Mechanisms of heat damage in proteins | British Journal of Nutrition | Cambridge Core (original) (raw)

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

1. The preparation of a propionylated protein is described, and the effects of this treatment on amino acid composition and availability are compared with the effects of severe heat treatment (autoclaving) of a protein.

2. Using chemical analyses, changes exceeding 5% for total tyrosine, histidine, methionine and cystine contents were found after propionylation of the protein. Autoclaving of the protein resulted in changes in total serine, lysine, methionine, cystine and tryptophan contents.

3. Microbiological estimates of total amino acid contents were not in close agreement with the chemical estimates for the autoclaved protein.

4. Fluorodinitrobenzene-reactive lysine content was reduced to almost zero by propionylation, and by almost 40% by autoclaving.

5. Both propionylating and autoclaving protein reduced the amount of lysine available to the chick by about half. In contrast, the availabilities of methionine and tryptophan to the chick were unchanged by propionylation, but were reduced to 0.66 and 0.44 respectively, relative to the untreated protein, by autoclaving.

6. Because of the difficulties of obtaining reliable absolute estimates of amino acid availability using chick growth assays, our interpretation of results is mainly based on relative values. The merits of microbiological microbiological estimates of amino acid availability are assessed.

References

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (1965). Official Methods of Analysis, 10th ed. Washington, DC: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar

Carpenter, K. J. & Booth, V. H. (1973). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 43, 423.Google Scholar

Carpenter, K. J., March, B. E., Milner, C. K. & Campbell, R. C. (1963). Br. J. Nutr. 17, 309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Donoso, G., Lewis, O. A. M., Miller, D. S. & Payne, P. R. (1962). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 13, 192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Finney, D. J. (1964). Statistical Method in Biological Assay p. 193. London: Griffin.Google Scholar

Hartley, A. W. (1966). 4th Amino Acid Colloquium p. 19. Chertsey, Surrey: Technicon Instruments Co. Ltd.Google Scholar

Harwood, E. J. & Shrimpton, D. H. (1969). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 28, 66A.Google Scholar

Leclerc, J. & Benoiton, L. (1968). Can. J. Biochem. Physiol. 46, 471.Google Scholar

Mauron, J. (1972). In International Encyclopaedia of Food and Nutrition Voi. II, Protein and Amino Acid Functions, p. 417 [Bigwood, E. J, editor]Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Miller, E. L., Carpenter, K. J., Morgan, C. B. & Boyne, A. W. (1965). Br. J. Nutr. 19, 249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Rolls, B. A., Williams, A. P. & Porter, J. W. G. (1969). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 28, 69A.Google Scholar

Technicon Instruments Corporation (1963). Technical Manual AA-I. Tarry Town, New York: Technicon Instruments Corporation.Google Scholar

Thomas, D. C. (1965). 3rd Amino Acid Colloquium p. 110. Chertsey, Surrey: Technicon Instruments Co. Ltd.Google Scholar

Varnish, S. A. (1971). Nutritional studies on heat-damaged protein. PhD Thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar

Varnish, S. A. & Carpenter, K. J. (1970). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 29, 45A.Google Scholar