4.5 Article

Water-soluble biopolymers from heat-treated and high pressure homogenized vegetable purees: investigating their emulsion forming and stabilizing capacities

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY-MYSORE
卷 60, 期 12, 页码 3043-3053

出版社

SPRINGER INDIA
DOI: 10.1007/s13197-023-05816-x

关键词

Water-soluble biopolymers; Pectin; Protein; Stabilizers; Vegetable sera; Emulsion

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the emulsion forming and stabilizing capacities of water-soluble biopolymers from heat-treated and high pressure homogenized purees. Results showed that carrot serum biopolymers exhibited high capacity to form fine emulsion droplets and maintain stability during storage at low temperature.
The emulsion forming and stabilizing capacities of water-soluble biopolymers originating from the aqueous (serum) phase of heat-treated and high pressure homogenized purees were investigated. The serum biopolymers were characterized and then utilized as emulsifier/stabilizer in simple oil-in-water emulsions. The resulting emulsions were stored at 4 degrees C and monitored for 2 weeks. Results revealed that carrot and tomato sera contained higher amounts of pectin and lower protein compared to broccoli. The serum pectic biopolymers exhibited distinct molecular structures, depending on the vegetable origin. Given these natural biopolymer composition and characteristics, emulsions with small droplet sizes were observed at pH 3.5. However, emulsions at pH 6.0 showed large mean droplet sizes, except for the emulsion formulated with carrot serum. Regardless of the pH, emulsions containing carrot serum biopolymers exhibited high capacity to form fine emulsions that were stable during the 2-week storage period at low temperature. This study clearly shows the capacity of natural water-soluble biopolymers isolated from the serum phase of vegetable purees to form fine emulsion droplets and maintain its stability during storage, especially in the case of carrot serum biopolymers.

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