Measurement of Digestibility of Alfalfa Protein Concentrates by in vivo and in vitro Methods

Saunders, Robert M.; Connor, Margaret A.; Booth, A. N.; Bickoff, E. M.; Kohler, G. O.

doi:10.1093/jn/103.4.530

Cited by 223 publications

(110 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Saunders et al (1973), in their in-vitro digestibility of protein studies using pepsin, pepsin-pancreatin and pepsin trypsin methods, found that values obtained with either system involving pepsin showed a high degree of correlation with protein digestibility values obtained in rat feeding trails.…”

Section: In-vitro Digestibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although strong buffer salts may affect the measurement of protein digestibility, the buffering effects found in general food proteins and product tested did not create any problem with this procedure. Walker (1981) found a high correlation (r = +089) between in-vitro digestibility using the Saunders et al (1973) method, and available lysine by dye-binding with 7 various leaf protein concentrates. The protein digestibility of Saunders et al (1973) was used in the present study, because of its high correlation with bio-assay methods and other chemical methods of investigating protein quality, as reported by Walker (1981).…”

Section: In-vitro Digestibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Protein Evaluation of Foods

Malomo¹

2015

IJNFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The measurement of protein quality is usually non-specific, that is, if one compares this with the assay for minerals, one would find that in the case of minerals, a specific substance is being measured. However, with proteins, the quality depends on the quantity of at least 9 amino acids. The quality of the protein depends on the balance among the respective amino acids, on which the utilisation of the protein depends. As a result, the different methods of protein evaluation give different results for the nutritive value.

show abstract

Section: In-vitro Digestibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: In-vitro Digestibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Protein Evaluation of Foods

Malomo¹

2015

IJNFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The method of Saunders et al(1973) was applied with slight modifications to determine the in vitro protein digestibility. The sample (0.2 g) was placed in a 50 ml centrifuge tube, to which 15 ml of 0.1 mol/L HCl containing 1.5 mg pepsin was added and then the tube was incubated at 37 °C for 3 h. The suspension was then neutralized with 0.5 mol/L NaOH (ca.…”

Section: Determination Of In Vitro Protein Digestibility (Ivpd)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nutritional evaluation of caseins and whey proteins and their hydrolysates from Protamex

Sindayikengera

Xia

2006

J. Zhejiang Univ. - Sci. B

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whey protein concentrate (WPC 80) and sodium caseinate were hydrolyzed by Protamex to 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20% degree of hydrolysis (DH). WPC 80, sodium caseinate and their hydrolysates were then analyzed, compared and evaluated for their nutritional qualities. Their chemical composition, protein solubility, amino acid composition, essential amino acid index (EAA index), biological value (BV), nutritional index (NI), chemical score, enzymic protein efficiency ratio (E-PER) and in vitro protein digestibility (IVPD) were determined. The results indicated that the enzymatic hydrolysis of WPC 80 and sodium caseinate by Protamex improved the solubility and IVPD of their hydrolysates. WPC 80, sodium caseinate and their hydrolysates were high-quality proteins and had a surplus of essential amino acids compared with the FAO/WHO/UNU (1985) reference standard. The nutritive value of WPC 80 and its hydrolysates was superior to that of sodium caseinate and its hydrolysates as indicated by some nutritional parameters such as the amino acid composition, chemical score, EAA index and predicted BV. However, the E-PER was lower for the WPC hydrolysates as compared to unhydrolyzed WPC 80 but sodium caseinate and its hydrolysates did not differ significantly. The nutritional qualities of WPC 80, sodium caseinate and their hydrolysates were good and make them appropriate for food formulations or as nutritional supplements.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the results of vitro studies correlates well with in-vivo method [Saunders et al 1973], which makes it reliable. The digested protein was later determined by macro-Kjeldahl method instead of micro.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 63%

“…In-vitro protein digestibility was measured according to Saunders et al [1973] with some adjustments. 250 mg of the sample was precisely weighed and placed into a 50-ml centrifuge tube.…”

Section: Methods Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Fortifi cation of white fl at bread with sprouted red kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris)

Viswanathan

2014

Acta Sci Pol Technol Aliment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Measurement of Digestibility of Alfalfa Protein Concentrates by in vivo and in vitro Methods

Cited by 223 publications

References 10 publications

Protein Evaluation of Foods

Protein Evaluation of Foods

Nutritional evaluation of caseins and whey proteins and their hydrolysates from Protamex

Fortifi cation of white fl at bread with sprouted red kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About