| Literature DB >> 35519201 |
Yuexi Yang1, Zhoujieyu Ji1, Cheng Wu1, Yin-Yi Ding1,2, Zhenyu Gu1.
Abstract
This study focused on the effect of the heating process on the whole cotyledon soymilk and tofu. Whole cotyledon soymilk was made from soybean cotyledon and processed by enzymatic hydrolysis using cellulase and high-pressure homogeneity. In this study, a one-step heating method was selected for the cooking process of whole cotyledon soybean milk, and the whole cotyledon soybean milk was heated to 90 °C and held for 4 min. Results showed that the protein, total saccharides and dietary fiber content of the whole cotyledon soymilk were higher than those of the tradition soymilk due to the existence of bean dregs (okara). Both protein aggregation and protein-polysaccharide interaction were observed during the heating process. We also found a change in soymilk physicochemical characteristics such as particle size distribution, viscosity, surface hydrophobicity and soluble protein during the heating process. The results in this study showed that compared with traditional tofu, the phytic acid and trypsin inhibitor content in whole cotyledon tofu was lower, so its protein had higher digestibility in vitro. In conclusion, whole cotyledon tofu had better health properties and application prospects. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35519201 PMCID: PMC9057697 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra07911a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Preparation of stock solution of simulated gastric fluid (SGF) and simulated intestinal fluid (SIF)
| Components | Concentration of electrolytic liquid | SGF stock solution (pH = 3) | SIF stock solution (pH = 7) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Volume | Concentration in SGF | Volume | Concentration in SIF | |||
| g L−1 | mol L−1 | mL | mM | mL | mM | |
| KCl | 37.3 | 0.5 | 6.9 | 6.9 | 6.8 | 6.8 |
| KH2PO4 | 68.0 | 0.5 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 |
| NaHCO3 | 84.0 | 1.0 | 12.5 | 25.0 | 42.5 | 85.0 |
| NaCl | 117.0 | 2.0 | 11.8 | 47.2 | 9.6 | 38.4 |
| MgCl2(H2O)6 | 30.5 | 0.15 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 1.1 | 0.33 |
| (NH4)2CO3 | 48.0 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | — | — |
| CaCl2(H2O)2 | 44.1 | 0.3 | — | 0.15 | — | 0.6 |
Chemical compositions of raw whole cotyledon soymilk and traditional soymilk
| Main components | Content (g/100 mL) | |
|---|---|---|
| Whole cotyledon soymilk | Traditional soymilk | |
| Protein | 4.68 ± 0.09 | 2.75 ± 0.03 |
| Fat | 2.22 ± 0.24 | 2.04 ± 0.11 |
| Carbohydrate | 2.10 ± 0.01 | 1.50 ± 0.03 |
| Fiber | 1.42 ± 0.02 | 0.30 ± 0.01 |
p < 0.001 when compared with whole cotyledon tofu.
Fig. 1The varying tendency of volume average particle size and temperature of whole cotyledon soymilk during the process of heating. Bars indicate standard deviation. (a–e) Means do not share a common superscript letter are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Fig. 2Differences of particle size distribution between the raw whole cotyledon soymilk and traditional soymilk.
Fig. 3The varying tendency of particle size distribution of whole cotyledon soymilk during the heating process. (a) Heated 0–8 min and (b) heated 10–18 min.
Fig. 4The varying tendency of viscosity and temperature of whole cotyledon soymilk during the heating process.
The changes of surface hydrophobicity and soluble protein content of whole cotyledon soymilk during the heating process
| Boiling time | 0 min | 2 min | 4 min | 6 min | 8 min | 10 min | 12 min | 14 min | 16 min | 18 min |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Surface hydrophobicity | 1071.72 ± 69.29 | 1021.84 ± 52.66 | 1147.44 ± 61.06 | 1544.07 ± 41.96 | 1785.84 ± 74.81 | 1743.90 ± 54.82 | 2024.34 ± 70.02 | 1731.80 ± 88.07 | 1303.80 ± 35.00 | 1274.15 ± 44.56 | <0.0001 |
| Soluble protein content (mg mL−1) | 230.04 ± 12.70 | 213.77 ± 11.20 | 157.34 ± 14.98 | 100.31 ± 7.01 | 69.33 ± 12.64 | 52.67 ± 11.05 | 48.43 ± 10.38 | 48.03 ± 10.26 | 47.87 ± 10.17 | 48.20 ± 11.05 | <0.0001 |
Effect of heating method on viscosity and content of free sulfhydryl group in whole cotyledon soymilka
| Heating method | Condition | Viscosity (mPa s) | Free sulfhydryl group (μmol g−1) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Two-step | 70 °C (5 min) to 95 °C (5 min) | 81.0 ± 0.01B | 0.95 ± 0.01d |
| 75 °C (5 min) to 95 °C (5 min) | 73.3 ± 0.6C | 1.13 ± 0.06d | |
| 80 °C (5 min) to 95 °C (5 min) | 84.3 ± 0.6A | 1.36 ± 0.01c | |
| One-step | 85 °C (5 min) | 46.7 ± 0.6F | 1.51 ± 0.01c |
| 90 °C (5 min) | 62.3 ± 0.6E | 2.11 ± 0.06b | |
| 95 °C (5 min) | 69.0 ± 0.01D | 2.45 ± 0.16a |
Different letters indicated significant differences (p < 0.05). Capital letters indicated the difference of viscosity of whole cotyledon soybean milk in different heating methods, and lower letters indicate the difference of thiol group content in whole cotyledon soybean milk in different heating methods.
Effect of heating method on texture properties of whole cotyledon tofu
| Temperature | Texture properties | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gel strength (g) | Hardness (g) | Springiness | Chewiness | |
| 90 °C (5 min) | 71.5 ± 4.9 | 108.9 ± 0.3 | 0.945 ± 0.003 | 37.8 ± 1.7 |
| 95 °C (5 min) | 61.0 ± 4.2 | 67.8 ± 2.1 | 0.939 ± 0.003 | 28.9 ± 4.4 |
The changes of sulfhydryl group content of whole cotyledon soymilk during the heating process
| Boiling time | 0 min | 2 min | 4 min | 6 min | 8 min | 10 min | 12 min | 14 min | 16 min | 18 min |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sulfhydryl group content (μmol g−1 protein) | 2.43 ± 0.14 | 2.39 ± 0.12 | 3.40 ± 0.15 | 2.98 ± 0.13 | 2.62 ± 0.11 | 2.99 ± 0.09 | 2.49 ± 0.06 | 2.70 ± 0.07 | 2.59 ± 0.10 | 3.04 ± 0.08 | <0.0001 |
Fig. 5SDS-PAGE profile of whole cotyledon soymilk under different temperature (a) and different heating time (b) α, α′ and β: subunits of β-conglycinin; A, A3 and B: acidic and basic subunits of glycinin; BX1 and BX2: oleosins.
Texture properties of whole cotyledon tofu prepared from heating whole cotyledon soymilk with different boiling time
| Boiling time | 0 min | 2 min | 4 min | 6 min |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gel strength (g) | 84.5 ± 7.8 | 94.5 ± 0.7 | 120.0 ± 9.9 | 84.0 ± 4.2 | <0.0001 |
| Hardness (g) | 77.1 ± 2.971 | 85.4 ± 0.727 | 94.8 ± 1.536 | 67.8 ± 2.164 | <0.0001 |
| Springiness | 0.8 ± 0.004 | 0.9 ± 0.013 | 1.0 ± 0.010 | 1.0 ± 0.003 | <0.0001 |
| Chewiness | 29.6 ± 1.415 | 38.6 ± 0.014 | 47.1 ± 0.254 | 28.9 ± 4.439 | <0.0001 |
Differences of anti-nutrient factor content between the whole cotyledon tofu and traditional tofu
| Anti-nutrient factors | Whole cotyledon tofu | Traditional tofu |
|---|---|---|
| Phytic acid (mg g−1) | 1.71 ± 0.81 | 23.35 ± 0.79 |
| Trypsin inhibitor (mg g−1) | 0.56 ± 0.06 | 1.65 ± 0.06 |
p < 0.001 when compared with whole cotyledon tofu.
Fig. 6The difference of protein digestibility in SGF (a) and SIF (b) between whole cotyledon tofu and traditional tofu.
Differences of color indexes between the whole cotyledon tofu and traditional tofu
| Color index | Whole cotyledon tofu | Traditional tofu |
|---|---|---|
|
| 88.33 ± 0.86 | 81.13 ± 1.90 |
|
| 0.24 ± 0.09 | 1.77 ± 0.12 |
|
| 13.19 ± 0.39 | 15.93 ± 0.60 |
p < 0.001 when compared with whole cotyledon tofu.
Differences of texture properties between the whole cotyledon tofu and traditional tofu
| Gel strength/g | Hardness/g | Springiness | Chewiness | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whole cotyledon tofu | 120.0 ± 9.9 | 94.8 ± 1.5 | 1.00 ± 0.01 | 47.1 ± 0.3 |
| Traditional tofu | 178.4 ± 4.3 | 181.2 ± 4.3 | 0.99 ± 0.02 | 37.7 ± 1.8 |
p < 0.05 when compared with whole cotyledon tofu.
p < 0.001 when compared with whole cotyledon tofu.