Other Fluid Bed Processes and Applications

Parikh, Dilip M.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-804727-9.00009-0

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lower survival rates (49% to 66%) were noted when the particles were coated with ethylcellulose solution; such lower survival rates were due to cracks (Semyonov et al., 2012). A molten encapsulant having a high melting temperature (e.g., 50 to 90 °C) should nevertheless be carefully considered because it may adversely affect a heat‐sensitive core material during fluidized‐bed spay cooling/chilling (Parikh, 2017).…”

Section: Encapsulation Methods Microstructures Encapsulation Efficimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Encapsulation Methods Microstructures Encapsulation Efficien...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As it is a coating process, the obtained encapsulate exhibits core-shell or mononuclear microstructure (Teunou & Poncelet, 2002). Encapsulates are simultaneously solidified using hot (liquid evaporation taking place) or cooling/chilling air (no liquid evaporation taking place) (Parikh, 2017). Viscosity and surface tension are the two important properties of an encapsulant solution.…”

Section: Fluidized-bed Spray Coatingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this process, a hot molten encapsulant is sprayed onto fluidizing core particles at a temperature below the melting temperature of the encapsulant. As no liquid evaporation takes place, the obtained encapsulates possess smooth surface with nonporous structure (Parikh, 2017). Semyonov et al (2012), for example, used molten wax (90 • C) and additional layer of ethylcellulose solution (ethylcellulose was dissolved in a mixture solvent of acetone and methanol to obtain a final concentration of 7% w/w) to coat Lactobacillus paracasei particles (the particles were obtained by spraying a mixture of L. paracasei, maltodextrin, and trehalose onto microcrystalline cellulose at inlet air temperatures of 45 to 50 • C) at inlet/outlet air temperatures of 45/25 • C. Higher survival rate (99%) of L. paracasei was noted when the particles were coated with wax.…”

Section: 13mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A molten encapsulant having a high melting temperature (e.g., 50 to 90 • C) should nevertheless be carefully considered because it may adversely affect a heat-sensitive core material during fluidized-bed spay cooling/chilling (Parikh, 2017).…”

Section: Fluidized-bed Spray Coating and Cooling/chillingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Microstructures of encapsulates and their relations with encapsulation efficiency and controlled release of bioactive constituents: A review

Yun

Devahastin

Chiewchan

2021

Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vitamins, peptides, essential oils, and probiotics are examples of health beneficial constituents, which are nevertheless heat‐sensitive and possess poor chemical stability. Various encapsulation methods have been applied to protect these constituents against thermal and chemical degradations. Encapsulates prepared by different methods and/or at different conditions exhibit different microstructures, which in turn differently influence the encapsulation efficiency as well as retention of encapsulated core materials. This review provides a summary of various microstructures resulted from the use of selected encapsulation methods or systems, namely, spray coating; co‐extrusion; emulsion‐, micelle‐, and liposome‐based; coacervation; and ionic gelation encapsulation, at different conditions. Subsequent effects of the different microstructures on encapsulation efficiency and retention of encapsulated core materials are mentioned and discussed. Encapsulates having compact microstructures resulted from the use of low‐surface tension and low‐viscosity encapsulants, high‐stability encapsulation systems, lower loads of core materials to total solids of encapsulants and appropriate solidification conditions have proved to exhibit higher encapsulation efficiencies and better retention of encapsulated core materials. Encapsulates with hollow, dent, shrunken microstructures or thinner walls resulted from inappropriate solidification conditions and higher loads of core materials, on the other hand, possess lower encapsulation efficiencies and protection capabilities. Encapsulates having crack, blow‐hole or porous microstructures resulted from the use of high‐viscosity encapsulants and inappropriate solidification conditions exhibit the lowest encapsulation efficiencies and poorest protection capabilities. Compact microstructures and structures formed between ionic biopolymers could be used to regulate the release of encapsulated cores.

show abstract

Section: Encapsulation Methods Microstructures Encapsulation Efficimentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Encapsulation Methods Microstructures Encapsulation Efficien...mentioning

confidence: 99%