4.2 Article

Comparison of physicochemical properties and structures of sugary-2 cornstarch with normal and waxy cultivars

期刊

CEREAL CHEMISTRY
卷 78, 期 3, 页码 249-256

出版社

AMER ASSOC CEREAL CHEMISTS
DOI: 10.1094/CCHEM.2001.78.3.249

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Starches from normal, waxy, and sugary-2 (su2) corn kernels were isolated, anti their structures and properties determined. The total lipid contents of normal, waxy, and su2 corn starches were 0.84, 0.00, and 1.61%, respectively. Scanning electron micrographs showed that normal and waxy corn starch granules were spherical or angular in shape with smooth surfaces. The su2 starch granules consisted of lobes that resembled starch mutants deficient in soluble starch synthases. Normal and waxy corn starches displayed A-type X-ray patterns. The su2 starch showed a weak A-type pattern. The chain-length distributions of normal, waxy, and su2 debranched amylopectins showed the first peak chain length at DP (degree of polymerization) 13, 14, and 13, respectively; second peak chain length at DP 45, 49, and 49, respectively; and highest detectable DP of 80, 72, and 76, respectively. The su2 amylopectin showed a higher percentage of chains with DP 6-12 (22.2%) than normal (15.0%) and waxy (14.6%) amylopectins. The absolute amylose content of normal, waxy, and su2 starches was 18.8, 0.0, and 27.3%, respectively. Gel-permeation profiles of su2 corn starch displayed a considerable amount of intermediate components. The su2 corn starch displayed lower gelatinization temperature, enthalpy change, and viscosity; a significantly higher enthalpy change for melting of amylose-lipid complex; and lower melting temperature and enthalpy change for retrograded starch than did normal and waxy corn starches. The initial rate of hydrolysis (3 hr) of the corn starches followed the order su2 > waxy > normal corn. Waxy and su2 starches were hydrolyzed to the same extent, which was higher than normal starch after a 72-hr hydrolysis period.

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

4.2
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