Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11, 1851-1869; doi:10.

3390/ijms11041851

International Journal of
Molecular Sciences
ISSN 1422-0067
www.mdpi.com/journal/ijms
Article
Functionality and Antioxidant Properties of Tilapia
(Oreochromis niloticus) as Influenced by the Degree of Hydrolysis
Mohamed Beva Kelfala Foh
1,2,
*, Issoufou Amadou
1
, Betty Mabel Foh
2
, Mohamed Tabita Kamara
1

and Wenshui Xia
1,
*
1
State Key Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, Jiangnan University, No 1800, Lihu Road,
Wuxi, 214122 Jiangsu, China
2
School of Community Health and Clinical Studies, Njala University, Kowama Campus, Bo, Sierra
Leone
* Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mails: [email protected] (W.X.),
[email protected] (M.B.K.F.); Tel.: +86-510-859-191-21 (W.X.);
Fax: +86-510-853-2057 (W.X.).
Received: 11 April 2010; in revised form: 12 April 2010 / Accepted: 18 April 2010 /
Published: 26 April 2010

Abstract: Freeze dried protein powders (Fresh minced meat, FMM and Hot water dip, HWD)
from tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) were hydrolyzed by Alcalase 2.4 L (Alc), Flavourzyme
(Flav) and Neutrase (Neut), and investigated for antioxidant activity and their functional
properties. FMM and HWD hydrolysed by Alc, exhibiting superior antioxidant activity, had
estimated degrees of hydrolysis (DH) of 23.40% and 25.43%, respectively. The maximum
values of the 1,1-diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), 2,2-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-
sulfonic acid) diammonium salt (ABTS), 3-(2-pyridyl) 5,6-bis(4-phenyl-sulphonic acid)-1,2,4-
triazine (ferrozine), radical scavenging activities and metal chelating properties were 86.67%,
91.27% and 82.57%, and 84.67%, 92.60% and 78.00% for FMM and HWD, respectively, with
a significant difference (P < 0.05) between the samples. Essential amino acids were above the
amounts recommended by the Food and Agricultural Organization/World Health Organization
(FAO/WHO/UNU) for humans. Lower molecular weight sizes <3,000 Da were more
predominant in FMM and HWD hydrolysed by Alc, while in hydrolysed by Flav and Neut
they were >8,000 Da. At pH 2, FMM and HWD hydrolysates have varying solubilities above
OPENACCESS
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1852
85% (Alc FMM; 91.33%, Flav FMM; 79.5%, Neut FMM; 83.8% and Alc HWD; 90.45%,
Flav HWD; 83.5%, and Neut HWD; 85.8%). They have U shaped solubility curves, water
holding capacity was in the range of 2.77 and 1.77 mL/g, while oil holding capacity ranged
between 3.13 and 2.23 mL/g. FMM and HWD have the highest bulk density of 0.53 and 0.53
for Neutrase and Alcalase 2.4 L, respectively. Foam capacity and stability ranged from 125.5
to 61.4, 138.5 to 45.2, 130.0 to 62.5, and 124.5 to 55.0, 137.5 to 53.3, 129.6 to 62.7 for FMM
and HWD hydrolyzed with Alcalase 2.4 L, Flavourzyme and Neutrase, respectively. Tilapia
fish protein hydrolysates are thus potential functional food ingredients.
Keywords: tilapia; fresh minced meat; hot water dip; hydrolysis; antioxidant activity;
functional foods

1. Introduction
Tilapias inhabit a variety of fresh water habitats. Traditionally they have been of major importance in
small scale commercial or subsistence fishing worldwide, especially Africa and Asia. It is the third most
widely cultured sh, after carp and salmonids [1]. The global production has been greatly influenced by
rapid expansion of Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) and Mossambique tilapia (Oreochromis
mossambicus), cultured in China, the Phillipines and Egypt [2]. Tilapia fish is nutritious and forms a
healthy part of a balanced diet that is high in protein (16-25%), low in fat (0.5-3.0%) and substitutes well
in any seafood recipe [3].
Modication of a protein is usually realized by physical, chemical, or enzymatic treatments, which
change its structure and consequently its physicochemical and functional properties [4]. Enzymatic
hydrolysis has been widely used to improve the functional properties of proteins, such as solubility,
emulsication, gelation, water and fat-holding capacities, and foaming ability, and to tailor the
functionality of certain proteins to meet specic needs [5]. Series of studies have demonstrated that
enzymatic hydrolysis of fish and fish by-products including, capelin [6], salmon protein [7,8], shark
protein [9], herring [10], and sardine [11,12] improved their functional properties. The production of Fish
Protein Hydrolysates (FPH) under controlled conditions is a way of improving its nutritional value [6].
Apart from fish protein hydrolysates functionalities, different sources, such as capelin mackerel and
herring have been found to possess antioxidant properties [10,13,14]. Many human diseases are known to
be caused by free radicals and the natural antioxidants can act as free radical scavengers. Protein
hydrolysates with antioxidant properties, in particular, have become a topic of great interest for the
pharmaceutical, health food, as well as the food processing and preservation industries [15,16]. There is
also a growing interest in antioxidants from natural sources, which may have less potential health hazard
compared with synthetic antioxidants. The bioactive molecules in FPH responsible for antioxidant
properties are peptides that are released upon hydrolysis. As a result, the objectives of this study were to
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1853
investigate the degree of hydrolysis, amino acid content, molecular weight, functional properties, and
antioxidant activity of Nile tilapia hydrolysates.
2. Results and Discussion
2.1. Degree of Hydrolysis (DH)
The DH is an important factor highly related with the hydrolysis process yield [6]. The results of the
DH are presented in Figure 1. There was an initial rapid increase in DH with increased time relating to the
frequency of addition and volume of NaOH used to maintain pH. This indicated that maximum cleavage
of peptides occurred within the first hour of hydrolysis. For all proteinases, Alcalase 2.4 L showed the
highest value in terms of DH for HWD and FMM (Figure 1). The result agreed with reported enzymatic
hydrolyses of fish protein substrates [10,17]. The significant difference (P < 0.01) of DH with Alcalase
2.4 L treatment suggested that Alcalase 2.4 L has superior affinity hence, is a more efficient enzyme than
Flavourzyme and Neutrase for preparing Nile tilapia protein hydrolysates.
Figure 1. Effect of time on the degree of hydrolysis (DH) of tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)
fish protein hydrolysates (TFPH). FMMH: Fresh minced meat hydrolysate; HWDH: Hot water
dip hydrolysate Value represent the mean standard deviation (SD) of n = 3 duplicate assays
(Alc-Alcalase 2.4 L; Flav- Flavourzyme; Neut-Neutrase).

2.2. Amino Acid Analysis
The total amino acid composition of Tilapia fish protein hydrolysates (FMM and HWD) are shown in
Table 1, along with the recommended essential amino acid composition according to the
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1854
FAO/WHO/UNU (2007) [18]. It is clear that tilapia fish protein contains all the essential amino acids in
good proportion as compared to Sathivel et al. [10] with a significant difference (P < 0.05). The results in
Table 1 indicate that the amino acid composition of FMM closely resembles to that of HWD. However,
glutamic acid, aspartic acid and lysine were found to be abundant, as expected in most fish protein
hydrolysates [8,29]. Both FMM and HWD have a well balanced amino acid composition and most of the
essential amino acids compositions of their proteins were at a higher level than FAO/WHO/UNU protein
and amino acid requirements in human nutrition [18]. The values are generally in accordance with
previous studies [6,7,27].
Table 1. Total amino acid composition of Tilapia Fish protein Hydrolysates (g/100 g Protein).
Amino Acids Alcalase 2.4 L Flavourzyme Neutrase FAO/WHO/UN
a

FMM HWD FMM HWD FMM HWD Child Adult
Essential Amino acids
Isoleucine 3.79 0.08d 3.48 0.01c 3.12 0.02a 3.22 0.11ab 3.29 0.01b 3.26 0.01b 3.0 3.0
Leucine 8.04 0.01ab 8.23 0.03bc 8.23 0.03bc 8.69 0.06d 7.88 0.12a 8.26 0.14c 6.0 5.9
Lysine 9.08 0.01a 10.14 0.01c 10.51 0.03d 10.81 0.06e 9.87 0.01b 10.53 0.01d 4.8 4.5
Methionine 2.96 0.02e 2.66 0.01c 2.34 0.01a 2.52 0.01b 2.73 0.03d 2.63 0.01c 2.3
b
1.6
b

Met + Cys 3.60 0.07d 3.35 0.06c 2.85 0.01a 3.11 0.02b 3.22 0.01c 3.29 0.02c
Phenylalanine 3.78 0.02e 3.20 0.01d 3.13 0.01c 2.99 0.01a 3.12 0.01bc 3.09 0.01b 4.1
c
3.8
c

Phe + Tyr 6.70 0.03d 5.31 0.02c 4.64 0.01a 4.66 0.06a 5.24 0.02bc 5.16 0.01b
Threonine 4.58 0.09d 4.38 0.04c 3.95 0.01a 4.09 0.02b 4.21 0.05b 4.39 0.04c 2.5 2.3
Valine 4.30 0.01f 4.10 0.01e 3.77 0.01a 3.91 0.01b 3.94 0.01c 3.98 0.01d 2.9 3.9
Histidine 2.28 0.06d 2.09 0.02ab 2.03 0.03a 2.09 0.02ab 2.17 0.06bc 2.23 0.01cd 1.6 1.5
Tryptophan 5.42 0.01e 2.79 0.02d 1.32 0.01a 1.67 0.02b 2.78 0.02d 2.33 0.02c 0.66 0.6
Nonessential Amino Acid
Alanine 6.44 0.02a 6.81 0.02b 7.98 0.01f 7.61 0.01e 7.06 0.03c 7.20 0.03d
Arginine 5.76 0.02a 5.97 0.01b 6.08 0.02c 6.13 0.04cd 6.17 0.01d 6.17 0.01d
Aspartic acid
d
9.96 0.02c 10.25 0.01d 9.91 0.01b 10.39 0.02e 9.85 0.02a 10.59 0.02f
Cysteine
e
0.66 0.03c 0.55 0.00b 0.51 0.01a 0.56 0.01b 0.51 0.01a 0.65 0.02c
Glutamic acid
f
16.37 0.01a 18.56 0.01c 19.62 0.01d 21.15 0.01e 18.14 0.01b 19.61 0.01d
Glycine 5.04 0.00c 4.71 0.01a 6.68 0.02f 5.16 0.02d 5.63 0.01e 4.90 0.01b
Serine 4.09 0.01b 4.06 0.03b 3.90 0.01a 4.07 0.03b 3.91 0.01a 4.05 0.02b
Tyrosine 2.93 0.04e 2.17 0.03d 1.50 0.01a 1.64 0.01b 2.12 0.02cd 2.08 0.02c
Proline 4.42 0.01c 5.65 0.01e 5.39 0.01d 3.26 0.01a 6.39 0.02f 3.70 0.03b
The data are means and standard deviations of triplicate. Column with different letters indicate
statistical differences (P < 0.05).
a
FAO/WHO/UNU. Energy and protein requirements (2007);
b
Requirements for methionine + cysteine;
c
Requirements for phenylalanine + tyrosine;
d
Aspartic acid + asparagines;
e
Cysteine + cysteine;
f
Glutamic acid + glutamine. FMMFresh minced meat; HWDHot water dip.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1855
2.3. Molecular Weight Distribution
Molecular weight distributions of tilapia fish protein (FMM and HWD) Hydrolysates were determined
by SE-HPLC (Table 2) by a TSK gel, 2000SWXL (7.8 300 mm) column. The molecular weights for all
samples were calculated according to the equation:
Log Mol Wt = 6.70 0.2.14T with R
2
= 0.9953 (1)
The rising level of DH corresponds inversely to lower molecular weight distributions. The result in
Table 2 shows that hydrolysates from Alcalase 2.4 L had lower molecular weights, below 3,000 Da.
Table 2. Molecular weight distribution of Tilapia fish protein hydrolysates.
Molecular weight (Da)
Area (%)
Alc FMM Flav FMM Neut FMM Alc HWD Flav HWD Neut HWD
>8000 10.00 9.87 14.32 10.96
30008000 24.71 9.87 5.68 10.17 16.52
20003000 4.98 17.201 30.81
10002000 21.17 9.54 34.63 28.78 31.31
6001000 32.47 20.04 13.17 21.57
300600 27.87 14.72 6.91 26.9 20.43 10.69
200300 19.54 5.06 3.28 5.80
< 200 15.11 12.83 7.87 32.79 9.85 3.38
FMMFresh minced meat; HWDHot water dip. Alc-Alcalase 2.4 L; FlavFlavourzyme; NeutNeutrase.

This result also indicated that cleavage of peptide bonds by the proteases had taken place. Hydrolysates
from Flavourzyme and Neutrase with low DH (Figure 1) were characterized by a high percentage of
peptides with molecular weights ranging from 8,000 Da to 15,000 Da. Different DH and proteases led to
different peptide chain lengths which greatly inuenced the antioxidant activities of the hydrolysates,
corroborating with findings that puried peptides with a molecular weight of less than 1,000 Da from
Alaska pollack frame proteins showed the strongest antioxidant activity among the hydrolysate
fractions [19].
2.4. DPPH Radical Scavenging Activity
A rapid, uncomplicated and inexpensive method to measure antioxidant capacity of food involves the
use of the free radical, 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH). DPPH is used to test the ability of
compounds to act as free radical scavengers or hydrogen donors, and to evaluate antioxidant activity.
DPPH scavenging activity of Tilapia fish protein hydrolysates (FMM and HWD) are listed in Table 3.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1856
Table 3. Antioxidant activity of Tilapia fish protein hydrolysates.
Sample
Antioxidant activity (%)
DPPH ABTS Fe
2+
chelating
FMM
Alcalase 86.67 1.15e 91.27 0.25b 82.57 0.51d
Flavourzyme 70.20 1.06b 88.13 0.23a 75.80 0.72ab
Neutrase 82.00 1.73cd 93.33 0.58c 77.23 0.32bc
HWD
Alcalase 84.67 0.58de 92.60 1.30bc 78.00 0.20c
Flavourzyme 64.67 0.58a 93.50 0.71c 75.00 1.00a
Neutrase 79.67 1.53c 94.23 0.68c 78.32 0.40c
Values are means standard deviation of three determinations.
Rows with different letters indicate statistical differences (P < 0.05).
DPPH/ Chelating activity were tested at 5 mg/mL.
ABTS were tested at 66.67g/mL.
FMMFresh minced meat. HWDHot water dip.

The DH data earlier reported (Figure 1) shows a reasonable link to this result. The samples (FMM and
HWD) hydrolysed using Alcalase 2.4 L, Neutrase and Flavourzyme show an increasing DPPH radical
scavenging activity: 86.67%, 82.00%, 70.20%, and 84.67%, 79.67%, 64.67% for both samples,
respectively. There was a significant difference (P < 0.05) between the various samples. Moreover, FMM
and HWD hydrolysates produced using Flavourzyme exhibited the lowest DPPH radical scavenging
activity. The peptides in tilapia fish protein hydrolysates (FMM, HWD) demonstrated a role as good
electron donors and could react with free radicals to terminate the radical chain reaction. DPPH is a stable
free radical with a maximum absorbance at 517 nm in ethanol. When DPPH encounters a proton-donating
substance, the radical is scavenged and the absorbance is reduced [20]. The results indicated that the
tilapia FPH acted as a good electron donor and could react with free radicals to terminate the radical chain
reaction, corroborating other findings [21,22].
2.5. ABTS Radical Scavenging Activity
Protein hydrolysates from many sources have been found to possess antioxidative activity [21,22]. The
ABTS radical assay is a widely used method of screening for antioxidant activity and is reported as a
decolorization assay applicable to both lipophilic and hydrophilic compounds [23]. The assay results of
the different tilapia FPH after using different enzymes are shown in Table 3. They possesses high ABTS
radical scavenging ability (P < 0.05) and could reduce more than 80% of the ABTS radicals in the assay
media at 66.67 g/mL sample concentration. The variation between the results of FMM and HWD were
significantly different (P < 0.05). The findings indicated that 120 min hydrolysis of the samples (FMM
and HWD), resulted in reasonable antioxidant ability and moreover, the conditions applied in the
hydrolysis are sufficient in making antioxidative FPH from tilapia fish. Similarly, high antioxidative
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1857
scavenging quality is shown in tilapia fish protein hydrolysates from DPPH and metal chelating activities,
exhibiting similar results reported by Klompong et al. [24]
2.6. Metal-Chelating Activity
A sample concentration of 5 mg/mL was used to determine the metal chelating properties of tilapia fish
protein hydrolysates. The results from Table 3 show that tilapia fish protein (FMM and HWD) hydrolysate
samples interacted with iron ion. The chelating activity however shows a significant difference (P < 0.05)
between the samples. Alcalase-treated samples manifested a higher chelating activity (FMM; 82.5%,
HWD; 78.0%) than Flavourzyme and Neutrase-treated ones (75.8%, 75.8% and 77.23%, 78.32%) for
FMM and HWD respectively. This result also corroborates a linear relationship with the increased DH,
lower molecular weight distribution, and high peptide solubility, that is showing higher metal chelating
activity [25].
2.7. Nitrogen Solubility
An increase in the extent of enzymatic hydrolysis corresponded to a considerable increase in the
nitrogen solubility over the pH range studied, indicating a positive relationship (Figure 2). Between pH
4.5 and 5.5 near the isoelectric point (pI) at which the net charge of the original proteins are minimized
and consequently, more protein-protein interactions and fewer protein-water interaction occur. FMM and
HWD have very similar solubility profiles; exhibiting a U shaped curve in which FMM and HWD
hydrolyzed with Alcalase 2.4 L have the highest solubility values at alkaline pH. Under acidic conditions,
all proteins had solubility above (80%). At pH 6.0, nitrogen solubility increased rapidly with an increase
in pH up to 12.0. These trends in solubility are in agreement with [7,9,10]. At pH 11.0, the solubility of
FMM reached 96.93%, 93.23%, and 88.33% for Alcalase 2.4 L, Neutrase and Flavoourzyme respectively,
whilst solubility for HWD were 96.0%, 91.63% and 89.83% for Alcalase 2.4 L, Neutrase and
Flavoourzyme respectively. The maximum solubility was under alkaline conditions. Protein solubility at
various pH values may serve as a useful indicator of how well protein hydrolysate will perform when they
are incorporated into food systems. The solubility curve is typical of that of most fish protein hydrolysates.
Enzymatic protein Hydrolysis leads to smaller peptides, consequently, to more soluble products. This is in
accordance with the findings of [6,7] who reported that hydrolysates had an excellent solubility at high
degrees of hydrolysis. The pH values influence the charge on the weakly acidic and basic side chain
groups [4]. Solubility variations could be attributed to both net charge of peptides, which increase as pH
moves away from pI, and surface hydrophobicity, that promotes the aggregation via hydrophobic
interaction [26]. Since many functional properties of proteins depend upon their capacity to initially go
into solution, the excellent solubility of the FPH suggests that they may have many potential applications
in formulated food systems.

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1858
Figure 2. Effect of pH treatment on nitrogen solubility of tilapia fish protein hydrolysates
(Oreochromis niloticus). Value represent the mean standard deviation (SD) of n = 3
duplicate assays. FMMH-Fresh minced meat hydrolysates; HWDH-Hot water dip
hydrolysates (Alc-Alcalase 2.4 L; Flav- Flavourzyme; Neut-Neutrase).

2.8. Oil/Water Holding Capacity
The ability of protein hydrolysates to absorb oil is an important functionality that influences the taste of
the product that is required in various food industries. The OHC for FMM are in the ranges of 2.27, 3.07,
2.77 mL/g for Alcalase 2.4 L, Flavourzyme and Neutrase respectively, with significant difference
(P < 0.01). HWD hydrolysates have OHC of 2.23, 2.57, 3.13 mL/g for Alcalase 2.4 L, Flavourzyme and
Neutrase, respectively (Table 4).
Table 4. Influence of enzyme on In vitro digestibility (IVD), water holding capacity (WHC),
oil holding capacity (OHC), emulsifying capacity (EC), bulk density (BD) and foam capacity
(FC).
Sample
FMM HWD
Alc. Flav. Neut. Alc. Flav. Neut.
IVPD (%) 92.73 0.76b 88.23 0.06a 92.43 0.06b 93.2 0.20b 89.37 0.67a 92.83 0.76b
WHC (mL/g) 2.10 0.10a 2.77 0.06b 2.57 0.12b 1.77 0.06a 2.10 0.17a 2.57 0.06b
OHC (mL/g) 2.27 0.06a 3.07 0.06c 2.77 0.06bc 2.23 0.25a 2.57 0.06ab 3.13 0.15c
EC (mL/0.5g) 22.33 0.58ab 27.33 0.58c 22.50 0.10ab 21.40 0.36a 26.40 0.17c 23.20 0.20b
BD (g/mL) 0.45 0.01ab 0.35 0.01a 0.53 0.06b 0.53 0.06b 0.34 0.01a 0.46 0.01ab
FC (g/mL) 125.50 0.10de 138.50 0.50b 130.20 0.76c 124.50 1.08e 137.50 0.20a 129.60 0.58d
Values are means standard deviation of three determinations.
Columns with different letters indicate statistical differences (P < 0.01).
FMMH-Fresh minced meat hydrolysate; HWDH-Hot water dip hydrolysate.
AlcAlcalase 2.4 L; FlavFlavourzyme; NeutNeutrase.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1859
On the other hand, the functional properties of proteins in food systems broadly depend on the
water-protein interactions. The ability of protein to imbibe water and retain it against a gravitational force
within a protein matrix is known as Water Holding Capacity (WHC). The WHC for FMM is in the range
of 2.10, 2.77, 2.57 mL/g for Alcalase 2.4 L, Flavourzyme and Neutrase respectively, with significant
difference (P < 0.01). HWD hydrolysates have WHC of 1.77, 2.10, 2.57 mL/g for Alcalase 2.4 L,
Flavourzyme and Neutrase, respectively, with significant difference (P < 0.01).
2.9. Emulsifying Capacity (EC)
The ability of proteins to form stable emulsions is important due to the interactions between proteins
and lipids in many food systems. An increase in the number of peptide molecules and exposed
hydrophobic amino acid residues due to hydrolysis of proteins should contribute to an improvement in the
formation of emulsions. From the results, samples hydrolyzed using Alcalase 2.4 L (FMM and HWD) had
lower emulsifying capacities of 22.33 and 21.40 mL/0.5g of protein with a significant difference
(P < 0.01). Samples hydrolyzed with Neutrase and Flavourzyme (FMM and HWD) have an EC of 22.50
and 23.20, and 27.33 and 26.40 mL/0.5g of protein, respectively (Table 4). Our result is in agreement with
with [7]. Extensive protein hydrolysis may result in a marked loss of emulsion properties. Though small
peptides diffuse to, and absorb fast at the interface, they are less efficient in reducing the interfacial
tension due to lack of unfolding and reorientation at the interface that large peptides are [7].
2.10. Foam Capacity and Foam Stability (FC/FS)
The formation of protein based foams involves the diffusion of soluble proteins toward the air-water
interface and rapid conformational change and rearrangement at the interface; the foam stability requires
formation of a thick, cohesive, and viscoelastic film around each gas bubble [27]. Hence, ability to form
foam is a function of the conguration of protein molecules. FMM and HWD show a significant
difference (P < 0.01) in the foaming capacity. Samples hydrolyzed with Alcalase 2.4 L have a FC of 125.5
and 124.5 g/mL, Flavourzyme with FC of 138.5 and 137.5 g/mL and Neutrase 130.2, and 129.6 g/mL for
FMM and HWD, respectively. The results imply an increase in surface activity, probably due to the initial
greater number of polypeptide chains that arose from partial proteolysis, allowing more air to be
incorporated. Similar FC data was obtained in previous studies [27,28].
To have foam stability, protein molecules should form continuous intermolecular polymers enveloping
the air bubbles, since intermolecular cohesiveness and elasticity are important to produce stable foams.
Foam stability values ranged from 125.5 to 61.4, 138.5 to 45.2, 130.0 to 62.5, and 124.5 to 55.0, 137.5 to
53.3, 129.6 to 62.7 for FMM and HWD hydrolyzed with Alcalase 2.4 L, Flavourzyme and Neutrase,
respectively. The FS for tilapia fish protein hydrolysates were within the range of the results reported by
Wasswa et al. [29].
On the other hand, there was a significant decrease (P < 0.05) in the foaming stability, (Alc. FMM,
38.2; Alc. HWD, 37.2 g/mL), (Flav. FMM, 47.3; Flav. HWD, 47.7 g/mL) and (Neut. FMM, 48.0, Neut.
HWD, 50.5 g/mL). An opposite effect on the surface activity is probably due to the lower surfactant
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1860
activity of smaller peptide chains from extensive hydrolysis [28]. These foaming properties suggest that
tilapia fish protein hydrolysate is a better foaming agent in protein foods.
Figure 3. Foam stability of fish protein hydrolysates (Oreochromis niloticus). Value represent
the mean standard deviation (SD) of n = 3 duplicate assays FMMH-Fresh minced meat
hydrolysate; HWDH-Hot water dip hydrolysate. Alc-Alcalase 2.4 L; Flav-Flavourzyme;
Neut-Neutrase.

2.11. Bulk Density

There was a significant difference (P < 0.01) among the various samples studied (Table 4). FMM and
HWD hydrolyzed with Neutrase and Alcalase 2.4 L shared a comparable and higher bulk density of 0.53
and 0.54 g/mL, while the samples hydrolyzed with Flavourzyme had the lowest (FMM: 0.35 g/mL;
HWD: 0.34 g/mL). Furthermore, the bulk density of tilapia fish protein hydrolysates demonstrated lower
bulk density compared to tilapia skin protein hydrolysate [29]. Bulk density represents the behavior of a
product in dry mixes, and is an important parameter that can determine the packaging requirements of a
product. Also it varies with the fineness of particles. High bulk density is unfavorable for the formulation
of weaning foods, where low bulk density is required [30].
2.12. In Vitro Protein Digestibility
In vitro protein digestibility of FMMH and HWDH samples were evaluated by the release of TCA-
soluble nitrogen, after incubation time of 120 min at 37 C. Table 4 shows that all protein samples
exhibited very good trypsin digestibility. Nonetheless, HWD fractions hydrolysed using Alcalase,
Flavourzyme, and Neutrase have digestibility values with trypsin of 93.2%, 89.3%, and 92.83%, whereas
FMM fractions showed digestibility values with trypsin of 92.72%, 88.23%, and 92.43%, respectively,
with a significant difference (P < 0.01). Our results are within the values reported by Aziz et al. [31]. The
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1861
pretreatment undergone by the samples during the cause of hydrolysis improved digestibility of protein
and may be attributed to the increase in protein solubility, or structural unfolding of protein molecules [32].
3. Experimental
3.1. Materials and Methods
Fresh minced meat (FMM) and Hot water dip (HWD) samples were obtained as byproducts from Fresh
Nile tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus, 480-600 g/fish with length range of 25-30 cm/fish, purchased from a
local fresh water product market in Wuxi, China. The fish samples were transported within 24 h after
purchased in ice boxes to the School of Food Science and Technology (SFST) laboratory of Jiangnan
University, Wuxi, Jiangsu, China. On arrival at the University laboratory, the fresh fish were prepared
using the standard handling method; gutted, beheaded, and skin removed before thoroughly washing with
clean water to remove contaminants or unwanted particles. Fish muscle was retrieved with care,
separating the bones from the meat, chopped into pieces (about 0.25 cm) and divided into two portions. A
portion of the chopped meat was dipped in hot water (95 5 C) and maintained for 15 min (HWD),
hence endogenous enzymes were supposedly inactivated and further impurities removed. It was allowed
to cool at room temperature, eventually vacuum packed in polyethylene bags, and kept frozen at 20 C
till needed for the experiments. The remaining portion was subjected to mincing using a meat mincer and
the pulverized fish meat (homogenate) were also vacuum packed in polyethylene bags (100-250 g per
unit), and kept frozen at 20 C till needed for the experiments. Alcalase 2.4 L from a strain of Bacillus
licheniformis, Flavourzyme 500 LAPU/g from Aspergillus oryzae and Neutrase 1.5 AU/g from Bacillus
subtulis strain were obtained from Novozymes China Inc. and stored at 4 C for subsequent analysis.
1,1-Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), 3-(2-pyridyl)-5,6-bis(4-phenylsulphonic acid)-1,2,4-triazine
(ferrozine), and 2,2-azino-bis(3-ethylbenzothiazoline -6-sulfonic acid) diammonium salt (ABTS) were
obtained from Sigma-Aldrich (Shanghai, China). All chemical reagents used for experiments were of
analytical grade.
Table 5. Characteristics used in preparation of samples in the evaluation with different
proteases.
Enzyme Form pH T (C)
Alcalase 2.4 L(AU/g)* Liquid/grain 8.0 55
Flavourzyme (500 LAPU/g)

Powder 7.0 50
Neutrase (1.5 AU/g) Liquid/grain 7.0 45
* AU (Anson units) is the amount of enzyme that under standard conditions
digests hemoglobin at an initial rate that produces an amount of trichloroacetic
acid-soluble product which gives the same color with the Filon reagent as one
milliequivalent of tyrosine released per minute.

LAPU (Leucine aminopeptidase unit) is the amount of enzyme that hydrolyze 1
mol of leucine-p-nitroanilide per minute.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1862
3.2. Preparation of Fish Protein Hydrolysates
HWD and FMM were hydrolyzed with three different enzymes, under the conditions given in Table 5
based on optimum hydrolysis conditions. One hundred grams of tilapia fish were weighed into a vessel
immersed in a water bath maintained at an appropriate temperature and 300 mL of distilled water was
added to make a suspension. The suspension, for each enzyme applied, was adjusted to a suitable pH and
pre heated to an appropriate temperature, then (0.5%, 1%, and 1.5%) enzymes:substrate ratio was added
with continuous stirring. Hydrolysis was carried out for 120 min. After hydrolysis, the enzymes were
inactivated by placing in boiling water for 15 min. The hydrolysate was allowed to cool down and
centrifuged at 7,500 g for 15 min. at 4 C with a D-3756 Osterode am Harz model 4515 centrifuge
(Sigma, Hamburg, Germany). The tilapia fish protein hydrolysate (FPH) was lyophilized and stored at
20 C until used. All experiments were performed in triplicate and the results are the average of the
three values.
3.3. Determination of the Degree of Hydrolysis DH
Reactions were monitored by measuring the extent of proteolytic degradation by means of the DH
according to the pH-stat method described by Adler-Nissen [33]. The degree of hydrolysis (DH%), is
dened as the percent ratio of the number of peptide bonds broken (h) to the total number of bonds per
unit weight (h
tot
), in each case, was calculated from the amount of base consumed [32], as given below:
100 (%)


=
tot
b b
h mP
N V
DH
o
(2)
where V
b
is base consumption in mL; N
b
is normality of the base; is average degree of dissociation of
the -NH
2
groups; mP is mass of protein (N 6.25) in g; and h
tot
is total number of peptide bonds in the
protein substrate. All the experiments were performed in triplicate and the results are the average of
three values.
3.4. Amino Acid Analysis
Amino acid determination commenced by placing samples of FPH (100 mg) for all the samples and
5 mL 6 M HCl in a 50 mL bottle that was sealed. The air was removed by keeping the sample in a vacuum
chamber. The sealed samples were placed in an oven at 120 C for 16 hours to hydrolyze. After hydrolysis,
5 mL of 2 mM norleucine internal standard was added and the solution was filtered in a 0.2 L Gelman
membrane filter. One mL of stock sample was pipetted into a 50 mL borosilicate glass serum bottle and
dried in a freeze-drier. One mL of sodium diluent buffer (pH 2.2) was added to the freeze-dried residue
and transferred to a 1.5 mL micro-centrifuge tube for HPLC analysis. The prepared samples were injected
as 2.5 L volumes and run on a Waters HPLC (Waters Corporation, Milford, MA, USA) at a flow rate of
0.4 mL/min with a Pickering sodium ion-exchange column of 4 150 mm (Pickering Laboratories, Inc.,
Mountain View, CA, USA) and sodium eluent (pH 3.15 and 7.40). TRIONE

ninhydrin reagent was

Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1863
added with post column instrument (TRIONE

ninhydrin derivatization instrument, Pickering

Laboratories, Inc.). The light absorbance of amino acids was detected with an UV Visible detector
(Pickering Laboratories Inc.) at 570 nm wavelength and the amino acids were quantified by comparing
with standard amino acid profiles. Methionine and cysteine were determined separately by oxidation
products according to the performic acid procedure of Moore [34] before hydrolysis in 6 M HCl.
Tryptophan was determined after alkaline hydrolysis by isocratic ion-exchange chromatography with
O-phthalaldehyde derivatization followed by fluorescence detection by Ravindran and Bryden [35].
Amino acid composition was reported as g/100 g of protein.
3.5. Determination of Molecular Weight
The samples were determined using a Waters 600 E Advanced Protein Purification System (Waters
Corporation, Milford, MA, USA). A TSK gel, 2000SWXL (7.8 300 mm) column was used with 10%
acetonitrile + 0.1% TFA in HPLC grade water as the mobile phase. The calibration curve was obtained by
running bovine carbonic anhydrase (29,000 Da), horse heart cytochrome C (12,400 Da), bovine insulin
(5800 kDa), bacitracin (1450 Da), Gly-Gly-Tyr-Arg (451 kDa) and Gly-Gly-Gly (189 Da). The total
surface area of the chromatograms was integrated and separated into eight ranges (>8,000, 3,000-8,000,
2,000-3,000, 1,000-2,000, 600-1,000, 300-600, 200-300, <200 Da), expressed as a percentage of the total
area, Table 2. The results were obtained and processed with the aid of Millennium 32 Version 3.05
software (Vaters Corporation, Milford, MA 01757, USA).
3.6. DPPH Radical Scavenging Activity Assay
The method described by Wu et al. [14] was used to measure the DPPH radical scavenging activity
with a slight modification. FPH samples (FMMH and HWDH) were dissolved in distilled water to obtain
a concentration of 40 mg protein/mL. Then 2.0 mL of sample was mixed with 2.0 mL of 0.15 mM DPPH
that was dissolved in 95% ethanol. The mixture was then shaken vigorously using a mixer (QT-1 Mixer,
Tianchen Technological Co. Ltd. Shanghai, China) and kept in the dark for 25-30 min. The absorbance of
the resultant solution was recorded at 517 nm. The scavenging activity was calculated using the following
equation:
DPPH (%) = 100
|
|
.
|

\
|
blank DPPH of absorbance
sample of absorbance DPPH of absorbance
(3)
where the DPPH blank is the value of 2 mL of 95% ethanol mixed with DPPH solution, the DPPH sample
is the value of 2 mL of sample solution mixed with DPPH solution, and the control sample is the value of
2 mL of sample solution mixed with 2 mL of 95% ethanol.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1864
3.7. ABTS Radical Scavenging Activity Assay
ABTS radical scavenging activities of FPH samples were determined by the method described Re et al.
[36], with slight modifications. A stock solution of ABTS radicals was prepared by mixing 5.0 mL of
7 mM ABTS solution with 88 L of 140 mM potassium persulfate, and keeping in the dark at room
temperature for 12-16 h. An aliquot of stock solution was diluted with phosphate buffer (PB, 5 mM,
pH 7.4) containing 0.15 M NaCl in order to prepare the working solution of ABTS radicals to an
absorbance of 0.70 0.02 at 734 nm. A 65 L aliquot of tilapia FPH dissolved in the same phosphate
buffer (66.67 g/mL nal assay concentration) or only buffer (for the control) was mixed with 910 L of
ABTS radical working solution, incubated for 10 min at room temperature in the dark, and then
absorbance was measured at 734 nm. The percent reduction of ABTS
+
to ABTS was calculated according
to the following equation:
ABTS (%) = 100 1
|
|
.
|

\
|

control of absorbance
sample of absorbance
(4)
3.8. Metal-Chelating Activity
The metal-chelating activity of FPH was assessed using the method of Decker and Welch [37]. One mL
of peptide solution (5 mg/mL) was rst mixed with 3.7 mL of distilled water. Then it was reacted with a
solution containing 0.1 mL 2 mM FeCl
2
and 0.2 mL of 5 mM ferrozine. After 10 min, the absorbance of
the reaction mixture was measured at 562 nm. The metal-chelating ability of FPH was calculated as a
percentage applying the equation:
Metal-chelating ability (%) = 100 1
|
|
.
|

\
|

control of absorbance
sample of absorbance
(5)
3.9. Nitrogen Solubility (NS)
Nitrogen solubility was determined according to the procedure of Diniz and Martin [9], with slight
modifications. Samples were dispersed in distilled water (10 g/L) and pH of the mixture was adjusted to
2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12 with either 0.5 N HCL or 0.5 N NaOH while continually shaking (Lab-Line
Environ-Shaker; Lab-Line Instrument, Inc., Melrose Park, IL, USA) at room temperature for 35 min. a
25 mL aliquot was then centrifuged at 2,800 g for 35 min. A 15 mL aliquot of the supernatant was
analyzed for nitrogen (N) content by the Kjeldahl method and the NS was calculated according
to Equation:
Nitrogen solubility (%) = 100
) (
) ( tan sup

|
|
.
|

\
|
ion concentrat N sample
ion concentrat N t erna
(6)
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1865
3.10. Oil-Holding Capacity (OHC)
Oil-holding capacity (OHC) of tilapia FPH was determined as the volume of edible oil held by 0.5 g of
material according to the method of Shahidi et al. [6]. A 0.5 g sample of each FPH was added to 10 mL
soybean oil (Gold Ingots Brand, QS310002012787, Suzhou, P.R. China) in a 50 mL centrifuge tube, and
vortexed for 30 s in triplicate. The oil dispersion was centrifuged at 2,800 g for 25 min. The free oil was
decanted and the OHC was determined by weight difference.
3.11. Water-Holding Capacity (WHC)
To determine the Water Holding Capacity (WHC) of tilapia FPH, the method outlined by Diniz and
Martin [9], was followed with slight modifications. Triplicate samples (0.5 g) of hydrolysates were
dissolved with 10 mL of distilled water in centrifuge tubes and vortexed for 30 s. The dispersions were
allowed to stand at room temperature for 30 min, centrifuged at 2,800 g for 25 min. The supernatant was
filtered with Whatman No.1 filter paper and the volume retrieved was accurately measured. The
difference between initial volumes of distilled water added to the protein sample and the volume retrieved.
The results were reported as mL of water absorbed per gram of protein sample.
3.12. Emulsifying Capacity (EC)
Emulsifying capacity was measured using the procedure described by Rakesh and Metz [38], with
modification. A 0.5 g of each freeze-dried sample was transferred into a 250 mL beaker and dissolved in
50 mL of 0.5 N NaCl, and then 50 mL of soybean oil (Gold Ingots Brand, QS310002012787, Suzhou, P.R.
China) was added. The homogenizer equipped with a motorized stirrer driven by a rheostat Ultra-T18
homogenizer (Shanghai, China) was immersed in the mixture, and operated for 120 s at 10,000 rpm to
make an emulsion. The mixture was transferred to centrifuge tubes, maintained in water-bath at 90 C for
10 min and then centrifuged at 2800 g for 20 min. Emulsifying capacity was calculated as in equation:
S
R A
W
V V
EC

=

(7)
where V
A
is the volume of oil added to form an emulsion, V
R
is the volume of oil released after
centrifugation, and W
S
is the weight of the sample.
3.13. Foaming Capacity (FC) and Foam Stability (FS)
Estimation of foaming capacity was done following the method of Bernardi Don et al. [39], with minor
modifications. Thirty mL of 30 g/L aqueous dispersion was mixed thoroughly using an Ultra-Turrax 25
homogenizer at 9,500 rpm for 3 min in a 250 mL graduated cylinder. The total volume of the protein
dispersion was measured immediately after 30 s. The difference in volume was expressed as the volume
of the foam. Foam stability was determined by measuring the fall in volume of the foam after 60 min.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1866
3.14. Bulk Density (BD)
Bulk density of freeze-dried tilapia FPH was estimated with approximately 3 g of each sample packed
into 25 mL graduated cylinders by gently tapping on the lab bench 10 times. The volume was recorded
and bulk density was reported as g/mL of the sample.
3.15. In Vitro Protein Digestibility (IVPD)
In vitro protein digestibility (IVPD) was carried out according to the method described by Elkhalil et
al. [40], with slight modifications. Twenty mg of tilapia FPH (FMMH and HWDH) samples were digested
in triplicate in 10 mL of trypsin (0.2 mg/mL in 100 mM Tris-HCl buffer, pH 7.6). The suspension was
incubated at 37 C for two hours. Hydrolysis was stopped by adding 5 mL 50% trichloroacetic acid
(TCA). The mixture was allowed to stand for 30-35 min at 4 C and was then centrifuged at 10,000 g
for 25 min using a D-3756 Osterode AM Harz Model 4515 Centrifuge (Sigma, Hamburg, Germany). The
resultant precipitate was dissolved in 5 mL of NaOH and protein concentrate was measured using the
Kjeldahl method. Digestibility was calculated as follows:
Protein digestibility (%) = 100
) (

A
B A
(8)
where A: total protein content (mg) in the sample and B: total protein content (mg) in the TCA precipitate.
3.16. Statistical Analysis
The results obtained were subjected to one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) using SPSS 18.0
statistical software package (SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA). Each value was determined by at least three
replicates. Results were given as mean standard deviation.
4. Conclusions
The study demonstrated that Alcalase 2.4 L is a suitable protease for use in the production of tilapia
(Oreochromis niloticus) muscle hydrolysates that exhibit a significant antioxidant activity and due to its
its functionality, it can serve as a good source of quality food ingredients and also provide desirable
characteristics to food products. Antioxidants block the process of oxidation by neutralizing free radicals.
The hydrolysates from FMM and HWD revealed a wide range of molecular weights polypeptides with an
appreciable level of solubility, high digestibility, fat absorption, foaming capacity, emulsifying capacity
and valuable antioxidant properties that can compete with hydrolysates and protein powders currently
available in the market. On the whole, endogenous enzyme inactivation in HWD did not manifest
significant differences in antioxidant properties and functionalities.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1867
Acknowledgments
Authors wish to thank the earmarked fund for Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System
(NYCYTX-49-22) for providing financial support to carry out this research.
References
1. El-Sayed, A.M. Tilapia Culture; CABI publishing: Oxford, UK, 2006; pp. 124.
2. Hempel, E. Tilapia the new white fish. Seafood Int. 2002, 10, 1623.
3. National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference; USDA: Washington, DC, USA, Release No. 18,
2005. Available at: www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/Data (Accessed on 12 April 2010).
4. Chobert, J.M.; Bertrand-Harb, C.; Nicolus, M.G. Solubility and emulsifying properties of caseins and
whey proteins modied enzymatically by trypsin. J. Agric. Food Chem. 1988, 36, 883892.
5. Panyam, D.; Kilara, A. Enhancing the functionality of food proteins by enzymatic modication.
Trends Food Sci. Technol. 1996, 7, 120125.
6. Shahidi, F.; Han, X.Q. Synowiecki, J. Production and characteristics of protein hydrolysates from
capelin (Mallotus villosus). Food Chem. 1995, 53, 285293.
7. Gbogouri, G.A.; Linder M.; Fanni J.; Parmentier, M. Influence of hydrolysis degree on the functional
properties of salmon byproducts hydrolysates. J. Food Sci. 2004, 69, 615622.
8. Sathivel, S.; Smiley S.; Prinyawiwatkul W.; Bechtel, P.J. Functional and nutritional properties of red
salmon (Oncorhynclnis nerka) enzymatic hydrolysates. J. Food Sci. 2005, 70, 401406.
9. Diniz, F.M.; Martin, A.M. Effects of the extent of enzymatic hydrolysis on the functional properties
of shark protein hydrolysate. LWT- Food Sci. Technol. 1997, 30, 266272.
10. Sathivel, S.; Bechtel, P.J.; Babbitt, J.; Smiley, S.; Crapo, C.; Reppond, K.D. Biochemical and
functional properties of herring (Clupea harengus) byproduct hydrolysates. J. Food Sci. 2003, 68,
21962200.
11. Quaglia, G.B.; Orban E. Influence of enzyrnatic hydrolysis on structure and emulsifying properties of
sardine (Sardina pilchardus) protein hydrolysates. J. Food Sci. 1990, 55, 15711573.
12. Quaglia, G.B.; Orban, E. Influence of the degree of hydrolysis on the solubility of the protein
hydrolysates from sardine (Sardina pilchardus). J. Sci. Food Agric. 1987, 38, 271276.
13. Amarowicz, R.; Shahidi, F. Antioxidant activity of peptide fractions of capelin protein hydrolysates.
Food Chem. 1997, 58,355359.
14. Wu, H.C.; Chen, H.M.; Shiau, C.Y. Free amino acids and peptides as related to antioxidant properties
in protein hydrolysates of mackerel (Scomber austriasicus). Food Res. Int. 2003, 36, 949957.
15. Alasalvar, C.; Shahidi, F.; Quantick, P. Food and health applications of marine neutraceuticals. In
SeafoodsQuality Technology and Nutraceutical Applications; Alasalvar, C., Taylor, T., Eds.;
Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Germany, 2002; pp. 175204.
16. Hagen, H.; Sandnes, K. Process for improvement of meat quality in sh, protein hydrolysate and
method of producing a protein hydrolysate. International Patent No. WO 2004071202, 2004.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1868
17. Guerard, F.; Guimas, A.; Binet, J. Production of tuna waste hydrolysates by a commercial neutral
protease preparation. J. Mol. Catal. B: Enzym. 2002, 19, 489498.
18. FAO Protein and Amino Acid Requirements in Human Nutrition. Report of a joint WHO/FAO/UNU
expert consultation, WHO technical report series, No. 935. The World Health Organization: Geneva,
Switzerland, 2007.
19. You, L.; Zhao, M.; Cui, C.; Zhao, H.; Yang, B. Effect of degree of hydrolysis on the antioxidant
activity of loach (Misgurnus anguillicaudatus) protein hydrolysates. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol.
2009, 2, 235240.
20. Yang, B.; Zhao, M.M.; Shi, J.; Yang, N.; Jiang, Y.M. Effect of ultrasonic treatment on the recovery
and DPPH radical scavenging activity of polysaccharides from longan fruit pericarp. Food Chem.
2008, 106, 685690.
21. Jao, C.L; Ko, W.C. 1,1-Diphenyl-2-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) radical scavenging by protein
hydrolyzates from tuna cooking juice. Fish Sci. 2002, 68, 430435.
22. Kim, S.K; Kim, Y.T; Byun, H.G; Nam, K.S; Joo, D.S; Shahidi, F. Isolation and characterization of
antioxidative peptides from gelatin hydrolysate of Alaska Pollock skin. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001,
49, 19841989.
23. Miliauskasa, G.; Venskutonisa, P.R.; Beek, T.A. Screening of radical scavenging activity of some
medicinal and aromatic plant extracts. Food Chem. 2004, 85, 231237.
24. Klompong, V.; Benjakul, S.; Kantachote, D.; Shahidi, F. Antioxidative activity and functional
properties of protein hydrolysate of yellow stripe trevally (Selaroides leptolepis) as inuenced by the
degree of hydrolysis and enzyme type. Food Chem. 2007, 102, 13171327.
25. Saiga, A.; Tanabe, S.; Nishimura, T. Antioxidant activity of peptides obtained from porcine
myobrilar proteins by protease treatment. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 36613667.
26. Sorgentini, D.A.; Wagner, J.R. Comparative study of foaming properties of whey and isolate soy
bean proteins. Food Res. Int. 2002, 35, 721729.
27. Petruccelli, S.; Anon, M.C. Soy protein isolates components and their interactions. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 1994, 43, 17621767.
28. Kuehler, C.A.; Stine, C.M. Effect of enzymatic hydrolysis on some functional properties of whey
proteins. J. Food Sci. 1974, 39, 379382.
29. Wasswa, J.; Tang, J.; Gu, X. Functional properties of Grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella), Nile
perch (Lates niloticus) and Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) skin hydrolysates. Int. J. Food Prop.
2008, 11, 339350.
30. Kamara, M.T.; Zhu, K.; Issoufou, A.; Tarawalie, F.; Zhou, H. Functionality, in vitro digestibility and
physicochemical properties of two varieties of defatted foxtail millet protein concentrates. Int. J. Mol.
Sci. 2009, 10, 52245238.
31. Azizah, A.H.; Bakar, J.; Bee, G.H. Nutritional quality of spray dried protein hydrolysate from Black
Tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus). Food Chem. 2002, 78, 6974.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2010, 11

1869
32. Van DER Plancken, I.; Van Remoortere, M.; Van Loey, A.; Hendrickx, M.E. Heat induced changes
in the susceptibility of egg white proteins to enzymatic hydrolysis: A kinetic study. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 2003, 51, 38193823.
33. Adler-Nissen, J. Enzymic Hydrolysis of Food Proteins; Elsevier Applied Science Publishers: New
York, NY, USA, 1986.
34. Moore, S. On the determination of cystine and cysteic acid. J. Biol. Chem. 1963, 238, 235237.
35. Ravindran, G.; Bryden, W.L. Tryptophan determination in proteins and feedstuffs by ion exchange
chromatography. Food Chem. 2005, 89, 309314.
36. Re, R.; Pellegrini, N.; Proteggente, A.; Pannala, A.; Yang, M.; Rice-Evans, C. Antioxidant activity
applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Rad. Biol. Med. 1999, 26,
12311237.
37. Decker, E.A.; Welch, B. Role of ferritin as a lipid oxidation catalyst in muscle food. J. Agric. Food
Chem. 1990, 38, 674677.
38. Rakesh, J.; Metz, A. Acid precipitated sh protein isolate exhibits good functional properties. Food
Product. Dev. 1973, 7, 1824.
39. Bernardi Don, L.S.; Pilosof, A.M.R.; Bartholomai, G.B. Enzymatic modification of soy protein
concentrates by fungal and bacterial proteases. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 1991, 68, 102105.
40. Elkhalil, E.A.J.; El Tinay, A.H.; Mohamed, B.E.; Elshseikh, E.A.E. Effect of malt pretreatment on
phytic acid and in vitro protein digestibility of sorghum flour. Food Chem. 2001, 72, 2932.
2010 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open-access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).