Comparison of Electrostatic Spray Drying, Spray Drying, and Freeze Drying for <i>Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG</i> Dehydration

Abstract

Spray drying (SD) is extensively used to encapsulate lactic acid bacteria in large-scale industrial applications; however, bacteria combat several harms that reduce their viability. In this study, a novel technique called electrostatic spray drying (ESD) was used to explore the benefits and disadvantages of using electrostatic charge and lower temperatures in the system. Freeze drying (FD) was used as a reference. The effect of different encapsulation agents, like maltodextrin, arabic gum, and skim milk, on the viability of Lacticaseibacillus rhamnosus GG (LGG) was investigated. The initial cell concentration, particle size distribution, aspect ratio, sphericity, scanning-electron-microscopy images, moisture content, water activity, glass transition, rehydration abilities, and survival during storage were compared. Skim milk was proven to be the best protectant for LGG, regardless of the drying process or storage time. A huge reduction in cell numbers (4.49 ± 0.06 log CFU/g) was observed with maltodextrin using SD; meanwhile, it was protected with minimum loss (8.64 ± 0.62 log CFU/g) with ESD. In general, ESD preserved more LGG cells during processing compared to SD, and provided better stability than FD and SD during storage, regardless of the applied voltage. The ESD product analysis demonstrated an efficient LGG preservation, close to FD; therefore, ESD presented to be a promising and scalable substitute for SD and FD.

Keywords

• electrostatic spray drying
• spray drying
• freeze drying
• survivability