Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T03:36:16.700Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mechanisms of heat damage in proteins. 8. The role of sucrose in the susceptibility of protein foods to heat damage*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

R. F. Hurrell  and
K. J. Carpenter
R. F. Hurrell
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3DX
K. J. Carpenter
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Biology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3DX
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. A high-protein yeast cake, based on ovalbumin and lactalbumin, and containing 200 g sucrose/kg was baked and toasted as previously described by Block, Cannon, Wissler, Steffe, Straube, Frazier & Woolridge (1946). This caused a severe reduction in its protein quality for rats, and in its fluorodinitrobenzene (FDNB)-reactive lysine content. The damage appeared to be caused by inversion of sucrose to glucose and fructose during fermentation by the yeast followed by Maillard reactions. Processing an albumin-sucrose mixture in a similar way but without fermentation caused no loss in nutritional value for rats and a small reduction in FDNB-reactive lysine.

2. Sucroselysine solutions were prepared and heated as previously described by El-Nockrashy & Frampton (1967). Contrary to their findings, we detected no loss of lysine after storage for 16 h at 35° or after heating for 2 h at 100°, although after heating for 4 h at 121° about 0.7 of the original lysine remained. At an alkaline pH, sucrose hydrolyses only slowly even at 121°, and this is catalysed to some extent by the presence of lysine.

3. A ‘dry’ albumin-sucrose mixture (10-200 mg moisture/g) was heated in sealed glass ampoules under a range of conditions. The loss of FDNB-reactive lysine was stongly dependent on the processing conditions; in particular it was decreased by an increase in pH. After 2 h at 121°, lysine damage caused by sucrose was similar to that caused by glucose. Lysine damage due to sucrose was believed to follow on from its breakdown to glucose and fructose.

4. Although the presence of sucrose does not make proteins highly sensitive to Maillard reactions and loss of nutritive value, it must not be considered entirely inert. Our results confirm earlier work indicating that its presence at relatively high levels in oil seeds may be largely responsible for the damage to protein quality observed when they are severely processed.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 38 , Issue 2 , September 1977 , pp. 285 - 297
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1977

References

REFERENCES

Adrian, J. (1963). Ann. Nutr. 17, 1.Google Scholar
Anantharaman, K. & Carpenter, K. J. (1971). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 22, 412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Association of, Official Agricultural Chemists (1965). Official Methods of Analysis, 10th edn., p. 494. Washington, DC: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar
Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (1975). Official Methods of Analysis, 12th edn., p. 286. Washington, DC: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar
Bender, A. E. (1970). In Wenner-Gren Center International Symposium Series, Vol. 14, Evaluation of Novel Protein Products, p. 319 [Bender, A. E., Kihlberg, R., Löfgist, B. and Munck, L., editors]. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Bender, A. E. & Doell, B. H. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, R. J., Cannon, P. R., Wissler, R. W., Steffe, C. H., Straube, R. L., Frazier, L. E. & Woolridge, R. L. (1946). Archs Biochem. 10, 295.Google Scholar
Booth, V. H. (1971). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 22, 658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, K. J. (1960). Biochem. J. 77, 604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carpenter, K. J. & Booth, V. H. (1973). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 43, 424.Google Scholar
Carpenter, K. J., Morgan, C. B., Lea, C. H. & Parr, L. J. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cathcart, W. H. (1944). In The Chemistry and Technology of Food and Food Products, p. 686 [Jacobs, M.B., editor]. New York: Interscience Publishers.Google Scholar
Clarke, H. E., Howe, J. E., Mertz, E. T. & Reizt, L. L. (1959). J. Am. Diet. Ass. 35, 469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
El-Nockrashy, A. S. & Frampton, V. L. (1967). Biochem. biophys. Res. Commun. 28, 675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, R. J. & Butts, H. A. (1949). Science, N. Y. 109, 569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finot, P. A. & Mauron, J. (1972). Helv. chim. Acta 55, 1153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hurrell, R. F. & Carpenter, K. J. (1974). Br. J. Nutr. 32, 589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karel, M. & Labuza, T. P. (1968). J. agric. Fd Chem. 16, 717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kawamura, S. (1967). Tech. Bull. Fac. Agric. Kagawa Univ. 18, 132.Google Scholar
Koch, R. B., Smith, F. & Gedes, W. F. (1954). Cereal Chem. 31, 55.Google Scholar
Lea, C. H. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, C. H. & Hannan, R. S. (1949). Biochim. biophys. Acta 3, 313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lea, C. H. & Hannan, R. S. (1950). Biochim. biophys. Acta 5, 433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maillard, L. C. (1916). Annls Chim. 6, 258.Google Scholar
Mottu, F. & Mauron, J. (1976). J. Sci Fd Agric. 18, 57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Partridge, S. M. (1949). Nature, Lond. 164, 443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickett, T. A. & Holley, K. T. (1952). Tech. Bull. Ga. Exp. Stns no. 1.Google Scholar
Rao, M. N., Sreenivas, H., Swaminathan, M., Carpenter, K. J. & Morgan, C. B. (1963). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 14, 544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, I. (1958). Chromatographic Techniques, p. 164. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Southgate, D. A. T. (1969). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 20, 326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valle-Riestra, J. & Barnes, R. H. (1970). J. Nutr. 100, 873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varela, G., Moreiras-Varela, O., Vidal, C., Murillo, A. & Luque, J. A. (1967). An. Bromat. 19, 465.Google Scholar
Walker, J. (1951). In Chemistry of Carbon Compounds, vol. IA, p. 381, [Rodd, E. H. editor]. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Warner, R. G. & Breuer, L. H. (1972). In Nutrient Requirements of Domestic Animals no. 10, p. 46. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar