Next Article in Journal
Effects of Bee Pollen Derived from Acer mono Maxim. or Phellodendron amurense Rupr. on the Lipid Composition of Royal Jelly Secreted by Honeybees
Next Article in Special Issue
Influences of Illumination Pretreatment on Soybean Oil Activated Clay Bleaching Effects and Soybean Oil Quality Evaluation
Previous Article in Journal
Using Front-Face Fluorescence Spectroscopy and Biochemical Analysis of Honey to Assess a Marker for the Level of Varroa destructor Infestation of Honey Bee (Apis mellifera) Colonies
Previous Article in Special Issue
Combined Effect of Drying Temperature and Varied Gelatin Concentration on Physicochemical and Antioxidant Properties of Ginger Oil Incorporated Chitosan Based Edible Films
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Foods
Volume 12
Issue 3
10.3390/foods12030630
foods-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Potential Application of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Production of Hydrolyzed Proteins with Antioxidant and Antihypertensive Properties and Low Allergenicity: A Review

by
Ana Paula Miguel Landim
1,2,
Julia Hauck Tiburski
3,
Caroline Grassi Mellinger
1,2,
Pablo Juliano
4 and
Amauri Rosenthal
1,2,*
1
Embrapa Agroindústria de Alimentos, Rio de Janeiro 23020-470, RJ, Brazil
2
Postgraduate Program in Food Science and Technology, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ), Seropédica 23897-000, RJ, Brazil
3
Department of Food Technology, Federal Rural University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRRJ), Seropédica 23897-000, RJ, Brazil
4
CSIRO Agriculture and Food, Werribee, VIC 3030, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Foods 2023, 12(3), 630; https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030630
Submission received: 30 November 2022 / Revised: 19 January 2023 / Accepted: 24 January 2023 / Published: 2 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Green Innovative Techniques for Foods)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The high hydrostatic pressure (HHP) process has been studied for several applications in food technology and has been commercially implemented in several countries, mainly for non-thermal pasteurization and shelf-life extension of food products. HHP processing has been demonstrated to accelerate proteolytic hydrolysis at a specific combination of pressure and pressure-holding time for a given protein source and enzyme. The enzymatic hydrolysis of proteins is a well-known alternative to producing biologically active peptides, with antioxidant and antihypertensive capacity, from different food protein sources. However, some of these protein sources contain allergenic epitopes which are often not degraded by traditional hydrolysis. Moreover, the peptide profile and related biological activity of a hydrolysate depend on the protein source, the enzymes used, the parameters of the proteolysis process (pH, temperature, time of hydrolysis), and the use of other technologies such as HHP. The present review aims to provide an update on the use of HHP for improving enzymatic hydrolysis, with a particular focus on studies which evaluated hydrolysate antihypertensive and antioxidant capacity, as well as residual allergenicity. Overall, HHP has been shown to improve the biological properties of hydrolysates. While protein allergenicity can be reduced with traditional hydrolysis, HHP can further reduce the allergenicity. Compared with traditional hydrolysis methods, HHP-assisted protein hydrolysis offers a greater opportunity to add value to protein-rich products through conversion into high-end hydrolysate products with enhanced nutritional and functional properties.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

Consumers are increasingly looking for foods containing substances that assist in health promotion. In this scenario, hydrolyzed proteins rich in biologically active peptides offer a pathway to meet the growing market demand for novel functional products and health promoting foods [1]. In some countries, peptides such as isoleucine-proline-proline (IPP) and valine-proline-proline (VPP) are approved for use in different commercial products such as sour milk products (Calpis®, Calpis Food Industry Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) and margarine (Becel Pro-Activ®, Evolus Co., Ltd., Bern, Switzerland) [2]. In this context, the development of technologically and economically viable protein hydrolysis processes that provide peptides with increased bioactivities (e.g., antihypertensive activity, antioxidant activity) and their use for the development of nutraceutical products, and even as substitutes for synthetic preservatives, continues to emerge [3]. Some studies have suggested using peptides with antihypertensive activity as an alternative to conventional drugs without the adverse effects seen with synthetic formulations [4]. In this case, their use is indicated for the initial treatment of high blood pressure symptoms. Peptides with antioxidant activity also show various potential applications, e.g., in food supplements and therapeutical agents with positive effects on cellular oxidation or as replacements for synthetic antioxidants to inhibit lipid peroxidation in foods during storage [5].
Hydrolyzed proteins can be produced from protein sources of animal (milk, eggs, meat, fish, and insects) [6] or plant origin (soybean, peas, maize, and rice) [7]. In particular, by-product streams from the agri-food industry can provide protein-rich sources for the production of hydrolyzed protein containing peptides with healthy attributes [8,9]. Several studies have demonstrated the production of protein hydrolysates from by-product streams from the dairy (e.g., whey) [10], meat (e.g., skin, viscera, bones) [6,11], and plant processing (e.g., non-edible parts) [12] industries. While some of these studies consider these food protein hydrolysates as sources of antihypertensive peptides, developing processes with maximum efficiency and industrial viability is still challenging [2].
Different methods can be used to produce hydrolysates, i.e., chemical hydrolysis, enzymatic hydrolysis, or microbial fermentation, among which the use of proteases as reaction catalysts are more advantageous compared with chemical processes [9,13]. Protease processes are water-based and do not require chemical solvents, they operate at milder pH and temperature conditions, and they enable a higher process reproducibility and product specificity. Furthermore, it is possible to combine various types of proteases with different specificities, resulting in an increased process efficiency and reaction speed, favoring the production of a hydrolysate with a diverse peptide profile and rich in free amino acids [14,15].
Various factors can influence the efficiency of hydrolysis and the biological properties of hydrolysates, e.g., the type and specificity of the enzyme chosen, the pH, temperature, protein source composition and material properties, and others [9,16]. However, even with the optimization of these parameters, obtaining efficient protein hydrolysis to achieve health and commercial outcomes can be considered a challenge, mainly because of the compact structure of the native state of some proteins [2,17,18]. From this perspective, using high hydrostatic pressure technology (HHP) combined with hydrolysis has been shown to be an option to improve proteolytic efficiencies leading to enhanced bioactivity and positive health attributes [5].
HHP is a technology commercially implemented in several countries in the last decades for non-thermal pasteurization and shelf-life extension purposes. This technology consists of subjecting pre-packaged foods to a hydrostatic pressure ranging during a set holding time, followed by pressure release. High pressure equipment at the laboratory scale exhibits the versatility to operate from 50 to 800 MPa [19,20] for a range of pressure holding times. For current commercial applications, it is commonly employed at 300 or 600 MPa holding for up to 3–5 min, depending on the application [21].
HHP is advantageous due to its ability to cause conformational and structural changes to proteins, particularly by modulating enzymatic processes such as hydrolysis. Proteins have structures maintained by different inter- and intramolecular interactions that can be destabilized using high pressures, resulting in the unfolding of the polypeptide chain [21]. Protein unfolding favors hydrolysis in terms of molecular lysis since more cleavage sites become accessible to enzymes [5,22]. High pressure processing is also known to activate or inactivate hydrolytic enzymes, depending on the HHP and material composition conditions [23]. It has been shown that the characteristics related to the above-mentioned bioactivity of hydrolysates (e.g., antihypertensive activity, antioxidant activity) can also be improved by HHP [5,17,24].
On the other hand, the use of bioactive peptides as ingredients can be limited by the allergenicity of the native protein used to make the hydrolysate. Producing hydrolysates with a greater extent of protein breakdown is an alternative to producing hypoallergenic formulas. In some cases, hydrolytic processing has been shown to achieve the complete destruction of the allergenic epitopes responsible for promoting immunological responses [25]. Furthermore, efforts are underway to understand the effects of HHP in decreasing protein hydrolysate allergenicity [26].
The emerging potential for HHP to enable the production of health-promoting bioactive peptides and to reduce the allergenicity of the substrate makes it worthy of a literature review. The present review examines the effects of HHP on the enzymatic hydrolysis of proteins, with a particular focus on the resulting antihypertensive and antioxidant activities, as well as on the reduction in the allergenicity of protein hydrolysates made from different raw materials.

2. Effect of High Hydrostatic Pressure on Proteins

Proteins are macromolecules that have a structural organization that can be divided into primary, secondary, tertiary, and quaternary levels (Figure 1). The balance of these structures is maintained by stabilizing interactions within the protein chain, and any change that may disturb the balance of these interactions, intramolecular and intermolecular, can lead to protein denaturation [27,28].
HHP can promote different levels of protein denaturation, as it acts on protein interactions. Quaternary and tertiary structures are the most affected by the use of pressure, as they are maintained by hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions that are more sensitive to pressure [28,29]. The secondary structure, on the other hand, requires the use of higher pressures for the changes to be effective. Finally, the primary structure is not affected by HHP, as it is formed by covalent bonds [30,31].
For enzymatic hydrolysis, protein unfolding caused by HHP is the most important alteration, being a key parameter to improve the process, as it allows greater access of the enzyme to more specific cleavage points, which were previously protected inside the molecule [32]. However, the parameters used during pressurization, as well as the biochemical characteristics of the proteins, are factors that guide the intensity of denaturation, the rate of refolding after depressurization, and the time for recovery of the initial state of the protein [33].
Furthermore, the formation of molecular aggregates is another important alteration that can be induced by HHP and, contrary to unfolding, can decrease the yield of enzymatic hydrolysis. The disruption of hydrophobic bonds in the core of proteins, as a result of unfolding, causes the exposure of hydrophobic groups and sulfhydryls (-SH), which can remain free to interact and form new hydrophobic interactions and disulfide bonds between proteins [34,35]. Protein–protein interactions, in general, are observed when higher pressures are used and may reduce the number of sites available for enzyme–protein interactions and, as a consequence, may decrease the yield of the hydrolysis process [36,37,38].

3. Utilization Strategies of HHP Associated with Enzymatic Hydrolysis

HHP associated with hydrolysis can be carried out in two different ways: (i) as a preliminary protein treatment immediately before hydrolysis or (ii) simultaneously with hydrolysis, as shown in Figure 2A,B, respectively. The use of HHP as a pre-treatment consists of subjecting proteins to high pressure levels for a given pressure holding time and then performing hydrolysis at ambient pressure (0.1 MPa) (Figure 2A). However, using HHP as a pre-treatment can lead to the structural reorganization of proteins after depressurizing the system, leading to the ongoing loss of susceptibility to hydrolysis [33,39,40,41]. More effective hydrolysis has been observed when the enzyme was mixed with the pressurized protein immediately after depressurization [42].
In the simultaneous HHP hydrolysis process, both protein and enzyme are jointly pressurized (Figure 2B). In this case, the enzyme acts by breaking the protein molecules at the moment when pressure promotes the unfolding of the protein structure, which can potentiate hydrolysis since unfolding enables greater enzyme access to the substrate. A more extensive hydrolysis is therefore achieved in a shorter time compared with conventional hydrolysis at ambient pressure (Figure 2C) [32]. Furthermore, the improvement could also be related to enzyme activation since these can be affected (activated or inactivated) by pressure through changes in their conformation and/or selectivity [5,22,43]. However, enzyme stability and sensitivity to pressure and the characteristics of proteins should be considered to ensure that the enzyme is active during the treatment [44].

4. Effect of HHP on Proteolysis and on the Bioactivity and Allergenicity of Hydrolysates

4.1. Effect of HHP on Protein Hydrolysis

The degree of hydrolysis (DH) of proteins is an important parameter in monitoring the production of protein hydrolysates, as the number of peptide bonds broken in a given proteolysis reaction determines, in quantitative terms, the degree to which a protein source was hydrolyzed [45].
For the evaluated conditions, using HHP as a pre-treatment or simultaneously with hydrolysis is an efficient strategy to increase the DH. Protein unfolding induced by pre-treatment with HHP increases the efficiency of hydrolysis. However, it was observed due to the particularities that each protein can present in relation to the forces that stabilize its structure that the pressure level necessary to influence the efficiency of the process can be different among proteins. Proteins of plant origin, for example, show more expressive DH values when subjected to HHP pre-treatment using pressures close to 300 MPa than at pressures above 400 MPa [36,46,47]. The use of high pressure in plant proteins can favor protein–protein interactions, resulting in a less efficient break of the molecule due to the reduction in the number of available cleavage sites for enzymatic action [47]. On the other hand, some studies have shown that pre-treatment pressures ranging from 400 to 800 MPa favored the production of hydrolysates with a higher DH degree compared with lower pressures, as observed in studies that evaluated the hydrolysis of pre-treated proteins such as β-lactoglobulin [37,48], mushroom stalk proteins [49], and egg proteins [50,51].
In many studies cited in this review, it has been shown that HHP-assisted hydrolysis (AH) is also an efficient strategy to potentiate the catalytic reaction and significantly reduce the processing time, especially compared with the conventional process [32,41,52,53,54]. However, in hydrolysis-assisted treatments, both enzyme and protein are subjected to the same pressure level, and the enzyme’s sensitivity to pressure is a relevant factor that should be considered when evaluating process parameters since the enzyme can undergo changes that result in denaturation and, consequently, the loss of activity. In various studies, the alcalase enzyme, one of the most known in the food production area, increased the DH when subjected to pressures under 200 MPa in different food sources such as lentil proteins [55] and sweet potato protein [53,55,56,57]. On the other hand, the pressure range of 300 to 400 MPa was more efficient in producing hydrolysates from whey proteins, flaxseed protein, and sweet potato protein when the enzymes pepsin and trypsin were the promoting agents of hydrolysis [25,40,52,57].

4.2. Effect of HHP on the Antihypertensive Activity of Hydrolysates

High blood pressure is one of the main risk factors for cardiovascular disease, which is one of the most prevalent causes of death in adults [58]. The interest in alternative therapies has grown considerably in recent years, especially due to the adverse reactions that conventional treatments can offer [4]. From this perspective, protein hydrolysates prepared from different food sources have been extensively studied for potentially containing biologically active peptides that can be used to treat high blood pressure [59,60].
Peptides have antihypertensive activity through different mechanisms of action [61], as shown in Figure 3. However, the primary mechanism studied for peptides generated from food sources is inhibiting the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE). The renin–angiotensin system is an essential regulator of blood pressure. Renin, secreted by kidney cells, converts angiotensinogen into an inactive peptide, angiotensin I [62]. ACE hydrolyzes this decapeptide into angiotensin II, which has intense vasoconstrictor activity, regulating electrolyte balance and exerting a pro-inflammatory state [62,63] (Figure 3). Furthermore, ACE also acts on the kallikrein–kinin system by promoting the degradation of bradykinin, a peptide known for its vasodilating action [58]. Therefore, inhibition of ACE action is a therapeutic alternative to prevent arterial hypertension, and peptides have been extensively studied regarding their ability to inhibit these systems (Figure 3) [64,65,66].
Although there is evidence showing that HHP is suitable for increasing efficiency in hydrolytic terms, few studies have evaluated the influence of HHP on the antihypertensive activity of hydrolysates, especially compared with the production of conventional hydrolysates, as can be seen in Table 1. Despite this, studies show that the use of HHP associated with hydrolysis increases the yield of peptides with ACE-inhibitory activity and can potentiate these results, as observed in hydrolysates from sweet potato protein [57], soybean [54], common bean [34], lentil [55], peas [67], and eggs [68], as seen in Table 1.
The production of ACE-inhibitor peptides can be influenced by several variables, including the type and source of protein to be hydrolyzed, the enzyme, and its specificity. Furthermore, the parameters employed in the HHP process are also important factors, as can be seen in Table 1. Studies have shown that to obtain hydrolysates with a greater antihypertensive activity, different pressure levels may be required depending on the enzyme used (Table 1). This difference may be related to the fact that each enzyme discussed can respond differently to high pressures, depending on the levels of pressure, temperature, and substrate, showing an increase or decrease in its activity and, consequently, in the production of a functional peptide [23].
Moreover, as discussed earlier, HHP disrupts the tertiary and even secondary conformations of proteins, increasing the rate of hydrolysis and favoring the production of greater amounts of bioactive peptides [5,22]. This protein unfolding may also allow the hydrolysis process to occur more quickly [54], and with the use of a lower enzyme:substrate ratio [67], and still present a greater antihypertensive activity compared with the process that does not use HHP. In addition, HHP also contributes to the production of peptides with a lower molecular mass, which is directly correlated with the increase in ACE-inhibitory activity [69].
This has been confirmed by further studies summarized in Table 1 carried out at laboratory scale across a number of substrates, enzymes, and processing conditions. Some processing times seem long and further scaling-up work should consider reducing the processing times, according to the commercial value added to the product. Thus, in general, HHP has been shown to favor the production of hydrolysates with a greater antihypertensive activity in a shorter process time, in some cases with a lower concentration of enzymes. Further cost–benefit analysis is required to demonstrate whether these benefits translate into a scalable and more economical process that will enable commercialization.

4.3. Effect of HHP on the Antioxidant Capacity of Hydrolysates

Peptides with antioxidant capacity have received significant attention from the industry and can be incorporated into foods for conservation or improving bioactive properties [54,55,68]. They can act in different ways to inhibit oxidation, mainly through the inactivation of reactive oxygen species, free radical scavenging, chelation of pro-oxidative transition metals, and reduction of hydroperoxides [70].
Among the functionalities of peptides, the antioxidant capacity is the most studied regarding the use of HHP, as shown in Table 2. HHP shows promising applications for the production of hydrolysates with a high antioxidant capacity [53,67]. Different researchers have demonstrated that pre-treatment of proteins or HHP-assisted hydrolysis can increase the antioxidant capacity of hydrolysates (Table 2). In addition, high pressure can also influence the different mechanisms of action of hydrolysates with antioxidant activity. Girgih et al. [38] observed that a pressure of 200 MPa favored the production of hydrolysates with a greater capacity to eliminate superoxide and hydroxyl radicals, while a pressure of 400 MPa was more effective in increasing the ability to sequester the DPPH radical. The different pressure levels used on the protein before hydrolysis, or on the protein and enzymes in assisted hydrolysis, can lead to different structural changes, altering the number of available cleavage sites in the peptide chain, as well as the activity and selectivity of the enzymes, resulting in a change in the profile of generated peptides, and consequently in the mechanism of action, according to the level of pressure used [38,54,55]. This change was observed by Guan et al. [54], who reported that pre-treatment using pressures of 200 and 300 MPa favored the production of peptides not obtained in conventional hydrolysis. This difference can also be observed between the different pressure levels, since at 200 MPa some peptides were identified that were not present in the treatment at 300 MPa.
In the HHP-assisted hydrolysis process, pressure can trigger different effects depending on the enzyme used, as observed by Garcia-Mora [34], who reported that this procedure for bean protein did not increase the donating capacity of hydrogen atoms when the enzyme alcalase was used, whereas the use of savinase in a pressurized system increased the antioxidant capacity of the hydrolysates as pressure increased. On the other hand, pressure potentiated the electron donation capacity of the hydrolysates obtained when using both enzymes, resulting in the highest values for alcalase in assisted hydrolysis at 100 MPa and at 200 MPa for savinase. Similar results were found by Garcia-Mora et al. [55], in whose study the different enzymes used produced hydrolysates with improved antioxidant capacity in different pressure ranges, highlighting the importance of optimizing the time and pressure parameters to which the reaction is subjected, taking into account the enzyme used in the process.
The increased bioactivity of pressurized hydrolysates is evident, although it is still unclear how HHP influences this property. Different studies associate this phenomenon with protein unfolding or enzymatic activation, which potentiates the production of peptides in qualitative and quantitative terms, granting a greater antioxidant capacity through different mechanisms. In addition, the generation of low molecular weight peptides, associated with the release of free amino acids, may also increase the antioxidant capacity of hydrolysates [74,75], since HHP can intensify the presence of free amino acids. Vilela et al. [76] verified a greater quantity and variety of free amino acids in the pressurized hydrolysates, indicating that the pressure also favors a more intense hydrolysis and, consequently, a greater release of amino acids, which may contribute to a greater antioxidant capacity. Several amino acids present antioxidant capacity, but the majority of two reactive amino acids have side chains with a nucleophilic environment (cysteine and methionine) or aromatic side chains (tryptophan, tyrosine, and phenylalanine), which cause hydrogen abstraction [70,77]. Therefore, HHP can intensify antioxidant capacity in the presence of these free amino acids in hydrolysates, as well as influencing their specific position in the peptide sequence, or it can also contribute to their bioactivity.

4.4. Effect of HHP on the Allergenicity of Hydrolysates

Food allergy is characterized by a disordered response of the immune system to certain molecules present in food, especially proteins, known as allergens [78]. Many studies have been carried out aiming to reduce the antigenicity of food proteins through different processes that can reduce the presence of allergenic epitopes [79,80]. The epitope is the region of the protein that binds to cell receptors and antibodies. Two types of epitopes can be identified in proteins: linear epitopes, which are specific amino acid sequences located in the primary structure of proteins, and conformational epitopes, which are formed from the tertiary conformation of proteins, in which non-linear amino acid sequences become close, generating the epitope [81].
Conformational epitopes can be disrupted when changes are generated in the tertiary structure or with protein aggregation. However, linear epitopes remain intact from these changes, since the primary structure is not altered [82]. In order to reduce the presence of linear epitopes, it is necessary to use processes that cause changes in the primary protein structure, e.g., enzymatic hydrolysis, which is effective in reducing allergenicity [83]. Nevertheless, food proteins can be resistant to proteolysis, and their fragments can maintain or even increase the sensitization capacity after hydrolysis if the epitope sequence is preserved, despite partial protein hydrolysis [84]. Thus, combining HHP with enzymatic hydrolysis becomes an interesting strategy to reduce or even exempt the allergenic response to various food sources, as shown in Table 3.
Compared with conventional hydrolysis, the association of HHP with enzymatic hydrolysis has shown significant effects in reducing the allergenicity of whey proteins [87,88], in addition to studies showing that, even without hydrolysis, HHP alone can reduce the allergenic response [29].
The strategy of using HHP for protein hydrolysis can affect the immunochemical characteristics of the hydrolysates, as reported by Chicón et al. [86], in whose study the pre-treatment of β-lactoglobulin by HHP showed no difference in immunoreactivity compared with the conventional hydrolysate. However, when the hydrolysis was simultaneously conducted with the use of HHP at the pressure of 400 MPa for 20 min, the hydrolysates did not show significant IgE immune responses [39]. Additionally, in the case of using HHP as a previous treatment of proteins, pressures above 600 MPa followed by hydrolysis can also reduce the in vitro reactivity with IgE of allergic individuals [89]. Landim et al. [85] verified that pre-treatment of whey proteins at 400 MPa was important to decrease the hydrolysis time necessary to reduce 100% of the immunoreactivity of the hydrolysates produced by the Novo Pro-D enzyme, also favoring a greater reduction in the immunoreactivity of the hydrolysates obtained by the ficin enzyme compared with the hydrolysate obtained in the conventional process.
In addition, the time of hydrolysis is another important parameter. In general, the use of HHP may favor the hydrolysis of the native protein in the first minutes of the reaction. However, it may not be sufficient to reduce the immunoreactivity of hydrolysates, since the protein fragments generated at the beginning of the reaction may still contain the immunoreactive epitopes intact [90]. López-Expósito [90] reported that the immunoreactivity of ovalbumin proteins hydrolyzed under pressure decreased with increasing treatment times but still maintained a small perceptible residual binding to IgE in egg-allergic patients. Similar results were found by Chicón et al. [39,86], in whose studies whey proteins hydrolyzed at 400 MPa showed progressive antigenicity reduction with treatment time, especially in relation to non-pressurized protein hydrolyzed at ambient pressure. However, reactions against IgE were still noticeable.
HHP changes the conformation of proteins that alter conformational epitopes, potentiating enzymatic hydrolysis and, consequently, reducing the presence of linear epitopes [26,29,84]. However, even after carrying out the protein hydrolysis process, it is still necessary to evaluate the immunoreactivity to IgE of the peptides formed in order to guarantee the reduction or exemption of an allergenic response. Studies in vivo conducted by López-Expósito [91] in sensitized mice proved that β-lactoglobulin protein hydrolysates under high hydrostatic pressure (400 MPa) are immunologically inert. In a study conducted by Lozano-Ojalvo [25], whey protein hydrolysates treated at 400 MPa showed allergenic epitopes of β-lactoglobulin and α-lactalbumin. However, changes in the immune response were not perceptible in the tests performed in vivo, e.g., changes in body temperature, anaphylaxis, and signs or release of markers in mice sensitized with the allergen. The study showed that HHP can produce hypoallergenic hydrolysate in a short time, i.e., which does not promote reactions mediated by IgE and IgG.
Finally, protein unfolding induced by HHP treatment facilitates enzymatic hydrolysis, resulting in shorter peptide fragments, with between 7 and 10 amino acid residues, which may not be recognized as epitopes, leading to reduced allergenicity [48,92]. Therefore, it is possible to obtain peptides with a lower allergenic response using HHP combined with enzymatic hydrolysis, since the peptide pattern and the immunoreactivity of the hydrolysates obtained under HHP can be altered by selecting the enzyme, pressure, and time of hydrolysis [25,91].

5. Conclusions

High hydrostatic pressure, when combined with enzymatic hydrolysis, is an emerging process that shows promising results in the production of protein hydrolysates. The use of HHP, either as a pre-treatment or simultaneously with hydrolysis, is an alternative to improve the process efficiency. In general, the combination of HHP and enzymatic hydrolysis potentiates catalysis in different protein sources, in a significantly shorter process time and allowing the use of a smaller amount of enzyme in relation to the substrate compared with conventional hydrolysis carried out at ambient pressure. Furthermore, the protein hydrolysates obtained show improved properties in terms of antihypertensive activity, mainly regarding the in vitro ACE-inhibitory activity and greater in vitro antioxidant capacity. HHP is also an important technology in the production of hypoallergenic hydrolysates. However, in order to obtain optimal results, it is important to individually evaluate the processing parameters in relation to the HHP technology, e.g., the way in which it is used (pre-treatment or simultaneously with hydrolysis), the selection of the enzyme, and the process parameters (pressure level and processing time), since all these factors can significantly impact the allergenic response. In addition, most of the research that has evaluated the effect of HHP on the health-promoting properties of hydrolysates has used in vitro assays. Thus, it becomes important to use clinical trials to provide evidence that the claimed properties are actually enhanced and have in vivo effects, making protein hydrolysates ingredients with an even greater market potential for the industry that seeks to meet a niche of consumers who are increasingly concerned about the relationship between health and food.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.P.M.L., J.H.T., C.G.M., P.J. and A.R.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P.M.L., J.H.T., C.G.M., P.J. and A.R.; writing—review and editing, A.P.M.L., J.H.T., C.G.M., P.J. and A.R.; supervision, C.G.M. and A.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported the Brazilian agencies Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ, grant number E-26/110.631/2012), Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoa de Nível Superior (CAPES), and Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária (EMBRAPA).

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lafarga, T.; Hayes, M. Bioactive Protein Hydrolysates in the Functional Food Ingredient Industry: Overcoming Current Challenges. Food Rev. Int. 2017, 33, 217–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Du, Z.; Li, Y. Review and Perspective on Bioactive Peptides: A Roadmap for Research, Development, and Future Opportunities. J. Agric. Food Res. 2022, 9, 100353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Peighambardoust, S.H.; Karami, Z.; Pateiro, M.; Lorenzo, J.M. A Review on Health-Promoting, Biological, and Functional Aspects of Bioactive Peptides in Food Applications. Biomolecules 2021, 11, 631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Premkumar, J.; Malini, M.; Arun Joshy, V. A Critical Review on Food Protein Derived Antihypertensive Peptides. Drug Invent. Today 2019, 12, 474–479. [Google Scholar]
  5. Marciniak, A.; Suwal, S.; Naderi, N.; Pouliot, Y.; Doyen, A. Enhancing Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Food Proteins and Production of Bioactive Peptides Using High Hydrostatic Pressure Technology. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 80, 187–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Etemadian, Y.; Ghaemi, V.; Shaviklo, A.R.; Pourashouri, P.; Sadeghi Mahoonak, A.R.; Rafipour, F. Development of Animal/Plant-Based Protein Hydrolysate and Its Application in Food, Feed and Nutraceutical Industries: State of the Art. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 278, 123219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wen, C.; Zhang, J.; Zhang, H.; Duan, Y.; Ma, H. Plant Protein-Derived Antioxidant Peptides: Isolation, Identification, Mechanism of Action and Application in Food Systems: A Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 105, 308–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Udenigwe, C.C.; Aluko, R.E. Food Protein-Derived Bioactive Peptides: Production, Processing, and Potential Health Benefits. J. Food Sci. 2012, 77, R11–R24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Nasri, M. Protein Hydrolysates and Biopeptides: Production, Biological Activities, and Applications in Foods and Health Benefits: A Review, 1st ed.; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; Volume 81. [Google Scholar]
  10. Hernández-Ledesma, B.; García-Nebot, M.J.; Fernández-Tomé, S.; Amigo, L.; Recio, I. Dairy Protein Hydrolysates: Peptides for Health Benefits. Int. Dairy J. 2014, 38, 82–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zou, Y.; Shahidi, F.; Shi, H.; Wang, J.; Huang, Y.; Xu, W.; Wang, D. Values-Added Utilization of Protein and Hydrolysates from Animal Processing by-Product Livers: A Review. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2021, 110, 432–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Montesano, D.; Gallo, M.; Blasi, F.; Cossignani, L. Biopeptides from Vegetable Proteins: New Scientific Evidences. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2020, 31, 31–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Korhonen, H. Milk-Derived Bioactive Peptides: From Science to Applications. J. Funct. Foods 2009, 1, 177–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Abd El-Salam, M.H.; El-Shibiny, S. Preparation, Properties, and Uses of Enzymatic Milk Protein Hydrolysates. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 57, 1119–1132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Lindberg, D.; Kristoffersen, K.A.; Wubshet, S.G.; Hunnes, L.M.G.; Dalsnes, M.; Dankel, K.R.; Høst, V.; Afseth, N.K. Exploring Effects of Protease Choice and Protease Combinations in Enzymatic Protein Hydrolysis of Poultry By-Products. Molecules 2021, 26, 5280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Cheison, S.C.; Kulozik, U. Impact of the Environmental Conditions and Substrate Pre-Treatment on Whey Protein Hydrolysis: A Review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2017, 57, 418–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Abadía-García, L.; Castaño-tostado, E.; Ozimek, L.; Romero-gómez, S.; Ozuna, C.; Amaya-llano, S.L. Impact of Ultrasound Pretreatment on Whey Protein Hydrolysis by Vegetable Proteases. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2016, 37, 84–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Tavares, T.G.; Amorim, M.; Gomes, D.; Pintado, M.E.; Pereira, C.D.; Malcata, F.X. Manufacture of Bioactive Peptide-Rich Concentrates from Whey: Characterization of Pilot Process. J. Food Eng. 2012, 110, 547–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pottier, L.; Villamonte, G.; de Lamballerie, M. Applications of High Pressure for Healthier Foods. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2017, 16, 21–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yamamoto, K. Food Processing by High Hydrostatic Pressure. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2017, 81, 672–679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Aganovic, K.; Hertel, C.; Vogel, R.F.; Johne, R.; Schlüter, O.; Schwarzenbolz, U.; Jäger, H.; Holzhauser, T.; Bergmair, J.; Roth, A.; et al. Aspects of High Hydrostatic Pressure Food Processing: Perspectives on Technology and Food Safety. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2021, 20, 3225–3266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Mozhaev, V.V.; Heremans, K.; Frank, J.; Masson, P.; Balny, C. High Pressure Effects on Protein Structure and Function. Proteins Struct. Funct. Genet. 1996, 24, 81–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Eisenmenger, M.J.; Reyes-De-Corcuera, J.I. High Pressure Enhancement of Enzymes: A Review. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 2009, 45, 331–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Yadav, J.S.S.; Yan, S.; Pilli, S.; Kumar, L.; Tyagi, R.D.; Surampalli, R.Y. Cheese Whey: A Potential Resource to Transform into Bioprotein, Functional/ Nutritional Proteins and Bioactive Peptides. Biotechnol. Adv. 2015, 33, 756–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lozano-Ojalvo, D.; Pérez-Rodríguez, L.; Pablos-Tanarro, A.; López-Fandiño, R.; Molina, E. Pepsin Treatment of Whey Proteins under High Pressure Produces Hypoallergenic Hydrolysates. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2017, 43, 154–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhang, Y.; Ren, Y.; Bi, Y.; Wang, Q.; Cheng, K.W.; Chen, F. Review: Seafood Allergy and Potential Application of High Hydrostatic Pressure to Reduce Seafood Allergenicity. Int. J. Food Eng. 2019, 15, 20180392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hendrickx, M.; Ludikhuyze, L.; van den Broeck, I.; Weemaes, C. Efects of High Pressure on Enzymes Related to Food Quality. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 1998, 9, 197–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Lullien-Pellerin, V.; Balny, C. High-Pressure as a Tool to Study Some Proteins’ Properties: Conformational Modification, Activity and Oligometric Dissociation. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2002, 3, 209–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Meng, X.; Bai, Y.; Gao, J.; Li, X.; Chen, H. Effects of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Structure and Potential Allergenicity of the Major Allergen Bovine B-Lactoglobulin. Food Chem. 2017, 219, 290–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Goyal, A.; Sharma, V.; Upadhyay, N.; Sihag, M.; Kaushik, R. High Pressure Processing and Its Impact on Milk Proteins: A Review. J. Dairy Sci. Technol. 2013, 2, 2319–3409. [Google Scholar]
  31. Yang, J.; Powers, J.R. Effects of High Pressure on Food Proteins. In High Pressure Processing of Food; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 353–389. ISBN 9781493932344. [Google Scholar]
  32. Landim, A.P.M.; Chávez, D.W.H.; da Rosa, J.S.; Mellinger-Silva, C.; Rosenthal, A. Effect of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Antioxidant Capacity and Peptic Hydrolysis of Whey Proteins. Ciênc. Rural. 2021, 51, e20200560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Carullo, D.; Barbosa-Cánovas, G.V.; Ferrari, G. Changes of Structural and Techno-Functional Properties of High Hydrostatic Pressure (HHP) Treated Whey Protein Isolate over Refrigerated Storage. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 137, 110436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Garcia-Mora, P.; Peñas, E.; Frias, J.; Zieliński, H.; Wiczkowski, W.; Zielińska, D.; Martínez-Villaluenga, C. High-Pressure-Assisted Enzymatic Release of Peptides and Phenolics Increases Angiotensin Converting Enzyme i Inhibitory and Antioxidant Activities of Pinto Bean Hydrolysates. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2016, 64, 1730–1740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Yin, S.W.; Tang, C.H.; Wen, Q.B.; Yang, X.Q.; Li, L. Functional Properties and in Vitro Trypsin Digestibility of Red Kidney Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Protein Isolate: Effect of High-Pressure Treatment. Food Chem. 2008, 110, 938–945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Al-Ruwaih, N.; Ahmed, J.; Mulla, M.F.; Arfat, Y.A. High-Pressure Assisted Enzymatic Proteolysis of Kidney Beans Protein Isolates and Characterization of Hydrolysates by Functional, Structural, Rheological and Antioxidant Properties. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 100, 231–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Boukil, A.; Suwal, S.; Chamberland, J.; Pouliot, Y.; Doyen, A. Ultrafiltration Performance and Recovery of Bioactive Peptides after Fractionation of Tryptic Hydrolysate Generated from Pressure-Treated Β-Lactoglobulin. J. Memb. Sci. 2018, 556, 42–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Girgih, A.T.; Chao, D.; Lin, L.; He, R.; Jung, S.; Aluko, R.E. Enzymatic Protein Hydrolysates from High Pressure-Pretreated Isolated Pea Proteins Have Better Antioxidant Properties than Similar Hydrolysates Produced from Heat Pretreatment. Food Chem. 2015, 188, 510–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chicón, R.; Belloque, J.; Alonso, E.; López-Fandiño, R. Food Hydrocolloids Antibody Binding and Functional Properties of Whey Protein Hydrolysates Obtained under High Pressure. Food Hydrocoll. 2009, 23, 593–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Belloque, J.; Chicón, R.; López-Fendiño, R. Unfolding and Refolding of B-Lactoglobulin Subjected to High Hydrostatic Pressure at Different PH Values and Temperatures and Its Influence on Proteolysis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 5282–5288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ambrosi, V.; Polenta, G.; Gonzalez, C.; Ferrari, G.; Maresca, P. High Hydrostatic Pressure Assisted Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Whey Proteins. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2016, 38, 294–301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Blayo, C.; Vidcoq, O.; Lazennec, F.; Dumay, E. Effects of High Pressure Processing (Hydrostatic High Pressure and Ultra-High Pressure Homogenisation) on Whey Protein Native State and Susceptibility to Tryptic Hydrolysis at Atmospheric Pressure. Food Res. Int. 2016, 79, 40–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Mozhaev, V.V.; Heremans, K.; Frank, J.; Masson, P.; Balny, C. Exploiting the Effects of High Hydrostatic Pressure in Biotechnological Applications. Trends Biotechnol. 1994, 12, 493–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Landim, A.P.M. Aplicação de Alta Pressão Hidrostática Para Melhoria Do Processo de Hidrólise Das Proteínas Do Soro de Leite Utilizando Diferentes Proteases; Tese, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro: Seropedica, Brazil, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  45. Rutherfurd, S.M. Methodology for Determining Degree of Hydrolysis of Proteins in Hydrolysates: A Review. J. AOAC Int. 2010, 93, 1515–1522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Ahmed, J.; Mulla, M.; Al-Ruwaih, N.; Arfat, Y.A. Effect of High-pressure Treatment Prior to Enzymatic Hydrolysis on Rheological, Thermal, and Antioxidant Properties of Lentil Protein Isolate. Legume Sci. 2019, 1, e10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Perreault, V.; Hénaux, L.; Bazinet, L.; Doyen, A. Pretreatment of Flaxseed Protein Isolate by High Hydrostatic Pressure: Impacts on Protein Structure, Enzymatic Hydrolysis and Final Hydrolysate Antioxidant Capacities. Food Chem. 2017, 221, 1805–1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Zeece, M.; Huppertz, T.; Kelly, A. Effect of High-Pressure Treatment on in-Vitro Digestibility of β-Lactoglobulin. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2008, 9, 62–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Zhao, R.J.; Huo, C.Y.; Qian, Y.; Ren, D.F.; Lu, J. Ultra-High-Pressure Processing Improves Proteolysis and Release of Bioactive Peptides with Activation Activities on Alcohol Metabolic Enzymes in Vitro from Mushroom Foot Protein. Food Chem. 2017, 231, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Singh, A.; Ramaswamy, H.S. Effect of High-Pressure Treatment on Trypsin Hydrolysis and Antioxidant Activity of Egg White Proteins. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2014, 49, 269–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Hoppe, A.; Jung, S.; Patnaik, A.; Zeece, M.G. Effect of High Pressure Treatment on Egg White Protein Digestibility and Peptide Products. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2013, 17, 54–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Franck, M.; Perreault, V.; Suwal, S.; Marciniak, A.; Bazinet, L.; Doyen, A. High Hydrostatic Pressure-Assisted Enzymatic Hydrolysis Improved Protein Digestion of Flaxseed Protein Isolate and Generation of Peptides with Antioxidant Activity. Food Res. Int. 2019, 115, 467–473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Zhang, M.; Mu, T.H. Identification and Characterization of Antioxidant Peptides from Sweet Potato Protein Hydrolysates by Alcalase under High Hydrostatic Pressure. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2017, 43, 92–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Guan, H.; Diao, X.; Jiang, F.; Han, J.; Kong, B. The Enzymatic Hydrolysis of Soy Protein Isolate by Corolase PP under High Hydrostatic Pressure and Its Effect on Bioactivity and Characteristics of Hydrolysates. Food Chem. 2018, 245, 89–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Garcia-Mora, P.; Peñas, E.; Gomez, R.; Martinez-Villaluenga, C. High-Pressure Improves Enzymatic Proteolysis and the Release of Peptides with Angiotensin I Converting Enzyme Inhibitory and Antioxidant Activities from Lentil Proteins. Food Chem. 2015, 171, 224–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Sun, M.; Mu, T.; Sun, H.; Zhang, M. Digestibility and Structural Properties of Thermal and High Hydrostatic Pressure Treated Sweet Potato (Ipomoea batatas L.) Protein. Plant Foods Hum. Nutr. 2014, 69, 270–275. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Nazir, M.A.; Mu, T.H.; Zhang, M. Preparation and Identification of Angiotensin I-Converting Enzyme Inhibitory Peptides from Sweet Potato Protein by Enzymatic Hydrolysis under High Hydrostatic Pressure. Int. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 55, 482–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Gomes, C.; Ferreira, D.; Carvalho, J.P.F.; Barreto, C.A.V.; Fernandes, J.; Gouveia, M.; Ribeiro, F.; Duque, A.S.; Vieira, S.I. Current Genetic Engineering Strategies for the Production of Antihypertensive ACEI Peptides. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2020, 117, 2610–2628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Morales-Camacho, J.I.; Espinosa-Hernández, E.; Rosas-Cárdenas, F.F.; Semería-Maitret, T.; Luna-Suárez, S. Insertions of Antihypertensive Peptides and Their Applications in Pharmacy and Functional Foods. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2019, 103, 2493–2505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhou, H.; Wang, C.; Ye, J.; Tao, R.; Chen, H.; Cao, F. Effects of Enzymatic Hydrolysis Assisted by High Hydrostatic Pressure Processing on the Hydrolysis and Allergenicity of Proteins from Ginkgo Seeds. Food Bioproc. Technol. 2016, 9, 839–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Udenigwe, C.C.; Mohan, A. Mechanisms of Food Protein-Derived Antihypertensive Peptides Other than ACE Inhibition. J. Funct. Foods 2014, 8, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Majumder, K.; Wu, J. Molecular Targets of Antihypertensive Peptides: Understanding the Mechanisms of Action Based on the Pathophysiology of Hypertension. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 256–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kobori, H.; Nangaku, M.; Navar, L.G.; Nishiyama, A. Intratubular Renin-Angiotensin System: From Physiology to the Pahobiology of Hypertension and Kidney Disease. Pharmacol. Rev. 2007, 59, 251–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Norris, R.; FitzGerald, R.J. Antihypertensive Peptides from Food Proteins: A Review. In Bioactive Food Peptides in Health and Disease Released; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2013; Volume 3, pp. 350–361. [Google Scholar]
  65. Mora, L.; Gallego, M.; Toldrá, F. ACEI-Inhibitory Peptides Naturally Generated in Meat and Meat Products and Their Health Relevance. Nutrients 2018, 10, 1259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Gallego, M.; Mora, L.; Toldrá, F. Health Relevance of Antihypertensive Peptides in Foods. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2018, 19, 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Chao, D.; He, R.; Jung, S.; Aluko, R.E. Effect of Pressure or Temperature Pretreatment of Isolated Pea Protein on Properties of the Enzymatic Hydrolysates. Food Res. Int. 2013, 54, 1528–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Quirós, A.; Chichón, R.; Recio, I.; López-Fendiño, R. The Use of High Hydrostatic Pressure to Promote the Proteolysis and Release of Bioactive Peptides from Ovalbumin. Food Chem. 2007, 104, 1734–1739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Aluko, R.E. Structure and Function of Plant Protein-Derived Antihypertensive Peptides. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 2015, 4, 44–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Elias, R.J.; Kellerby, S.S.; Decker, E.A. Antioxidant Activity of Proteins and Peptides. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 2008, 48, 430–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Yoo, H.; Bamdad, F.; Gujral, N.; Suh, J.-W.; Sunwoo, H. High Hydrostatic Pressure-Assisted Enzymatic Treatment Improves Antioxidant and Anti-Inflammatory Properties of Phosvitin. Curr. Pharm. Biotechnol. 2017, 18, 158–167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Piccolomini, A.F.; Iskandar, M.M.; Lands, L.C.; Kubow, S. High Hydrostatic Pressure Pre-Treatment of They Proteins Enhances Whey Protein Hydrolysate Inhibition of Oxidative Stress and IL-8 Secretion in Intestinal Epithelial Cells. Food Nutr. Res. 2012, 56, 63–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhang, T.; Jiang, B.; Miao, M.; Mu, W.; Li, Y. Combined Effects of High-Pressure and Enzymatic Treatments on the Hydrolysis of Chickpea Protein Isolates and Antioxidant Activity of the Hydrolysates. Food Chem. 2012, 135, 904–912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Iskandar, M.M.; Landis, L.C.; Sabally, K.; Azadi, B.; Meehan, B.; Mawji, N.; Skinner, C.D.; Kubow, S. High Hydrostatic Pressure Pretreatment of Whey Protein Isolates Improves Their Digestibility and Antioxidant Capacity. Foods 2015, 4, 184–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Corrochano, A.R.; Buckin, V.; Kelly, P.M.; Giblin, L. Invited Review: Whey Proteins as Antioxidants and Promoters of Cellular Antioxidant Pathways. J. Dairy Sci. 2018, 101, 4747–4761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Vilela, R.M.; Lands, L.C.; Chan, H.M.; Azadi, B.; Kubow, S. High Hydrostatic Pressure Enhances Whey Protein Digestibility to Generate Whey Peptides That Improve Glutathione Status in CFTR-Deficient Lung Epithelial Cells. Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2006, 50, 1013–1029. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Power-Grant, O.; McCormack, W.G.; Ramia De Cap, M.; Amigo-Benavent, M.; Fitzgerald, R.J.; Jakeman, P. Evaluation of the Antioxidant Capacity of a Milk Protein Matrix in Vitro and in Vivo in Women Aged 50-70 Years. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 2016, 67, 325–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Somkuti, J.; Smeller, L. High Pressure Effects on Allergen Food Proteins. Biophys. Chem. 2013, 183, 19–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Chizoba Ekezie, F.G.; Cheng, J.H.; Sun, D.W. Effects of Nonthermal Food Processing Technologies on Food Allergens: A Review of Recent Research Advances. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2018, 74, 12–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Villa, C.; Costa, J.; Oliveira, M.B.P.P.; Mafra, I. Bovine Milk Allergens: A Comprehensive Review. Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2018, 17, 137–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Abd El-Salam, M.H.; El-Shibiny, S. Reduction of Milk Protein Antigenicity by Enzymatic Hydrolysis and Fermentation. A Review. Food Rev. Int. 2019, 37, 276–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Rahaman, T.; Vasiljevic, T.; Ramchandran, L. Effect of Processing on Conformational Changes of Food Proteins Related to Allergenicity. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2016, 49, 24–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kasera, R.; Singh, A.B.; Lavasa, S.; Prasad, K.N.; Arora, N. Enzymatic Hydrolysis: A Method in Alleviating Legume Allergenicity. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2015, 76, 54–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Meinlschmidt, P.; Brode, V.; Sevenich, R.; Ueberham, E.; Schweiggert-Weisz, U.; Lehmann, J.; Rauh, C.; Knorr, D.; Eisner, P. High Pressure Processing Assisted Enzymatic Hydrolysis—An Innovative Approach for the Reduction of Soy Immunoreactivity. Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. 2017, 40, 58–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Landim, A.P.M.; Matsubara, N.K.; da Silva-Santos, J.E.; Mellinger-Silva, C.; Rosenthal, A. Application of Preliminary High-Pressure Processing for Improving Bioactive Characteristics and Reducing Antigenicity of Whey Protein Hydrolysates. Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2021, 28, 489–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Chicón, R.; López-Fandiño, R.; Alonso, E.; Belloque, J. Proteolytic Pattern, Antigenicity, and Serum Immunoglobulin e Binding of β-Lactoglobulin Hydrolysates Obtained by Pepsin and High-Pressure Treatments. J. Dairy Sci. 2008, 91, 928–938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  87. Peñas, E.; Snel, H.; Floris, R.; Préstamo, G.; Gomez, R. High Pressure Can Reduce the Antigenicity of Bovine Whey Protein Hydrolysates. Int. Dairy J. 2006, 16, 969–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Peñas, E.; Restani, P.; Ballabio, C.; Préstamo, G.; Fiocchi, A.; Gómez, R. Assessment of the Residual Immunoreactivity of Soybean Whey Hydrolysates Obtained by Combined Enzymatic Proteolysis and High Pressure. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2006, 222, 286–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Bonomi, F.; Fiocchi, A.; Frøkiær, H.; Gaiaschi, A.; Iametti, S.; Poiesi, C.; Rasmussen, P.; Restani, P.; Rovere, P. Reduction of Immunoreactivity of Bovine β-Lactoglobulin upon Combined Physical and Proteolytic Treatment. J. Dairy Res. 2003, 70, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. López-Expósito, I.; Chicón, R.; Belloque, J.; Recio, I.; Alonso, E.; López-Fandiño, R. Changes in the Ovalbumin Proteolysis Profile by High Pressure and Its Effect on IgG and IgE Binding. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56, 11809–11816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. López-Expósito, I.; Chicón, R.; Belloque, J.; López-Fandiño, R.; Berin, M.C. In Vivo Methods for Testing Allergenicity Show That High Hydrostatic Pressure Hydrolysates of β-Lactoglobulin Are Immunologically Inert. J. Dairy Sci. 2012, 95, 541–548. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Bøgh, K.L.; Barkholt, V.; Madsen, C.B. Characterization of the Immunogenicity and Allergenicity of Two Cow’s Milk Hydrolysates—A Study in Brown Norway Rats. Scand. J. Immunol. 2015, 81, 274–283. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Foods 12 00630 g001 550
Figure 1. Different structural levels of proteins and the effect of high hydrostatic pressure on the structure and conformation of proteins.
Figure 1. Different structural levels of proteins and the effect of high hydrostatic pressure on the structure and conformation of proteins.
Foods 12 00630 g001
Foods 12 00630 g002 550
Figure 2. Strategies of HHP application to improve enzymatic hydrolysis. (A) Protein pre-treatment followed by enzymatic hydrolysis (pre-treatment—PT); (B) HHP treatment simultaneously with enzymatic hydrolysis (assisted hydrolysis—AH); and (C) conventional hydrolysis at an ambient temperature.
Figure 2. Strategies of HHP application to improve enzymatic hydrolysis. (A) Protein pre-treatment followed by enzymatic hydrolysis (pre-treatment—PT); (B) HHP treatment simultaneously with enzymatic hydrolysis (assisted hydrolysis—AH); and (C) conventional hydrolysis at an ambient temperature.
Foods 12 00630 g002
Foods 12 00630 g003 550
Figure 3. Mechanisms of action of antihypertensive peptides (A); regulation of blood pressure by the renin–angiotensin (B) and kallikrein–kinin (C) systems.
Figure 3. Mechanisms of action of antihypertensive peptides (A); regulation of blood pressure by the renin–angiotensin (B) and kallikrein–kinin (C) systems.
Foods 12 00630 g003
Table
Table 1. Influence of HHP on the production of hydrolysates with antihypertensive activity.
Table 1. Influence of HHP on the production of hydrolysates with antihypertensive activity.
Source HHP Parameter (Pressure/Time)EnzymeMain ResultsReference
Sweet potato 100, 200, and 300 MPa/60 min (AH)Papain, Pepsin, and AlcalasePressure increased the ACE-inhibitory activity in all treatments. However, for the papain and alcalase hydrolysates, the maximum inhibitory activity was obtained with pressures lower than 200 MPa and below 300 MPa for pepsin.[57]
Soybean 80, 100, 120, 200, and 300 MPa/1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 h (AH)Colorase PP®The hydrolysates obtained under high pressure showed a higher ACE-inhibitory activity than conventional hydrolysis. The treatment at 200 MPa for 5 h resulted in the greatest inhibition.[54]
Common bean 100 and 200 MPa/15 min (AH)Alcalase and SavinaseHHP-assisted hydrolysis increased the ACE-inhibitory activity at 100 and 200 MPa for alcalase and at 200 MPa for savinase, in addition to reducing the hydrolysis time.[34]
Lentil 100, 200, 300, and 400 and 500 MPa/15 min (AH)Alcalase, Savinase, Promatex, and Colorase PP®The treatment had no effect on the hydrolysate obtained from alcalase. The pressure of 200 MPa for promatex and 300 MPa for colorase and savinase resulted in hydrolysates with a higher ACE-inhibitory activity.[55]
Peas 200, 400, and 600 MPa/5 min (PT)AlcalasePre-treatment at 600 MPa favored an increase in peptides with ACE-inhibitory capacity, even when using low enzyme concentrations.[67]
Eggs 100–400 MPa/5, 10 and 20 min (AH)
100–400 MPa/20 min (PT)		Pepsin, Chymotrypsin, and TrypsinHigh pressure hydrolysis accelerated the process and increased the release of peptides identified with ACE-inhibitory activity.[68]
PT—pre-treatment; AH—assisted hydrolysis; ACE—angiotensin-converting enzyme.
Table
Table 2. Influence of HHP on the production of hydrolysates with antioxidant capacity.
Table 2. Influence of HHP on the production of hydrolysates with antioxidant capacity.
SourceHHP Parameter (Pressure/Time)AssayEnzymeMain ResultsReference
Whey100, 250, 400 MPa/5, 20, and 35 min (AH and PT)ORAC and ABTSPepsinPT resulted in hydrolysates with a higher antioxidant capacity than conventional treatment.[32]
Lentil300, 400, and 600 MPa/15 min (PT)DPPHAlcalasePT at 300 MPa/15 min increased the hydrolysate’s ability to reduce the DPPH radical.[46]
Common bean300, 400, and 600 MPa/15 min (PT)DPPHAlcalasePT at 300 MPa produced hydrolysates with a greater antioxidant capacity.[36]
Soybean80, 100, 120, 200, and 300 MPa/1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 hABTS
Reducing power		Colorase PP®The treatment with 200 MPa/5 h resulted in a hydrolysate capable of reducing the ABTS radical by 62%.[54]
Flaxseed100 and 300 MPa/5 and 10 min (AH)ORACTrypsinPressure and time were important factors in increasing bioactivity, with treatment at 300 MPa/10 min increasing the antioxidant capacity by 20%.[52]
Phosvitin50 and 100 MPa/6, 12, and 24 h (AH)DPPH,
FRAP,
SRSA, and MCA		Alcalase, trypsinHHP improved the ability to reduce the DPPH radical, the superoxide radical scavenging, and the iron reduction capacity of the alcalase hydrolysate. The iron chelation capacity was improved for alcalase and trypsin.[71]
β-lactoglobulin100, 200, 300, and 400 and 500 MPa/15 min (AH)ORACAlcalase, Savinase, Promatex, and coloraseHHP improved the antioxidant capacity of the hydrolysates.[72]
Flaxseed600 MPa/5, 10, and 20 min
(PT)		ORACTrypsin and
trypsin-pronase		PT at 600 MPa/20 min resulted in the greatest increase in the antioxidant activity of the hydrolysates.[47]
Sweet potato100, 200, and 300 MPa/
30 and 60 min (AH)		ORACAlcalaseThe hydrolysate obtained in the HHP-assisted hydrolysis using 300 MPa/20 min resulted in the highest antioxidant capacity.[7]
Common bean100 and 200 MPa/15 min (AH)ORAC, FRAP,
ABTS		Alcalase and SavinaseThe highest ORAC and ABTS values of the hydrolysates were observed in the treatments at 200 MPa for savinase and 100 MPa for alcalase. HHP had no influence on the ability of the hydrolysates to reduce iron for both enzymes.[34]
Lentil100, 200, 300, 400, and
500 MPa/15 min (AH)		ORACAlcalase,
Savinase, Promatex.
Colorase		Treatment at 100 MPa produced hydrolysates with a higher antioxidant capacity from alcalase, and 300 MPa exhibited greater effects for savinase and colorase.[55]
Peas200, 400, 600 MPa/5
min (PT)		ORAC, DPPH, FRAP, MCA, SRSAAlcalaseImproved DPPH scavenging capacity at 400 MPa. Improved ORAC activity at 400 and 600 MPa.[38]
Chickpea100, 200, 300, 400,
500, and 600 MPa (PT); 100,
200, 300 MPa (AH)		SRSA, FRAPAlcalasePT 300 and 400 MPa and assisted hydrolysis at 200 MPa/30 min were more effective in increasing the antioxidant capacity of hydrolysates.[73]
PT—pre-treatment; AH—assisted hydrolysis; MCA—metal chelating activity; SRSA—superoxide radical scavenging activity; ORAC—oxygen radical absorbance capacity; FRAP—ferric reducing antioxidant power; DPPH—DPPH radical method; ABTS—ABTS radical method.
Table
Table 3. Influence of HHP on the production of hydrolysates with reduced allergenicity.
Table 3. Influence of HHP on the production of hydrolysates with reduced allergenicity.
SourceHHP Parameter (Pressure/Time)EnzymeMain ResultsReference
Whey100, 250, 400 MPa/5, 20, and 35 min (PT)Novo Pro-D and FicinPT contributes to reducing the antigenicity of the hydrolysates obtained by ficin and reduced the hydrolysis time from 60 min to 15 min necessary to achieve a complete reduction in immunoreactivity.[85]
Whey400 MPa/30 min (AH)PepsinMaximum hydrolysis with peptides ranging from 10 to 3 kDa (50%), with a reduction in intact allergens and no induction of clinical signs in sensitized mice.[25]
β-lactoglobulin100, 200, 300, and 400 MPa/120 min (PT and AH)PepsinPT did not influence the immunoreactivity of hydrolysates. Assisted hydrolysis progressively reduced antigenicity with increasing incubation times and pressures.[86]
Whey200 and 400 MPa/10, 30, and 60 min (AH)Pepsin and ChymotrypsinHHP favored a reduction in b-LG immunoreactivity with the use of the pepsin enzyme, which was progressive with the incubation time and increasing pressure (400 MPa/30 min).[39]
Whey100 and 200 MPa/min (PT and AH)Alcalase, Neutrase, Colorase 7089, and Colocarase PN-LThe treatment influenced the reduction in antigenicity only in the hydrolysate obtained from the enzyme Colorase PN-L at 300 MPa.[87]
Soybean100,200, and 300 MPa/15 min (AH)Alcalase, Neutrase, and ColoraseThe treatment using the pressure of 300 MPa contributed to reducing the immunoreactivity of the hydrolysates obtained from Colorase.[88]
β-lactoglobulin600 MPa/10 min (PT)Trypsin and ChymotrypsinDecreased immunoreactivity after combination treatment, which was greater when chymotrypsin was used.[89]
PT—pre-treatment; AH—assisted hydrolysis.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Landim, A.P.M.; Tiburski, J.H.; Mellinger, C.G.; Juliano, P.; Rosenthal, A. Potential Application of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Production of Hydrolyzed Proteins with Antioxidant and Antihypertensive Properties and Low Allergenicity: A Review. Foods 2023, 12, 630. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030630

AMA Style

Landim APM, Tiburski JH, Mellinger CG, Juliano P, Rosenthal A. Potential Application of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Production of Hydrolyzed Proteins with Antioxidant and Antihypertensive Properties and Low Allergenicity: A Review. Foods. 2023; 12(3):630. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030630

Chicago/Turabian Style

Landim, Ana Paula Miguel, Julia Hauck Tiburski, Caroline Grassi Mellinger, Pablo Juliano, and Amauri Rosenthal. 2023. "Potential Application of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Production of Hydrolyzed Proteins with Antioxidant and Antihypertensive Properties and Low Allergenicity: A Review" Foods 12, no. 3: 630. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030630

APA Style

Landim, A. P. M., Tiburski, J. H., Mellinger, C. G., Juliano, P., & Rosenthal, A. (2023). Potential Application of High Hydrostatic Pressure on the Production of Hydrolyzed Proteins with Antioxidant and Antihypertensive Properties and Low Allergenicity: A Review. Foods, 12(3), 630. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods12030630

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop