Skip to main content
Log in

Assessment of cell damage in high-pressure-shift frozen broccoli: comparison with market samples

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Food Research and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Pressure-shift freezing (PSF) is one of the most promising methods for obtaining high-quality frozen products. The aim of this work was to analyse the differences between broccoli that was frozen using two different PSF processes. In one of the processes, all the freezing was done inside the high-pressure vessel tempered at −20.5 °C. In the other process, the sample was taken out of the vessel after expansion, and freezing was completed using liquid N2. Colour, texture, electrical conductivity, microstructure and drip losses after centrifugation were analysed and a sensory test was performed. The results were compared with those for conventionally frozen broccoli purchased at the market. PSF broccoli presented less cell damage, lower drip losses and better texture than the market samples. The two different PSF processes assayed produced no significant differences in the final quality of the samples.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Li B, Sun DW (2002) J Food Eng 54:175–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Otero L, Sanz PD (2000) Biotechnol Prog 16:1030–1036

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kanda Y, Aoki M, Kosugi T (1992) Nippon Shokuhin Kogyo Gakkaishi 39:608–661

    Google Scholar 

  4. Fuchigami M, Teramoto A (1996) Texture and cryo-scanning electron micrographs of pressure shift frozen tofu. In: Hayashi R, Balny C (eds) High pressure bioscience and biotechnology, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, pp 411–414

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fuchigami M, Teramoto A (1997) J Food Sci 62:828–832 and 837

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Fuchigami M, Teramoto A, Ogawa N (1998) J Food Sci 63:1054–1057

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fuchigami M, Ogawa N, Teramoto A (2002) Innovat Food Sci Emerg Technol 3:139–147

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fuchigami M, Kato N, Teramoto A (1997) J Food Sci 62:804–808

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fuchigami M, Miyazaki K, Kato N, Teramoto A (1997) J Food Sci 62:809–812

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Otero L, Solas MT, Sanz PD, de Elvira C, Carrasco JA (1998) Eur Food Res Technol 206:338–342

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Otero L, Martino MN, Zaritzky N, Solas M, Sanz PD (2000) J Food Sci 65:466–470

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Koch H, Seyderhelm I, Wille P, Kalichevsky MT, Knorr D (1996) Nahrung 40:125–131

    Google Scholar 

  13. Fuchigami M, Kato N, Teramoto A (1998) J Food Sci 63:122–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Luscher C, Schlüter O, Knorr D (2005) Innovat Food Sci Emerg Technol 6:59–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Otero L, Sanz PD (2006) J Food Eng 72:354–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Chevalier D, Sequeira-Munoz A, Le Bail A, Simpson BK, Ghoul M (2000) Lebensm-Wiss u- Technol 33:570–577

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Chevalier D, Sequeira-Munoz A, Le Bail A, Simpson BK, Ghoul M (2001) Innovat Food Sci Emerg Technol 1:193–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Préstamo G, Palomares L, Sanz PD (2004) Eur Food Res Technol 219:598–604

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cover CM, Hsieh SJ, Tran SH, Hallden G, Kim GS, Bjeldanes LF, Firestone GL (1998) J Biol Chem 273:3838–3847

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Faulkner K, Mithem R, Willianson G (1998) Carcinogenesis 19:605–609

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Finley JW, Lisk DJ, Davis CD, Hintze KJ, Whanger PD (2001) J Agric Food Chem 49:2679–2683

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Xu H, Orner GA, Bailey GS, Stoner GD, Horio DT, Dashwood RH (2001) Carcinogenesis 22:309–314

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Houška M, Strohalm J, Kocurová K, Totušek J, Lefnerová D, Tríska J, Vrchotová N, Fiedleova V, Holasova M, Gabrovská D, Paulícková I. J Food Eng (in press)

  24. Fernández PP, Otero L, Guignon B, Sanz PD (2006) Food Hydro 20:510–522

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was carried out with financial support from the Spanish “Plan Nacional de I+D+i (2004-2006) MCYT” through the AGL 2003-06862-C02-00 project. P.P. Fernández thanks the CSIC of Spain for his grant in the context I3P program, supported by the European Social Fund. L. Otero was supported by a Ramón y Cajal research contract from the Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia in Spain.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pedro D. Sanz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fernández, P.P., Préstamo, G., Otero, L. et al. Assessment of cell damage in high-pressure-shift frozen broccoli: comparison with market samples. Eur Food Res Technol 224, 101–107 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-006-0294-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-006-0294-0

Keywords

Navigation