4.7 Article

Towards the rapid detection of haze-forming proteins

期刊

TALANTA
卷 268, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2023.125305

关键词

Haze-forming proteins; Chitinases; Thaumatin-like proteins; Wine; Biosensor; Artificial neural networks

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to develop an easy-to-use sensor device for the detection of haze-forming proteins in wine. Both impedimetric immunosensors and FT-IR-based methods were explored, allowing for rapid assessment and quantification of protein content in wine.
Protein haze in white wine can be a serious quality defect because consumers perceive hazy wines as spoiled. Unfortunately, a specific method for the detection, or selective treatment, of such proteins in affected wines does not exist. Herein we investigate on the development of an easy-to-use sensor device that allows detection of haze -forming proteins (HFPs). Such a device is expected to overcome the limitations of the heat test currently used to assess the protein content in wine and the amount of bentonite needed to remove such proteins. To this aim, three different approaches were explored. Firstly, an impedimetric immunosensor against chitinases was developed and its performance assessed. Secondly, the exploitation of the dual role of HFPs as biorecognition element and analyte to develop an impedimetric biosensor was evaluated, in what can be considered a very unique strategy, representing a new paradigm in biosensing. Lastly, Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectra were collected for various wine samples and chemometric tools such as discrete wavelet transform (DWT) and artificial neural networks (ANNs) were used to achieve the quantification of HFPs. Detection of HFPs at the mu g/L level was achieved with both impedimetric biosensors, whereas the FT-IR-based approach allowed their quantification at the mg/L level in wine samples directly. The sensitivity of the developed methods may enable the rapid assessment of wine protein content.

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