PDF
Full
Outline
This study aimed to investigate the effects of different heat treatment methods (atmospheric pressure cooking, high-pressure cooking, atmospheric pressure steaming, high-pressure steaming, and microwave heating) and time (2 to 10 minutes) on the quality of Antarctic krill. The results showed that under the same heating time, the heat treatment loss rate of atmospheric pressure steaming was the lowest, and it was significantly lower than the other four methods within 6 minutes (P<0.05). Microwave heating performed best in terms of crude protein, crude fat, astaxanthin content, L*, b* values, and sensory scores, while atmospheric pressure cooking had the highest a* value. As the heating time increased, the heat treatment loss rate of all five methods rose, and the differences were significant within 6 minutes (P<0.05), the contents of crude protein and crude fat decreased, and there was no significant difference within 6 minutes and 8 minutes or more (P>0.05), but the difference between 6 and 8 minutes was significant (P<0.05), the astaxanthin content and sensory scores first increased and then decreased, reaching the highest at 6 minutes, and then significantly decreased after 6 minutes (P<0.05), L* and b* values increased, while a* value decreased, and the color differences were significant between 6 and 8 minutes (P<0.05). Through a comprehensive analysis of the overall impact of heat treatment methods and time on various quality indicators of krill, it was concluded that microwave heating was preferred within 2 to 6 minutes, followed by high-pressure steaming; both microwave heating and high-pressure steaming were optimal within 6 to 8 minutes; and microwave heating and atmospheric pressure steaming performed better at 8 minutes or more. This study provides a theoretical basis for the processing of Antarctic krill, which is helpful for optimizing the processing flow, improving product quality, and promoting industrial development.
PDF
53
24
| 科 Family | 属数 Number of genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) | 属 Genus | 种数 Number of species | 占总种数比例 Percentage of total species (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 鹅膏菌科Amanitaceae | 2 | 11 | 5.26 | 鹅膏菌属 Amanita | 10 | 4.78 |
| 小菇科 Mycenaceae | 2 | 12 | 5.74 | 丝盖伞属 Inocybe | 5 | 2.39 |
| 多孔菌科 Polyporaceae | 8 | 14 | 6.70 | 蜡蘑属 Laccaria | 5 | 2.39 |
| 红菇科 Russulaceae | 3 | 23 | 11.00 | 小皮伞属 Marasmius | 6 | 2.87 |
| 小菇属 Mycena | 11 | 5.26 | ||||
| 光柄菇属 Pluteus | 5 | 2.39 | ||||
| 红菇属 Russula | 17 | 8.13 | ||||
| 栓菌属 Trametes | 5 | 2.39 |
关闭全屏
No. 86 Xueyuan South Road, Haidian District, Beijing
010-62199257
qkjq@cast.org.cn
Copyright © 2025 China Association for Science and Technology. All rights reserved. For all open access content, the relevant licensing terms apply.
Sponsored by the Office of the Leading Group for Cybersecurity and Informatization of CAST, and supported by Science and Technology Review Publishing House
