Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Sugarbeet, a form of Beta vulgaris var vulgaris, fails to soften completely after heating at 100°C for several hours. This is due to thermal stability of the cell–wall polymers involved in cell–cell adhesion. In contrast, beetroot softens within 25–30 min due to a relatively rapid increase in the ability of the cells to separate. Information concerning the cell–wall polymers responsible for cell–cell adhesion was obtained by subjecting sugarbeet and beetroot tissues to a range of chemical and biochemical treatments designed to cleave cell–wall chemical bonds selectively. Treatment of sugarbeet tissues with chelating agents, weak base (Na2CO3, 0·05 M) or a purified, specific endoxylanase did not facilitate vortex-induced cell separation. However, this could be induced after extraction in dilute, cold alkali (0·05–0·1 M KOH) or dilute, hot acid (0·1 M TFA, 100°C). Tissues from beetroot behaved similarly. Furthermore, the cell walls of sugarbeet and beetroot were similar in yield and neutral carbohydrate composition; the cell–wall-galacturonic acid content of beetroot was 50% higher as compared with sugarbeet. They were also rich in ferulic acid (FA) and its derivatives (6–7 mg g-1 CWM), and exhibited pH-dependent autofluorescence which disappeared during alkali-induced cell separation. In sugarbeet, over 20% of the FA was in dimer form. In beetroot, however, the value was only 10%. The main FA dimers were 8-O-4′DiFA and 8,5′DiFA (benzofuran form). The results indicate that the degree of thermal stability of cell–cell adhesion and, therefore, texture in Beta vulgaris tissues is related to the degree of FA-cross linking between pectic polysaccharides.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Waldron et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: