Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37701634›Full record

ArticleCurrent research in food science2023

Physicochemical and chemical properties of mung bean protein isolate affected by the isolation procedure.

Christina Wintersohle, Inola Kracke, Laura Melanie Ignatzy, Lara Etzbach, Ute Schweiggert-Weisz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current research in food science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Opportunities and challenges of plant proteins as functional ingredients for food production.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Christina WintersohleInstitute of Nutritional and Food Sciences, Food Sciences, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 166a, D-53115, Bonn, Germany.
Inola KrackeInstitute of Nutritional and Food Sciences, Food Sciences, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 166a, D-53115, Bonn, Germany.
Laura Melanie IgnatzyFraunhofer Institute for Process Engineering and Packaging, Giggenhauser Straße 35, D-85354, Freising, Germany.
Lara EtzbachInstitute of Nutritional and Food Sciences, Food Sciences, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 166a, D-53115, Bonn, Germany.
Ute Schweiggert-WeiszInstitute of Nutritional and Food Sciences, Food Sciences, University of Bonn, Meckenheimer Allee 166a, D-53115, Bonn, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The effects of different mung bean protein isolation methods on the chemical composition, the physicochemical properties, and selected antinutritional factors of mung bean protein isolates were investigated. Six protein isolates were prepared by isoelectric precipitation at different extraction pH levels (pH 8 and 9), by micellization, and by hybrid isolation at varying salt concentrations (0.25 M, 0.50 M, 0.75 M). The extraction conditions affected the amount of antinutritive compounds of the isolates. Compared to mung bean flour, micellization reduced phytic acid content by approximately 48% and trypsin inhibitor activity by around 88%. The remaining phytic acid concentration of the isolates influenced their re-solubility, particularly under acidic conditions. The protein isolates exhibited significant differences in surface hydrophobicity and thermal characteristics, indicating structural modifications caused by the extraction methods. Micellization and extraction at pH 8 were identified as mildest isolation methods, as evidenced by the highest enthalpy values. SDS-PAGE analysis demonstrated an enrichment of globulins and comparable protein profiles among the isolates, suggesting that the observed differences arise from conformational changes rather than variations in protein composition. The product yield in protein extraction from mung beans ranged from 8% to 19%, emphasizing the importance of enhancing overall extraction efficiency or exploring the utilization of by-products obtained during the protein isolation process.

Indexed as

FT-IRIsoelectric precipitationMicellizationPhytic acidProtein solubilityProtein yield

Identifiers

PMID37701634
PMCPMC10494313

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.