| Literature DB >> 32092846 |
Siqi Wang1,2,3,4, Rong Lin1,2,3,4, Shasha Cheng1,2,3,4, Zhixiang Wang5, Mingqian Tan1,2,3,4.
Abstract
Water mobility and distribution of a dual-protein system of surf clam myofibrillar protein (MP) and soy protein (SP) was investigated by the nondestructive low field nuclear magnetic resonance (LF-NMR) technique. Four proton populations were found in the contour plots of T2 relaxation times for the SP-MP system. The first component, (T21), was assigned to the highly integrated water located in protein macromolecules with a relaxation time of approximately 1.15 ms. The second signal, T22, with a relaxation time of 2.20 to 38.00 ms was regarded as the inter-myofibrillar water trapped in organized protein structures. The third component, T23, with a relaxation time of around 100 ms was ascribed to the extra-myofibrillar water. With an increase in temperature, T24 appeared which was assigned to the free water within the extra-myofibrillar space. The gelation behavior occurred at 70, 62, and 52 °C as the proportion of SP/MP was 4:6, 2:8, and 0:10, respectively. The principal component analysis (PCA) and heatmap of LF-NMR data analysis showed potential for distinguishing the different dual-protein systems formed at various temperatures. The analysis of storage modulus G', loss modulus G″, and tanδ confirmed the change trend of the LF-NMR results. The measurements of cooking loss, water holding capability, and gel strength further revealed that the SP and MP were likely to form a gel network with an increase of additional clam protein. The hydrophobicity analysis showed, for the systems with the SP/MP proportions of 4:6, 2:8, and 0:10, more hydrophobic groups were exposed when the temperature was over 50 °C. Scanning electron microscopy showed that the number of the micropores increased with an addition of MP in the dual-protein system of SP/MP. All the results demonstrated that LF-NMR has great potential for characterizing the gelation process of a dual-protein system.Entities:
Keywords: LF-NMR; gelation; myofibrillar protein; soy protein
Year: 2020 PMID: 32092846 PMCID: PMC7073513 DOI: 10.3390/foods9020213
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Scheme 1Schematic illustration of preparing the double-protein gel with soy protein (SP) and myofibrillar protein (MP) before and after heating at 90 °C for 1 h.
Figure 1Plots of T2 relaxation times for the SP and MP system during heating from 38 to 90 °C with SP: MP ratio at 10:0 (a); 8:2 (b); 6:4 (c); 4:6 (d); 2:8 (e); and 0:10 (f). The initial protein content of SP and MP solution was 7.8% and 3.6%, respectively.
Figure 2Moisture distribution change of MP-only system by adding 20% (v/v) distilled water at various temperatures.
Low field nuclear magnetic resonance (LF-NMR) parameters of T2 relaxation times and peak area (P) of the dual-protein system with various SP/MP proportions before and after 90 °C heating for 1 h.
| SP:MP | T21 (ms) | T22 (ms) | T23 (ms) | T24 (ms) | P21 (%) | P22 (%) | P23 (%) | P24 (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before heating | ||||||||
| 10:0 | 0.54 ± 0.31 a | 2.96 ± 0.54 b | 223.28 ± 0.00 a | - | 3.35 ± 0.82 a | 2.06 ± 1.17 a | 94.58 ± 0.50 a | - |
| 8:2 | 0.89 ± 0.26 a | 6.66 ± 2.41 b | 214.69 ± 14.88 a | - | 4.71 ± 1.35 a | 0.59 ± 0.29 a | 94.70 ± 1.59 a | - |
| 6:4 | 0.97 ± 0.55 a | 3.17 ± 1.09 ab | 206.10 ± 14.88 a | - | 4.53 ± 1.87 a | 0.97 ± 0.33 a | 94.49 ± 2.18 a | - |
| 4:6 | 0.61 ± 0.34 a | 4.30 ± 3.50 ab | 206.10 ± 14.88 a | - | 3.11 ± 2.69 a | 1.73 ± 1.50 a | 94.84 ± 1.34 a | - |
| 2:8 | 0.57 ± 0.28 a | 3.57 ± 1.05 a | 174.72 ± 0.00 a | - | 4.34 ± 0.62 a | 1.20 ± 0.30 a | 94.47 ± 0.92 a | - |
| 0:10 | 0.40 ± 0.05 a | 7.80 ± 2.44 a | 175.59 ± 21.49 a | - | 5.36 ± 0.45 a | 1.35 ± 0.21 a | 91.79 ± 0.36 a | - |
| 90 °C heating | ||||||||
| 10:0 | 0.54 ± 0.14 ab | 5.66 ± 0.69 a | 252.42 ± 0.00 cd | - | 12.86 ± 2.23 ab | 2.29 ± 0.20 a | 84.85 ± 2.43 c | - |
| 8:2 | 0.49 ± 0.11 ab | 9.25 ± 1.13 a | 243.97 ± 35.84 c | - | 15.09 ± 1.91 ab | 2.61 ± 0.4a a | 82.30 ± 2.31 c | - |
| 6:4 | 0.89 ± 0.26 b | 15.85 ± 3.04 b | 285.35 ± 0.00 d | - | 15.49 ± 3.44 ab | 4.00 ± 0.41 a | 80.52 ± 3.34 c | - |
| 4:6 | 0.78 ± 0.31 ab | 9.05 ± 3.59 a | 396.40 ± 27.47 e | - | 14.22 ± 1.83 ab | 1.68 ± 0.21 a | 82.81 ± 1.46 c | - |
| 2:8 | 0.60 ± 0.04 ab | 5.26 ± 1.01 a | 77.27 ± 5.58 a | 526.86 ± 0.00 | 11.02 ± 0.83 a | 1.94 ± 0.44 a | 31.88 ± 0.60 a | 55.16 ± 1.36 |
| 0:10 | 0.38 ± 0.05 a | 8.01 ± 3.17 a | 126.19 ± 9.11 b | 2948.14 ± 360.89 | 18.71 ± 2.75 b | 4.32 ± 3.37 a | 42.74 ± 2.77 b | 34.22 ± 3.00 |
Values are presented as means ± standard deviation; different number superscripts indicate the significant difference (p < 0.05) between each treatment in a respective column.
Figure 3(a) T23; (b) T24; (c) A23; and (d) A24 changes of the SP and MP system during heating from 38 to 90 °C.
Figure 4(a) Principal component analysis (PCA) and (b) heatmap of the SP and MP system with various MP/SP proportions at different heating temperatures.
Figure 5Rheology properties of (a) storage modulus G’ and loss modulus G’’; and (b) tan δ of the SP and MP system with various SP/MP proportions at different heating temperatures.
Figure 6(a) Cooking loss; (b) water holding capacity (WHC); and (c) gel strength in the SP and MP system with various SP/MP proportions after heating at 90 °C for 1 h.
Figure 7Hydrophobicity (S0) of the SP and MP system with various SP/MP proportions at different temperatures.
Figure 8SEM graphs with different magnification times in the SP and MP system. SP/MP was set as 10:0 (a); 8:2 (b); 6:4 (c); 4:6 (d); 2:8 (e); and 0:10 (f).