| Literature DB >> 35407085 |
Yilin Guo1, Wentian Li1, Haiming Chen1,2, Weijun Chen1, Ming Zhang1, Qiuping Zhong1, Wenxue Chen1.
Abstract
The current research aimed to solve the environmental pollution of mature coconut water by Lipomyces starkeyi and provide a study of its high value utilization. The innovation firstly investigated the rheological properties and interface behavior of a crude exopolysaccharide and provided a technical support for its application in food. A response surface methodology was performed to ameliorate the fermentation factors of the new exopolysaccharide with mature coconut water as a substrate, and the consequences suggested that the maximum yield was 7.76 g/L under optimal conditions. Rotary shear measurements were used to study the influence of four variables on the viscosity of the exopolysaccharide solution. The results illustrated that the exopolysaccharide solution demonstrated a shear-thinning behavior and satisfactory thermal stability within the test range. The viscosity of the exopolysaccharide solution was significantly affected by ionic strength and pH; it reached the peak viscosity when the concentration of NaCl was 0.1 mol/L and the pH was neutral. The adsorption behavior of the exopolysaccharide at the medium chain triglyceride-water interface was investigated by a quartz crystal microbalance with a dissipation detector. The results demonstrated that the exopolysaccharide might form a multilayer adsorption layer, and the thickness of the adsorption layer was at its maximum at a concentration of 1.0%, while the interfacial film was the most rigid at a concentration of 0.4%. Overall, these results suggest that the exopolysaccharide produced by Lipomyces starkeyi is an excellent biomaterial for usage in drink, makeup and drug fabrications as a thickening and stabilizing agent.Entities:
Keywords: exopolysaccharide; interface adsorption; mature coconut water; response surface optimization; rheological properties
Year: 2022 PMID: 35407085 PMCID: PMC8997579 DOI: 10.3390/foods11070999
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1Effects of different concentrations of glucose (a), Zn2+ (b), Mn2+ (c), and pH (d) on the production of LSEP.
Process variables and their ranges of BBD.
| Level | −1 | 0 | 1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | 60 | 90 | 120 |
| B | 5.5 | 6.5 | 7.5 |
| C | 5 | 10 | 15 |
| D | 5 | 10 | 15 |
The Box–Behnken design and corresponding observed values.
| Run | A | B | C | D | Yield (g/L) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glucose (g/L) | pH | Mn2+ (mg/L) | Zn2+ (mg/L) | Experimental | Predicted | |
| 1 | 60 | 5.5 | 10 | 10 | 3.45 ± 0.03 p | 3.45 |
| 2 | 120 | 5.5 | 10 | 10 | 6.10 ± 0.05 d | 6.07 |
| 3 | 60 | 7.5 | 10 | 10 | 3.75 ± 0.04 o | 3.80 |
| 4 | 120 | 7.5 | 10 | 10 | 7.30 ± 0.06 b | 7.32 |
| 5 | 90 | 6.5 | 5 | 5 | 4.45 ± 0.05 l | 4.62 |
| 6 | 90 | 6.5 | 15 | 5 | 5.90 ± 0.07 f | 5.39 |
| 7 | 90 | 6.5 | 5 | 15 | 4.00 ± 0.02 n | 4.53 |
| 8 | 90 | 6.5 | 15 | 15 | 5.85 ± 0.03 f | 5.69 |
| 9 | 60 | 6.5 | 10 | 5 | 3.40 ± 0.01 p | 3.55 |
| 10 | 120 | 6.5 | 10 | 5 | 5.90 ± 0.06 f | 6.29 |
| 11 | 60 | 6.5 | 10 | 15 | 3.45 ± 0.03 p | 3.33 |
| 12 | 120 | 6.5 | 10 | 15 | 6.60 ± 0.05 c | 6.72 |
| 13 | 90 | 5.5 | 5 | 10 | 4.35 ± 0.05 m | 4.38 |
| 14 | 90 | 7.5 | 5 | 10 | 5.35 ± 0.03 h | 5.15 |
| 15 | 90 | 5.5 | 15 | 10 | 4.85 ± 0.02 k | 5.32 |
| 16 | 90 | 7.5 | 15 | 10 | 5.90 ± 0.06 f | 6.14 |
| 17 | 60 | 6.5 | 5 | 10 | 3.70 ± 0.01 o | 3.54 |
| 18 | 120 | 6.5 | 5 | 10 | 6.55 ± 0.05 c | 6.18 |
| 19 | 60 | 6.5 | 15 | 10 | 4.00 ± 0.03 n | 4.08 |
| 20 | 120 | 6.5 | 15 | 10 | 7.70 ± 0.08 a | 7.57 |
| 21 | 90 | 5.5 | 10 | 5 | 4.45 ± 0.03 l | 4.26 |
| 22 | 90 | 7.5 | 10 | 5 | 5.40 ± 0.05 h | 5.38 |
| 23 | 90 | 5.5 | 10 | 15 | 4.95 ± 0.03 j | 4.68 |
| 24 | 90 | 7.5 | 10 | 15 | 5.25 ± 0.05 i | 5.16 |
| 25 | 90 | 6.5 | 10 | 10 | 5.45 ± 0.02 g | 5.81 |
| 26 | 90 | 6.5 | 10 | 10 | 5.83 ± 0.04 f | 5.81 |
| 27 | 90 | 6.5 | 10 | 10 | 5.90 ± 0.03 f | 5.81 |
| 28 | 90 | 6.5 | 10 | 10 | 5.85 ± 0.06 f | 5.81 |
The values of different tags in the same rank are significant (p < 0.05, n = 3) by Duncan’s test.
The ANOVA details of the fitted equation model for the production of LSEP.
| Source | Sum of Squares | df a | Mean Square | F-Value | Significance b | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model | 36.24 | 14 | 2.59 | 22.79 | <0.0001 | ** |
| A-Glucose | 28.21 | 1 | 28.21 | 248.44 | <0.0001 | ** |
| B-pH | 1.92 | 1 | 1.92 | 16.91 | 0.0011 | ** |
| C-Mn | 2.80 | 1 | 2.80 | 24.69 | 0.0002 | ** |
| D-Zn | 0.0300 | 1 | 0.0300 | 0.2642 | 0.6153 | |
| AB | 0.2025 | 1 | 0.2025 | 1.78 | 0.2031 | |
| AC | 0.1806 | 1 | 0.1806 | 1.59 | 0.2279 | |
| AD | 0.1056 | 1 | 0.1056 | 0.9301 | 0.3512 | |
| BC | 0.0006 | 1 | 0.0006 | 0.0055 | 0.9419 | |
| BD | 0.1056 | 1 | 0.1056 | 0.9301 | 0.3512 | |
| CD | 0.0400 | 1 | 0.0400 | 0.3522 | 0.5623 | |
| A2 | 0.4864 | 1 | 0.4864 | 4.28 | 0.0575 | |
| B2 | 0.9065 | 1 | 0.9065 | 7.98 | 0.0135 | * |
| C2 | 0.2252 | 1 | 0.2252 | 1.98 | 0.1809 | |
| D2 | 2.04 | 1 | 2.04 | 18.00 | 0.0008 | ** |
| Residual | 1.59 | 14 | 0.1136 | |||
| Lack of Fit | 1.41 | 10 | 0.1414 | 3.22 | 0.1356 | Not significant |
| Pure Error | 0.1757 | 4 | 0.0439 | |||
| Cor Total | 37.83 | 28 | ||||
| Source | Sum of Squares | df a | Mean Square | F-value | Significance b |
R2 = 0.9580; Adjusted R2 = 0.9159; C.V. % = 6.45; Adeq Precision = 17.5357. a df, Degrees of freedom. b * significant influence (p < 0.05); ** highly significant influence (p < 0.01).
Figure 23D response surface and 2D contour plots. ((a): glucose concentration and pH; (b): glucose concentration and Mn2+ concentration; (c): glucose concentration and Zn2+ concentration; (d): pH and Mn2+ concentration; (e): pH and Zn2+ concentration; (f): Mn2+ concentration and Zn2+ concentration).
Figure 3The apparent viscosity dependence of LSEP solutions on shear rates at different pH (a), CaCl2 concentration (c), and NaCl concentration (e); the apparent viscosity dependence of LSEP solutions on temperature at different pH (b), CaCl2 concentration (d), and NaCl concentration (f).
Figure 4The frequency (a), dissipative (b) and thickness (c) during the adhesion and washing at the MCT-coated sensors; D-f plots (d) during adhesion and washing processes (K1, K2, K3, and K4 were the slopes at four different phases, respectively).
The slopes of all D-f curves, including K1, K2, K3, and K4 stages.
| K1 (LR) | K2 (LR) | K3 (LR) | K4 (LR) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.4% | −0.1242 ± 0.00199 (0.9650) a | −0.2780 ± 0.00088 (0.9711) c | −1.2710 ± 0.02397 (0.9386) c | −0.2389 ± 0.00149 (0.9622) a |
| 0.6% | −0.1959 ± 0.00187 (0.9797) c | −0.2759 ± 0.00068 (0.9837) c | −1.1649 ± 0.01166 (0.9574) b | −0.3420 ± 0.00213 (0.9640) c |
| 0.8% | −0.1851 ± 0.00225 (0.9630) b | −0.2401 ± 0.00045 (0.9901) b | −0.9431 ± 0.02375 (0.8561) a | −0.3819 ± 0.00523 (0.8424) d |
| 1.0% | −0.2852 ± 0.00205 (0.9880) d | −0.1859 ± 0.00044 (0.9803) a | −1.8835 ± 0.05091 (0.9435) d | −0.3298 ± 0.00202 (0.9632) b |
The values of different tags in the same rank are significant (p < 0.05, n = 3) by Duncan’s test. LR represents linear regression coefficients.