4.7 Article

Insight into the conformational and functional properties of myofibrillar protein modified by mulberry polyphenols

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 308, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.125592

关键词

Mulberry phenolic compounds; Myofibrillar protein; Conformation; Functionality; Meat protein

资金

  1. Province Natural Science Fund of Guangdong [2018A030313202, 2018A030313796]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31972074]
  3. Guangzhou Science and Technology Program key projects [201704020054, 201807010080, 201806040007]
  4. Guangdong Provincial Department of Agriculture Project [2018LM2154]
  5. Guangdong Science and Technology Project [2017A040405036]
  6. Guangdong Yangfan Program [2016YT03H079]
  7. R&D Projects in key Areas of Guangdong Province [2019B020212003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper investigated the conformational and functional properties of myofibrillar protein modified by five phenolic compounds, including cyanidin 3-O-glucoside, cyanidin 3-O-rutinoside, caffeic acid, quercetin and rutin, dominantly presented in mulberry polyphenols-enriched sausage. These phenolic compounds significantly affected the structure of myofibrillar protein as indicated by the remarkable losses of carbonyl and epsilon-NH2 and the obviously fluorescence quenching effect (P < 0.05). Modified myofibrillar protein increased antioxidative activity but decreased thermal stability. Myofibirllar protein modified with rutin had no change in thermal stability but improved emulsifying properties. Quercetin has little effect on secondary structure of myofibirlliar protein. Caffeic acid triggered the conversion of a-helix to beta-sheet in myofibrillar protein, and the resulted protein exhibited the strongest fluorescence quenching, solubility and antioxidant activity among all samples. Overall, the results suggested that all phenolic compounds involved in the changes of meat product quality, with caffeic acid and rutin being the most critical ones.

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