A comprehensive study was conducted to elucidate physicochemical and structural properties of sago starches. Two sago starch granules were oval in shape with an average diameter of 34.41 μm and had C-type polymorph with a crystallinity of about 28.13%. The amylose and resistant starch (RS) contents of two sago starches were higher than those of corn and potato starches. The two sago starches had a large amount of A and B1 chains (DP 6-24) which could form double helix structures. FTIR exhibited that the structure of two sago starches had a lower degree of order. The peak viscosity and breakdown of sago starch 2 were lower than corn starch, and the setback was higher than potato starch. Additionally, sago starches had lower gelatinization enthalpy and higher regeneration tendency. According to rheological results, sago starches showed lower shear thinning degree and thixotropy compared to corn and potato starches. Sago starch 1 gels represented the highest hardness, adhesiveness, springiness and cohesiveness, which could be used as potential food stabilizer. This study revealed the characteristics of two sago starches compared with other starches. The results indicated that the amylose content and amylopectin structures had significant influence on the physicochemical properties of sago starch.
Keywords: Pasting; Rheology; Sago starch; Structural properties; Thermal properties.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Declaration of competing interest The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Kuakpetoon D, Wang YJ. Kuakpetoon D, et al. Carbohydr Res. 2007 Nov 5;342(15):2253-63. doi: 10.1016/j.carres.2007.06.010. Epub 2007 Jun 12. Carbohydr Res. 2007. PMID: 17610854
Woo HD, We GJ, Kang TY, Shon KH, Chung HW, Yoon MR, Lee JS, Ko S. Woo HD, et al. J Food Sci. 2015 Oct;80(10):E2208-16. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.13071. Epub 2015 Sep 9. J Food Sci. 2015. PMID: 26352343
Kuakpetoon D, Wang YJ. Kuakpetoon D, et al. Carbohydr Res. 2006 Aug 14;341(11):1896-915. doi: 10.1016/j.carres.2006.04.013. Epub 2006 May 11. Carbohydr Res. 2006. PMID: 16690041
Li Z, Wei C. Li Z, et al. Int J Biol Macromol. 2020 Nov 15;163:2084-2096. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.09.077. Epub 2020 Sep 17. Int J Biol Macromol. 2020. PMID: 32950526 Review.
Ren Y, Yuan TZ, Chigwedere CM, Ai Y. Ren Y, et al. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2021 May;20(3):3061-3092. doi: 10.1111/1541-4337.12735. Epub 2021 Apr 2. Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2021. PMID: 33798276 Review.
Susanto B, Tosuli YT, Adnan, Cahyadi, Nami H, Surjosatyo A, Alandro D, Nugroho AD, Rashyid MI, Muflikhun MA. Susanto B, et al. Heliyon. 2024 Jan 5;10(1):e23993. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e23993. eCollection 2024 Jan 15. Heliyon. 2024. PMID: 38268580 Free PMC article.
Putra ON, Musfiroh I, Elisa S, Musa M, Ikram EHK, Chaidir C, Muchtaridi M. Putra ON, et al. Molecules. 2023 Dec 26;29(1):151. doi: 10.3390/molecules29010151. Molecules. 2023. PMID: 38202734 Free PMC article. Review.
Zhu Y, Xie F, Ren J, Jiang F, Zhao N, Du SK. Zhu Y, et al. Food Chem X. 2023 Jul 4;19:100784. doi: 10.1016/j.fochx.2023.100784. eCollection 2023 Oct 30. Food Chem X. 2023. PMID: 37780251 Free PMC article.
Cheng Z, Lu X, Hu X, Zhang Q, Ali M, Long C. Cheng Z, et al. Econ Bot. 2023;77(1):63-81. doi: 10.1007/s12231-022-09565-4. Epub 2023 Feb 16. Econ Bot. 2023. PMID: 36811019 Free PMC article.
Yan S, Li Z, Wang B, Li T, Li Z, Zhang N, Cui B. Yan S, et al. Front Nutr. 2023 Jan 10;9:1101868. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.1101868. eCollection 2022. Front Nutr. 2023. PMID: 36712512 Free PMC article.