Nofre-Tinti E1 and E4 Sweetener Subsites Activity on High Sweetness of Chlorodeoxy Derivatives of Sucrose and Galactosucrose

• Autorzy: Pietrzycki W.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

PM3 quantum chemical population analysis in the ground state was performed for sucrose and galactosucrose, their 8 chlorodeoxy derivatives and threonine as a moiety of sweet taste receptor. QSAR (Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship) studies on RSj relative sweetness of these sugars is carried out based on calculated quantum chemical parameters derived from independent particle model. It excellently explains very high sweetness of 1_,4,6_-trichloro-1_,4,6_-trideoxy-galactosucrose (RSj = 2000), 1_,4,6,6_-tetrachloro-1_,4,6,6_-tetradeoxy-galactosucrose (RSj =1000) and other chlorosugars. Presented QSAR analysis brings rather a limited contribution of the G4(1_-CH2) and G1(6_-CH2) dispersion fructofuranose subsites to Nofre-Tinti sweetener and reveals a great activity of E4(Cl-1_) and E1(Cl-6_) charge-transfer fructofuranose subsites in this sweetener. The latter subsites have a character of strong n-electron donors. According to Brand and Feigin, such a property may result in substantial increase of probability of a stimulus-gated ion channel transduction scheme for sweet taste.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

E1 and E4 sweetener activity in chlorodeoxy sucrose derivatives; E1 and E4 sweetener activity in chlorodeoxy galactosucrose derivatives; QSAR computational model of Nofre-Tinti theory on sugar's high sweetness

• Wydawca: Polskie Towarzystwo Chemiczne
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Chemistry
• Rocznik: 2002
• Tom: Vol. 76 / nr 6
• Strony: 875--889

Twórcy

autor

Pietrzycki W.

• Department of Chemistry, University of Agriculture, 31-120 Kraków, Mickiewicz Avenue 21, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Krutošikova A. and Uher M., Natural and Synthetic Sweet Taste Substances, (in Polish), PWN, Warszawa, 1990.
• 2. Shallenberger R.S., Food Technology, 52, 72 (1998).
• 3. Shallenberger R.S., J. Food Sci., 28, 584 (1963).
• 4. Shallenberger R.S., Agr. Sci. Rev., 2, 11 (1964).
• 5. Holtje H.D. and Kier L.B., J. Pharm. Sci., 63, 1722 (1974). Nofre-Tinti Et andE4 sweetener subsites activity..
• 6. Kier L.B., J. Pharm. Sci., 61, 1394 (1972).
• 7. Ruffolo R.R., Jr., Nichols A.J., Stadel J.M. and Hieble J.R, Pharmacol. Rev., 43, 475 (1991).
• 8. Nowak Z. and Zawilska B., Receptors. Structure, Characteristic, Functions, (in Polish), PWN, Warszawa, 1977.
• 9. Zejc A. and Gorczyca M., Medicine Chemistry, (in Polish), PZWL, Warszawa 1999; p. 41.
• 10. Streim B.J., Pace U., Zehavi U., Naim M. and Lancet D., Biochem. J., 260, 121 (1989).
• 11. Naim M., Ronen T., Streim B.J., Levinson M. and Zehavi U., Comp. Biochem. Physiol 100B 455 (1991).
• 12. Bernhardt S.J., Naim M., Zehavi U. and Lindemann B., J. Physiol., 490, 325 (1996).
• 13. Noire C. and Tinti J.M., Food Chem., 56, 263 (1996).
• 14. Pietrzycki W., Polish J. Chem., 10, 1569(2001).
• 15. Jeffrey G.A., Food Chem., 56, 241 (1996).
• 16. Streim B.J., Naim J. and Lindemann B., Cell. Physiol. Biochem., 1, 46 (1991).
• 17. Allinger N.L., J. Am. Chem. Soc., 99, 8127 (1977).
• 18. Stewart J.J.P., J. Comput. Chem., 10,209,221 (1989); Hypercube, Inc., 419 Philip Street, Waterloo, On¬tario N2L 3X2, Canada.
• 19. Pietrzycki W., Acta Phys. Polon., A76, 421 (1989).
• 20. Sokalski A. and Chojnacki H., Int. J. Quant. Chem., 13, 679 (1978).
• 21. Pietrzycki W., Polish J. Chem., 74, 89 (2000).
• 22. Czermiński J.B., Iwasiewicz A., Paszek Z. and Sikorski A., Statistical Methods for Chemists, (in Pol¬ish), PWN, Warszawa 1992; p. 259-261.
• 23. Hough L. and Phadnis S.P., Nature, 263, 800 (1976).
• 24. Hough L. and Khan R., Trends in Biochem. Sei., 3, 61 (1978).
• 25. Khan R., in Sugar Science and Technology, Appl. Sei. Publ., London 1979; p. 181.
• 26. Brand J.G. and Feigin A.M., Food Chem., 56, 199(1996).