4.7 Article

Sea Bass Side Streams Extracts Obtained by Pulsed Electric Fields: Nutritional Characterization and Effect on SH-SY5Y Cells

期刊

FOODS
卷 12, 期 14, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/foods12142717

关键词

pulsed electric fields; fish side streams; antioxidants; minerals; heavy metals; bioactive peptides; cell viability; SH-SY5Y

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, pulsed electric fields (PEF) extraction was optimized and used as a new method for valorizing fish side streams. The PEF technology improved the extraction of proteins and antioxidant compounds from fish head and skin. However, it was not successful for fish viscera. The extraction of minerals and heavy metals was also evaluated.
Fish side streams are an environmental and economic problem. In this work, pulsed electric fields (PEF) extraction was optimized and used as a new method for their valorization. Sea bass head, skin, viscera, and backbone were used. PEF technology (123-300 kJ/kg, 1-3 kV/cm) improved the extraction of proteins and antioxidant compounds from head and skin, but was not successful for viscera. SDS-PAGE showed that the protein molecular weight distribution was affected by the extraction process, revealing differences between the control and PEF extraction conditions. In addition, the extraction of macro-minerals and micro-minerals were also evaluated. The effect of PEF differed according to the matrix and the mineral studied. Heavy metals were also taken into account, studying the presence of As, Cd, Hg, and Pb in the extracts. PEF pre-treatment reduced the presence of As in skin, viscera, and backbone, ranging from 18.25 to 28.48% according to the matrix evaluated. The analysis of potential antioxidant bioactive peptides showed that the treatment of the sample directly influenced their variety. Additionally, the extracts obtained from the head were found to increase cell viability when tested on SH-SY5Y cells. In conclusion, PEF extraction can be a useful tool for the valorization of fish side streams.

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