4.7 Article

Preparation and identification of antioxidant peptides from cottonseed proteins

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 352, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.129399

关键词

Cottonseed meal; Peptide; Antioxidant; Keap1-Nrf2 interaction; Molecular docking

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31901606]
  2. Natural Science Basic Research Program of Shaanxi [2020JQ-253]
  3. Research Foundation for Doctors of NWAFU [Z109021802]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed that cottonseed peptides prepared by enzymatic hydrolysis and microbial fermentation possess antioxidant properties, especially when the molecular weight is less than 3 kDa. The cottonseed protein hydrolysates are rich in specific amino acids, and certain peptides interact with the binding site of Keap1-Nrf2 interaction, indicating potential as functional ingredients in food products.
The objective of this study was to investigate the antioxidant properties of cottonseed peptides. Results indicated that cottonseed peptides prepared by enzymatic hydrolysis and microbial fermentation both showed antioxidant properties. The cottonseed protein enzymatic hydrolysate with molecular weight less than 3 kDa exhibited excellent DPPH, ABTS and hydroxyl radical scavenging activity and ferrous ion chelating activity with EC50 values of 0.49 ? 0.02, 2.05 ? 0.02, 2.21 ? 0.12, and 0.99 ? 0.03 mg/mL, respectively. Amino acid composition analysis revealed that cottonseed protein hydrolysates are rich in acidic/basic and aromatic amino acids. In addition, among the 19 identified cottonseed protein-derived peptides, YSNQNGRF had the lowest CDOCKER energy and formed hydrogen bonds with Tyr334, Arg380, Arg415, Ser508, and Ser602, and van der Waals interactions with Asn382, Tyr525, Gln530, and Ser555, which all located in the binding site of Keap1-Nrf2 interaction. These findings suggested that the antioxidant peptides from cottonseed protein had the potential as functional ingredients in foods.

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