2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2018.02.043
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lupine allergen detecting capability and cross-reactivity of related legumes by ELISA

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, they exhibited main disadvantages in comparison to the current study: The protein extraction protocol in the current study is highly specific for the extraction of the vicilin family of proteins (β-conglutins), based on the presence of NaCl (0.25M) in the extraction buffer [33]. Previous studies made protein extractions using general protein extraction buffers [4,45,47], or using alternative methods from commercial kits [48] currently no longer available (Abnova, ), displaying very limited or no information about: (i) The antibody design; (ii) antibody production and use in the ELISA detection method; (iii) the limited information about protocol for total proteins extraction, which may not be specific for β-conglutin extraction; (iv) no information about lupin species used [46,48] to obtain this protein extract. The last two are the main factors with high impact in the protein extract characteristics, such as a low amount or not of Lup an 1 content.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…However, they exhibited main disadvantages in comparison to the current study: The protein extraction protocol in the current study is highly specific for the extraction of the vicilin family of proteins (β-conglutins), based on the presence of NaCl (0.25M) in the extraction buffer [33]. Previous studies made protein extractions using general protein extraction buffers [4,45,47], or using alternative methods from commercial kits [48] currently no longer available (Abnova, ), displaying very limited or no information about: (i) The antibody design; (ii) antibody production and use in the ELISA detection method; (iii) the limited information about protocol for total proteins extraction, which may not be specific for β-conglutin extraction; (iv) no information about lupin species used [46,48] to obtain this protein extract. The last two are the main factors with high impact in the protein extract characteristics, such as a low amount or not of Lup an 1 content.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In comparison, other ELISA methods previously developed showed low specificity of their antibodies used in the ELISA methods, since cross-reactivity showed with other legumes: Either with pea, chickpea, peanut, lentil, and soy [45], with brown bean and fenugreek (Holden et al, 2007); black bean and soy [46]; or even with non-legume proteins such as sunflower seed, cashew, almond, and pumpkin seed [61]. Furthermore, Koeberl et al [48] used three available commercial kits to analyze cross-reactivity between lupin and other legume proteins finding that all peanut samples tested showed cross-reactivity on ELISA test kit B and C [48]. In addition, cross-reactivity was also described for the entire lentil samples analyzed, thus promoting false positive results in all analyzed legume samples.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Until recently, lupine has not been widely available in Canada, but will likely become more popular because of its purported health benefits [ 8 ]. Therefore, more education about lupine is necessary for peanut-allergic Canadians and those who prepare foods for peanut-allergic individuals.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Owing to the increasing demand for specific allergen detection, a wide range of commercial kits for lupine detection has become available in the market and summarized in Table 5. Moreover, in‐house developed‐systems are frequently reported in the literature (Table 4) (Ecker & Cichna‐Markl, 2012; Ecker, Ertl, Pulverer, et al., 2013; Ecker, Ertl, & Cichna‐Markl, 2013; Holden, Faeste, & Egaas, 2005; Holden, Moen, Sletten, & Dooper, 2007; Kaw, Hefle, & Taylor, 2008; Koeberl et al., 2018; Lima‐Cabello, Alché, & Jimenez‐Lopez, 2019; Revák, Golian, Židek, Capla, & Zajác, 2014; Röder, Kleiner, Sachs, Keil, & Holzhauser, 2013). The majority of these systems relies on polyclonal antibodies (IgY from hen's eggs or IgG from rabbit) targeting lupine proteins from one or more Lupinus spp., normally providing suitable specificity for all the sweet lupine species used as food ingredients or technological aids.…”
Section: Analytical Methods For Lupine Detection In Foodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The comparison of different ELISA kits from distinct manufacturers is quite difficult because each one has their own generated antibodies, conjugates, standards, and calibrants (Table 5). Koeberl et al (2018) performed an interesting comparison of three different ELISA kits to detect lupine protein or lupine flour protein from one or more species, realizing that the specificity of the antibodies used in the kits was not available, which is an important information for the detection capability to lupine and cross-reactivity phenomena. The estimated concentration of lupine in foods differed among the kits due to the use of different standards and crossreactivity was observed with some legumes and nuts.…”
Section: Immunochemical Assaysmentioning
confidence: 99%