Monitoring protein hydrolysis by pepsin using pH-stat: In vitro gastric digestions in static and dynamic pH conditions

Food Chemistry

Volumn 239, Issue , 2018, Pages 268-275

  Mat, Damien J L ^a   Cattenoz, Thomas ^a   Souchon, Isabelle ^a   Michon, Camille ^a   Le Feunteun, Steven ^a  

^a CEMAGREF   (France)

Author keywords

Aspartic proteases; Hydrolysis; In vitro digestion; Pepsin; pH stat; Proteolysis; Titrimetry; Whey proteins

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; HYDROLYSIS; PH; PROTEOLYSIS;

ASPARTIC PROTEASE; IN-VITRO DIGESTIONS; PEPSIN; PH-STAT; TITRIMETRY; WHEY PROTEINS;

PROTEINS;

ASPARTIC PROTEINASE; PEPSIN A; WHEY PROTEIN;

ACID BASE BALANCE; ACIDIFICATION; ARTICLE; CALCULATION; CARBOXY TERMINAL SEQUENCE; DIGESTION; DYNAMIC PH; ENZYME ACTIVITY; IN VITRO STUDY; PH; PH MEASUREMENT; PROTEIN DEGRADATION; PROTEIN HYDROLYSIS; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; STATIC PH; STOMACH EMPTYING; TITRIMETRY; VALIDATION STUDY; HYDROLYSIS; STOMACH;

DIGESTION; HYDROGEN-ION CONCENTRATION; HYDROLYSIS; PEPSIN A; STOMACH;

EID: 85021212541     PISSN: 03088146     EISSN: 18737072     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2017.06.115     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Adler-Nissen, J., Eriksen, S., Olsen, H.S., Improvement of the functionality of vegetable proteins by controlled enzymatic hydrolysis. Qualitas Plantarum Plant Foods for Human Nutrition 32 (1983), 411–423.
2. Asselin, J., Hébert, J., Amiot, J., Effects of in vitro proteolysis on the allergenicity of major whey proteins. Journal of Food Science 54 (1989), 1037–1039.
3. Astwood, J.D., Leach, J.N., Fuchs, R.L., Stability of food allergens to digestion in vitro. Nature Biotechnology 14 (1996), 1269–1273.
4. Camacho, F., González-Tello, P., Páez-Dueñas, M.-P., Guadix, E.-M., Guadix, A., Correlation of base consumption with the degree of hydrolysis in enzymic protein hydrolysis. Journal of Dairy Research 68:2 (2001), 251–265.
5. Church, F.C., Porter, D.H., Catignani, G.L., Swaisgood, H.E., An o-phthalaldehyde spectrophotometric assay for proteinases. Analytical Biochemistry 146 (1985), 343–348.
6. Dressman, J.B., Comparison of canine and human gastrointestinal physiology. Pharmaceutical Research 3 (1986), 123–131.
7. Fu, T.J., Abbott, U.R., Hatzos, C., Digestibility of food allergens and nonallergenic proteins in simulated gastric fluid and simulated intestinal fluid – A comparative study. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 50 (2002), 7154–7160.
8. Golding, M., Wooster, T.J., The influence of emulsion structure and stability on lipid digestion. Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science 15 (2010), 90–101.
9. Griffiths, M., Crash course: Gastrointestinal system. 4th ed., 2012, MOSBY Elsevier.
10. Guerra, A., Etienne-Mesmin, L., Livrelli, V., Denis, S., Blanquet-Diot, S., Alric, M., Relevance and challenges in modeling human gastric and small intestinal digestion. Trends in Biotechnology 30 (2012), 591–600.
11. Guo, M.R., Fox, P.F., Flynn, A., Kindstedt, P.S., Susceptibility of β-lactoglobulin and sodium caseinate to proteolysis by pepsin and trypsin. Journal of Dairy Science 78 (1995), 2336–2344.
12. Kim, S.B., Ki, K.S., Khan, M.A., Lee, W.S., Lee, H.J., Ahn, B.S., Kim, H.S., Peptic and tryptic hydrolysis of native and heated whey protein to reduce its antigenicity. Journal of Dairy Science 90 (2007), 4043–4050.
13. Kitabatake, N., Kinekawa, Y.I., Digestibility of bovine milk whey protein and β-lactoglobulin in vitro and in vivo. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 46 (1998), 4917–4923.
14. Le Feunteun, S., Barbé, F., Remond, D., Ménard, O., Le Gouar, Y., Dupont, D., Laroche, B., Impact of the dairy matrix structure on milk protein digestion kinetics: Mechanistic modelling based on mini-pig in vivo data. Food and Bioprocess Technology 7 (2014), 1099–1113.
15. Malagelada, J.-R., Go, V.L.W., Summerskill, W.H.J., Different gastric, pancreatic, and biliary responses to solid-liquid or homogenized meals. Digestive Diseases and Sciences 24 (1979), 101–110.
16. Marathe, C.S., Rayner, C.K., Jones, K.L., Horowitz, M., Relationships between gastric emptying, postprandial glycemia, and incretin hormones. Diabetes Care 36:5 (2013), 1396–1405.
17. Mat, D.J.L., Le Feunteun, S., Michon, C., Souchon, I., In vitro digestion of foods using pH-stat and the INFOGEST protocol: Impact of matrix structure on digestion kinetics of macronutrients, proteins and lipids. Food Research International 88 (2016), 226–233.
18. McClements, D.J., Li, Y., Structured emulsion-based delivery systems: Controlling the digestion and release of lipophilic food components. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science 159 (2010), 213–228.
19. Ménard, O., Cattenoz, T., Guillemin, H., Souchon, I., Deglaire, A., Dupont, D., Picque, D., Validation of a new in vitro dynamic system to simulate infant digestion. Food Chemistry 145 (2014), 1039–1045.
20. Minekus, M., Alminger, M., Alvito, P., Ballance, S., Bohn, T., Bourlieu, C.,. Brodkorb, A., A standardised static in vitro digestion method suitable for food – An international consensus. Food & Function 5 (2014), 1113–1124.
21. Nielsen, M., Functionality of protein hydrolysates. Damodaran, S., Paraf, A., (eds.) Food proteins and their applications, 1997, CRC Press, 443–472.
22. Norton, J.E., Wallis, G.A., Spyropoulos, F., Lillford, P.J., Norton, I.T., Designing food structures for nutrition and health benefits. Annual Review of Food Science and Technology 5 (2014), 177–195.
23. Piper, D.W., Fenton, B.H., PH stability and activity curves of pepsin with special reference to their clinical importance. Gut 6 (1965), 506–508.
24. Salaün, F., Mietton, B., Gaucheron, F., Buffering capacity of dairy products. International Dairy Journal 15 (2005), 95–109.
25. Savitzky, A., Golay, M.J.E., Smoothing and differentiation of data by simplified least squares procedures. Analytical Chemistry 36 (1964), 1627–1639.
26. Spellman, D., McEvoy, E., O'Cuinn, G., FitzGerald, R.J., Proteinase and exopeptidase hydrolysis of whey protein: Comparison of the TNBS, OPA and pH stat methods for quantification of degree of hydrolysis. International Dairy Journal 13 (2003), 447–453.
27. Turgeon, S.L., Bard, C., Gauthier, S.F., Comparaison de trois méthodes pour la mesure du degré d'hydrolyse de protéines laitières modifiées enzymatiquement. Canadian Institute of Food Science and Technology Journal 24 (1991), 14–18.
28. Umezawa, H., Structures and activities of protease inhibitors of microbial origin. Methods in Enzymology 45 (1976), 678–695.
29. Whittier, E.O., Buffer intensities of milk and milk constituents I. The buffer action of casein in milk. Journal of Biological Chemistry 83 (1929), 79–88.
30. Wickham, M., Faulks, R., Mills, C., In vitro digestion methods for assessing the effect of food structure on allergen breakdown. Molecular Nutrition & Food Research 53 (2009), 952–958.
31. Williams, H.D., Sassene, P., Kleberg, K., Bakala-N'Goma, J.-C., Calderone, M., Jannin, V.,. Pouton, C.W., Toward the establishment of standardized in vitro tests for lipid-based formulations, part 1: Method parameterization and comparison of in vitro digestion profiles across a range of representative formulations. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 101 (2012), 3360–3380.
32. Wooster, T.J., Day, L., Xu, M., Golding, M., Oiseth, S., Keogh, J., Clifton, P.M., Impact of different biopolymer networks on the digestion of gastric structured emulsions. Food Hydrocolloids 36 (2014), 102–114.