4.7 Article

Optimization of ultrasonic-assisted enzymatic extraction of kiwi starch and evaluation of its structural, physicochemical, and functional characteristics

期刊

ULTRASONICS SONOCHEMISTRY
卷 81, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ultsonch.2021.105866

关键词

Kiwi starch; Ultrasonic-assisted enzymatic extraction; Characteristics; Antioxidant capacity; Digestive resistance

资金

  1. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2020M673505]
  2. innovative talent promotion program-technology innovation team of Shaanxi [2020TD-047, 2019TD-006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The new ultrasound-assisted enzymatic extraction method for kiwifruit starch has been optimized to achieve high yield and purity. The extracted starch has low gelatinization enthalpy, high peak viscosity, rich in polyphenols, and high contents of amylose and resistant starch. This highly efficient extraction method opens up possibilities for various applications in the food industry.
A new ultrasound-assisted enzymatic extraction (UAEE) method of starch from kiwifruit was established and optimized using response surface methodology (RSM). Under optimal conditions (the pectinase-to-cellulase-to-papain ratio = 1:2:1 g/kg, solid/liquid ratio = 1:6.68, extraction pH = 5.23, ultrasound power = 300 W, and extraction temperature = 52 ?), the kiwi starch (KS) yield was about 4.25%, and the starch content of KS was 873.23 mg/g. Compared to other extraction methods, UAEE can obtain KS with high yield and purity with a shorter extraction time and less solvent and enzyme. The extracted KS has a low gelatinization enthalpy (8.02 J/g) and a high peak viscosity (7933 cP), with obvious particle properties and low adhesion. In addition, KS is rich in polyphenols, has strong antioxidant activity, and has higher contents of amylose starch (30.74%) and resistant starch (60.18%). This study established a novel and highly efficient method for KS extraction and suggest several possible applications for KS in the food industry.

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