4.6 Article

Adhesive Performance of Sorghum Protein Extracted from Sorghum DDGS and Flour

期刊

JOURNAL OF POLYMERS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
卷 19, 期 3, 页码 755-765

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10924-011-0305-5

关键词

Sorghum protein; DDGS; Adhesion; Water resistance; Amino acids

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Distillers dried grains with solubles (DDGS) is the main co-product from grain-based ethanol production. The objective of this research was to compare the adhesive performance of three types of sorghum proteins: acetic acid-extracted sorghum protein from DDGS (PI), aqueous ethanol-extracted sorghum protein from DDGS (PII) and acetic acid-extracted sorghum protein from sorghum flour (PF). Physicochemical properties including amino acid composition, and rheological, thermal and morphological properties also were characterized. Results showed that PI had the best adhesion performance in terms of dry, wet and soak adhesion strength, followed by PF and PII. The wet strength of PI at a concentration of 12% protein assembled at 150 A degrees C was 3.15 MPa, compared to 2.17 MPa and 2.59 MPa for PII and PF, respectively. DSC thermograms indicated that the PF protein isolates contained higher levels of carbohydrates than PI and PII; such non-protein contaminants in the PF isolate could be the reason for its lower adhesion strength than PI. In addition, PI might have more hydrophobic amino acids aligned at the protein-wood interface than PII, which could explain the better water resistance of PI. The optimum sorghum protein concentration and pressing temperature for maximum adhesion strength was 12% and 150 A degrees C. PI had a significantly higher wet strength (3.15 MPa) than unmodified soy protein (1.63 MPa for soy protein). The high percentage of hydrophobic amino acids in PI (57%) was likely a key factor in the increased water resistance of PI compared with soy protein (36% hydrophobic amino acids). These results indicated that sorghum protein has huge potential as an alternative to petroleum-based adhesives.

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

4.6
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