4.5 Article

Antioxidant, functional properties and amino acid composition of pepsin-derived protein hydrolysates from whole tilapia waste as influenced by pre-processing ice storage

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-MYSORE
卷 54, 期 13, 页码 4257-4267

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s13197-017-2897-9

关键词

Antioxidant; Amino acid composition; Functional properties; Bioactive fish protein hydrolysate; Tilapia fish waste; DNA nicking assay

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In recent years, hygienic handling of fishery waste is demanded owing to the fact that the fishery waste is an ideal raw material for the preparation of bioactive compounds. In the present study, the effect of pre-processing storage (at 4 +/- 2 A degrees C) of whole tilapia waste (WTW) on the properties of its protein hydrolysate derived using pepsin was evaluated. Fish protein hydrolysates (FPH) were prepared from 0, 24 and 48 h old ice stored WTW and designated as FPH-0, FPH-1, and FPH-2, respectively. Total amino acids, total essential amino acids and total hydrophobic amino acids of FPH samples increased with the storage period of raw material (WTW). Antioxidant activities such as DPPH (2, 2 diphynyl-1-picrylhydrazyl) free radical scavenging activity and ferric reducing power of FPH samples were dose dependent. FPH-0 had better antioxidant properties including linoleic acid peroxidation inhibition activity than FPH-1 and FPH-2. The DNA nicking assay revealed the protective effect of FPH preparations against Fenton's reaction mediated oxidative damage. FPH-2 had better emulsifying properties and foaming stability whereas the FPH-0 had relatively good foaming capacity. SDS-PAGE indicated the presence of peptides ranging from 116 to < 14.4 kDa in FPH-0 and less than 18 kDa in FPH-1 and FPH-2. The present study, clearly demonstrated that whole tilapia waste can effectively be converted to FPH and could be a potential ingredient in functional food and as a rich source of high-quality protein in animal feed formulations.

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

4.5
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