4.7 Review

Structure, properties, and potential applications of waxy tapioca starches - A review

期刊

TRENDS IN FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 83, 期 -, 页码 225-234

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LONDON
DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.11.022

关键词

Tapioca; Cassava; Waxy starch; Clean-label; Freeze-thaw stability; Chain-length distribution; Retrogradation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Waxy tapioca starches, successfully developed less than two decades ago, have unique function alines. In Africa, cassava is principally used as a staple food, whereas in Asia, cassava is mostly processed into starch. Tapioca starches, which are isolated from cassava, are heavily traded comparable to maize, potato and wheat starches. Scope and approach: This review aims to highlight the properties of waxy tapioca starches compared to normal taopica starch and to waxy starches from other botanical sources and draw attention to food industries that can benefit from the unique functionalities of waxy tapioca starches. Key findings and conclusions: Pastes of native waxy tapioca starches perform well in refrigerated and frozen foods as opposed to waxy starches and non-waxy starches from maize, wheat, and potato. Unmodified waxy tapioca starch yields thick, clear pastes with good shelf life. The cold-temperature stability of waxy tapioca is correlated to its amylopectin structure with a relatively high proportion of short branch chains of DP 6-12. The high stability of waxy tapioca starch under freeze-thaw conditions and refrigerated storage indicates that the starch is resistant to retrogradation. With a rising demand for clean-label foods by consumers and markets, the cold temperature stability of waxy tapioca starch offers an attractive alternative to the use of chemically or genetically modified starch in frozen/refrigerated foods. In this review, we undertake to gain insight on waxy tapioca starches and other starches in order to identify approaches to further develop solutions to make products with desired functionality.

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

4.7
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