JFOODENG-D-10-01056__-_revisions-düzeltil Möner

8/8/2019 JFOODENG-D-10-01056__-_revisions-dzeltil Mner

1/29

1

Fitting Ficks Model to Analyze Water Diffusion into Chickpeas During Soaking with1

Ultrasound Treatment2

3

Ali YILDIRIMa, Mehmet Durdu NERb*, Mustafa BAYRAMb4

5

aDepartment of Food Technology, Vocational School of Higher Education in Nizip, Gaziantep University,6

27700, Nizip, Gaziantep, TURKEY7

8

bDepartment of Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Gaziantep University, 27310, Gaziantep,9

TURKEY10

11

Running title: Fitting Fick Mdl to ultrs trtd Chickpea12

13

*Corresponding author:14

Prof.Dr. Mehmet Durdu ner15

Department of Food Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Gaziantep University, 27310, Gaziantep, TURKEY16

Phone number:+90(342)317230517

Fax number: +90(342)317236218

E-mail address:[email protected]

20

Abstract21

Ficks model together with Arrhenius relationship were successfully used to evaluate22

water absorption of chickpea during soaking at a temperature range of 20-97 oC with 25 kHz23

100 W, 40 kHz 100 W and 25 kHz 300 W ultrasound treatments. Use of ultrasound, increase24

in ultrasound power and soaking temperature significantly (P


2/29

2

chickpea was found as 61.47 oC. Activation energy (Ea) values of chickpea for below and27

above gelatinization temperature were found to be 28.69 and 9.34 kJ mol-1, respectively.28

Ultrasound treatments significantly decreased the soaking time of chickpea.29

30

Keywords:Chickpea, fitting, Ficks model, ultrasound, water diffusion31

32

ABBREVIATIONS33

AOAC: Official methods of analysis of AOAC International34

EAD: Acoustic energy density in W cm-335

Deff : Water diffusion coefficient in m2 s-136

d.b.: Moisture content in dry basis (%)37

inci: A special type of chickpea produced by ukurova Agricultural Research Institute38

(Adana, Turkey)39

40

1. Introduction41

Chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is one of the oldest and most widely consumed legumes in42

the world, particularly in tropical and subtropical areas. Major chickpea producer and exporter43

countries are India, Turkey, Pakistan, Iran Islamic Republic, and Australia. Chickpea is an44

important source of proteins, carbohydrates, B-group vitamins and certain minerals (Chavan45

et al., 1986; Christodoulou et al., 2006a). Food legumes decreased incidence of several46

diseases, such as cancer, cardiovascular diseases, obesity and diabetes (Bhathena &47

Velasquez, 2002). Legumes are usually cooked before being used in the human diet to48

improve the protein quality by destruction or inactivation of the heat labile anti-nutritional49

factors (Wang et al., 1997). Recently, there has been increasing demand for research to50

improve cooking of chickpeas in developed countries where chickpeas are mainly consumed51


3/29

3

to improve overall nutritional status by replacing animal foods with legumes (Guillon &52

Champ, 1996). The most common process of pre-soaking usually is not sufficient to decrease53

overall cooking time of chickpea. Understanding water absorption in legumes during soaking54

is of practical importance since it affects subsequent processing operations and the quality of55

the final product.56

Ultrasound is a form of energy generated by sound waves of frequencies that are too high57

to be detected by human ear, i.e. above 16 kHz (Jayasooriya et al., 2004). Ultrasound58

cavitations could result in the occurrence of micro streaming which is able to enhance heat59

and mass transfer. Ultrasonic is a rapidly growing field of research, which is finding60

increasing use in the food industry (Jayasooriya et al., 2004; Zheng & Sun, 2006). Ultrasound61

has been used to enhance mass transfer in solid/liquid food systems (Fuente et al., 2004; Riera62

et al., 2004). Ultrasound applications were reported to promote the leaching of63

oligosaccharides in legumes (Han & Baik (2006) and to reduce cooking time of rice64

(Wambura et al., 2008).65

In the food industry, chickpea is pre-processed in the factories to produce humus (as66

arabic food), canned products, blended powder products. To produce these products, chickpea67

is soaked and cooked. Therefore, this study supplies important information and ultrasonic68

technique to process it easily. In addition, it is known that chickpea is a hard legume to cook.69

Therefore, ultrasonic technique supply a new solution to decrease soaking and cooking time.70

These studies show that thermosonication can be used to increase the water absorption71

during soaking operation. The objective of this study was to determine the applicability of72

Ficks second law of diffusion in modeling the water diffusion characteristics of ultrasound73

treated chickpea in an attempt to determine suitable processing conditions for rehydration.74

75

76


4/29

4

2. Materials and Methods77

2.1. Raw materials78

Certified chickpeas (inci-2003) with initial moisture content of 11.58 % (d.b.) and an79

average diameter of 8.00 (0.27) mm (measured with Mutitoyo No. 505633, Japan, digital80

micrometer) obtained from ukurova Agricultural Research Institute (Adana, Turkey), were81

used throughout this study. After removing foreign materials and damaged seeds, they were82

sieved to standardize the sizes, 7.5 mm to 9 mm.83

84

2.2. Water absorption determination during soaking operation85

The soaking of chickpea was performed at 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 87, 92 and 97 86

oC without, and with 25 kHz 100 W (acoustic energy density (EAD) of 0.025 W cm-3), 4087

kHz 100 W (EAD of 0.025 W cm-3) and 25 kHz 300 W (EAD of 0.017 W cm-3) ultrasound88

treatments. One hundred grams of chickpea seeds were immersed in 2000 ml deionized water89

(1:20); conventional and ultrasonic soaking were both performed in ultrasonic (US) tanks90

(Intersonik Co., Turkey) until seeds were fully hydrated. Four grams of chickpea and 80 ml91

soaking water (1:20) were quickly removed from the tanks for the moisture content92

determination within 30 minutes intervals. Chickpea seeds were gently wiped with clean93

paper towel to remove excess water and ground for themoisture content determination. The94

moisture contents of randomly selected grains (5 g) were determined in dry basis at 105 oC for95

48 h using oven drying method (AOAC, 2002) and used for Ficks modeling of water96

diffusion. The experiments were replicated twice and measurements were duplicated.97

98

2.3. Determination of soluble solids loss during soaking of chickpeas99

Four grams of chickpea and 80 mL of soaking water (1:20 ratio) were removed from the100

soaking chamber after 3.5 h of soaking operation at 97o

C. Soluble solids content (Brix, g/g%)101


5/29

5

of the soaking water was measured at 25 oC by using Abbe-refractometer (Opton-F.G. Bode102

and Co., Germany) and was reported as maximum soluble solids loss.103

104

2.4. Determination of gelatinization temperature of chickpeas105

Birefringence images of the chickpea samples at soaking temperatures of 40, 50, 60 and106

70 oC were captured in a PC using a polarized light microscope (OLYPOS TX51, Euromex107

Microscopen, Ed Arnhem, Netherlands) equipped with a video camera (VC 3031, Euromex108

Microscopen, Ed Arnhem, Netherlands) connected to the PC (Figure 6). A solution of 1 %109

(cooked chickpea flour/water) samples was prepared. After 30 minutes of mixing, 20 L of110

sample solution was spread on lamella, and the birefringence images were captured through111

the microscope. The gelatinization temperature of the grains is defined as the temperature at112

which the birefringence of starch start to diminish (Hoseney, 1994).113

114

2.5. Statistical analysis115

SIGMA PLOT 10 (Jandel Scientific, San Francisco, USA) were used to fit the models116

and to plot the data. ANOVA and DUNCAN Multiple Range Tests, using SPSS version 16, at117

P < 0.05 were performed to determine effect of processing parameters.118

119

3. Results and Discussion120

3.1. Water diffusion characteristics of chickpea during soaking121

Food legumes are usually soaked before cooking to provide sufficient amount of moisture122

for gelatinization of starch and/or gelation of protein. The most important property for123

soaking of chickpea is the moisture content to achieve the proper cooking operation. It could124

be achieved either through conditioning below the gelatinization temperature and then125

cooking above the gelatinization temperature, or through direct cooking above the126

gelatinization temperature. Mass transfer plays a key role in food processing, like127


6/29

6

humidification and dehumidification, dehydration, distillation, absorption, etc. The driving128

force for mass diffusion is the concentration difference. In solids, there can obviously be no129

convection and all movements are by molecular diffusion due to random molecular130

movements.131

The water absorption characteristics of chickpea were analyzed using moisture content132

(%, d.b.) values in this study. The mean moisture contents and the statistical analysis of133

soaked chickpeas at 20-97 oC without ultrasound, and with 25 kHz 100 W, 40 kHz 100 W and134

25 kHz 300 W ultrasounds treatment were illustrated in Figures 1-4 and tabulated in Tables 1-135

4. The moisture contents (%, d.b.) of chickpea during soaking were significantly (P


7/29

7

coefficient is the factor of proportionality representing the quantity of substance diffusing153

across a unit area through a unit concentration gradient in unit time. Total amounts of154

diffusing substance entered a spherical grain of radius r can be obtained from the following155

Ficks series type equation (Crank, 1975):156

=

=

tnr

D

nMM

MMeff

neo

e 2

2

2

122

exp6

(1)157

Where M, Me, Mo are moisture contents (%, d.b.) at any time, equilibrium and initial,158

respectively. Deffand r are effective diffusion constant (m2 s-1) and average radius of chickpea159

(m), respectively. A fit of the experimental data for soaking times leads to the determination160

of an average diffusion coefficient, Deff, via Eq. 1 which is Ficks law of diffusion of water in161

solids of spherical shape. The chickpea seeds may be approximated as spheres with a mean162

diameter of 0.0040 m (0.0001). Ficks laws of diffusion (Eq. 1) and its derived equations163

account for most of the models used in food science, as can be observed from publications164

(Garcia-Pascual et al., 2006; Gowen et al., 2007; Sabapathy et al., 2005). Some of the165

common assumptions and simplifications often made for solving Ficks second law (Eq. 1)166

include the following: 1) the moisture transfer is one dimensional, unsteady state in the radial167

direction, 2) chickpea is considered to be an almost spherical object, 3) the initial temperature168

and moisture distributions are uniform, 4) there is a moisture gradient in the chickpea with169

respect to time, 5) the thermal properties are constant, 6) chickpea is considered as a170

homogeneous isotropic solid, 7) moisture transfer to and from the seed is due to concentration171

gradient, 8) the quantity of solid loss in the grains during cooking was neglected, 9) for long172

soaking times, only the first term of series equation was significant.173

In this study, the effect of loss of soluble solids from chickpea seeds was not taken into174

account in calculating the moisture content because maximum loss of soluble solids from175

chickpea at temperatures of 97

o

C for 3.5 h soaking was about 2.06 % of the original mass176


8/29

8

which in comparison with the water gain was assumed to be negligible. Other researchers177

have also reported similar assumption for other seeds (Sayar et al., 2001; Sabapathy et al.,178

2005). When these assumptions were applied on Ficks second law, the following equation179

was obtained.180

+=

2

2

2exp

6)(

r

tDMMMM

eff

eoe

(2)181

The Ficks law of diffusion function is related to diffusion of water and diffusion182

coefficient (Deff). For mathematical modeling of the variation of moisture content of chickpea183

during soaking at each temperature without, and with ultrasounds treatment, Ficks law model184

was tested. The parameters in this model such as Deff(main parameter), Me, were estimated by185

using the non-linear regression analysis of equations (2) and presented on Table 5. The186

performance parameters of the model, the coefficient of determination (R2) and percentage of187

root mean square error (% RMSE) are given on Table 5. The course of the hydration,188

adequately fitted by a nonlinear equation (Eq. 2), and reveals the fact that the seed moisture189

content increases with soaking time, use of ultrasound treatments and increase in used190

ultrasound power at all temperatures (Figures 1-4 and Tables 1-5). Water absorption ceases191

when the seed attained the equilibrium water content (Sayar et al., 2001). The diffusion192

process, which obeys the Ficks law model, was found to be a thermally activated process and193

sensitive to temperature, time, ultrasound treatment and its power.194

When the temperature was raised from 20 to 97 oC, Deffvalues were increased from 1.40 x195

10-10 to 7.72 x 10-10 (m2 s-1), also significant (P


9/29

9

10-10 m2 s-1 for winter chickpea. The water diffusion coefficient of chickpea ranged from 9.71201

x 10-11 to 5.98 x 10-10 m2 s-1 in the study of Seyhan-Grta et al. (2001). The diffusion202

coefficients of chickpeas for temperature range of 45 - 98.7 oC were found as 0.14 x 10-10 -203

5.51 x 10-10 m2 s-1 in another study (Sabapathy et al., 2005). Diffusivity values reported in this204

study were similar to the literature results. Moisture absorption at elevated temperatures may205

induce irreversible changes of the seeds, such as chemical and structural degradation. It was206

reported that the rate of water absorption by legumes increased with increase in time and207

temperature of the soaking water. As the process continued, water absorption rate decreased208

steadily due to water filling into the free capillary and intermicellar spaces, and increasing the209

extraction rates of soluble solids from grains (Quast & de Silva, 1977; Tang et al., 1994;210

Sopade & Obekpa, 1990; Abu-Ghannam & McKenna, 1997).211

212

3.3. A general model to describe the water diffusion as a function of soaking time and213

temperature214

Previous studies showed that temperature is one of the most important factors affecting215

the water diffusivity and water absorption of agricultural products (Kashaninejad et al., 2007;216

Turhan et al., 2002). An Arrhenius type equation (Eq. 3), which had been used previously to217

describe the temperature dependant hydration kinetics of legumes (Abu-Ghannam &218

McKenna, 1997; Turhan et al., 2002), were used to evaluate temperature dependency of219

diffusion coefficients (Deff) and gelatinization temperature:220

)1

)(()ln()ln(TR

EDD a

refeff= (3)221

Where Deff, T, Ea and R are effective diffusion coefficient of the Ficks model, soaking222

temperature (in K), activation energy for the hydration process in kJ mol-1 and ideal gas223

constant in 8.314 x10-3 kJ mol-1 K-1, respectively. Dref is reference diffusion rate constant for224

the Ficks model. The rate of water transfer and/or starch gelatinization in whole cereal and225


10/29

10

legume grains were found to be changing linearly with temperature and every curve brake at226

a specific temperature which is close to gelatinization temperature (Bakshi & Singh, 1980;227

Sayar et al., 2001; Saol et al., 2006). Arrhenius plots of the natural logarithm of rate228

constants versus the inverse of T (K) for chickpeas are superposed in Figure 5. The activation229

energy, Ea,is related to the slope of this graph, and shows the temperature dependence of Deff.230

To locate the temperature at which the break in the Arrhenius curve for soaked chickpeas231

occurred, the estimated natural log of rate constants (Deff) was fitted to a linear model with232

break point and the break temperature was estimated to be 61.47 oC (R2= 0.9349-0.9954) for233

the model (Muggeo, 2003). Such a discontinuity in the Arrhenius curve has been observed234

during the soaking of rice (Bakshi & Singh, 1980) and chickpeas (Sayar et al., 2001), and it235

has been suggested that the break is linked to the early onset of starch gelatinization. The236

process of gelatinization is generally thought to occur between 63 and 70 oC for chickpeas237

(Fernandez & Berry, 1989). However, it has been suggested (Sayar et al., 2001; Turhan et al.,238

2002) that chickpea gelatinization may actually begin between the lower temperatures of 55239

and 60 oC. Starch granules of the chickpeas used in this study kept the integrity of Maltese240

crosses till 61 oC (Figure 6). They noticeably started to decrease in number and distort in241

shape between 60 and 70 oC (Figure 6) pointing that gelatinization temperature of chickpeas242

starts between 60 and 70 oC. This observed temperature range is fairly close to the reported243

gelatinization temperature of 63-70 oC for chickpea (Fernandez & Berry, 1989). It is possible244

that the break in the Arrhenius curve for soaked chickpeas was due to partial gelatinization245

and/or structural changes, promoted soaking at temperatures above 60 oC.246

Incorporating the temperature break at 61.47 oC for the Ficks model, time and247

temperature dependence of moisture content for soaked chickpeas, and dependence of initial248

and equilibrium moisture contents, the following general models were derived to describe the249

water absorption kinetics of chickpeas:250


11/29

11

+=

tTr

MMMM eoe )79.3450

exp(106961exp6

)( 52

2

2

( 60 oC) (4)251

+=

tTrMMMM eoe )

56.1123

exp(10613.1exp

6

)(

8

2

2

2

( > 60o

C) (5)252

Equations 4 and 5 can be used to find the moisture content of chickpea during253

soaking/cooking at any time (seconds) and temperature (K) providing that Mo and Me are254

known.255

The Arrhenius equation has been previously used to describe the temperature dependent256

hydration kinetics of other grains and seeds (Maskan, 2002; Turhan et al., 2002). The D eff257

values decreased as temperature increased suggesting a corresponding increase in the initial258

water absorption rate. As it is evident from Figure 5, the linearity of the curves indicates an259

Arrhenius relationship for model.260

When the Arrhenius equation (3) was applied to the Deff values for temperatures below261

and above break point (61.47 oC) separately, the activation energy values of 28.69262

(R2=0.9756) and 9.34 (R2=0.9954) kJ mol-1 were calculated, respectively. This value agrees263

well with the literature value of 19.50 kJ mol-1 for the activation energy of osmotic hydration264

of chickpeas at 5-50 oC (Pinto and Esin, 2004). The activation energies of chickpea were265

found as 41.79 kJ mol-1 and 8 kJ mol-1 for 25-37 oC and 37-60 oC temperature ranges by266

Goven et al. (2007). In another study, the activation energy for chickpea was 48 and 18 kJ267

mol-1 for temperature bellow and above 55 oC, respectively (Sayar et al., 2001). The lower268

activation energy for the rate of water transfer above the gelatinization269

temperature implies that water travels faster in gelatinized chickpea than in ungelatinized270

chickpea.271

272

273


12/29

12

3.4. Effect of ultrasounds on water diffusion during soaking of chickpeas274

One emergent application of power ultrasound in food industry is the enhancement of275

mass transfer in processes where diffusion takes place. Power ultrasound introduces that276

pressure variation at solid/liquid interfaces, and therefore increases the moisture absorption277

rate. Acoustic energy also causes oscillating velocities and micro streaming at the interfaces278

which may affect the diffusion boundary layer (Gallego-Juarez, 1998). Furthermore,279

ultrasonic waves also produce rapid series of alternative contractions and expansions (sponge280

effect) of the material in which they are traveling; this alternating stress creates microscopic281

channels which may make the moisture gain easier. In addition, acoustic waves may produce282

cavitations of water molecules inside the solid matrix, which may be beneficial for the gain of283

strongly attached moisture (Gallego-Juarez, 1998; Mulet et al., 2003).284

The effects of ultrasounds on water absorption of chickpeas were illustrated in Figures 2-285

4. The statistical analysis of moisture contents were tabulated in Tables 1-4. Application of 25286

kHz 100 W ultrasound significantly (P


13/29

13

Deff of the Fick's law model was main parameter for the ultrasonic assisted process of298

diffusion which was compared with the conventional soaking.At all temperatures, Deffvalues299found from the Ficks model were significantly increased when 25 kHz 100 W ultrasound300

treatment applied and also when ultrasound power increased to 300 W (Table 5). For soaking301

at 20 oC, Deff values changed from 1.40x10-10 to 1.70x10-10 and to 2.01x10-10m2 s-1for non-302

ultrasound, 25 kHz 100 W and 25 kHz 300 W ultrasound treatments, respectively. D eff303

changes at all temperatures were significant (P0.05) affect or/and decreased the water307

absorption rate and the diffusion coefficient of chickpea (Tables 2-5 and Figures 2-4). Change308

of ultrasound frequency from 25 to 40 kHz decrease Deff value from 1.40x10-10 to 1.28 x10-10309

m2 s-1 (20 oC soaking).310

311

4. Conclusion312

Water diffusion rates of chickpea significantly increased (P0.05) affect the water diffusion of315

chickpea during soaking. Ficks diffusion constant (Deff) for a temperature range of 20-97oC316

increased from 1.40 x 10-10 to 11.9 x 10-10 (m2 s-1) with ultrasound application.317

Ficks second law model where Arrhenius relationship inserted for Deff can be used to318

determine moisture content of chickpeas as a function of soaking time and temperature.319

Average gelatinization temperature of chickpea from the water absorption model was found320

as 61.47 oC. Activation energy (Ea) values of chickpea for below and above gelatinization321


14/29

14

temperature of 61.47 oC were found to be 28.69 and 9.34 kJ mol-1, respectively. Ultrasound322

treatments decreased the soaking time of chickpea.323

324

References325

Abu-Ghannam, N. & Mckenna, B. (1997). Hydration kinetics of red kidney beans (Phaseolus326

vulgaris L.).Journal of Food Science, 62, 520-523.327

AOAC. (2002). Official methods of analysis of AOAC International, 17th Ed., Revision I,328

Gaithersburg, M. D, USA.329

Bakshi, A.S. & Singh, R.P. (1980). Kinetics of water diffusion and starch gelatinization330

during rice parboiling.Journal of Food Science, 45, 13871392.331

Bello, M., Tolaba, M.P. & Suarez, C. (2004). Factors affecting water uptake of rice grain332

during soaking.Lebensmittel Wissenschaft und Technologie, 37, 811816.333

Bhathena, S.J. & Velasquez, M.T. (2002). Beneficial role of dietary phytoestrogens in obesity334

and diabetes.Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 76, 1191-201.335

Chavan, J.K., Kadam, S.S. & Salunkhe, D.K. (1986). Biochemistry and technology of336

chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) seeds. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 25,337

107132.338

Christodoulou, V., Bampidis, V.A., Hucko, B., Iliadis, C. & Mudrik, Z. (2006a). Nutritional339

value of chickpeas in rations of broiler chickens. Archiv Geflgelk, 70, 112118.340

Crank, J. (1975). The mathematics of diffusion (2nd ed). London: Oxford University Press.341

Fernandez, M.L. & Berry, J.W. (1989). The effect of germination on chickpea starch. Starch,342

41, 17-21.343

Fuente, S.D.L., Riera, E. & Gallego, J.A. (2004). Effect of Power Ultrasound on Mass344

Transfer in Food Processing.ICA, We 2, A4.345


15/29

15

Gallego-Juarez, J.A. (1998). Some applications of air-borne power ultrasound to food346

processing, in Povey, M. J. W. and Mason, T.J. (eds). Ultrasound in Food Processing347

(Chapman & Hall, London, UK).348

Garcia-Pascual, P., Sanjuan, N., Melis, R. & Mulet, A. (2006). Morchella esculenta (morel)349

rehydration process modelling.Journal of Food Engineering, 72, 346353.350

Gowen, A., Abu-Ghannam, N., Frias, J. & Oliveira, J. (2007). Modeling the water absorption351

process in chickpeas (Cicer arietinum L.)-The effect of blanching pre-treatment on water352

intake and texture kinetics.Journal of Food Engineering, 78, 810-819.353

Guillon, F. & Champ, M. (1996). Grain legumes and transit in humans. In Grain Legumes,354

AEP edn, pp:11-/18.355

Han, I.H. & Baik, B.K. (2006). Oligosaccharide Content and Composition of Legumes and356

Their Reduction by Soaking, Cooking, Ultrasound, and High Hydrostatic Pressure. Cereal357

Chemistry, 83, 428-433.358

Hoseney, R. (1994). Principles of Cereal Science and Technology, 2nd ed. Am. Assoc. Cereal359

Chem.: St. Paul, MN.360

Jayasooriya, S.D., Bhandari, B.R., Torley, P. & DArcy, B.R. (2004). Effect of high power361

ultrasound waves on properties of meat: a review. International Journal of Food362

Properties, 7, 301-319.363

Kashaninejad, M., Maghsoudlou, Y., Rafiee, S. & Khomeiri, M. (2007). Study of hydration364

kinetics and density changes of rice (Tarom Mahali) during hydrothermal processing,365

Journal of Food Engineering, 79, 13831390.366

Maskan, M. (2002). Effect of processing on hydration kinetics of three wheat products of the367

same variety.Journal of Food Engineering, 52, 337341.368

Muggeo, V.M. (2003). Estimating regression models with unknown break-points. Statistics in369

Medicine, 22,30553071.370


16/29

16

Mulet, A., Carcel, J.A., Sanjuan, N. & Bon, J. (2003). New food drying Technologies-use of371

ultrasound. Food Science and Technology International, 9, 215-221.372

Quast, D.G. & Silva, S.D. (1977). Temperature dependence of hydration rate and effect of373

hydration on the cooking rate of dry legumes.Journal of Food Science, 42, 1299-1303.374

Pinto, G. & Esin, A. (2004). Kinetics of the osmotic hydration of chickpeas. Journal of375

Chemical Education, 81, 532-536.376

Riera, E., Golas, Y., Blanco, A., Gallego, J.A., Blasco, M. & Mulet, A. (2004). Mass transfer377

enhancement in supercritical fluids extraction by means of power ultrasound. Ultrason378

Sonochem., 11, 241244.379

Sabapathy, N.D., Tabil, L.G. & Baik, O.D. (2005). Moisture Absorption in Kabuli Type380

Chickpea During Soaking and Cooking.ASAE Annual International Meeting.381

Saol, S., Turhan, M. & Sayar, S. (2006). A potential method for determining in situ382

gelatinization temperature of starch using initial water transfer rate in whole cereals.383

Journal of Food Engineering, 76, 427432.384

Sayar, S., Turhan, M. & Gunasekaran, S. (2001). Analysis of chickpea soaking by385

simultaneous water transfer and waterstarch reaction. Journal of Food Engineering, 50,386

9198.387

Seyhan-Grta, F., Mehmet, A.K. & Evranuz, .E. (2001). Water diffusion coefficients of388

selected legumes grown in Turkey as affected by temperature and variety. Turkey Journal389

of Agriculture, 25, 297304.390

Sopade, P.A. & Obekpa, J.A. (1990). Modeling water absorption soybean, cowpea and391

peanuts at three temperatures using Pelegs equation. Journal of Food Science, 55, 1084-392

1087.393

Tang, J., Sokhansanj, S. & Sosulski, F.W. (1994). Moisture-absorption characteristics of394

Laird lentils and hard shell seeds. Cereal Chemistry, 71, 423428.395


17/29

17

Turhan, M., Sayar, S. & Gunasekaran, S. (2002). Application of Peleg model to study water396

absorption in chickpea during soaking.Journal of Food Engineering, 53, 153-159.397

Wambura, P., Yang, W. & Wang, Y. (2008). Power Ultrasound Enhanced One-Step Soaking398

and Gelatinization for Rough Rice Parboiling.International Journal of Food Engineering,399

4, 1-12.400

Wang, N., Lewis, M.J., Brennan, J.G. & Westby, A. (1997). Effect of processing methods on401

nutrients and anti-nutritional factors in cowpea. Food Chemistry, 58, 5968.402

Zheng, L. & Sun, D.W. (2006). Innovative applications of power ultrasound during food403

freezing processes-a review. Food Science and Technology, 17, 16-23.404

405

406

407

408

409

410

411

412

413

414

415

416

417

418

419


18/29

18

Figure 1. Means of experimental and predicted moisture contents (% g/g, d.b.) of chickpeas420

during soaking at different temperatures.421

422


during soaking at 20 (A), 30 (B) and 40 (C) oC temperatures without and with ultrasound424

treatments.425

426



treatments.429

430



treatments.433

434

Figure 5. Arrhenius plot of Ficks law model of diffusion constant, Deff, of chickpea over the435

soaking temperature range of 20-97 oC.436

437

Figure 6.Effect of soaking temperature on the birefriengence of chickpea starch at 40, 50, 60438

and 70 oC.439

440

441

442

443

444


19/29

19

Time (min)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Moisturecontent(%g/g,d.b.)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

20 oC

30 oC

40 oC

50 oC

60 oC

70 oC

87 oC

92 oC

97 oC

Fick's Model

445

446


during soaking at different temperatures.448

449

450

451

452

453

454

455

456


20/29

20

Time (min)

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Moisturecon

tent(%g/g,d.b.)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

20 oC (control)

20 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

20 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

20 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

457

(A)458

Time (min)

0 100 200 300 400 500

Moisturecontent(%g/g,d.b

.)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

30 oC (control)

30 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

30 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

30 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

459

(B)460

Time (min)

0 100 200 300 400 500


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

40 oC (control)

40 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

40 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

40 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

461

(C)462

463



treatments.466


21/29

21

Time (min)

0 100 200 300 400


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

50 oC (control)

50 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

50 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

50 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

467

(A)468

Time (min)

0 100 200 300


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

60 oC (control)

60 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

60 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

60 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

469

(B)470

Time (min)

0 100 200 300 400


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

70 oC (control)

70 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

70 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

70 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

471

(C)472

473



treatments.476


22/29

22

Time (min)

0 50 100 150 200 250

Moisturecon

tent(%g/g,d.b.)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

87 oC (control)

87 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

87 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

87 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

477

(A)478

Time (min)

0 50 100 150 200 250


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

92 oC (control)

92 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

92 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

92 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

479

(B)480

Time (min)

0 50 100 150 200 25


0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

97 oC (control)

97 oC + 25 kHz 100 W US

97 oC + 40 kHz 100 W US

97 oC + 25 kHz 300 W US

Fick's model

481

(C)482

483



treatments.486


23/29

23

1/T (1/K)

0,0026 0,0028 0,0030 0,0032 0,0034 0,0036

ln(D

eff,

m2s-1)

-23,0

-22,5

-22,0

-21,5

-21,0

-20,5

Experimental (20-60oC)

Experimental (60-97oC)

y= -10.9844- 3450.7955*x (R2=0.9756) (20-60

oC)

y= -17.9424-1123.565*x (R2

=0.9954) (60- 97o

C)

487

488

Figure 5. Arrhenius plot of Ficks law model of diffusion constant, Deff, of chickpea over the489

soaking temperature range of 20-97 oC.490

491


24/29

24

492

(40

o

C) (50

o

C)493

494

(60 oC) (70 oC)495

496

Figure 6.Effect of soaking temperature on the birefriengence of chickpea starch at 40, 50, 60497

and 70 oC.498

499

500

501

502


25/29

25

Table 1. Summary of multiple range analysis (Duncan test) on moisture contents (%, d.b.) of503

soaked chickpeas as a function of processing time and temperature.504

505

Moisture content (%, d.b)Time(min) 20 oC 30 oC 40 oC 50 oC 60 oC 70 oC 87 oC 92 oC 97 oC

0 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,1 11.58a,130 33.55b,1 37.40b,2 46.10b,3 62.36b,4 70.61b,5 76.09b,6 86.85b,7 91.54b,8 97.05b,9

60 43.88c,1 57.54c,2 62.58c,3 84.70c,4 97.89c,5 99.01c,6 108.58c,7 111.16c,8 121.06c,9

90 56.27d,1 66.99d,2 80.53d,3 95.43d,4 108.05d,5 110.19d,6 122.38d,7 125.43d,8 136.49d,9

120 65.50e,1 78.98e,2 88.24e,3 108.69e,4 115.63e,5 119.45e,6 129.30e,7 131.36e,8 144.71e,9

150 72.52f,1 82.27f,2 97.30f,3 115.84f,4 124.02f,5 126.35f,6 135.41f,7 137.76f,8 148.59f,9

180 76.91g,1 84.53g,2 101.90g,3 120.82g,4 126.57g,5 129.78g,6 138.37g,7 142.44g,8 150.72g,9

210 81.93h,1 93.76h,2 110.18h,3 122.71h,4 128.99h,5 130.68h,6 140.17h,7 142.67h,8 151.97h,9a-h Indicate statistical differences between each row at =0.05,

5061-9 Indicate statistical differences between each column at constant temperatures, =0.05.507

508

509

510

511

512

513

514

515

516

517

518

519

520

521

522

523


26/29

26


soaked chickpeas at 20, 30 and 40 oC with and without ultrasound treatments.525

526

Moisture content (%, d.b)Time(min) 20 oC 20 oC+40 kHz 100 W 20 oC+25 kHz 100 W 20 oC+25 kHz 300 W

0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 33.55a 34.82b 40.61c 43.18d

60 43.88a 44.97b 54.06c 55.93d

90 56.27b 56.24a 65.76c 69.60d

120 65.50b 64.60a 70.64c 74.85d

150 72.52b 70.24a 78.20c 86.92d

180 76.91b 76.55a 85.14c 91.89d

210 81.93b 80.54a 89.48c 95.66d

240 88.39

b

86.14

a

95.14

c

102.30

d

270 90.63a 92.05b 99.12c 106.56d

300 98.06b 97.69a 103.11c 111.56d

30 oC 30 oC+40 kHz 100 W 30 oC+25 kHz 100 W 30 oC+25 kHz 300 W0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 37.40a 39.79b 41.04c 49.85d

60 57.54a 57.79b 60.40c 60.88d

90 66.99b 66.24a 73.77c 72.19d

120 78.98b 78.37a 79.63c 90.31d

150 82.27b 81.72a 86.40c 100.06d

180 84.53a 84.87b 92.52c 107.72d

210 93.76b 93.20a 98.00c 111.05d

240 104.78b 104.40a 106.25c 113.29d

270 107.75b 107.39a 108.23c 115.60d

300 109.96b 109.75a 112.03c 118.85d

40 oC 40 oC+40 kHz 100 W 40 oC+25 kHz 100 W 40 oC+25 kHz 300 W0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 46.10b 45.55a 54.71c 59.86d

60 62.58a 63.92b 72.20c 77.41d

90 80.53b 78.70a 84.23c 97.25d

120 88.24a 89.43b 93.59c 107.08d

150 97.30a 100.21b 109.76c 115.29d

180 101.90b 100.62a 115.10c 121.19d

210 110.18b 109.70a 118.23c 128.12d

240 111.00a 112.58b 122.29c 127.27d

270 117.95b 116.90a 125.34c 128.00d

300 121.84b 120.49a 125.47c 128.12da-d Indicate statistical differences between each column at constant temperatures, =0.05.527

528

529

530


27/29

27



533


0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 62.36b 57.74a 64.74c 75.35d

60 84.70a 86.78b 91.31c 109.25d

90 95.43a 101.14b 106.73c 117.07d

120 108.69b 108.19a 115.86c 121.01d

150 115.84a 117.20b 123.87c 128.71d

180 120.82b 119.15a 126.11c 131.34d

210 122.71a 123.12b 127.22c 134.59d

60o

C 60o

C+40 kHz 100 W 60o

C+25 kHz 100 W 60o

C+25 kHz 300 W0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 70.61b 69.73a 72.96c 80.35d

60 97.89b 96.90a 99.89c 111.50d

90 108.05a 108.36b 113.06c 120.27d

120 115.63b 114.91a 119.91c 126.34d

150 124.02b 124.00a 127.76c 130.71d

180 126.57b 126.51a 128.99c 132.14d

210 128.99b 127.93a 130.74c 134.92d

70 oC 70 oC+40 kHz 100 W 70 oC+25 kHz 100 W 70 oC+25 kHz 300 W0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a

30 76.09b

74.13a

82.82c

84.81d

60 99.01b 98.09a 105.95c 112.69d

90 110.19b 109.72a 114.24c 124.46d

120 119.45b 115.87a 122.16c 129.46d

150 126.35b 125.11a 129.20c 131.97d

180 129.78b 128.64a 131.50c 133.72d

210 130.68b 129.32a 132.30c 135.78da-d Indicate statistical differences between each column at constant temperatures, =0.05.534

535

536

537

538

539

540

541


28/29

28



544


0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 86.85b 85.33a 92.25c 108.65d

60 108.58b 107.48a 115.49c 128.81d

90 122.38b 122.13a 128.16c 142.46d

120 129.30a 130.03b 132.48c 148.93d

150 135.41a 136.01b 138.23c 150.90d

92 oC 92 oC+40 kHz 100 W 92 oC+25 kHz 100 W 92 oC+25 kHz 300 W0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a

30 91.54b

89.91a

102.61c

115.27d

60 111.16a 112.34b 122.37c 132.71d

90 125.43b 124.29a 139.77c 147.79d

120 131.36b 131.23a 146.11c 151.24d

150 137.76b 137.75a 150.54b 154.23c

97 oC 97 oC+40 kHz 100 W 97 oC+25 kHz 100 W 97 oC+25 kHz 300 W0 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a 11.58a30 97.05b 96.49a 106.98c 122.78d

60 121.06b 119.59a 139.07c 145.37d

90 136.49b 136.25a 148.67c 153.97d

120 144.71a 144.91b 151.23c 157.57d

150 148.59a

148.61b

158.93c

165.45d

a-d Indicate statistical differences between each column at constant temperatures, =0.05.545

546

547

548

549

550

551

552

553

554

555


29/29

Table 5. Predicted parameters of Ficks model during soaking of chickpeas at different556

temperatures withoutand with ultrasound application.557

558

ProcessMe

(%, d.b)Deff x10

10(m2 s-1) R2

RMSE(%)

20 oC 119.82 1.40 0.9960 8.0320 oC + 25 kHz 100 W 119.48 1.70 0.9907 13.8820 oC + 40 kHz 100 W 123.10 1.28 0.9943 10.7620 oC + 25 kHz 300 W 120.94 2.01 0.9925 11.29





70o

C 130.66 6.01 0.9944 5.8570 oC + 25 kHz 100 W 131.05 7.11 0.9924 5.4570 oC + 40 kHz 100 W 130.22 5.78 0.9935 6.1970 oC + 25 kHz 300 W 134.06 7.96 0.9993 1.29




RMSE (%) = Root mean square error: 100* [ ]2

1expexp /)(

1

n

pre MMMn

559

Documents

JFOODENG-D-10-01056__-_revisions-düzeltil Möner