Structural and functional properties of food protein-derived antioxidant peptides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this work is to provide a timely examination of the structure-activity relationship of antioxidative peptides. The main production approach involves enzymatic hydrolysis of animal and plant proteins to produce protein hydrolyzates, which can be further processed by membrane ultrafiltration into size-based peptide fractions. The hydrolyzates and peptide fractions can also be subjected to separation by column chromatography to obtain pure peptides. Although the structural basis for enhanced antioxidant activity varies, protein hydrolyzates and peptide fractions that contain largely low molecular weight peptides have generally been shown to be potent antioxidants. In addition to having hydrophobic amino acids such as Leu or Val in their N-terminal regions, protein hydrolyzates, and peptides containing the nucleophilic sulfur-containing amino acid residues (Cys and Met), aromatic amino acid residues (Phe, Trp, and Tyr) and/or the imidazole ring-containing His have been generally found to possess strong antioxidant properties. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: High levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in addition to the presence of metal cations can lead to oxidative stress, which promotes reactions that cause destruction of critical cellular biopolymers, such as proteins, lipids, and nucleic acids. Oxidative stress could be due to insufficient levels of natural cellular antioxidants, which enables accumulation of ROS to toxic levels. A proposed approach to ameliorating oxidative stress is the provision of exogenous peptides that can be consumed to complement cellular antioxidants. Food protein-derived peptides consist of amino acids joined by peptides bonds just like glutathione, a very powerful natural cellular antioxidant. Therefore, this review provides a timely summary of the in vitro and in vivo reactions impacted by antioxidant peptides and the postulated mechanisms of action, which could aid development of potent antioxidant agents. The review also serves as a resource material for identifying novel antioxidant peptide sources for the formulation of functional foods and nutraceuticals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".