English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This study was aimed to prepare oleogels of whale spermaceti wax (WsWO) and lanolin wax (LnWO), and to compare them with well-known animal wax oleogels of shellac (ShWO) and beeswax (BsWO). WsWO, ShWO and BsWO were prepared at 5% (w/w) organogelator addition level, while LnWO was necessarily prepared at its minimum gelling concentration (C*) of 30% (w/w) addition level. All oleogels were posed high oil binding capacity and thermal reversibility. Melting peak temperatures were ordered as ShWO &gt; BsWO &gt; WsWO &gt; LnWO by calorimetry. X-ray diffraction patterns indicated the presence of both β´and β type polymorphs, together with needle-like crystal morphology. Rheological analyses indicated that the stiffness of the gels were ordered as BsWO &gt; WsWO &gt; LnWO &gt; ShWO. All showed good thixotropy, and thermal stability until 40°C (ShWO until 80°C). Finally, the sensory descriptive analysis indicated that LnWO had distinct negative sheep odor, but WsWO was quite similar to BsWO. Overall, LnWO determined to be not proper for food applications, but WsWO was shown to be a suitable oleogel for food applications.

Structure, Rheological and Sensory Properties of Some Animal Wax Based Oleogels