Ionic strength and hydrogen bonding effects on whey protein isolate–flaxseed gum coacervate rheology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Whey protein isolate (WPI) was mixed with anionic flaxseed (Linum usitatissimum L.) gum (FG), and phase transition during coacervate formation was monitored. Effects of ionic strength and hydrogen bonding on coacervation of WPI‐FG system and corresponding rheological properties were investigated. During coacervate formation, structural transitions were confirmed by both turbidimetry and confocal laser scanning microscopy. Increasing ionic strength with sodium chloride (50 mM) decreased optical density (600 nm) at pHmax. Correspondingly, pHc and pHϕ1 decreased from pH 5.4 to 4.8 and from 5.0 to 4.6, respectively, while pHϕ2 increased from pH 1.8 to 2.4. Sodium chloride suppressed biopolymer electrostatic interactions and reduced coacervate formation. Adding urea (100 mM) shifted pHϕ1, pHmax, and pHϕ2 from 4.8, 3.8, and 1.8 to 5.0, 4.0, and 2.2, respectively, while pHc was unaffected. Optical density (600 nm) at pHmax (0.536) was lower than that of control in the absence of urea (0.617). This confirmed the role of hydrogen bonding during coacervate formation in the biopolymer system composed of WPI and FG. Dynamic shear behavior and viscoelasticity of collected coacervates were measured, and both shear‐thinning behavior and gel‐like properties were observed. Addition of sodium chloride and urea reduced ionic strength and hydrogen bonding, resulting in decreased WPI‐FG coacervate dynamic viscosity and viscoelasticity. The disturbed charge balance contributed to a loosely packed structure of coacervates which were less affected by altered hydrogen bonding. Findings obtained here will help to predict flaxseed gum behavior in protein‐based foods.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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".