Effect of Different Classes of Proteases on Techno-functional Properties of Pea Protein Isolates

Capa

Citar

Texto integral

Acesso aberto Acesso aberto
Acesso é fechado Acesso está concedido
Acesso é fechado Somente assinantes

Resumo

The effect of four enzyme preparations: bacillolysin, agroprot, protozyme and protozyme C (Russia) on solubility, emulsifying activity, emulsion stability, foaming and foam stability of isolates preparated from two varieties of peas was studied. It is shown that treatment with enzymes can increase the solubility of isolates at pH 5 by more than 7 times, the index of emulsifying activity at pH 5 by 1.5 to 2 times, and at pH 6 by almost 1.5 times; the stability index of the emulsion increased by about 20% at pH 5, and by 1.7 times (in one of the varieties) at pH 6; foaming increased by 2.4 to 3 times at pH 5, and at pH 6 by 1.8 to 3.7 times; foam stability increased by 25 to 33% at pH 5 and by more than 1.5 times (in one of the varieties) at pH 6. The results obtained made it possible to select an enzyme preparation (bacterial alkaline serine protease) to improve the parameters of pea protein isolates intended for the manufacture of analogues of fermented milk products.

Texto integral

Acesso é fechado

Sobre autores

I. Kravchenko

Research Center of Biotechnology of the RAS

Autor responsável pela correspondência
Email: ink71@yandex.ru

Bach Institute of Biochemistry

Rússia, Moscow, 119071

V. Furalyov

Research Center of Biotechnology of the RAS

Email: ink71@yandex.ru

Bach Institute of Biochemistry

Rússia, Moscow, 119071

E. Kostyleva

All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Food Biotechnology — a Branch of the Federal Research Center for Nutrition, Biotechnology and Food Safety

Email: ink71@yandex.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 111033

A. Sereda

All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Food Biotechnology — a Branch of the Federal Research Center for Nutrition, Biotechnology and Food Safety

Email: ink71@yandex.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 111033

E. Kurbatova

All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Food Biotechnology — a Branch of the Federal Research Center for Nutrition, Biotechnology and Food Safety

Email: ink71@yandex.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 111033

N. Tsurikova

All-Russian Scientific Research Institute of Food Biotechnology — a Branch of the Federal Research Center for Nutrition, Biotechnology and Food Safety

Email: ink71@yandex.ru
Rússia, Moscow, 111033

E. Pshennikova

Research Center of Biotechnology of the RAS

Email: ink71@yandex.ru

Bach Institute of Biochemistry

Rússia, Moscow, 119071

T. Boyarintseva

Research Center of Biotechnology of the RAS

Email: ink71@yandex.ru

Bach Institute of Biochemistry

Rússia, Moscow, 119071

V. Popov

Research Center of Biotechnology of the RAS

Email: ink71@yandex.ru

Bach Institute of Biochemistry

Rússia, Moscow, 119071

A. Fedorov

Research Center of Biotechnology of the RAS

Email: ink71@yandex.ru

Bach Institute of Biochemistry

Rússia, Moscow, 119071

Bibliografia

  1. Tesarowicz I., Zawiślak A., Maciejaszek I., Surówka K. // International J. Food Sciences. 2022. V. 2022. P. 6187441. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6187441
  2. Schlegel K., Sontheimer K., Eisner P., Schweiggert-Weisz U. // Food Science & Nutrition. 2019. V. 8. P. 3041–3051. https://doi.org/10.1002/fsn3.1286
  3. Meinlschmidt P., Schweiggert-Weisz U., Brode V., Eisner P. // LWT — Food Science & Technology. 2016. V. 68. P. 707–716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2016.01.023
  4. Yust M. M., Pedroche J., Millán-Linares M. C., Alcaide-Hidalgo J.M., Millán F. // Food Chemistry. 2010. V. 122. № 4. P. 1212–1217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2013.11.053
  5. Yust M. M., Millán-Linares M. D. C., Alcaide-Hidalgo J. M., Millán F., Pedroche J. // Food Science & Technology International. 2013. V. 19. P. 217–223. https://doi.org/10.1177/1082013212442197
  6. Paraman I., Hettiarachchy N. S., Schaefer C., Beck M. I. // Cereal Chemistry. 2007. V. 84. P. 343–349. https://doi.org/10.1094/CCHEM-84-4-0343
  7. Neves V. A., Lourenço E. J., da Silva M. A. // Arch. Latinoam. Nutr. 1996. V. 46. № 3. P. 238–242.
  8. Higgins T. J., Chandler P. M., Randall P. J., Spencer D., Beach L. R., Blagrove R. J., Kortt A. A., Inglis A. S. // J. Biol. Chem. 1986. V. 261. P. 11124–11130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(18)67357-0
  9. Stone A. K., Karalash A., Tyler R. T., Warkentin T. D., Nickerson N. T. // Food Research International. 2015. V. 76. P. 31–38. doi: 10.1016/j.foodres.2014.11.017
  10. Asen N. D., Aluko R. E. // Front Nutr. 2022. V. 9. P. 852225. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnut.2022.852225
  11. Ivanova P., Kalaydzhiev H., Dessev T. T., Silva C. L. M., Rustad T., Chalova V. I. J. // Food Sci. Technol. 2018. V. 55. № 9. P. 3792–3798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-018-3311-y
  12. Nielsen P. M., Petersen D., Dambmann C. // J. Food Sci. 2001. V. 66. № 5. P. 642–646. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2001.tb04614.x
  13. Adler-Nissen J. Enzymic Hydrolysis of Food Proteins. // New York: Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, 1986. 427 р.
  14. Matoba T. // Agric Biol Ghem. 1972. V. 36. P. 1423–1443. https://doi.org/10.1080/00021369.1972.10860410
  15. Barac M., Cabrilo S., Pesiesic M., Stanojevic S., Zilic S., Macej O., Ristic N. // Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010. V. 1. P. 4973–4990. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms11124973
  16. Robinson G. H.; Domoney C. // Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2021. V. 158. P. 353–362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2020.11.020
  17. Klost M., Drusch S. // Food Hydrocoll. 2019. V. 86. P. 134–140. https://doi.org/10.14279/depositonce-9553

Arquivos suplementares

Arquivos suplementares
Ação
1. JATS XML
Baixar
2. Fig. 1. Laemmli electrophoresis of protein isolates obtained from pea varieties Rodnik (a, c, d, g) and Fokor (b, d, f, h) and treated with 8.9 units/ml BNP (a, b), 1.5 units/ml GKP (c, d), 1.5 units/ml GSP (d, f) and 1.5 units/ml BSCP (g, h): 1 — untreated isolate, 2 — 15 min, 3 — 30 min, 4 — 1 h, 5 — 2 h of treatment; M — molecular weight markers.

Baixar (258KB)
Metadados
3. Fig. 2. Effect of treatment with BNP, GKP, GSHP and BSCHP on the solubility of pea protein isolates of the Rodnik (a, c) and Fokor (b, d) varieties at pH 5.0 (a, b) and 6 (c, d) and different treatment times: 1 - no treatment, 2 - 15 min; 3 - 30 min; 4 - 1 h; 5 - 2 h.

Baixar (735KB)
Metadados
4. Fig. 3. Effect of treatment with BNP, GKP, GSHP and BSCHP on the emulsifying activity index of pea protein isolates of the Rodnik (a, c) and Fokor (b, d) varieties at pH 5.0 (a, b) and 6.0 (c, d) with different treatment times: 1 - no treatment, 2 - 15 min; 3 - 30 min; 4 - 1 h; 5 - 2 h.

Baixar (678KB)
Metadados
5. Fig. 4. Effect of BNP, GKP, GSHP and BSCP treatment on the emulsion stability index of pea protein isolates of the Rodnik (a, c) and Fokor (b, d) varieties at pH 5 (a, b) and 6 (c, d) with different treatment times: 1 — no treatment, 2 — 15 min; 3 — 30 min; 4 — 1 h; 5 — 2 h.

Baixar (670KB)
Metadados
6. Fig. 5. Effect of BNP, GKP, GSHP and BSCP treatment on foaming of pea protein isolates of the Rodnik (a, c) and Fokor (b, d) varieties at pH 5 (a, b) and 6 (c, d) with different treatment times: 1 — no treatment; 2 — 15 min; 3 — 30 min; 4 — 1 h; 5 — 2 h.

Baixar (678KB)
Metadados
7. Fig. 6. Effect of treatment with BNP, GKP, GSHP and BSHP on the foam stability of pea protein isolates of the Rodnik (a, c) and Fokor (b, d) varieties at pH 5.0 (a, b) and 6 (c, d) for different treatment times: 1 - no treatment, 2 - 15 min; 3 - 30 min; 4 - 1 h; 5 - 2 h.

Baixar (830KB)
Metadados

Declaração de direitos autorais © Russian Academy of Sciences, 2024