4.7 Article

Ultrasound-assisted extraction from defatted oat (Avena sativa L.) bran to simultaneously enhance phenolic compounds and beta-glucan contents: Compositional and kinetic studies

期刊

JOURNAL OF FOOD ENGINEERING
卷 222, 期 -, 页码 1-10

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2017.11.002

关键词

Defatted oat bran; Ultrasonic-assisted extraction; Phenolic compounds; Antioxidant activity; Avenanthramides; beta-Glucan

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFD0401200, 2017YFD0401100]
  2. Special Fund for Agro Scientific Research in the Public Interest [201303069]
  3. Industry-Academia-Research Joint Innovation Fund of Jiangsu Province [BY2016022-30]
  4. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31471616, 31501579]
  5. International S&T Cooperation Program of China (ISTCP) [2015DFA30540]
  6. Postgraduate Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province [KYCX17_1409]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this research, the influence of ultrasonic application and temperature on extraction yields of free, esterified, bound phenolics, and beta-glucan from defatted oat bran was investigated. Ultrasonic-assisted extraction (UAE) and conventional extraction (CE) were performed at different temperature. Extracts kinetics were monitored by determining the total phenolic content (TPC), antioxidant capacity (ORAC), and total avenanthramides of free phenolic compounds by mathematical model. HPLC-DAD was used to identify and quantify the main phenolic compounds. The results suggested that phenolic extraction yields of UAE was faster and higher than that of CE for free phenolics, with fitting to mathematically model (MRPD < 6%) well, whereas the bound fractions decreased. Besides, the TPC, ORAC and total avenanthramides of free phenolics were significantly improved by increasing the temperature in both UAE and CE, whereas the bound were significantly decreased. beta-Glucan yields pretreated in UAE were approximately 37% higher than that in CE. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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