The Radical Scavenging Activity of Protein Hydrolysates Prepared from Mercenariamercenaria and Ruditapesphilippinarum

Jiao Jiao Mu; Qian Cheng Zhao; Jian Wei Li

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.361-363.748

Paper Titles

The Research of Ice-Water Phase Change and Heat Transfer in Natural Environment of Northern Winter in China
p.724

Extraction of Effective Compounds in Pine Pollen and In Vitro Assay of their Antitumor Effect
p.731

Experimental Study on the Temperature Variation of a New Tobacco Curing Barn with Double-Way Ventilation
p.735

Optimization of Supercritical CO₂ Extraction of Noni (Morinda citrifolia L) Seed Oil Using Response Surface Methodology
p.743

The Radical Scavenging Activity of Protein Hydrolysates Prepared from Mercenariamercenaria and Ruditapesphilippinarum
p.748

Preliminary Research on Extract Ferulic Acid from Wheat Bran by Ultrasonic-Assisted Alkaline-Alcohol Hydrolysis
p.753

Effect of Storage Treatments on Anthocyanin, Fumonisin B₁, Aflatoxin B₁ Content of Anthocyanin Extract from Purple Corn (Zea may L.) in North China
p.759

Study on Drying Technology of Sargassum Fusiforme
p.764

Optimization of Extraction Condition of Mycelium Polysaccharide from Tricholoma mongolium by Response Surface Methodology
p.770

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 361-363The Radical Scavenging Activity of Protein...

The Radical Scavenging Activity of Protein Hydrolysates Prepared from Mercenariamercenaria and Ruditapesphilippinarum

Abstract:

The Mercenaria mercenaria protein hydrolysates (MMPH) and Ruditapes philippinarum protein hydrolysates (RPPH) were prepared by three enzymatic methods, and the radical scavenging activity of the protein hydrolysates was analyzed. The results showed that the protein hydrolysates prepared by the combination of Protamex and Flavourzyme exhibited significant radical scavenging activity; For DPPH radical, the EC₅₀ values of MMPH and RPPH were 33.0 mg/mL and 93.0 mg/mL, respectively, and for hydroxyl radical, the EC₅₀ values of the protein hydrolysates were 7.5 mg/mL and 7.0 mg/mL, respectively; The protein hydrolysates were further fractionated by ultrafiltration membrane of 6000 Da, and the radical scavenging activity of the resultant fraction with lower molecular weight (<6000 Da) was significantly (P<0.05) increased, and for DPPH radical, the EC₅₀ values of MMPH and RPPH fractions were 29.5 mg/mL and 58.5 mg/mL, respectively, and for hydroxyl radical, the EC50 values of the fractions were 6.0 mg/mL and 7.0 mg/mL, respectively.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

Natural Resources and Sustainable Development

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 361-363)

Pages:

748-752

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.361-363.748

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

October 2011

Authors:

Jiao Jiao Mu, Qian Cheng Zhao, Jian Wei Li

Keywords:

CLAM, Protein Hydrolysates, Radical Scavenging Activity, Ultrafiltration (UF)

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

Citation:

References

[1] J. M. Yang, S. R.Qiu andX. D.Zhenget al: Journal of Fisheries of China, Vol. 5(2003) No.5, p.495 (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[2] X. L. Zhang, S. C. Jiang and Y. Q. Cong et al:T tansactions of Oceanology and Limnology, Vol. (2007) No.4, p.151 (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[3] S. R.Qiu, Z. B.Lv and Z. H. Wei et al: Journal of Fisheries of China, Vol. 30 (2006) No.3, p.429 (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[4] J. Su: Fishery Modernization, Vol. 35 (2008) No.2, p.53 (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[5] J.S. Tsai T.C. Lin and J.L. Chen et al:Process Biochemistry,Vol. 41 (2006), p.2276

Google Scholar

[6] VilailakKlompong,SoottawatBenjakul and DuangpornKantachote et al:Food Chemistry,Vol. 102 (2007), p.1317

Google Scholar

[7] SanjeewaRanathunga,NiranjanRajapakse and Se-Kwon Kim:Eur Food Res Technol,Vol. 222 (2006), p.310

Google Scholar

[8] S. Y. Wang, C. P. Liu and S. Wu et al:Food Science,Vol. 28(2007) No.9, p.298 (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[9] L. Gu and J. Sun:Food Science,Vol. 29(2008) No.8, p.177 (In Chinese)

Google Scholar

[10] B.Giménez,A.Alemán and P. Montero et al:Food Chemistry,Vol. 114 (2009), p.976

Google Scholar

[11] S. Y. Dong,M. Y. Zeng andD. F. Wang et al:Food Chemistry,Vol. 107 (2008), p.1485

Google Scholar

[12] J. S. Tsai,J. L. Chen andB. S. Pan:Process Biochemistry,Vol. 43(2008), p.743

Google Scholar

[13] S. SATHIVEL, P. J. BECHTEL and J. BABBITT, et al:Food Science,Vol. 68, (2003), p.2196

Google Scholar

[14] AOAC: Official methods of analysis (16th ed.) (Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC 2000)

Google Scholar

[15] H. W. Robinson and C. G.Hodgen: Journalof Biological Chemistry, Vol. 135(1940), p.707

Google Scholar

[16] W. Brand-Williams, M. E. Cuvelier and C. Berset:Lebensm.-Wiss.u.-Technol, Vol.28, (1995)No.1, p.25

Google Scholar