Polysaccharides and proteins are natural polymers that are widely used as functional ingredients for various food colloids or emulsion formulations. Majority of food emulsions are constituted with polysaccharide and protein combinations. They are the essential ingredients of any food colloid formulation mainly due to their ability to change product shelf life by varying food texture (Schmidt & Smith, 1992; Schorsch, Jones & Norton 1999). Their interaction in the formulation thus finds many applications particularly in new food formulation development. Due to complex formation and creation of nano or micro structures (aggregation and gelation behavior) they generally change the rheological properties of food colloids which may affect the food product texture and colloidal stability (Benichou, 2002; McClements, 2005, 2006, 2007; Dickinson, 2003). Polysaccharide and protein interactions in solution and interfaces have been studied by several groups (Dickinson, 2003, 2008; Bos &Van Vliet 2001; Carrera & Rodríguez Patino 2005; Krägel, Derkatch, & Miller, 2008; Koupantis, & Kiosseoglou, 2009; Mackie, 2009). However, despite the vast advancement made in the recent past, polysaccharide and protein interactions in food hydrocolloids continue to be one of the most challenging topics to understand.
Proteins, being surface active can play major role in the formation and stabilization of emulsions in the presence of polysaccharide, while interacting through electrostatic or hydrophobic-hydrophobic interactions. On the other hand, polysaccharides being hydrophilic in nature generally remain in aqueous phase thus help in controlling the aqueous phase rheology like thickening, gelling and acting as stabilizing agents. The formation and deformation of polysaccharide-protein complexes and their solubility depend on various factors like charge and nature of biopolymers, pH, ionic strength and temperature of the medium and even the presence of surfactant of the medium (Ghosh & Bandyopadhyay, 2011). If pH of the medium is reduced below isoelctric point (p
Polysaccharides and proteins both contribute to the structural and textural properties of food by changing rheology of food emulsions through their gelling networking system (Dickinson, 1992). Non-covalent interactions between polysaccharide and protein in any emulsion formulation play a major role to change the interfacial behavior and stability of the food colloids. The driving force for these non-covalent interactions is electrostatic interactions, hydrophobic interactions, H-bonding and Van der Waals interactions. Recent literatures also focus on how protein and polysaccharide molecules can be linked together by covalent bond. At pH close to protein p
2. Nature of polysaccharide-protein complex
Polysaccharide and protein complex formation is mainly driven by various non-covalent interactions, like electrostatic, H-bonding, hydrophobic, and steric interactions (Kruif et al 2001). Protein carries +ve or –ve zeta potential based on the pH of the medium (+ve at pH lower than p
In general, interactions between proteins and polysaccharides are quite explored where large numbers of report have been published based on the interactions between oppositely charged “protein-polysaccharide” systems (Dmitrochenko et al 1989; Bengoechea et al 2011, Stone & Nickerson 2012). Although electrostatic attraction is the main driving force for the complexation between protein and polysaccharide, but it is also reported that hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interaction plays a secondary role for stability of the “protein-polysaccharide” aggregates (McClements, 2006). The extent of hydrogen bonding and hydrophobic interaction also depends on temperature (Weinbreck et al, 2004). In 2009 Nickerson and co-workers(Liu, Low, & Nickerson, 2009) have reported that pea protein and gum acacia complex stabilize at low temperature due to increase in hydrogen bonding interactions and destabilize at high temperature due to decline in hydrogen bonding interactions. Temperature also plays an important role to decide the protein conformations (folded or unfolded). In 2007, Pal (Mitra, Sinha & Pal, 2007) and coworkers have reported that human serum albumin unfolds at higher temperature and undergoes in reversible refolding conformations upon cooling (below 600 c). Unfolded conformations of protein expose more reactive sites (amino acids) to the solvent phase, thus more chances of interactions (or binding) with polysaccharide. Binding of anionic polysaccharides (pH~pKa) to the cationic proteins (at pH<p
Two bio-polymers can exist either in a single phase systems or in a phase separated systems depending on the nature of bio-polymers, their concentration, and solution conditions. When two bio-polymers carry opposite charge, then either they agglomerates to form soluble complexes (single phase) or insoluble precipitates (2-phase system). On the other hand, when two non-interacting bio-polymers mixed together, either they exist in a single phase system (where two separate entities distributes uniformly throughout the medium) or exist as two distinct phases (each phases comprise different bio-polymer). Therefore, in the protein-polysaccharide system, phase separation occurs through two different mechanisms which are
3. Functional properties of polysaccharide-protein complexes related to food application
Polysaccharide-protein complexes exhibit a wide range of interesting properties, such as surface activity to stabilize air-water or oil-water interfaces, viscosifying, and gelling properties etc. Viscosifying and gelling ability of polysaccharide-protein complexes help to obtain gel-like processed food products without any thermal treatment in the process. The interfacial properties of these complexes help to impart stability into the emulsion food products. Also, protein–polysaccharide complexes are able to encapsulate several active ingredients; hence they act as delivery systems for many bioactives or sensitive molecules in food formulations. These complexes are also known to vary bulk/interfacial structures, textures and shelf-life stability of the food colloids. In the following section we will discuss this polysaccharide-protein interaction in light of their functional properties.
3.1. Viscosity of polysaccharide-protein complex and air-water foam stability
Viscosity and gelling are the rheological property which depends on the molecular characteristics of the biopolymers, such as their molecular weight, shape, chain flexibility. Other factors are the concentration, interaction between the biopolymers and water, as well as solution parameters like: pH, ionic strength and presence of other components/ligands etc. Interactions between polysaccharide and protein have been proven to widen the functional properties of each individual biopolymer. Rheological properties of polysaccharide-protein complex lead to new rheological behaviors different from each individual biopolymer.
Association of two bio-polymers is expected to increase the bulk viscosity of the system as entities of larger sizes are formed. The rheological behavior of several protein–polysaccharide mixed systems have been studied and ranged from viscous to viscoelastic properties showing elastic behavior is reported. The hydrated polysaccharide-protein complexes increase viscosity and rheology of the system found to be depends on the nature and structure of polysaccharides. Viscous property of gum acacia-protein coacervates attributes to the globular conformation of the polysaccharide, whereas the same protein with linear pectin results in gel-like system. Beside the nature of the individual bio-polymer solution property and concentration of bio-polymers are also known to affect the rheology of the system (Dickinson, 2011). For example, it was found that pH played a major role in the viscosity of the coacervate phase. A maximum viscosity was obtained at pH 4.0, where concentration of whey protein and gum arabic in the coacervate phase was maximum and extent of electrostatic attraction was highest. This suggests that the electrostatic interactions between whey protein and gum arabic were responsible for the highly viscous behavior of the coacervates. Whereas, the same composition of whey protein and gum arabic at pH above protein p
Viscoelastic properties of polysaccharide-protein complexes also play an important role towards the foam stability in variety of food products. In case of air-water system foam can be define as the air entrapment by a thin liquid film (water), where this liquid film is stabilized by some surface active molecules. Stability of the foam increases with the increase in the stability of the interfacial liquid film, because lower stability of this interfacial liquid film can lead to the diffusion of air entrapped inside the foam. Viscosity of this liquid film is another parameter by which one can control the diffusion rate of air entrapped inside the foam. Therefore, higher stability and viscosity of the interfacial liquid film leads to lower diffusion of air entrapped inside the foam and increase the foam stability. Schmitt and co-workers have studied the air-water interfacial property of β-lactoglobulin-acacia gum complexes at pH 4.2 [Schmitt et al 2005]. The group has reported that although surface activity of the complex is similar with the pure protein, but complex forms much stronger viscoelastic interfacial film with thickness of about 250 Å. As a result, gas permeability of thin-film stabilized by the complexes was significantly reduced (0.021 cm s -1) compared to pure β-lactoglobulin (0.521 cm s-1). This phenomenon suggests that stability of foam (stabilized by protein-polysaccharide complex) is higher compared to the foam stabilized by protein alone.
The likely explanation of the higher foam stability and different interfacial properties of coacervate is that protein-polysccharide complexes are able to re-organize at the interface by coalescence, forming interfacial microgel. These findings were applied for the ice cream formulation for improved air bubble stability (Schmitt C, Kolodziejczyk E. 2010). Similarly, gelatin has been replaced by whey protein isolate-gum acacia complexes to improve the bubble stability in chilled dairy products (Schmitt C, Kolodziejczyk E. 2010). In case of stabilization by complexes, variation in ratio of biopolymers could be used to control the size of the complexes, hence their surface activity. In addition to that, viscoelastic properties of the air-water interfacial film is possible to tune by either adsorbing two biopolymers simultaneously or by the sequential adsorption of protein followed by polysaccharide. As for example, β-lactoglobulin-pectin complexes are known to stabilize the air-water interface. In this case, thickness of the film obtained from the sequential adsorption of protein and polysaccharide was higher (450 Å) than the adsorption of complexes (250 Å) (Ganzelves et al 2008).
In contrary to air-water foam stability, use of polysaccharide-protein complexes for the stabilization of oil-water emulsion (Martínez et al 2007) has received much more attention. Use of these polysaccharide-protein hydrocolloids as an emulsion stabilizer will be discussed in the next section.
3.2. Oil-water emulsion stability
Emulsion is a uniform dispersion of liquid droplets within a continuous matrix of a second immiscible liquid, stabilized by surface active molecules. These stabilizers are termed as emulsifier. In the context of the present topic, we will limit our discussion to the role of bio-polymers as emulsifier. Generally, emulsifier has the amphiphilic character to adsorb onto the interface of liquid droplets, which can prevent the phase separation of two immiscible liquids. For a fixed emulsifier, stability of the emulsion depends on few factors, such as rate of adsorption of the emulsifier, concentration of emulsifier, etc. At low concentration of emulsifiers, emulsion system fails to retain its initial droplet size. This destabilization can take place through different mechanisms. In case of poor coverage of the interface by liquid droplets, they can coalesce with each other to form a bigger droplet (Fig. 4). Few examples are also reported, where polymer adsorbed onto the interface of liquid droplets thus bridge between two such liquid droplets and initiates bridging flocculation. Interestingly, emulsions at high emulsifier concentration produces stable oil droplets due to better coverage of the interfaces of the liquid droplets ( Liu & Zhao, 2011).
Emulsion is possible to achieve by using many surface active agents, such as small surfactant molecules, bio-polymers (proteins or polysaccharides, hydrocolloids (protein-polysaccharide complexes), and inorganic particles. Stability of those emulsion systems mainly governs by the two important factors. First, repulsive force between two closely approaching liquid droplets; second, Ostwald ripening, which involves disappearing of smaller droplets in expense of the formation of larger one. Higher degree of repulsion between the two neighboring droplets results in maximum stability due to least chances of coalescence. Repulsive force between the two liquid droplets govern by the inter droplet distance, i.e. thickness of the thin liquid film between two closely approaching droplets. Thickness of this liquid film depends on the space occupied by the adsorbed molecules (emulsifier) at interface of the droplets. Emulsion generally get stabilized by different emulsifiers present in the formulations such as surfactants, proteins, or hydro-colloids (protein-polysaccharide complexes) and the relative thickness of the liquid film between two closely spaced droplets lies in the order of hydrocolloids (5-10 nm) > proteins (1-5 nm) > surfactants (0.5-1 nm) (Fig. 5). Therefore, stability of the emulsion droplets expected to be higher when they are stabilized by protein-polysaccharide complex compared to the same stabilized by protein or surfactant molecules. In addition to the thickness of the liquid film between two closely spaced droplets, rate of desorption of the emulsifiers from the interface is another important factor. Adsorption of emulsifier molecules (like surfactants, proteins etc.) at the liquid interface is highly reversible. Desorption of the emulsifiers from the liquid interface governs the instability of the system. According to this fact, emulsion stabilized by particles (size ranges from 10 nm to several μm) is likely to have indefinite stability, because of the maximum thickness of thin liquid film in between two closely spaced droplets and maximum desorption energy of the particles from the liquid interface. Despite of this theoretical consideration, experimental evidence by Tcholakova et al. does not support this hypothesis that particle stabilized emulsion are more stable compared to surfactant or protein or hydrocolloids stabilized emulsion (Tcholakova et al. 2008).
Another factor guides the emulsion instability is Ostwald ripening, which is disappearance of small size droplets at the expense of the larger droplets formation. Driving force for the Ostwald ripening is the difference in the chemical potential of the smaller and larger droplets. Mass transfer takes place between the droplets by diffusion process. Therefore, Ostwald ripening process requires the solubility of the dispersed phase into the continuous phase to initiate the diffusion process. Type of the emulsifier also plays an important role towards the Ostwald ripening process. Emulsion stabilized by the water soluble surfactant molecules has lower interfacial tension, which reduces the thermodynamic driving force of Ostwald ripening. Adsorption of the surfactant molecules at the droplet interface is a reversible phenomenon. Reversible desorption and adsorption of the surfactant molecules from the interface of the liquid droplet increases the rate of mass transfer between the dispersed droplets, hence increase the Ostwald ripening. The chances of desorption of emulsifier is less in case of the emulsions stabilized by protein molecule because it provides a thicker layer (elastic layer) around the droplets and greater surface coverage of the interfacial area. These factors reduce the ripening process in the protein stabilized emulsion. Ostwald ripening process is possible to avoid completely, only if emulsion is stabilized by insoluble particles (due to very high desorption energy) or thickness of the elastic layer around the dispersed droplets is equal to the droplet radius (Kabalnov, 2001). For this reason particulate emulsions are able to prevent the ripening process completely. Whereas hydrocolloid (protein-polysaccharide complexes) mostly behaves like a soft polymer, more resembles with the protein structures compared to solid particles, which cannot completely avoid the ripening process.
Protein–polysaccharide complex stabilized emulsions are possible to obtain by using two alternative ways. One of them involves addition of charged polysaccharide solution to a primary emulsion which is already stabilized by the protein as single emulsifier, to produce emulsion droplets having a protein–polysaccharide ‘bilayer’ surface coating (Fig. 6B). Another method involves addition of an aqueous solution containing the protein–polysaccharide complexes as an emulsifying agent following homogenization (Fig. 6A). For convenience, the first method is termed as ‘bilayer emulsions’ and second one is termed as ‘mixed emulsions’. The bilayer approach is also commonly known as ‘layer-by-layer’ approach. Recently, it has attracted significant importance because of its use in nano-encapsulation and protection of emulsions against severe environmental stresses. The major problem lies in ‘layer-by-layer’ approach, where emulsion droplet tends to flocculate. Flocculation during the ‘layer-by-layer’ adsorption takes place because of two different mechanisms: a) bridging flocculation, b) depletion flocculation.
3.3. Encapulation and release of active molecules
Generally, encapsulation includes all aspects of protection or stabilization of active molecules (flavors and bio-actives) against several external drastic conditions (such as heat, redox potential, shear, temperature, light, oxygen, moisture, etc.). Controlled release facilitates the delivery of the encapsulated material to the targeted place with the optimal kinetics. Conditions for the encapsulation of active molecules depends on the sensitivity (thermal and redox stability) and nature (solubility in oil and water) of the active components but release can be controlled by mechanical process, pH variations (acidic conditions in the stomach, neutral in the intestine) or enzymatic actions etc. As for example, Peniche et al. has shown the encapsulation of shark liver oil (rich in poly unsaturated fatty acids) using chitosan-alginate system to mask the unpleasant taste of oil. These capsules disrupts by enzymes, like lipase or pancreatine. Initially it was resistant to the acid environment of the stomach, but after 4 hour in the intestinal pH (pH 7.4), the capsule walls weakened and delivers the active molecules.
Another important application of this aspect is the encapsulation of flavor molecules. Recently, Yeo et al. has shown that gelatin–acacia gum coacervate can encapsulate flavors which can be released during cooking in baked goods (Yeo et al. 2005). Weinbreck et al. (Weinbreck et al. 2004) has shown that Whey protein–acacia gum coacervates can encapsulate lemon and orange flavors and their release under mechanical action like chewing. Encapsulation was one of the first applications of gum arabic-gelatin coacervates (Bungenberg de Jong and Kruyt, 1929). Viscous coacervate was made at a temperature higher than the gel point of gelatin and during cooling, interfacial rigidity increases which lead to a stable gelled shell around the microcapsule. This rigid shell disrupts after consumption, gelatin melts easily in the mouth and therefore releases the encapsulated actives. In addition to gelatin-acacia gum, several other protein-polysaccharide systems have been evolved (whey proteins, plant proteins, pectin, and xanthan gum) to broaden the encapsulation techniques. Beside these polysaccharide-protein combinations, process parameter for encapsulation (pH, ionic strength, macromolecular ratio, and drying/homogenization procedure) also plays an important role to modulate the physical properties (thickness, swelling rate, etc.) of the coacervate layer in the microcapsules (Savary et al 2010). Use of cross-linking agents can further harden the coacervate layer after formation of the microcapsules. As for example, use of trans-glutaminase can introduce covalent linkages between carboxyl group of a glutamine and amino group of lysine in the protein molecules. Alternatively, formaldehydes and glutaraldehydes have also been studied although they are non-food grade reagents. Recently, tannic acid, plant phenolics, citral molecules and glycerin have been studied as food grade alternatives (McClements, 2010).
Contrary to the encapsulation through coacervation, the bi-layer emulsion technique (formed by successive adsorption of biopolymers at the interface) is another way to study the microcapsule properties. Recently, McClements group has described that bi-layer approach of encapsulation has a better control of the interface structure, charge, thickness and permeability with improved stability and controlled release of actives. Group has reviewed this research area and discussed multilayer emulsions in light of bioavailability control and release of actives to the specific site of action depending on layer composition and properties (McClements, 2011). Sagis et al. has used high molecular weight pectins and pre-heated whey proteins (denaturation of protein) for the encapsulation through multilayer approach. (Sagis et al 2011).
Basic understanding of supramolecular chemistry which span among origin and nature of the various non-covalent molecular interactions between polysaccharides and proteins can be widely used to create various desirable nano and macro structures which are quite significant in food colloids/formulations. Food product texture modulation and colloidal stability can be achieved by controlling protein-polysaccharide interactions. Modulation of this interaction by varying medium conditions like pH, ionic strength etc. one can create many possibilities towards rheological properties of food colloids which may affect the emulsion stability. Protein-polysaccharide interactions are well characterized in various pH conditions. Although, the interaction depends on type and nature of biopolymers, no structure-activity correlation has been established until now. Moving forward, there is a huge demand to establish a correlation between biopolymer structures and interaction efficiency. The creative manipulation of polysaccharide-protein interactions can open up a completely new dimension in health and nutrition platform. Food particle travels from mouth to gut in various pH environments (for example pH decreases when it moves from mouth saliva to stomach and increases when partially digested food particle passes from stomach to small intestine), thus one can design a smart polysaccharide-protein complex system which can encapsulate or slow down and trigger or release of nutrients in various stages of digestion process depending on the pH of the system and any particular health demand. Such kind of pH sensitive system design and product development which works in vivo is a real challenge for the food scientists. Unfortunately, general understanding of protein-polysaccharide interactions, their bulk and interfacial properties toward emulsion stability is not completely understood and requires more systematic investigation in future to unveil its full potential.
Bengoechea C. Jones O. G. Guerreo A. Mc Clements D. J. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 1227 1232
Journal of Dispersion Science and Technology. Benichou A. Aserin A. Garti N. 23 2002 93 123
Benichou A. Aserin A. Lutz R. Garti N. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2007 379 391
Advances in Colloid & Interface Science. Bos M. A. Van Vilet T. 91 2001
Bungenberg H. G. Kruyt H. R. Procedings K. Ned Akad. Wet Vol. 3. 1929 849 856
Camino N. A. Sánchez C. C. Rodríguez Patino. J. M. Pilosof A. M. R. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 1 11
Carrera C. Rodríguez Patino. J. M. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 1. 2005 407 416
Choi S. J. Decker E. A. Henson L. Popplewell L. M. Mc Clements D. J. Food Chemistry. Vol 12. 2010 111 116
An introduction to food colloids. Dickinson E. 1992Oxford University Press
Dickinson E. Colloid Surfaces B. Biointerfaces Vol. 2. 2001 197 210
Dickinson E. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 1966 1983
Dickinson E. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 1. 2003 25 40
Dickinson E. Soft Matter. Vol . 2008 932 942
Applied Biochemistry and Microbiology, Dmitrochenko A. P. Antoonov Yu. A. Tolseoguzov V. B. 25 1989
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science Ganzelves R. A. Fokkink R. van Vilet T. Cohen Stuart. M. A. de Jongh H. H. J. 317 2008
Ghosh A. Bandyopadhyay P. Chemical Communications. Vol 4. 2011 8937 8939
Grinberg V. Y. Toolstoguzov V. B. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 1. 1997 145 158
Jiménez-Castańo L. Villamiel M. López-Fandiňo R. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2007 433 443
Journal Dispersion Science Technology Kabalnov A. 22 2002 1 12
Koupantis T. Kiosseoglou V. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2009 1156 1163
Advances in Colloid & Interface Science. Krägel J. Derkatch S. R. Miller R. 144 2008
Kruif de C. G. Tuinier R. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 1. 2001 555 563
Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science. Kruif de C. G. Weinbreck F. Vries de R. 9 2004
Liu L. Zhao Q. Liu T. Zhao M. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 921 927
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Liu S. Low N. H. Nickerson M. T. 57 2009 1521 1526
Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science. Mackie A. 9 2009
Magnusson E. Nilsson L. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 764 772
Martínez K. D. Sánchez C. C. Ruíz-Henestrosa V. P. Rodríguez Patino. J. M. Pilosof A. M. R. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2007 813 822
Mc Clements D. J. Biotechnology Advances. Vol 2. 2006 621 625
Mc Clements D. J. Biotechnology Advances. Vol 2. 2006 621 625
Mc Clements D. J. Food Emulsions. (2nd Ed. 2005Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press
Mc Clements D. J. Soft Matter. Vol . 2011 2297 2316
Understanding and controlling the microstructure of complex foods. Abington: woodhead Publishing Mc Clements D. J. 2007
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry Mei L. Y. Choi S. J. Alamed J. Henson L. Popplewell L. M. Mc Clements D. J. 57 2009 11349 11353
Mitra R. K. Sinha S. S. Pal S. K. Langmuir Vol. 2. 2007 10224 10229
Peniche C. Howland I. Carrillo O. Zaldı´var C. Argqelles-Monal W. Food Hydrocoll. . 2004 2004 865 871
Rodríguez Patino. J. M. Pilosof A. M. R. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 1925 1937
Salgam D. Venema P. Vries de R. J. Sagis L. M. C. Linden E. van der Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2011 1139 1148
Savary G. Hucher N. Bernadi E. Grisel M. Malhiac C. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2010 178 183
Journal of Dairy Science. Schmidt K. A. Smith D. E. 5 1992 36 42
Gums and stabilizers for the food industry, 15. Royal Society of Chemistry; Schmitt C. Kolodziejczyk E. In Williams. P. A. Phillips G. O. editors 2010 211 221
Advances in Colloid & Interface Science. Schmitt C. Turgeon S. L. 167 2011
Schmitt C. Kolodziejczyk E. Lesser M. E. Food Colloids. interactions microstructure. processing R. S. C. 2005 284 300
Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, Schmitt C. Sanchez C. Desobry-Banon S. Hardy J. 38 1998 689 753
Schorsch C. Jones M. G. Norton I. T. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 1. 1999 89 99
Stone A. K. Nickerson M. T. Food Hydrocolloid. Vol 2. 2012 271 277
Tcholakova S. Denkov N. D. Lips A. 2008Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 10 1608 1627
Food Polysaccharides and their Application, Taylor & Francis, Tolstoguzov V. 2006 589 627
Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science. Turgeon S. L. Schmitt C. Sanchez C. 12 2007
Weinbreck F. Minor M. de Kruif C. G. Microencapsul J. 2. 2004
Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Weinbreck F. Nieuwenhuijse H. Robijn G. W. de Kruif C. G. 52 2004 3550 3555
Macromolecular Complexes in Chemistry and Biology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Xia J. Dubin P. L. 1994 247
Yeo Y. Bellas E. Firestone W. Langer R. Kohane D. S. Agric J. Food Chem. 5. 2005