4.7 Article

Effects of corn oil on glass transition temperatures of cassava starch

期刊

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
卷 85, 期 4, 页码 875-884

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.04.013

关键词

Glass transition; Cassava starch; Corn oil; Relaxation enthalpy

资金

  1. National Fund for Science and Technology FONACIT in Venezuela [G-2005000776]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Glass transition temperatures of cassava starch-corn oil blends were determined by means of differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and dynamic mechanical thermal analysis (DMTA), in a moisture content range of 4-35% (dry basis, d.b.). The samples were equilibrated at ambient temperature (25 degrees C) during 4 weeks. A sub-T-g endothermic peak, occurring between 45 and 60 degrees C, appeared in samples with relatively low moisture contents (less than: 14.4% (d.b.), 10.1% and 8.5% for added corn oil levels of 1.1, 4.5 and 6.6%, respectively). In correspondence with DSC measurements, secondary relaxation temperatures (T-beta) at around 55 C, measured by DMTA were also present at low moisture contents (less than: 18% (d.b.), 16% and 15% for added corn oil levels of 1.1, 4.5 and 6.6%, respectively). At intermediate moisture contents enthalpic relaxation events associated to ageing processes were evidenced by DSC first heating scans, while at higher moisture contents only the glass transition was exhibited by the samples. In all cases, increasing levels of added corn oil decreased the moisture content at which the samples exhibited the above described thermal events. The effect of water on glass transition temperatures (as determined during a DSC second heating scan and DMTA results) was well described by the Gordon-Taylor equation. It was found that cassava starch was better plasticized by water when the levels of added corn oil were decreased. The added corn oil was also found to be a plasticizer for cassava starch probably due to hydrophobic-hydrophilic type interactions with starch. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.7
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