Studies on different press drying techniques for dehydration of ornamental foliages

Abstract

Dry flowers are attaining immense popularity as they are natural, eco-friendly, inexpensive, long lasting, biodegradable and retains their ornamental worth irrespective of the spell. Experiment was conducted with an objective to standardize the press drying techniques for dehydration of ornamental foliages. From the results of experiment, it can be concluded that iron press found excellent technique for press drying of Rosa spp., Swietenia mahagoni and Lagerstroemia speciosa leaves. Tiles pressed in microwave oven for 1 min found finest technique for press drying of Anthocephalus cadamba leaves, 2 min found suitable for Mussaenda erythrophylla leaves, 3 min found appropriate for Hibiscus rosa-sinensis and Areca lutescens leaves, 4 min found ideal for Tagetes spp. leaves. Both iron press drying and tiles pressed in microwave oven for 3 min found appropriate for Acacia auriculiformis leaves and 4 min found ideal for press drying of Phoenix roebeleni leaves. The dried leaves can be utilized for value added products preparations.

Full text

~ 150 ~
The Pharma Innovation Journal 2020; 9(11): 150-157
ISSN (E): 2277- 7695
ISSN (P): 2349-8242
NAAS Rating: 5.03
TPI 2020; 9(11): 150-157
© 2020 TPI
www.thepharmajournal.com
Received: 13-09-2020
Accepted: 18-10-2020
Raghupathi B
Department of Floriculture and
Landscape Architecture, Faculty
of Horticulture Bidhan Chandra
Krishi Viswavidyalaya,
Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal,
India
Subhendu S Gantait
Department of Floriculture and
Landscape Architecture, Faculty
of Horticulture Bidhan Chandra
Krishi Viswavidyalaya,
Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal,
India
Corresponding Author:
Raghupathi B
Department of Floriculture and
Landscape Architecture, Faculty
of Horticulture Bidhan Chandra
Krishi Viswavidyalaya,
Mohanpur, Nadia, West Bengal,
India
Studies on different press drying techniques for
dehydration of ornamental foliages
Raghupathi B and Subhendu S Gantait
Abstract
Dry flowers are attaining immense popularity as they are natural, eco-friendly, inexpensive, long lasting,
bio-degradable and retains their ornamental worth irrespective of the spell. Experiment was conducted
with an objective to standardize the press drying techniques for dehydration of ornamental foliages. From
the results of experiment, it can be concluded that iron press found excellent technique for press drying of
Rosa spp., Swietenia mahagoni and Lagerstroemia speciosa leaves. Tiles pressed in microwave oven for
1 min found finest technique for press drying of Anthocephalus cadamba leaves, 2 min found suitable for
Mussaenda erythrophylla leaves, 3 min found appropriate for Hibiscus rosa-sinensis and Areca lutescens
leaves, 4 min found ideal for Tagetes spp. leaves. Both iron press drying and tiles pressed in microwave
oven for 3 min found appropriate for Acacia auriculiformis leaves and 4 min found ideal for press drying
of Phoenix roebeleni leaves. The dried leaves can be utilized for value added products preparations.
Keywords: Press drying, iron press, wooden press, microwave press, dehydration
Introduction
The art of pressing and drying ornamentals is a very old and ancient art of practice. Drying and
preserving of flowers and plants has been considered as hundreds years of fine art. In Egyptian
pyramids mummified bodies were encased with scented dried flowers and aromatic herb
garlands. The “Japanese preserved flower art” of permanent designs to save the exquisite
beauty of live flora centuries ago is well-known as Oshibana (Christie, 2010) [1]. Later
Japanese spread the flower preserving art to Victorian England because of their long lasting
beautiful appearance. The monks dried flowers, foliages and herbs for use in ornamental
motifs or for making dyes to colour their hand-printed books during the middle ages. For
centuries ago, dried flower arrangements have been popular in Europe i.e. as early as 1700 AD
and Colonial Americans used dried flowers to brighten their homes especially during the dark
winter months. For the first time flowers were commercially dried in Germany though it was
well known in the past (Jean and Lesley, 1982) [3]. Various press drying techniques were
practised for dehydration of plant samples such as wooden press, iron pres, book press and
pressed samples in microwave and hot air oven drier etc. Press drying is a method used to
preserve the plants to use on greeting cards, book marks, stationery etc (Murugan et al., 2007)
[6]. The present investigation was conducted with an objective to standardize the press drying
techniques for dehydration of ornamental foliages.
Materials and Methods
The experiment was carried out in Dry Flower Laboratory at Department of Floriculture and
Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Horticulture, Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya,
Mohanpur, Nadia (Dist.), West Bengal-741252 during the period of 2017 to 2019. Fresh
matured leaves were collected within the university campus free from blemishes, pest and
disease in the morning after dew/moisture evaporation. Experiment was laid out in CRD with
five replications and eight treatments. Treatments were set based on trial-and-error method for
all the foliage. 10 different foliages were used for experiment purpose viz., mussaenda,
kadamba tree, rose, hibiscus, mahogany tree, earpod wattle tree, pride of India tree, pygmy
date palm, marigold and areca palm. The following observations were recorded from the
experiment i.e. fresh weight of sample (g), dry weight of sample (g), moisture content loss (%)
and dried samples were given subjective scores on average 10 points scale with reference to
ornamental values viz., colour, texture, brittleness and appearance/shape retention. Based on
cumulative score, ranks were given and the best treatment combinations were worked out (Raj
and Gupta, 2005) [7].

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 151 ~
Results and Discussion
1.
Mussaenda erythrophylla
The data presented in Table-1 revealed that greatest moisture
loss percent in different press dried mussaenda leaves was
recorded in T5 (74.20%), which is statistically far with T2
(60.15%). Highest sensory score for colour noted in T3 (6.30),
while least was found in T8 (3.20). Utmost score for texture
was observed in T6 (7.0) and least noted in T2 (4.30).
Principal score for brittleness was observed in T6 (7.30),
which is significantly far with T5 (4.20). Uppermost score for
appearance was recorded in T3 (6.80) and lower most noted in
T8 (3.30).
Table 1: Effect of press drying on mussaenda (Mussaenda erythrophylla) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
0.44
0.16
63.66
3.90
5.60
5.40
6.70
T2
1.05
0.42
60.15
5.40
4.30
5.00
6.20
T3
0.87
0.34
61.11
6.30
6.70
5.90
6.80
T4
1.12
0.34
69.40
5.80
6.30
5.50
5.80
T5
1.00
0.26
74.20
5.40
5.80
4.20
5.90
T6
1.05
0.40
61.62
5.50
7.00
7.30
4.00
T7
1.21
0.44
63.85
5.80
6.60
6.70
5.70
T8
1.06
0.35
67.01
3.20
5.00
4.40
3.30
S.Em (±)
0.01
0.01
0.65
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.05
CD at 5%
0.03
0.01
1.87
0.15
0.17
0.15
0.16
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 4 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
2.
Anthocephalus cadamba
In different press dried techniques of kadamba tree leaves
(Table-2) maximum moisture loss percent was noted in T8
(66.31%) and minimum recorded in T2 (55.61%). Highest
score for colour was recorded in T3 (6.20), which is
statistically far with T8 (2.20). Uppermost score for texture
found in T6 (7.80), while lower most was recorded in T2
(4.40). Chief brittleness score was noted in T6 (8.0), which is
statistically far with T5 (4.40). Highest score for appearance
was noted in T1 (6.60) and least recorded in T8 (2.40).
Table 2: Effect of press drying on kadamba tree (Anthocephalus cadamba) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
1.33
0.52
61.08
3.60
6.00
6.00
6.60
T2
1.28
0.57
55.61
4.80
4.40
5.00
4.60
T3
1.73
0.67
61.16
6.20
7.20
6.00
6.40
T4
1.68
0.62
63.16
5.80
6.60
5.00
5.80
T5
1.41
0.51
64.11
5.60
6.40
4.40
5.60
T6
1.65
0.62
62.16
4.40
7.80
8.00
3.60
T7
1.61
0.58
63.97
3.60
7.40
7.40
3.20
T8
1.35
0.46
66.31
2.20
7.00
5.60
2.40
S.Em (±)
0.02
0.01
0.62
0.04
0.07
0.06
0.05
CD at 5%
0.04
0.02
1.80
0.12
0.19
0.17
0.13
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 1 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 3 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
3.
Rosa spp.
A perusal of data on Table-3 revealed the effect of different
press drying techniques on rose leaves. Chief moisture loss
percent was recorded in T5 (55.87%), which is significantly
far with T3 (38.06%). Maximum score for colour was found in
T2 (8.40) and minimum recorded in T5 and T8 (5.0).
Uppermost score for texture was noted in T2 (7.40), while
lower most found in T5 (5.40). Utmost score for brittleness
was recorded in T6 (7.80) and least found in T5 (5.40). Highest
score for appearance was noted in T2 (8.40), which is
statistically far with T3 (5.60).
Table 3: Effect of press drying on rose (Rosa spp.) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
0.58
0.27
52.59
7.40
6.40
7.20
7.60
T2
0.43
0.22
48.17
8.40
7.40
7.60
8.40
T3
0.44
0.27
38.06
6.60
7.00
7.40
5.60
T4
0.47
0.25
47.66
5.60
6.40
7.00
6.00
T5
0.52
0.23
55.87
5.00
5.40
5.40
6.80
T6
0.38
0.23
40.94
5.40
6.40
7.80
6.40
T7
0.38
0.19
49.82
7.00
7.00
7.40
7.40
T8
0.44
0.20
55.48
5.00
5.80
6.60
6.80
S.Em (±)
0.00
0.00
0.49
0.06
0.06
0.07
0.07
CD at 5%
0.01
0.01
1.43
0.17
0.18
0.20
0.19
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 4 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 152 ~
4.
Hibiscus rosa-sinensis
Peak moisture loss percent in different press dried techniques
of hibiscus leaves (Table-4) was noted in T8 (78.22%), which
is statistically far with T2 (62.94%). Colour score found
maximum in T3 (8.40), while minimum was noted in T8 (4.0).
Texture score was found utmost in T5 (8.0), which is
significantly far with T8 (4.0). Brittleness score found utmost
in T3 (8.0) and least was observed in T8 (5.20). Supreme score
for appearance was observed in T4 and T5 (8.0), which is
statistically far with T8 (4.60).
Table 4: Effect of press drying on hibiscus (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
1.41
0.43
69.40
6.20
6.00
6.20
6.60
T2
1.20
0.44
62.94
5.80
6.00
6.00
6.80
T3
1.03
0.31
70.09
8.40
7.40
8.00
7.60
T4
1.03
0.28
73.41
8.00
7.80
7.60
8.00
T5
0.96
0.24
75.13
7.40
8.00
6.00
8.00
T6
0.98
0.26
73.32
6.20
6.80
7.40
6.40
T7
0.82
0.21
75.12
4.80
4.80
6.40
5.40
T8
0.79
0.17
78.22
4.00
4.00
5.20
4.60
S.Em (±)
0.01
0.00
0.73
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
CD at 5%
0.03
0.01
2.10
0.17
0.17
0.18
0.18
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T5- Tiles pressed
in MO for 4 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
5.
Swietenia mahagoni
A perusal of data on different press drying techniques of
mahogany tree leaves (Table-5) revealed that chief moisture
loss percent was noted in T1 (52.33%), which is significantly
far with T3 (34.93%). Supreme score for colour was recorded
in T2 (8.60), which is statistically far with T1 (3.30).
Uppermost texture score was noted in T1 (8.20), while lower
most found T3 (5.70). Highest score for brittleness was
recorded in T2 (8.50), whereas least observed in T5 (5.30).
Appearance score was recorded utmost in T2 and T5 (8.40)
and least found in T1 (5.0).
Table 5: Effect of press drying on mahogany tree (Swietenia mahagoni) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
0.71
0.34
52.33
3.30
8.20
8.10
5.00
T2
0.73
0.38
48.24
8.60
7.40
8.50
8.40
T3
0.90
0.59
34.93
8.20
5.70
7.80
7.20
T4
0.87
0.53
38.71
8.30
7.60
6.60
7.70
T5
0.77
0.41
46.94
8.40
7.20
5.30
8.40
T6
0.60
0.37
38.73
6.40
7.30
8.40
6.90
T7
0.69
0.41
41.52
6.30
7.50
8.00
7.40
T8
0.71
0.40
43.58
5.90
6.30
5.80
6.70
S.Em (±)
0.01
0.01
0.42
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
CD at 5%
0.02
0.01
1.21
0.19
0.20
0.20
0.20
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T5- Tiles pressed
in MO for 4 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
6.
Acacia auriculiformis
The effect of different press drying techniques on earpod
wattle tree leaves (Table-6) shows that maximum moisture
loss percent was recorded in T5 (58.68%) and minimum noted
in T1 (49.94%). Supreme score for colour was recorded in T2
(8.40), which is significantly far with T8 (4.40). Utmost
texture score was noted in T2 and T5 (8.0), whereas low most
observed in T8 (6.20). Chief score for brittleness was noted in
T2 and T6 (8.0), which is statistically far with T8 (4.40).
Uppermost appearance score was observed in T2 (8.40) and
lower most found in T8 (4.60).
Table 6: Effect of press drying on earpod wattle tree (Acacia auriculiformis) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
0.73
0.36
49.94
6.80
7.60
7.40
8.00
T2
0.64
0.30
52.17
8.40
8.00
8.00
8.40
T3
0.67
0.32
51.89
7.60
6.80
7.80
7.40
T4
0.58
0.27
54.61
8.20
7.80
7.40
8.20
T5
0.61
0.25
58.68
8.00
8.00
5.60
7.80
T6
0.62
0.29
52.55
6.80
7.80
8.00
7.00
T7
0.48
0.22
54.77
5.40
7.40
6.60
5.60
T8
0.57
0.24
57.54
4.40
6.20
4.40
4.60
S.Em (±)
0.01
0.00
0.54
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.07
CD at 5%
0.02
0.01
1.56
0.19
0.20
0.19
0.19
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T5- Tiles pressed
in MO for 4 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
7.
Lagerstroemia speciosa
Utmost moisture loss percent was recorded in T8 (66.04%), which is statistically far with T6 (57.66%) in different press
dried techniques of lagerstroemia tree leaves (Table-7). Peak

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 153 ~
score for colour was noted in T2 (7.40), which is significantly
far with T8 (3.60). Texture score found maximum in T2 (8.40),
whereas minimum was noted in T3 (4.80). Brittleness score
varied from 8.0 (T2, T3 and T6) to 5.60 (T5). Greatest
appearance score was recorded in T2 (8.0), which is
significantly far with T8 (3.40).
Table 7: Effect of press drying on pride of India tree (Lagerstroemia speciosa) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
1.24
0.46
63.01
6.80
7.20
7.40
6.40
T2
1.53
0.61
59.74
7.40
8.40
8.00
8.00
T3
1.15
0.48
58.49
7.20
4.80
8.00
6.80
T4
1.23
0.49
60.48
6.80
6.20
7.40
6.40
T5
1.05
0.37
64.80
5.40
6.60
5.60
5.00
T6
1.32
0.56
57.66
5.00
7.20
8.00
5.20
T7
1.25
0.48
61.82
4.40
7.40
6.60
3.60
T8
1.66
0.56
66.04
3.60
7.60
6.20
3.40
S.Em (±)
0.01
0.01
0.61
0.06
0.07
0.07
0.05
CD at 5%
0.04
0.02
1.77
0.16
0.20
0.20
0.15
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 1 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 3 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
8.
Phoenix roebeleni
The effect of different press drying techniques on pygmy date
palm leaves (Table-8) revealed that maximum percent of
moisture loss was noted in T1 (46.70%), which is statistically
far with T6 (38.77%). Highest sensory score for colour was
recorded in T2 and T3 (8.20), which are significantly far with
T8 (5.80). Uppermost texture score was recorded in T2 (8.20),
whereas lower most observed in T8 (6.60). Chief score for
brittleness was noted in T6 (8.40), which is significantly far
with T8 (5.80). Principal score for appearance was noted in T2
and T4 (8.0), which is significantly far with T8 (6.0).
Table 8: Effect of press drying on pygmy date palm (Phoenix roebeleni) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
2.27
1.21
46.70
6.80
7.60
7.40
6.80
T2
2.70
1.56
42.25
8.20
8.20
8.00
8.00
T3
2.76
1.65
40.19
8.20
7.00
7.00
7.60
T4
2.52
1.41
43.89
7.80
8.00
7.80
8.00
T5
2.68
1.47
45.36
7.00
7.40
6.40
7.20
T6
2.46
1.50
38.77
7.20
7.60
8.40
6.80
T7
2.34
1.36
42.03
6.40
7.20
7.60
7.60
T8
2.29
1.24
46.24
5.80
6.60
5.80
6.00
S.Em (±)
0.02
0.01
0.43
0.07
0.07
0.07
0.07
CD at 5%
0.07
0.04
1.25
0.20
0.21
0.20
0.20
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 4 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 5 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 30 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 40 hrs)
9.
Tagetes spp.
The data presented in Table-9 indicates that percent moisture
loss was found maximum in T8 (83.66%), which is
significantly far with T6 (73.75%) in different press dried
techniques of marigold leaves. Utmost sensory score for
colour was recorded in T3 (8.40), which is statistically far with
T6 (4.0). Highest texture score found in T4 (7.60) and least
was observed in T6 (3.40). Peak brittleness score was recorded
in T3 (7.60), which is significantly far with T2 (4.60).
Uppermost score for appearance was noted in T3 (8.0), which
is statistically far with T2 (4.20).
Table 9: Effect of press drying on marigold (Tagetes spp.) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
0.87
0.16
81.92
4.80
5.40
6.60
5.00
T2
0.77
0.15
80.67
4.40
4.80
4.60
4.20
T3
0.59
0.13
77.61
8.40
6.40
7.60
8.00
T4
0.88
0.17
80.68
8.00
7.60
7.00
7.60
T5
0.89
0.15
82.86
7.00
5.60
5.60
6.80
T6
0.67
0.18
73.75
4.00
3.40
7.40
4.60
T7
0.54
0.11
79.56
5.00
4.40
6.80
5.40
T8
0.75
0.12
83.66
6.20
6.00
4.80
6.00
S.Em (±)
0.01
0.00
0.80
0.06
0.06
0.06
0.06
CD at 5%
0.02
0.00
2.30
0.18
0.17
0.18
0.18
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 4 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 5 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 18 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 26 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 34 hrs)
10.
Areca lutescens
A perusal of data on different press drying techniques of areca
palm leaves (Table-10) revealed that maximum moisture loss
percent was noted in T5 (63.39%), which is statistically far
with T6 (48.72%). Utmost sensory score for colour was noted
in T3 (7.60), whereas least found in T2 and T5 (4.60). Peak

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 154 ~
score for texture was recorded in T3 (7.60), which is
significantly far with T6 (4.20). Principal score for brittleness
was noted in T6 (7.60), which is statistically far with T5
(4.80). Uppermost score for appearance was recorded in T3
(7.40), whereas lower most found in T2 and T8 (5.80).
Table 10: Effect of press drying on areca palm (Areca lutescens) leaves
Treatments
FW (g)
DW (g)
ML (%)
Colour
Texture
Brittleness
Appearance
T1
1.58
0.62
60.71
6.60
6.60
6.20
6.80
T2
2.26
0.84
62.94
4.60
5.60
6.40
5.80
T3
1.35
0.61
55.05
7.60
7.60
7.40
7.40
T4
1.79
0.73
59.38
6.60
7.00
6.40
7.00
T5
1.55
0.57
63.39
4.60
5.60
4.80
6.00
T6
1.89
0.97
48.72
6.40
4.20
7.60
7.20
T7
1.45
0.66
54.37
7.20
6.60
7.20
7.00
T8
1.49
0.60
59.65
5.80
7.40
5.60
5.80
S.Em (±)
0.02
0.01
0.57
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.06
CD at 5%
0.05
0.02
1.66
0.18
0.20
0.18
0.19
(T1- Wooden pressed, T2- Iron pressed, T3- Tiles pressed in MO for 2 min, T4- Tiles pressed in MO for 3 min, T5- Tiles pressed in
MO for 4 min, T6- Tiles pressed in HAO for 12 hrs, T7- Tiles pressed in HAO for 20 hrs, T8- Tiles pressed in HAO for 28 hrs)
The fresh weight of samples found insignificant due to
homogeneous collection of material for press drying. In few
crops, it might have varied due to varying selection of plant
samples. These results are in accordance with Yadlod et al.,
(2016) [12]. Dry weight of flowers was significantly influenced
by different drying treatments. These results are in accordance
with Renuka et al., (2016) [8]. Mainly heat energy is added in
the course of press drying through various techniques in order
to shorten the pressing time. Among them, wooden press
recorded maximum moisture loss percent in mahogany tree
(52.33%) and pygmy date palm (46.70%) foliage. Still now,
wooden press is most popular and familiar method of
preserving the plant samples. In this method due to pressure
of wooden press, blotting sheets might have observed
moisture from the plant samples and get dried. Here it’s not
possible to maintain the shape of flowers, very slow and time
taking process. It takes few days to weeks depending upon the
plant samples to get dry. Tiles pressed sample in microwave
oven drier recorded maximum moisture loss percent in
foliages of mussaenda (74.20%), rose (55.87%), earpod wattle
(58.68%) and areca palm (63.39%). Several kinds of flower
presses are available. Electronically produced microwaves
might have liberated moisture from the plant samples by
agitating the water molecule. The advantage of this method is
we can get finished product in minutes and colour is more
vibrant than the traditional pressing. Tiles pressed sample in
hot air oven drier recorded maximum moisture loss percent in
foliages of kadamba tree (66.31%), hibiscus (78.22%), pride
of India (66.04%) and marigold (83.66%). Electrically
produced hot air might have removed the moisture from plant
samples and get dried. It will take hours to few days to get
dried depending upon the plant samples. These results are in
confirmation with findings of Singh and Dhaduk (2005) [11],
Singh et al., (2017) [10] in local weed flora of south Gujarat
and Imtiyaz et al., (2012) [2] in some genera of Kashmir
valley.
The qualitative characteristics i.e. colour, texture, brittleness
and appearance of the dried flowers were influenced
significantly by different drying treatments. Colour plays
important role in dehydration to obtain good aesthetic quality
of dried flower products (Sharma et al., 2007) [9]. Up to
certain duration of drying the texture score found increasing
after that decreasing trend was observed and surface texture
turned to rough importantly at longer duration of drying.
Prolonged drying duration recorded maximum brittleness
scores in dried flowers, which could be attributed to excessive
loss in moisture (Kumari et al., 2017) [4]. The final moisture
content in the flowers and foliages after dehydration
influences quality as appearance (Mishra et al., 2014) [5].
Before drying After drying
Plate 1: Iron press dried rose (Rosa spp.) leaves

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 155 ~
Plate 2: Microwave oven press dried hibiscus (Hibiscus rosa-sinensis) leaves
Plate 3: Iron press dried mahogany tree (Swietenia mahagoni) leaves
Before drying After drying
Plate 4: Microwave oven press dried earpod wattle tree (Acacia auriculiformis) leaves
Plate 5: Iron press dried pride of India tree (Lagerstroemia speciosa) leaves

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 156 ~
Plate 6: Iron press dried pygmy date palm (Phoenix roebeleni) leaves
Plate 7: Microwave oven press dried marigold (Tagetes spp.) leaves
Before drying After drying
Plate 8: Microwave oven press dried areca palm (Areca lutescens) leaves
Plate 9: Microwave oven Press dried mussaenda (Mussaenda erythrophylla) leaves

The Pharma Innovation Journal
http://www.thepharmajournal.com
~ 157 ~
Conclusion
Plate 10: Microwave oven press dried kadamba tree (Anthocephalus cadamba) leaves
Evaluation of local weed flora of south Gujarat for dry
From the results of above experiment, it can be concluded that
iron press found suitable technique for press drying mahogany
tree, lagerstroemia tree and rose leaves. Tiles pressed in MO
for 1 min found most suitable technique for kadamba tree
leaves, 2 min found ideal for mussaenda leaves, 3 min found
best suitable technique for hibiscus and areca palm leaves, 4
min found ideal for marigold leaves. Both iron pressed and
tiles pressed in MO for 3 min found suitable for earpod wattle
tree leaves and 4 min found appropriate for pygmy date palm
leaves.
Reference
1.
Christie G. Florage Freeze Dried Flowers 2010 [Website:
http://www.florage.com/freeze-dried-flowers.html],
[Visited on 01 June 2019].
2.
Imtiyaz, Nazki T, Lone NH, Qadri ZA, Rather ZA.
Evaluation of dehydration techniques for product
diversification in floral craft in some genera of Kashmir
valley. Journal of Ornamental Horticulture 2012; 15(3,
4):259-265.
3.
Jean L, Lesley G. The complete guide to drying and
preserving flowers 1982 [Webb and Bower Ltd, England]
[Visited on 30 December 2018].
4.
Kumari S, Kashyap B, Gupta YC. Studies on microwave
oven drying of Gomphrena globosa L. ‘Magenta’ and
‘White’. Indian Journal of Horticulture 2017;4(1):146-
149.
5.
Mishra S, Dwivedi AK, Kulshreshtha K. To study the
effect of texture of flower petal and moisture content
during floral dehydration. International Journal of Latest
Research in Science and Technology 2014;3(2):144-146.
6.
Murugan PA, Thiyagarajan G, Ramesh K. Dry flower
technology 2007 [Website: http://www.techno-
preneur.nt/information-desk/sciencetech
magazine/2007/Dec07/Dry-flower.pdf] [Visited on 25
December 2018].
7.
Raj D, Gupta PK. Standardizing dehydration technology
for ornamental herbaceous plants from outer Himalayas.
Journal of Ornamental Horticulture 2005;8(1):53-55.
8.
Renuka, Moond SK, Mishra A, Jain SK, Arya CK. Effect
of drying techniques and embedding media on dried
flower quality of Rose (Rosa chinensis Jacq.) and Water
Lily (Nymphaea alba L.). HortFlora Research Spectrum
2016;5(4):289-294.
9.
Sharma BK, Dhiman YD, Rajesh SR, Thakur BP. Dry-
flower making: a potential cottage industry in Himachal
Pradesh. MFP News 2007;17(3):5-8.
10.
Singh A, Bhandari A, Chhatrola HN, Patel BN.
flower products. Current Agriculture Research Journal
2017;5(3):292-296.
11.
Singh A, Dhaduk BK. Effect of dehydration techniques
in some selected flowers. Journal of Ornamental
Horticulture 2005;8(2):155-156.
12.
Yadlod SS, Dalal SR, Nagare PK. Effect of harvest
stages, cultivars and drying methods on weight and
quality of dry Dutch rose flowers. International Journal of
Processing and Post Harvest Technology 2016;7(1):60-
66.