Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T05:12:03.827Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

370. The reaction between milk protein and reducing sugar in the ‘dry’ state

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2009

C. H. Lea
Affiliation:
Low Temperature Station for Research in Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Cambridge, and Department of Scientific and Industrial Research

Extract

‘Dry’, dialysed milk protein was stored for 6 months at 37° C. and 55% relative humidity alone and in the presence of small proportions of glucose, of high proportions of lactose and of sucrose, and of mixtures of these sugars.

The reducing sugars combined with free amino-groups of the protein, apparently in a 1:1 ratio; sucrose did not. The reaction did not proceed to completion, probably owing to difficulty of access of the reactive groups to one another. Only when the sugar-amino reaction occurred did discoloration ensue.

Glucose reacted more rapidly with the protein than did lactose, and the complex formed became discoloured and insoluble in both cold and hot water much more rapidly.

Sucrose and lactose both greatly delayed the onset of glucose-induced insolubility, lactose being the more efficient of the two. They did not prevent discoloration.

The protein alone became insoluble in cold but not in hot water after prolonged storage; but did not discolour. This change was prevented by sucrose. The behaviour of lactose was inconsistent, loss of solubility being accelerated in one experiment and retarded in another.

Type
Original Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Proprietors of Journal of Dairy Research 1948

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

(1)Henry, K. M., Kon, S. K., Lea, C. H. & White, J. C. D. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 292.Google Scholar
(2)Maillard, L. C. (1912). C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris, 154, 66.Google Scholar
(3)Whttnah, C. H. (1931). J. Amer. chem. Soc. 53, 300.Google Scholar
(4)Jones, T. S. G. (1936). J. Dairy Res. 7, 41.Google Scholar
(5)Lea, C. H. (1948). J. Dairy Res. 15, 364.Google Scholar
(6)Lea, C. H. & White, J. C. D. (1947). Proc. XIth Int. Congr. pure and appl. Chem., Lond, (in Press).Google Scholar
(7)Wright, N. C. (1924). Biochem. J. 18, 245.Google Scholar
(8)Kass, J. P. & Palmer, L. S. (1940). Industr. Engng Chem. 32, 1360.Google Scholar
(9)Somogyi, M. (1945). J. biol. Chem. 160, 61.Google Scholar