4.2 Article

Enzymatic preparation of fructooligosaccharides-rich burdock syrup with enhanced antioxidative properties

期刊

ELECTRONIC JOURNAL OF BIOTECHNOLOGY
卷 40, 期 -, 页码 71-77

出版社

UNIV CATOLICA DE VALPARAISO
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejbt.2019.04.009

关键词

Antioxidant activity; Arctium; Burdock; Endo-inulinase; Enzymatic process; Fructooligosaccharides; Functional food; Fungitetraose; Hydroxyl radical; Polygalacturonase; Polyphenols; Tannase

资金

  1. Intergovernmental International Scientific and Technological Innovation Cooperation program, MOST, China [2018YFE0100400]
  2. Raising Program of Innovation Team for Tianjin Colleges and Universities, Tianjin, China [TD12-5002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Burdock (Arctium lappa L.) is a fructan-rich plant with prebiotic potential. The aim of this study was to develop an efficient enzymatic route to prepare fructooligosaccharides (FOS)-rich and highly antioxidative syrup using burdock root as a raw material. Results: Endo-inulinase significantly improved the yield of FOS 2.4-fold while tannase pretreatment further increased the yield of FOS 2.8-fold. Other enzymes, including endo-polygalacturonase, endo-glucanase and endo-xylanase, were able to increase the yield of total soluble sugar by 11.1% (w/w). By this process, a new enzymatic process for burdock syrup was developed and the yield of burdock syrup increased by 25% (w/w), whereas with FOS, total soluble sugars, total soluble protein and total soluble polyphenols were enhanced to 28.8%, 53.3%, 8.9% and 3.3% (w/w), respectively. Additionally, the scavenging abilities of DPPH and hydroxyl radicals, and total antioxidant capacity of the syrup were increased by 23.7%, 51.8% and 35.4%, respectively. Conclusions: Our results could be applied to the development of efficient extraction of valuable products from agricultural materials using enzyme-mediated methods. (C) 2019 Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso. Production and hosting by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.2
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