Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A number of variations were evaluated in the techniques and procedures of the classical 6N hydrochloric acid, 110°C, 24 h hydrolysis of protein. Variations included the use of glass tubes with Teflon-lined screw caps as the hydrolysis vessel, high-temperature short-time hydrolysis, performic acid oxidation of cystine and methionine, multiple hydrolysis times at 145°C, and interlaboratory preparation of hydrolysates. A diverse sample set used in the study included a range of protein-containing matrices, and automated ionexchange chromatography was used for the amino acid analysis. Results show that for hydrolysis in glass tubes with Teflon-lined screw caps at 110°C for 24 h, recoveries of amino acids were in good agreement with recoveries by classical hydrolysis in sealed glass ampoules at reduced pressure. Recoveries from a higher temperature hydrolysis, i.e., 145°C for 4 h and using sealed ampoules, were also in agreement with 110°C, 24 h, sealed ampoule results; the former procedure yielded increased isoleucine and valine and decreased serine and threonine values. Glass tubes with Teflon-lined screw caps for hydrolysis were found to be a practical and convenient alternative to sealed glass ampoules; the improved precision with the former was probably due to the simplicity of the method. The average recovery of cystine from a wide range of matrices without the use of performic acid was 55.5% compared with results obtained with performic acid oxidation. Similarly, methionine is preferably analyzed as methionine sulfone. Interlaboratory evaluation of 145°C, 4 h hydrolysis, in which one laboratory used sealed ampoules and the other laboratory used Teflon-lined screw-cap tubes, demonstrated excellent agreement of amino acid values.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gehrke et al. (1985) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: