Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-564cf476b6-pxp6n Total loading time: 0.278 Render date: 2021-06-19T07:28:07.736Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Multi-criteria assessment of pea protein quality in rats: a comparison between casein, gluten and pea protein alone or supplemented with methionine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2020

Florence M. Guillin
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR PNCA, 75005, Paris, France Roquette, 62080 Lestrem, France
Claire Gaudichon
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR PNCA, 75005, Paris, France
Laetitia Guérin-Deremaux
Affiliation:
Roquette, 62080 Lestrem, France
Catherine Lefranc-Millot
Affiliation:
Roquette, 62080 Lestrem, France
Dalila Azzout-Marniche
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR PNCA, 75005, Paris, France
Nadezda Khodorova
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR PNCA, 75005, Paris, France
Juliane Calvez
Affiliation:
Université Paris-Saclay, AgroParisTech, INRAE, UMR PNCA, 75005, Paris, France
Corresponding

Abstract

The objective of this study was to assess the nutritional quality of pea protein isolate in rats and to evaluate the impact of methionine (Met) supplementation. Several protein diets were studied: pea protein, casein, gluten, pea protein–gluten combination and pea protein supplemented with Met. Study 1: Young male Wistar rats (n 8/group) were fed the test diets ad libitum for 28 d. The protein efficiency ratio (PER) was measured. Study 2: Adult male Wistar rats (n 9/group) were fed the test diets for 10 d. A protein-free diet group was used to determine endogenous losses of N. The rats were placed in metabolism cages for 3 d to assess N balance, true faecal N digestibility and to calculate the Protein Digestible-Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS). They were then given a calibrated meal and euthanised 6 h later for collection of digestive contents. The true caecal amino acid (AA) digestibility was determined, and the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) was calculated. Met supplementation increased the PER of pea protein (2·52 v. 1·14, P < 0·001) up to the PER of casein (2·55). Mean true caecal AA digestibility was 94 % for pea protein. The DIAAS was 0·88 for pea protein and 1·10 with Met supplementation, 1·29 for casein and 0·25 for gluten. Pea protein was highly digestible in rats under our experimental conditions, and Met supplementation enabled generation of a mixture that had a protein quality that was not different from that of casein.

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Millward, DJ, Layman, DK, Tomé, D, et al. (2008) Protein quality assessment: impact of expanding understanding of protein and amino acid needs for optimal health. Am J Clin Nutr 87, 1576S1581S.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davis, J, Sonesson, U, Baumgartner, DU, et al. (2010) Environmental impact of four meals with different protein sources: case studies in Spain and Sweden. Food Res Int 43, 18741884.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tome, D (2012) Criteria and markers for protein quality assessment – a review. Br J Nutr 108, Suppl. 2, S222S229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, WT, Weisell, R, Albert, J, et al. (2016) Research approaches and methods for evaluating the protein quality of human foods proposed by an FAO expert working group in 2014. J Nutr 146, 929932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davila, A-M, Blachier, F, Gotteland, M, et al. (2013) Intestinal luminal nitrogen metabolism: role of the gut microbiota and consequences for the host. Pharmacol Res 68, 95107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuller, M (2012) Determination of protein and amino acid digestibility in foods including implications of gut microbial amino acid synthesis. Br J Nutr 108, Suppl. 2, S238S246.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hendriks, WH, van Baal, J & Bosch, G (2012) Ileal and faecal protein digestibility measurement in humans and other non-ruminants – a comparative species view. Br J Nutr 108, Suppl. 2, S247S257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Wielen, N, Moughan, PJ & Mensink, M (2017) Amino acid absorption in the large intestine of humans and porcine models. J Nutr 147, 14931498.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
FAO (2013) Report of an FAO expert consultation: Dietary Protein Quality Evaluation in Human Nutrition, 31 March–2 April, 2011, Auckland, New Zealand, Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Hood-Niefer, SD, Warkentin, TD, Chibbar, RN, et al. (2012) Effect of genotype and environment on the concentrations of starch and protein in, and the physicochemical properties of starch from, field pea and fababean. J Sci Food Agric 92, 141150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gueguen, J & Cerletti, P (1994) Proteins of some legume seeds: soyabean, pea, faba bean and lupin. In: New and Developing Sources of Food Proteins, pp. 145193. London: Chapman & Hall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leterme, P, Monmart, T & Baudart, E (1990) Amino acid composition of pea (Pisum sativum) proteins and protein profile of pea flour. J Sci Food Agric 53, 107110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mariotti, F, Pueyo, ME, Tome, D, et al. (2001) The influence of the albumin fraction on the bioavailability and postprandial utilization of pea protein given selectively to humans. J Nutr 131, 17061713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilani, GS, Wu Xiao, C & Cockell, KA (2012) Impact of antinutritional factors in food proteins on the digestibility of protein and the bioavailability of amino acids and on protein quality. Br J Nutr 108, Suppl. 2, S315S332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gausserès, N, Mahé, S, Benamouzig, R, et al. (1996) The gastro-ileal digestion of 15 N-labelled pea nitrogen in adult humans. Br J Nutr 76, 7585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tessier, R, Khodorova, N, Calvez, J, et al. (2019) 15N and 2H intrinsic labeling demonstrate that real digestibility in rats of proteins and amino acids from sunflower protein isolate is almost as high as that of goat whey. J Nutr 150, 450457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO/WHO (1991) Report of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation: Protein Quality Evaluation. Bethesda, MD, USA, 8 December 1989. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.Google Scholar
Rutherfurd, SM & Gilani, GS (2009) Amino acid analysis. In Current Protocols in Protein Science, pp. 11.9.111.9.37 [JE Coligan, BM Dunn, DW Speicher, et al., editors]. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joint Expert Consultation on Protein and Amino Acid Requirements in Human Nutrition, Weltgesundheitsorganisation, FAO, et al. (editors) (2007) Protein and amino acid requirements in human nutrition: report of a joint WHO/FAO/UNU Expert Consultation, Geneva, 9–16 April 2002. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar
Gilani, GS, Peace, RW, Botting, HG, et al. (1989) Digestibility of protein and amino acids in selected foods as determined by a rat balance method. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 39, 2332.Google Scholar
Gilani, GS & Sepehr, E (2003) Protein digestibility and quality in products containing antinutritional factors are adversely affected by old age in rats. J Nutr 133, 220225.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, H, Guérin-Deremaux, L, Zhou, L, et al. (2012) Evaluation of nutritional quality of a novel pea protein. Agro Food Ind Hi-Tech 23, 10.Google Scholar
Rutherfurd, SM, Fanning, AC, Miller, BJ, et al. (2015) Protein digestibility-corrected amino acid scores and digestible indispensable amino acid scores differentially describe protein quality in growing male rats. J Nutr 145, 372379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bajaj, S, Mickelson, O, Lillevik, HA, et al. (1971) Prediction of protein efficiency ratio of peas from their albumin content 1. Crop Sci 11, 813815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, DG, Castillo, R & Campbell, JA (1959) Evaluation of protein in foods: 1. A method for the determination of protein efficiency ratios. Can J Biochem Physiol 37, 679686.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, AD & Baumgardt, BR (1971) Influence of level of energy demand on the ability of rats to compensate for diet dilution. J Nutr 101, 10691074.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gahl, MJ, Finke, MD, Crenshaw, TD, et al. (1991) Use of a four-parameter logistic equation to evaluate the response of growing rats to ten levels of each indispensable amino acid. J Nutr 121, 17201729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gietzen, DW, Hao, S & Anthony, TG (2007) Mechanisms of food intake repression in indispensable amino acid deficiency. Annu Rev Nutr 27, 6378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCoy, RH, Meyer, CE & Rose, WC (1935) Feeding experiments with mixtures of highly purified amino acids. 8. Isolation and identification of a new essential amino acid. J Biol Chem 112, 283302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nosworthy, MG, Neufeld, J, Frohlich, P, et al. (2017) Determination of the protein quality of cooked Canadian pulses. Food Sci Nutr 5, 896903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Le Gall, M, Warpechowski, M, Jaguelin-Peyraud, Y, et al. (2009) Influence of dietary fibre level and pelleting on the digestibility of energy and nutrients in growing pigs and adult sows. Animal 3, 352359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathai, JK, Liu, Y & Stein, HH (2017) Values for digestible indispensable amino acid scores (DIAAS) for some dairy and plant proteins may better describe protein quality than values calculated using the concept for protein digestibility-corrected amino acid scores (PDCAAS). Br J Nutr 117, 490499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuller, MF & Tomé, D (2005) In vivo determination of amino acid bioavailability in humans and model animals. J AOAC Int, 88, 923934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Deglaire, A & Moughan, PJ (2012) Animal models for determining amino acid digestibility in humans – a review. Br J Nutr 108, Suppl. 2, S273S281.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stein, HH, Pedersen, C, Wirt, AR, et al. (2005) Additivity of values for apparent and standardized ileal digestibility of amino acids in mixed diets fed to growing pigs. J Anim Sci 83, 23872395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyachoti, CM, de Lange, CFM, McBride, BW, et al. (1997) Significance of endogenous gut nitrogen losses in the nutrition of growing pigs: a review. Can J Anim Sci 77, 149163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Digestive physiology in pigs: proceedings of the 5 (1991) International Symposium on Digestive Physiology in Pigs, Wageningen (Doorwerth), Netherlands, 24–26 April 1991.Google Scholar
Low, AG (1980) Nutrient absorption in pigs. J Sci Food Agric 31, 10871130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jansman, AJM, Smink, W, van Leeuwen, P, et al. (2002) Evaluation through literature data of the amount and amino acid composition of basal endogenous crude protein at the terminal ileum of pigs. Anim Feed Sci Technol 98, 4960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buraczewska, L (1979) Secretion of nitrogenous compounds in the small intestine of pigs. Acta Physiol Pol 30, 319–316.Google ScholarPubMed
Rutherfurd, SM, Cui, J, Goroncy, AK, et al. (2015) Dietary protein structure affects endogenous ileal amino acids but not true ileal amino acid digestibility in growing male rats. J Nutr 145, 193198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stein, HH, Sève, B, Fuller, MF, et al. (2007) Invited review: amino acid bioavailability and digestibility in pig feed ingredients: terminology and application. J Anim Sci 85, 172180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reeves, PG, Nielsen, FH & Fahey, GC (1993) AIN-93 purified diets for laboratory rodents: final report of the American Institute of Nutrition ad hoc writing committee on the reformulation of the AIN-76A rodent diet. J Nutr 123, 19391951.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Guillin et al. supplementary material

Guillin et al. supplementary material

Download Guillin et al. supplementary material(File)
File 15 KB

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Multi-criteria assessment of pea protein quality in rats: a comparison between casein, gluten and pea protein alone or supplemented with methionine
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Multi-criteria assessment of pea protein quality in rats: a comparison between casein, gluten and pea protein alone or supplemented with methionine
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Multi-criteria assessment of pea protein quality in rats: a comparison between casein, gluten and pea protein alone or supplemented with methionine
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *