4.7 Article

Ascorbic acid-loaded gliadin nanoparticles as a novel nutraceutical formulation

期刊

FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 161, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2022.111869

关键词

Ascorbic acid; Antioxidant; Food; Gliadin; Nanoparticles; Nutraceutical

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, ascorbic acid was encapsulated in vegetable protein-based nanoparticles to enhance its stability and antioxidant features, and promote prolonged release. The results demonstrate the potential application of these nanoparticles as a novel nutraceutical formulation or as food fortificants.
Ascorbic acid (AA) is one of the foremost antioxidants. Unfortunately, its sensitivity to different external stimuli such as light, heat and oxygen are concrete limitations for its use. Various approaches have been investigated in order to circumvent this problem and enhance the stability of the active compound, besides promoting its use for different applications. In this investigation, AA was encapsulated in a vegetal protein-based matrix made up of gliadin, the prolamin obtained from wheat kernels, with the aim of proposing a novel nutraceutical formulation. The nanosystems were characterized by an average diameter of < 200 nm and a negative surface charge of similar to-40 mV. The samples were not destabilized after incubation at different temperatures (up to 70 degrees C) or after the pasteurization procedure. Suitable stability was also observed in NaCl 100 mM, as well as after cryodesiccation when 10 % w/v of mannose was used. The gliadin nanoparticles showed the ability to retain high amounts of AA, promoting its prolonged release in PBS and under simulated gastrointestinal conditions. The nanosystems enhanced the antioxidant features of the compound as compared to its free form and preserved its chemical stability following UV exposition. The results demonstrate the potential application of the investigated nanoparticles as a novel nutraceutical formulation or as food fortificants.

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