Solvent free-microwave green extraction of essential oil from orange peel (Citrus sinensis L.): effects on shelf life of flavored liquid whole eggs during storage under commercial retail conditions
- 25 Downloads
This study compares the extraction of essential oil (EO) from orange peel (Citrus sinensis L.) by three different methods, namely solvent-free microwave assisted extraction (SFME), traditional hydrodistillation (HD) and cold-pressing (CP), in terms of efficiency and chemical composition using gas chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (GC–MS). Microstructure analysis of the behaviour of the epithelial cells of the orange peel bark was carried out by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). Results showed that the traditional HD extraction method caused greater modifications of the cellular structure than the SFME method. The comparison between SFME and HD indicated that SFME showed advantages such as faster kinetics and higher efficiency with similar yields (0.40% dry basis in 30 min by SFME versus 3 h by HD). The antioxidant activity of EO was evaluated in vitro by the DPPH assay, resulting in high radical scavenging activity exceeding 80%. The EO was added at three levels (0.1, 0.3, and 0.5%, v/v) to liquid whole egg in order to evaluate its effect on oxidative stability and organoleptic attributes (colour and odour) during simulated cold commercial retail conditions. The thiobarbituric acid reactive substances assay showed that the EO addition significantly reduced the lipid oxidation. The results obtained confirm orange peel EO as a promising functional food ingredient.
KeywordsOrange peel essential oil Green extraction Scanning electron microscopy Antioxidant Liquid whole eggs Shelf-life Retail conditions
The present research was carried out with the financial support of the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research of Algeria (Grant F00520140089) and the Spanish AECID/PCI (Grant A/033506/10) as well as the Government of Aragón and FEDER 2014-2020 (Grant Grupo A06_17R).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
No conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
- 1.FAOSTAT (2018), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Statistics division. https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data Accessed 15 Jan 2018
- 2.C. Torres-Álvarez, A. Núñez González, J. Rodríguez, S. Castillo, C. Leos-Rivas, J.G. Báez-González, CyTA J. Food 15(1), 129–135 (2017)Google Scholar
- 5.European Commission (2018), European Union lists of flavourings. https://ec.europa.eu/food/safety/food_improvement_agents/flavourings/eu_lists_flavourings_en. Accessed 15 Jan 2018
- 10.P.J. Cullen, B.J. Tiwari. V. Valdramidis, Novel Thermal and Non-Thermal Technologies for Fluid Foods. 1st edn. (Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 2012).Google Scholar
- 15.J. Folch, M. Lees, G.H.S. Stanley, J. Biol. Chem. 226, 497–509 (1957)Google Scholar
- 18.C.I.E. (International Commission on Ilumination), Supplement No. 15 to CIE publication No. 15 (E-1.3.1) 1971/(TO-1.3), 1978, Paris, FranceGoogle Scholar
- 29.J. Bernard, Sci. Vie 214, 68–73 (2001)Google Scholar
- 33.J.R.J. Paré, J.M.R. Bélanger, Instrumental Methods in Food Analysis (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1997)Google Scholar
- 36.F. Fancello, G.L. Petretto, S. Zara, M.L. Sanna, R. Addis, M. Maldini, M. Foddai, J.P. Rourke, M. Chessa, G. Pintore, LWT-Food. Sci. Technol. 69, 579–585 (2016)Google Scholar