Cargando…
A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks
The aim of this study was to conduct a comparative assessment of the structural and biomechanical properties of eight selected food-grade biopolymers (pea protein, wheat protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, inulin, maltodextrin, psyllium, and tara gum) as potential hydrogel building blocks. The prepared...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9495968/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36140206 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10092106 |
_version_ | 1784794152900231168 |
---|---|
author | Hilal, Adonis Florowska, Anna Florowski, Tomasz Wroniak, Małgorzata |
author_facet | Hilal, Adonis Florowska, Anna Florowski, Tomasz Wroniak, Małgorzata |
author_sort | Hilal, Adonis |
collection | PubMed |
description | The aim of this study was to conduct a comparative assessment of the structural and biomechanical properties of eight selected food-grade biopolymers (pea protein, wheat protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, inulin, maltodextrin, psyllium, and tara gum) as potential hydrogel building blocks. The prepared samples were investigated in terms of the volumetric gelling index, microrheological parameters, physical stability, and color parameters. Pea protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, and psyllium samples had high VGI values (100%), low solid–liquid balance (SLB < 0.5), and high macroscopic viscosity index (MVI) values (53.50, 59.98, 81.58, and 45.62 nm(−2), respectively) in comparison with the samples prepared using wheat protein, maltodextrin, and tara gum (SLB > 0.5, MVI: 13.58, 0.04, and 0.25 nm(−2), respectively). Inulin had the highest elasticity index value (31.05 nm(−2)) and MVI value (590.17 nm(−2)). The instability index was the lowest in the case of pea protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, and inulin (below 0.02). The color parameters and whiteness index (WI) of each biopolymer differed significantly from one another. Based on the obtained results, pea protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, and psyllium hydrogels had similar structural and biomechanical properties, while inulin hydrogel had the most diverse properties. Wheat protein, maltodextrin, and tara gum did not form a gel structure. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9495968 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94959682022-09-23 A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks Hilal, Adonis Florowska, Anna Florowski, Tomasz Wroniak, Małgorzata Biomedicines Article The aim of this study was to conduct a comparative assessment of the structural and biomechanical properties of eight selected food-grade biopolymers (pea protein, wheat protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, inulin, maltodextrin, psyllium, and tara gum) as potential hydrogel building blocks. The prepared samples were investigated in terms of the volumetric gelling index, microrheological parameters, physical stability, and color parameters. Pea protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, and psyllium samples had high VGI values (100%), low solid–liquid balance (SLB < 0.5), and high macroscopic viscosity index (MVI) values (53.50, 59.98, 81.58, and 45.62 nm(−2), respectively) in comparison with the samples prepared using wheat protein, maltodextrin, and tara gum (SLB > 0.5, MVI: 13.58, 0.04, and 0.25 nm(−2), respectively). Inulin had the highest elasticity index value (31.05 nm(−2)) and MVI value (590.17 nm(−2)). The instability index was the lowest in the case of pea protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, and inulin (below 0.02). The color parameters and whiteness index (WI) of each biopolymer differed significantly from one another. Based on the obtained results, pea protein, gellan gum, konjac gum, and psyllium hydrogels had similar structural and biomechanical properties, while inulin hydrogel had the most diverse properties. Wheat protein, maltodextrin, and tara gum did not form a gel structure. MDPI 2022-08-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9495968/ /pubmed/36140206 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10092106 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Hilal, Adonis Florowska, Anna Florowski, Tomasz Wroniak, Małgorzata A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks |
title | A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks |
title_full | A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks |
title_fullStr | A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks |
title_short | A Comparative Evaluation of the Structural and Biomechanical Properties of Food-Grade Biopolymers as Potential Hydrogel Building Blocks |
title_sort | comparative evaluation of the structural and biomechanical properties of food-grade biopolymers as potential hydrogel building blocks |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9495968/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36140206 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/biomedicines10092106 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hilaladonis acomparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT florowskaanna acomparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT florowskitomasz acomparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT wroniakmałgorzata acomparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT hilaladonis comparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT florowskaanna comparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT florowskitomasz comparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks AT wroniakmałgorzata comparativeevaluationofthestructuralandbiomechanicalpropertiesoffoodgradebiopolymersaspotentialhydrogelbuildingblocks |