| Title |
Effects of gamma irradiation on tropomyosin allergen, proximate composition and mineral elements in giant freshwater prawn (Macrobrachium rosenbergii)
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Food Science and Technology, March 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13197-018-3104-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wipawan Muanghorn, Nattaya Konsue, Hasan Sham, Zainon Othman, Faizal Mohamed, Noramaliza Mohd Noor, Norsyafiqah Othman, Nur Shamin Shyamimi Mohd Noor Akmal, Nurulhuda Ahmad Fauzi, Mary Margaret Packiamuthu Dewaprigam Solomen, Ahmad Faizal Abdull Razis |
| Abstract |
Effects of food irradiation on allergen and nutritional composition of giant freshwater prawn are not well documented. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the effects of gamma irradiation on tropomyosin allergen, proximate composition, and mineral elements in Macrobrachium rosenbergii. In this study, prawn was peeled, cut into small pieces, vacuum packaged and gamma irradiated at 0, 5, 7, 10 and 15 kGy with a dose rate of 0.5 kGy/h using cobalt-60 as the source, subsequently determined the level of tropomyosin, proximate composition and mineral elements respectively. The results showed that band density of tropomyosin irradiated at 10 and 15 kGy is markedly decreased. Proximate analysis revealed that moisture, protein, and carbohydrate content were significantly different as compared with non-irradiated prawn. Meanwhile, gamma irradiated M. rosenbergii at 15 kGy was observed to be significantly higher in nickel and zinc than the non-irradiated prawn. The findings provide a new information that food irradiation may affect the tropomyosin allergen, proximate composition and mineral elements of the prawn. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 30 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 30 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 20% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 13% |
| Researcher | 4 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 10% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 13 | 43% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 2 | 7% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 1 | 3% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 13 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 April 2018.
All research outputs
#15,505,836
of 23,043,346 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#639
of 1,452 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,233
of 329,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Food Science and Technology
#32
of 86 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,043,346 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,452 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.4. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 329,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 86 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.