Submitted:
09 April 2024
Posted:
10 April 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
3.2. Materials
3.3. Obtaining the Pulps
3.4. Suspension Preparation and Atomization
3.5. Powder Physicochemical Analysis
3.5.1. Yield
3.5.2. Solubility
3.5.3. Hygroscopicity
3.5.4. Vitamin C
3.5.5. Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM)
3.6. Experimental Design and Statistical Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Process yield

3.2. Solubility

3.3. Hygroscopicity

3.4. Vitamin C

3.5. Microstructures

3.6. Model Optimization and Verification
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Machado, W.; Guimarães, M.F.; Lira, F.F.; Santos, J.V.F.; Takahashi, L.S.A.; Leal, A.C.; Coelho, G.T.C.P. Evaluation of Two Fruit Ecotypes (Totai and Sclerocarpa) of Macaúba (Acrocomia Aculeata). Ind Crops Prod 2015, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Costa, J.M.C.; Oliveira, D.M.; Costa, L.E.C. Macauba Palm— Acrocomia Aculeata. In Exotic Fruits; Elsevier, 2018; pp. 297–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oliveira, D.M.; Clemente, E.; da Costa, J.M.C. Bioactive Compounds and Physicochemical Parameters of Grugru Palm (Acrocomia Aculeata) from Brazil: Pulp and Powder. Food Sci Technol Res 2014, 20, 7–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.-M.; Nie, S.-P. The Functional and Nutritional Aspects of Hydrocolloids in Foods. Food Hydrocoll 2016, 53, 46–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giunco, A.J. Características Físicas, Químicas, Nutricionais e Funcionais de Frutos e Farinha de Acrocomia Aculeata (Jacq) Lodd. Em Diferentes Estádios de Maturação, Universidade Federal da Grande Dourados, Dourados. 2017. Available online: https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=5015970 (accessed on 28 March 2024).
- Sá, S.; Chaul, L.T.; Alves, V.F.; Fiuza, T.S.; Tresvenzol, L.M.F.; Vaz, B.G.; Ferri, P.H.; Borges, L.L.; Paula, J.R. Phytochemistry and Antimicrobial Activity of Campomanesia Adamantium. Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia 2018, 28, 303–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Souza, J.C.; Piccinelli, A.C.; Aquino, D.F.S.; de Souza, V.V.; Schmitz, W.O.; Traesel, G.K.; Cardoso, C.A.L.; Kassuya, C.A.L.; Arena, A.C. Toxicological Analysis and Antihyperalgesic, Antidepressant, and Anti-Inflammatory Effects of Campomanesia Adamantium Fruit Barks. Nutr Neurosci 2017, 20, 23–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Viscardi, D.Z.; de Oliveira, V.S.; Arrigo, J.d.S.; Piccinelli, A.C.; Cardoso, C.A.L.; Maldonade, I.R.; Kassuya, C.A.L.; Sanjinez-Argandoña, E.J. Anti-Inflammatory, and Antinociceptive Effects of Campomanesia Adamantium Microencapsulated Pulp. Revista Brasileira de Farmacognosia 2017, 27, 220–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malta, L.G.; Tessaro, E.P.; Eberlin, M.; Pastore, G.M.; Liu, R.H. Assessment of Antioxidant and Antiproliferative Activities and the Identification of Phenolic Compounds of Exotic Brazilian Fruits. Food Research International 2013, 53, 417–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lourenço, S.C.; Torres, C.A.V.; Nunes, D.; Duarte, P.; Freitas, F.; Reis, M.A.M.; Fortunato, E.; Moldão-Martins, M.; da Costa, L.B.; Alves, V.D. Using a Bacterial Fucose-Rich Polysaccharide as Encapsulation Material of Bioactive Compounds. Int J Biol Macromol 2017, 104, 1099–1106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Di Battista, C.A.; Constenla, D.; Ramírez Rigo, M.V.; Piña, J. Process Analysis and Global Optimization for the Microencapsulation of Phytosterols by Spray Drying. Powder Technol 2017, 321, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casanova, F.; Estevinho, B.N.; Santos, L. Preliminary Studies of Rosmarinic Acid Microencapsulation with Chitosan and Modified Chitosan for Topical Delivery. Powder Technol 2016, 297, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bezerra, F.M.; Lis, M.; Carmona, Ó.G.; Carmona, C.G.; Moisés, M.P.; Zanin, G.M.; Moraes, F.F. Assessment of the Delivery of Citronella Oil from Microcapsules Supported on Wool Fabrics. Powder Technol 2019, 343, 775–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Braga, A.B.A.C.; Costa, C.J.M.; Pomella, A.W.V.; Ribeiro, E.J.; Santos, L.D.; Zotarelli, M.F. Evaluation of Lethality Temperature and Use of Different Wall Materials in the Microencapsulation Process of Trichoderma Asperellum Conidias by Spray Drying. Powder Technol 2019, 347, 199–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Avellone, G.; Salvo, A.; Costa, R.; Saija, E.; Bongiorno, D.; Di Stefano, V.; Calabrese, G.; Dugo, G. Investigation on the Influence of Spray-Drying Technology on the Quality of Sicilian Nero d’Avola Wines. Food Chem 2018, 240, 222–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Dantas, D.; Pasquali, M.A.; Cavalcanti-Mata, M.; Duarte, M.E.; Lisboa, H.M. Influence of Spray Drying Conditions on the Properties of Avocado Powder Drink. Food Chem 2018, 266, 284–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zotarelli, M.F.; da Silva, V.M.; Durigon, A.; Hubinger, M.D.; Laurindo, J.B. Production of Mango Powder by Spray Drying and Cast-Tape Drying. Powder Technol 2017, 305, 447–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Labuschagne, P. Impact of Wall Material Physicochemical Characteristics on the Stability of Encapsulated Phytochemicals: A Review. Food Research International 2018, 107, 227–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sablania, V.; Bosco, S.J.D. Optimization of Spray Drying Parameters for Murraya Koenigii (Linn) Leaves Extract Using Response Surface Methodology. Powder Technol 2018, 335, 35–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, Q.; Bi, J.; Zhou, Y.; Liu, X.; Wu, X.; Chen, R. Multi-Objective Optimization of Spray Drying of Jujube (Zizyphus Jujuba Miller) Powder Using Response Surface Methodology. Food Bioproc Tech 2014, 7, 1807–1818. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oussaid, S.; Chibane, M.; Madani, K.; Amrouche, T.; Achat, S.; Dahmoune, F.; Houali, K.; Rendueles, M.; Diaz, M. Optimization of the Extraction of Phenolic Compounds from Scirpus Holoschoenus Using a Simplex Centroid Design for Antioxidant and Antibacterial Applications. LWT 2017, 86, 635–642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Moraes Filho, M.L.; Busanello, M.; Prudencio, S.H.; Garcia, S. Soymilk with Okara Flour Fermented by Lactobacillus Acidophilus: Simplex-Centroid Mixture Design Applied in the Elaboration of Probiotic Creamy Sauce and Storage Stability. LWT 2018, 93, 339–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vinícius Soares de Oliveira; Eliana Janet, S. Argandoña; Ayd Mary Oshiro. Atomização e Liofilização Da Polpa de Campomanesia Adamantium: Influência Das Variáveis de Processo Na Retenção de Vitamina C Novas Edições Acadêmicas, 2018; Vol. 1.
- Kalkan, F.; Vanga, S.K.; Murugesan, R.; Orsat, V.; Raghavan, V. Microencapsulation of Hazelnut Oil through Spray Drying. Drying Technology 2017, 35, 527–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santhalakshmy, S.; Don Bosco, S.J.; Francis, S.; Sabeena, M. Effect of Inlet Temperature on Physicochemical Properties of Spray-Dried Jamun Fruit Juice Powder. Powder Technol 2015, 274, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cai, Y.Z.; Corke, H. Production and Properties of Spray-dried Amaranthus Betacyanin Pigments. J Food Sci 2000, 65, 1248–1252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cunniff, P.; Washington, D. Official Methods of Analysis of AOAC International. 1995.
- Wang, S.; Langrish, T. A Review of Process Simulations and the Use of Additives in Spray Drying. Food Research International 2009, 42, 13–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mariod, A.A. Functional Properties of Gum Arabic. In Gum Arabic; Elsevier, 2018; pp. 283–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santana, A.A.; Cano-Higuita, D.M.; de Oliveira, R.A.; Telis, V.R.N. Influence of Different Combinations of Wall Materials on the Microencapsulation of Jussara Pulp (Euterpe Edulis) by Spray Drying. Food Chem 2016, 212, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Alves, A.I.; Rodrigues, M.Z.; Ribeiro Pinto, M.R.M.; Lago Vanzela, E.S.; Stringheta, P.C.; Perrone, Í.T.; Ramos, A.M. Morphological Characterization of Pequi Extract Microencapsulated through Spray Drying. Int J Food Prop 2017, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Suhag, Y.; Nanda, V. Optimization for Spray Drying Process Parameters of Nutritionally Rich Honey Powder Using Response Surface Methodology. Cogent Food Agric 2016, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Santana, A.A.; Kurozawa, L.E.; de Oliveira, R.A.; Park, K.J. Influence of Process Conditions on the Physicochemical Properties of Pequi Powder Produced by Spray Drying. Drying Technology 2013, 31, 825–836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murali, S.; Kar, A.; Mohapatra, D.; Kalia, P. Encapsulation of Black Carrot Juice Using Spray and Freeze Drying. Food Science and Technology International 2015, 21, 604–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cortés-Rojas, D.F.; Souza, C.R.F.; Oliveira, W.P. Optimization of Spray Drying Conditions for Production of Bidens Pilosa L. Dried Extract. Chemical Engineering Research and Design 2015, 93, 366–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oyewumi, M.O.; Kumar, A.; Cui, Z. Nano-Microparticles as Immune Adjuvants: Correlating Particle Sizes and the Resultant Immune Responses. Expert Rev Vaccines 2010, 9, 1095–1107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cano-Higuita, D.M.; Villa-Vélez, H.A.; Telis-Romero, J.; Váquiro, H.A.; Telis, V.R.N. Influence of Alternative Drying Aids on Water Sorption of Spray Dried Mango Mix Powders: A Thermodynamic Approach. Food and Bioproducts Processing 2015, 93, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lengyel, M.; Kállai-Szabó, N.; Antal, V.; Laki, A.J.; Antal, I. Microparticles, Microspheres, and Microcapsules for Advanced Drug Delivery. Sci Pharm 2019, 87, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
| Trials | Coded and real independent variables (%) | ||
| X1 (%) | X2 (%) | X3 (%) | |
| 1 | 1.00 | 0.00 | 0.00 |
| 2 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.00 |
| 3 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
| 4 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.00 |
| 5 | 0.50 | 0.00 | 0.50 |
| 6 | 0.00 | 0.50 | 0.50 |
| 7 | 0.33 | 0.33 | 0.33 |
| Yield (%) ± SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Tests | nozzle 1 | nozzle 2 | nozzle 3 |
| 1 (M) | 12.58 ± 0.45b | 8.34 ± 0.12c | 22.22 ± 0.88a |
| 2 (G) | 26.42 ± 0.38a | 14.78 ± 0.86c | 17.44 ± 0.65b |
| 3 (Q) | 5.17 ± 0.62c | 8.57 ± 0.17a | 6.17 ± 0.20b |
| 4 (M+G) | 10.14 ± 0.29c | 13.00 ± 0.25b | 33.56 ± 0.78a |
| 5 (M+Q) | 5.58 ± 0.27b | 5.17 ± 0.30b | 6.54 ± 0.15a |
| 6 (G+Q) | 27.83 ± 0.31b | 16.89 ± 0.51c | 35.56 ± 0.46a |
| 7 (M+G+Q) | 24.17 ± 0.20b | 25.78 ± 0.22a | 26.33 ± 0.39a |
| Solubility (%) ± SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Tests | nozzle 1 | nozzle 2 | nozzle 3 |
| 1 (M) | 86.50 ± 0.62a | 78.82 ± 0.21b | 78.85 ± 0.29b |
| 2 (G) | 80.37 ± 0.39a | 79.55 ± 0.20a | 79.61 ± 0.39a |
| 3 (Q) | 79.95 ± 0.72c | 86.17 ± 0.22b | 88.78 ± 0.20a |
| 4 (M+G) | 79.71 ± 0.28a | 79.44 ± 0.39a | 79.15 ± 0.69a |
| 5 (M+Q) | 84.79 ± 0.29a | 81.72 ± 0.30b | 84.77 ± 0.34a |
| 6 (G+Q) | 83.04 ± 0.20a | 82.81 ± 0.43a | 82.23 ± 0.29a |
| 7 (M+G+Q) | 81.81 ± 0.22a | 81.75 ± 0.32a | 81.85 ± 0.42a |
| Hygroscopicity (g/100g) ± SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Tests | nozzle 1 | nozzle 2 | nozzle 3 |
| 1 (M) | 14.77 ± 0.11a | 8.24 ±0.24b | 16.30 ± 0.40a |
| 2 (G) | 16.37 ± 0.47b | 16.53 ± 0.08b | 19.06 ± 0.27a |
| 3 (Q) | 21.93 ± 0.70a | 12.95 ± 0.41c | 17.05 ± 0.46b |
| 4 (M+G) | 16.23 ± 0.30b | 15.10 ± 0.17b | 18.06 ± 0.31a |
| 5 (M+Q) | 12.73 ± 0.25ab | 14.15 ± 0.34a | 11.89 ± 0.32b |
| 6 (G+Q) | 16.35 ± 0.28b | 15.50 ± 0.22b | 24.10 ± 0.79a |
| 7 (M+G+Q) | 15.10 ± 0.10a | 16.21 ± 0.23a | 13.25 ± 0.40b |
| Vitamin C (mg/100g dried pulp) ± SD | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Tests | nozzle 1 | nozzle 2 | nozzle 3 |
| 1 (M) | 631.67 ± 5.13a | 510.33 ± 3.07c | 577.05 ± 5.61b |
| 2 (G) | 737.97 ± 2.86a | 646.29 ± 4.36c | 664.51 ± 6.63b |
| 3 (Q) | 302.76 ± 6.22c | 538.46 ± 4.92a | 494.35 ± 3.62b |
| 4 (M+G) | 528.25 ± 6.37b | 488.82 ± 4.17c | 550.33 ± 3.11a |
| 5 (M+Q) | 544.47 ± 2.90b | 554.22 ± 6.87ab | 563.21 ± 5.43a |
| 6 (G+Q) | 704.98 ± 2.77a | 532.49 ± 4.64c | 595.32 ± 4.62b |
| 7 (M+G+Q) | 630.71 ± 6.87a | 587.39 ± 7.25b | 519.80 ± 7.80c |
| Nozzle | Coefficient | Response function | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yield (%) |
Solubility (%) |
Hygroscopicity (g/100g) |
Vitamin C (mg/100g) |
||
| Linear | |||||
| X1 (M) | 12.58 | 86.50 | 14.77 | 631.67 | |
| X2 (G) | 26.42 | 80.37 | 16.37 | 737.97 | |
| X3 (Q) | 5.17 | 79.95 | 21.93 | 302.76 | |
| Quadratic | |||||
| 1.0 mm | X1-2 (M+G) | (-37.43 | (-14.92 | 2.66 | (-626.28 |
| X1-3 (M+Q) | -13.17 | 6.25 | (-22.45 | 309.03 | |
| X2-3 (G+Q) | 48.17 | 11.49 | (-11.20 | 738.44 | |
| Cubic | |||||
| X1-2-3 (M+G+Q) | 260.47 | -23.34 | 23.36 | 824.23 | |
| R2 (%) | 96.96 | 99.20 | 95.86 | 96.98 | |
| Linear | |||||
| X1 (M) | 8.34 | 78.82 | 8.24 | 510.33 | |
| X2 (G) | 14.78 | 79.55 | 16.53 | 646.29 | |
| X3 (Q) | 8.57 | 86.17 | 12.95 | 538.46 | |
| Quadratic | |||||
| 1.2 mm | X1-2 (M+G) | 5.76 | 1.03 | 10.87 | (-357.93 |
| X1-3 (M+Q) | -13.15 | (-3.11 | 14.21 | 119.33 | |
| X2-3 (G+Q) | 20.87 | -0.20 | 3.03 | (-239.52 | |
| Cubic | |||||
| X1-2-3 (M+G+Q) | 358.10 | 5.63 | -77.10 | 1924.193 | |
| R2 (%) | 96.94 | 99.48 | 41.73 | 98.34 | |
| Linear | |||||
| X1 (M) | 22.22 | 78.85 | 16.30 | 577.05 | |
| X2 (G) | 17.44 | 79.61 | 19.06 | 664.51 | |
| X3 (Q) | 6.17 | 88.78 | 17.05 | 494.35 | |
| Quadratic | |||||
| 1.5 mm | X1-2 (M+G) | 54.90 | (-0.30 | (1.52 | (-281.78 |
| X1-3 (M+Q) | (-30.61 | 3.83 | (-19.14 | 110.03 | |
| X2-3 (G+Q) | 95.00 | (-7.85 | 24.18 | (63.56 | |
| Cubic | |||||
| X1-2-3 (M+G+Q) | -65.00 | -10.12 | -137.75 | -1407.45 | |
| R2 (%) | 95.95 | 98.80 | 96.96 | 98.63 | |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).