This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1082013209346042v1 15/4/407    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Rocha, G.A. Articles by Favaro-Trindade, C.S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Microcapsules of a Casein Hydrolysate: Production, Characterization, and Application in Protein Bars

Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Zootecnia e Engenharia de Alimentos. Av. Duque de Caxias Norte 225, P.O. Box 23, 13535-900 Pirassununga SP, Brazil

M.A. Trindade

Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Zootecnia e Engenharia de Alimentos. Av. Duque de Caxias Norte 225, P.O. Box 23, 13535-900 Pirassununga SP, Brazil

F.M. Netto

Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Faculdade de Engenharia de Alimentos. R. Monteiro Lobat 80, P.O. Box 6121, 13083-862 Campinas-SP, Brazil

C.S. Favaro-Trindade

Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Zootecnia e Engenharia de Alimentos. Av. Duque de Caxias Norte 225, P.O. Box 23, 13535-900 Pirassununga SP, Brazil, carmenft{at}usp.br

The aim of this work was to encapsulate a casein hydrolysate by spray drying using maltodextrins (DE 10 and 20) as wall materials and to evaluate the efficiency of the microencapsulation in attenuating the bitter taste of the hydrolysate using protein bars as the model system. Microcapsules were evaluated for morphology (SEM), particle size, hygroscopicity, solubility, thermal behavior (DSC), and bitter taste with a trained sensory panel by a paired comparison test (nonencapsulated samples vs. encapsulated samples). Bars were prepared with the addition of 3% casein hydrolysate at free or both encapsulated forms, and were then evaluated for their moisture, water activity (a_w) and for their bitter taste by a ranking test. Microcapsules were of the matrix type, having continuous surfaces with no apparent porosity for both coatings. Both encapsulated casein hydrolysates had similar hygroscopicity, and lower values than free encapsulated hydrolysates. The degree of hydrolysis of the maltodextrin influenced only the particle size and T_g. The sensory panel considered the protein bars produced with both encapsulated materials less bitter (p < 0.05) than those produced with the free casein hydrolysates. Microencapsulation by spray drying with maltodextrin DE 10 and 20 was successful to attenuate the bitter taste and the hygroscopicity of casein hydrolysates.

Key Words: peptides • spray drying • protein bar • ranking test • maltodextrin

This version was published on August 1, 2009

Food Science and Technology International, Vol. 15, No. 4, 407-413 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1082013209346042


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?