4.7 Article

Influence of cyclodextrins on the gelation behavior of κ-carrageenan/konjac glucomannan composite gel

期刊

FOOD HYDROCOLLOIDS
卷 120, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodhyd.2021.106927

关键词

Konjac glucomannan; kappa-Carrageenan; Cyclodextrins; Rheological properties; Confocal laser scanning microscopy

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [32072170, 31571881]
  2. Funds for Innovation Team of Jinan [2018GXRC004]
  3. Special Funds for Taishan Scholars Project of Shandong Province, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study evaluated the effects of cyclodextrins (CDs) on the gelation behavior of x-carrageenan/konjac glucomannan (KC/KGM) composite gel. The results showed that CDs reduced viscosity and yield stress, while enhancing storage modulus of the gel. Methyl-beta-CD (M-beta-CD) had the most significant impact on improving gel structure flexibility.
The effects of cyclodextrins (CDs) on the gelation behavior of x-carrageenan/konjac glucomannan (KC/KGM) composite gel were evaluated. The steady shear rheology result showed that the incorporation of CDs reduced the apparent viscosity, yield stress (tau(0)) and consistency coefficient (K) of KC/KGM composite sol, the shear thinning of the sol was more pronounced. Methyl-beta-CD (M-beta-CD) exerted the greatest effect. The frequency sweep result showed that CDs enhanced the storage modulus of the composite gel and promoted the formation of more flexible gel structures. The improvement of M-beta-CD was more significant than other CDs. Confocal laser scanning microscope images showed that a continuous gel structure formed after the incorporation of alpha-CD, beta-CD or M-beta-CD. While the composite gel containing gamma-CD or HP-beta-CD showed an uneven and discontinuous structure. More hydrogen bond interaction in the gel system formed after the addition of CDs. The presence of CDs strongly contributed to improve the degradation temperature of KC/KGM composite gel and thermal stability.

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