Article Number: 803263 Thank you for choosing to publish with us. This is your final opportunity to ensure your article will be accurate at publication. Please review your proof carefully and respond to the queries using the circled tools in the image below, which are available by clicking ''Comment'' from the right-side menu in Adobe Reader DC.* Please use only the tools circled in the image, as edits via other tools/methods can be lost during file conversion. For comments, questions, or formatting requests, please use. Please do not use comment bubbles/sticky notes. Comment *If you do not see these tools, please ensure you have opened this file with Adobe Reader DC, available for free at get.adobe.com/reader or by going to Help > Check for Updates within other versions of Reader. For more detailed instructions, please see us.sagepub.com/ReaderXProofs. No. Query Please confirm that all author information, including names, affiliations, sequence, and contact details, is correct. Please review the entire document for typographical errors, mathematical errors, and any other necessary corrections; check headings, tables, and figures. Please confirm that the Funding and Conflict of Interest statements are accurate. Please ensure that you have obtained and enclosed all necessary permissions for the reproduction of artistic works, (e.g. illustrations, photographs, charts, maps, other visual material, etc.) not owned by yourself. Please refer to your publishing agreement for further information. Please note that this proof represents your final opportunity to review your article prior to publication, so please do send all of your changes now. AQ: 1 Please provide complete reference details for the in-text citation ''Aider and Ounis (2012).''

The progressive freeze concentration of sucrose solutions was tested. The effect of the initial concentration of the solution (C 0), the temperature of the refrigerant (T) and the stirring speed (ω) on the final concentration of the solution was determined. The effects were significant on the freeze concentration, for both individual and combined effects. The maximum concentration achieved in the progressive freeze concentration was 53º Brix, when the initial concentration was 35º Brix, at a speed of 800 rpm and a temperature of refrigerant of-20°C. The best values of the concentration index are obtained at low concentrations, high stirring speed and low temperature. The average distribution coefficient increased with the initial concentration of the solution. The average yield parameter at different initial concentrations is around 0.6 kg ice•kg sol-1 •h-1 .

This work focuses on the study of the concentration of lactose‐free milk using a combination of progressive freezing concentration (PFC) with block freezing concentration (BFC). First, we investigated the PFC of skim lactose‐free milk applying response surface methodology. To analyze the influence of three factors (stirring rate, coolant temperature, and assay time) on the response variables (concentrate yield, efficiency of the process, concentration index, and average ice growth rate), a central composite design was used previously. It was found that all factors had a significate influence on the responses. Then, once the optimized condition for this step was chosen (time of 58 min, coolant temperature of −5°C, and mechanical stirring of 1,035 rpm), the ice obtained from it was subjected to a new freeze concentration cycle using the BFC assisted by vacuum. In the concentrated fraction of this cycle, protein and carbohydrate contents were equals to 6.7 g 100 g−1 and 10.24 g 100 g−1, respectively. The results suggest that in PFC carbohydrates accumulate more in the concentrated phase, while in BFC it is the protein that has the greatest tendency to pass into the concentrated liquid. In this approach, we believe that it is possible to combine the two techniques (PFC + vacuum‐assisted BFC) to obtain concentrates, and that they can be used for the development of innovative lactose‐free dairy products. Practical Applications The use of concentration processes can facilitate the customization of milk products rich in proteins to meet specific requirements on nutritional and functional properties, for instance in bakery products, formulated food, ice‐cream, beverages, energy drinks, and others. Moreover, since most changes occur in an aqueous environment, the removal of some part of milk water results in its preservation. Within the concentration processes, the freeze concentration emerges swiftly thanks to its inherent features, involving low‐temperature processing and selective nature of the water removal step. Because of the low temperatures used in freeze concentration, this technology is gaining in popularity as an alternative technique to the standard concentration techniques currently used in dairy processing. It offers the most enhanced functional and sensorial qualities of concentrated milk because it decreases the quality deviation by minimizing the heat abuse on sensitive milk components, such as proteins, water‐soluble vitamins, and aromatics.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

No abstract

Poly(p-dioxanone) monofilaments were loaded with triclosan, a drug with a well-known antimicrobial effect. Two different procedures were considered: loading by molecular diffusion with a swelling solvent such as dichloromethane and loading by means of a coating based on polycaprolactone or polycaprolactone/magnesium stearate mixtures. Triclosan release was studied in different media by high-performance liquid chromatography. The kinetics of loading by diffusion and the release from both kinds of preparations were evaluated with wellestablished models. In general, the first stages of the loading process fit with the Higuchi approximation, whereas the final stages fit with the first-order model. The last model could be applied to predict the release behavior. A sustained release over a period that could reach 400 h was attained when ethanol was added to the release medium, whereas equilibrium conditions were reached when Sö rensen's hydrophilic medium was used. Significant differences in the release profiles of a Sö rensen's/ethanol medium were observed, which depended on the loading methodology. Thus, an 80% release was attained after 36 h for a polycaprolactone-coated sample and after 80-100 h for a sample loaded by diffusion. Degradation studies of the triclosan-loaded samples were also performed because the increase in the hydrophobicity of the samples could hinder the hydrolytic degradation. The weight-average molecular weight of unloaded and loaded (29,075 lg/g) sutures dropped to 220.000 and 110.000 after 45 days of exposure to the medium at 37 C, respectively.

The optimization of the extraction of natural antioxidants from white tea has fostered intensive research. This study has investigated the effects of ethanol-water mixtures, temperature and time on the extraction of polyphenols and antioxidant components from white tea. The response surface methodology was applied to identify the best extraction conditions. The best conditions to maximize the extraction of total polyphenols were: ethanol, 50%, for 47.5 min. Although the yield of polyphenols was optimal at 65 °C, the maximum antioxidant capacity was achieved with an extraction temperature of 90 °C. This study has identified the optimal conditions for the extraction of tea liquor with the best antioxidant properties. Epigallocatechin gallate, epicatechin gallate, epigallocatechin and epicatechin were extracted from white tea at concentrations up to 29.6 ± 10.6, 5.40 ± 2.09, 5.04 ± 0.20 and 2.48 ± 1.10 mg/100 g.

No abstract