4.7 Article

Exploring in vitro gastric digestion of whey protein by time-domain nuclear magnetic resonance and magnetic resonance imaging

期刊

FOOD HYDROCOLLOIDS
卷 99, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2019.105348

关键词

Time-domain NMR; MRI; Whey protein; Gel; In vitro; Gastric digestion

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Gastric digestion is crucial for protein breakdown. Although it has been widely studied with in vitro models, verification in vivo remains a big challenge. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has the potential to bridge this gap. Our objective was to use the transverse relaxation time (T-2) and rate (R-2 = T-2(-1)) to monitor hydrolysis of protein-rich food during in vitro gastric digestion. Whey protein solution and heat-induced hydrogels were digested by means of simulated gastric fluid (SGF). Free amino groups (-NH2 groups) and protein concentration in the supernatant were measured. T-2 and R-2 of the digestion mixture were determined by time-domain nuclear magnetic resonance (TD-NMR) and MRI. Subsequently, relative amplitudes (TD-NMR) for different T-2 values and T-2 distribution (MRI) were determined. For the solution, protein concentration and T-2 did not change during digestion. For the gels, water in supernatant and gel phase could be discriminated on the basis of their T-2 values. During digestion, R-2 of supernatant correlated positively with protein (-NH2 groups) concentration in SGF. Also, the decrease in relative amplitude of gel fraction correlated linearly with the increase of supernatant protein concentration. MRI T-2-mapping showed similar associations between R-2 of supernatant and protein (-NH2 groups) concentration. In conclusion, T-2-measurements by TD-NMR and MRI can be used to monitor in vitro gastric digestion of whey protein gels; TD-NMR measurements contributed to interpreting the MRI data. Thus, MRI has high potential for monitoring in vivo gastric digestion and this should be further pursued.

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