• EI
  • Scopus
  • 食品科学与工程领域高质量科技期刊分级目录第一方阵T1
  • DOAJ
  • EBSCO
  • 北大核心期刊
  • 中国核心学术期刊RCCSE
  • JST China
  • FSTA
  • 中国精品科技期刊
  • 中国农业核心期刊
  • CA
  • WJCI
  • 中国科技核心期刊CSTPCD
  • 中国生物医学SinoMed
中国精品科技期刊2020
徐静,丁珊珊,陶宇婷,等. 天然保鲜剂对牛肉贮藏期间水分和蛋白质结构变化的影响[J]. 食品工业科技,2024,45(17):1−8. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2024020291.
引用本文: 徐静,丁珊珊,陶宇婷,等. 天然保鲜剂对牛肉贮藏期间水分和蛋白质结构变化的影响[J]. 食品工业科技,2024,45(17):1−8. doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2024020291.
XU Jing, DING Shanshan, TAO Yuting, et al. Effects of Natural Preservatives on the Moisture and Protein Structure Changes of Beef during Storage[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(17): 1−8. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2024020291.
Citation: XU Jing, DING Shanshan, TAO Yuting, et al. Effects of Natural Preservatives on the Moisture and Protein Structure Changes of Beef during Storage[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2024, 45(17): 1−8. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2024020291.

天然保鲜剂对牛肉贮藏期间水分和蛋白质结构变化的影响

Effects of Natural Preservatives on the Moisture and Protein Structure Changes of Beef during Storage

  • 摘要: 为深入了解牛肉贮藏过程中水分和蛋白质结构变化,本研究分析了挥发性盐基氮(TVB-N)、保水性、水分分布和迁移、蛋白质二级结构、疏水性等指标,探究了不同天然保鲜剂(0.5% ε-聚赖氨酸、0.5%茶多酚、0.5%壳聚糖以及0.2% ε-聚赖氨酸+0.2%茶多酚+0.2%壳聚糖)处理对牛肉4 ℃贮藏期间(12 d)保鲜效果。结果显示:贮藏期间,保鲜剂能显著降低牛肉中TVB-N(P<0.05)并降低牛肉的贮藏损失,0.5% ε-聚赖氨酸、0.5%茶多酚以及0.5%壳聚糖处理对于牛肉的压力损失无显著优势,而复合保鲜剂在贮藏中期能显著降低压力损失(P<0.05);保鲜剂处理减缓了牛肉中结合水转化为不易流动水的幅度和速率以及不易流动水转化为自由水的幅度,并延迟结合水迁移的进程;保鲜剂能维持肌纤维蛋白二级结构的稳定性(P<0.05),显著降低疏水基团裸露含量(P<0.05),延缓蛋白质的降解;0.5% ε-聚赖氨酸、0.5%茶多酚以及0.5%壳聚糖处理组间对于肌纤维蛋白的维持效果没有显著性差异,复合保鲜剂对肌纤维蛋白结构维持效果显著优于单一保鲜剂处理组。综上,复合天然保鲜剂保鲜和保水效果最佳,研究结果能够为复合天然保鲜剂的保鲜保水方面应用和开发提供科学理论根据。

     

    Abstract: In order to gain a deeper understanding of the changes in moisture and protein structure during beef storage, the preservation effects of different natural preservatives (0.5% ε-polylysine, 0.5% tea polyphenols, 0.5% chitosan, and 0.2% ε-polylysine+0.2% tea polyphenols+0.2% chitosan) during beef storage period at 4 ℃ (12 d) were investigated in this study. Total volatile base nitrogen (TVB-N), water-holding properties, water distribution and migration, protein secondary structure, hydrophobicity, and other indexes were determined. Results showed that natural preservatives could significantly reduce TVB-N (P<0.05) and reduce storage losses of beef during storage, there was no significant advantage in pressure loss between 0.5% ε-polylysine, 0.5% tea polyphenols, and 0.5% chitosan treatment groups, while composite natural preservative significantly reduced pressure loss during mid-storage period (P<0.05). Natural preservatives were able to slow down the magnitude and rate of conversion of bound water to immobile water and the magnitude of conversion of immobile water to free water, as well as delay the process of bound water migration. Natural preservatives could maintain the stability of protein secondary structure (P<0.05), significantly reduce the exposed content of hydrophobic groups (P<0.05), and alleviate the degradation and denaturation of proteins. There was no significant difference in the maintenance of myofibrillar protein among the 0.5% ε-polylysine, 0.5% tea polyphenols and 0.5% chitosan treatment groups, and composite natural preservative was significantly better than the individual natural preservative treatment groups in maintaining the structure of myofibrillar protein. In conclusion, composite natural preservative had the best preservation and water retention effects. The research could provide a scientific theoretical basis for the application and development of composite biological preservatives in terms of preservation and water retention.

     

/

返回文章
返回