The lowering of gushing potential from hydrophobin by the use of proteolytic enzymes

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58430/jib.v130i3.53

Keywords:

gushing, hydrophobin, proteinase, papain, foam

Abstract

Why was the work done: Gushing caused by hydrophobin originating from field fungal contamination of grain remains a significant problem in certain regions. We sought to explore whether the use of added proteinase enzymes could overcome the problem and allow the use of problematic grain.

How was the work done: Four commercial proteinases were studied for their ability to digest hydrophobin and remove its foaming potential. One of those enzymes was then explored for its utility as an addition to mashing with a view to lowering the gushing potential of the ensuing beer.

What are the main findings: The four enzyme preparations (Smizyme LP-G, Thermoase PC, Bromelain and Papain) were all capable of digesting hydrophobin. Of these, papain was chosen to assess whether the use of such an enzyme in mashing could ameliorate the gushing potential in finished beers. It was demonstrated that this can be achieved and without apparent detriment to the foaming potential of those beers.

Why is the work important: It is now possible for brewers to consider an alternative approach to rectifying gushing risks if they are confronted with problematic grain. It must be stressed that this technique will not address the other main risk from infections of this type, namely the production of mycotoxins. Even in a context where gushing is not a problem, this work has indicated that there should be little concern with addition of papain at the mashing stage from a perspective of decreasing the foaming performance of beer.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

American Society of Brewing Chemists. 1992. Methods of Analysis. Malt-4 Extract. St. Paul, MN, USA

Aastrup S. Legind-Hansen P. Nielsen H. 1996. Enzymatic reduction of gushing tendencies in beer. Brau Int 14 (2):136-137

Aldred P, Kanauchi M, Bamforth CW. 2021. An investigation into proteolysis in mashing. J Inst Brew 127:21-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jib.635

Amaha M, Kitabatake K. 1981. Gushing in beer, p. 457-489 in Pollock JRA (ed) Brewing Science, vol. 2. Academic Press, London, UK

Bamforth CW, Milani C. 2004. The foaming of mixtures of albumin and hordein protein hydrolysates in model systems. J Sci Food Agric 84:1001-1004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.1749

Buffin B, Campbell Pl. 2013. The influence of hop acid components on the phenomenon of gushing in various standard and non-alcoholic beers - evaluation of advanced hop products under induced gushing conditions. BrewSci 66:198-204

Deckers S, Vissers L, Gebruers K, Shokribousjein Z, Khalesi M, Riveros-Galan D, Schönberger C, Verachtert H, Neven H, Delcour J, Michiels C, Ilberg V, Derdelinckx G, Titze J, Martens J. 2012. Doubly modified Carlsberg test combined with dynamic light scattering allows prediction of the primary gushing potential of harvested barley and malt. Cerevisia 37:77–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cervis.2012.10.001

Garbe L-A, Schwarz P, Ehmer A. 2009. Beer gushing, p. 186-212 in Bamforth CW (ed), Beer, a Quality Perspective, Academic Press, New York, US DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-669201-3.00006-3

Goertzen AD, Nickerson MT, Tanaka T. 2021. The improvement of the functional properties of a chickpea protein isolate through proteolysis with three proteases. Cereal Chem 98:439-449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cche.10383

Jasim AS, Nasser, JM. 2020. Functional properties of enzymatically modified wheat gluten. Iraqi J Agric Sci 51:777-788. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36103/ijas.v51i3.1033

Jones BL. 1997. Purification, identification, and partial characterization of a barley protein that Inhibits green malt endoproteinases. J Am Soc Brew Chem 55:58-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/ASBCJ-55-0058

Kapp GR, Bamforth CW. 2002. The foaming properties of proteins isolated from barley. J Sci Food Agric 82:1276-1281. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.1177

Khalesi M, Venken T, Deckers S, Winterburn J, Shokribousjein Z, Gebruers K, Verachtert H, Delcour J, Martin P, Derdelinckx G. 2013. A novel method for hydrophobin extraction using CO2 foam fractionation system. Indus Crops Prod 43:372– 377. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.06.048

Laemmli UK. 1970. Cleavage of structural proteins during the assembly of the head of bacteriophage T4. Nature 227:680–685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/227680a0

Lee WC, Chen TC. 2002. Functional characteristics of egg white solids obtained from papain treated albumen. J Food Eng 51:263–266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0260-8774(01)00066-8

Lei H, Wang W, Chen L, Li X, Yi B, Deng L. 2004. The preparation and catalytically active characterization of papain immobilized on magnetic composite microspheres. Enzyme Microb Technol 35:15-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enzmictec.2004.03.007

Leiper KA, Duszanskyj R, Stewart GG. 2002. Premixing of isinglass and silica gel to obtain improved beer stability. J Inst Brew 108:28-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2002.tb00117.x

Linder M, Selber K, Nakari-Setälä T, Qiao M, Kula MR, Penttilä M. 2001. The hydrophobins HFBI and HFBII from Trichoderma reesei showing efficient interactions with nonionic surfactants in aqueous two-phase systems. Biomacromol 2:511–517. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/bm0001493

Lusk LT. 2016. Controlling beer foam and gushing, p. 175-198 in Bamforth CW (ed), Brewing Materials and Processes, Academic Press, San Diego, US DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-799954-8.00010-1

Mimouni B, Azanza JL, Raymond J. 1999. Influence of double enzymic hydrolyses on gluten functionality. J Sci Food Agric 79:1048-1053. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0010(19990515)79:7<1048::AID-JSFA327>3.0.CO;2-Y

Sarlin T, Nakari-Setälä T, Linder M, Penttilä M, Haikara A. 2005. Fungal hydrophobins as predictors of the gushing activity of malt. J Inst Brew 111:105-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2005.tb00655.x

Sarlin T, Vilpola A, Kotaviita E, Olkku J, Haikara A. 2007. Fungal hydrophobins in the barley-to-beer chain. J Inst Brew 113:147-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2007.tb00271.x

Schneidereit JO, Kunz T, Methner F-J. 2013. Application of gallotannins to prevent gushing in beer and carbonated beverages. Mast Brew Assoc Am, Ann Conf Austin, Texas, Poster 58.

Shokribousjein Z, Decker SM, Gebruers K, Lorgouilloux Y, Baggerman G, Verachtert H, Delcour JA, Etienne P, Rock J-M, Michielsa C, Derdelinckx G. 2011. Hydrophobins, beer foaming and gushing. Cerevisia 35:85-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cervis.2010.12.001

Siebert KJ, Lynn PY. 1997. Mechanisms of beer colloidal stabilization. J Am Soc Brew Chem 55:73-78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1094/ASBCJ-55-0073

Skelton GS. 1968. Papaya proteinases. I. Temperature and pH stability curves. Enzymologia 35:270-274. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(01)82385-2

Tang YR, Stone AK, Wang Y, Jafarian Z, Zhou L, Kimmel J, House JD, Tanaka T, Nickerson MT. 2023. Effects of enzyme treatments on the functionality of commercial pea and pea blended protein ingredients. Food Biosci 53: 102838. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbio.2023.102838

Zeng M, Adhikari B, He Z, Qin F, Huang X, Chen J. 2013. Improving the foaming properties of soy protein Isolate through partial enzymatic hydrolysis. Drying Tech 31:1545–1552. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/07373937.2013.829490

Downloads

Published

22-05-2024

How to Cite

Kanauchi, M., & Bamforth, C. (2024). The lowering of gushing potential from hydrophobin by the use of proteolytic enzymes. Journal of the Institute of Brewing, 130(3), xxx-xxx. https://doi.org/10.58430/jib.v130i3.53