Evaluation of oven baking and air-frying as potential alternatives of deep frying, considering PM2.5 and PAHs emissions from cooking animal- and plant-based protein foods

Szu-Yun Wu , Kuang-Mao Chiang , Shih-Chun Candice Lung , Yu-Cheng Chen , Wen-Harn Pan
{"title":"Evaluation of oven baking and air-frying as potential alternatives of deep frying, considering PM2.5 and PAHs emissions from cooking animal- and plant-based protein foods","authors":"Szu-Yun Wu ,&nbsp;Kuang-Mao Chiang ,&nbsp;Shih-Chun Candice Lung ,&nbsp;Yu-Cheng Chen ,&nbsp;Wen-Harn Pan","doi":"10.1016/j.afres.2025.101143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>With most people spending more time indoors than outdoors, indoor pollution is considered having profound impacts on health. In Asian countries, high-temperature cooking oil fumes (COFs) are a major indoor air pollution source. Previous studies indicate variations in aerosol types and concentrations during deep-frying are attributed to differences in of ingredient composition such as foods cooked and oil used.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The goal is to compare PM<sub>2.5</sub> and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) emissions during deep-frying, oven-baking, and air-frying of plant-based (tofu) and animal-based (chicken) protein foods with soybean oil and to evaluate sensory acceptability of the produced foods in order to identify alternative cooking methods with lower emission but equivalent food tastes.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>We monitored emitted PAHs, PM<sub>2.5</sub>, and particle size-specific mass and number concentrations of fine particles in eight replicates during cooking. Moreover, acceptance tests were conducted employing a nine-point Hedonic Scale regarding appearance, aroma, flavor, mouthfeel, aftertaste, and overall acceptance for different protein sources and cooking methods.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Regarding particle matters, irrespective of the foods, deep-frying demonstrated higher particle mass and number concentrations compared to oven-baking and air-frying. Both mass and number concentrations for chicken were substantially higher than those for tofu, especially in the Accumulation mode and Aitken mode with diameters below 1000 nm. Tofu exhibited extremely low PAHs emissions across all cooking methods, while chicken showed significantly higher PAHs emissions during deep-frying than the other two cooking methods, with an accumulating effect over time. In sensory evaluation, although deep-frying still achieved the highest scores, oven-baking also received favorable ratings. It even surpassed deep-frying in certain aspects.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8168,"journal":{"name":"Applied Food Research","volume":"5 2","pages":"Article 101143"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Food Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772502225004482","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

With most people spending more time indoors than outdoors, indoor pollution is considered having profound impacts on health. In Asian countries, high-temperature cooking oil fumes (COFs) are a major indoor air pollution source. Previous studies indicate variations in aerosol types and concentrations during deep-frying are attributed to differences in of ingredient composition such as foods cooked and oil used.

Objective

The goal is to compare PM2.5 and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) emissions during deep-frying, oven-baking, and air-frying of plant-based (tofu) and animal-based (chicken) protein foods with soybean oil and to evaluate sensory acceptability of the produced foods in order to identify alternative cooking methods with lower emission but equivalent food tastes.

Method

We monitored emitted PAHs, PM2.5, and particle size-specific mass and number concentrations of fine particles in eight replicates during cooking. Moreover, acceptance tests were conducted employing a nine-point Hedonic Scale regarding appearance, aroma, flavor, mouthfeel, aftertaste, and overall acceptance for different protein sources and cooking methods.

Results

Regarding particle matters, irrespective of the foods, deep-frying demonstrated higher particle mass and number concentrations compared to oven-baking and air-frying. Both mass and number concentrations for chicken were substantially higher than those for tofu, especially in the Accumulation mode and Aitken mode with diameters below 1000 nm. Tofu exhibited extremely low PAHs emissions across all cooking methods, while chicken showed significantly higher PAHs emissions during deep-frying than the other two cooking methods, with an accumulating effect over time. In sensory evaluation, although deep-frying still achieved the highest scores, oven-baking also received favorable ratings. It even surpassed deep-frying in certain aspects.
评估烤箱烘焙和空气油炸作为油炸的潜在替代品,考虑烹饪动物性和植物性蛋白质食品产生的PM2.5和多环芳烃排放
由于大多数人在室内的时间比在室外的时间长,室内污染被认为对健康有深远的影响。在亚洲国家,高温烹饪油烟(COFs)是主要的室内空气污染源。先前的研究表明,油炸过程中气溶胶类型和浓度的变化归因于配料组成的不同,如烹调的食物和使用的油。目的比较植物性(豆腐)和动物性(鸡肉)蛋白质食品与豆油在油炸、烤箱烘焙和空气油炸过程中的PM2.5和多环芳烃(PAHs)排放,并评估所生产食品的感官可接受性,以确定排放更低但食物味道相同的替代烹饪方法。方法对8个重复烹饪过程中排放的多环芳烃、PM2.5、细颗粒物的粒径比质量和数量浓度进行监测。此外,接受度测试采用九分制的享乐量表,包括外观、香气、风味、口感、余味以及对不同蛋白质来源和烹饪方法的总体接受度。结果就颗粒物质而言,无论何种食品,油炸食品的颗粒质量和数量浓度都高于烤箱烘烤和空气油炸食品。鸡肉的质量浓度和数量浓度均显著高于豆腐,特别是直径小于1000 nm的积累模式和艾特肯模式。豆腐在所有烹饪方法中都表现出极低的多环芳烃排放量,而鸡肉在油炸过程中的多环芳烃排放量明显高于其他两种烹饪方法,并随着时间的推移而累积。在感官评价方面,虽然油炸仍然获得了最高分,但烤箱烘焙也获得了好评。它甚至在某些方面超过了油炸。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信