| Literature DB >> 35626975 |
María Belén Gutiérrez-Barrutia1,2, María Dolores Del Castillo2, Patricia Arcia1,3, Sonia Cozzano1.
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the effect of the extrusion process on the nutritional and bioactive profiles of brewer's spent grain (BSG), contributing to nutrition security by applying a circular economy concept. Response surface methodology was used to optimize the effect extrusion parameters (moisture content, screw speed, and barrel temperature ) had on BSG's soluble dietary fiber, free glucose, and overall antioxidant capacity. Proximate composition analyses, amino acid profile, extractable polyphenolic content, and antioxidant capacity of BSG and brewer's spent grain extruded under optimal conditions (BSGE) were carried out. Food safety was analyzed by their microbiological quality, gluten, and acrylamide content. Optimal extrusion conditions were 15.8% of moisture content, 164.3 revolutions per min and 122.5 °C. BSGE presented 61% more soluble dietary fiber than BSG, lower digestible starch, 0.546% of free glucose, and protein quality parameters mostly like those reported for egg, soy, and milk. Despite this, BSG's overall antioxidant capacity was not improved after thermomechanical processing; BSGE had significantly higher extractable polyphenolic content in its alkali extracts, which were determined qualitatively by high-performance liquid chromatography quadrupole time-of-flight assay in its hydro-alcoholic acid extracts. Furthermore, although it is not gluten free, BSGE is a safe food ingredient with acceptable microbiological quality and no acrylamide.Entities:
Keywords: amino acids; antioxidants; brewer’s spent grain; dietary fiber; extrusion; nutrition security; proteins; sustainability
Year: 2022 PMID: 35626975 PMCID: PMC9140782 DOI: 10.3390/foods11101403
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
CCRD and response values.
| Assay | Independent Variables | Dependent Variables | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coded | Actual | Responses | |||||||
| 0 | - | - | - | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1.103 ± 0.028 | 1.250 ± 0.028 | 1.315 ± 0.008 |
| 1 | −1 | −1 | −1 | 15 | 125 | 105 | 1.687 ± 0.064 | 5.612 ± 0.047 | 1.276 ± 0.108 |
| 2 | 1 | −1 | −1 | 25 | 125 | 105 | 1.235 ± 0.006 | 5.590 ± 0.032 | 1.094 ± 0.028 |
| 3 | −1 | 1 | −1 | 15 | 175 | 105 | 1.634 ± 0.069 | 5.525 ± 0.171 | 1.324 ± 0.110 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | −1 | 25 | 175 | 105 | 1.480 ±0.050 | 5.685 ± 0.132 | 1.109 ± 0.046 |
| 5 | −1 | −1 | 1 | 15 | 125 | 155 | 1.388 ± 0.045 | 5.584 ± 0.063 | 1.121 ± 0.070 |
| 6 | 1 | −1 | 1 | 25 | 125 | 155 | 1.233 ± 0.022 | 5.537 ± 0.199 | 1.036 ± 0.038 |
| 7 | −1 | 1 | 1 | 15 | 175 | 155 | 1.341 ± 0.009 | 4.857 ± 0.315 | 1.226 ±0.044 |
| 8 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 25 | 175 | 155 | 1.037 ± 0.012 | 4.279 ± 0.035 | 1.101 ± 0.076 |
| 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 150 | 130 | 1.992 ± 0.095 | 5.826 ± 0.306 | 1.076 ± 0.030 |
| 10 | −1.68 | 0 | 0 | 11.59 | 150 | 130 | 1.338 ± 0.030 | 6.266 ± 0.152 | 1.180 ± 0.026 |
| 11 | 1.68 | 0 | 0 | 28.41 | 150 | 130 | 1.333 ± 0.055 | 3.927 ± 0.150 | 1.027 ± 0.043 |
| 12 | 0 | −1.68 | 0 | 20 | 107.95 | 130 | 1.229 ± 0.063 | 4.710 ± 0.181 | 1.133 ± 0.012 |
| 13 | 0 | 1.68 | 0 | 20 | 192.05 | 130 | 1.255 ± 0.005 | 6.027 ± 0.204 | 1.171 ± 0.030 |
| 14 | 0 | 0 | −1.68 | 20 | 150 | 87.96 | 0.820 ± 0.010 | 5.451 ± 0.035 | 1.252 ± 0.018 |
| 15 | 0 | 0 | 1.68 | 20 | 150 | 172.05 | 0.691 ± 0.019 | 5.649 ± 0.398 | 1.070 ± 0.054 |
| 16 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 150 | 130 | 1.775 ± 0.043 | 5.471 ± 0.265 | 1.107 ± 0.027 |
| 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 150 | 130 | 1.753 ± 0.084 | 5.803 ± 0.306 | 0.991 ± 0.056 |
| 18 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 150 | 130 | 1.802 ± 0.070 | 5.595 ± 0.013 | 1.077 ± 0.072 |
| 19 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 20 | 150 | 130 | 1.738 ± 0.059 | 5.564 ± 0.266 | 1.137 ± 0.014 |
Regression summaries for dependent variables.
| Coefficients in Terms of Coded Factors | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Factors | |||
| Intercept | 1.81 | 5.44 | 1.10 |
|
| −0.0383 | −0.4793 *** | −0.0560 *** |
|
| +0.0397 | −0.3402 *** | 0.0145 |
|
| −0.0515 | 0.1688 *** | −0.0531 *** |
|
| −0.2924 ** | −0.1471 *** | ns |
|
| −0.2925 ** | 0.3468 *** | ns |
|
| −0.3652 *** | −0.1139 ** | 0.0357 ** |
|
| −0.1688 *** | −0.2679 *** | ns |
|
| −0.2019 *** | −0.3846 *** | 0.0196 * |
|
| −0.3740 *** | 0.0798 ** | 0.0226 * |
|
| |||
| F-value (model) | 20.44 *** | 68.12 *** | 33.93 ** |
| Lack of fit | 0.5646 | 0.7886 | 0.8273 |
| R2 | 0.9633 | 0.9082 | 0.9532 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.9162 | 0.8948 | 0.9251 |
| Predicted R2 | 0.7443 | 0.8743 | 0.8806 |
| CV | 7.07 | 4.15 | 2.00 |
MC, SS, BT, SDF, FG, and OAC represent moisture content, screw speed, barrel temperature, soluble dietary fiber, free glucose, and total antioxidant capacity. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001; ns: not significant.
Figure 1Response surface plots showing the effects of (a) moisture content (MC) and screw speed (SS), (b) moisture content (MC) and barrel temperature (BT), and (c) barrel temperature (BT) and screw speed (SS) on soluble dietary fiber content (SDF).
Figure 2Response surface plots showing the effects of (a) moisture content (MC) and screw speed (SS), (b) moisture content (MC) and barrel temperature (BT), and (c) barrel temperature (BT) and screw speed (SS) on free glucose content (FG).
Figure 3Response surface plots showing the effects of (a) moisture content (MC) and screw speed (SS), (b) moisture content (MC) and barrel temperature (BT), and (c) barrel temperature (BT) and screw speed (SS) on overall antioxidant content (OAC).
Proximate composition of BSG and BSGE.
| BSG | BSGE | |
|---|---|---|
| Carbohydrates | ||
| Total dietary fiber (TDF) | 49.66 ± 0.22 a | 48.47 ± 0.91 a |
| Insoluble dietary fiber (IDF) | 48.57 ± 0.15 b | 46.70± 0.63 a |
| Soluble dietary fiber (SDF) | 1.12 ± 0.03 a | 1.77 ± 0.00 b |
| Total starch | 4.498 ± 0.18 b | 4.14 ± 0.17 a |
| Digestible starch | 2.68± 0.11 b | 2.55 ± 0.06 a |
| Resistant starch | 1.71 ± 0.04 a | 1.69 ± 0.01 a |
| Free glucose | 0.13 ±0.00 a | 0.54 ± 0.02 b |
| Proteins (g/100 g dwb) | 29.78 ± 0.33 a | 29.46 ± 0.11 a |
| Lipids (g/100 g dwb) | 9.61 ± 0.04 a | 10.34 ± 0.01 b |
| Ash (g/100 g dwb) | 3.27 ± 0.02 a | 3.31 ± 0.06 a |
Different letters within the same row mean significant differences (p > 0.05).
Amino acid composition of BSG and BSGE.
| Amino Acid (g/100 g dwb) | BSG | BSGE | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nonessential amino acids (NEAA) | Alanine (Ala) | 2.054 ± 0.028 b | 1.888 ± 0.039 a |
| Arginine (Arg) | 0.996 ± 0.022 b | 0.857 ± 0.020 a | |
| Aspartic acid (Asp) | 1.954 ± 0.0246 b | 1.800 ± 0.033 a | |
| Cysteine (Cys) | 0.220 ± 0.017 b | 0.176 ± 0.006 a | |
| Glutamic acid (Glu) | 5.360 ± 0.226 a | 5.124 ± 0.107 a | |
| Glycine (Gly) | 1.075 ± 0.016 b | 0.988 ± 0.020 a | |
| Proline (Pro) | 2.994 ± 0.063 b | 2.729 ± 0.083 a | |
| Serine (Ser) | 1.460 ± 0.011 b | 1.361 ± 0.030 a | |
| Tyrosine (Tyr) | 0.939 ± 0.020 b | 0.768 ± 0.009 a | |
| Essential amino acids (EAA) | Histidine (His) | 0.832 ± 0.016 b | 0.755 ± 0.017 a |
| Isoleucine (Ile) | 1.108 ± 0.009 b | 1.023 ± 0.020 a | |
| Leucine (Leu) | 3.188 ± 0.150 a | 3.003 ± 0.042 a | |
| Lysine (Lys) | 0.931 ± 0.032 b | 0.857 ± 0.025 a | |
| Methionine (Met) | 0.589 ± 0.012 b | 0.527 ± 0.008 a | |
| Phenylalanine (Phe) | 1.593 ± 0.028 b | 1.472 ± 0.030 a | |
| Threonine (Thr) | 1.111 ± 0.011 b | 1.014 ± 0.019 a | |
| Tryptophan (Trp) | n.d. | n.d. | |
| Valine (Val) | 1.453 ± 0.019 b | 1.356 ± 0.018 a | |
| Total | 27.859 ± 0.264 b | 25.698 ± 0.419 a |
Different letters within the same row mean significant differences (p > 0.05). n.d means not determined.
BSG and BSGE’s nutritional protein quality parameters.
| BSG | BSGE | |
|---|---|---|
| EAA (g/100 g of protein) | 38.786 ± 0.272 a | 39.351 ± 0.188 b |
| Phe + Tyr (AAA) (g/100 g of protein) | 8.505 ± 0.151 b | 7.605 ± 0.084 a |
| Ile + Leu + Val (BCAA) (g/100 g of protein) | 19.310 ± 0.561 b | 18.272 ± 0.243 a |
| Fischer’s ratio (BCAA/AAA) | 2.271 ± 0.092 a | 2.403 ± 0.037 a |
| Lys/Arg ratio | 0.935 ± 0.045 a | 0.999 ± 0.026 a |
| %EAAI | 76.074 ± 0.261 b | 70.698 ± 1.1888 a |
| BV | 71.220 ± 0.285 b | 65.361 ± 1.296 a |
| NI | 22.647 ± 0.078 b | 21.047 ± 0.359 a |
| PER1 | 4.671 ± 0.222 a | 4.400 ± 0.073 a |
| PER2 | 4.724 ± 0.224 a | 4.434 ± 0.068 a |
| PER3 | 5.009 ± 0.443 a | 4.993 ± 0.098 a |
| SAT1 (g/100 g of protein) | 24.443 ± 0.375 b | 22.625 ± 0.326 a |
| SAT2 (g/100 g of protein) | 6.885 ± 0.102 b | 6.050 ± 0.071 a |
Essential amino acids (EAA), phenylalanine (Phe), tyrosine (Tyr), isoleucine (Ile), leucine (Leu), valine (Val), branched-chain amino acids (BCAA), aromatic amino acids (AAA), lysine (Lys), arginine (Arg), essential amino acid index (EAAI), biological value (BV), nutritional index (NI), protein efficiency ratio (PER), satiety indicators (SAT). Different letters within the same row mean significant differences (p > 0.05).
Phenolic content and antioxidant capacity of BSG and BSGE’s extracts.
| Sample | Extraction Method | EPC (mg GAE/g dwb) | ABTS Method | ORAC Method |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BSG | EHAA 5 min | 1.403 ± 0.056 b | 27.126 ± 1.287 a | 25.475 ± 1.305 a |
| EHAA 24 h | 1.569 ± 0.038 c | 38.548 ± 0.851 a,b | 50.188 ± 0.873 b | |
| Alkaline 5 min | 1.587 ± 0.056 c | 38.945 ± 0.651 c | 216.232 ± 7.951 c | |
| Alkaline 24 h | 3.623 ± 0.124 e | 79.143 ± 2.834 e | 304.923 ± 5.752 d | |
| BSGE | EHAA 5 min | 1.206 ± 0.044 a | 26.904 ± 0.906 a | 23.337 ± 1.395 a |
| EHAA 24 h | 1.623 ± 0.088 c | 32.084 ± 1.590 b | 67.591 ± 0.037 b | |
| Alkaline 5 min | 2.366 ± 0.110 d | 52.200 ± 1.215 d | 311.769 ± 6.654 d | |
| Alkaline 24 h | 4.221 ± 0.114 f | 92.955 ± 4.775 f | 492.470 ± 8.691 e |
Extractable phenolic content (EPC), gallic acid equivalent (GAE), hydro-alcoholic acid extraction (EHAA), 2,2′-azino-bis (3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonic acid) (ABTS), total antioxidant capacity by oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), Trolox equivalent (TE). Different letters within the same column mean significant differences (p > 0.05).
Qualitative analysis of phenolic compounds present in BSG and BSGE.
| Proposed Compound | Molecular Formula | Molar Mass (g/mol) | Retention Time (min) | Relative | Relative | Variation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C9H8O3 | 163.0 | 16.4 | 0.4 | 0.9 | 111.1 | |
| 2-(3-hydroxyphenyl) propionic acid | C9H10O3 | 165.1 | 16.7 | 51.6 | 58.8 | 27.5 |
| Ferulic acid | C15H18O8 | 193.1 | 20.0 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 72.4 |
| C15H18O8 | 325.1 | 18.2 | 1.3 | 1.5 | 23.9 | |
| Hydrodiferulic | C20H18O8 | 385.1 | 6.7 | 7.5 | 6.2 | −7.5 |
| Dihydrocaffeic acid | C9H10O4 | 181.1 | 6.7 | 24.9 | 19.4 | −12.7 |
| Dihydrobenzoic acid | C7H6O4 | 153.0 | 4.3 | 4.0 | 3.0 | −15.6 |
| Hydroxybenzoic acid | C7H6O3 | 137.0 | 7.6 | 5.4 | 4.5 | −5.2 |
| Benzoic acid | C7H6O2 | 121.0 | 11.5 | 4.6 | 5.7 | 31.3 |
(*) Calculated as the ration between each compound chromatogram area and the sum of all areas registered. (**) Calculated as the ratio between the difference of area in BSGE and BSG and its chromatogram area in BSG for each compound.
Food security evaluation of BSG and BSGE.
| BSG | BSGE | |
|---|---|---|
| Total aerobic count (cfu/g) | (5.150 ± 1.626) × 106 b | (6.550 ± 0.636) × 102 a |
| Total aerobic endospores count (cfu/g) | (3.250 ± 0.495) × 104 b | 6.000 ± 1.414 a |
| Total molds and yeasts count (cfu/g) | (1.700 ± 0.282) × 106 a | n.d. |
| Gluten (ppm) | (30.519 ± 2.361) × 105 b | (25.258 ± 1.413) × 105 a |
| Acrilamida | <20 µg/kg a | <20 µg/kg a |
Different letters within the same row mean significant differences (p > 0.05). n.d means not determined.