Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Pea protein ingredients vary widely in composition and functional properties depending on their processing history, which strongly affects their behavior during high-moisture extrusion. This study compared pea protein isolate (PPI, 81% protein), pea protein concentrate (PPC, 52% protein), and a 1:1 blend (PPC–PPI, 67% protein) to elucidate how raw material properties influence protein aggregation and the resulting texture of meat analogues processed at high moisture contents (50–60%). PPI exhibited low solubility, high water-holding capacity (WHC), and a partially denatured protein state, whereas PPC contained higher levels of carbohydrates and fiber, showed greater solubility, and retained a more native protein structure. These differences resulted in distinct rheological responses: PPI dispersions formed dense, elastic networks at ambient temperature, while PPC showed limited initial structure but pronounced heat-induced gelation; the blend exhibited comparatively low viscosity and elasticity. During extrusion, PPI formed predominantly disulfide-stabilized networks, resulting in high hardness and anisotropy at low moisture (50%). In contrast, PPC aggregated mainly via non-disulfide covalent bonds, producing stiff but brittle structures. The PPC–PPI blend showed moisture-dependent behavior: at high moisture (60%), enhanced non-covalent interactions promoted molecular mobility and alignment, whereas at low moisture increased non-disulfide covalent cross-linking strengthened the network but constrained anisotropy. Correlation analysis confirmed that aggregation pathway, rather than protein content alone, governs extrudate texture. Overall, controlling the balance between disulfide, non-disulfide, and non-covalent interactions is critical for optimizing strength and alignment during high-moisture extrusion of pea proteins, highlighting blending as a practical strategy to tailor texture while leveraging the sustainability advantages of dry-fractionated proteins.
Gräfenhahn et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: