2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2019.109697
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of hydrodynamic and ultrasonic cavitation effects on soy protein isolate functionality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

2
58
0
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 101 publications
(61 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
58
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The H 0 of proteins was an indication that the number of exposed hydrophobic groups on the surface of protein molecules were available for bonding, which was important for protein stability and conformation and influence protein functionality [11] , [14] . The influences of ultrasonic power on the H 0 of MOWP were displayed in Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…The H 0 of proteins was an indication that the number of exposed hydrophobic groups on the surface of protein molecules were available for bonding, which was important for protein stability and conformation and influence protein functionality [11] , [14] . The influences of ultrasonic power on the H 0 of MOWP were displayed in Fig.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Stathopulos et al [29] reported that H 0 of bovine serum protein treated by ultrasound was enhanced due to the gradual exposure of hydrophobic group. Ren et al [11] reported that H 0 of soy protein isolate treated by ultrasound was increased because large aggregates in soy protein isolate were dissociated, which increased the exposure of hydrophobic regions. H 0 values of whey protein [21] and wheat germ protein [13] treated by ultrasound were also increased.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 3 more Smart Citations