4.7 Article

Preparation and characterization of active and intelligent packaging films based on cassava starch and anthocyanins from Lycium ruthenicum Murr

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2019.05.029

关键词

Active packaging film; Anthocyanins; Antioxidant; Cassava starch; Lycium ruthenicum Murr

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31571788]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu Province [BK20151310]
  3. Qing Lan Project of Jiangsu Province and High Level Talent Support Program of Yangzhou University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lycium ruthenicum Murr. is a functional food with abundant anthocyanins. Since anthocyanins can change colors under different pH conditions, pH-sensitive packaging films were developed based on cassava starch and L. ruthenicum anthocyanins (LRA). Effect of LRA content on the physical, structural, antioxidant and pH sensitive properties of starch-LRA films were evaluated. In addition, starch-LRA films were applied to monitor the freshness of pork. Spectroscopic analysis showed LRA contained six kinds of anthocyanins. The incorporation of LRA significantly enhanced the water vapor and ultraviolet-visible light barrier ability, tensile strength and antioxidant potential of starch film. Moreover, the barrier, antioxidant and pH-sensitive properties of starch-LRA films were closely related with LRA content. However, the thermal stability of starch film was not affected by LRA Fourier transform infrared and X-ray diffraction analyses revealed intermolecular interactions (hydrogen bonds) formed between starch and LRA in the films. Starch-LRA films are pH-sensitive and could change their colors in different buffer solutions (pH 2-13). When applied to monitor the freshness of pork, starch-LRA films exhibited remarkable color variations with the quality change of pork. Our results suggested starch-LRA films could be used as active and intelligent packaging films in 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