4.6 Article

Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Blue Whiting (Micromesistius poutassou); Functional and Bioactive Properties

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE
卷 76, 期 1, 页码 C14-C20

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2010.01877.x

关键词

ACE; bioactive properties; blue whiting; enzyme hydrolysis; functional properties

资金

  1. Icelandic Centre for Research (ICR)
  2. AVS of Ministry of Fisheries in Iceland
  3. Project SEAFOODplus [FOOD-CT-2004-506359]
  4. AVS
  5. European Union

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Functional and biochemical properties of fish protein hydrolysates (FPH) from blue whiting (BW) were studied. FPH (2.5%, 5%, 10%, and 15% degree of hydrolysis [DH]) were made from isolated proteins from headed and gutted BW with Alcalase 2.4 L. The properties of dried BW mince and protein isolate compared to 4 reference proteins (soy and milk protein) were studied: color, solubility, water-holding capacity (WHC), oil-binding capacity (OBC), emulsion capacity (EC), and emulsion stability (ES). The angiotensin I-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitory activities of the soluble fraction of BW powders were also investigated. Furthermore, the products were characterized by analyzing their chemical composition. Chemical composition, solubility, OBC, and EC of the BW powders was significantly (P < 0.05) different with different DH, while color, ES, and WHC were not significantly (P > 0.05) different. Salt content of the FPH was high (4% to 19%) and increased with increased DH. Protein solubility varied from 10% to 70% and increased with increased DH. WHC of the FPH was around 97% and was higher than that of all the reference proteins tested. OBC decreased with increased DH (from 3.5 to 2.1 g oil/g protein) and was higher than OBC of the soy and milk proteins (1.6 to 1.9 g oil/g protein). EC of FPH was similar or lower than the reference proteins. ES of FPH (60% to 90%) was similar to or lower than soy and whey proteins (60% to 98%) but higher than casein (20%). ACE inhibition activity increased as DH was increased.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据