4.6 Article

Influence of Lactobacillus (LAB) Fermentation on the Enhancement of Branched Chain Amino Acids and Antioxidant Properties in Bran among Wheat By-Products

期刊

FERMENTATION-BASEL
卷 8, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/fermentation8120732

关键词

wheat bran; Lactobacillus; solid-state fermentation; branched chain amino acids; antioxidant properties

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The main objective of this study was to enhance the nutritional properties, including branched chain amino acids (BCAAs), through solid-state fermentation of wheat bran using lactic acid bacteria. The study found that wheat bran fermented with Lactobacillus acidophilus had the highest level of BCAAs and bioactive components. The findings suggest that fermented wheat bran with enhanced BCAAs can be used in future functional food.
The main objective of this study was to enhance the nutritional properties, including branched chain amino acids (BCAAs), through the solid-state fermentation (SSF) of wheat bran (WB) using lactic acid bacteria (LAB). The physicochemical properties, amino acid profiles, bioactive components, and antioxidant properties of raw and sterilized WB were compared with those of WB fermented with five different LAB strains. The highest level of BCAAs, isoleucine (Ile; 2.557 +/- 0.05 mg/100 g), leucine (Leu; 7.703 +/- 0.40 mg/100 g), and valine (Val; 7.207 +/- 0.37 mg/100 g), was displayed in the WB fermented with Lactobacillus acidophilus (L.A WB). In addition, L.A WB showed the highest amount of total phenolic and flavonoid contents (2.80 mg GAE/g and 1.01 mg CE/g, respectively), and the highest Trolox equivalent antioxidant capacity (9.88 mM TE/g). Statistical analysis clearly revealed that L.A WB presented the highest abundance of branched chain amino acids as well as bioactive components. Overall, this study distinctly implemented the possibility of fermented WB with enhanced BCAAs for application in future functional food through experimental and statistical observations.

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

4.6
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