4.7 Article

Water droplet surface tension method - An innovation in quantifying saponin content in quinoa seed

Journal

FOOD CHEMISTRY
Volume 343, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128483

Keywords

Quinoa; Saponin; Water droplet surface tension; Afrosimetric foam test; Axisymmetric drop shape analysis; Quinoa seed quality

Funding

  1. AgriFutures Australia [PRJ-010057]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Researchers have developed an innovative method based on water droplet surface tension to accurately determine the saponin content in quinoa seeds. This method can effectively measure saponin concentrations ranging from 0.05 to 0.15 mg.ml(-1), providing quinoa processors with an accurate and inexpensive way to measure saponin concentration.
Quinoa surface borne saponins are bitter tasting anti-nutritional compounds that must be removed before consumption of the seed. To determine saponin content, the currently available standard afrosimetric foam test method only determines the presence of saponin via a rating of either 'acceptable' or 'unacceptable'. A water droplet surface tension (WDST) based innovative method was developed that can quantify saponin content in aqueous solutions with greater accuracy. The method comprised four steps: solution preparation, droplet creation, image capture and image analysis using Axisymmetric Drop Shape Analysis computer software. The method applied satisfactorily to saponin content up to 0.2 mg.ml(-1) as higher concentrations did not further reduce the surface tension. Results demonstrated that saponin concentration may be measured in the range 0.05 to 0.15 mg. ml(-1) (0.05 - 0.15% saponin by weight of seed). Validation of the WDST method on commercial and experimental samples offers quinoa processors an accurate inexpensive way of measuring saponin concentration to satisfy current seed quality specifications.

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