4.7 Article

Physicochemical and functional properties of protein concentrates from pulses

Journal

FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
Volume 52, Issue 1, Pages 445-451

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2012.12.009

Keywords

Physicochemical properties; Functional properties; Pulses; Protein concentrates

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The physicochemical and functional properties of protein concentrates from peas, lentils, navy beans, chickpeas, and defatted chickpeas were investigated. Protein concentrates were prepared using a laboratory wet milling procedure. Chemical composition and colour of the protein concentrates were significantly different among the various pulses. Functional properties of the chickpea protein concentrates, including water hydration capacity, foaming capacity, and emulsion capacity, were improved significantly after a defatting step was added prior to the fractionation process. Navy bean protein concentrate had the largest foaming capacity, whilst chickpea protein concentrates had the smallest. Protein concentrates from lentils had the most stable foams after 120 min, whilst those from chickpeas had the least stable foams. Navy bean protein concentrate also had the highest emulsion capacity, whilst pea protein concentrates had the poorest. Protein content of the protein concentrates was positively correlated, whilst the fat content was negatively correlated with foaming capacity (r=0.663, p<0.001 and r=-0.712, p<0.001, respectively). Water hydration capacity of the protein concentrates was significantly correlated with ash content (r=0.597, p<0.01), fat absorption (r=0.535, p<0.01), foaming capacity (r=0.775, p<0.001) and foam stability at 120 min (r=0.595, p<0.01). Ash content and foaming capacity were significantly correlated with emulsion capacity (r=0.497, p<0.05, and r=0.552, p<0.01, respectively). Crown Copyright (C) 2012 Published by 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

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available