Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos |
Texto Completo: | http://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/818 |
Resumo: | Population growth and the change in old social habits have been driving the demand for protein consumption on the planet. Due to the high economic and environmental costs and the time required to produce traditional animal proteins, the demand for new sources of alternative proteins has been increasing over time. The use of alternative proteins, such as those of plant and insect origin, has become increasingly necessary for the survival and development of humanity. These diverse protein sources require studies to evaluate their technological properties and thus suggest better applications for each of them. Therefore, the objective was to evaluate the physicochemical characteristics and main functionalities of alternative proteins from plant and insect sources. To this end, the proximal composition (moisture, lipids, proteins, ash and carbohydrates) of alternative proteins from plant sources (Glycine max soybean and Phaseolus vulgaris Pinto Group carioca beans) and insects (Tenebrio molitor mealworm and Gryllus black cricket), as well as, the technological properties of water retention capacity (WRC) and oil retention capacity (ORC), emulsion stability (ES), foaming capacity (FC) and foam stability (FS) were determined. Insect flours had higher protein contents (cricket 65.9% and mealworm 63.8%) compared to vegetable flours (beans 51.4% and soy 38.0%). Soy protein had the highest WRC with a value of 2.8 mL/g, followed by mealworm (1.7 mL/g), cricket (1.7 mL/g) and beans (0.9 mL/g). And as for ORC, the flours presented similar values for soybeans and beans, crickets and mealworms (0.7 mL/g). Protein flours of vegetable origin showed higher ES values, with bean protein at 62.5% and soy protein at 52.5%. Bean flour had the highest FC (66.7%) and FS (94.1%). Insect flours presented promising protein content and technological functionalities for applications and thus contribute to new ingredients for food supplements and food products. |
id |
JRG_2a1ee0cbfab3836d5f3d84f8352d0b63 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs2.revistajrg.com:article/818 |
network_acronym_str |
JRG |
network_name_str |
Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteinsEstudo comparativo de funcionalidade de proteínas ProteínaInsetos comestíveisPropriedades funcionaisProteinEdible insectsFunctional propertiesPopulation growth and the change in old social habits have been driving the demand for protein consumption on the planet. Due to the high economic and environmental costs and the time required to produce traditional animal proteins, the demand for new sources of alternative proteins has been increasing over time. The use of alternative proteins, such as those of plant and insect origin, has become increasingly necessary for the survival and development of humanity. These diverse protein sources require studies to evaluate their technological properties and thus suggest better applications for each of them. Therefore, the objective was to evaluate the physicochemical characteristics and main functionalities of alternative proteins from plant and insect sources. To this end, the proximal composition (moisture, lipids, proteins, ash and carbohydrates) of alternative proteins from plant sources (Glycine max soybean and Phaseolus vulgaris Pinto Group carioca beans) and insects (Tenebrio molitor mealworm and Gryllus black cricket), as well as, the technological properties of water retention capacity (WRC) and oil retention capacity (ORC), emulsion stability (ES), foaming capacity (FC) and foam stability (FS) were determined. Insect flours had higher protein contents (cricket 65.9% and mealworm 63.8%) compared to vegetable flours (beans 51.4% and soy 38.0%). Soy protein had the highest WRC with a value of 2.8 mL/g, followed by mealworm (1.7 mL/g), cricket (1.7 mL/g) and beans (0.9 mL/g). And as for ORC, the flours presented similar values for soybeans and beans, crickets and mealworms (0.7 mL/g). Protein flours of vegetable origin showed higher ES values, with bean protein at 62.5% and soy protein at 52.5%. Bean flour had the highest FC (66.7%) and FS (94.1%). Insect flours presented promising protein content and technological functionalities for applications and thus contribute to new ingredients for food supplements and food products.O crescimento populacional e a mudança de antigos hábitos sociais, vem impulsionando a demanda pelo consumo de proteínas no planeta. Devido ao alto custo econômico, ambiental e o tempo necessário para a produção de proteínas animais tradicionais, a demanda por novas fontes de proteínas alternativas vem aumentando com o passar do tempo. O uso de proteínas alternativas, como as de origem vegetal e de insetos, tem se tornado cada vez mais necessário para a sobrevivência e desenvolvimento da humanidade. Essas diversas fontes proteicas demandam estudos para avaliar suas propriedades tecnológicas e assim sugerir melhores aplicações para cada uma delas. Portanto, o objetivo foi avaliar as características físico-químicas e principais funcionalidades das proteínas alternativas de fontes vegetais e de insetos. Para isso, primeiramente foi determinado a composição proximal (umidade, lipídios, proteínas, cinzas e carboidratos) das proteínas alternativas de fontes vegetais (soja Glycine max e feijão carioca Phaseolus vulgaris Pinto Group) e insetos (larva da farinha Tenebrio molitor e grilo preto Gryllus assimilis), bem como as propriedades tecnológicas de capacidade de retenção de água (CRA) e óleo (CRO), estabilidade de emulsão (EE), capacidade de formação de espuma (CFE) e estabilidade da espuma (EES). As farinhas de insetos apresentaram maiores teores de proteínas (grilo 65,9% e tenébrio 63,8%) em relação as farinhas de vegetais (feijão 51,4% e soja 38,0%). A proteína de soja apresentou a maior CRA com valor de 2,8 mL/g, seguido do tenébrio (1,7 mL/g), grilo (1,7 mL/g) e feijão (0,9 mL/g). E quanto a CRO, as farinhas apresentaram valores semelhantes para soja e feijão, grilo e tenébrio (0,7 mL/g). As farinhas das proteínas de origem vegetal apresentaram maiores valores de EE, sendo a proteína do feijão com 62,5% e soja com 52,5%. A farinha de feijão apresentou a maior CFE (66,7%) e EES (94,1%). As farinhas de insetos apresentaram teores de proteínas e funcionalidades tecnológicas promissoras para aplicações e assim contribuir com novos ingredientes para suplementos alimentares e produtos alimentícios. Editora JRG2023-11-30info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado pelos Paresapplication/pdfhttp://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/81810.55892/jrg.v6i13.818ark:/57118/JRG.v6i13.818JRG Journal of Academic Studies; Vol. 6 No. 13 (2023): JRG Journal of Academic Studies; 2160-2171JRG Journal of Academic Studies ; Vol. 6 Núm. 13 (2023): Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos; 2160-2171JRG Journal of Academic Studies; V. 6 N. 13 (2023): Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos; 2160-2171Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos ; v. 6 n. 13 (2023): Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos; 2160-21712595-1661ark:/57118/jrg.v6i13reponame:Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicosinstname:Editora JRGinstacron:JRGporhttp://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/818/757https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessHennig, Kelvin MerelesSouza, Natieli Edileni deMassarolo, Kelly Cristina2023-11-28T16:19:06Zoai:ojs2.revistajrg.com:article/818Revistahttp://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrgPRIhttp://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/oaiprofessorjonas@gmail.com||2595-16612595-1661opendoar:2023-11-28T16:19:06Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos - Editora JRGfalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins Estudo comparativo de funcionalidade de proteínas |
title |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins |
spellingShingle |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins Hennig, Kelvin Mereles Proteína Insetos comestíveis Propriedades funcionais Protein Edible insects Functional properties |
title_short |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins |
title_full |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins |
title_fullStr |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins |
title_full_unstemmed |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins |
title_sort |
Comparative study of the functionality of alternative proteins |
author |
Hennig, Kelvin Mereles |
author_facet |
Hennig, Kelvin Mereles Souza, Natieli Edileni de Massarolo, Kelly Cristina |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Souza, Natieli Edileni de Massarolo, Kelly Cristina |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Hennig, Kelvin Mereles Souza, Natieli Edileni de Massarolo, Kelly Cristina |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Proteína Insetos comestíveis Propriedades funcionais Protein Edible insects Functional properties |
topic |
Proteína Insetos comestíveis Propriedades funcionais Protein Edible insects Functional properties |
description |
Population growth and the change in old social habits have been driving the demand for protein consumption on the planet. Due to the high economic and environmental costs and the time required to produce traditional animal proteins, the demand for new sources of alternative proteins has been increasing over time. The use of alternative proteins, such as those of plant and insect origin, has become increasingly necessary for the survival and development of humanity. These diverse protein sources require studies to evaluate their technological properties and thus suggest better applications for each of them. Therefore, the objective was to evaluate the physicochemical characteristics and main functionalities of alternative proteins from plant and insect sources. To this end, the proximal composition (moisture, lipids, proteins, ash and carbohydrates) of alternative proteins from plant sources (Glycine max soybean and Phaseolus vulgaris Pinto Group carioca beans) and insects (Tenebrio molitor mealworm and Gryllus black cricket), as well as, the technological properties of water retention capacity (WRC) and oil retention capacity (ORC), emulsion stability (ES), foaming capacity (FC) and foam stability (FS) were determined. Insect flours had higher protein contents (cricket 65.9% and mealworm 63.8%) compared to vegetable flours (beans 51.4% and soy 38.0%). Soy protein had the highest WRC with a value of 2.8 mL/g, followed by mealworm (1.7 mL/g), cricket (1.7 mL/g) and beans (0.9 mL/g). And as for ORC, the flours presented similar values for soybeans and beans, crickets and mealworms (0.7 mL/g). Protein flours of vegetable origin showed higher ES values, with bean protein at 62.5% and soy protein at 52.5%. Bean flour had the highest FC (66.7%) and FS (94.1%). Insect flours presented promising protein content and technological functionalities for applications and thus contribute to new ingredients for food supplements and food products. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-11-30 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artigo avaliado pelos Pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/818 10.55892/jrg.v6i13.818 ark:/57118/JRG.v6i13.818 |
url |
http://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/818 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.55892/jrg.v6i13.818 ark:/57118/JRG.v6i13.818 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
http://revistajrg.com/index.php/jrg/article/view/818/757 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora JRG |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Editora JRG |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
JRG Journal of Academic Studies; Vol. 6 No. 13 (2023): JRG Journal of Academic Studies; 2160-2171 JRG Journal of Academic Studies ; Vol. 6 Núm. 13 (2023): Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos; 2160-2171 JRG Journal of Academic Studies; V. 6 N. 13 (2023): Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos; 2160-2171 Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos ; v. 6 n. 13 (2023): Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos; 2160-2171 2595-1661 ark:/57118/jrg.v6i13 reponame:Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos instname:Editora JRG instacron:JRG |
instname_str |
Editora JRG |
instacron_str |
JRG |
institution |
JRG |
reponame_str |
Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos |
collection |
Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista JRG de Estudos Acadêmicos - Editora JRG |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
professorjonas@gmail.com|| |
_version_ |
1797068982716465152 |