AI Article Synopsis

  • Dry fractionated faba bean protein-rich flour (FPR) has 64.1% protein content, while faba bean protein isolate (FPI) boasts a higher 90.1% due to different processing methods.
  • FPR exhibits superior functional properties like higher protein solubility and foaming capacity, though FPI has better nutritional qualities such as higher protein digestibility and lower trypsin inhibitor activity.
  • A life cycle assessment indicates that both FPR and FPI have a lower environmental impact compared to cow's milk protein, with FPR being more environmentally friendly due to less resource-intensive processing.

Article Abstract

Dry fractionated faba bean protein-rich flour (FPR) produced by milling/air classification, and faba bean protein isolate (FPI) produced by acid extraction/isoelectric precipitation were compared in terms of composition, techno-functional properties, nutritional properties and environmental impacts. FPR had a lower protein content (64.1%, dry matter (DM)) compared to FPI (90.1%, DM), due to the inherent limitations of air classification. Of the two ingredients, FPR demonstrated superior functionality, including higher protein solubility (85%), compared to FPI (32%) at pH 7. Foaming capacity was higher for FPR, although foam stability was similar for both ingredients. FPR had greater gelling ability compared to FPI. The higher carbohydrate content of FPR may have contributed to this difference. An amino acid (AA) analysis revealed that both ingredients were low in sulfur-containing AAs, with FPR having a slightly higher level than FPI. The potential nutritional benefits of the aqueous process compared to the dry process used in this study were apparent in the higher in vitro protein digestibility (IVPD) and lower trypsin inhibitor activity (TIA) in FPI compared to FPR. Additionally, vicine/convicine were detected in FPR, but not in FPI. Furthermore, much lower levels of fermentable oligo-, di- and monosaccharides, and polyols (FODMAPs) were found in FPI compared to FPR. The life cycle assessment (LCA) revealed a lower environmental impact for FPR, partly due to the extra water and energy required for aqueous processing. However, in a comparison with cow's milk protein, both FPR and FPI were shown to have considerably lower environmental impacts.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7143175PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/foods9030322DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

faba bean
12
fpr
12
compared fpi
12
fpi
9
bean protein
8
environmental impacts
8
ingredients fpr
8
fpi compared
8
compared fpr
8
fpr fpi
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!