Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/11011
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorConstantinou, Savvas-
dc.contributor.authorGómez-Caravaca, Ana María-
dc.contributor.authorGoulas, Vlasios-
dc.contributor.authorSegura-Carretero, Antonio-
dc.contributor.authorKoundouras, Stefanos-
dc.contributor.authorManganaris, George A.-
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-03T11:53:58Z-
dc.date.available2018-05-03T11:53:58Z-
dc.date.issued2018-01-
dc.identifier.citationPostharvest Biology and Technology, 2018, vol. 135, pp. 114-122en_US
dc.identifier.issn09255214-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14279/11011-
dc.description.abstractThe objective of this study was to compare the effect of traditional sun-drying method (TM) with four alternative dehydration methods [(a) multiple horizontal wires (MHW), (b) multiple vertical pallets (MVP), (c) low greenhouse (LGH) and (d) hot-air dryer treatment (HAD)] on phenolic composition, oenological parameters, aroma potential and browning compounds of musts obtained from dehydrated grapes (Vitis vinifera cv. ‘Xynisteri’). Dehydrated grapes of the examined cultivar are being used to produce ‘Commandaria’ dessert wine, a protected designation of origin product in Cyprus. LGH and HAD treatments led to a significant reduction of the dehydration period. Soluble solid contents were used to monitor the progress of dehydration process; no changes among the examined dehydration methods in reducing sugar composition were found. Notably, HAD led to a dramatic rise (3.2-fold) of titratable acidity that was obviously not related only to the concentration effect. Furthermore, all dehydration methods concentrated total bound volatiles and induced the formation of brown pigments. Based on the Folin-Ciocalteu index, only HAD and LGH induced a significant increase in total phenolic content in dehydrated grape musts. Subsequently, forty phenolic compounds were identified and quantified by LC-DAD-qTOF-MS. Results showed a significant effect of dehydration methods that vary according to the different groups of phenolic compounds considered. Similarly to Folin-Ciocalteu index, HAD and LGH methods increased significantly the phenolic content in grape musts, whereas MHW and MVP methods increased it slightly higher than the concentration factor. Flavonols, flavan-3-ols and flavanonols were the most affected polyphenolic groups. A significant increment of hydroxybenzoic and hydroxycinnamic acids, the predominant groups of phenolic compounds found in ‘Xynisteri’ grapes, was monitored. Taking into consideration that HAD cannot be exploited under the existing legal framework, LGH showed the greatest potential for the production of high quality dehydrated ‘Xynisteri’ grape must.en_US
dc.formatpdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.relation.ispartofPostharvest Biology and Technologyen_US
dc.rights© Elsevieren_US
dc.subjectBound volatilesen_US
dc.subjectCommandariaen_US
dc.subjectLC-DAD-qTOF-MSen_US
dc.subjectMelanoidinsen_US
dc.subjectPhenolic compoundsen_US
dc.subjectPostharvest dehydrationen_US
dc.titleThe impact of postharvest dehydration methods on qualitative attributes and chemical composition of ‘Xynisteri’ grape (Vitis vinifera) musten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.collaborationCyprus University of Technologyen_US
dc.collaborationUniversity of Granadaen_US
dc.collaborationResearch and Development of Functional Food Centre (CIDAF)en_US
dc.collaborationAristotle University of Thessalonikien_US
dc.subject.categoryAgriculture Forestry and Fisheriesen_US
dc.journalsSubscriptionen_US
dc.countryCyprusen_US
dc.countrySpainen_US
dc.countryGreeceen_US
dc.subject.fieldAgricultural Sciencesen_US
dc.publicationPeer Revieweden_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.postharvbio.2017.09.005en_US
dc.relation.volume135en_US
cut.common.academicyear2017-2018en_US
dc.identifier.spage114en_US
dc.identifier.epage122en_US
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.openairetypearticle-
item.languageiso639-1en-
crisitem.journal.journalissn0925-5214-
crisitem.journal.publisherElsevier-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Biotechnology and Food Science-
crisitem.author.deptDepartment of Agricultural Sciences, Biotechnology and Food Science-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.facultyFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0001-7527-1559-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-5849-6104-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
crisitem.author.parentorgFaculty of Geotechnical Sciences and Environmental Management-
Appears in Collections:Άρθρα/Articles
CORE Recommender
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

15
checked on Nov 9, 2023

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

14
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Oct 29, 2023

Page view(s) 50

354
Last Week
4
Last month
11
checked on May 9, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in KTISIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.