2015
DOI: 10.1007/s10068-015-0010-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quality evaluation of fresh tomato juices prepared using high-speed centrifugal and low-speed masticating household juicers

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
17
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
4
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The current results showed that slow juicer is the preferred method for MC juice preparation. This finding is comparable to previous studies by Kim et al (2015) and Lee et al (2013) and where both studies reported that slow juicer can retain more phytochemicals compared to conventional juicer [36,37].…”
Section: Effect Of Processing Methods On Coxs Inhibition Activitysupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The current results showed that slow juicer is the preferred method for MC juice preparation. This finding is comparable to previous studies by Kim et al (2015) and Lee et al (2013) and where both studies reported that slow juicer can retain more phytochemicals compared to conventional juicer [36,37].…”
Section: Effect Of Processing Methods On Coxs Inhibition Activitysupporting
confidence: 90%
“…A juicer provides a convenient option for the consumer to produce fresh juice from fruits and vegetables. However, nutrient level in the fruits and vegetables can be reduced along the juicing process and lead to destructions of polyphenols and flavonoids [36,37]. Furthermore, different processing/extraction technique may produce juice with varying amounts of phytochemicals depending on the type of juicer used [38].…”
Section: Effect Of Processing Methods On Coxs Inhibition Activitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The yield of the LSM juicer was 79.1%, which was better than that of the HSC juicer (45.0%). The difference in yield is caused by the different juice extracting mechanisms, and a similar result was obtained when preparing tomato juice [9]. The TSS of the grape juices ranged from 13.8 to 14.4.…”
Section: Physicochemical Propertiessupporting
confidence: 56%
“…This result is due to the different extraction mechanisms of the juicers. The flat blade disk rotating at a high speed (8000-12,000 rpm), causes deflection of a considerable amount of the grape to waste, and therefore the extraction of polyphenols from grape skins and seeds is insufficient [9]. Although a blender ground all parts of the grape without loss during the juicing process, the total polyphenol content of BLD juice was Grape juices were prepared using a low-speed masticating juicer (LSM), a high-speed masticating juicer (HSC), and a blender (BLD).…”
Section: Total Polyphenol Contentmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation