Fundamental study on reactivities of gluten protein types from wheat, rye and barley with five sandwich ELISA test kits

Lexhaller, Barbara; Tompos, Christine; Scherf, Katharina Anne

doi:10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.05.121

Cited by 49 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table S2 lists the CP contents of the GPTs isolated from wheat, rye and barley flours and the proportions of each GPT within total gluten. The Osborne fraction values are based on flour weight; the proportions of GPTs are based on total gluten content (Lexhaller et al, 2016;Lexhaller et al, 2017). The results corresponded well to those reported previously (Gellrich et al, 2003;Kerpes et al, 2016;Schalk et al, 2017) identification of Protein Groups in the Gluten Protein Types…”

Section: General Characterization Of Gluten Protein Typessupporting

confidence: 87%

Characterization and Relative Quantitation of Wheat, Rye, and Barley Gluten Protein Types by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The consumption of wheat, rye, and barley may cause adverse reactions to wheat such as celiac disease, non-celiac gluten/wheat sensitivity, or wheat allergy. The storage proteins (gluten) are known as major triggers, but also other functional protein groups such as α-amylase/trypsin-inhibitors or enzymes are possibly harmful for people suffering of adverse reactions to wheat. Gluten is widely used as a collective term for the complex protein mixture of wheat, rye or barley and can be subdivided into the following gluten protein types (GPTs): α-gliadins, γ-gliadins, ω5-gliadins, ω1,2-gliadins, high-and lowmolecular-weight glutenin subunits of wheat, ω-secalins, high-molecular-weight secalins, γ-75k-secalins and γ-40k-secalins of rye, and C-hordeins, γ-hordeins, B-hordeins, and D-hordeins of barley. GPTs isolated from the flours are useful as reference materials for clinical studies, diagnostics or in food analyses and to elucidate disease mechanisms. A combined strategy of protein separation according to solubility followed by preparative reversed-phase high-performance liquid chromatography was employed to purify the GPTs according to hydrophobicity. Due to the heterogeneity of gluten proteins and their partly polymeric nature, it is a challenge to obtain highly purified GPTs with only one protein group. Therefore, it is essential to characterize and identify the proteins and their proportions in each GPT. In this study, the complexity of gluten from wheat, rye, and barley was demonstrated by identification of the individual proteins employing an undirected proteomics strategy involving liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry of tryptic and chymotryptic hydrolysates of the GPTs. Different protein groups were obtained and the relative composition of the GPTs was revealed. Multiple reaction monitoring liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used for the relative quantitation of the most abundant gluten proteins. These analyses also allowed the identification of known wheat allergens and celiac disease-active peptides. Combined with functional assays, Frontiers in Plant Science | www.frontiersin.org

show abstract

Section: General Characterization Of Gluten Protein Typessupporting

confidence: 87%

Characterization and Relative Quantitation of Wheat, Rye, and Barley Gluten Protein Types by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Celiac Diseasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…One question that needs to be addressed is the precision of analytical measurements. It should be recognized that the analysis of gluten and gluten epitopes presents challenges due to the difficulty in solubilizing gluten protein/peptides, variation in the compositions of gluten hydrolysates and food matrices, the lack of appropriate reference materials, the specificity of antibodies, and the use of different methods for separation and quantification (Lexhaller, Tompos, & Scherf, 2017;Schalk, Lang, Wieser, Koehler, & Scherf, 2017;Schalk, Lexhaller, Koehler, & Scherf, 2017;Scherf, 2017;Scherf & Poms, 2016; http://www.wgpat.com/aims.html). Schopf and Scherf (2018) reported that the relative proportions of CD-immunogenic and -toxic peptides in gluten protein fractions vary depending on genetic factors such as species and cultivar in combination with environmental factors such as climate, soil, fertilization, and agricultural practices (Ashraf, 2014;Hajas et al, 2018).…”

Section: Causing Substancesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse Reactions to Wheat or Wheat Components

Brouns

Rooy

Shewry

et al. 2019

Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wheat is an important staple food globally, providing a significant contribution to daily energy, fiber, and micronutrient intake. Observational evidence for health impacts of consuming more whole grains, among which wheat is a major contributor, points to significant risk reduction for diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and colon cancer. However, specific wheat components may also elicit adverse physical reactions in susceptible individuals such as celiac disease (CD) and wheat allergy (WA). Recently, broad coverage in the popular and social media has suggested that wheat consumption leads to a wide range of adverse health effects. This has motivated many consumers to avoid or reduce their consumption of foods that contain wheat/gluten, despite the absence of diagnosed CD or WA, raising questions about underlying mechanisms and possible nocebo effects. However, recent studies did show that some individuals may suffer from adverse reactions in absence of CD and WA. This condition is called non‐celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) or non‐celiac wheat sensitivity (NCWS). In addition to gluten, wheat and derived products contain many other components which may trigger symptoms, including inhibitors of α‐amylase and trypsin (ATIs), lectins, and rapidly fermentable carbohydrates (FODMAPs). Furthermore, the way in which foods are being processed, such as the use of yeast or sourdough fermentation, fermentation time and baking conditions, may also affect the presence and bioactivity of these components. The present review systematically describes the characteristics of wheat‐related intolerances, including their etiology, prevalence, the components responsible, diagnosis, and strategies to reduce adverse reactions.

show abstract

“…For example, Lexhaller, Tompos, and Scherf (2017) reported that certain purified gliadins produced the highest response on the R5 test, followed by certain purified hordeins, and purified secalins. This process assumed that each of the cereal grains responded the same way to the gliadin test kit.…”

Section: Relationship Between Gluten Concentration and Visual Assesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, research demonstrates that gliadin-like proteins in barley (hordeins) and rye (secalins) produce a different response than gliadin toward the antibody used in the R5 test. For example, Lexhaller, Tompos, and Scherf (2017) reported that certain purified gliadins produced the highest response on the R5 test, followed by certain purified hordeins, and purified secalins. Kanerva, Sontag-Strohm, Ryöpy, Alho-Lehto, and Salovaara (2006) observed that the R5 antibody-based test gluten response overestimated the hordein concentration in oat flour contaminated with known amounts of barley flour by up to a factor of 30.…”

Section: Relationship Between Gluten Concentration and Visual Assesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reducing variability in the measurement of gluten contamination in oats, oilseeds, and pulses by improving sample preparation

Tittlemier¹,

Zirdum²,

Chan³

et al. 2018

Cereal Chem

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and objectives:The variability in gluten in non-gluten-containing grains (NGCG) processed using two preparation schemes was evaluated with the aim of minimizing effects of sample heterogeneity on gluten determined by enzyme linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The relationship between gluten concentration as determined by ELISA and visually assessed contamination of NGCG with wheat, durum, barley, and rye was investigated. Findings: Low variability between duplicate aliquots taken from test portions (0-30.6% relative standard deviation [RSD]) demonstrated the ELISA itself was precise. In the first scheme, variability among test portions ranged from 1% to 143% RSD, with only half in the range of 1-50%. Using scheme 2, variability in gluten among test portions ranged from 1% to 85% RSD, with more than three quarters in the range of 1-50%. High lipid content hemp seed was a particular challenge to grind, and this was reflected in higher variability in gluten results between test portions (mean RSD = 61%). Conclusions: Subsampling ground samples using rotary sample division and the use of a 1-g test portion in scheme 2 decreased the variability of gluten results for most samples. At concentrations relevant to existing thresholds of gluten contamination (e.g. 20 mg/kg), there was no relationship between gluten concentration in NGCG and cereal contamination as determined by visual inspection. Significance and novelty: This study provides guidance on how to improve the analysis of gluten contamination in NGCG by ELISA and describes the absence of a relationship between ELISA-determined gluten and the visual assessment of contamination in NGCG.

show abstract

Fundamental study on reactivities of gluten protein types from wheat, rye and barley with five sandwich ELISA test kits

Cited by 49 publications

References 32 publications

Characterization and Relative Quantitation of Wheat, Rye, and Barley Gluten Protein Types by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Characterization and Relative Quantitation of Wheat, Rye, and Barley Gluten Protein Types by Liquid Chromatography–Tandem Mass Spectrometry

Adverse Reactions to Wheat or Wheat Components

Reducing variability in the measurement of gluten contamination in oats, oilseeds, and pulses by improving sample preparation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About