Quality Characteristics of Kimchi Prepared with Different Part of Chinese Cabbage and Its Quality Change by Freeze-drying

전체 글

(1)KOREAN J. FOOD SCI. TECHNOL. Vol. 36, No. 5, pp. 784~789 (2004). ©The Korean Society of Food Science and Technology. Vº~ ¦*ö 8 B~~ ®îß9 ÿÖö ~ ®îæz *Á {9¶&L ®'·. Quality Characteristics of Kimchi Prepared with Different Part of Chinese Cabbage and Its Quality Change by Freeze-drying Young-Tae Ko* and Ju-Youn Lee Department of Foods and Nutrition, Duksung Women’s University Acid production and growth of lactic acid bacteria, sensory properties, volatile odor components, and effects of freeze-drying on quality of kimchi prepared with whole, midlib, and leaves of Chinese cabbages ripened at 20æ for 3 days were investigated. Salinities of whole, midlib, and leaf were 2.31, 2.03, and 2.68%, respectively. In kimchi pH of midlib was the lowest and that of leaf was the highest, while acidities of whole and midlib were higher than that of leaf. Numbers of lactic acid bacteria in whole and midlib were slightly higher than that of leaf. Overall acceptability, taste, and odor of kimchi and freeze-dried/rehydrated kimchi prepared with whole or midlib were better than those of leaf. Volatile odor components such as ethanol and sulfur-containing components of kimchi prepared with whole or midlib were generally higher than those of kimchi prepared with leaf. Key words: kimchi, Chinese cabbage, midlib, leaf. *. . Öö ~ f~~ >BWêîWª~ æz(5), Zf~~ ÿÖö & (6) 5 Z Î&f~~ ®îßW" ÿÖ ö ~ ®îæz(7)¢ >¯~ ÿÖö ~ f~~ & ËW BFö & &æ ¶ò¢ B~& . f~º Vº¢ "Òò ~æò Î&>º ¦Òòf º O»ö V¢ Ö. · B® ò Úææ f~~ «~º Ö ·~ ~Æ . f ? · «~~ f~º &Ë' ßW" b Ò' ßW B ¢ öò jî¢ ?W";, ß® <Ö ö ~ BÎ";ê N& ® . ?f Vºf~¢ ~z¢ê Vº~ ¦*¢ Ò~ BB f~º ®îßW ¢ ©b '>, B .ªVº~ "ê& Vº¦*ê N& ® º ©f B: ® (8). ¾ Vº¦*ê ò f ~~ ®îßWö & º jç B :& ìº © ? . V¢B öBº f~~ "Òò Vº¢ Â(´*V), ´, *Ú(7" ´j ¾*æ pf ©) ¾*, Vö '' ¦Òò Í&, î¾, ;, ²., 9.j Î&~ f~¢ B ê ¢ ÿÖ~& . ~ Ï'f Ñ, Vº¢ 7, ´, *Úf ? ¦* ê ¾*Ú '' f~¢ B~ f~~ ®îßW ¯, <Ö~ G" ÖW, &ËW 5 >BWêîWªj Ò~ , ~, ÿÖ& ¦*ê ¾*Ú BB f~~ ®îö ~º 'Ëj Ò~º © .. f~~ ?Wj æÊ &ËWj Ë~¶~º º ô Úrb¾ jç Ïz ò O»f ìb *Ò Bº &NFÛb f~~ ÖN¢ æÊº © &Ë Î" ' O» (1). ÿÖº O»ö j~ B ò~ ®î" öW Ö>~ º ßW ®bæ f~~ ®îæz¢ ²z~B &ËWj ËÒ > ®º O»b JF > ®. . Ko (2)f f~¢ ÿÖ~ 0, 5, 28oCöB 60¢* & Ë~B ÿÖ/&Ë/öB ò~ <Ö>f &Ë' ß Wj &V~&º, 60¢ &Ë ê~ <Ö>º 0, 5oC~ ãÖ º þ ÑÆ(4.48Ü107)~ 4.7-4.8%, 28oC~ ãÖº þ Ñ Æ" jv~ 10−4 >&b 6²~&b, 60¢ &Ë ê~ & Ë' ßWf &ò(ÿÖ~æ pf ò)f jv~. ² &~>îb¾, 0, 5oC &Ëò~ ãÖº jv' ·^~&. ~& . Þ ÿÖB f~º ö~æ p & ~ê Ö> V^Wj ¾æîbæ “f~”¢º îÚ «~~ f~&®~ BBê ê~& (3). Kof Kang f ÿÖ * ÿÖf~~ ®îö ~º 'Ë(4), ÿ *Corresponding author: Young-Tae Ko, Department of Food and Nutrition, Duksung Women’s University, Ssangmun-dong, Dobonggu, Seoul 132-714, Korea Tel: 82-2-901-8374 Fax: 82-2-901-8372 E-mail: [email protected]. Òò 5 O» Òò Vº, Í&(f~Ï, â·³>Ö), ;(&¾FÛ), î¾(& 784.

(2) Vº~ ¦*ö V f~~ ®î Table 1. Formula of kimchi 1) Chinese cabbage Red pepper powder Ginger Salt-fermented anchovy extract Garlic Sugar. (%, w/w) 100 002 0000.5 002 002 001. 1). Salt content was different according to samples.. ¾FÛ), Jû(B¢B), ².(Â¢", 'êÖ®), ~9 (~ö 100%, " 23%, &ç®)f E-Mart BÞ cÿæ 6öB «~& . >BWêîWª ªC~ &bîº 1pentanol(>99%, Aldrich Chemical Co., USA), ethanol(99.8%, Merck Co., Germany), allyl mercaptan(>80%, Aldrich Chemical Co., USA), methyl allyl sulfide(98%, Aldrich Chemical Co., USA), dimethyl disulfide(>98%, Fluka Chemie, Switzerland), diallyl sulfide(Sigma Chemical Co., USA), methyl propyl disulfide (90%, Aldrich Chemical Co., USA), methyl trisulfide(>98%, Acros Organics, USA) 5 diallyl disulfide(>80%, Fluka Chemie, Switzerland)¢ ÒÏ~& . GCòö >ª ÃB~º ©j Û B~V *~ sodium sulfate, anhydrous(ß/, Yakuri Pure Chemicals, Japan)¢ ÒÏ~& . B~~ B Vºº &jö ÖB ÖVº¢ ÒÏ~& . Vº¢ ¾. f ê, 7, ´, *Ú(7" ´j ¾*æ pf ©) ¾.. r, '' 4Ü4 cm V Ú VºZ²f 1 : 2 jN~ 20%(w/w) ².bö 3* .& . ©j >ýb 3² 10ª* î>Î ê ·vj b~ Table 1" ?f W b f~¢ B~& . ?Wj * òº V& Ú&æ pº 1 L~ 2¢ÊÏV(Nalgene, USA)ö If ê, V¢ ¢ V *~ ¾ * r, 20oC~ NV(JISICO, Model JIBO2)öB 3¢* ?W~& . B~~ ÿÖ 5 ö f~¢ 250 mL 2¢Ê j (Nalgene, USA)ö 30 gO I f ê ÿÖV((")¢Ï, Model FD-5510) chamberö I w»V Nê −65oC, {K 5 mmTorr~ ~öB 24* ÿÖ ~& . ÿÖV chamber Ú¦~ Nêº 20Û5oCî . ÿÖB f~¢ ö rº òö B Ã~>¢ &~ 5oCöB 24* O~~ >ªj >V . öö Î& >~ ·f “ÿÖ *~ j 5 f~ò~ 7ï”öB “ÿÖ ê~ j 5 f~~ 7ï”j ¦ N . <Ö>, pH 5 Öê G; <Ö>, pH 5 Öêº " çê~ f~(j?Wò), ? Wê~ f~(?Wò) $º ÿÖ/öê ò(öò)~ b¦ªj ~ ªC~& . <Ö>º ò¢ ÏÊ>ö ~ 10V C»b C~ MRS ÂVæ(Difco Lab., USA)öB 30oC, 48* V· ê colony>& 30-300B ï 6j F~ ÖÂ~&, pHº pH meter(istek, Model 720P) G;~& . Öêº Ã~> 10 gö f~b 5 gj I 0.1 N NaOH pH 8.3ræ ';~ áf >~¢ r ö V¢. 785. <Öb ~Ö~& (9). CÖê = 0.1 N NaOH ²jï(mL)Ü0.9Ýò~ Z²(g) Ë¦Ò ?Wòf öòº 5oCöB 5* Oï ê «ö 20 gO IÚ ¦Òöö² ¾*Ú"î, ÿÖòº 10 gO ¾*Ú"î . &Ë¦Ò O»f reference(*Ú)¢ ¦Òöö² Ò rJ", ò 7öê Êº multiple comparisons testö &~&b(10), .j þj Û Ò îNÎ 10 «~ ¦Òöj &çb '' 5¢* 5²ö ö *>' V ^ê, , êî, ç6, crispness 5 ïçj G;~& . >B9êî9ª ª+ &jB ò~ >BWêîWªf HP 6890 Series gas chromatograph(Hewlett Packard Co., USA)¢ ÒÏ~ r" ? ªC~& . 100 mL~ â'2¢Êö ò 25 g, Ã~> 25 g, sodium sulfate, anhydrous 25 g 5 100 ppm~ 1-pentanol(Ú¦ &bî)j I rubber septum(24 mm, Sigma Chemical Co., USA)b &/ ê, 35oC~ pair stirrer(Eyela, PS-100, Japan) öB 20ª* v>~& . B headspace gas¢ 5 mL gas tight syringe(Hamilton Co., USA) 1 mL ~ Gas chromatograph ªC~& . &bî" ^Zª*j jv~ b ¢ {~(;WªC), HP ChemStation(Revision A.05.01, 1997)b êÖB &òf þò~ êîWª~ b 'j jv~ ;ï~& . &òº 50 mL~ Ã~>, 25 g~ sodium sulfate, anhydrous 5 1-pentanol, ethanol(ç 100 ppm >Ï), allyl mercaptan, methyl allyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide, diallyl sulfide, methyl propyl disulfide, methyl trisulfide, diallyl disulfide(ç 20 ppm >Ï)¢ '' Î&~ ò ê, òf ÿ¢ b ªC~& . &ò¦V B headspace gas¢ 1 mL "«B áÚê b~ '" ò~ êîWª~ b 'j jv~ êÖ~, Vö &ò 7~ 1-pentanol~ '" ò 7~ 1-pentanol~ 'j ²>N~ >¢ ~ ;ï~& . ' >BWêîWª~ ïêÖf r" ? . Amount of each component(ppm) = 100 ppmÜ(Area of each component in sampleÝArea of same component in standard sample)Ü(Area of 1-pentanol in standard sampleÝArea of 1pentanol in sample) 1-Pentanolf þöB ÒÏB ¢"~ Úö & >w W f~~ "º >BW êîWª " FÒ~&bæ &bî" ò7~ 1-pentanol~ ïj¢ Ú¦&bî~ ; ê> ÒÏ > ®î . þf 3² > ~ ² 7² ç "«~&b gas chromatograph~ ªCf Table 2f ? . ¶ò~ ¾Ò 5 ª+ *Ú' þf 3-6²ö ö > ~&b, ' Ï ê þ >Å>º Table ~ö «V~& . þÖ"º WindowÏ SigmaStat software(11)¢ ÒÏ~ F-test(ANOVAf ²F~N¦;)f F;²æªC(linear regression)b Ûê¾Ò ~& ..

(3) ®"²æ B 36 ² B 5 ^ (2004). 786. Table 2. Conditions of gas chromatographic analysis Column. : HP-5 (5% diphenyl and 95% dimethyl-polysiloxane : length 30 mÜI.D. 0.32 mmÜfilm thickness 0.25 µm) : Nitrogen (flow rate 3.2 mL/min). Carrier gas Air & hydrogen : 350 mL & 35 mL/min flow rate Injector temp. : 120oC Detector : FID Detector temp. : 230oC Oven temp. : 35oC/3 min hold, 3oC/min to 220oC Injection volume : Headspace gas 1 mL Split ratio : 5.0 : 1 : Slope sensitivity (5), peak width (0.02), Integration Events : area reject (0.5), height reject (0.5). Ö 5 V <Ö~ Ö9 G Table 3f Vº~ *Ú(~ whole¢ ), 7¦*, ´ ¦* ò f~ò~ "ê, pH, Öê 5 <Ö>¢ " º © . b& "ê¢ wholef 2.31% j~ 7 ¦*º 2.03% Ô~, ´¦*º 2.68% ¸~b Ò öº F~' N& ®î (p < 0.05). ?Wò~ pH¢ 4.77-4.78 N& ìîb, Öê º 0.207-0.246% Vº ¦* Òö ² N& ®îb¾ F ~' >&f jîî (p < 0.05). Þ <Ö>º 1.4-1.5Ü105 b Vº¦* Òö N& ìî . 20oC, 3¢ ?WB ò~ pH¢ 7ò& 4.00b & Ë Ô~, ´ò& 4.62 &Ë ¸~ . Öêº wholeò 0.652%, 7ò 0.667%ö j~ ´òº 0.422% Ô~b ´ò~ Öê >~º v òf F~' N¢ & (p < 0.05). <Ö>º wholeò 1.7Ü109, 7ò 1.8Ü 109, ´ò 1.0Ü109b wholeòf 7ò& ´ò. ² ¸~ . ÿÖê öB ò~ pH¢ 7ò& 4.45 & Ë Ô~ ´ò& 4.94 &Ë ¸~b ÿÖ*~ ò (?Wò)ö j~ pH& çß~& . Öêº 0.308-0.374%. ò Òö ² N& ®îb¾ F~' >&f jîî. (p < 0.05). ÿÖ*~ òf jv~ ÿÖê ò~ Öêº *&~² &~~& . <Ö>º 3.4-4.0Ü108b ò Òö N& ìîb¾, ÿÖ*~ òf jv~ *&~² 6²~& . ç~ Ö"º Vº~ ¦*& ò Úê f~ò~ pHf ÖWê º ©j "º, &æ F& ®Ææò "º Fº "ê~ N¢ ' > ® . ¯ ´¦* ò f~~ "ê& whole $º 7¦* ò f ~ "ê& ¸jB <Öö ~ G" ÖW ÛBB ©b 'B . .ªVº~ "ê& Vº¦*ê N& ®. º ©f B : ® (8). f~¢ ·v~ V *ö Vº¢ ².ö .º ö V¢B .Z '² . f~ö >ª ô bæ, >ö .Z . >ª ' îÎî öò jî¢ ê ¢ê . .º O»" .º f Ïê¾ çö V¢. ·~ "³ê, .ªNêf *, 'Òªï ö V¢ ¢ææ V&j ;~V& Ö Ú[ . .ê Vº~ '" êº 2.4%¢ ~Vê ~, ´¦* 4%, 7¦* 2.5%¢ ~V ê . ¾ "ê, ?WNê, ?W*f B ç&&ê¢ æî ®ÚB ³¢'b '"ê¢ ;~º © f~& r² f '?V~ Öêf pH¢ rJê Öê 0.6% ¦", pH 4.2 ¦"ö º ?WNêf ?W* f~?W~ 7 º ¶& F > ® (12). ;(13)f f~~ "ê¢ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5% ~ 25oC, 48*ÿn ?WÊB <Öö ~ ÖW" pH~ æz¢ Ò Ö", "ê& ¸j> Öê~ >~& Ô pHê ¶Ò² &~®b¾ 30* êöº 1%. 2%öB ÖWï ¸ pHê Ô~ ~&º, Fº f~BÎö " &~º Leuconostoc mesenteroides ~ <Ö "³ê 2% ¦"öB G {W~V r^ ¢ ~& . 20oCöB 3¢* ?WÎ ~ ãÖöº " ê 2.31%(whole) $º 2.03%(7)öBº <Ö~ G B~ pH& Ô Öê& ¸~æò 2.68%(´)öBº G Û B>Ú pH& ¸ Öê& Ô~ . ÿÖö ~~ f~ò~ pH& çß~ Öê& &~ ~º Fº ÿÖ >BWFVÖ~ ¢¦& ¶ B r^ , <Ö>& 6²~º Fº Ë*~ ö ~~ . Table 3. Effects of part of Chinese cabbage on salt concentration, pH, acidity and viable cells of unripened kimchi, 3 days-ripened kimchi and freeze-dried/rehydrated kimchi 1) Part of Chinese cabbage Unripened kimchi Whole. Midrib. Ripened kimchi Leaf. Whole. Midrib. FD/rehydrated kimchi Leaf. Whole. Midrib. Leaf. Salt conc. (%)2) 2.31bÛ0.15 2.03cÛ0.10 2.68aÛ0.12 pH3) 4.78 4.77 4.77 4.15 4.00 4.62 4.45 4.36 4.94 Acidity (%)4) 0.233aÛ0.032 0.246aÛ0.029 0.207aÛ0.023 0.652aÛ0.024 0.667aÛ0.038 0.422bÛ0.078 0.371aÛ0.032 0.374aÛ0.055 0.308aÛ0.062 Viable cells5) (Ü105 CFU/mL) (Ü109 CFU/mL) (Ü108 CFU/mL) 1.5aÛ0.5 1.5aÛ0.5 1.4aÛ0.4 1.7aÛ0.4 1.8aÛ0.7 1.0bÛ0.5 4.0aÛ1.0 3.4aÛ0.8 3.4aÛ0.6 1). a-c: Any two means in a row not followed by the same letter are significantly different at the 5% level. Mean values and standard deviations of 8 or more replications. 2) Salt content was measured by digital-salinometer (Sekisui Co., Model SS-31A, Japan). 3) Median values of 6 or more replications. 4) Mean values and standard deviations of 6 or more replications. 5) Mean values and standard deviations of 9 or more replications. 2) CFU: Colony forming unit. 2).

(4) Vº~ ¦*ö V f~~ ®î. 787. Table 4. Sensory properties of ripened kimchi1). Overall acceptability Taste Odor Texture Color. Reference (Whole). Midrib. Leaf. 5.00a. 5.00aÛ0.51. 3.75bÛ0.44. 5.00a 5.00a 5.00a 5.00b. 5.00aÛ0.51 4.88bÛ0.33 5.00a 5.25aÛ0.44. 3.75bÛ0.44 3.75cÛ0.44 5.00a 4.63cÛ0.49. 1) Sensory evaluation test was repeated five times using 10 panelists. The scores were assigned numerical values 1 to 9 with “no difference between sample and reference” equaling 5, “extremely better than reference” equaling 9 and “extremely inferior to reference” equaling 1. a-c Any two means in a row not followed by the same letter are significantly different at the 5% level.. Table 5. Sensory properties of freeze-dried kimchi1) Fig. 1. Correlation between pH and acidity.1) 1) Linear regression: y = -1.68x + 5.19, R2 = 0.805: Coefficient of determination, Straight line: Least squares regression line, Inner dashed lines: Confidence interval, Outer dashed lines: Predicted values.. Ú~ ¢¦& ¶ç>îV r^¢ 'B (6). Fig. 1f Table 3~ pH>~f Öê>~ Ò~ &ê¢ F; ²æªC(linear regression)b ©bB Öê¢ ëãæ >(x) ~ pH¢ «³æ>(y) ®j r, ²æO;f y = −1.68x + 5.19, Ö;ê> R2 = 0.805 pHº Öê~ 'Ëj ;~ ² Aº ©b ¾æÒ . B~~ Ë' ß9 Table 4º 20oCöB 3¢ ?WB ò~ &Ë' ßWj "º, *>' V^êº &ò(whole)f 7ò& ´ ò F~'b Ö>~& (p < 0.05). f *>' V^ê f ãË ¢~~, êîº &ò~ >~& &Ë ¸~ ´ò~ >~& &Ë Ô~º ^ òÒö F~' N & ®î (p < 0.05). ç6f ^ òÒö N& ìîb, ïçf 7ò~ >~& &Ë ¸~ ´ò& &Ë Ô~º ^ òÒö F~' N& ®î (p < 0.05). ´òº &ò $º 7òö j~ ?Wê& Ôbæ Ö& Ô ±Úê ;~ *>' V^ê, 5 êî~ V^ê& Ô~~ ©b 'B . 7ò~ ïç~ 6>& ¸ ´ ò~ ïç~ >~& Ôf Fº 7¦*öº ï ~ ì b¾ ´¦*öº ï ê~ V^êö ¦;'b 'Ëj "îV r^¢ 'B . Þ '?V~ f~~ Öêf pH º ¢>'b Öê 0.6% ¦", pH 4.2 ¦"¢ rJ^ ® º(12), wholeòf 7ò~ pHf Öê& ';>~ö & rÚ j~ ´ò~ pHf Öê& ';>~f N¢ º 6ê ´ò~ Ôf V^ê~ F C > ® . Table 5º ÿÖB ò~ &Ë' ßWj "º ©b , *>' V^ê, 5 êîº &ò(whole)f 7 ò& ´ò F~'b Ö>~&b(p < 0.05), ç6f òÒö N& ìî, 2Ó2Ó(crispness)f ´ò& F ~'b Ö>~&b(p < 0.05), ïçf ´ò~ >~& ò F~'b Ô~ (p < 0.05). ÿÖB òº >ª Ö Ôbæ ÿÖ*~ òö j~ "& ;~&. Overall acceptability Taste Odor Texture Crispness Color. Reference (Whole). Midrib. Leaf. 5.00a. 5.13aÛ0.33. 4.75bÛ0.67. 5.00a 5.00a 5.00a 5.00b 5.00a. 5.13aÛ0.33 5.00a 5.00a 4.88cÛ0.33 5.00a. 4.75bÛ0.67 4.88bÛ0.33 5.00a 5.13aÛ0.33 4.50bÛ0.51. 1). See footnote in Table 4.. Table 6. Sensory properties of freeze-dried/rehydrated kimchi1). Overall acceptability Taste Odor Texture Color. Reference (Whole). Midrib. Leaf. 5.00a. 4.75bÛ0.44. 4.13cÛ0.33. 5.00a 5.00a 5.00a 5.00a. 4.75bÛ0.44 4.75bÛ0.44 4.88bÛ0.33 5.00a. 4.00cÛ0.51 4.38cÛ0.49 5.00a 5.00a. 1). See footnote in Table 4.. º, ß® ´òº òö j~ Ö& ÔV r^ö "& z ;~² ¶^B *>' V^êf ~ >~& Ô ~ 'B . ¾ Ã¦* vþ& f ´¦*~ ÿÖB®f ò 2Ó2Ó(crispness)>~º ¸ ² ¾æÒ . Table 6f ÿÖ/öB ò~ &Ë' ßWj "º ©b, *>' V^ê, 5 êîº &ò(whole)& & Ë Ö>~&, ´ò& &Ë &~&b ^ òÒöº F~' N¢ & (p < 0.05). ç6~ >~º 7ò&. ² Ô~, ïçf ^ òÒö N& ìî . f ?f Ö"¢ Table 4(?Wò)~ Ö"f jv *>' V^ ê, , êî~ ãÖº ãË &Ú ¢~~º ©îº, ÿ Ö/öò¢º © ?Wò¢ ÿÖÎ ê, ö ©æ ö¾~ òf FÒ ßWj ¾æÞ © . ç~ Ö"¢ ÿÖ¦ö &êì &ò(whole) f 7ò~ *>' V^ê, 5 êî& ´ò Ö >~&º Fº &òf Ãò~ ãÖº ?W.

(5) ®"²æ B 36 ² B 5 ^ (2004). 788. Table 7. Amounts of volatile odor components in kimchi prepared from whole, midlib and leaf of Chinese cabbage1) 2). 3). 4). 5). 6). 7). (Unit: ppm). Ethanol. AM. MAS. DD. DS. MPD. MT. DDS8). A9) B10) C11). 0988.24Û125.64 1189.75Û69.280 890.69Û83.36. 1.13Û0.47 0.84Û0.20 1.09Û0.49. 0.77Û0.31 0.93Û0.39 0.76Û0.33. Unripened sample 8.14Û1.13 6.81Û1.64 7.21Û1.23. -. 3.26Û0.40 4.45Û0.29 2.42Û0.18. -. 28.95Û3.05 35.98Û0.82 23.20Û1.34. A B C. 8910.05Û970.17 14064.82Û1436.54 3832.54Û217.97. 2.33Û0.65 8.80Û2.61 1.14Û0.25. 18.74Û2.54 20.52Û1.53 15.29Û1.86. Ripened sample 35.69Û2.69 25.18Û1.61 36.11Û1.31. 5.64Û0.77 8.26Û0.97 4.08Û0.36. 3.76Û0.66 4.78Û0.51 3.02Û0.45. 8.42Û1.42 2.79Û0.33 13.51Û1.870. 25.35Û3.84 32.27Û1.93 21.60Û1.91. A B C. 55.19Û21.65 37.42Û12.10 16.18Û0.790. 0.10Û0.03 0.15Û0.05 0.09Û0.02. 0.62Û0.25 0.48Û0.08 0.42Û0.03. Rehydrated sample 0.29Û0.04 0.28Û0.06 0.27Û0.02. -. -. -. 2.91Û0.47 2.67Û0.56 2.57Û0.38. 1). Means and standard deviations of 15 or more replications. AM: Allyl mercaptan, 3)MAS: Methyl allyl sulfide, 4)DD: Dimethyl disulfide, 5)DS: Diallyl sulfide, 6)MPD: Methyl propyl disulfide, 7)MT: Methyl trisulfide, 8)DDS: Diallyl disulfide, 9)A: Whole, 10)B: Midrib, 11)C: Leaf 2). '~² Úrb¾ ´òº rf ?Wêö æ á ~&V r^¢ 'B . B~~ >B9êî9ª Table 7f j?Wò, ?Wò, ÿÖ/öò~ >B WêîWª ïj "º © . j?WòöBº ethanol, allyl mercaptan, methyl allyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide, methyl propyl disulfide, diallyl disulfide~ 6B Wª {>îb f ~B~ ò ÒÏ ¦* Òö êîWªö ®ÚB N º æ p~ . ?Wò~ ãÖöº ethanol, allyl mercaptan, methyl allyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide, diallyl sulfide, methyl propyl disulfide, methyl trisulfide, diallyl disulfide~ 8B Wª {>îº , dimethyl disulfidef metyl trisulfide¢ B 6B Wªf *Ú $º 7ò& ´ò ¸~ . ?WÊæ pf òf jv~ diallyl sulfidef methyl trisulfide& î W >î . ÿÖ/öò~ ãÖº ethanol, allyl mercaptan, methyl allyl sulfide, dimethyl disulfide 5 diallyl disulfide~ 5B Wª ¦Â>îº *Ú $º 7ò& ´ò ¸~ . ? Wòf jv~ >BWêîWª ÿÖö ~~ *& ~² 6²>¾, diallyl sulfide, methyl propyl disulfide 5 methyl trisulsulfide~ ãÖº jê® B>î . ç~ Ö" ?Wò $º ÿÖ/öò~ ãÖöº wholeò f 7òöB ethanol 5 Fzb" ?f >BWêî Wª ï ´ò &Ú'b ¸~º, Fº ´ ò wholeòf 7òöB <Ö~ ÿ B~ >BWêîWª~ Wê ¸~V r^¢ 'B . j?W òö j~ ?WòöB diallyl sulfidef methyl trisulfide& î WB 6f Kof Lee(7)~ Ö"f ¢~~º © .. º. £. ~ Ï'f Vº¢ 7, ´, *Úf ? ¦*ê ¾ *Ú '' f~¢ B~ f~~ ®îßW ¯, <Ö ~ G" ÖW, &ËW 5 >BWêîWªj Ò~, j. Þ ÿÖ& ¦*ê ¾*Ú BB f~~ ®îö ~ º 'Ëj Ò~º © . b& "ê¢ whole(*Ú)f 2.31% j~ 7¦* º 2.03% Ô~, ´¦*º 2.68% ¸~b Vº~ ¦* Òö F~' N& ®î (p < 0.05). 20oC, 3¢ ?WB ò~ pH¢ 7ò& 4.00b &Ë Ô~, ´ò& 4.62 &Ë ¸~ . Öêº wholeò 0.652%, 7ò 0.667%ö j~ ´òº 0.422% Ô~b ´ò~ Öê >~º v òf F~' N¢ & (p < 0.05). <Ö >º wholeò 1.7Ü109, 7ò 1.8Ü109, ´ò 1.0Ü109 b wholeòf 7ò& ´ò. ² ¸~ .. &Ë 'ßWj ÿÖ¦ö &êì &ò(*Ú)f 7 ò~ *>' V^ê, 5 êî& ´ò Ö>~&. . ?Wò $º ÿÖ/öò~ ãÖöº wholeòf 7òöB ethanol" Fzb" ?f >BWêîWª ï ´ò &Ú'b ¸~ .. 6Ò~ º 2004jê {W¶&v(¶"²) j æöb Úrb {W¶&vö p 6Òãî .. ^. ò. 1. Jo JS. Studies on Kimchi, Yurim-munhwasa, Seoul, Korea. p. 160 (2000) 2. Ko YT, Kang JH, Kim TE. Quality of freeze dried kimchi. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 33: 100-106 (2001) 3. Ko YT, Kang JH, Kim TE. Novel instant kimchi and its preparation method. Korean patent 0390185 (2003) 4. Ko YT, Kang JH. Effects of freeze-drying time on quality of freezed-dried kimchi. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 34: 91-95 (2002) 5. Ko YT, Kang JH. Changes of volatile odor components in kimchi by freeze-drying. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 34: 559-564 (2002) 6. Ko YT, Kang JH. Quality of freeze-dried yulmoo-kimchi. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 35: 254-259 (2003) 7. Ko YT, Lee JY. Quality characteristics of kimchi prepared with.

(6) Vº~ ¦*ö V f~~ ®î Chinese radish and its quality change by freeze-drying. Korean J. Food Sci. Technol. 35: 937-942 (2003) 8. Doh YH, Park JB. Changes of partial salinity and cutting force of Chinese cabbage with brine concentration and salting time. Food Eng. Prog. 4: 182-188 (2000) 9. Hong SI, Park NH, Kim KH. Changes of quality of kimchi according to packing method. pp. 384-399. In: Science of Kimchi, Symposium of Korean Society of Food Sci. Technol., Seoul, Korea (1994) 10. Larmond E. Laboratory Methods for Sensory Evaluation of Food.. 789. Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa, Canada. pp. 31-37 (1977) 11. Jandel Co. SigmaStat for Windows. Version 1.02. Jandel Co., San Rafael, CA, USA (1994) 12. Jo JS. Studies on Kimchi. Yurim-munhwasa, Seoul, Korea (2000) 13. Park WP. The effect of various seasonings on kimchi fermentation. PhD thesis, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea (1991) (2004j 5ú 31¢ %>; 2004j 8ú 26¢ j).

(7)