ArticleElectrophoresis2026
Production of Protein Hydrolysates and Bioactive Peptides From Lablab purpureus and Macrotyloma uniflorum via Optimized Extraction and Proteolysis Protocols.
Article in Electrophoresis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Comprehensive Characterization and Antioxidant Function Prediction of Endogenous and Exogenous Peptides fromCurrent issues in molecular biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rising global demand for sustainable, plant-based protein sources necessitates the exploration of underutilized legumes with high nutritional potential. This study systematically evaluates and compares five protein extraction techniques-ultrasound-assisted extraction (UAE), alkaline extraction-acid precipitation, phosphate buffer with TCA-acetone, TCA-acetone alone, and micellization-applied to Lablab purpureus and Macrotyloma uniflorum, two resilient and underexploited pulse crops. Protein recovery and yield were quantified for each method to identify the most efficient extraction approach. Among the tested methods, ultrasound-assisted extraction demonstrated superior performance in both legumes, with maximum protein yields of 84.02% for L. purpureus and 78.4% for M. uniflorum under optimized conditions (40% power, 10-15 min). Alkaline-acid precipitation resulted in the highest recovery (88.4%) but comparatively lower yields, indicating significant protein loss during isoelectric precipitation. Traditional precipitation techniques using TCA-acetone and phosphate buffer showed limited effectiveness, while micellization produced the lowest recovery and yield in both species. Importantly, the study reveals species-specific responses to extraction conditions, with L. purpureus consistently exhibiting higher extractability than M. uniflorum, likely due to differences in seed microstructure and protein distribution. These findings underscore the need for pulse-specific optimisation strategies rather than universal extraction protocols. The outcomes pave the way for their application in food, nutraceutical, and feed industries, contributing to sustainable protein innovation and improved utilisation of climate-resilient crops. Future work should focus on the structural, functional, and bioactive characterisation of the extracted proteins to enable targeted formulation in diverse food systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.