4.7 Article

Characterization of Flavor of Whey Protein Hydrolysates

Journal

JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 58, Issue 10, Pages 6318-6327

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jf100009u

Keywords

Whey protein hydrolysate; enzymatic hydrolysis; degree of hydrolysis; bitter taste; whey protein flavor

Funding

  1. Synergy Flavors (Chicago, II)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Twenty-two whey protein hydrolysates (WPH) obtained from 8 major global manufacturers were characterized by instrumental analysis and descriptive sensory analysis. Proximate analysis, size exclusion chromatography, and two different degrees of hydrolysis (DH) analytical methods were also conducted. WPH were evaluated by a trained descriptive sensory panel, and volatile compounds were extracted by solid phase microextraction (SPME) followed by gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and gas chromatography olfactometry (GC-O). Eleven representative WPH were selected, and 15 aroma active compounds were quantified by GC-MS via the generation of external standard curves. Potato/brothy, malty, and animal flavors and bitter taste were key distinguishing sensory attributes of WPH. Correlations between bitter taste intensity, degree of hydrolysis (using both methods), and concentration of different molecular weight peptides were documented, with high DH samples having high bitter taste intensity and a high concentration of low molecular weight peptides and vice versa. The four aroma-active compounds out of 40 detected by GC-O present at the highest concentration and with consistently high odor activity values in WPH were Strecker derived products, dimethyl sulfide (DMS), 3-methyl butanal, 2-methyl butanal, and methional. Orthonasal thresholds of WPH were lower (p < 0.05) than basic taste thresholds suggesting that aromatics and bitter taste are both crucial to control in WPH food applications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available