1998
DOI: 10.1094/cchem.1998.75.1.30
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Isolation and Functionality Testing of Low Molecular Weight Glutenin Subunits

Abstract: Cereal Chem. 75(1):30-36Various protein fractionation techniques have been applied to the isolation and purification of milligram quantities of low molecular weight glutenin subunits (LMW-GS). No single technique was applicable to the purification of the majority of the subunits. Partial purification of certain LMW-GS was obtained using ion-exchange chromatography and reversedphase HPLC. Preparations containing αand γ-type subunit sequences did not strengthen dough when incorporated into a base flour, whereas … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
16
0
1

Year Published

1999
1999
2014
2014

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 45 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
16
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The role of HMW glutenins in wheat quality, particularly dough strength, is well established (Payne et al 1979;Payne 1987;Shewry et al 1992). LMW glutenins also have significant effects on wheat quality through both additive and epistatic interactions, particularly with HMW glutenins (Damidaux et al 1978;Gupta et al 1989Gupta and MacRitchie 1994;Nieto-Taladriz et al 1994;SontogStrohm et al 1996;Sissons et al 1998;Luo et al 2001;Eagles et al 2002;Tranquilli et al 2002). However, the exact role or contribution of individual LMW glutenin subunits or their alleles to wheat quality is not fully understood.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The role of HMW glutenins in wheat quality, particularly dough strength, is well established (Payne et al 1979;Payne 1987;Shewry et al 1992). LMW glutenins also have significant effects on wheat quality through both additive and epistatic interactions, particularly with HMW glutenins (Damidaux et al 1978;Gupta et al 1989Gupta and MacRitchie 1994;Nieto-Taladriz et al 1994;SontogStrohm et al 1996;Sissons et al 1998;Luo et al 2001;Eagles et al 2002;Tranquilli et al 2002). However, the exact role or contribution of individual LMW glutenin subunits or their alleles to wheat quality is not fully understood.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…LMW glutenins comprise about 40% of the total endosperm proteins and 60-70% of glutenins. As the major components of wheat storage proteins, LMW-GS fractions have been found to be significantly correlated with dough extensibility (Gupta et al 1989;Metakovsky et al 1990), dough-mixing time (Sissons et al 1998) and dough strength (Tanaka et al 2005). In the past several decades, however, there have been fewer structure and function studies of LMW-GSs compared with HMW-GSs because of the similar mobilities of a large number of subunits in SDS-PAGE analysis and the difficulty of separation and characterization.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1). These 16 lines GS polypeptides incorporated into the flour have are identical to Chinese Spring for all chromosome a dough strengthening effect 18 . These results, topairs except 1A, reducing genetic variation among gether with correlation studies of LM r -GS allelic lines and increasing the sensitivity of the exvariation and dough properties 9,19 , suggest that periments to detect small effects of loci located on differences in dough strength are mainly originated chromosome 1A on CMQ and predictive tests for in the LM r -GS rather than in the linked gliadin BMQ.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…However, all previous Spring 31 and QTL analysis showed that Cheyenne studies aimed to differentiate the effect of these allele 2 * was associated with a 19% increase in SDS two linked loci have shown that the allelic variation sedimentation volume 46 compared to the 13·6% at the LM r -GS is the responsible for the observed increase observed here for the T. monococcum allele. effects on gluten strength 9,[16][17][18][19] . This result suggests that the beneficial effect of the T. monococcum allele will not be superior to that of the active T. aestivum 2 * allele.…”
Section: Loci No Rsls Were Available With Recombinationmentioning
confidence: 99%