4.7 Article

Structural and Physical Characteristics of Mixed-Component Oleogels: Natural Wax and Monoglyceride Interactions in Different Edible Oils

期刊

GELS
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/gels9080627

关键词

oleogels; waxes; monoglycerides; edible oils; lipid structuring; FTIR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the properties of oleogels formed by the interaction between different waxes and monoglycerides in various edible oils. The results showed that different wax-oil combinations led to different crystallization structures and physical properties, which can be controlled by adjusting the gelator composition for specific food applications.
Waxes and monoglycerides (MGs) added in edible oils form oleogels that can be used as an alternative structured fat, providing healthier substitutes to saturated and trans fats in foods. This study aimed to investigate the properties of oleogels formed by the interaction between monoglycerides and different waxes in various edible oils. For this purpose, waxes, namely rice bran (RBW), candelilla (CDW), sunflower (SW), and beeswax (BW), together with MGs in a total concentration level of 15% (w/w) were dissolved in several edible oils (olive, sunflower, sesame, and soybean). The structure and physical properties of oleogels were investigated using texture analysis, polarized light microscopy, melting point measurements, and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). The hardest structure was produced by SW/MG (5.18 N), followed by CDW (2.87 N), RBW (2.34 N), BW (2.24 N) and plain MG (1.92 N). Furthermore, RBW and SW led to a higher melting point (69.2 and 67.3 & DEG;C) than the plain MG oleogels (64.5 & DEG;C). Different crystallization structures, i.e., needle-like crystals and spherulites, were observed depending on the type of wax, its concentration, and the oil used. These results can be used to control the properties of oleogels by adjusting the gelator composition for a variety of potential food applications.

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