| Literature DB >> 27447598 |
Yafeng Zheng1,2, Qi Wang3,4, Baoyu Li5,6, Liangmei Lin7,8, Rosa Tundis9, Monica R Loizzo10, Baodong Zheng11,12, Jianbo Xiao13.
Abstract
Purple sweet potato starch is a potential resource for resistant starch production. The effects of heat-moisture treatment (HMT) and enzyme debranching combined heat-moisture treatment (EHMT) on the morphological, crystallinity and thermal properties of PSP starches were investigated. The results indicated that, after HMT or EHMT treatments, native starch granules with smooth surface was destroyed to form a more compact, irregular and sheet-like structure. The crystalline pattern was transformed from C-type to B-type with decreasing relative crystallinity. Due to stronger crystallites formed in modified starches, the swelling power and solubility of HMT and EHMT starch were decreased, while the transition temperatures and gelatinization enthalpy were significantly increased. In addition, HMT and EHMT exhibited greater effects on the proliferation of bifidobacteria compared with either glucose or high amylose maize starch.Entities:
Keywords: bifidobacteria proliferation; physicochemical properties; purple sweet potato; resistant starch; structure properties
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27447598 PMCID: PMC6273351 DOI: 10.3390/molecules21070932
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
The chemical composition of native, HMT and EHMT starch samples *.
| Samples | Moisture (%) | Protein (%) | Lipid (%) | Amylose (%) | RS (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Native | 5.03 ± 0.19 a | 0.41 ± 0.01 a | 0.11 ± 0.01 a | 29.91 ± 0.14 a | 5.02 ± 0.21 a |
| HMT | 4.92 ± 0.08 a | 0.38 ± 0.04 a | 0.17 ± 0.01 b | 32.83 ± 0.13 b | 14.23 ± 0.55 b |
| EHMT | 4.67 ± 0.07 b | 1.67 ± 0.07 b | 0.19 ± 0.02 c | 36.62 ± 0.25 c | 17.16 ± 0.63 c |
* Results are expressed as mean ± standard deviation; means with different superscripts (a, b, c) in the same column are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Scanning electronic micrographs of native, HMT and EHMT starches: (A) Native starch (×500); (B) HMT starch (×500); (C) EHMT starch (×1000).
Swelling power, solubility and thermal properties of native, HMT and EHMT starches.
| Samples | SP (g/g) | S (%) | Δ | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Native | 26.21 | 9.46 | 67.2 | 80.6 | 87.8 | 20.6 | 21.26 |
| HMT | 20.72 | 8.74 | 106.7 | 115.2 | 124.1 | 17.4 | 25.53 |
| EHMT | 17.21 | 7.41 | 135.9 | 143.3 | 152.8 | 16.9 | 26.78 |
SP, swelling power; S, solubility; T, onset temperature; T, peak temperature; T, conclusion temperature; T–T, gelatinization temperature range; ΔH, gelatinization enthalpy.
Figure 2X-ray diffraction patterns of native, HMT and EHMT starches.
Figure 3Infrared spectra of native, HMT and EHMT starches.
Figure 4Effect of different carbon source concentrations on the number of bifidobacteria.
Figure 5(A) Growth curves of bifidobacteria incubated in media with 20 g/L of GLU, HMT, EHMT, or HAMS; (B) Variation trend of pH values of the media during cultivation.