Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2rsb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-13T10:29:16.319Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Aspects of physical and chemical alterations to proteins during food processing – some implications for nutrition

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2012

Juliet A. Gerrard*
Affiliation:
Riddet Institute, Massey University, PB 11 222, Palmerston North4442, New ZealandBiomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Moritz Lasse
Affiliation:
Riddet Institute, Massey University, PB 11 222, Palmerston North4442, New ZealandBiomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Justine Cottam
Affiliation:
Biomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandFonterra Research Centre, Fonterra Co-operative Group Limited, Dairy Farm Road, Palmerston North4442, New Zealand
Jackie P. Healy
Affiliation:
Biomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Sian E. Fayle
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandPlant and Food Research, Private Bag 4704, Lincoln, New Zealand
Indira Rasiah
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandPlant and Food Research, Private Bag 4704, Lincoln, New Zealand
Paula K. Brown
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
Suhaimi Md. BinYasir
Affiliation:
School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandPlant and Food Research, Private Bag 4704, Lincoln, New Zealand
Kevin H. Sutton
Affiliation:
Plant and Food Research, Private Bag 4704, Lincoln, New Zealand
Nigel G. Larsen
Affiliation:
Riddet Institute, Massey University, PB 11 222, Palmerston North4442, New ZealandBiomolecular Interaction Centre, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New ZealandPlant and Food Research, Private Bag 4704, Lincoln, New Zealand
*
*Corresponding author: Juliet A. Gerrard, fax 0064 3 3642987 extn 7302, email juliet.gerrard@canterbury.ac.nz
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we give an overview of our research exploring the impact of physical and chemical processing on food proteins. There are three themes, applied to the proteins of wheat, soya, egg and dairy foods. Firstly, the impact of the Maillard reaction on food proteins is discussed, with a particular focus on how the reactions might be harnessed to manipulate food texture. Secondly, the potential of enzymatic protein-protein crosslinking is considered, especially the enzyme transglutaminase. Thirdly, the broader question of how the aggregation of proteins within a food is altered by chemical and physical modification and how, in turn, this might impact on the overall nutritional quality of the food is considered.

Information

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2012
Figure 0

Fig. 1Possible interrelationships between food protein structure, protein chemical derivatisation and nutritional value in the final food.

Figure 1

Fig. 2Treatment of soya milk with glutaraldehyde during the preparation of tofu changes the fracture force and the ultrastructure of the final product. (a) and (b) represent micrographs of 1 and 2 mM glutaraldehyde added before soyamilk boiling. (c) represents the control. (d) and (e) represent micrographs of 1 and 2 mM glutaraldehyde added after soymilk boiling. The images are representative of five replicate experiment. The scale bar represents 10 μm. For more detail, refer to Yasir et al.(14,18).

Figure 2

Fig. 3SDS PAGE analysis of crosslinking of milk proteins. Lanes 1/2, WPI controls containing no glutaraldehyde, non heated (lane 1), heated for the duration of the experiment (lane 2). Lane 3 – WPI+50 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 4 – WPI+20 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 5 – WPI+10 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 6 – WPI+6 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 7 – WPI+5 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 8 – WPI+4 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 9 – WPI+2 mM glutaraldehyde; lane 10 – WPI+1 mM glutaraldehyde.

Figure 3

Fig. 4Plot of gelation curves obtained with the whey protein solution (WPI) pre-crosslinked with glutaraldehyde in acid-gel experiments. Storage modulus (G′) as a function of time (hrs). WPI Control (no glutaraldehyde), WPI (0·125 mM glutaraldehyde), WPI (0·25 mM glutaraldehyde), WPI (0·5 mM glutaraldehyde), WPI (1 mM glutaraldehyde), WPI (2 mM glutaraldehyde).

Figure 4

Fig. 5Transglutaminase has a dramatic impact on croissant pastry. In this image, the control croissant is made to a standard recipe whilst the croissant on the left is made to the same recipe, with the addition of transglutaminase. Unfortunately, doubts have been cast on the safety of transglutaminase for the use in wheat-based products. For more details refer previous paper(19,10).

Figure 5

Fig. 6SDS-PAGE analysis of proteins extracted from croissant pastry. Lane 1, molecular weight markers. Lanes 2/3, albumin and globulin fraction with/without transglutaminase; lanes 4/5, gliadin fraction with/without transglutaminase; lanes 6/7 soluble glutenin fraction with/without transglutaminase; lanes 8/9 insolble glutenin fraction with/without transglutaminase. Arrows highlight crosslinked proteins that correspond to an increase in product quality. For more details see Rasiah et al.(35).

Figure 6

Fig. 7SEM micrographs of egg white in the presence of different glycation partners and controls. From top left to bottom: Egg white incubated for 5 h in the presence of (a) 100 mM glucose, (b) 100 mM fructose, (c) 100 mM lactose, (d) 100 mM glutaraldehyde, (e) 100 mM methylglyoxal, (f) 100 mM NaCl, (g) water. The scale bar is 10 μm.

Figure 7

Table 1Melting temperature (TM) for ovalbumin incubated with a variety of crosslinking agents during the melting experiment from 20°C to 95°C. Measurements were made via differential scanning fluorimetry according to the method of Ericsson et al. 2006

Figure 8

Fig. 8SAXS experiments. Scattering intensity plotted against q at five different protein concentrations ranging from 0·8 mg/mL to 45·5 mg/mL. Ligands are held constant at 100 mM. (a) water, (b) methylglyoxal, (c) glucose, (d) NaCl. The predominant distances in the ovalbumin samples in the presence of water or glucose decrease significantly in the NaCl and methylglyoxal samples. This suggests different molecule behaviour in the presence of different possible ligands.

Figure 9

Fig. 9Egg white + crosslinkers heated at 90°C for (a) 0 hours, (b) 5 hours, (c) 24 hours and then subjected to an in vitro model of human digestion. 1–8: 1) protein marker, 2) egg white +200 mM glucose, 3) egg white +200 mM fructose, 4) egg white +200 mM lactose, 5) egg white +200 mM glutaraldehyde, 6) egg white +200 mM methylglyoxal, 7) egg white + dH2O, 8) egg white +200 mM NaCl. The protein smear in the lanes corresponds to crosslinked, non digested high molecular weight protein. The visible distinct bands are enzymes from the pancreatin mixture and correspond to amylase, trypsin, chymotrypsin.