| Literature DB >> 36230043 |
Ankita Chandak1, Sanju Bala Dhull1, Prince Chawla2, Melinda Fogarasi3, Szabolcs Fogarasi4,5.
Abstract
A comparative study between two novel starch modification technologies, i.e., microwave (MI) and γ-irradiation (IR), is of important significance for their applications. The objective of this work is to compare the changes in lotus rhizome starch (LRS) subjected to single modifications by MI (thermal treatment) and IR (non-thermal treatment), and dual modification by changing the treatment sequence, i.e., microwave followed by irradiation (MI-IR) and irradiation followed by microwave (IR-MI). The amylose content of native and modified LRS varied from 14.68 to 18.94%, the highest and lowest values found for native and MI-LRS, respectively. IR-treated LRS showed the lowest swelling power (4.13 g/g) but highest solubility (86.9%) among native and modified LRS. An increase in light transmittance value suggested a lower retrogradation rate for dual-modified starches, making them more suitable for food application at refrigeration and frozen temperatures. Dual-modified LRS showed the development of fissures and dents on the surface of granules as well as the reduction in peak intensities of OH and CH2 groups in FTIR spectra. Combined modifications (MI and IR) reduced values of pasting parameters and gelatinization properties compared to native and microwaved LRS and showed improved stability to shear thinning during cooking and thermal processing. The sequence of modification also affected the rheological properties; the G' and G″ of MI-IR LRS were lower (357.41 Pa and 50.16 Pa, respectively) than the IR-MI sample (511.96 Pa and 70.09 Pa, respectively), giving it a soft gel texture. Nevertheless, dual modification of LRS by combining MI and IR made more significant changes in starch characteristics than single modifications.Entities:
Keywords: dual modification; lotus rhizome starch; microwave; modification sequence; γ-irradiation
Year: 2022 PMID: 36230043 PMCID: PMC9562692 DOI: 10.3390/foods11192969
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Amylose content, swelling power, and solubility of native and modified lotus rhizome starches.
| Sample | Amylose Content (%) | Swelling Power (at 90 °C) (g/g) | Solubility (at 90 °C) | WAC | OAC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Native | 18.94 ± 0.19 a | 23.82 ± 0.16 a | 9.63 ± 0.13 e | 1.62 ± 0.1 e | 1.30 ± 0.03 e |
| MI | 14.68 ± 0.21 d | 19.50 ± 0.13 b | 12.51 ± 0.09 d | 1.78 ± 0.03 d | 1.41 ± 0.02 d |
| IR | 16.55 ± 0.24 c | 4.13 ± 0.14 d | 86.9 ± 0.20 a | 1.88 ± 0.02 c | 1.53 ± 0.04 c |
| MI-IR | 17.58 ± 0.23 b | 10 ± 0.15 c | 79.5 ± 0.15 b | 1.95 ± 0.01 b | 1.89 ± 0.01 a |
| IR-MI | 18.86 ± 0.24 a | 9.71 ± 0.14 c | 78.5 ± 0.17 c | 2.00 ± 0.01 a | 1.78 ± 0.01 b |
MI: Microwaved, IR: Irradiated, MI-IR: Microwaved–irradiated, IR-MI: Irradiated–microwaved; WAC: Water absorption capacity; OAC: Oil absorption capacity. a–e: Means ± SD within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 1Effect of storage duration on light transmittance (%) of native and modified lotus rhizome starch pastes.
Figure 2Morphological properties of native and modified lotus rhizome starches. (A)—Native; (B)—Microwaved (MI); (C)—Irradiated (IR); (D)—Microwaved–Irradiated (MI-IR); (E)—Irradiated–Microwaved (IR-MI).
Figure 3FTIR spectra of native and modified lotus rhizome starches. (A)—Native; (B)—MI; (C)—IR; (D)—MI-IR; (E)—IR-MI; (F)—IR—ratios for absorbance 1047/1022 and 995/1022 of native and modified LRS.
Figure 4XRD spectra of native and modified lotus rhizome starches (A)—Native; (B)—MI; (C)—IR; (D)—MI-IR; (E)—IR-MI.
Pasting properties of native and modified lotus rhizome starches.
| Sample | PV (mPa.s) | TV (mPa.s) | BDV | FV (mPa.s) | SBV (mPa.s) | PT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Native | 4486 ± 35 a | 1834 ± 25 b | 2652 ± 23 a | 2791 ± 21 b | 957 ± 15 a | 74.3 ± 0.1 c |
| MI | 3880 ± 33 b | 2384 ± 29 a | 1496 ± 26 b | 3095 ± 32 a | 711 ± 16 b | 76.9 ± 0.2 a |
| IR | 649 ± 13 e | 36 ± 2 e | 613 ± 14 e | 63 ± 11 e | 26 ± 3 d | 71.2 ± 0.1 d |
| MI-IR | 706 ± 18 d | 69 ± 11 d | 636 ± 17 d | 99 ± 12 d | 29 ± 2 d | 74.9 ± 0.2 c |
| IR-MI | 847 ± 15 c | 105 ± 10 c | 742 ± 15 c | 156 ± 12 c | 51 ± 4 c | 75.1 ± 0.3 b |
PV: Peak viscosity, TV: Trough viscosity, BDV: Breakdown viscosity, FV: Final viscosity, SBV: Set back viscosity, PT: Pasting temperature. a–e: Means ± SD within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 5Pasting profile of native and modified lotus rhizome starches. A—Native; B—MI; C—IR; D—MI-IR; E—IR-MI.
Thermal properties of native and modified lotus rhizome starches.
| Sample | Δ | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Native | 28.9 ± 0.2 d | 78.1 ± 0.5 c | 139.8 ± 0.3 a | 253.1 ± 0.2 c |
| MI | 29.2 ± 0.3 cd | 86.7 ± 0.4 a | 140.5 ± 0.5 a | 323.7 ± 0.3 a |
| IR | 29.6 ± 0.5 bc | 82.6 ± 0.3 b | 140.2 ± 0.2 a | 287.6 ± 0.1 b |
| MI-IR | 31.3 ± 0.4 a | 77.3 ± 0.1 c | 130.4 ± 0.1 b | 199.7 ± 0.4 e |
| IR-MI | 30.3 ± 0.1 b | 72.9 ± 0.2 d | 125.1 ± 0.6 c | 228.0 ± 0.2 d |
To: Onset temperature; Tp: Peak temperature; Tc: Conclusion temperature; ΔHgel: Enthalpy of gelatinization (dwb, based on starch weight). a–e: Means ± SD within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Dynamic rheological properties of native and modified lotus rhizome starches.
| Sample | Storage Modulus G′ (Pa) | Loss Modulus G″ (Pa) | tanδ (G″/G′) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Native | 216.00 ± 4 d | 86.64 ± 5 b | 0.40 |
| MI | 673.48 ± 8 a | 143.29 ± 6 a | 0.21 |
| IR | 149.71 ± 5 e | 49.22 ± 5 d | 0.33 |
| MI-IR | 357.41 ± 5 c | 50.16 ± 7 d | 0.14 |
| IR-MI | 511.96 ± 7 b | 70.09 ± 7 c | 0.14 |
a–e: Means ± SD within the column with different lowercase superscripts are significantly different (p < 0.05).
Figure 6(A) Angular frequency dependence of G′ at 25 °C for native and modified lotus rhizome starches A—Native; B—MI; C—IR; D—MI-IR; E—IR-MI. (B) Angular frequency dependence of G″ at 25 °C for native and modified lotus rhizome starches A—Native; B—MI; C—IR; D—MI-IR; E—IR-MI.