4.5 Article

Differences in the functionality and characterization of kafirins extracted from decorticated sorghum flour or gluten meal treated with protease

Journal

JOURNAL OF CEREAL SCIENCE
Volume 73, Issue -, Pages 174-182

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcs.2016.12.009

Keywords

Kafirin extraction; Protease; Sorghum gluten meal; Wet-milling

Funding

  1. research group of Nutriomics
  2. CIDPRO from Tecnologico de Monterrey
  3. CONACyT [375643]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Kafirins have been extracted from several types of sorghums due to their potential use for production of gluten-free products. Nevertheless, the extraction of these proteins from wet-milled sorghum gluten meal (SGM) has not yet been explored. In this study, we investigated the differences in composition, color, molecular structures, functionality and in vitro protein digestibility of kafirin extracts obtained from dry-milled flour or SGM obtained from decorticated white sorghum treated with and without endopeptidic protease. Kafirins were extracted using aqueous ethanol and metabisulfite. Kafirin extracts from SGM presented higher protein purity (95% vs 86%), lower fat content (0.7% vs 2.0%), in vitro protein digestibility (89% vs 85%), and better water holding (2.8 vs 1.9 g/g) and fat absorption capacities (2.4 vs 1.6 g/g) compared to extracts from ground decorticated sorghum. Color was not affected by treatments. SDS-PAGE showed differences in the low molecular weight patterns of kafirin extracts obtained from SGM whereas FTIR analyses showed reduction of alpha-helical and beta-turn percentages and beta-sheet increment after extraction. The proposed protease treatment increased free amino nitrogen and emulsifying index of kafirins, but did not affect other functional properties. Thus, SGM represents a potential new feedstock for the extraction of food-grade kafirins. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available