| Literature DB >> 33282264 |
Fengjuan Jia1,2,3, Xuecheng Liu1,2,3, Zhiqing Gong1,2,3, Wenjia Cui1,2,3, Yansheng Wang1,2,3, Wenliang Wang1,2,3.
Abstract
Dietary fiber (DF) has gained a great attention owing to its potential health benefits. Agrocybe cylindracea is an edible fungus with high protein and low fat contents, which is also an enriched source of DF. However, limited study has been conducted on optimizing the conditions of A. cylindracea-derived DF extraction and modification as well as characterizing its properties. In this study, ultrasound-assisted enzymatic method for DF extraction was optimized as the following conditions: liquid material ratio of 29 ml/g, α-amylase concentration of 1.50%, protamex concentration of 1.20%, and ultrasonic power of 150 W, which improved the DF extraction yield to 37.70%. Moreover, high temperature modification (HTM) and cellulase modification (CEM) were applied to modify A. cylindracea-derived DF. The results showed that HTM had more potential capacity in converting insoluble DF into soluble DF, and DF with HTM exhibited more advantages in its physicochemical properties than DF with CEM. The DF with both HTM and CEM showed antioxidant activities, reflected by the increased reducing power as well as DPPH radical, hydroxyl radical, and ABTS+ scavenging capabilities in vitro. These findings could offer a reference for the extraction, modification, and characterizing various properties of DF from A. cylindracea, which would establish the foundation for the comprehensive application of fungi-derived DF.Entities:
Keywords: Agrocybe cylindracea; antioxidant property; dietary fiber; extraction; modification
Year: 2020 PMID: 33282264 PMCID: PMC7684601 DOI: 10.1002/fsn3.1905
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Food Sci Nutr ISSN: 2048-7177 Impact factor: 2.863
RSM design scheme and DF yield
| No. | (A) Liquid material ratio ml/g | (B) α‐amylase concentration % | (C) Protamex concentration % | (D) Ultrasonic power W | DF yield % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 200 | 34.2 |
| 2 | 30 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 100 | 33.9 |
| 3 | 25 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 150 | 34.2 |
| 4 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 150 | 37.6 |
| 5 | 35 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 200 | 32.8 |
| 6 | 30 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 200 | 33.6 |
| 7 | 25 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 150 | 35.9 |
| 8 | 25 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 100 | 34.0 |
| 9 | 30 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 200 | 34.6 |
| 10 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 150 | 37.3 |
| 11 | 25 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 150 | 34.6 |
| 12 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 150 | 37.6 |
| 13 | 35 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 150 | 33.1 |
| 14 | 35 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 150 | 32.8 |
| 15 | 30 | 2.0 | 0.8 | 150 | 33.5 |
| 16 | 30 | 2.0 | 1.2 | 100 | 34.8 |
| 17 | 30 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 150 | 35.5 |
| 18 | 30 | 1.0 | 1.6 | 150 | 33.3 |
| 19 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 150 | 38.1 |
| 20 | 25 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 200 | 36.6 |
| 21 | 30 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 200 | 34.6 |
| 22 | 25 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 150 | 34.1 |
| 23 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 100 | 35.3 |
| 24 | 35 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 150 | 34.8 |
| 25 | 30 | 1.0 | 1.2 | 100 | 35.2 |
| 26 | 35 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 100 | 35.4 |
| 27 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 150 | 38.5 |
| 28 | 30 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 150 | 34.4 |
| 29 | 35 | 1.5 | 0.8 | 150 | 33.8 |
DF, dietary fiber.
FIGURE 1Effects of independent variables on dietary fiber yield from Agrocybe cylindracea. The independent variable was examined by keeping other variables constant, based on the default values of liquid material ratio = 30 ml/g, α‐amylase concentration = 1.5%, protamex concentration = 1.2%, ultrasonic power = 150 W, ultrasonic time = 30 min, and ultrasonic temperature = 60°C; (a) liquid material ratio; (b) α‐amylase concentration; (c) protamex concentration; (d) ultrasonic power; (e) ultrasonic time; and (f) ultrasonic temperature
Analysis of variance (ANOVA)
| Source | Sum of squares | Degree of freedom | Mean square |
|
| Significance analysis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 66.65 | 14 | 4.76 | 13.46 | <.0001 | ** |
| A | 3.74 | 1 | 3.74 | 10.58 | .0058 | ** |
| B | 0.14 | 1 | 0.14 | 0.4 | .5381 | |
| C | 0.48 | 1 | 0.48 | 1.36 | .2635 | |
| D | 0.4 | 1 | 0.4 | 1.14 | .3036 | |
| AB | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2.83 | .1148 | |
| AC | 0.56 | 1 | 0.56 | 1.59 | .2278 | |
| AD | 6.76 | 1 | 6.76 | 19.12 | .0006 | ** |
| BC | 2.4 | 1 | 2.4 | 6.79 | .0207 | * |
| BD | 0.09 | 1 | 0.09 | 0.25 | .6218 | |
| CD | 0.81 | 1 | 0.81 | 2.29 | .1524 | |
| A2 | 20.38 | 1 | 20.38 | 57.63 | <.0001 | ** |
| B2 | 23.97 | 1 | 23.97 | 67.8 | <.0001 | ** |
| C2 | 20.67 | 1 | 20.67 | 58.45 | <.0001 | ** |
| D2 | 12.9 | 1 | 12.9 | 36.47 | <.0001 | ** |
| Total error | 4.95 | 14 | 0.35 | |||
| Lack of fit | 4.04 | 10 | 0.4 | 1.78 | .3039 | |
| Pure error | 0.91 | 4 | 0.23 | |||
| Cor total | 71.6 | 28 | ||||
| Predicted | ||||||
FIGURE 2Response surface plots for independent variables on dietary fiber extraction yield from Agrocybe cylindracea. (a) Liquid material ratio; (b) concentration of α‐amylase; (c) concentration of protamex; and (d) ultrasonic power
FIGURE 3Effects of independent variables on the dietary fiber yield for high temperature modification (HTM) and cellulase modification (CEM). The variables for HTM were examined by keeping other variables constant, based on the default values of liquid material ratio = 30 ml/g, temperature = 120°C, and time = 40 min; (a) HTM liquid material ratio; (b) HTM temperature; and (c) HTM time. The variables for CEM were examined by keeping other variables constant, based on the default values of liquid material ratio = 30 ml/g, cellulase concentration = 1.5%, and time = 2.0 hr; (d) CEM liquid material ratio; (e) CEM cellulase concentration; and (f) CEM time
Orthogonal experimental design and results of HTM
| No. | A: HTM liquid material ratio (ml/g) | B: HTM temperature (°C) | C: HTM time (min) | SDF yield (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25 | 115 | 30 | 4.2 | |
| 2 | 25 | 120 | 40 | 5.5 | |
| 3 | 25 | 125 | 50 | 6.4 | |
| 4 | 30 | 115 | 40 | 4.8 | |
| 5 | 30 | 120 | 50 | 6.6 | |
| 6 | 30 | 125 | 30 | 5.1 | |
| 7 | 35 | 115 | 50 | 4.9 | |
| 8 | 35 | 120 | 30 | 4.6 | |
| 9 | 35 | 125 | 40 | 5.9 | |
|
| 5.367 | 4.633 | 4.633 | ||
|
| 5.500 | 5.567 | 5.400 | ||
|
| 5.133 | 5.800 | 5.967 | ||
| Range | 0.367 | 1.167 | 1.334 | ||
| Important order | C > B > A | ||||
| Optimal combination | A2B3C3 | ||||
HTM, high temperature modification; SDF, soluble dietary fiber.
Orthogonal experimental design and results of CEM
| No. | A: CEM liquid material ratio (ml/g) | B: CEM cellulase concentration (%) | C: CEM time (hr) | SDF yield (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 25 | 0.5 | 1.0 | 2.8 |
| 2 | 25 | 1.0 | 1.5 | 3.5 |
| 3 | 25 | 1.5 | 2.0 | 4.3 |
| 4 | 30 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 3.4 |
| 5 | 30 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 5.7 |
| 6 | 30 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 4.5 |
| 7 | 35 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 3.2 |
| 8 | 35 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 4.8 |
| 9 | 35 | 1.5 | 1.5 | 5.5 |
|
| 3.533 | 3.133 | 4.033 | |
|
| 4.533 | 4.667 | 4.133 | |
|
| 4.500 | 4.767 | 4.400 | |
| Range | 1.000 | 1.634 | 0.367 | |
| Important order | B > A>C | |||
| Optimal combination | A2B3C3 | |||
CEM, cellulase modification; SDF, soluble dietary fiber.
FIGURE 8Antioxidant activities of dietary fiber with different modifications in vitro. (a) Reducing power; (b) DPPH radical scavenging activity; (c) hydroxyl radical scavenging activity; and (d) ABTS+ scavenging activity
FIGURE 4Water binding capacity (a), swelling capacity (b), and fat adsorption capacity (c) of dietary fiber with different modifications
FIGURE 5Glucose adsorption capacity (a), cholesterol adsorption capacity (b), and cation exchange capacity (c) of dietary fiber with different modifications
FIGURE 6Scanning electron micrographs of dietary fiber (DF) with different modifications. (a) Untreated DF; (b) DF with HTM; and (c) DF with CEM
FIGURE 7FTIR spectrometric analysis of dietary fiber (DF) by frequency ranging 4000–400 cm−1. (a) Untreated DF; (b) DF with HTM; and (c) DF with CEM