4.5 Article

Investigation of the optimal production conditions for egg white hydrolysates and physicochemical characteristics

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-MYSORE
卷 60, 期 5, 页码 1600-1611

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s13197-023-05708-0

关键词

Response surface methodology (RSM); Egg white hydrolysate (EWH); Degree of hydrolysis (DH); Bioactive

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to identify the optimal production conditions for egg white protein hydrolysate (EWH) using response surface methodology and evaluate its physicochemical and biological activity. The results showed that the optimal economic production conditions were a substrate concentration of 12.5%, enzyme content of 7.5%, and hydrolysis time of 100 min, resulting in a degree of hydrolysis of 13.51%. Additionally, the study demonstrated that EWH has good antioxidant activity, which is dose-dependent. This study provides a theoretical basis for the future research and application of EWH.
This study aimed to investigate the potential of egg white protein hydrolysate (EWH) as a functional food by identifying the optimum production conditions for EWH with response surface methodology (the results of the sensory evaluation were considered as an essential quality indicator). At the same time, its physicochemical and biological activity was also evaluated. The optimal economic production conditions were selected: substrate concentration of 12.5%, enzyme content of 7.5%, and hydrolysis time at 100 min. The degree of hydrolysis (DH %) was 13.51%. In addition, to the better acceptance of the evaluation, it also helps to reduce the production cost of the protein hydrolysate, which is beneficial to future processing and applications. The antioxidant capacity experiments showed that EWH has good antioxidant activity, which presents a dose-dependent relationship. Hence, this study provides a theoretical basis for future research and application of EWH for processing applications, including dietary supplementation.

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

4.5
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