Next Article in Journal
Science Mapping the Knowledge Base on Sustainable Tourism Development, 1990–2018
Next Article in Special Issue
Risk Assessment for Social Practices in Small Vegetable farms in Poland as a Tool for the Optimization of Quality Management Systems
Previous Article in Journal
A Case Study of Environmental Policies and Guidelines for the Use of Coal Ash as Mine Reclamation Filler: Relevance for Needed South Korean Policy Updates
Previous Article in Special Issue
Numerical Modeling of the Shape of Agricultural Products on the Example of Cucumber Fruits
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 11
Issue 13
10.3390/su11133630
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Effect of Press Construction on Yield and Quality of Apple Juice

by
Kamil Wilczyński
1,
Zbigniew Kobus
2,* and
Dariusz Dziki
3
1
Department of Food Engineering and Machines, University of Life Sciences postcode, 20-612 Lublin, Poland
2
Department of Technology Fundamentals, University of Life Sciences, 20-612 Lublin, Poland
3
Department of Thermal Technology and Food Process Engineering, University of Life Sciences, 20-612 Lublin, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(13), 3630; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133630
Submission received: 31 May 2019 / Revised: 28 June 2019 / Accepted: 28 June 2019 / Published: 2 July 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Production in Food and Agriculture Engineering)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The paper presents the possibility of applying different press constructions for juice extraction in small farms. The research was carried out with three different varieties of apples, namely, Rubin, Mutsu, and Jonaprince. Two types of presses were tested: a basket press and a screw press. Generally, application of the screw press makes it possible to obtain a higher yield of extraction compared to the basket press. In our study, the differences in the pressing yield among press machines also depended on the apple variety used. The juices obtained on the screw press were found to be of a higher quality characterized by a higher content of soluble solids, higher viscosity, higher total content of polyphenols, higher antioxidant activity, and lower acidity. Thus, the selection of an appropriate press is the key to producing high-quality apple juice with health-promoting properties for manufacturers of apple juice at the local marketplace.

1. Introduction

Apples (Malus domestica) are the most commonly used fruit for juice extraction in the European Union (EU). They are a rich source of nutrients and polyphenols and possess antioxidant properties that have beneficial effects on human health [1,2]. The yield of apples is estimated to be 12.59 million tons per year in Europe and 3.6 million tons in Poland [3].
Apples are mainly processed into concentrates, which contributes to the reduction of volume and facilitates storage. Poland is the largest producer and exporter of concentrated juices extracted from fruits grown in the temperate zone of the EU [4]. The European share of the juice yield was estimated to account for 66% in 2016.
Currently, there is a growing trend towards healthy eating and an increased interest in ecological produced food. This in turn contributes to the increasing interest of scientists in functional foods and new methods of production to preserve their quality and high level of bioactive compounds [5]. Some examples of these kinds of foods include juices that are not obtained from concentrate (NFC) and freshly squeezed non-pasteurized juices (FS). These juices are obtained from the fruit tissue by pressing and centrifugation of the pulp. Cloudy juices are classified as products obtained with a low degree of processing. They contain higher amounts of bioactive compounds, such as polyphenols or flavonoids, than clarified ones due to the omission of enzymatic and clarifying treatments. They are also richer in dietary fibre, which is necessary for the proper functioning of the digestive system, and several mineral compounds [6]. In their studies, Paepe et al. [7] and Markowski et al. [8] showed that cloudy juices contain substantially higher amounts of beneficial compounds such as polyphenols and also exhibit considerably higher antioxidant activity than clarified juices. Additionally, apple pomace obtained after low-degree processing can be used as animal feed after drying or pickling. The natural nutrients contained in the pomace can serve as a valuable source of nutrition for animals in organic farms [9].
Fruit juices are extracted on an industrial scale using different devices, depending on the type of operation (periodic or continuous) and raw material [10]. Many different press construction solutions are used in the industry for obtaining apple juice. Among them, belt press, water press [11], decanter, rack-and-frame press, hydraulic press [12], basket press [13], and screw press [14] are the most distinguished.
A basket press ensures high pressing yields of up to 60%, but it is less often used on an industrial scale. In one study, Nadulski [15] confirmed the usefulness of the basket press in juice extraction from Jonagold apples. In another study, the same author and his group [10] showed that not all apple cultivars are suitable for juice pressing under farm conditions. This suggests that the use of a suitable fruit variety for juice pressing may reduce the cost of pressing and increase the quality parameters of the juice produced.
A screw press is mainly used for oil extraction from oilseeds such as rape [16,17], flax [18], sunflower [19], cumin [20], tobacco seeds [21], and pistachio nuts [22]. Currently, screw presses are becoming increasingly popular, especially on small farms, among local entrepreneurs and for domestic applications. Based on the construction solution, screw presses are classified as single- and double-screw type. These presses are characterized by several extracting processes, where the pulp is subjected to energetic grinding and mixing. The main advantage of a screw press is that the juice obtained has a much higher amount of soluble solids and bioactive compounds [23,24].
The programmes implemented by the EU such as ‘Agricultural and rural development 2014–2020′ and ‘Promotion of farm products’ help producers develop new products based on the policy of sustainable agriculture [25,26]. These programmes allow appropriate usage of resources (raw material, energy) and increase the effectiveness of production without affecting the environment [27]. The protection and promotion of regional and traditional products is one of the most important factors supporting the sustainable development of rural areas (as it increases the income of agricultural producers, prevents depopulation and enhances the attractiveness of rural areas). In addition, this may be considered as potentially influencing the development of agricultural products. In the context of sustainable agriculture, the use of a new press construction may allow the farmers to obtain juices with higher quality and a large amount of bioactive compounds. Moreover, fresh pressing of apple juice may help open new markets.
Considering the above, it appears viable that local farms can use small presses for juice production. In this view, the aim of the present study is to compare the efficiency of screw and basket presses in the extraction of apple juice. This includes the determination of parameters affecting the juice quality such as the content of soluble solids, pH, viscosity, total phenolic content (TPC) and antioxidant activity.

2. Materials and Methods

The research material included three varieties of apples, namely Rubin, Mutsu, and Jonaprince, all obtained from the 2017 harvest. The fruits were delivered by Groups of Fruit Producers, which is related to the company Rylex Sp. z o.o with office registered in the village of Błędów (near Grójec, Poland; GPS coordinates: 51°47′N, 20°42′E), to the local Auchan store in Lublin, Poland.
The experimental flowchart is presented in Figure 1.

2.1. Washing and Blotting

The apples were washed in tap water and blotted dry using laboratory tissue paper.

2.2. Grinding

The apples were crushed using a shredding machine (MKJ250; Spomasz Nakło, Poland) equipped with a standard grating disc with 8 mm holes. The rotational speed of the disc was set at 170 rpm. The obtained mash was divided into portions weighing 300 g and placed in plastic containers.

2.3. Determination of Moisture Content

The moisture content of the apple mash was measured before pressing by drying 3 g of mash at a temperature of 105 °C for 3 hours [28]. The measurements were carried out in five replicates.

2.4. Analysis of Texture Properties

The texture of the apples was examined using a texture analyser (model TA.XT Plus Texture Analyzer) equipped with a measuring head that has a working range of up to 0.5 kN. A double-compression test and a cutting test were performed. The speed of the measuring head was set at 0.83 mm·s−1 for the double-compression test (TPA) and 1 mm·s−1 for the cutting test. For TPA, the apple samples with skin were cut into cylinders of 15 mm diameter and 10 mm height and were then placed with their diameter dimension parallel to the device base. Hardness was defined as the maximum force recorded during the first compression cycle (Fh). For the cutting test, a Warner–Bratzler blade was used. The samples with skin were cut into cylinders of 20 mm diameter and 20 mm height. The maximum value of the cutting force (Fc) was determined. The texture analysis was repeated ten times.

2.5. Pressing

Two kinds of presses were used to extract apple juices: basket press and screw press.

2.5.1. Types of Presses

The basket press (Figure 2) consisted of a perforated cylinder with holes of 3 mm diameter, piston, construction frame, and hydraulic system (UHJG 20/C/2; Hydrotech, Lublin, Poland), which allowed for maintaining a pressure of 4.5 MPa. The press was equipped with a tensometric sensor system for measuring pressure (EMS50; WObit, Poznan, Poland) combined with a digital recorder (MG-TAE1; WObit, Poznan, Poland).
The screw press used was a twin-screw type (Green Star Elite 5000; Tribest), which had a rated power of 260 W and was equipped with a sieve with holes of 0.4/0.5 mm. The press has two rotating gears. The dual stainless steel gears contain magnets and utilize bioceramic technologies that pull more nutrients into the juice. The press gears at a low 110 rpm and generates minimal heat while juicing.

2.5.2. Extraction Procedure

The sample materials weighed 300 g. They were pressed in ten replicates in each type of press.
In the case of the basket press, the material was put in a special bag made of pressing cloth, placed in the cylinder of the press, and subjected to the force applied by the piston. Once a pressure of 4.0 ± 0.1 MPa was reached, the extraction process was stopped.
In the case of the screw press, the material was directly put into the press chamber.
The extracted juice was collected in plastic containers, filtered using a Whatman No. 1 filter and stored in a refrigerator at a temperature of 4 °C.

2.5.3. Pressing Yield

The efficiency of pressing was calculated using the formula:
W j ( % ) = M j M i · 100
where
  • Wj is the efficiency of pressing (%),
  • Mj is the mass of juice after pressing (kg), and
  • Mi is the mass of input material (kg).
  • The calculation was performed for all ten replicated samples.

2.6. Determination of Soluble Solids Content (Brix) and pH

After each extraction, the weight of the obtained juices was measured. The pH [29] and content of soluble solids [30] were also calculated. To determine the pH of the juices, a CP-411 pH-meter (Elmetron, Zabrze, Poland) was used. The content of soluble substances in fruit juices was measured using a PAL-3 refractometer (Atago, Tokyo, Japan). The parameters were determined in three replicates for each sample of extracted juice.

2.7. Determination of Viscosity

Viscosity was measured using a Brookfield viscometer (model LVDV-II + PRO; Brookfield Engineering Laboratories) with Rheolac 3.1 software. A 16 mL sample of juice was taken in ULA – 10EY-baker for all experiments. The spindle speed was set at 10–80 rpm, which corresponded to a shear rate of 12.24–97.84·s−1. The temperature was kept constant at 20 °C using a water bath (Brookfield TC-502P). The measurement was performed in three replicates for each sample.

2.8. Determination of TPC

The total phenolic content (TPC) of apple juices was determined according to the FC method [31] with slight modification. Gallic acid was used as the standard and was diluted with methanol (1 mg/1 mL) to give the appropriate concentrations required for plotting a standard curve. First, the sample extract (0.2 mL) was mixed with 2 mL of methanol in a 25 mL volumetric flask. Then, Folin–Ciocalteu reagent (2 mL, diluted 1:10) was added and allowed to react for 3 minutes. Next, 2 mL of Na2CO3 solution were added, and the mixture was made up to 25 mL with distilled water. After leaving the mixture for 30 minutes at room temperature in the dark, the absorbance at 760 nm was measured using a spectrophotometer (UV-1800; Shimadzu, Japan). The results were expressed as mg gallic acid equivalent per 100 mL of fresh juice (mg GAE 100 mL−1). The measurement was performed in three replicates for each sample.

2.9. Determination of Antioxidant Activity

The antioxidant activity of apple juices was evaluated using DPPH (2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) assay. For this analysis, 0.2 mL of apple juice was mixed with an aliquot of 5.8 mL of freshly prepared 6·10-5 M DPPH radical in methanol. After allowing to stand for 30 minutes at room temperature, the spectrophotometric absorbance of the juice at 516 nm was measured using methanol as a blank. The measurement was performed in three replicates for each sample. Antioxidant activity was expressed as percentage inhibition of the DPPH radical calculated using the following equation [32]:
AA ( % ) = Absorbance of control − Absorbance of sample Absorbance of control · 100

2.10. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis of the data was performed with Statistica software (Statistica 12; StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA) using analysis of variance for factorial designs. The significance of differences was tested using Tukey’s least significant difference (LSD) test (p ≤ 0.05) and using T-test (p ≤ 0.05) for data in Table 1 and Table 2.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Moisture Content of Fresh Apples

The moisture content of the apples ranged from 84.0% to 85.27%, and no significant differences were observed between the tested varieties. Moisture content is an important parameter to be determined to carry out further investigations because it influences the yield of juice processing.

3.2. Effect of the Press Construction on the Yield of Pressing

The effect of the type of press on pressing yield is shown in Figure 3.
The yield of pressing ranged from 61.9% to 71.6%. Generally, higher pressing yields were obtained with screw press. In addition, statistical analysis showed significant differences in the efficiency of juice extraction from the pulp of the different varieties of apples. A statistically significant effect of the press type on the pressing yield was observed in the case of the Mutsu and Jonaprince varieties, whereas no significant differences were noted in the case of Rubin.
In the case of the screw press, pieces of apple are fed into the cylinder and thrown to the perforated wall by the centrifugal action of the gears. These gears crush, cut, and squeeze the pieces at the same time. This maximizes the yield as well as the quality of juice. The yield of the recovered juice depends on the diameter of the perforations, the speed of rotation of the gears and the gap between the knob and the pulp discharge casing.
In the case of the basket press, the crushed material is wrapped in the pressing cloth and gradually compressed by the hydraulic piston. The pressing cloth serves both as a package for the mash and as a filter for the juice.
In the case of the screw press, the correct course of the process is influenced by the texture of apples. Apples with a greater hardness are better for juice extraction on screw press, whereas those with a lower hardness are shredded to very small-sized particles, creating a layer of mousse inside the chamber, which clogs the sieve openings. This leads to a drop in the pressing yield or the passage of the mousse to the liquid phase.
To support the hypothesis about the relationship between hardness and yield of pressing, the texture properties of the apples were analysed.
Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the hardness and cutting force of the tested apple varieties, respectively.
The texture analysis showed that, among the studied varieties, Rubin had the lowest hardness and cutting force. Probably due to these features, no statistically significant differences in the pressing yield were observed between the basket press and the screw press for this cultivar.
High efficiency of pressing was also reported by Takenaka et al. [33] when screw press was used for the extraction of citrus juice. In their experiment, the authors demonstrated that, of the three tested presses (belt, centrifugal and screw press), screw press provided the highest yield of pressing. The extraction yield obtained with the screw press was approximately 54% higher as compared to the belt press and approximately 18% higher as compared to the centrifugal extractor.

3.3. Effect of the Press Construction on the Soluble Solids Content

The content of soluble solids mainly reflects the amount of sugars and organic acids and is a very important parameter of juice quality. A study conducted by Eisele and Drake [34] showed that the content of soluble solids in juices obtained from various apple cultivars varied from 10.26 to 21.62 Brix.
In the present study, the content of soluble solids in the juices ranged from 11.2 to 13.1 °Brix (Table 1). This is similar to the content of soluble solids in the pressure-extracted apple juice produced in the Polish fruit and vegetable industry (i.e., 11.0–12.4 Brix) [35].
Generally, the juices obtained on the screw press had statistically significantly higher content of soluble solids than the ones obtained on the basket press. This was due to the wider opening of cell membranes and release of greater amounts of the deep-seated nutrients.
It was noted that the press type had no statistically significant effect on the content of soluble solids in the case of the Mutsu variety, probably due to the structure of the apple tissue. In fact, the flesh of the Mutsu apples is characterized by a coarse structure, while the Rubin and Jonaprince apples have a fine-grained structure. It was likely that the basket press enabled the breakdown of coarse-grained apples to the same extent as the screw press. Therefore, no effect of the type of press on the extract content was found in the case of the Mutsu variety. On the other hand, due to the wider opening of the cell membranes, the screw press enables a better breakdown of fine-grained structure. Therefore, there were differences in the content of soluble solids between presses in the case of the Rubin and Jonaprince varieties.

3.4. Effect of the Press Construction on Acidity

The apple juices were characterized by different levels of acidity (Table 2).
The pH of the juices obtained in this study ranged from 3.45 to 3.81. According to the literature, acidity (pH) of the apple juice varies from 3.37 to 4.24 [34]. Kobus et al. [14] found that the pH of the apple juice obtained on the screw press was in the range of 3.66 ± 0.09.
The press construction had a significant effect on the pH of the tested apple juice. It was observed that the juice extracted on the screw press had a slightly higher acidity (lower pH) compared to the juice from the basket press. The acidity was higher by 2.2%, 2.8%, and 4.6% for Jonaprince, Mutsu, and Rubin, respectively. A probable reason for the higher acidity of the juices from the screw press was increased migration of microelements, organic acids, and secondary plant metabolites such as polyphenols caused by the greater disintegration of membranes and cell walls.
Acidity is one of the most important traits of freshly squeezed apple juice. It influences the flavour, clarity, colour, aroma, and overall sensory satisfaction [36]. In addition, high acidity acts as a natural barrier against contamination by most microorganisms [37]. Consequently, it is reasonable to employ the screw press to produce juice with relatively high acidity.

3.5. Effect of the Press Construction on Viscosity

The viscosity of the juices obtained in this study ranged from 3.15 to 4.35 mPa·s (Figure 6). The viscosity of cloudy apple juice showed a wide range from 1.7 to 9.6 mPa·s, depending on the apple variety, method of processing, and concentration of soluble solids. Genovese and Lozano [38] found that the viscosity of apple juice from Granny Smith cv. ranged between 1.71 mPa·s at 10 °Brix and 3.65 mPa·s at 20 °Brix. Will et al. [39] reported that the values of viscosity ranged between 1.74 (Topaz cv.) and 2.15 mPa·s (Boskoop cv.), and the values determined by Teleszko et al. [40] ranged between 2.40 and 9.60 mPa·s.
In the present study, the press construction was found to have a significant effect on the viscosity of the apple juice. In the case of Rubin, the viscosity of apple juice obtained on the screw press was 3.8% higher compared to the juice from the basket press. In the case of the Jonagold, the difference was greater and amounted to 8.3%, while the highest difference amounting to 18.2% was observed in the case of Mutsu.
The rheological behaviour of a cloudy juice is governed by both liquid viscosity and size characteristics of the solids [41].
In the case of clear juice, the viscosity depends on the content of soluble solids, with sugars playing the main role [42]. The juice from the Jonaprince variety obtained on the basket press was characterized by the lowest content of soluble solids and lowest viscosity. By contrast, the juice obtained on the screw press had a higher content of soluble solids, which probably resulted in higher juice viscosity. Thus, in the case of Jonaprince, the higher viscosity of the juice obtained from the screw press could have resulted from the greater disintegration and release of soluble phytochemical ingredients from apples.
There were no statistically significant differences found in the content of soluble solids in the juices obtained from the Mutsu cultivar between the tested presses. The higher viscosity observed in the case of this variety may be caused by the higher amount of total suspended solids in the juice obtained on the screw press, and due to the use of the pressing cloth, which serves both as a package for the mash and as a filter for the juice, for extraction on the basket press.
In the case of Rubin, the higher viscosity of the juice obtained on the screw press was mainly due to the higher content of soluble solids.

3.6. Effect of the Press Construction on TPC

Polyphenols play an important role in fruit juices because they influence the colour and flavour [11]. The content of polyphenols in juices varies depending on both the fruit variety and production technique used.
In the present study, the content of polyphenols in the juices ranged from 29.89 to 60.96 mg GAE 100 mL-1 (Figure 7).
The TPC in juices produced in Europe varies within a broad range from 10 to 300 mg GAE 100 mL-1 [43]. Kobus et al. [14] showed that the content of polyphenols in juices obtained on the screw press ranged from 44.2 to 58.3 mg GAE 100 mL-1.
In this study, the statistical analysis revealed a significant effect of the press type on the content of polyphenols in the obtained juices. The juices from the screw press were statistically significantly richer in polyphenols than the juices from the basket press. The higher content of polyphenols in the juice from the screw press was related to the higher percentage of solid particles and probably better grinding of apple tissue, especially skin.
It is generally known that apple skin is characterized by a higher content of polyphenols compared to the flesh. There is up to a three- to fourfold difference between these two tissue types [44]. Thus, with the complex action of the gears, the screw press ensures better disintegration of apple skin and greater release of the cell contents to the extracted juice.
It is also known that the content of phenolic compounds decreases gradually during grinding and pressing due to the oxidation of pulp and freshly extracted juices [11,45]. So, our results can also be attributed to the rate of mash oxidation. Since the apples were disintegrated directly in the screw press, the entire process of juice extraction was faster and the rate of mash oxidation was lower than in the case of the basket press.
Noteworthy, for varieties with similar contents of polyphenols in the juice extracted on the basket press (Rubin – 30.47 mg GAE 100 mL-1 and Mutsu – 29.89 mg GAE 100 mL-1), a similar percentage of increase in polyphenols was also observed in the juice obtained on the screw press (62% for Rubin and 65% for Mutsu).
Jaeger et al. [12] found that the release of polyphenols from coarse mash was lower than that from fine mash. Since the screw press crushes apples more finely than the basket press, more polyphenols are extracted to the juice. A similar observation was reported by Heinmaa et al. [11], who noticed a higher amount of individual polyphenols in the juice extracted on a belt press (which also crushes the apples during pressing) as compared to the rack-and-frame press.
The efficiency of polyphenol extraction on individual presses may also be influenced by the textural characteristics of the apples tested. It is worth mentioning that the greatest differences were observed in the Mutsu and Rubin varieties, which are characterized by lower cutting forces.

3.7. Effect of the Press Construction on Antioxidant Activity

The antioxidant capacity of a substance is defined as its ability to scavenge reactive oxygen species and electrophiles [46]. Antioxidant activity is a very important parameter of juice quality.
The effect of press construction on the antioxidant capacity of juices is presented in Figure 8.
The study showed that press construction had a significant effect on the antioxidant activity of the juice depending on the apple variety used. In the case of Rubin and Mutsu, the differences in antioxidant activity were statistically significant, whereas no statistically significant differences were found for Jonagold. Among the cultivars, the juice obtained from Mutsu showed the highest antioxidant activity.
The ability to scavenge free radicals was very closely related to the content of phenolic compounds in the apple juice. For the Jonagold, only small differences in the content of polyphenols in the juices were observed between the presses, which probably resulted in the absence of statistically significant differences in the antioxidant activity. Numerous studies have demonstrated a strong relationship between the polyphenols concentration and the antioxidant capacity of foods [44,47,48,49,50].
On the other hand, Wolfe et al. [51] did not find any relation between the antioxidant capacity and the TPC in apples. The lack of a correlation between these two properties may be related to the extraction process, apple varieties, percentage share of individual polyphenols, and the content of other compounds such as vitamin C, which may influence the antioxidant capacity.
Another determinant of the antioxidant activity is the degree of disintegration of the raw material. After cutting, defence metabolism is activated and synthesis and oxidation of phenolics occur simultaneously, modifying the initial phenolic composition of the fruit [46].
An effect of the processing technology on antioxidant capacity was also observed in other studies. For instance, Heinmaa et al. [11] reported that antioxidant capacity was highest in juices extracted on water press, followed by those extracted on belt press and rack-and-frame press. Their results also showed that the degrees of correlation between individual polyphenols and antioxidant activity were different.
Both antioxidant activity and TPC indicate the quality of a product with respect to its biological properties, and hence can be used in the process of quality control in the production of apple juices [52]. As indicated by our results, small-scale manufacturers should be advised to make use of a screw press to produce healthy and high-quality apple juice.

4. Conclusions

The present research demonstrated the varied efficiency of extraction of apple juice depending on the design of the press and apple variety. Generally, application of the screw press ensured higher yields of pressing compared to the basket press. The differences in the yield of extracted juice observed between the presses were related to the wider opening of cell membranes and release of greater amounts of nutrients facilitated by the screw press.
This study also showed the effect of press construction on the quality of apple juice. The juices extracted on screw press had higher TPC and antioxidant activity. This was probably due to the more intensive grinding and mixing of the raw material and the greater release of valuable bioactive components into the extracted juice. Additionally, the apple juices extracted on the screw press were characterized by a higher content of soluble solids, higher viscosity, and lower acidity. The obtained results indicate the necessity of further research on the use of screw presses for the production of juices from various varieties of apples in the farm conditions.

Author Contributions

Z.K. conceptualization; K.W. methodology; Z.K. formal analysis; K.W. investigation; K.W. data curation; Z.K. and K.W. writing—original draft preparation; D.D. writing—review and editing; Z.K. and D.D. supervision.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Li, Z.; Teng, J.; Lyu, Y.; Hu, X.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, M. Enhanced Antioxidant Activity for Apple Juice Fermented with Lactobacillus plantarum ATCC14917. Molecules 2018, 24, 51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Kschonsek, J.; Wolfram, T.; Stöckl, A.; Böhm, V. Polyphenolic Compounds Analysis of Old and New Apple Cultivars and Contribution of Polyphenolic Profile to the In Vitro Antioxidant Capacity. Antioxidants (Basel) 2018, 7, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. FAOSTAT. Food and agriculture organization: FAO-STAT 2016. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QC (accessed on 23 January 2019).
  4. Bugala, A. Zmiany w polskim handlu zagranicznym sokami zagęszczonymi w 2016 r. Przemysł Fermentacyjny i Owocowo-Warzywny 2017, 61, 19–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Francini, A.; Sebastiani, L. Phenolic Compounds in Apple (Malus x domestica Borkh.): Compounds Characterization and Stability during Postharvest and after Processing. Antioxidants (Basel) 2013, 2, 181–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Plocharski, W.; Markowski, J.; Groele, B.; Stos, K.; Koziol-Kozakowska, A. Soki, nektary, napoje - aspekty rynkowe i zdrowotne. Przemysł Fermentacyjny i Owocowo-Warzywny 2017, 61, 6–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. De Paepe, D.; Coudijzer, K.; Noten, B.; Valkenborg, D.; Servaes, K.; De Loose, M.; Diels, L.; Voorspoels, S.; Van Droogenbroeck, B. A comparative study between spiral-filter press and belt press implemented in a cloudy apple juice production process. Food Chem. 2015, 173, 986–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Markowski, J.; Baron, A.; Le Quéré, J.-M.; Płocharski, W. Composition of clear and cloudy juices from French and Polish apples in relation to processing technology. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 62, 813–820. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kruczek, M.; Drygaś, B.; Habryka, C. Pomace in fruit industry and their contemporary potential application. World Sci. News 2016, 48, 259–265. [Google Scholar]
  10. Nadulski, R.; Kobus, Z.; Wilczyński, K.; Guz, T.; Ahmed, Z.A. Characterisation of selected apple cutivars in the aspect of juice production in the condition of farm. In Farm Machinery and Processes Management in Sustainable Agriculture. Proceedings IX International Scientific Symposium Farm Machinery and Processes Management in Sustainable Agriculture, Lublin, Poland, 22–24 November 2017; pp. 255–259. Available online: https://depot.ceon.pl/handle/123456789/14803 (accessed on 02 July 2019).
  11. Heinmaa, L.; Moor, U.; Põldma, P.; Raudsepp, P.; Kidmose, U.; Lo Scalzo, R. Content of health-beneficial compounds and sensory properties of organic apple juice as affected by processing technology. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 85, 372–379. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Jaeger, H.; Schulz, M.; Lu, P.; Knorr, D. Adjustment of milling, mash electroporation and pressing for the development of a PEF assisted juice production in industrial scale. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2012, 14, 46–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Nadulski, R.; Kobus, Z.; Wilczyński, K.; Zawiślak, K.; Grochowicz, J.; Guz, T. Application of Freezing and Thawing in Apple (Malus domestica) Juice Extraction. J. Food Sci. 2016, 81, E2718–E2725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kobus, Z.; Nadulski, R.; Anifantis, A.S.; Santoro, F. Effect of press construction on yield of pressing and selected quality characteristics of apple juice. Engineering for rural development. Jelgava, 23.-25.05.2018. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325386311_ Effect_of_press_construction_on_yield_of_pressing_and_selected_quality_characteristics_of_apple_juice (accessed on 24 Janauary 2019).
  15. Nadulski, R. Ocena przydatności laboratoryjnej prasy koszowej do badań procesu tłoczenia soku z surowców roślinnych. Inżynieria Rolnicza 2006, 6, 73–80. [Google Scholar]
  16. Łaska, B.; Myczko, A.; Golimowski, W. Badanie wydajności prasy ślimakowej i sprawności tłoczenia oleju w warunkach zimowych i letnich. Problemy Inżynierii Rolniczej 2012, 4, 163–170. [Google Scholar]
  17. Wroniak, M.; Ptaszek, A.; Ratusz, K. Ocena wpływu warunków tłoczenia w prasie ślimakowej na jakość i skład chemiczny olejów rzepakowych. Żywność: Nauka - technologia - jakość 2013, 20, 92–104. [Google Scholar]
  18. Bogaert, L.; Mathieu, H.; Mhemdi, H.; Vorobiev, E. Characterization of oilseeds mechanical expression in an instrumented pilot screw press. Ind. Crop. Prod. 2018, 121, 106–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Isobe, S.; Zuber, F.; Uemura, K.; Noguchi, A. A new twin-screw press design for oil extraction of dehulled sunflower seeds. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 1992, 69, 884. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Bakhshabadi, H.; Mirzaei, H.; Ghodsvali, A.; Jafari, S.M.; Ziaiifar, A.M. The influence of pulsed electric fields and microwave pretreatments on some selected physicochemical properties of oil extracted from black cumin seed. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 6, 111–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Sannino, M.; del Piano, L.; Abet, M.; Baiano, S.; Crimaldi, M.; Modestia, F.; Raimo, F.; Ricciardiello, G.; Faugno, S. Effect of mechanical extraction parameters on the yield and quality of tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) seed oil. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 54, 4009–4015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Rabadán, A.; Álvarez-Ortí, M.; Gómez, R.; Alvarruiz, A.; Pardo, J.E. Optimization of pistachio oil extraction regarding processing parameters of screw and hydraulic presses. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 2017, 83, 79–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Wilczyński, K.; Kobus, Z.; Guz, T. Analysis of efficiency and particles size distribution in apple juice obtained with different methods. J. Res. Appl. Agric. Eng. 2018, 63, 140–143. [Google Scholar]
  24. Wilczyński, K. Charakterystyka oraz efektywność urządzeń wykorzystywanych w przemyśle do pozyskiwania soku z owoców i warzyw. In Wybrane problemy z zakresu przemysłu spożywczego - teoria i praktyka; Stoma, M., Dudziak, A., Kobus, Z., Eds.; Libropolis: Lublin, Poland, 2016; pp. 81–90. [Google Scholar]
  25. Agriculture and rural development 2014-2020. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/rural-development-2014-2020_en (accessed on 28 May 2019).
  26. Promotion of EU farm products. 2019. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/market-measures/promotion-eu-farm-products_en (accessed on 28 May 2019).
  27. Juściński, S. The mobile service of agricultural machines as the element of the support for the sustainable agriculture. In Farm Machinery and Processes Management in Sustainable Agriculture. Proceedings IX International Scientific Symposium Farm Machinery and Processes Management in Sustainable Agriculture, Lublin, Poland, 22–24 November 2017; pp. 136–141. Available online: https://depot.ceon.pl/handle/123456789/14824 (accessed on 02 July 2019).
  28. Horwitz, W. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International, 17th ed.; AOAC International: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  29. PN-EN 1132:1999 - Polish version. 2019. Available online: http://sklep.pkn.pl/pn-en-1132-1999p.html (accessed on 24 January 2019).
  30. PN-EN 12143:2000 - Polish version. 2019. Available online: http://sklep.pkn.pl/pn-en-12143-2000p.html (accessed on 24 January 2019).
  31. Singleton, V.L.; Orthofer, R.; Lamuela-Raventós, R.M. [14] Analysis of total phenols and other oxidation substrates and antioxidants by means of folin-ciocalteu reagent. Methods Enzymol. 1999, 299, 152–178. [Google Scholar]
  32. Sharma, S.; Kori, S.; Parmar, A. Surfactant mediated extraction of total phenolic contents (TPC) and antioxidants from fruits juices. Food Chem. 2015, 185, 284–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Takenaka, M.; Nanayama, K.; Isobe, S.; Ozaki, K.; Miyagi, K.; Sumi, H.; Toume, Y.; Morine, S.; Ohta, H. Effect of extraction method on yield and quality of Citrus depressa juice. Food Sci. Technol. Res. 2007, 13, 281–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Eisele, T.A.; Drake, S.R. The partial compositional characteristics of apple juice from 175 apple varieties. J. Food Compos. Anal. 2005, 18, 213–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Kowalczyk, R. Wydajność tłoczenia i wskaźnik zużycia jabłek w procesie wytwarzania zagęszczonego soku jabłkowego. Problemy Inżynierii Rolniczej 2004, 12, 21–30. [Google Scholar]
  36. Huang, Z.; Hu, H.; Shen, F.; Wu, B.; Wang, X.; Zhang, B.; Wang, W.; Liu, L.; Liu, J.; Chen, C.; et al. Relatively high acidity is an important breeding objective for fresh juice-specific apple cultivars. Sci. Hortic. 2018, 233, 29–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Choi, L.H.; Nielsen, S.S. The Effects of Thermal and Nonthermal Processing Methods on Apple Cider Quality and Consumer Acceptability. J. Food Qual. 2005, 28, 13–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Genovese, D.B.; Lozano, J.E. Contribution of colloidal forces to the viscosity and stability of cloudy apple juice. Food Hydrocoll. 2006, 20, 767–773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Will, F.; Roth, M.; Olk, M.; Ludwig, M.; Dietrich, H. Processing and analytical characterisation of pulp-enriched cloudy apple juices. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 2008, 41, 2057–2063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Teleszko, M.; Nowicka, P.; Wojdyło, A. Chemical, enzymatic and physical characteristic of cloudy apple juices. Agric. Food Sci. 2016, 25, 34–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Genovese, D.B.; Lozano, J.E. Effect of Cloud Particle Characteristics on the Viscosity of Cloudy Apple Juice. J. Food Sci. 2000, 65, 641–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Juszczak, L.; Fortuna, T. Effect of temperature and soluble solids content on the viscosity of cherry juice concentrate. Int. Agrophysics 2004, 18, 17–21. [Google Scholar]
  43. Gökmen, V.; Artık, N.; Acar, J.; Kahraman, N.; Poyrazoğlu, E. Effects of various clarification treatments on patulin, phenolic compound and organic acid compositions of apple juice. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2001, 213, 194–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Vieira, F.G.K.; Borges, G.S.; Copetti, C.; Gonzaga, L.V.; Nunes, E.C.; Fett, R. Activity and contents of polyphenolic antioxidants in the whole fruit, flesh and peel of three apple cultivars. Arch. Latinoam. Nutr. 2009, 59, 101–106. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  45. Van Der Sluis, A.A.; Dekker, M.; Skrede, G.; Jongen, W.M.F. Activity and concentration of polyphenolic antioxidants in apple juice. 1. Effect of existing production methods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 7211–7219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Queiroz, C.; Lopes, M.L.M.; Fialho, E.; Valente-Mesquita, V.L. Changes in bioactive compounds and antioxidant capacity of fresh-cut cashew apple. Food Res. Int. 2011, 44, 1459–1462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. He, L.; Xu, H.; Liu, X.; He, W.; Yuan, F.; Hou, Z.; Gao, Y. Identification of phenolic compounds from pomegranate (Punica granatum L.) seed residues and investigation into their antioxidant capacities by HPLC–ABTS+ assay. Food Res. Int. 2011, 44, 1161–1167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Chinnici, F.; Bendini, A.; Gaiani, A.; Riponi, C. Radical scavenging activities of peels and pulps from cv. Golden Delicious apples as related to their phenolic composition. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 4684–4689. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. do Rufino, M.; Alves, R.E.; de Brito, E.S.; Pérez-Jiménez, J.; Saura-Calixto, F.; Mancini-Filho, J. Bioactive compounds and antioxidant capacities of 18 non-traditional tropical fruits from Brazil. Food Chem. 2010, 121, 996–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Drogoudi, P.D.; Michailidis, Z.; Pantelidis, G. Peel and flesh antioxidant content and harvest quality characteristics of seven apple cultivars. Sci. Hortic. 2008, 115, 149–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Wolfe, K.; Wu, X.; Liu, R.H. Antioxidant activity of apple peels. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 609–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Pavun, L.; Đurđević, P.; Jelikić-Stankov, M.; Đikanović, D.; Uskoković-Marković, S. Determination of flavonoids and total polyphenol contents in commercial apple juices. Czech. J. Food Sci. 2018, 36, 233–238. [Google Scholar] [Green Version]
Sustainability 11 03630 g001 550
Figure 1. Experimental flowchart.
Figure 1. Experimental flowchart.
Sustainability 11 03630 g001
Sustainability 11 03630 g002 550
Figure 2. Construction and principle underlying the operation of the hydraulic press: 1 – hydraulic ram, 2 – measurement system, 3 – frame, 4 – tensometer, 5 – piston, 6 – cylinder and 7 – base.
Figure 2. Construction and principle underlying the operation of the hydraulic press: 1 – hydraulic ram, 2 – measurement system, 3 – frame, 4 – tensometer, 5 – piston, 6 – cylinder and 7 – base.
Sustainability 11 03630 g002
Sustainability 11 03630 g003 550
Figure 3. Effect of the type of press machine on the pressing yield.
Figure 3. Effect of the type of press machine on the pressing yield.
Sustainability 11 03630 g003
Sustainability 11 03630 g004 550
Figure 4. Hardness of the tested apple varieties.
Figure 4. Hardness of the tested apple varieties.
Sustainability 11 03630 g004
Sustainability 11 03630 g005 550
Figure 5. Cutting force of the tested apple varieties.
Figure 5. Cutting force of the tested apple varieties.
Sustainability 11 03630 g005
Sustainability 11 03630 g006 550
Figure 6. Viscosity of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Figure 6. Viscosity of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Sustainability 11 03630 g006
Sustainability 11 03630 g007 550
Figure 7. Total phenolic content of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Figure 7. Total phenolic content of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Sustainability 11 03630 g007
Sustainability 11 03630 g008 550
Figure 8. Antioxidant activity of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Figure 8. Antioxidant activity of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Sustainability 11 03630 g008
Table
Table 1. Total soluble solids (Brix) of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Table 1. Total soluble solids (Brix) of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
VarietySolid Soluble Content (in Brix)
Basket PressScrew Press
Rubin11.9 ± 0.00a13.1 ± 0.00b
Mutsu12.9 ± 0.00a12.9 ± 0.00a
Jonaprince11.2 ± 0.00a11.9 ± 0.00b
a, b and c – average values in the row marked with the same letter are not statistically significantly different (T-test, p ≤ 0.05).
Table
Table 2. Acidity (pH) of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
Table 2. Acidity (pH) of the apple juice depending on the type of press machine.
VarietyAcidity (pH)
Basket PressScrew Press
Rubin3.61 ± 0.012a3.45 ± 0.125b
Mutsu3.72 ± 0.008a3.62 ± 0.08b
Jonaprince3.81 ± 0.008a3.73 ± 0.012a
a, b and c – average values in the row marked with the same letter are not statistically significantly different (T-test, p ≤ 0.05).

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wilczyński, K.; Kobus, Z.; Dziki, D. Effect of Press Construction on Yield and Quality of Apple Juice. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133630

AMA Style

Wilczyński K, Kobus Z, Dziki D. Effect of Press Construction on Yield and Quality of Apple Juice. Sustainability. 2019; 11(13):3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133630

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wilczyński, Kamil, Zbigniew Kobus, and Dariusz Dziki. 2019. "Effect of Press Construction on Yield and Quality of Apple Juice" Sustainability 11, no. 13: 3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133630

APA Style

Wilczyński, K., Kobus, Z., & Dziki, D. (2019). Effect of Press Construction on Yield and Quality of Apple Juice. Sustainability, 11(13), 3630. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11133630

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop