Rheology and microstructure of myofibrillar protein–plant lipid composite gels: Effect of emulsion droplet size and membrane type

Application of ultrasound treatment for modulating the structural, functional and rheological properties of black bean protein isolates

“…The heating–cooling cycle programme was set as: heating from 25 °C to 90 °C at 5 °C min −1 , holding at 90 °C for 30 min and cooling to 25 °C at the same speed. The storage modulus (G') and loss modulus (G'') were recorded as a function of time during this process (Wu et al , ). The gels formed by temperature scanning were subjected to a frequency sweep (0.1–10.0 Hz) at 25 °C, and the fixed shape was changed to 0.01.…”

Rheology and microstructure of myofibrillar protein–olive oil composite gels: effect of different non‐meat protein as emulsifier

“…peanut oil, soy oil, sunflower oil, canola oil, or olive oil) has been used in comminuted meat products to replace animal fat and got acceptable sensory properties . In a previous study, we investigated the effects of two kinds of vegetable oil with different particle size and different interfacial membrane on the rheological properties of MP gels . We noted that pre‐emulsified lipids (olive oil and peanut oil) significantly improved the dynamic rheological performance of the MP gel network with emulsified olive oil having a stronger influence on the MP gels than emulsified peanut oil.…”

“…In another theory, the formation of an interfacial protein film around fat globules stabilises the fat in the meat batter . Previous studies used MP and Tween 80 solution to emulsify fat/oil, and the microstructures of these emulsions on the MP gel have been studied . However, there are limited reports about effects of non‐meat protein as emulsifier on the rheological property and microstructure of MP‐oil composite gels.…”

Gelation enhancement of soy protein isolate by sequential low‐ and ultrahigh‐temperature two‐stage preheating treatments

“…These preheating treatment effect was noticeably inconsistent with that observed in the rheological measurement (Fig. ), but the discrepancy may be accounted for by the fundamental difference involved with dynamic rheological testing versus static textural analysis (Wu et al ., ). The G′ value was obtained from a small‐strain test that applies a given strain to induce a shear force (stress), while the gel strength was determined by exerting a large deformation until the gel was ruptured and the measurement device predominantly produces a compressive force.…”