| Literature DB >> 34068570 |
Ali Osman1, Abdel-Rahaman M Merwad2, Azza H Mohamed3,4, Mahmoud Sitohy1.
Abstract
Papain and pepsin-hydrolyzed whey protein (PAH and PEH, respectively) were prepared and characterized for its degree of hydrolysis, chemical constituents (amino acid and peptides) and antioxidant activity. A field experiment was conducted at El Salheya El Gedida City, Sharqia, Egypt, during the seasons 2019 and 2020, to investigate the biological action of the foliar spray of PAH and PEH on the growth and yield of pea plants cultivated in a clay loam soil. Foliar application of the papain and pepsin-hydrolyzed whey protein (PAH and PEH, respectively) at 1000 and 2000 mg/L was applied three times after 25, 35 and 45 days from planting. All protein foliar spray treatments had significant positive effects on the uptake of N, P and K, simultaneously increasing the contents of all the photosynthetic pigments (Chlorophyll a, Chlorophyll b and Carotenoids) in a concentration-dependent manner. The most conspicuous increase was seen in Chlorophyll b (105% increase), followed by Carotenoids (91% increase). Generally, the favorable increases caused by the second level of application (2000 mg/L) were nearly 2-3 times that of the low level (1000 mg/L). Pod growth and formation indicators, e.g., no. of pod/plant, pod length and no. of seeds/pod, responded more evidently to the hydrolyzed than the intact form of whey protein treatments. Hydrolyzed whey protein foliar spray treatments achieved significantly higher increases in the global field yield components of Pisum sativum plants than the intact form, where peptic hydrolysates were significantly superior to papain hydrolysate. The treatment PEH (2000 mg/L) can be recommended as the most effective bio-stimulating foliar spray treatment for higher plant productivity when applied 25, 35 and 45 days after planting.Entities:
Keywords: bio-stimulation; clay loam soil; hydrolysate; nutrient uptake; pea plants; plant growth; productivity; whey protein
Year: 2021 PMID: 34068570 PMCID: PMC8126062 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26092805
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Chromatogram of peptides formation from whey proteins hydrolyzed with papain (A) and pepsin (B), including positive and negative ions by electro-spray-ionization-MS (ESI-MS).
Possible peptide compositions of whey proteins hydrolyzed with papain and pepsin, including positive and negative ions.
| Whey Protein Enzymatic Hydrolysate | Peak No. | MW (Da) | Total Area (%) | Composition | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Papain | Positive ion (ES+) | 1 | 141.81 | 3.16 | AA |
| 3 | 159.85 | 2.2 | TG | ||
| 4 | 205 | 25.37 | MG | ||
| 5 | 282.8 | 2.88 | RQ | ||
| 6 | 214 | 2.67 | RG | ||
| 13 | 274.19 | 9 | WS | ||
| 15 | 270 | 2.86 | RL | ||
| 19 | 279.15 | 3.06 | YD | ||
| 24 | 239.14 | 7.79 | HT | ||
| 28 | 284.21 | 2.42 | WP | ||
| 29 | 359.3 | 4.56 | WC | ||
| 31 | 338.31 | 1.42 | WF | ||
| No. of peptides | 35 | ||||
| No. of dipeptides | 17 | ||||
| Total area of dipeptides | 72.46% | ||||
| Papain | Negative ion (ES−) | 4 | 181 | 56.03 | LA |
| 8 | 268 | 1.23 | YC | ||
| 9 | 275 | 1.59 | WW | ||
| 17 | 313.25 | 1.05 | WK | ||
| 19 | 295.21 | 6.15 | YM | ||
| 23 | 339.24 | 3.04 | CY | ||
| 25 | 347.22 | 11.46 | WC | ||
| 40 | 356.94 | 1.11 | WY | ||
| No. of peptides | 14 | ||||
| No. of dipeptides | 10 | ||||
| Total area of dipeptides | 82.35% | ||||
| Pepsin | Positive ion (ES+) | 1 | 141.78 | 3.27 | |
| 2 | 157.9 | 1.15 | |||
| 3 | 182.87 | 2.39 | |||
| 4 | 214.89 | 1.41 | |||
| 7 | 249.07 | 1.22 | |||
| 9 | 239.1 | 1.75 | |||
| 10 | 252.91 | 1.8 | |||
| 12 | 279.07 | 2.08 | |||
| 67 | 274 | 10.97 | |||
| 68 | 318.22 | 1.69 | |||
| No. of peptides | 53 | ||||
| No. of dipeptides | 12 | ||||
| Total area of dipeptides | 28.84% | ||||
| Pepsin | Negative ion (ES−) | 5 | 197.74 | 3.03 | HG |
| 6 | 199.75 | 2.82 | EA | ||
| No. of peptides | 183 | ||||
| No. of dipeptides | 23 | ||||
| Total area of dipeptides | 9.33% | ||||
A: alanine, T: theronine, G: glycine, M: methionine, R: arginine, Q: glutamine, W: tryptophane, S: serine, L: leucine, Y: tyrosine, D: aspartic acid, H: histidine, T: theronine, P: proline, C: cysteine, F: phenylalanine, K: lysine, E: glutamic acid.
Figure 2Degree of hydrolysis of pepsin- and papain-whey protein hydrolysates at different times (0–8 h) and antioxidant activity estimated by DPPH assay (% inhibition) at different degrees of hydrolysis.
Free amino acids (g/100g total free amino acids) of pepsin (PEH) and papain (PAH) whey protein hydrolysate.
| Amino Acid | Concentration (g/100g Total Free Amino Acids) | |
|---|---|---|
| PAH | PEH | |
| Aspartic | 8.5 | 9.9 |
| Glutamic | 14.5 | 13.2 |
| Cysteine | 1.6 | 2.6 |
| Serine | 3.8 | 4.8 |
| Histidine | 1.4 | 1.7 |
| Glycine | 1.4 | 5.9 |
| Threonine | 5.2 | 5.6 |
| Arginine | 19 | 9.5 |
| Alanine | 3.9 | 2.5 |
| Valine | 4.6 | 6.7 |
| Methionine | 1.6 | 0.3 |
| Isoleucine | 4.7 | 5.6 |
| Leucine | 8.4 | 9.3 |
| Phenylalanine | 2.4 | 2.2 |
| Lysine | 7.2 | 7.8 |
N, P and K-uptake of Pisum sativum plants under normal clay loam soil conditions, as treated with foliar spray of native whey protein (NAP), papain-hydrolyzed whey protein (PAH) or pepsin-hydrolyzed whey protein (PEH) at two different concentrations; 1000 and 2000 mg L−1, as compared to the normal control (CNT).
| Substance | Shoots | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | P | K | ||||
| Kg ha−1 | % Change | Kg ha−1 | % Change | Kg ha−1 | % Change | |
| CNT 0.0 | 19.75 ± 1.95 g | 2.93 ± 0.06 g | 22.32 ± 1.45 g | |||
| NAP 1000 | 26.83 ± 1.78 f | +36 | 3.92 ± 0.20 f | +34 | 28.80 ± 1.96 f | +29 |
| NAP 2000 | 47.01 ± 1.99 c | +138 | 7.76 ± 0.24 c | +165 | 50.18 ± 1.40 c | +125 |
| PAH 1000 | 32.62 ± 1.40 e | +65 | 5.36 ± 0.29 e | +83 | 34.72 ± 1.66 e | +56 |
| PAH 2000 | 56.60 ± 1.86 b | +187 | 9.38 ± 0.42 b | +220 | 59.13 ± 2.35 b | +165 |
| PEH 1000 | 38.86 ± 2.40 d | +97 | 6.32 ± 0.29 d | +116 | 42.96 ± 3.11 d | +92 |
| PEH 2000 | 64.83 ± 2.06 a | +228 | 10.81 ± 0.33 a | +269 | 70.04 ± 1.06 a | +214 |
| Mean | 40.93 | 6.64 | 44.02 | |||
| LSD 0.05% | 2.495 | 0.319 | 1.831 | |||
| C.V, % | 3.58 | 2.82 | 2.44 | |||
|
| ||||||
| CNT 0.0 | 33.54 ± 2.30 g | 2.97 ± 0.16 g | 18.36 ± 0.35 g | |||
| NAP 1000 | 56.96 ± 0.12 f | +70 | 4.90 ± 0.06 f | +65 | 28.95 ± 1.07 f | +58 |
| NAP 2000 | 99.94 ± 3.50 c | +198 | 8.84 ± 0.17 c | +198 | 52.32 ± 1.51 c | +185 |
| PAH 1000 | 72..95 ± 0.59 e | +117 | 6.28 ± 0.35 e | +111 | 36.90 ± 1.57 e | +101 |
| PAH 2000 | 117.4 ± 3.93 b | +250 | 10.15 ± 0.24 b | +242 | 58.00 ± 2.19 b | +216 |
| PEH 1000 | 84.58 ± 1.63 d | +152 | 7.47 ± 0.16 d | +152 | 42.43 ± 0.78 d | +131 |
| PEH 2000 | 133.5 ± 2.46 a | +298 | 12.93 ± 1.10 a | +335 | 65.95 ± 2.27 a | +259 |
| Mean | 85.55 | 7.65 | 43.27 | |||
| LSD 0.05% | 4.374 | 0.695 | 1.969 | |||
| C.V, % | 4.17 | 5.33 | 2.67 | |||
Mean values in the same column for each trait followed by the same lower-case italic letter is not significantly different according to Duncan’s multiple range test at p ≤ 0.05.
Photosynthetic pigment contents in Pisum sativum leaves after foliar spray with native milk whey protein (NAP), papain-hydrolyzed whey protein (PAH) or pepsin-hydrolyzed whey protein (PEH) at two different concentrations; 1000 and 2000 mg L−1, as compared to normal control (CNT).
| Treatment | Photosynthetic Pigments | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chlorophyll a | Chlorophyll b | Carotenoids | ||||
| mg g−1 FW | % Change | mg g−1FW | % Change | mg g−1 FW | % Change | |
| Control 0.0 | 1.27 ± 0.02 g | 0.41 ± 0.02 g | 0.34 ± 0.00 g | |||
| NAP 1000 | 1.32 ± 0.02 f | +4 | 0.49 ± 0.01 f | +20 | 0.40 ± 0.01 f | +18 |
| NAP 2000 | 1.55 ± 0.02 c | +22 | 0.71 ± 0.01 c | +73 | 0.52 ± 0.01 c | +53 |
| PAH 1000 | 1.38 ± 0.01 e | +9 | 0.52 ± 0.02 e | +27 | 0.44 ± 0.02 e | +29 |
| PAH 2000 | 1.60 ± 0.01 b | +26 | 0.78 ± 0.00 b | +90 | 0.60 ± 0.01 b | +76 |
| PEH 1000 | 1.43 ± 0.03 d | +3 | 0.61 ± 0.01 d | +49 | 0.48 ± 0.00 d | +41 |
| PEH 2000 | 1.72 ± 0.02 a | +35 | 0.84 ± 0.01 a | +105 | 0.65 ± 0.01 a | +91 |
Mean values in the same column for each trait followed by the same lower-case italic letter is not significantly different according to Duncan’s multiple range test at p ≤ 0.05.
Growth and yield parameters of Pisum sativum plants grown in poor clay loam soil and treated with foliar spray of native whey protein (NAP), papain-hydrolyzed whey protein (PAH) or pepsin-hydrolyzed whey protein (PEH) at two different concentrations; 1000 and 2000 mg L−1, as compared to normal control (CNT).
| Treatment | Plant Height (cm) | Leaf | No | % Change | Pod | % Change | No | % Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNT 0.0 | 51.37 ± 0.79 f | 16.32 ± 0.79 g | 12.67 ± 1.15 f | 5.30 ± 0.26 f | 4.10 ± 0.0 f | |||
| NAP 1000 | 65.41 ± 2.67 e | 17.31 ± 0.22 f | 15.00 ± 0.0 e | +18 | 6.17 ± 0.15 e | 16 | 5.30 ± 0.0 e | 29 |
| NAP 2000 | 75.74 ± 0.39 c | 25.08 ± 0.11 c | 19.67 ± 0.58 c | +55 | 8.50 ± 0.20 c | 60 | 7.40 ± 0.0 c | 80 |
| PAH 1000 | 68.12 ± 0.18 e | 19.38 ± 1.04 e | 15.67 ± 0.58 de | +24 | 6.77 ± 0.25 e | 28 | 5.50 ± 0.58 de | 34 |
| PAH 2000 | 82.29 ± 1.99 b | 26.91 ± 0.31 b | 23.00 ± 1.0 b | +82 | 9.39 ± 0.13 b | 77 | 8.30 ± 0.58 b | 102 |
| PEH 1000 | 71.76 ± 1.38 d | 21.94 ± 0.47 d | 17.33 ± 0.58 d | 37 | 7.43 ± 0.15 d | 40 | 6.40 ± 0.0 d | 56 |
| PEH 2000 | 90.26 ± 1.35 a | 29.75 ± 0.51 a | 26.67 ± 2.08 a | 110 | 10.73 ± 0.15 a | 102 | 9.60 ± 0.58 a | 134 |
Mean values in the same column for each trait followed by the same lower-case italic letter is not significantly different according to Duncan’s multiple range test at p ≤ 0.05.
Figure 3Protein content (A) and SDS-PAGE (B) of Pisum sativum plants under normal clay loam soil conditions treated with foliar spray of native whey protein (NAP), papain-hydrolysed whey protein (PAH) or pepsin-hydrolysed whey protein at two different concentrations; 1000 and 2000 mg L−1, as compared to normal control (CNT). St; Protein standard.
Global field yields of Pisum sativum plans cultivated under normal clay loam soil conditions and treated with foliar spray of native whey protein (NAP), papain-hydrolyzed whey protein (PAH) or pepsin-hydrolyzed whey protein (PEH) at two different concentrations; 1000 and 2000 mg L−1, as compared to normal control (CNT) that received no foliar spray.
| Treatment ppm | Weight | Pods | Shoot | % | Seed | % | Biological Yield | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CNT 0.0 | 10.65 ± 0.08 g | 3.03 ± 0.06 g | 1.49 ± 0.04 g | 1.30 ± 0.04 g | 2.78 ± 0.04 g | |||
| NAP 1000 | 11.58 ± 0.06 f | 3.47 ± 0.08 f | 1.69 ± 0.08 f | +13 | 1.82 ± 0.04 f | +40 | 3.51 ± 0.05 f | +26 |
| NAP 2000 | 14.16 ± 0.06 c | 4.78 ± 0.30 c | 2.21 ± 0.03 c | +48 | 2.40 ± 0.03 c | +85 | 4.62 ± 0.06 c | +66 |
| PAH 1000 | 12.41 ± 0.12 e | 3.80 ± 0.06 e | 1.90 ± 0.07 e | +28 | 2.14 ± 0.04 e | +65 | 4.04 ± 0.09 e | +45 |
| PAH 2000 | 15.29 ± 0.14 b | 5.81 ± 0.05 b | 2.46 ± 0.08 b | +65 | 2.54 ± 0.05 b | +95 | 5.00 ± 0.12 b | +80 |
| PEH 1000 | 13.08 ± 0.14 d | 4.20 ± 0.12 d | 2.08 ± 0.08 d | +40 | 2.27 ± 0.03 d | +75 | 4.35 ± 0.09 d | +56 |
| PEH 2000 | 16.66 ± 0.41 a | 6.30 ± 0.13 a | 2.61 ± 0.03 a | +75 | 2.67 ± 0.03 a | +105 | 5.28 ± 0.03 a | +90 |
| Mean | 13.4 | 4.49 | 2.06 | 2.16 | 4.23 | |||
| LSD 0.05 | 0.327 | 0.181 | 0.074 | 0.063 | 0.087 | |||
| C.V. | 1.43 | 2.37 | 2.11 | 1.70 | 1.21 |
Mean values in the same column for each trait followed by the same lower-case italic letter is not significantly different according to Duncan’s multiple range test at p ≤ 0.05.
Physicochemical properties of the investigated soil; soil particle distribution, soluble cations and anions, available nutrients and some physicochemical traits.
| Propert | Value | Property | Value | Property | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soil Particles Distribution | Soluble Cations & Anions Molc L−1 ** | Available Nutrients mg kg−1 Soil | |||
| Sand % | 40.54 | Ca++ | 2.92 | N | 85.74 |
| Silt % | 25.17 | Mg++ | 1.87 | P | 6.46 |
| Clay % | 34.29 | Na+ | 2.68 | K | 91.25 |
| Textural class | Clay loam | K+ | 0.69 | ||
| CO3= | - | ||||
| FCa % | 14.52 | HCO3− | 2.84 |
| |
| CaCO3 (g kg−1) | 6.19 | Cl− | 3.61 | pH * | 8.04 |
| OGb (g kg−1) | 4.91 | SO4= | 1.71 | EC(dSm−1) ** | 0.81 |
FC: Field capacity, OG: Organic matter * Soil-water suspension 1:1, ** Soil water extract 1:1.