4.7 Article

Viscoelastic and fragmentation characters of model bolus from polysaccharide gels after instrumental mastication

期刊

FOOD HYDROCOLLOIDS
卷 25, 期 5, 页码 1210-1218

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2010.11.008

关键词

Model bolus; Polysaccharide gels; Viscoelasticity; Particulate size; Structural homogeneity; Saliva miscibility

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Model bolus from polysaccharide gels was investigated by the stress-relaxation tests and particulate size analyses. Using two gelling agents, gellan gum and a composite of gellan/psyllium seed gums, gels with different physical properties (i.e., elastic gellan single gels and plastic composite gels) and gel hardness were prepared. Gels were masticated instrumentally in the presence or absence of artificial saliva to prepare model bolus. Data from the stress-relaxation tests analyzed by 5-element mechanical model showed that difference between two Maxwell-bodies in the elasticity for the composite gels was generally smaller than that for gellan single gels when compared at equivalent gel hardness and was less influenced by the addition level of saliva. For each gel sample, cumulative particulate size distribution of model bolus was reduced logarithmically with a normal curve regardless of the addition level of saliva. Mean particulate size of model bolus from the composite gels was generally larger than that for gellan single gels when compared at equivalent gel hardness and was less influenced by the addition level of saliva. Based on the particulate size distribution of model bolus, coefficients of skewness and kurtosis calculated for the composite gels tended to be larger than those for gellan single gels when compared at equivalent gel hardness. Results indicated higher structural homogeneity of model bolus from the composite gels, which is related to higher miscibility with saliva. Structural homogeneity should be the key for texture design of nursing-care foods, particularly for dysphagia. (C) 2010 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