4.7 Article

Physicochemical characteristics and antioxidant activities of non-starch polysaccharides from different kiwifruits

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.06.142

关键词

Kiwifruit; Polysaccharides; Structural characterization; Antioxidant activity

资金

  1. Scientific Research Foundation of Sichuan Agricultural University [03120321]
  2. Scientific Research Fund Project of Science & Technology Department of Sichuan Province [2018JY0149, 2018NZ0010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Non-starch polysaccharides are considered the main bioactive ingredients in kiwifruits. In order to well understand the chemical structures and antioxidant activities of non-starch polysaccharides from different varieties of kiwifruits (KPSs), the physicochemical characteristics and antioxidant activities of KPSs extracted by hot water extraction from Actinidia deliciosa cv. Hayward, A. chinensis cv. Hort16A, A. chinensis cv. Jinshi, A. chinensis cv. Hongshi, A. polygama, A. macrosperma, and A. arguta were investigated and compared. Results showed that extraction yields and contents of total uronic acids in KPSs ranged from 2.60% to 5.52%, and from 35.07% to 42.20%, respectively. Molecular weights and intrinsic viscosities of KPSs ranged from 1.405 x 10(5) to 1.620 x 10(6) Da, and from 0.34 dL/g to 1.24 dL/g, respectively. The dominant constituent monosaccharides of KPSs were galacturonic acid, arabinose, and galactose. Furthermore, KPSs from kiwifruits, especially KPSs extracted from A. arguta, exerted remarkable 2,2'-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid and nitric oxide radical scavenging activities, which might be partially attributed to their high content of unmethylated galacturonic acids. Results are helpful for better understanding of the chemical structures and antioxidant activities of KPSs, and KPSs had potential to be further explored as natural antioxidants for the application in the functional food industry. (C) 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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