2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.02.014
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Role of secondary structures in the gelation of porcine myosin at different pH values

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

15
129
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 300 publications
(145 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
15
129
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The initial increase in G′ trend indicated the onset of gelation or the formation of the preliminary elastic protein network, which was probably due to the unfolding and cross-linking of heavy meromyosin (Egelandsdal, Fretheim, & Samejima, 1986;Jiang & Xiong, 2013). The temporary decrease in G′ was attributed to the denaturation of the myosin tails, which involved the disentanglement of noncovalent, short-term intermolecular interactions to increase the mobility of muscle proteins (Liu, Zhao, Xiong, Xie, & Qin, 2008;Xiong, 1997). On further heating, the formation of hydrophobic and sulfhydryl-disulfide interactions created the cross-links between protein aggregates or strands for an increase in G′, indicating the transformation of the viscous sol into an elastic gel network (Ferris, Sandoval, Barreiro, Sánchez, & Müller, 2009;Zhao et al, 2014).…”
Section: Storage Modulus (G′)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The initial increase in G′ trend indicated the onset of gelation or the formation of the preliminary elastic protein network, which was probably due to the unfolding and cross-linking of heavy meromyosin (Egelandsdal, Fretheim, & Samejima, 1986;Jiang & Xiong, 2013). The temporary decrease in G′ was attributed to the denaturation of the myosin tails, which involved the disentanglement of noncovalent, short-term intermolecular interactions to increase the mobility of muscle proteins (Liu, Zhao, Xiong, Xie, & Qin, 2008;Xiong, 1997). On further heating, the formation of hydrophobic and sulfhydryl-disulfide interactions created the cross-links between protein aggregates or strands for an increase in G′, indicating the transformation of the viscous sol into an elastic gel network (Ferris, Sandoval, Barreiro, Sánchez, & Müller, 2009;Zhao et al, 2014).…”
Section: Storage Modulus (G′)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The water holding capacity of a hydrocolloid gel can be attributed to increasing moisture content with increasing levels of konjac (Osburn and Keeton, 2004). In general, the increased water holding capacity can be largely attributed to the total amount of solubilized myosin, since myosin is largely responsible (Choi et al, 2011; Nakayama and Sato, 1971), and heat-induced gel requires the association of myosin and actin chains, which produces a continuous three-dimensional network in which water is captured (Liu et al, 2008).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Gel strength, which was evaluated as rigid, was influenced by many factors according to previous studies (Camou et al, 1989;Ishioroshi et al, 1983;Lesiów & Xiong, 2001;Liu et al, 2010), such as the heating rate, pH, ionic strength, the lengths of the filaments before heating and the addition of other components like ATP, most of which mainly functioned by affecting protein-protein attractive interactions (hydrogen bonds, ionic bonds, sulfhydryl bonds and hydrophobic interactions), repulsive interactions (mainly electrostatic but also sometimes steric) and proteinwater interactions (Liu, Zhao, Xiong, Xie, & Qin, 2008). The gel strength decreased as the heating rate increased (Camou et al, 1989).…”
Section: Gel Strength Of Heat-induced Myofibrillar Gel At 65°cmentioning
confidence: 99%