Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T15:36:15.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of dietary concentrations of n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids on the n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid content of edible poultry tissues: a review and meta analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

C. Rymer  and
D.I. Givens
C. Rymer*
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Unit, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, PO Box 237, Reading, RG6 6AR, UK
D.I. Givens
Affiliation:
Nutritional Sciences Research Unit, School of Agriculture, Policy and Development, University of Reading, PO Box 237, Reading, RG6 6AR, UK
*
Email: c.rymer@reading.ac.uk
Get access

Extract

The nutritional benefits of consuming long chain n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), which are predominantly found in oily fish, are well known but consumption of oily fish is declining. Poultry consumption, on the other hand, is increasing, but poultry meat is generally a poor source of long chain n-3 PUFA. The concentrations of the n-3 PUFA α-linolenic acid (LNA), EPA and DHA in poultry meat may be increased by feeding birds diets that are themselves rich in these acids. The objective of this study was to review the literature to determine what relationship if any there was between n-3 PUFA content in the diet and edible tissues of poultry.

Type
Theatre Presentations
Information
Proceedings of the British Society of Animal Science , Volume 2005 , 2005 , pp. 79
Copyright
Copyright © The British Society of Animal Science 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ajuyah, A. O., Hardin, R. T., Cheung, K. and Sim, J. S. (1992). J. Food Sci., 57: 338–341.Google Scholar
Ajuyah, A. O., Lee, K. H., Hardin, R. T. and Sim, J. S. (1991). Can. J. Anim. Sci., 71: 1011–1019.Google Scholar
Chanmugan, P., Boudreau, M., Bouette, T., Park, R.S., Hebert, J., Berrio, L. and Hwang, D. H. (1992). Poult. Sci., 71: 516–521.Google Scholar
Gonzalez-Esquerra, R. and Leeson, S. (2000). Br. Poult. Sci., 41: 481–488.Google Scholar
Howe, P. R. C., Downing, J. A., Grenyer, B. F. S., Grigonis-Deane, E. M. and Bryden, L. (2002). Lipids, 37: 1067–1076.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Komprda, T., Zelenka, J., Bakaj, P., Kladroba, D., Blazkova, E. and Fajmonova, E. (2003). Arch. Geflügelk, 67: 65–75.Google Scholar
Krasicka, B., Kulasek, G. W., Swierczewska, E. and Orzechowski, A. (2000). Arch. Geflügelk., 64: 61–69.Google Scholar
López-Ferrer, S., Baucells, M. D., Barroeta, A. C. and Grashorn, M. A. (2001b). Poult. Sci., 80: 741–752.Google Scholar
López-Ferrer, S., Baucells, M. D., Barroeta, A. C., Galobart, J. and Grashorn, M. A. (2001a). Poult. Sci., 80: 753–761.Google Scholar
Mooney, J. W., Hirschler, E. M., Kennedy, A. K., Sams, A. R. and van Elswyk, M. E. (1998). J. Sci. Food Agric., 78: 134–140.Google Scholar
Nam, K.-T., Lee, H.-A., Min, B.-S. and Kang, C.-W. (1997). Anim. Fd Sci. Technol., 66: 149–158.Google Scholar
Nitsan, Z., Mokady, S. and Sukenik, A. (1999). J. Agric. Food Chem., 47: 5127–5132.Google Scholar
Özpinar, H., Kahraman, R., Abas, I., Kutay, H.C., Eseceli, H. and Grashorn, M. A. (2003). Arch. Geflügelk, 67: 57–64.Google Scholar
Ratnayake, W. M. N., Ackman, R. G. and Hulan, H. W. (1989). J. Sci. Fd Agric., 49:59–74.Google Scholar
Sheehy, P. J. A., Morrissey, P. A. and Flynn, A. (1993). Br. Poult. Sci., 34: 367–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar