4.7 Article

Co- encapsulation of Lactobacillus acidophilus with inulin or polydextrose in solid lipid microparticles provides protection and improves stability

期刊

FOOD RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL
卷 53, 期 1, 页码 96-103

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodres.2013.03.042

关键词

Probiotics; Microencapsulation; Encapsulation; Spray-chilling; Spray-cooling; Structural evaluation; Fat

资金

  1. FAPESP [09/11713-2, 10/13026-0]
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [10/13026-0, 09/11713-2] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aims of this study were to produce and evaluate solid lipid microparticles (SLM) in which Lactobacillus acidophilus (La), a probiotic, was co-encapsulated with a prebiotics, either inulin (mu) or polydextrose (Poly) using spray chilling technology. Morphological, chemical, and thermal characterisation of SLMs were conducted, along with survival assays to evaluate the resistance of the probiotic to the microencapsulation process, its resistance to exposure to simulated gastric fluids (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluids (SIF), and its stability throughout storage for 120 days at -18, 7 and 22 degrees C a vacuum or with controlled relative humidity. Cell viability was not affected by the spray-chilling process. All of the microcapsules produced in the present study increased the survival rate of La exposed to SGF and SIF compared to that of free probiotic cells. Promising results were obtained when these microcapsules were stored refrigerated and frozen with a controlled relative humidity. This study indicated that combined spray chilling process, combined with the addition of a prebiotic component, specifically polydextrose is an interesting technology for the protection, delivery and improve stability of probiotics, which increases the potential of symbiotic SLMs. Scaling up the spray chilling technique will allow efficient encapsulation of probiotics in a lipid matrix. (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