination process for fruits and
vegetables.
Bilek and Taurantus,Bilek and Taurantus,

25. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 25
Treatments Pre-cut Post-cut
TVC YMC TVC YMC
Ultrasound −US (45 kHz, 1
min) 1.3b 0.9e 0.5a 0.5c
Combined applications
Chlorinated water (200 ppm
free chlorine/5 min,
5 °C) + US (45 kHz, 1 min)
1.0b 0.9e 0.9b 0.8de
Ozonated water (1 ppm/5
min, 5 °C),
+US (45 kHz, 1 min) 0.2a 0.5c 0.4a 0.6cd
Table 4: The effects of singular and combined decontamination treatments
applied on the microbial load in pre-cut and post-cut shredded carrots (log10
CFU/g): mesophilic total viable counts (TVC) and yeast and mold counts
(YMC) (summarized from Alegria et al., 2009).
Bilek and Taurantus,Bilek and Taurantus,
p<0.05

26. Concentrations
(ClO2 -ppm)
Apples Lettuce
ClO2 alone ClO2+ US ClO2 alone ClO2+ US
5 2.5a 3.7b 1.7a 1.7a
10 2.5a 3.9b 2.1a 2.2b
20 2.5a 3.7b 2.1a 3.0c
40 2.5a 4.2b 2.2a 3.6d
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 26
Table 5: The reduction values of different concentrations of chlorine dioxide
single and combined with ultrasound (170kHz, 10 mins) on Salmonella
spp. in apples and lettuce samples (summarized from Huang et al., 2006).
Bilek and Taurantus,Bilek and Taurantus,
p<0.05

27. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 27
Table 6: The reduction values of different concentrations of chlorine dioxide
single and combined with ultrasound (170kHz, 10 mins) on E. coli O157:H7
in apples and lettuce samples (summarized from Huang et al., 2006).
Concentrations
(ClO2 -ppm)
Apples Lettuce
ClO2 alone ClO2+ US ClO2 alone ClO2+ US
5 1.7a 3.2b 1.5a 1.7a
10 1.8a 3.1b 1.7a 1.7a
20 1.8a 3.7b 1.8a 2.3b
40 2.2a 3.8b 1.9a 2.4b
Bilek and Taurantus,Bilek and Taurantus,
p<0.05

28. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 28
Sanitizer
Reduction (log10 CFU/g sample)
Alone
sanitizer
Sanitizer + US
(21.2 kHz, 2 min)
Water 1.0a 2.1b
Chlorinated water
(200 mg/L)
2.0b
3.1c
Acidic electrolysed water
(80 mg/L)
2.2b
3.1c
Peroxyacetic acid
(80 mg/L)
2.2b
2.9c
Acidified sodium chlorite
(200 mg/L)
3.1c
4.0d
Table 7: The reduction of E. coli O157:H7 on the surface of spinach with
ultrasound (US, 21.2 kHz, 2 min) in combination with selected sanitizers
(summarized from Zhou et al., 2009)
Bilek and Taurantus,Bilek and Taurantus,
p<0.05

29. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 29
Treatments
Microbial counts (log10 CFU/g sample)
TVC
(mesophilic)
TVC
(psychrotrophic)
YMC
Control (tap water washing,
without US) 3.9a 3.7a 2.7a
ClO2 (40 mg/L) + US in ClO2
solution
(40 kHz, 10 min)
1.6b 1.5b 1.3b
ClO2 (40 mg/L) + US in tap
water
(40 kHz, 10 min)
0.9c 0.8c 0.7c
Table 8: The microbial counts on (log10 CFU/g) plum fruit treated with combined
ClO2 and ultrasound (summarized from Chen and Zhu, 2011)
TVC: total viable count.
YMC: yeast and mold count.
Bilek and Taurantus,Bilek and Taurantus,
p<0.05

30. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 30
Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010
jhj

31. Treatment detailsTreatment details
Treatment time: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 min
Amplitudes: 24.4µm, 30.5µm, 42.7µm,
54.9µm and 61µm
Temperature: 25°C
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 31
Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010

32. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 32
Fig. 3: Survival curves for yeast inactivation as a function of time at varying amplitude
levels of A (24.4 μm), B (30.5 μm), C (42.7 μm), D (54.9 μm), E (61.0 μm).
Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010
5.8
5.3
5

33. Amplitude (µm) k×10−2 β (shape factor)
24.4 3.234±0.477 1.46±0.792
30.5 3.494±0.429 1.44±0.118
42.7 5.400±0.499 2.05±0.491
54.9 5.437±0.835 3.62±1.043
61.0 6.672±0.434 4.95±0.600
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 33
Table 9: Effect of amplitude level (μm) on the inactivation rate constants
(±SD) and shape factor (±SD)
Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010
p<0.05

34. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 34
Fig. 4: Changes in (A) inactivation rate constant (k×10−2) and (B) shape factor (β) as a
function of amplitude level (μm).
Fig. 4: Changes in (A) inactivation rate constant (k×10−2) and (B) shape factor (β) as a
function of amplitude level (μm).
Adekunte et al., 2010Adekunte et al., 2010
6.67
3.23
1.46
4.95

35. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 35
Extraction:Extraction: It has been proposed as an
alternative to conventional
extraction, providing higher recovery
of targeted compounds

36. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 36
Objective: To development and validate an
innovative, robust, stable, reliable and
efficient ultrasonic system at pilot
scale to assist supercritical CO2 extraction
of oils from different substrates
Riera et al., 2009

37. Treatment detailsTreatment details
Almond
pressure: 320 barsand 280 bars
temperature: 45°C
Cocoacake
pressure: 320 bars
temperature: 65°C
Frequency: 20kHz
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 37
Riera et al., 2009

38. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 38
Riera et al., 2009
Fig. 5: Almond-oil extraction curve at 280 bar and 45ºC with ( ) and without ( )
ultrasounds
15.5
8

39. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 39
Riera et al., 2009
Fig. 6: Almond-oil extraction curve at 320 bar and 45ºC with ( ) and without( )
ultrasound
14
8

40. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 40
Riera et al., 2009
Fig. 7: Cocoa cake-oil extraction curve at 320 bar and 65ºC with ( ) and
without ( ) ultrasounds
16.5
12.5

41. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 41
Objective: To investigate the use of
ultrasound-assisted extraction
(UAE) in recovery of volatile
compounds from the Cannabis
sativa L. cultivar
Objective: To investigate the use of
ultrasound-assisted extraction
(UAE) in recovery of volatile
compounds from the Cannabis
sativa L. cultivar
Porto et al., 2014

42. Treatment detailsTreatment details
Maceration: With 70% ethanol for 3 hrs
Ultrasound assisted extraction
Frequency: 20kHz
UAE5: 5 min
UAE10: 10 min
UAE15: 15 min
Temperature: 30°C
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 42
Porto et al., 2014

43. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 43
Fig. 8: Comparison of terpenes content from Cannabis sativa inflorescences
extracted using maceration (M) and ultrasound-assisted extraction for
5 (UAE5), 10 (UAE10) and 15 min (UAE15)
Porto et al., 2014
0.4
4.8
5.3

44. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 44
Table 10: Volatile composition of Cannabis sativa extracts obtained by
maceration (M) and by ultrasound-assisted extraction for 5 (UAE5), 10
(UAE10) and 15 min (UAE15)
Porto et al., 2014
p<0.05

45. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 45
Nutrients: Being a non-thermal
process, loss of nutrients is highly
reduced.

46. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 46
Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013
Objectives: To evaluate the effect of
ultrasound on the quality
parameters: pH, TSS, acidity,
ascorbic acid, total phenols
and flavonoids of grapefruit
juice.
Objectives: To evaluate the effect of
ultrasound on the quality
parameters: pH, TSS, acidity,
ascorbic acid, total phenols
and flavonoids of grapefruit
juice.

47. Control: No sonication
Sonication :
temperature: 20°C
frequency: 28kHz
US30: 30 min
US60: 60 min
US90: 90 min
Treatment detailsTreatment details
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 47
Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013

48. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 48
Treatment TA (%) TSS (Brix) pH
Control 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.60 ± 0.20a 4.91 ± 0.01a
US30 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.53 ± 0.10a 4.91 ± 0.01a
US60 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.50 ± 0.10a 4.90 ± 0.01a
US90 0.16 ± 0.01a 9.50 ± 0.23a 4.90 ± 0.01a
Table 11. Effect of sonication on titratable acidity, total soluble solids and pH of
grapefruit juice
Table 11. Effect of sonication on titratable acidity, total soluble solids and pH of
grapefruit juice
Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013
p<0.05

49. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 49
Treatment Ascorbic acid
(mg/100 ml)
Total
phenolics
(GAE µg/g)
Total flavonoids
(catechin
equivalent µg/g)
Control 27.83 ± 0.03d 757.96±0.04d 462.27 ± 0.08d
US30 31.81 ± 0.04c 769.93±0.07c 485.00 ± 0.04c
US60 35.40 ± 0.08b 814.30±0.06b 598.64 ± 0.06b
US90 35.75 ± 0.07a35.75 ± 0.07a
826.27±0.0826.27±0.0
8a8a
603.18 ± 0.03a603.18 ± 0.03a
Table 12: Effect of sonication on ascorbic acid, total phenols and
flavonoids in grapefruit juice
Table 12: Effect of sonication on ascorbic acid, total phenols and
flavonoids in grapefruit juice
Aadil et al., 2013Aadil et al., 2013
p<0.05

50. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 50
Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016
Objective: To investigate in detail the
effect of ultrasound treatment
on the quality of carrot juice
including physicochemical
parameters, bioactive compounds
and microbial load

51. Control: No sonication
T1: Extraction and sonication for 20 min
T2: Extraction and sonication for 40 min
T3: Extraction and sonication for 60 min
Temperature: 25°C
Frequency: 25kHz
Treatment detailsTreatment details
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 51
Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016

52. Treatment time
(min)
pH
Viscosity
(cP)
0 5.22 ± 0.03a 1.97 ± 0.05c
20 5.21 ± 0.04a 2.06 ± 0.04b
40 5.23 ± 0.02a 2.18 ± 0.07a
60 5.25 ± 0.03a 2.23 ± 0.08a2.23 ± 0.08a
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 52
Table 13: Effect of ultrasound treatment on pH and viscosity of carrot juice
Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016
p<0.05

53. Treatment
time
(min)
Visual color
L* a* b*
0 32.86 ± 0.06c 3.94 ± 0.05b 6.87 ± 0.04d
20 33.02 ± 0.05b 3.99 ± 0.05b 6.98 ± 0.03c
40 33.14 ± 0.03a 4.08 ± 0.03a 7.09 ± 0.06b
60
33.19 ±33.19 ±
0.07a0.07a
4.14 ± 0.04a4.14 ± 0.04a 7.19 ± 0.03a7.19 ± 0.03a
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 53
Table 14: Effect of ultrasound treatment on visual color of carrot juice
Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016
p<0.05

54. Treatment
time
(min)
Total soluble
solids
(°Brix)
Total sugars
(g/L)
Total
carotenoids
(mg/L)
Ascorbic acid
(mg/L)
0 4.04 ± 0.05b 14.42 ± 0.12b 3.47 ± 0.12c 5.26 ± 0.10c
20 4.09 ± 0.06ab 14.58 ± 0.11b 3.68 ± 0.07b 5.45 ± 0.08b
40
4.12 ±4.12 ±
0.05ab0.05ab
14.79 ±14.79 ±
0.09a0.09a
3.89 ± 0.13a3.89 ± 0.13a 5.69 ± 0.14a5.69 ± 0.14a
60 4.19 ± 0.07a4.19 ± 0.07a
14.82 ±14.82 ±
0.14a0.14a
3.94 ± 0.14a3.94 ± 0.14a 5.67 ± 0.12a5.67 ± 0.12a
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 54
Table 15: Effect of ultrasound treatment on total soluble solids, total sugars,
total carotenoids and ascorbic acid contents of carrot juice
Zou and Jiang, 2016Zou and Jiang, 2016
p<0.05

55. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 55
Treatment
time
(min)
Total plate count
(log CFU/ml)
Total yeast and mold
counts
(log CFU/ml)
0 4.22 ± 0.21a 3.97 ± 0.15a
20 3.71 ± 0.15b 3.36 ± 0.17b
40 3.45 ± 0.10c 3.25 ± 0.11b
60 3.23 ± 0.11d 3.03 ± 0.09c
Table 16: Effect of ultrasound treatment on microbial survival in
carrot juice
Table 16: Effect of ultrasound treatment on microbial survival in
carrot juice
p<0.05

56. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 56
Objective: To study the effect of
ultrasonic treatment on
physicochemical properties of
juices extracted from two
pomegranate parts (whole
pomegranate and arils alone)
Aligourchi et al., 2013

57. Treatment detailsTreatment details
Ultrasonication:
Frequency: 20kHz
Temperature: 25°C
Waveamplitudes: 50%, 75% and 100%
Treatment time: 3, 6 and 9 min
Varieties: Malase Momtaze Saveh & Alak
Saveh
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 57
Aligourchi et al., 2013

58. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 58
MMSA ASA MMSW ASW
TSS (°Brix) 16.7±0.1d 17.2±0.1c 18.1±0.1b 18.9±0.1a18.9±0.1a
pH 3.56±0.01a 3.09±0.02b 3.54±0.01a 3.05±0.01b3.05±0.01b
TA
(g/100mL)
0.81±0.01d 1.61±0.00b 0.93±0.01c 1.67±0.02a1.67±0.02a
TAC (mg/L) 375.5±12.9b 409.4±6.1a409.4±6.1a 338.7±3.3d 355.8±4.1c
TPC
(mg/100mL)
204.6±6.9c 234.9±4.6b 278.3±11.0a 290.7±6.8a290.7±6.8a
** Total soluble solids (TSS); total titratable acidity (TA); total phenolic content (TPC); total
anthocyanin pigment content (TAC)
Table 17: Main physicochemical quality parameters of untreated pomegranate
juices obtained from: Malase Momtaze Saveh arils (MMSA); Alak Saveh arils
(ASA); whole Malase Momtaze Saveh pomegranate (MMSW); and whole
Alak Saveh pomegranate (ASW)
Table 17: Main physicochemical quality parameters of untreated pomegranate
juices obtained from: Malase Momtaze Saveh arils (MMSA); Alak Saveh arils
(ASA); whole Malase Momtaze Saveh pomegranate (MMSW); and whole
Alak Saveh pomegranate (ASW)
Aligourchi et al., 2013
p<0.05

59. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 59
Ultrasonic
power
(%)
T (min) TAC(mg/L)
TPC
(mg/100mL)
Antioxidant
(mg/100mL)
β-carotene
(%ALPA)
0 0 409±6ab 235±5ab 1130±67a 79±5ab
50 3 408±12ab 229±3ab 1231±44a 77±2ab
6 381±10c 229±7ab 1108±46a 76±1b
9 425±22ab 224±4b 1282±96a 77±2ab
75 3 385±5c 243±9ab 1219±39a 84±5ab
6 388±12bc 245±6ab 1243±128a 79±0ab
9 403±10bc 236±10ab 1203±90a 80±4ab
100 3 442±5a 249±10a 1220±102a 89±1a
6 400±4bc 239±7ab 1288±80a 85±1ab
9 373±8c 235±6ab 1277±44a 89±3a
Table 18: Evaluation of total anthocyanin (mg/L), total polyphenol content (mg/100 mL
juice), assay of antioxidant activities based on ABTS (mg/100 mL juice) and β-carotene
(%ALPA) in pomegranate juice (ASA) as a function of the ultrasonic amplitude
levels and treatment times.
Aligourchi et al., 2013
p<0.05

60. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 60
Ultrasonic
power (%)
T
(min)
TAC(mg/L)
TPC
(mg/100mL)
Antioxidant
(mg/100mL)
β-carotene
(%ALPA)
0 0 356±4a 291±7b 1558±109a 92±5a
50 3 361±4a 312±10ab 1524±88a 89±1a
6 354±11a 294±15ab 1569±101a 93±5a
9 347±4a 315±17ab 1438±117a 85±2a
75 3 341±9a 285±14b 1539±96a 89±2a
6 339±4a 298±10ab 1498±106a 93±0a
9 344±7a 283±15b 1442±109a 89±4a
100 3 348±15a 306±8a 1482±67a 88±3a
6 343±8a 318±13a 1511±128a 92±1a
9 335±7a
340±15a
1423±74a 89±2a
Table 19: Evaluation of total anthocyanin (mg/L), total polyphenol content (mg/100 mL
juice), assay of antioxidant activities based on ABTS (mg/100 mL juice) and β-carotene
(%ALPA) in pomegranate juice (ASW) as a function of the ultrasonic amplitude
levels and treatment times.
Aligourchi et al., 2013
p<0.05

61. AdvantagesAdvantages
Rapid processand high output
Low energy consumption
Reduced processing cost
Non-thermal technology
Higher purity
Green technology
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 61

62. LimitationsLimitations
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 62
High initial investment
Budding technology
Narrow spectrum of application
Skilled labour requirement

63. ConclusionConclusion
This technology can be effectively used in
decontamination of fruits and vegetables,
enhancestheeffectivenessof sterilizers.
It improves the extraction process as well
asretention of nutrients.
04/13/17 Post harvest technology 63

64. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 64

65. 04/13/17 Post harvest technology 65