ArticleUltrasonics sonochemistry2026
Multi-frequency ultrasound-assisted hot-air drying of Cistanche deserticola slices: Effects on drying efficiency, energy consumption, bioactive compounds, and microstructure.
Article in Ultrasonics sonochemistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study systematically investigated the effects of single-frequency (SFU), dual-frequency (DFU), and triple-frequency ultrasound (TFU) combined with hot-air drying on the drying performance, energy consumption, physicochemical quality, characteristic bioactive compounds, and microstructure of Cistanche deserticola slices. All ultrasound treatments were conducted at 55 °C with a constant total ultrasonic power of 120 W using 25, 28, and 40 kHz individually or in combination. Ultrasound accelerated dehydration, with DFU and TFU reducing the drying time by up to 43.75% compared with conventional hot-air drying. Among the tested modes, DFU2 (25 + 40 kHz) showed the lowest specific energy consumption of 76.15 kWh/kg water, corresponding to a 32.28% reduction relative to hot-air drying. TFU was characterized by higher measured contents of phenolics, flavonoids, and polysaccharides, stronger antioxidant activity, lower color deviation, and generally higher contents of most characteristic phenylethanoid and iridoid glycosides. SEM observations showed that ultrasound produced a more open and porous tissue structure, consistent with the improved drying behavior. Multivariate analysis further distinguished the treatments, showing that TFU was more closely associated with most quality indicators, whereas DFU2 was more strongly associated with energy efficiency. These findings indicate that increasing the number of ultrasound frequencies did not result in uniform improvement across all responses; instead, different frequency modes favored different processing objectives. Overall, ultrasound-assisted HA improved drying performance while maintaining favorable quality attributes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.