Rheological properties and effects of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion on functional components and antioxidant activities of cooked yam flour

  • Rui Zhou
  • Yoon-Han KangEmail author


There is dearth of documented information on rheological behavior, bioaccessibility and antioxidant potential of cooked yam flour (CY). This study was carried out to evaluate rheological properties and effects of in vitro gastrointestinal digestion (GID) on functional compositions and antioxidant activities of CY. CY displayed enhanced pseudoplastic and ‘‘gel-like” characteristics with incremental concentration (4.5–9.0%). After GID, contents of total polyphenols, flavonoids, sugar (TS), acidic polysaccharides (AP) and free amino acids (FAAs) significantly increased with maximal increment of 3.51-fold for TS followed by AP (3.05-fold), and DPPH, ABTS, FRAP and FIC assays pointed to a significant increase in antioxidant activity. Sixteen FAAs including 7 essential amino acids were detected with highest content of 9.81 mg/g for arginine. Large block remnants with a micro-porous structure were confirmed by scanning electron microscopy. Results indicate that CY with favourable swallowing performance can serve as a reliable source of bioaccessible and bioactive compounds with antioxidation.


Yam flour Rheological property Antioxidant In vitro gastrointestinal digestion Bioactive component 



This research was supported by grants from the open technology program of GWNU Leaders in Industry-university Cooperation (GWNU LINC+) of Ministry of Education of Korea.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have declared no conflict of interest.


  1. AACC International. Method 44-15.02 (Moisture). In: Approved Methods of the American Association of Cereal Chemists. 11th ed. St. Paul, Minnesota. American Association of Cereal Chemists International, USA (2010)Google Scholar
  2. Abeysinghe DC, Li X, Sun CD, Zhang WS, Zhou CH, Chen KS. Bioactive compounds and antioxidant capacities in different edible tissues of citrus fruit of four species. Food Chem. 104: 1338–1344 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adepoju OT, Boyejo O, Adeniji PO. Effects of processing methods on nutrient and antinutrient composition of yellow yam (Dioscorea cayenensis) products. Food Chem. 238: 160–165 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benzie IFF, Strain JJ. The ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) as a measure of “antioxidant power”: the FRAP assay. Anal. Biochem. 239: 70–76 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brand-Williams W, Cuvelier ME, Berset C. Use of a free radical method to evaluate antioxidant activity. Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 28: 25–30 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chandrasekara A, Shahidi F. Bioaccessibility and antioxidant potential of millet grain phenolics as affected by simulated in vitro digestion and microbial fermentation. J. Funct. Foods 4: 226–237 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chen X, Lu J, Li X, Wang Y, Miao J, Mao X, Zhao C, Gao W. Effect of blanching and drying temperatures on starch-related physicochemical properties, bioactive components and antioxidant activities of yam flours. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 82: 303–310 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Claybaugh T, Decker S, McCall K, Slyvka Y, Steimle J, Wood A, Schaefer M, Thuma J, Inman S. L-arginine supplementation in type II diabetic rats preserves renal function and improves insulin sensitivity by altering the nitric oxide pathway. Int. J. Endocrinol. 2014: 171546 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dey P, Ray S, Chaudhuri TK. Immunomodulatory activities and phytochemical characterisation of the methanolic extract of Dioscorea alata aerial tuber. J. Funct. Foods 23: 315–328 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Do JH, Lee HO, Lee SK, Jang JK, Lee SD, Sung HS. Colorimetric determination of acidic polysaccharide from Panax ginseng, its extraction condition and stability. J. Ginseng Res. 17: 139–144 (1993)Google Scholar
  11. Dubois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smith F. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal. Chem. 28: 350–356 (1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elias RJ, Kellerby SS, Decker EA. Antioxidant activity of proteins and peptides. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 48: 430–441 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Friedrich CHR, Heymann L. Extension of a model for crosslinking polymer at the gel point. J. Rheol. 32: 235–241 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hadde EK, Chen J. Shear and extensional rheological characterization of thickened fluid for dysphagia management. J. Food Eng. 245: 18–23 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hao LX, Zhao XH. Immune activities of the water-soluble yam (Dioscorea opposite Thunb) polysaccharides as affected by thermal, acidic and enzymatic treatments. CYTA-J. Food 14: 266–270 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. He M, Zeng J, Zhai L, Liu Y, Wu H, Zhang R, Li Z, Xia E. Effect of in vitro simulated gastrointestinal digestion on polyphenol and polysaccharide content and their biological activities among 22 fruit juices. Food Res. Int. 102: 156–162 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hsu CL, Chen W, Weng YM, Tseng CY. Chemical composition, physical properties, and antioxidant activities of yam flours as affected by different drying methods. Food Chem. 83: 85–92 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Huang H, Jiang Q, Chen Y, Li X, Mao X, Chen X, Huang L, Gao W Preparation, physico-chemical characterization and biological activities of two modified starches from yam (Dioscorea opposita Thunb.). Food Hydrocoll. 55: 244–253 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. Jiang H, Jane J, Acevedo D, Green A, Shinn G, Schrenker D, Srichuwong S, Campbell M, Wu Y. Variations in starch physicochemical properties from a generation-means analysis study using amylomaize V and VII parents. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58: 5633–5639 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ma F, Zhang Y, Liu N, Zhang J, Tan G, Kannan B, Liu X, Bell AE. Rheological properties of polysaccharides from Dioscorea opposita Thunb. Food Chem. 227: 64–72 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marathe SA, Rajalakshmi V, Jamdar SN, Sharma A. Comparative study on antioxidant activity of different varieties of commonly consumed legumes in India. Food Chem. Toxicol. 49: 2005–2012 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Minekus M, Alminger M, Alvito P, Ballance S, Bohn T, Bourlieu C, Carrière F, Boutrou R, Corredig M, Dupont D, Dufour C, Egger L, Golding M, Karakaya S, Kirkhus B, Le Feunteun S, Lesmes U, Macierzanka A, Mackie A, Marze S, McClements DJ, Ménard O, Recio I, Santos CN, Singh RP, Vegarud GE, Wickham MS, Weitschies W, Brodkorb A. A standardised static in vitro digestion method suitable for food: an international consensus. Food Funct. 5: 1113–1124 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pellegrini M, Lucas-Gonzalez R, Fernández-López J, Ricci A, Pérez-Álvarez JA, Sterzo CL, Viuda-Martos M. Bioaccessibility of polyphenolic compounds of six quinoa seeds during in vitro gastrointestinal digestion. J. Funct. Foods 38: 77–88 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Prior RL, Wu X, Schaich K. Standardized methods for the determination of antioxidant capacity and phenolics in foods and dietary supplements. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53: 4290–4302 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Quirós-Sauceda AE, Palafox-Carlos H, Sáyago-Ayerdi SG, Ayala-Zavala JF, Bello-Perez LA, Alvarez-Parrilla E, de la Rosa LA, González-Córdova AF, González-Aguilar GA. Dietary fiber and phenolic compounds as functional ingredients: interaction and possible effect after ingestion. Food Funct. 5: 1063–1072 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Razavi SMA, Alghooneh A, Behrouzian F, Cui SW. Investigation of the interaction between sage seed gum and guar gum: steady and dynamic shear rheology. Food Hydrocoll. 60: 67–76 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Re R, Pellegrini N, Proteggente A, Pannala A, Yang M, Rice-Evans C. Antioxidant activity applying an improved ABTS radical cation decolorization assay. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 26: 1231–1237 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Singh J, Dartois A, Kaur L. Starch digestibility in food matrix: a review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 21: 168–180 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Son IS, Lee JS, Lee JY, Kwon CS (2014) Antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects of yam (Dioscorea batatas Decne.) on azoxymethane-induced colonic aberrant crypt foci in F344 rats. Prev. Nutr. Food Sci. 19: 82–88 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wang J, Hu S, Nie SP, Yu Q, Xie M. Reviews on mechanisms of in vitro antioxidant activity of polysaccharides. Oxid. Med. Cell. Longev. 64: 1–13 (2016)Google Scholar
  31. Whitaker JR. Proteolytic enzymes. In: Handbook of Food Enzymology. Whitaker JR, Voragen AGJ, Wong DWS (eds.) Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY, USA pp. 993–1009 (2003)Google Scholar
  32. Wu ZG, Jiang W, Nitin M, Bao XQ, Chen SL, Tao ZM. Characterizing diversity based on nutritional and bioactive compositions of yam germplasm (Dioscorea spp.) commonly cultivated in China. J. Food Drug Anal. 24: 367–375 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Xia Q, Wang L, Xu C, Mei J, Li Y. Effects of germination and high hydrostatic pressure processing on mineral elements, amino acids and antioxidants in vitro bioaccessibility, as well as starch digestibility in brown rice (Oryza sativa L.). Food Chem. 214: 533–542 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhang J, Tian H, Zhan P, Du F, Zong A, Xu T. Isolation and identification of phenolic compounds in Chinese purple yam and evaluation of antioxidant activity. LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 96: 161–165 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Zhou R, Bao H, Kang YH. Synergistic rheological behavior and morphology of yam starch and Auricularia auricula-judae polysaccharide-composite gels under processing conditions. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 26: 883–891 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Food Science and Technology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Food Science and TechnologyHubei University of Arts and ScienceXiangyangChina
  2. 2.Department of Food ScienceGangneung-Wonju National UniversityGangneungKorea
  3. 3.Department of Food Processing and DistributionGangneung-Wonju National UniversityGangneungKorea

Personalised recommendations