Skip to main content
Log in

Modeling mass transfer in brine salting of chickpea

  • Original
  • Published:
Heat and Mass Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Salted chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) is increasingly used in snack production and in home cooking by soaking in brines. Order to achieve better quality and higher nutrient content, it is important to model and understand the mass transfer processes during this operation. In this work, brine salting of chickpea was studied at 1, 5 and 20% salt concentrations, at temperatures of 25, 50, 75 and 100 °C. Water uptake, salt uptake and non-ash solids loss over time were modeled using the Peleg, Fickian diffusion and anomalous diffusion models. Salt content of brines significantly affects the changes occurring during chickpea soaking. At 1% salt content, the volume gain is larger than when soaking in water, while at 5 and 20% swelling decreases, with a lower solids’ loss. The fit of each model to experimental data was assessed using the Coefficient of Determination, the Root Mean Square Error, the Akaike Information Criterion, and the errors of the fitted parameters of each model. The results show that the Fick model is at least as good as the Peleg model in predicting the mass transfer of each considered component, but the influence of the equilibrium parameter is more clear on the Peleg model, resulting in better forecasts of the kinetic parameter. The anomalous diffusion model was not adequate to fit neither the water, the salt nor the solids loss, resulting in large errors in both the diffusion coefficient and the equilibrium parameter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

Upon request.

Abbreviations

AIC:

Akaike Information Criterion

RMSE:

Root Mean Square Error

C w, ∞ :

water content per solids content at infinite time (g/100 g dry basis)

D :

apparent diffusion coefficient (m2/s)

Ea :

activation energy (kJ/mol)

f nas :

fraction of non-ash solids loss during soaking until time t (g/100 g dry basis)

K 1 :

Peleg rate constant (h·%−1)

K 2 :

Peleg capacity constant (%−1)

M :

mass at time t (g)

M n :

normalized mass at time t (g/g)

r :

chickpea radius (m)

t :

soaking time (s)

T:

soaking temperature (°C)

V :

volume at time t (cm3)

V n :

normalized volume at time t (g/g)

X n :

normalized content (g/g)

Z :

salt content of the inner solution of the chickpea (g/100 g)

α:

differential order of the anomalous diffusion model

∞:

at infinite time

ρ :

density (mass/volume) of the chickpea (g/cm3)

i :

at initial time

NaCl :

sodium chloride

nas :

non-ash solids

w :

water

∞:

at infinite time

References

  1. Doyle JJ, Luckow MA (2003) Update on phylogeny the rest of the iceberg. Legume diversity and evolution in a phylogenetic context 1. Plant Physiol 131:900–910. https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.102.018150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. FAO (2014) Food outlook: biannual report on global food markets. Rome

  3. Klamczynska B, Czuchajowska Z, Baik BK (2001) Composition, soaking, cooking properties and thermal characteristics of starch of chickpeas, wrinkled peas and smooth peas. Int J Food Sci Technol 36:563–572. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2621.2001.00486.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. FAO/WHO (2007) Codex Alimentarius commission-cereals, pulses. Legumes and Vegetable Proteins, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  5. Westhoek H, Lesschen JP, Rood T et al (2014) Food choices, health and environment: effects of cutting Europe’s meat and dairy intake. Glob Environ Chang 26:196–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Coşkuner Y, Karababa E (2004) Leblebi: a roasted chickpea product as a traditional Turkish snack food. Food Rev Int 20:257–274. https://doi.org/10.1081/FRI-200029424

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Coşkuner Y, Karababa E (2003) Effect of location and soaking treatments on the cooking quality of some chickpea breeding lines. Int J Food Sci Technol 38:751–757. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2621.2003.00727.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Turhan M, Sagol S (2004) Abrupt changes in the rates of processes occurring during hydrothermal treatment of whole starchy foods around the gelatinization temperature - a review of the literature. J Food Eng 62:365–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(03)00252-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Miano AC, Esteves P, Augusto D (2017) The Hydration of Grains : A Critical Review from Description of Phenomena to Process Improvements 00:1–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.12328

  10. Havlin S, Ben-Avraham D (2002) Diffusion in disordered media. Adv Phys 51:187–292. https://doi.org/10.1080/00018730110116353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Coffigniez F, Briffaz A, Mestres C et al (2019) Impact of soaking process on the microstructure of cowpea seeds in relation to solid losses and water absorption. Food Res Int 119:268–275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2019.02.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sahin S, Sumnu SG (2006) Physical properties of foods. Springer New York, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Peleg M (1988) An empirical model for the description of moisture sorption curves. J Food Sci 53:1216–1217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1988.tb13565.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Chenoll C, Betoret N, Fito P (2009) Analysis of chickpea (var. “Blanco Lechoso”) rehydration. Part I. physicochemical and texture analysis. J Food Eng 95:352–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2009.05.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Crank J (1979) The mathematics of diffusion. Clarendon Press

  16. Simpson R, Jaques A, Nuñez H et al (2013) Fractional Calculus as a mathematical tool to improve the modeling of mass transfer phenomena in food processing. Food Eng Rev 5:45–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-012-9059-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. R Core Team (2017) R: A language and environment for statistical computing

  18. Spiess AN, Neumeyer N (2010) An evaluation of R2as an inadequate measure for nonlinear models in pharmacological and biochemical research: a Monte Carlo approach. BMC Pharmacol 10:1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2210-10-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wood JA, Knights EJ, Choct M (2011) Morphology of chickpea seeds (Cicer Arietinum L.): comparison of Desi and Kabuli types. Int J Plant Sci 172:632–643. https://doi.org/10.1086/659456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaur M, Singh N, Sodhi NS (2005) Physicochemical, cooking, textural and roasting characteristics of chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) cultivars. J Food Eng 69:511–517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2004.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sayar S, Turhan M, Gunasekaran S (2001) Analysis of chickpea soaking by simultaneous water transfer and water–starch reaction. J Food Eng 50:91–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(00)00196-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Costa R, Fusco F, Gândara JFM (2018) Mass transfer dynamics in soaking of chickpea. J Food Eng 42–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2018.02.004

  23. Tester RF, Morrison WR (1990) Swelling and gelatinization of cereal starches. I. Effects of amylopectin, amylose, and lipids. Cereal Chem 67:551–557

    Google Scholar 

  24. McDonnell CK, Allen P, Duggan E et al (2013) The effect of salt and fibre direction on water dynamics, distribution and mobility in pork muscle: a low field NMR study. Meat Sci 95:51–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meatsci.2013.04.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Hadnadjev M, Dapcevic-Hadnadjev T, Pojic M et al (2017) Progress in vegetable proteins isolation techniques: a review. Food Feed Res 44:11–21. https://doi.org/10.5937/FFR1701011H

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Banks HT, Joyner ML (2017) AIC under the framework of least squares estimation. Appl Math Lett 74:33–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aml.2017.05.005

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  27. Shafaei SM, Masoumi AA, Roshan H (2016) Analysis of water absorption of bean and chickpea during soaking using Peleg model. J Saudi Soc Agric Sci 15:135–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2014.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Johnny S, Razavi SMA, Khodaei D (2015) Hydration kinetics and physical properties of split chickpea as affected by soaking temperature and time. J Food Sci Technol 52:8377–8382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-015-1893-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Turhan M, Sayar S, Gunasekaran S (2002) Application of Peleg model to study water absorption in chickpea during soaking. J Food Eng 53:153–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(01)00152-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Yildirim A, Öner MD, Bayram M (2011) Fitting Fick’s model to analyze water diffusion into chickpeas during soaking with ultrasound treatment. J Food Eng 104:134–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2010.12.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. King RD, Ashton SJ (1985) Effect of seed coat thickness and blanching on the water absorption by soybeans. Int J Food Sci Technol 20:505–509. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1985.tb01960.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sayar S, Turhan M, Köksel H (2003) Application of unreacted-core model to in situ gelatinization of chickpea starch. J Food Eng 60:349–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(03)00057-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Prasad K, Vairagar PR, Bera MB (2010) Temperature dependent hydration kinetics of Cicer arietinum splits. Food Res Int 43:483–488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2009.09.038

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ghaffari A, Rahbar-Kelishami A (2013) MD simulation and evaluation of the self-diffusion coefficients in aqueous NaCl solutions at different temperatures and concentrations. J Mol Liq 187:238–245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2013.08.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Holz M, Heil SR, Sacco A (2000) Temperature-dependent self-diffusion coefficients of water and six selected molecular liquids for calibration in accurate 1H NMR PFG measurements. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2:4740–4742. https://doi.org/10.1039/b005319h

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Wootton M, Bamunuarachchi A (1980) Application of differential scanning calorimetry to starch gelatinization\rIII. Effect of sucrose and sodium chloride. Starch - Stärke 32:126–129. 0038-9058/80/0404-0126 $02.50/0

  37. Seyhan-Gürtas F, Ak MM, Evranuz EÖ (2001) Water diffusion coefficients of selected legumes grown in Turkey as affected by temperature and variety. Turkey J Agric 25:297–304

    Google Scholar 

  38. Berkowitz B, Klafter J, Metzler R, Scher H (2002) Physical pictures of transport in heterogeneous media: advection-dispersion, random-walk, and fractional derivative formulations. Water Resour Res 38:9-1-9–12. https://doi.org/10.1029/2001wr001030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ramírez C, Astorga V, Nuñez H et al (2017) Anomalous diffusion based on fractional calculus approach applied to drying analysis of apple slices: the effects of relative humidity and temperature. J Food Process Eng 40:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.12549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Oliveira H, Gonçalves A, Nunes ML et al (2016) Influence of temperature and fish thickness on the mass transfer kinetics during the cod (Gadus morhua) desalting process. J Sci Food Agric 96:4457–4464. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.7657

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Kestin J, Khalifa HE, Correia RJ (1981) Tables of the dynamic and kinematic viscosity of aqueous NaCl solutions in the temperature range 20-150 °C and the pressure range 0.1-35 MPa. J Phys Chem Ref Data. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.555641

  42. Bouazizi S, Nasr S (2011) Self-diffusion coefficients and orientational correlation times in aqueous NaCl solutions: complementarity with structural investigations. J Mol Liq 162:78–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2011.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Francesca Fusco for her assistance and to Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia for its support under UID/AMB/00681/2013.

Funding

The authors wish to thank Francesca Fusco for her assistance and to Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia for its support under UID/AMB/00681/2013.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Rui Costa –Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Investigation; Methodology; Supervision; Writing - original draft;

Vânia Gomes –Investigation; Methodology;

João F. M. Gândara – Formal analysis; Software; Computation; Writing - review & editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rui Costa.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of interest/competing interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Costa, R., Gomes, V. & Gândara, J.F.M. Modeling mass transfer in brine salting of chickpea. Heat Mass Transfer 57, 1439–1452 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-021-03036-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-021-03036-7

Keywords

Navigation