Cited by 41

Isolation and evaluation of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) protein fractions: A nutritional and bio-functional approach to the globulin fraction

Tavano, Olga Luisa, Amistá, Maria Julia de Miguel, Del Ciello, Giani, Rodrigues, Marilia Caroline Martini, Bono Nishida, Amanda Marcela, Valadares, Letícia Alves, Siqueira, Bruno Moreira, Gomes, Roseli Aparecida da Silva +2 more·2022·Current Research in Food Science

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.crfs.2022.06.006

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Quinoa proteins similarly show chenopodin (11S globulin) as oligomeric assemblies (300-380 kDa) with smaller dissociation products and low-MW albumins (<20 kDa), but the aggregate fraction is particularly sensitive to extraction pH and processing history.

    “Quinoa proteins similarly show che­ nopedin (11S globulin) as oligomeric assemblies (300-380 kDa) with smaller dissociation products and low-MW albumins ( &lt; 20 kDa), but the aggregate fraction is particularly sensitive to extraction pH and pro­ cessing history”
  • Quinoa also contain 7S/13S proglobulin at 45-60 kDa and 2S albumins at 8-16 kDa, whose relative intensity varies with cultivar and extraction pH.

    “They also contain 7S/13S proglobulin at 45-60 kDa and 2S albumins at 8-16 kDa, whose relative intensity varies with cultivar and extraction pH”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Akeson W.R. Stahman M.A.A. Pepsin-pancreatin digest index of protein quality evaluation J. Nutr. 83 1964 257 261 14191426
  2. Alves M.F. Araujo M.C. Juliano M.A. Oliveira E.M. Krieger J.E. Casarini D.E. Juliano L. Carmona A.K. A continuous fluorescent assay for the determination of plasma and tissue angiotensin I-converting enzyme activity Braz. J. Med. Biol. Res. 38 2005 861 868 10.1590/S0100-879X2005000600007 15933779 · DOI
  3. Aschemann-Witzel J. Gantriis R.F. Fraga P. Perez-Cueto F.J.A. Plant-based food and protein trend from a business perspective: markets, consumers, and the challenges and opportunities in the future Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 61 2020 3119 3128 32654499
  4. Brand-Williams W. Cuvelier M.E. Berset C. Use of free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity LWT - Food Sci. Technol. (Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft -Technol.) 28 1995 25 30 10.1016/S0023-6438(95)80008-5 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Burrieza H.P. Rizzo A.J. Vale E.M. Silveira V. Maldonado S. Shotgun proteomic analysis of quinoa seeds reveals novel lysine-rich seed storage globulins Food Chem. 293 2019 299 306 31151615
  6. Clemente A. Arques M.D.C. Bowman-Birk inhibitors from legumes as colorectal chemopreventive agents World J. Gastroenterol. 20 2014 10305 10315 25132747 PMC4130838
  7. FAO/WHO Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition. Report of 593 and FAO Expert Consultation Food Nutrit. Paper 92 2013 67 World Health 594 Organization, Rome, Italy 26369006
  8. Green C.L. Lamming D.W. Regulation of metabolic health by essential dietary amino acids Mech. Ageing Dev. 177 2019 186 200 30044947 PMC6333505
  9. Hagen S.R. Frost B. Augustin J. Precolumn phenylisothiocyanate derivatization and liquid chromatography of amino acids in food J. Assoc. Off. Anal. Chem. 72 1989 912 916 2592313
  10. Han R. Hernández-Álvarez A.J. Maycock J. Murray B.S. Boesch C. Comparison of alcalase- and pepsin-treated oilseed protein hydrolysates – experimental validation of predicted antioxidant, antihypertensive and antidiabetic properties Curr. Res. Food Sci. 4 2021 141 149 33778774 PMC7985463
  11. Laemmli U.K. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of head of bacteriophage T4 Nature 227 1970 680 685 5432063
  12. Lowry O.H. Rosebrough N.J. Farr L.A. Randall R.J. Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent J. Biol. Chem. 1951 265 275 14907713
  13. Ogungbenle H.N. Nutritional evaluation and functional properties of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa) flour Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 54 2003 153 158 12701372
  14. Pereira M.P. Tavano O.L. Use of different spices as potential natural antioxidant additives on cooked beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). Increase of DPPH radical scavenging activity and total phenolic content Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 69 2014 337 343 10.1007/s11130-014-0439-4 25179942 · DOI
  15. Pereira E. Encina-Zelada C. Barros L. Gonzales-Barron U. Cadavez V. Ferreira I.C.F.R. Chemical and nutritional characterization of Chenopodium quinoa Willd (quinoa) grains: a good alternative to nutritious food Food Chem. 280 2019 110 114 30642475
  16. Research Council National Nutrient Requirements of Laboratory Animals 1995 National Academy Press Washington, DC 13
  17. Saadi S. Saari N. Ghazali H.M. Abdulkarim M.S. Mitigation of antinutritional factors and protease inhibitors of defatted winged bean-seed proteins using thermal and hydrothermal treatments: denaturation/unfolding coupled hydrolysis mechanism Curr. Res. Food Sci. 5 2022 207 221 35106485 PMC8789533
  18. Sánchez-Velázquez O.A. Cuevas-Rodríguez E.O. Mondor M. Ribéreau S. Arcand Y. Mackie A. Hernández-Álvarez A.J. Impact of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion on peptide profile and bioactivity of cooked and non-cooked oat protein concentrates Curr. Res. Food Sci. 4 2021 93 104 33748776 PMC7957154
  19. Sobota A. Świeca M. Gęsiński K. Wirkijowska A. Bochnak J. Yellow-coated quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd) – physicochemical, nutritional, and antioxidant properties J. Sci. Food Agric. 100 2020 2035 2042 31858602
  20. Spies J.R. Determination of tryptophan in proteins Anal. Chem. 49 1967 1412 1415 6073804
  21. Statsoft STATISTICA 8.0. Statistics Computer Program for Windows vol. 1 2007 StatSoft Inc. Software Tulsa
  22. Swaminathan A. Fokin A. Venckūnas T. Degens H. Methionine restriction plus overload improves skeletal muscle and metabolic health in old mice on a high fat diet Sci. Rep. 11 2021 1260 33441954 PMC7806605
  23. Tavano O.L. Silva Junior S.I. Demonte A. Neves V.A. Nutritional responses of rats to diets based on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) seed meal or its protein fractions J. Agric. Food Chem. 56 2008 11006 11010 18942847
  24. Tavano O.L. Neves V.A. Silva Junior S.I. In vitro versus in vivo protein digestibility techniques for calculating PDCAAS (protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score) applied to chickpea fractions Food Res. Int. 89 2016 756 763 28460976
  25. Tunon P. Johanson K.E. Yet another improved silver staining method for the detection of proteins in polyacrylamide gels J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 9 1984 171 179 6203956

Authors
Tavano, O. L., Amistá, M. J. D. M., Del Ciello, G., Rodrigues, M. C. M., Bono Nishida, A. M., Valadares, L. A., Siqueira, B. M., Gomes, R. A. D. S., Parolini, M. T., & Silva Junior, S. I. D.
Venue
Current Research in Food Science
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022
Volume
5
Pages
1028-1037
ISSN
2665-9271
Cited by
41
References
1
Language
en
Funders
  • Fundação de Ensino e Pesquisa de Uberaba (nº921/2009)
  • Instituto de Tecnologia de Alimentos

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review