4.7 Article

Technological properties of Lactobacillus plantarum strains isolated from Chinese traditional low salt fermented whole fish

期刊

FOOD CONTROL
卷 40, 期 -, 页码 351-358

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2013.11.048

关键词

Traditional low salt fish; Lactobacillus plantarum; Acidifying activity; Antimicrobial activity; Proteolytic activity; Sensory

资金

  1. earmarked fund for China Agriculture Research System [46-22]
  2. NFSC [31171709, 31371823]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A total of 21 Lactobacillus plantarum were isolated from a Chinese traditional low salt fermented whole fish product Suan yu and identified by biochemical and molecular methods. The isolates were screened for acidifying and amino-biogenic ability for proteolysis, lipolysis, antimicrobial activity, and sensory in order to select the most suitable candidates as the starter cultures. All the strains had high acidifying activities and were able to reduce the pH to lower than 4.5 in 36, 24 and 16 h at 15, 25 and 37 degrees C respectively. Major strains showed antimicrobial activities against Listeria monocytogenes, Staphylococcus aureus and Escherichia coli, and ten L plantarum strains could produce bacteriocins. Five L plantarum strains exhibited weak proteolytic activities against myofibrillar proteins, as evidenced by the agar plate assay and sodium dodecyl sulphate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE). None of the strains showed lipolytic activity. Major L. plantarum strains displayed different enzymatic profiles. Besides, the isolates mostly showed negative-decarboxylase activities, but Lp-10 had a decarboxylase activity against L-tyrosine. Furthermore, the fermented fish surimi inoculated with Lp-15 and Lp-21 strains respectively scored high for overall acceptability. Therefore, Lp-15 and Lp-21 presented the best technological properties, which should be given first priority as the starter culture for manufacturing fermented fish products. (C) 2013 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