Food Science & Nutrition, 2024; 12:9621–9631 https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.4541 9621 Food Science & Nutrition ORIGINAL RESEARCH OPEN ACCESS Drying Strawberry Slices: A Comparative Study of Electrohydrodynamic, Hot Air, and Electrohydrodynamic-Hot Air Techniques Ahmet Polat Department of Biosystems Engineering, Faculty of Agriculture, Bursa Uludag University, Bursa, Turkey Correspondence: Ahmet Polat (ahmetpolat@uludag.edu.tr) Received: 13 December 2023  |  Revised: 13 September 2024  |  Accepted: 2 October 2024 Funding: This work was supported by the Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu, TUB1. Keywords: color | drying times | electrohydrodynamic | microstructure | modeling | strawberry ABSTRACT The investigation encompassed an examination of the drying durations, modeling, and quality attributes (color, rehydration capacity, microstructural features, total soluble solid [TSS], and pH values) of strawberry slices subjected to diverse drying meth- odologies, namely electrohydrodynamic (EHD), EHD-hot air, and hot air processes. Furthermore, 10 distinct thin-layer drying models were applied, and their goodness-of-fit was assessed to identify the most suitable model for the drying process. This analysis encompassed applying two distinct temperatures (50°C and 55°C), and voltage levels (20 and 30 kV). The EHD method yielded the lengthiest drying durations for the strawberry samples, with hot air and EHD-hot air drying techniques subsequent in descending order of drying time. The outcomes of the modeling analyses demonstrated that the thin-layer drying behaviors of used drying methods were best described by the Midilli et al. and Wang and Singh models in terms of their goodness-of-fit. A decline in the L* values was noted with the elevation of temperature in the hot air drying method and with the escalation of voltage in the EHD drying. The minimum a* value was detected in the hot air drying method conducted at 55°C. The rehydration capacity of strawberry samples subjected to the EHD and EHD-hot air combination drying methods (except 20 kV-55°C) did not exhibit any statistically significant variation in response to different voltage settings. Although the structure of strawberry sam- ples dried with 20 kV application was observed as smoother, cracks occurred on the product surface in other drying applications. In hot air and EHD methods, varying temperature and volt applications did not show a significant effect on TSS and pH values. As a result, it has been seen that EHD technology, which is a promising drying method used in this study, is a suitable method in terms of processing efficiency and consumer acceptability of dried strawberry products. 1   |   Introduction The strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa), a member of the Rosaceae family, stands as one of the most widely consumed fruits globally (Yan et  al.  2018). Global production in 2021 reached a staggering 9,175,384.43 tons, with China leading as the top producer at 3,380,478.19 tons, followed closely by the United States, Turkiye, and Mexico (FAO  2021). Strawberry is shown among the berry fruits that contain both flavor and nutritional value and important bioactive components (especially vitamin C). Studies have reported that vitamin C is effective in preventing obesity, type 2 diabetes, cancer, inflammation, and cardiovascular diseases (Gamboa-Santos et al. 2014). Strawberry fruit is generally consumed fresh. Due to its elevated respiration rate, susceptibility to weight loss, and propensity for microbial contamination, this product is classified among the delicate and perishable items. Therefore, it is processed and transformed into different forms such as This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2024 The Author(s). Food Science & Nutrition published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.4541 https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.4541 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1673-7165 mailto: mailto:ahmetpolat@uludag.edu.tr http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1002%2Ffsn3.4541&domain=pdf&date_stamp=2024-10-20 9622 Food Science & Nutrition, 2024 dried, jelly concentrated jam, fruit juice, and bakery products to ensure consumption during the season (El-Beltagy, Gamea, and Essa  2007; de Bruijn and Bórquez  2014). Among these procedures, drying stands out as one of the oldest preserva- tion techniques. This method not only facilitates the creation of product variations and novel designs but also prolongs shelf life and decreases the bulk of agricultural commodities (Dinani, Hamdami, Shahedi, and Havet  2015). For numer- ous years, the conventional practice of employing hot air in convective drying has remained a prominent technique for processing agricultural goods. Despite its extensive adoption across the drying sector, this method ranks among the most energy-intensive processes. Statistics reveal that about a quar- ter (25%) of industrial energy usage in developed nations is allocated to drying operations (Gamboa-Santos et  al.  2014). Furthermore, the consistent exposure to elevated tempera- tures through hot air, which exerts an impact on product qual- ity, including nutrient content, color, flavor, taste, and shape, stands out as a significant drawback associated with this approach (Szadzińska, Kowalski, and Stasiak  2016). Novel drying technologies have been innovated with the primary objectives of mitigating quality degradation in products and enhancing energy efficiency in the drying process. One of these is electrohydrodynamic (EHD) drying, which is a heat- sensitive method that has been investigated in depth recently. At the basis of the EHD technique lies a secondary airflow known as the corona wind. This flow is induced by the ap- plication of high voltage to a curved electrode, typically in the form of a needle, wire, or pin. Under the impact of high voltage, the air surrounding the pointed electrode undergoes ionization. Ions sharing the same polarity as the pointed elec- trode are swiftly propelled toward the grounded electrode. High-velocity ions strike uncharged air molecules along their path, transmitting their movements and creating an ion flow called the corona wind. The corona wind disturbs the bound- ary layer of the biological material, consequently enhancing the rate of moisture evaporation (Dinani, Hamdami, Shahedi, Havet, and Queveau 2015). Similar to numerous drying meth- odologies, the efficiency of drying diminishes as the duration of the process extends. In the case of EHD drying, there is a reported potential advantage in integrating traditional dry- ing techniques to expedite the process and facilitate moisture migration to the surface. Given this, innovative equipment has been developed, harnessing the advantages of both ap- proaches (Dinani et  al.  2014). Within this study, strawberry samples underwent drying via the methods of EHD, hot air, and a combination of EHD-hot air. The study delved into the impact of these distinct techniques on drying durations, mod- eling, coloration, rehydration capabilities, and microstruc- tural characteristics of the strawberry samples. 2   |   Materials and Methods 2.1   |   Fresh Product Fresh samples of strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa) were pro- cured from a local market situated in Bursa. The harvest place of the products is the İnegöl district of Bursa. Rotten and deformed products were separated, and the remaining part was placed in plastic bags so that the product would not be damaged. The items were kept under storage conditions of 4 ± 0.5°C until the exper- iments reached completion. To ascertain the initial moisture content of the strawberry product, a randomly selected subset of items was subjected to an oven set at 70°C for a period of 24 h. As a result of the calculations, the initial humidity was deter- mined as 7.10 (d.b.). The samples were sliced using a cutting tool to initiate the drying procedure. Strawberry dimensions were found to be 24.10 ± 3.84 mm in diameter and 2.36 ± 0.23 mm in thickness with the help of a caliper. Each experiment utilized a sample weighing 130 ± 0.01 g. 2.2   |   Drying Process The custom-designed EHD-convective dryer was employed to dry the sliced strawberry samples until they achieved a final moisture content of 0.1 (d.b.). The drying process involved the utilization of two distinct voltage levels (20 and 30 kV) and two varying temperature settings (50°C and 55°C). Every drying instance was executed under an air velocity of 1.5 m/s. Using these values, eight different drying applications (20 kV, 30 kV, 50°C, 55°C 20 kV-50°C, 20 kV-55°C, 30 kV-50°C, and 30 kV-55°C) were arranged. The EHD drying method was facilitated using a wire system. In the EHD wire system, six wires (0.4 mm diameter) were positioned 5 cm apart (Dinani and Havet 2015). In the drying process, a stainless steel plate measuring 26.5 × 34.5 cm was used. A gap of 30 mm was es- tablished between the dried product and the wire electrode. Moisture loss during the drying process was gauged every 30 min using a precision scale positioned beneath the dryer, ac- curate to 0.01. The drying procedures were conducted within controlled laboratory settings at a temperature of 27.1 ± 0.1°C and humidity of 23.8 ± 0.1%. The experiments were replicated thrice for each condition. 2.3   |   Thin-Layer Modeling The experimental outcomes from the dried strawberry samples were matched against 10 distinct thin-layer models enumerated in Table 1. The model coefficients (a, b, c, g, n), (k, k0, and k1), and t within the equations correspond to the drying rate con- stant (1/min), drying time, and time, respectively (Therdthai and Zhou  2009). The moisture ratio of the drying strawberry samples was computed employing Equation (1). In this context, the variables Mt, Mo, and Me denote the mois- ture content at any time, the initial moisture content, and the equilibrium moisture content (kg water/kg dry matter), respec- tively. Certain researchers have transformed Equation  (1) into Equation  (2) due to the insignificantly small magnitude of the Me value in comparison with the Mt and Mo values (Erbay and Icier 2010). (1)MR = Mt −Me Mo −Me (2) MR = Mt Mo 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9623 2.4   |   Determination of Color Values The surface color attributes of strawberry samples, subjected to different drying methods, were assessed using a colorimeter (MSEZ-4500 L, HunterLab, USA). Prior to recording the color values, the instrument underwent calibration employing black and white plates. Post-calibration, the samples were positioned within a glass petri dish, and color values were obtained from five distinct points. The L*, a*, and b* values displayed on the device screen represent lightness/darkness, redness/greenness, and yellowness/blueness, respectively. Chroma (C), a measure of color intensity, Hue angle (α°), indicating diminished brown- ing, and ΔE, representing the overall color disparity, were com- puted using the subsequent formulas (Dehghannya, Gorbani, and Ghanbarzadeh 2017; Li et al. 2017). The formulas incorporate the L*, a*, and b* values representing the color characteristics of the dried samples, whereas the L0*, a0*, and b0* values signify the color attributes of the fresh samples. 2.5   |   Determination of Rehydration Capacity Rehydration capacity assessments for the strawberry samples were conducted by immersing the dried samples in a beaker at a solid–liquid ratio of 1:50 for a duration of 14 h (de Jesus Junqueira et al. 2017). Subsequently, the liquid in the beaker was decanted, and any residual moisture on the rehydrated product was carefully absorbed using filter paper. The rehydrated prod- ucts were then weighed on a precise scale and documented. The rehydration capacity values were computed using Equation (5) (Feng et al. 2021): Here, M1 represents the weight of the dried sample and M2 signi- fies the weight of the rehydrated sample. The experiments were conducted in triplicate. 2.6   |   Microstructure Analysis Surface microstructural alterations of strawberry samples sub- jected to various drying methods were examined using a scan- ning electron microscope (SEM) (EVO 40, Germany) (Xiao et al. 2009). Samples taken from certain parts of each product were positioned in holders and coated with gold palladium under vacuum conditions. After this process, the coated samples were placed in the SEM device, and their micrographs were taken. 2.7   |   Statistical Analysis The data acquired from the experiments involving dried straw- berry samples were imported into the MS-Excel software. Analysis of the data, except for the modeling aspects, was conducted using the JMP software (Version 7.0; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). To fit the experimental data with the thin-layer mathematical models specified in Table 1, a nonlinear regression analysis was executed using the MATLAB software package (MathWorks Inc., Natick, MA). The coefficient of determination (R2), chi-squared (χ2), and root mean square error (RMSE) statistical parameters were used to determine the model that best explains the drying behavior of the strawberry product. The calculation of the RMSE and chi-squared (χ2) values was achieved through Equations (7) and (8), respectively (Doymaz, Kipcak, and Piskin 2015): (3)C = √ ( a2 + b2 ) (4)� = tan−1 ( b a ) (5)ΔE= √ ( L*−L0* )2 + ( a*−a0* )2 + ( b*−b0* )2 (6)Rehydration capacity = M2 −M1 M1 (7)RMSE = � ∑n İ=1 � MRpre,i−MRexp,i �2 N (8)𝜒2 = ∑N İ=1 � MRexp,i−MRpre,i �2 N − z TABLE 1    |    Thin-layer drying models used for mathematical modeling of strawberry samples. No Model Name Model Reference 1 Henderson and Pabis MR = aexp(−kt) Demiray and Tulek (2014) 2 Newton MR = exp(−kt) Taskin (2020) 3 Page MR = exp ( −ktn ) Murthy and Manohar (2014) 4 Logarithmic MR = aexp(−kt) + c Amiri Chayjan and Shadidi (2014) 5 Two Term MR = aexp ( −k0t ) + bexp ( −k1t ) Bhattacharya, Srivastav, and Mishra (2015) 6 Two Term Exponential MR = aexp(−kt) + (1 − a)exp(−kat) Evin (2011) 7 Wang and Singh MR = 1 + at + bt2 Belghith, Azzouz, and ElCafsi (2016) 8 Diffusion Approach MR = aexp(−kt) + (1 − a)exp(−kbt) Taşkın, İzli, and İzli (2018) 9 Verma et al. MR = aexp(−kt) + (1 − a)exp(−gt) Faal, Tavakoli, and Ghobadian (2015) 10 Midilli et al. MR = aexp ( −ktn ) + bt Midilli, Kucuk, and Yapar (2002) 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9624 Food Science & Nutrition, 2024 In the equation, MRpre,i and MRexp,i denote the estimated mois- ture ratio for test number i, the experimental moisture ratio for test number i, respectively. Additionally, N stands for the count of observed experimental data, whereas z representing the count of independent variables within the model. 3   |   Results and Discussion 3.1   |   Drying Curves of Strawberry Slices Figure 1 illustrates the variation of moisture content of straw- berry samples dried under different drying conditions (EHD, EHD-hot air, and hot air) over time. The figure reveals a reduction in product moisture content as drying time pro- gresses. Comparing the methods, it is evident that EHD-dried samples took longer to attain the final moisture content in contrast to those dried using hot air. A similar observation was made by Bai et al. (2013) in their investigation of sea cu- cumber drying. For the strawberry samples, drying durations at 50°C and 55°C were determined as 270 and 240 min, re- spectively. The elevated temperatures in the drying process expedited heat transfer between the product and the heat source, resulting in accelerated moisture removal and reduced drying times (Beigi  2016). These findings align with previ- ous research on agricultural product drying (Kumar, Sarkar, and Sharma  2012; Tunde-Akintunde and Ogunlakin  2013). Drying durations for the 20 kV-55°C, 30 kV-50°C, and 30 kV- 55°C applications were notably shorter by 18.75%, 12.5%, and 31.25%, respectively, in comparison with the 20 kV-50°C ap- plications. Within the EHD combined method, an increase in temperature and voltage resulted in a decrease in drying time. Specifically, samples dried with a 20 kV application required 530 min, whereas those dried with a 30 kV application took 460 min. Similar to our study, Pirnazari, Esehaghbeygi, and Sadeghi (2016) observed a decline in drying time with height- ened electric field strength in a study on bananas. 3.2   |   Modeling of Drying Curves The investigation encompassed the variation of moisture ratio values throughout the drying process of strawberry slices uti- lizing EHD, EHD-hot air, and hot air methods. This variation was examined concerning drying times through the applica- tion of 10 thin-layer drying models outlined in Table 1. The co- efficients of the employed models across all drying conditions were assessed by computing statistical parameters R2, χ2, and RMSE. These findings are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Within these tables, R2 values ranged from 0.9680 to 0.9999, χ2 values ranged from 0.0309 × 10−4 to 35.8827 × 10−4, and RMSE values ranged from 0.0017 to 0.0599. For model selection, the criteria involved favoring the highest R2 values alongside the lowest RMSE and χ2 values. A thorough examination of Table 2 re- vealed that the drying behavior of strawberry samples sub- jected to EHD and hot air drying methods aligned well with the model proposed by Midilli et  al. Table  3 demonstrates that, for the EHD-hot air combined method, the Wang and Singh model consistently displayed the highest R2 values and the lowest RMSE and χ2 values across all investigated cases. As a result, the Wang and Singh model was selected as the most suitable representation for the thin-layer drying process FIGURE 1    |    Variation of moisture content of strawberry samples dried under different drying conditions over time. 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9625 T A B L E 2      |     S ta tis tic al a na ly si s r es ul ts fr om m od el s u se d fo r s tr aw be rr y sl ic es d ri ed u nd er E H D a nd h ot a ir d ry in g co nd iti on s. N o. 20  k V 30  k V 50 °C 55 °C M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) 1 a  =  1. 05 2 k =  0. 00 66 87 0. 99 43 0. 02 17 4. 71 64 a  =  1. 04 8 k =  0. 00 74 2 0. 99 42 0. 02 21 4. 87 03 a  =  1. 07 9 k =  0. 01 07 8 0. 98 80 0. 03 39 11 .4 92 1 a  =  1. 06 7 k =  0. 01 20 4 0. 98 97 0. 03 13 9. 77 01 2 k =  0. 00 63 68 0. 99 17 0. 02 63 6. 89 72 k =  0. 00 70 91 0. 99 19 0. 02 60 6. 78 34 k =  0. 00 99 98 0. 98 11 0. 04 25 18 .0 27 5 k =  0. 01 13 0. 98 47 0. 03 80 14 .4 00 4 3 k =  0. 00 26 39 n  =  1. 16 8 0. 99 91 0. 00 89 0. 79 09 k =  0. 00 30 61 n  =  1. 16 3 0. 99 90 0. 00 93 0. 86 62 k =  0. 00 26 05 n  =  1. 28 3 0. 99 95 0. 00 69 0. 48 40 k =  0. 00 37 07 n  =  1. 24 1 0. 99 88 0. 01 09 1. 17 95 4 a  =  1. 08 1 k =  0. 00 57 43 c =  − 0. 05 60 5 0. 99 83 0. 01 18 1. 38 59 a  =  1. 08 3 k =  0. 00 62 73 c =  − 0. 06 33 6 0. 99 87 0. 01 05 1. 10 18 a  =  1. 17 4 k =  0. 00 80 35 c =  − 0. 13 52 0. 99 77 0. 01 48 2. 19 71 a  =  1. 15 9 k =  0. 00 90 29 c =  − 0. 13 1 0. 99 88 0. 01 06 1. 11 62 5 a  =  0. 52 68 k o =  0. 00 66 75 b =  0. 52 68 k 1 =  0. 00 67 2 0. 99 41 0. 02 22 4. 90 78 a  =  0. 52 42 k o =  0. 00 74 24 b =  0. 52 42 k 1 =  0. 00 74 24 0. 99 39 0. 02 26 5. 09 70 a  =  0. 95 45 k o =  0. 01 07 7 b =  0. 12 47 k 1 =  0. 01 07 7 0. 98 70 0. 03 53 12 .4 49 3 a  =  0. 88 14 k o =  0. 01 20 4 b =  0. 18 51 k 1 =  0. 01 20 4 0. 98 87 0. 03 27 10 .7 00 6 6 a  =  1. 69 1 k =  0. 00 83 59 0. 99 91 0. 00 87 0. 75 22 a  =  1. 68 4 k =  0. 00 92 78 0. 99 91 0. 00 88 0. 77 64 a  =  1. 00 2 k =  0. 00 99 98 0. 98 04 0. 04 33 18 .7 20 9 a  =  1. 78 7 k =  0. 01 57 3 0. 99 84 0. 01 24 1. 54 09 7 a  =  − 0. 00 45 66 b =  0. 00 00 53 04 0. 99 43 0. 02 18 4. 76 33 a  =  − 0. 00 51 26 b =  0. 00 00 06 72 3 0. 99 48 0. 02 08 4. 33 44 a  =  − 0. 00 74 45 b =  0. 00 00 14 33 0. 99 90 0. 00 99 0. 98 69 a  =  − 0. 00 83 91 b =  0. 00 00 18 23 0. 99 85 0. 01 17 1. 37 36 8 a  =  5. 49 9 k =  0. 00 39 46 b =  0. 90 17 0. 99 86 0. 01 10 1. 20 31 a  =  0. 64 74 k =  0. 00 70 92 b =  0. 99 97 0. 99 16 0. 02 66 7. 09 17 a  =  5. 28 k =  0. 00 49 84 b =  0. 84 22 0. 99 68 0. 01 75 3. 07 33 a  =  0. 75 01 k =  0. 01 13 b =  0. 99 9 0. 98 34 0. 03 96 15 .7 09 5 9 a  =  7. 29 7 k =  0. 00 98 07 g =  0. 01 06 5 0. 99 93 0. 00 76 0. 57 39 a  =  0. 88 21 k =  0. 00 70 91 g =  0. 00 70 88 0. 99 16 0. 02 66 7. 09 17 a  =  − 2. 56 7 k =  0. 00 39 58 g =  0. 00 51 91 0. 99 68 0. 01 76 3. 08 58 a  =  0. 01 98 k =  0. 01 12 6 g =  0. 01 13 0. 98 34 0. 03 96 15 .7 09 6 10 a  =  0. 98 46 k =  0. 00 25 49 n  =  1. 16 7 b =  − 0. 00 00 24 48 0. 99 95 0. 00 67 0. 44 57 a  =  0. 98 41 k =  0. 00 30 69 n  =  1. 15 4 b =  − 0. 00 00 39 29 0. 99 96 0. 00 59 0. 34 94 a  =  0. 99 63 k =  0. 00 30 46 n  =  1. 24 b =  − 0. 00 00 94 02 0. 99 99 0. 00 17 0. 03 09 a  =  1. 00 1 k =  0. 00 50 53 n  =  1. 15 8 b =  − 0. 00 01 81 4 0. 99 98 0. 00 42 0. 17 73 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9626 Food Science & Nutrition, 2024 T A B L E 3      |     S ta tis tic al a na ly si s r es ul ts fr om m od el s u se d fo r s tr aw be rr y sl ic es d ri ed u nd er E H D -h ot a ir c om bi ne d dr yi ng c on di tio ns . N o. 20  k V -5 0° C 20  k V -5 5° C 30  k V -5 0° C 30  k V -5 5° C M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) M od el K at sa yı la rı R 2 R M SE χ2 ( 10 − 4 ) 1 a  =  1. 05 4 k =  0. 01 93 1 0. 98 76 0. 03 55 12 .6 34 6 a  =  1. 06 6 k =  0. 02 25 4 0. 98 09 0. 04 59 21 .0 61 6 a  =  1. 06 3 k =  0. 02 12 4 0. 98 34 0. 04 22 17 .7 64 4 a  =  1. 06 2 k =  0. 02 37 8 0. 97 69 0. 05 09 25 .8 67 2 2 k =  0. 01 83 7 0. 98 49 0. 03 91 15 .3 14 8 k =  0. 02 12 3 0. 97 71 0. 05 03 25 .3 02 0 k =  0. 02 00 4 0. 97 98 0. 04 66 21 .7 12 9 k =  0. 02 24 4 0. 97 38 0. 05 42 29 .3 58 5 3 k =  0. 00 65 41 n  =  1. 24 7 0. 99 80 0. 01 43 2. 05 18 k =  0. 00 54 69 n  =  1. 33 8 0. 99 83 0. 01 38 1. 91 52 k =  0. 00 56 75 n  =  1. 31 0. 99 84 0. 01 30 1. 68 50 k =  0. 00 56 82 n  =  1. 34 9 0. 99 66 0. 01 95 3. 81 48 4 a  =  1. 14 1 k =  0. 01 46 5 c =  − 0. 12 15 0. 99 78 0. 01 48 2. 20 07 a  =  1. 19 5 k =  0. 01 59 5 c =  − 0. 16 68 0. 99 54 0. 02 25 5. 06 68 a  =  1. 17 7 k =  0. 01 54 1 c =  − 0. 15 03 0. 99 63 0. 01 99 3. 95 49 a  =  1. 28 2 k =  0. 01 47 1 c =  − 0. 26 43 0. 99 75 0. 01 68 2. 82 60 5 a  =  0. 52 66 k o =  0. 01 93 b =  0. 52 66 k 1 =  0. 01 93 0. 98 56 0. 03 82 14 .5 78 2 a  =  0. 53 28 k o =  0. 02 25 4 b =  0. 53 28 k 1 =  0. 02 25 4 0. 97 71 0. 05 03 25 .2 73 7 a  =  0. 91 72 k o =  0. 02 12 4 b =  0. 14 58 k 1 =  0. 02 11 9 0. 98 04 0. 04 58 20 .9 94 2 a  =  0. 53 08 k o =  0. 02 37 8 b =  0. 53 08 k 1 =  0. 02 37 8 0. 97 12 0. 05 69 32 .3 33 8 6 a  =  1. 00 5 k =  0. 01 83 7 0. 98 39 0. 04 04 16 .3 35 8 a  =  1. 87 1 k =  0. 03 07 7 0. 99 69 0. 01 86 3. 44 78 a  =  1. 00 2 k =  0. 02 00 4 0. 97 82 0. 04 84 23 .3 83 1 a  =  1. 87 1 k =  0. 03 27 0. 99 47 0. 02 44 5. 97 02 7 a  =  − 0. 01 34 1 b =  0. 00 00 46 01 0. 99 94 0. 00 79 0. 62 87 a  =  − 0. 01 55 8 b =  0. 00 00 61 77 0. 99 95 0. 00 73 0. 52 93 a  =  − 0. 01 47 1 b =  0. 00 00 55 23 0. 99 97 0. 00 53 0. 28 54 a  =  − 0. 01 63 9 b =  0. 00 00 67 24 0. 99 97 0. 00 55 0. 29 86 8 a  =  0. 87 11 k =  0. 01 83 7 b =  1 0. 98 28 0. 04 18 17 .5 02 6 a  =  0. 75 36 k =  0. 02 12 4 b =  0. 99 87 0. 97 29 0. 05 47 29 .9 02 4 a  =  0. 77 63 k =  0. 02 00 4 b =  0. 99 87 0. 97 64 0. 05 03 25 .3 31 8 a  =  0. 77 99 k =  0. 02 24 3 b =  1. 00 2 0. 96 80 0. 05 99 35 .8 82 7 9 a  =  − 2. 26 7 k =  0. 00 77 68 g =  0. 01 01 5 0. 99 81 0. 01 37 1. 88 90 a  =  − 11 .2 8 k =  0. 04 07 6 g =  0. 03 81 2 0. 99 75 0. 01 65 2. 71 57 a  =  − 10 .2 5 k =  0. 03 78 2 g =  0. 03 52 6 0. 99 80 0. 01 47 2. 16 96 a  =  − 3. 11 8 k =  0. 00 70 31 g =  0. 00 96 21 0. 99 76 0. 01 66 2. 74 34 10 a  =  0. 99 11 k =  0. 00 78 32 n  =  1. 18 6 b =  − 0. 00 02 38 0. 99 92 0. 00 88 0. 77 58 a  =  0. 98 93 k =  0. 00 61 06 n  =  1. 29 4 b =  − 0. 00 02 34 5 0. 99 91 0. 01 00 1. 00 29 a  =  0. 99 02 k =  0. 00 64 28 n  =  1. 26 3 b =  − 0. 00 02 22 5 0. 99 93 0. 00 87 0. 74 83 a  =  0. 99 3 k =  0. 00 80 24 n  =  1. 22 7 b =  − 0. 00 06 58 8 0. 99 92 0. 00 96 0. 92 47 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9627 of strawberries. Figure  2 illustrates the variation of experi- mental moisture content of strawberry samples dried under different drying conditions and estimated moisture content obtained from Midilli et al. and Wang and Singh models. The figure depicts a remarkable degree of similarity between the curves, indicating that the chosen models can adequately pre- dict the moisture ratio of strawberry slices at various time points during the EHD, hot air, and EHD-hot air drying pro- cesses. These findings align with previous research studies. Takougnadi, Boroze, and Azouma (2018), Zhang et al. (2018), and Krzykowski et al.  (2020) found a good fit of experimen- tal data to the Midilli et al. model in their respective drying investigations, which resonates with our research. Similarly, our findings for the Wang and Singh model are in line with the results reported by Doymaz (2008), Wilson et al. (2012), and Omolola, Jideani, and Kapila (2014). 3.3   |   Color Parameters of Strawberry Slices Table 4 provides the color values for both fresh strawberries and those subjected to drying through EHD, EHD-hot air, and hot air methods. Remarkably, the fresh samples exhibited the highest L*, a*, and b* values, which experienced a reduction due to the influence of temperature. In a parallel observation to our research, Ozturk and Singh  (2019) noted a decline in color parameters (L*, a*, and b*) during their study on hot air drying of strawberries. They attributed this phenomenon to factors like ascorbic acid oxidation, amino compound con- densation, browning reactions, and carotenoid degradation. Upon examination of the table, a significant disparity in L* values (p < 0.05) was evident between the drying methods (EHD, EHD-hot air, and hot air). Among the drying meth- ods, the EHD method yielded samples with L* values that closely resembled those of the fresh samples, with the EHD- hot air combined method and hot air method following in se- quential order. Similar findings were reported by Hashinaga et  al.  (1999), who observed higher L* values in EHD-dried apples compared with oven-dried counterparts. Regarding a* values, the EHD-hot air combined method yielded higher values than both the hot air and EHD methods. The a* values declined with temperature escalation in the hot air method and kV value reduction in the EHD applications. The b* values ranged from 25.6 ± 1.03 (fresh) to −11.69 ± 0.46 (55°C). With the exception of the 30 kV-55°C treatment, there were no sta- tistically significant differences observed in b* values among the various methods within the EHD-hot air combination (p > 0.05). The Chroma (C) values, representing color satura- tion, demonstrated their highest expression in the EHD-hot air combination method following the fresh product. The hue angle (α°) values of the fresh products exhibited a decrease ranging from 13.17% (30 kV) to 25.58% (55°C) as influenced by the applied drying process. The total color change (ΔE) value serves as an indicator of the degree of color alteration between fresh and dried products. A low ΔE value signifies better preservation of color parameters, indicating a closer resemblance to the fresh product (Siriamornpun, Kaisoon, and Meeso  2012). The hot air method exhibited the highest ΔE values, whereas the employment of the EHD method solely or in conjunction with hot air led to decreased ΔE values. A study by Esehaghbeygi and Karimi (2020) involving various methods for drying mint leaves found ΔE values of EHD-dried FIGURE 2    |    Variation of experimental moisture content of strawberry samples dried under different drying conditions and estimated moisture content obtained from Midilli et al. and Wang and Singh models. 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9628 Food Science & Nutrition, 2024 samples to be lower than those dried in an oven, a correlation aligned with our findings. 3.4   |   Rehydration Capacity of Dried Strawberry Slices Typically employed prior to consuming dried foods, the rehydra- tion process underscores the significance of rehydration proper- ties, serving as markers for the physical and chemical changes occurring within dried products (Mujaffar and Lee Loy  2017). The rehydration capacity values of strawberry samples subjected to EHD, hot air, and EHD-hot air combined methods are depicted in Figure 3. Among these methods, the highest rehydration value was recorded for the 20 kV-55°C treatment; the most diminished values were discerned in samples subjected to drying at both 50°C and 55°C, as well as in those undergoing the 30 kV-55°C treat- ment. Notably, neither the elevation of temperature within the hot air drying method nor the increment in voltage values in the EHD drying method exhibited a statistically significant impact on rehydration capacity (p > 0.05). This observation mirrors the findings of our study and aligns with research by Gamboa-Santos et al. (2014), who reported that temperature elevation did not sig- nificantly influence the rehydration ratio in their strawberry dry- ing investigation. Similarly, Dinani and Havet (2015) observed no statistical disparity in rehydration values for mushroom samples dried at high air velocity (2.2 m/s) when voltage values were aug- mented, in line with our study's outcomes. 3.5   |   Microstructure of Dried Strawberry Slices Scanning electron microscope images illustrating the sur- face structures of strawberry samples subjected to three dis- tinct drying methods (EHD, EHD-hot air, and hot air), have been presented in Figure 4. Notably, the samples dried using 20 kV revealed the presence of small crystal structures on their surfaces. However, in other methods, the crystals di- minished due to the influence of temperature. Within samples dried through hot air and EHD-hot air methods, a hardening of the tissue surface was observed. Excessive hardening in- duced by elevated temperatures led to the formation of cracks on the product's surface, further exacerbated by heightened stress. Furthermore, an escalation in temperature resulted in an increased number of fractures (Bai et al. 2002; Zielinska, Sadowski, and Błaszczak  2016). Remarkably, within the hot air drying method, the surface structures of the samples lost their three-dimensional quality, appearing flatter compared with other methods. Conversely, within the EHD method, a three-dimensional structure was discernible in the samples dried using 20 kV. However, for the samples dried at 30 kV, the surface structure appeared flatter in comparison with those dried at 20 kV, forming a structure marked by fractures and voids. With an increase in voltage value, the incidence of breakage is amplified (Yu et al. 2018). TABLE 4    |    Color values of fresh and dried strawberry slices with different drying methods. Drying conditions Color parameters L* a* b* C α° ∆E Fresh 38.450 (0.532)a 36.274 (0.759)a 25.602 (1.031)a 44.400 (1.214)a 35.221 (0.517)a — EHD 20 kV 36.238 (0.696)b 27.092 (0.190)f 15.490 (0.400)e 31.208 (0.411)f 29.770 (0.464)c 13.849 (0.504)d 30 kV 33.698 (0.177)c 28.894 (0.141)e 17.062 (0.123)c 33.555 (0.179)e 30.577 (0.091)b 12.246 (0.234)b Hot Air 50°C 29.428 (0.170)f 28.726 (0.222)e 16.140 (0.136)d 32.950 (0.255)e 29.345 (0.097)c,d 15.097 (0.275)e 55°C 24.928 (0.350)g 23.752 (0.242)g 11.690 (0.461)f 26.474 (0.392)g 26.211 (0.737)f 23.094 (0.483)f EHD-Hot Air 20 kV-50°C 31.680 (0.104)d 31.104 (0.132)c 17.054 (0.099)c 35.473 (0.140)c 28.750 (0.140)e 12.068 (0.121)b 20 kV-55°C 30.594 (0.147)e 30.450 (0.095)d 16.536 (0.403)c,d 34.651 (0.378)d 28.515 (0.675)e 13.338 (0.303)c,d 30 kV-50°C 31.298 (2.316)d,e 30.694 (0.526)c,d 16.956 (0.198)c 35.068 (0.259)c,d 28.937 (0.535)d,e 12.666 (1.199)b,c 30 kV-55°C 30.528 (0.070)e 32.322 (0.135)b 18.514 (0.100)b 37.249 (0.145)b 29.819 (0.132)c 11.341 (0.135)a Note: The statistics of each color parameter column have been applied separately, and the differences between the means with different letters in the same column are significant (p < 0.05). FIGURE 3    |    Rehydration capacity values of dried strawberry slices. 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9629 3.6   |   Total Soluble Solids and pH Values of Strawberry Slices The presented data in Table 5 furnishes the pH and total soluble solid (TSS) measurements of strawberry specimens subjected to various drying techniques. Upon scrutinizing Table 5, it be- comes evident that the electric potential applied in the EHD method and the temperature employed in the hot air drying method do not exert a statistically significant influence on the parameters under consideration (p > 0.05). These parameters represent pivotal indicators of the resultant quality of the de- hydrated products. The most substantial concentrations of sol- uble solids are manifest in the specimens that underwent the drying process at either 20 kV and 50°C or 30 kV and 50°C. In a prior investigation conducted by Fang et al. (2009), it was noted that the soluble solids content in the fresh produce was com- paratively lower, whereas no statistically meaningful discrep- ancies in soluble solids content were observed among products subjected to distinct drying temperatures. These findings align with the outcomes of our own research. It was ascertained that the variations in electric potential and temperature, as parameterized within the different drying methodologies, yield no statistically significant alterations in the pH values of the resultant products (p > 0.05). It is pertinent to note that the pH value of strawberry specimens subjected to hot air drying surpasses that of the fresh product. In a parallel study, Vega-Gálvez et al. (2009) observed an analogous trend in the pH values of fresh produce, which augmented with increas- ing drying temperatures in the context of their examination of red pepper subjected to hot air drying. 4   |   Conclusion This study encompassed an analysis of the drying behavior, modeling, color attributes, rehydration capacity, microstruc- tural properties, TSS, and pH values of strawberry slices across various drying conditions Drying times varied, with the longest duration of 530 min observed for the 20 kV application and the shortest, 110 min, for the 30 kV-55°C application. The moisture ratio extracted from the product during drying was subjected to thin-layer drying models, revealing the Midilli et al. model as the most accurate predictor for EHD and hot air drying con- ditions, whereas the Wang and Singh model fit best for EHD- hot air combined drying conditions. An evident reduction in b* values was noted under the influence of different drying con- ditions. Notably, the EHD-dried samples exhibited lower ΔE values compared with other methods. With the exception of the 20 kV-55°C application, the rehydration capacities of straw- berry samples subjected to the EHD-hot air combination drying method did not significantly differ. Predominant cracks on the product surface were evident in samples subjected to the 30 kV- 55°C application. The highest TSS values were determined in dried strawberry samples obtained from 20 kV-55°C and 30 kV- 50°C treatments. The change of air temperature in the hot air method and the change of volt value in the EHD method did not FIGURE 4    |    SEM images of strawberry slices dried under different drying conditions: (a) 20 kV, (b) 30 kV, (c) 50°C, (d) 55°C, (e) 20 kV-50°C, (f) 20 kV-55°C, (g) 30 kV-50°C, and (h) 30 kV-55°C. TABLE 5    |    TSS and pH values of strawberry slices. Product TSS pH Fresh 9.67 ± 0.47 d 3.42 ± 0.07 c 20 kV 63.40 ± 1.25 b 3.45 ± 0.08 b,c 30 kV 60.60 ± 3.17 b,c 3.43 ± 0.09 c 50°C 61.80 ± 5.13 b,c 3.50 ± 0.14 a,b 55°C 57.80 ± 3.30 c 3.59 ± 0.09 a 20 kV-50°C 60.40 ± 1.93 b,c 3.43 ± 0.09 c 20 kV-55°C 69.00 ± 2.08 a 3.49 ± 0.04 a,b,c 30 kV-50°C 71.00 ± 1.25 a 3.42 ± 0.06 c 30 kV-55°C 63.40 ± 4.42 b 3.53 ± 0.02 a,b,c Note: The statistics of Brix and pH column have been applied separately, and the differences between the means with different letters in the same column are significant (p < 0.05). 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense 9630 Food Science & Nutrition, 2024 statistically affect the pH value (p > 0.05). This study contributes valuable evidence demonstrating that the EHD method yields high-quality dried strawberry products. Moreover, it is antici- pated that integrating the EHD method with hot air for straw- berry drying could offer time-saving advantages compared with employing either method individually, particularly due to the extended drying time associated with EHD and hot air drying. Furthermore, the study's findings can foster the progression of future research and establish an information foundation for the development of industrial-scale drying devices. Author Contributions Ahmet Polat: conceptualization (lead), data curation (lead), formal analysis (lead), funding acquisition (lead), investigation (lead), meth- odology (lead), software (lead), supervision (lead), validation (lead), vi- sualization (lead), writing – original draft (lead), writing – review and editing (lead). Ethics Statement The author has nothing to report. Conflicts of Interest The author declares no conflicts of interest. Data Availability Statement The author has nothing to report. References Amiri Chayjan, R., and B. Shadidi. 2014. “Modeling High-Moisture Faba Bean Drying in Fixed and Semi-Fluidized Bed Conditions.” Journal of Food Processing and Preservation 38, no. 1: 200–211. https://​ doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1745-​4549.​2012.​00766.​x. Bai, Y., M. Qu, Z. Luan, X. Li, and Y. Yang. 2013. “Electrohydrodynamic Drying of Sea Cucumber (Stichopus japonicus).” LWT Food Science and Technology 54, no. 2: 570–576. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​lwt.​2013.​ 06.​026. Bai, Y., M. S. Rahman, C. O. Perera, B. Smith, and L. D. Melton. 2002. “Structural Changes in Apple Rings During Convection Air-Drying With Controlled Temperature and Humidity.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 50, no. 11: 3179–3185. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1021/​ jf011​354s. Beigi, M. 2016. “Energy Efficiency and Moisture Diffusivity of Apple Slices During Convective Drying.” Food Science and Technology 36: 145–150. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1590/​1678-​457X.​0068. Belghith, A., S. Azzouz, and A. ElCafsi. 2016. “Desorption Isotherms and Mathematical Modeling of Thin Layer Drying Kinetics of Tomato.” Heat and Mass Transfer 52: 407–419. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s0023​ 1-​015-​1560-​0. Bhattacharya, M., P. P. Srivastav, and H. N. Mishra. 2015. “Thin- Layer Modeling of Convective and Microwave-Convective Drying of Oyster Mushroom (Pleurotus ostreatus).” Journal of Food Science and Technology 52: 2013–2022. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s1319​7-​013-​1209-​2. de Bruijn, J., and R. Bórquez. 2014. “Quality Retention in Strawberries Dried by Emerging Dehydration Methods.” Food Research International 63: 42–48. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​foodr​es.​2014.​03.​029. de Jesus Junqueira, J. R., J. L. G. Corrêa, H. M. de Oliveira, R. I. S. Avelar, and L. A. S. Pio. 2017. “Convective Drying of Cape Gooseberry Fruits: Effect of Pretreatments on Kinetics and Quality Parameters.” LWT- Food Science and Technology 82: 404–410. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 1016/j.​lwt.​2017.​04.​072. Dehghannya, J., R. Gorbani, and B. Ghanbarzadeh. 2017. “Influence of Combined Pretreatments on Color Parameters During Convective Drying of Mirabelle Plum (Prunus domestica subsp. syriaca).” Heat and Mass Transfer 53: 2425–2433. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s0023​ 1-​017-​1995-​6. Demiray, E., and Y. Tulek. 2014. “Drying Characteristics of Garlic (Allium sativum L.) Slices in a Convective Hot Air Dryer.” Heat and Mass Transfer 50: 779–786. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s0023​1-​013-​1286-​9. Dinani, S. T., N. Hamdami, M. Shahedi, and M. Havet. 2014. “Mathematical Modeling of Hot Air/Electrohydrodynamic (EHD) Drying Kinetics of Mushroom Slices.” Energy Conversion and Management 86: 70–80. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​encon​man.​2014.​ 05.​010. Dinani, S. T., N. Hamdami, M. Shahedi, and M. Havet. 2015. “Quality Assessment of Mushroom Slices Dried by Hot Air Combined With an Electrohydrodynamic (EHD) Drying System.” Food and Bioproducts Processing 94: 572–580. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​fbp.​2014.​08.​004. Dinani, S. T., N. Hamdami, M. Shahedi, M. Havet, and D. Queveau. 2015. “Influence of the Electrohydrodynamic Process on the Properties of Dried Button Mushroom Slices: A Differential Scanning Calorimetry (DSC) Study.” Food and Bioproducts Processing 95: 83–95. https://​doi.​ org/​10.​1016/j.​fbp.​2015.​04.​001. Dinani, S. T., and M. Havet. 2015. “Effect of Voltage and Air Flow Velocity of Combined Convective-Electrohydrodynamic Drying System on the Physical Properties of Mushroom Slices.” Industrial Crops and Products 70: 417–426. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​indcr​op.​2015.​03.​047. Doymaz, I. 2008. “Convective Drying Kinetics of Strawberry.” Chemical Engineering and Processing: Process Intensification 47, no. 5: 914–919. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​cep.​2007.​02.​003. Doymaz, I., A. S. Kipcak, and S. Piskin. 2015. “Microwave Drying of Green Bean Slices: Drying Kinetics and Physical Quality.” Czech Journal of Food Sciences 33, no. 4: 367–376. https://​doi.​org/​10.​17221/​​ 566/​2014-​CJFS. El-Beltagy, A., G. R. Gamea, and A. A. Essa. 2007. “Solar Drying Characteristics of Strawberry.” Journal of Food Engineering 78, no. 2: 456–464. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfood​eng.​2005.​10.​015. Erbay, Z., and F. Icier. 2010. “A Review of Thin Layer Drying of Foods: Theory, Modeling, and Experimental Results.” Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition 50, no. 5: 441–464. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​10408​ 39080​2437063. Esehaghbeygi, A., and Z. Karimi. 2020. “Electrohydrodynamic, Oven and Natural Drying of Mint Leaves and Effects on the Physiochemical Indices of the Leaves.” Research in Agricultural Engineering 66, no. 3. Evin, D. 2011. “Microwave Drying and Moisture Diffusivity of White Mulberry: Experimental and Mathematical Modeling.” Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 25: 2711–2718. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 1007/​s1220​6-​011-​0744-​x. Faal, S., T. Tavakoli, and B. Ghobadian. 2015. “Mathematical Modelling of Thin Layer Hot Air Drying of Apricot With Combined Heat and Power Dryer.” Journal of Food Science and Technology 52: 2950–2957. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s1319​7-​014-​1331-​9. Fang, S., Z. Wang, X. Hu, and A. K. Datta. 2009. “Hot-Air Drying of Whole Fruit Chinese Jujube (Zizyphus jujuba Miller): Physicochemical Properties of Dried Products.” International Journal of Food Science & Technology 44, no. 7: 1415–1421. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/j.​1365-​2621.​ 2009.​01972.​x. FAO. 2021. “Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.” https://​www.​fao.​org/​faost​at/​en/#​data/​QCL/​visua​lize. Feng, Y., B. Xu, A. E. A. Yagoub, et al. 2021. “Role of Drying Techniques on Physical, Rehydration, Flavor, Bioactive Compounds and Antioxidant 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4549.2012.00766.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-4549.2012.00766.x https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2013.06.026 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2013.06.026 https://doi.org/10.1021/jf011354s https://doi.org/10.1021/jf011354s https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-457X.0068 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-015-1560-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-015-1560-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-013-1209-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2014.03.029 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2017.04.072 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2017.04.072 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-017-1995-6 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-017-1995-6 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-013-1286-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.05.010 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2014.08.004 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2015.04.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2015.04.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2015.03.047 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2007.02.003 https://doi.org/10.17221/566/2014-CJFS https://doi.org/10.17221/566/2014-CJFS https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.10.015 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408390802437063 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408390802437063 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-011-0744-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-011-0744-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-014-1331-9 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2009.01972.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2009.01972.x https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/QCL/visualize 9631 Characteristics of Garlic.” Food Chemistry 343: 128404. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1016/j.​foodc​hem.​2020.​128404. Gamboa-Santos, J., A. Montilla, J. A. Cárcel, M. Villamiel, and J. V. Garcia-Perez. 2014. “Air-Borne Ultrasound Application in the Convective Drying of Strawberry.” Journal of Food Engineering 128: 132–139. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfood​eng.​2013.​12.​021. Hashinaga, F., T. R. Bajgai, S. Isobe, and N. N. Barthakur. 1999. “Electrohydrodynamic (EHD) Drying of Apple Slices.” Drying Technology 17, no. 3: 479–495. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​07373​93990​ 8917547. Krzykowski, A., D. Dziki, S. Rudy, U. Gawlik-Dziki, E. Janiszewska- Turak, and B. Biernacka. 2020. “Wild Strawberry Fragaria vesca L.: Kinetics of Fruit Drying and Quality Characteristics of the Dried Fruits.” PRO 8, no. 10: 1265. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3390/​pr810​1265. Kumar, N., B. C. Sarkar, and H. K. Sharma. 2012. “Mathematical Modelling of Thin Layer Hot Air Drying of Carrot Pomace.” Journal of Food Science and Technology 49: 33–41. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s1319​ 7-​011-​0266-​7. Li, J., J. Q. Wan, H. Bian, et al. 2017. “Effect of Controlled Freezing-Point Vacuum Drying on Color and Flavor of Muraenesox cinereus Fillets.” Journal of Food Process Engineering 40, no. 1: e12273. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1111/​jfpe.​12273​. Midilli, A., H. Kucuk, and Z. Yapar. 2002. “A New Model for Single- Layer Drying.” Drying Technology 20, no. 7: 1503–1513. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1081/​DRT-​12000​5864. Mujaffar, S., and A. Lee Loy. 2017. “The Rehydration Behavior of Microwave-Dried Amaranth (Amaranthus dubius) Leaves.” Food Science & Nutrition 5, no. 3: 399–406. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​fsn3.​406. Murthy, T. P. K., and B. Manohar. 2014. “Hot Air Drying Characteristics of Mango Ginger: Prediction of Drying Kinetics by Mathematical Modeling and Artificial Neural Network.” Journal of Food Science and Technology 51: 3712–3721. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s1319​7-​013-​0941-​y. Omolola, A. O., A. I. Jideani, and P. F. Kapila. 2014. “Modeling Microwave Drying Kinetics and Moisture Diffusivity of Mabonde Banana Variety.” International Journal of Agricultural and Biological Engineering 7, no. 6: 107–113. https://​doi.​org/​10.​3965/j.​ijabe.​20140​706.​013. Ozturk, O. K., and P. T. Singh. 2019. “Selected Physical and Viscoelastic Properties of Strawberries as a Function of Heated-Air Drying Conditions.” Drying Technology 37, no. 14: 1833–1843. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1080/​07373​937.​2018.​1543701. Pirnazari, K., A. Esehaghbeygi, and M. Sadeghi. 2016. “Modeling the Electrohydrodynamic (EHD) Drying of Banana Slices.” International Journal of Food Engineering 12, no. 1: 17–26. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1515/​ ijfe-​2015-​0005. Siriamornpun, S., O. Kaisoon, and N. Meeso. 2012. “Changes in Colour, Antioxidant Activities and Carotenoids (Lycopene, β-Carotene, Lutein) of Marigold Flower (Tagetes erecta L.) Resulting From Different Drying Processes.” Journal of Functional Foods 4, no. 4: 757–766. https://​doi.​ org/​10.​1016/j.​jff.​2012.​05.​002. Szadzińska, J., S. J. Kowalski, and M. Stasiak. 2016. “Microwave and Ultrasound Enhancement of Convective Drying of Strawberries: Experimental and Modeling Efficiency.” International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 103: 1065–1074. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​ijhea​tmass​ trans​fer.​2016.​08.​001. Takougnadi, E., T. E. T. Boroze, and O. Y. Azouma. 2018. “Development of an Intermittent Drying Process of Onion.” Cogent Food & Agriculture 4, no. 1: 1422225. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1080/​23311​932.​2017.​1422225. Taskin, O. 2020. “Evaluation of Freeze Drying for Whole, Half Cut and Puree Black Chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa L.).” Heat and Mass Transfer 56: 2503–2513. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s0023​1-​020-​02867​-​0. Taşkın, O., G. İzli, and N. İzli. 2018. “Convective Drying Kinetics and Quality Parameters of European Cranberrybush.” Journal of Agricultural Sciences 24, no. 3: 349–358. https://​doi.​org/​10.​15832/​​ankut​ bd.​456654. Therdthai, N., and W. Zhou. 2009. “Characterization of Microwave Vacuum Drying and Hot Air Drying of Mint Leaves (Mentha Cordifolia Opiz ex Fresen).” Journal of Food Engineering 91, no. 3: 482–489. https://​ doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​jfood​eng.​2008.​09.​031. Tunde-Akintunde, T. Y., and G. O. Ogunlakin. 2013. “Mathematical Modeling of Drying of Pretreated and Untreated Pumpkin.” Journal of Food Science and Technology 50: 705–713. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1007/​s1319​ 7-​011-​0392-​2. Vega-Gálvez, A., K. Di Scala, K. Rodríguez, et al. 2009. “Effect of Air- Drying Temperature on Physico-Chemical Properties, Antioxidant Capacity, Colour and Total Phenolic Content of Red Pepper (Capsicum annuum, L. var. Hungarian).” Food Chemistry 117, no. 4: 647–653. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/j.​foodc​hem.​2009.​04.​066. Wilson, R. A., D. M. Kadam, S. Chadha, and M. Sharma. 2012. “Foam Mat Drying Characteristics of Mango Pulp.” International Journal of Food Science and Nutrition Engineering 2, no. 4: 63–69. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​5923/j.​food.​20120​204.​03. Xiao, H. W., H. Lin, X. D. Yao, Z. L. Du, Z. Lou, and Z. J. Gao. 2009. “Effects of Different Pretreatments on Drying Kinetics and Quality of Sweet Potato Bars Undergoing Air Impingement Drying.” International Journal of Food Engineering 5, no. 5: 1–17. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2202/​1556-​ 3758.​1758. Yan, J. W., Z. J. Ban, H. Y. Lu, et al. 2018. “The Aroma Volatile Repertoire in Strawberry Fruit: A Review.” Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 98, no. 12: 4395–4402. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1002/​jsfa.​9039. Yu, H., A. Bai, X. Yang, and Y. Wang. 2018. “Electrohydrodynamic Drying of Potato and Process Optimization.” Journal of Food Processing and Preservation 42, no. 2: e13492. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1111/​jfpp.​13492​. Zhang, J., P. Ma, X. Zhang, B. Wang, J. Wu, and X. Xing. 2018. “Isothermal Drying Kinetics of Paddy Using Thermogravimetric Analysis.” Journal of Thermal Analysis and Calorimetry 134: 2359–2365. https://​doi.​org/​10.​ 1007/​s1097​3-​018-​7716-​7. Zielinska, M., P. Sadowski, and W. Błaszczak. 2016. “Combined Hot Air Convective Drying and Microwave-Vacuum Drying of Blueberries (Vaccinium corymbosum L.): Drying Kinetics and Quality Characteristics.” Drying Technology 34, no. 6: 665–684. https://​doi.​org/​ 10.​1080/​07373​937.​2015.​1070358. 20487177, 2024, 11, D ow nloaded from https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /doi/10.1002/fsn3.4541 by B ursa U ludag U niversity K utuphane ve D okum antasyon, W iley O nline L ibrary on [26/05/2025]. See the T erm s and C onditions (https://onlinelibrary.w iley.com /term s-and-conditions) on W iley O nline L ibrary for rules of use; O A articles are governed by the applicable C reative C om m ons L icense https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128404 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128404 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2013.12.021 https://doi.org/10.1080/07373939908917547 https://doi.org/10.1080/07373939908917547 https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8101265 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0266-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0266-7 https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.12273 https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpe.12273 https://doi.org/10.1081/DRT-120005864 https://doi.org/10.1081/DRT-120005864 https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.406 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-013-0941-y https://doi.org/10.3965/j.ijabe.20140706.013 https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2018.1543701 https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2018.1543701 https://doi.org/10.1515/ijfe-2015-0005 https://doi.org/10.1515/ijfe-2015-0005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2012.05.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jff.2012.05.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2016.08.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2016.08.001 https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2017.1422225 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00231-020-02867-0 https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.456654 https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.456654 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2008.09.031 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2008.09.031 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0392-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-011-0392-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2009.04.066 https://doi.org/10.5923/j.food.20120204.03 https://doi.org/10.5923/j.food.20120204.03 https://doi.org/10.2202/1556-3758.1758 https://doi.org/10.2202/1556-3758.1758 https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.9039 https://doi.org/10.1111/jfpp.13492 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-018-7716-7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10973-018-7716-7 https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2015.1070358 https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2015.1070358 Drying Strawberry Slices: A Comparative Study of Electrohydrodynamic, Hot Air, and Electrohydrodynamic-Hot Air Techniques ABSTRACT 1   |   Introduction 2   |   Materials and Methods 2.1   |   Fresh Product 2.2   |   Drying Process 2.3   |   Thin-Layer Modeling 2.4   |   Determination of Color Values 2.5   |   Determination of Rehydration Capacity 2.6   |   Microstructure Analysis 2.7   |   Statistical Analysis 3   |   Results and Discussion 3.1   |   Drying Curves of Strawberry Slices 3.2   |   Modeling of Drying Curves 3.3   |   Color Parameters of Strawberry Slices 3.4   |   Rehydration Capacity of Dried Strawberry Slices 3.5   |   Microstructure of Dried Strawberry Slices 3.6   |   Total Soluble Solids and pH Values of Strawberry Slices 4   |   Conclusion Author Contributions Ethics Statement Conflicts of Interest Data Availability Statement References