4.5 Article

Polyphenol oxidase and enzymatic browning in apricot (Prunus armeniaca L.): Effect on phenolic composition and deduction of main substrates

期刊

CURRENT RESEARCH IN FOOD SCIENCE
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 196-206

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.crfs.2021.12.015

关键词

Browning reactions; Tyrosinase; Heterologous expression; Enzyme characterization; Individual phenolics; Antioxidants

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P32326]
  2. Algerian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research
  3. Algerian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research (MESRS)
  4. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [P32326] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the effect of enzymatic browning on the phenolic composition of apricot was investigated. The results showed that browning significantly decreased total phenolics and antioxidant capacity, with catechin, epicatechin, and B-type procyanidins being the most affected phenolics.
In this study, we investigate the effect of enzymatic browning on the phenolic composition of apricot in vivo and in vitro. The in vitro browning was caused by the recombinant latent apricot polyphenol oxidase (L-PaPPO). Successful heterologous expression of PaPPO in Escherichia coli yielded substantial amounts of enzyme containing both copper ions in the catalytic active site. The expressed L-PaPPO was characterized with regard to its molecular mass (56531.3 Da), pH optimum (7.0), activation by SDS, and enzyme kinetics. LC-MS/MS was used to compare the phenolic profiles of brown and non-brown apricots. The browning reactions did significantly decrease total phenolics and antioxidant capacity (measured with DPPH and CUPRAC assays). Catechin, epicatechin, and B-type procyanidins were the individual phenolics most affected by browning, followed by chlorogenic and neochlorogenic acid. These phenolics are most likely the main endogenous substrates of LPaPPO, as they were oxidized much faster than the other identified phenolics.

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