| Title |
Denaturation and in Vitro Gastric Digestion of Heat-Treated Quinoa Protein Isolates Obtained at Various Extraction pH
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Food Biophysics, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11483-016-9429-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Geraldine Avila Ruiz, Mauricio Opazo-Navarrete, Marlon Meurs, Marcel Minor, Guido Sala, Martinus van Boekel, Markus Stieger, Anja E. M. Janssen |
| Abstract |
The aim of this study was to determine the influence of heat processing on denaturation and digestibility properties of protein isolates obtained from sweet quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) at various extraction pH values (8, 9, 10 and 11). Pretreatment of suspensions of protein isolates at 60, 90 and 120 °C for 30 min led to protein denaturation and aggregation, which was enhanced at higher treatment temperatures. The in vitro gastric digestibility measured during 6 h was lower for protein extracts pre-treated at 90 and 120 °C compared to 60 °C. The digestibility decreased with increasing extraction pH, which could be ascribed to protein aggregation. Protein digestibility of the quinoa protein isolates was higher compared to wholemeal quinoa flour. We conclude that an interactive effect of processing temperature and extraction pH on in vitro gastric digestibility of quinoa protein isolates obtained at various extraction pH is observed. This gives a first indication of how the nutritional value of quinoa protein could be influenced by heat processing, protein extraction conditions and other grain components. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 118 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 117 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 29 | 25% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 18 | 15% |
| Researcher | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 9% |
| Professor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 15 | 13% |
| Unknown | 26 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 27 | 23% |
| Engineering | 13 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 8% |
| Chemistry | 6 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 17 | 14% |
| Unknown | 39 | 33% |
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 30 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,330,976
of 22,875,477 outputs
Outputs from Food Biophysics
#73
of 82 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,446
of 299,167 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Food Biophysics
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,875,477 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 82 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 299,167 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.