scholarly journals Protein quality evaluation twenty years after the introduction of the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score method

2012 ◽  
Vol 108 (S2) ◽  
pp. S183-S211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce Boye ◽  
Ramani Wijesinha-Bettoni ◽  
Barbara Burlingame
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Quality Evaluation ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Food Groups ◽  
Preparation Methods ◽  
Reference Protein ◽  
Amino Acid Score ◽  
Limiting Amino Acid ◽  
New Research

In 1989 the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Protein Quality Evaluation recommended the use of the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) method for evaluating protein quality. In calculating PDCAAS, the limiting amino acid score (i.e., ratio of first limiting amino acid in a gram of target food to that in a reference protein or requirement) is multiplied by protein digestibility. The PDCAAS method has now been in use for 20 years. Research emerging during this time has provided useful data on various aspects of protein quality evaluation that has made a review of the current methods used in assessing protein quality necessary. This paper provides an overview of the use of the PDCAAS method as compared to other methods and addresses some of the key challenges that remain in regards to protein quality evaluation. Furthermore, specific factors influencing protein quality including the effects of processing conditions and preparation methods are presented. Protein quality evaluation methods and recommended protein intakes currently used in different countries vis-à-vis the WHO/FAO/UNU standards are further provided. As foods are frequently consumed in complement with other foods, the significance of the PDCAAS of single protein sources may not be evident, thus, protein quality of some key food groups and challenges surrounding the calculation of the amino acid score for dietary protein mixtures are further discussed. As results from new research emerge, recommendations may need to be updated or revised to maintain relevance of methods used in calculating protein quality.

scholarly journals Protein Quality Assessment of Follow-up Formula for Young Children and Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Foods: Recommendations by the FAO Expert Working Group in 2017

2019 ◽  
Vol 150 (2) ◽  
pp. 195-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nirupama Shivakumar ◽  
Alan Anthony Jackson ◽  
Glenda Courtney-Martin ◽  
Rajavel Elango ◽  
Shibani Ghosh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Young Children ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Quality Evaluation ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Protein Requirement ◽  
Expert Working Group ◽  
Amino Acid Score

ABSTRACT The FAO of the UN convened an Expert Working Group meeting to provide recommendations related to protein quality evaluation of Follow-up Formula for Young Children (FUF-YC) and Ready-to-Use Therapeutic Foods (RUTFs). The protein and amino acid (AA) scoring patterns for the target age groups were defined and recommendations provided on the use of currently available protein and indispensable AA digestibility data. For FUF-YC, an age category of 1–2.9 y was identified, and a matching protein requirement of 0.86 g · kg−1 · d−1 with corresponding AA requirements were recommended. For RUTF, the protein requirement recommended was 2.82 g · kg−1 · d−1, to achieve a catch-up weight gain of 10 g · kg−1 · d−1 in children recovering from severe acute malnutrition. The AA requirements were factorially derived based on the adult protein requirement for maintenance and tissue AA composition. A flowchart was proposed for the best available methods to estimate digestibility coefficients (of either protein or AAs), in the following order: human, growing pig, and rat true ileal AA digestibility values. Where this is not possible, fecal protein digestibility values should be used. The Expert Working Group recommends the use of the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS), with existing protein digestibility values, or the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score provided that individual AA digestibility values are available for protein quality evaluation using the latter score. The Group also recommends the use of ileal digestibility of protein or of AAs for plant-based protein sources, recognizing the possible effects of antinutritional factors and impaired gut function. A PDCAAS score of ≥90% can be considered adequate for these formulations, whereas with a score <90%, the quantity of protein should be increased to meet the requirements. Regardless of the protein quality score, the ability of formulations to support growth in the target population should be evaluated. Future research recommendations are also proposed based on the knowledge gaps identified.

scholarly journals Dietary Protein Quality in Humans—An Overview

2005 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 874-876 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul J Moughan
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Nutritive Value ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Current Method ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Food Protein ◽  
Amino Acid Utilization ◽  
Dietary Amino Acid ◽  
Amino Acid Requirements ◽  
Amino Acid Score

Abstract The first objective in evaluating protein quality is to permit a ranking of proteins according to their potential nutritive value and to permit detection of changes in nutritive value due to processing and/or storage. The second objective is to permit prediction of the contribution a food protein, or mixture of food proteins, makes toward meeting nitrogen and amino acid requirements for growth or maintenance. Different approaches are used in meeting these distinct aims. The preferred current method to meet the second aim is the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS). This article introduces the concept of PDCAAS and places it in the context of the series of papers published in this Special Guest Editor Section addressing aspects of dietary amino acid utilization.

scholarly journals Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) better Estimates the Protein Value of Pistachios than Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS)

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Marie Bailey ◽  
Arianna Carughi ◽  
Hans-Henrik Stein
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Unsaturated Fatty Acids ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Growing Pigs ◽  
Ileal Digestibility ◽  
Indispensable Amino Acid ◽  
Older Adolescents ◽  
Adolescents And Adults ◽  
Amino Acid Score

AbstractPistachios (Pistacia Vera) are nutrient-dense foods with a healthy nutritional profile that contains fiber, unsaturated fatty acids, essential nutrients, phytochemicals and protein. However, the nutritional quality of the protein has not been characterized to date. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) and Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) for raw and roasted American pistachio nuts in growing pigs. The values for apparent ileal digestibility (AID) of crude protein (CP) and the standard ileal digestibility (SID) where calculated for these proteins. The CP content was greater for raw pistachios (27.1%) compared with roasted pistachios (25.1%). The amino acid (AA) in greatest concentrations for both types of pistachio were arginine followed by leucine. The AA in the lowest concentration were tryptophan followed by methionine. The AID of CP was greater (P < 0.05) for raw pistachios than for roasted pistachios, and the AID of most indispensable AA (IAA), except arginine, isoleucine, and phenylalanine, was greater (P < 0.05) for raw pistachios. The SID of CP was greater (P < 0.05) for raw than for roasted pistachios, and the SID of all IAA, except phenylalanine, was greater (P < 0.05) for raw than for roasted pistachios. The PDCAAS value calculated for both types of pistachios was based on the requirement for children from 2 to 5 years old (FAO, 1991), whereas the DIAAS value was calculated based on the requirement for children 3 years and older, adolescents, and adults (FAO, 2013). Both raw and roasted pistachios had a PDCAAS value of 75. In contrast, the DIAAS was numerically greater for raw pistachios than for roasted pistachios with values of 86 and 83, respectively. For PDCAAS, the first limiting AA in both raw and roasted pistachios when compared with the AA requirements for children 2 to 5 years was threonine. For DIAAS, lysine was the first limiting AA in both raw and roasted pistachios when compared with the AA requirements for children 3 years and older, adolescents, and adults. Based on the DIAAS cut-off values describing protein quality (FAO, 2013), raw pistachios and roasted pistachios can both be considered a ‘Good’ quality protein if consumed by children older than 3 year, adolescents, and adults.

scholarly journals Background on international activities on protein quality assessment of foods

2012 ◽  
Vol 108 (S2) ◽  
pp. S168-S182 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Sarwar Gilani
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Quality Assessment ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Expert Consultation ◽  
Codex Committee ◽  
Vegetable Proteins ◽  
Amino Acid Score

The subject of protein quality assessment of foods and diets was addressed at the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins (1982–1989), FAO/WHO (1989, 2001) and WHO/FAO (2002) expert reviews. These international developments are summarized in this manuscript. In 1989, a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Protein Quality Evaluation reviewed knowledge of protein quality assessment of foods, and specifically evaluated amino acid score corrected for protein digestibility, the method recommended by the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins. The report of the Consultation published in 1991 concluded that the Protein Digestibility-corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) method was the most suitable approach for routine evaluation of protein quality for humans. The Consultation recognized that the amino acid scoring pattern proposed by FAO/WHO/UNU (1985) for preschool children was at that time the most suitable pattern for calculating PDCAAS for all ages except infants in which case the amino acid composition of human milk was recommended to be the basis of the scoring pattern. The rat balance method was considered as the most suitable practical method for predicting protein digestibility by humans. Since its adoption by FAO/WHO (1991), the PDCAAS method has been criticised for a number of reasons. The FAO/WHO (2001) Working Group on analytical issues related to protein quality assessed the validity of criticisms of the PDCAAS method. While recognizing a distinct regulatory use of protein quality data, the Working Group recommended that the PDCAAS method may be inappropriate for the routine prediction of protein quality of novel and sole source foods which contain high levels of anti nutritional factors; and that for regulatory purposes, the method should be revised to permit values of >100 for high quality proteins. In evaluating the recommendations of the Working Group, the WHO/FAO (2002) Expert Consultation on Protein and Amino Acid Requirements endorsed the PDCAAS method with minor modifications to the calculation method but also raised several issues. These included the calculation of scoring patterns; prediction of amino acid digestibility by faecal and ileal methods; reduced bioavailability of lysine in processed proteins; truncation of the amino acid score and consequent PDCAAS value; protein digestibility as a first limiting factor in determining the overall available dietary nitrogen; and the calculation of amino acid score for a dietary protein mixture. These concerns were considered particularly important in relation to the regulatory aspects of protein quality of foods, and their resolution was urgently recommended through a new separate expert review.

scholarly journals Meat protein quality of Dormitator latifrons (Pisces: Eleotridae): arguments for use by rural communities

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mao Ernesto Rafael Basto-Rosales ◽  
Olimpia Carrillo-Farnés ◽  
Cynthia Eugenia Montoya-Martínez ◽  
Daniel Badillo-Zapata ◽  
Gustavo Gustavo Rodríguez-Montes de Oca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Rural Communities ◽  
Essential Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Amino Acid Content ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Amino Acid Profile ◽  
Meat Protein ◽  
Reference Protein

The objective of this study was to evaluate the quality of meat protein of Dormitator latifrons for humans based on its Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS). Wild and cultured specimens were evaluated for amino acid content using HPLC equipment. The calculation of PDCAAS was performed as follows: milligrams of essential amino acid in 1 g of test protein per milligram of the same amino acid in 1 g of reference protein per true digestibility. To evaluate the protein of D. latifrons in relation to that of other fish, PDCAAS was calculated from the proteins of eight fish usually used in human nutrition. D. latifrons has a good essential amino acid profile, providing the same nutritional quality as those of other fish. Although the meat of wild D. latifrons contributes only 73% of human lysine requirements, it can be complemented with other lysine sources.

scholarly journals Research and regulatory gaps for the substantiation of protein content claims on foods

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashleigh K.A. Wiggins ◽  
G. Harvey Anderson ◽  
James D. House
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
The United States ◽  
Score Method ◽  
Amino Acid Score ◽  
Protein Rich ◽  
Quality Assessments ◽  
The Impact

Protein claims provide guidance to consumers seeking protein-rich foods. Protein claim regulations differ globally, and both Canada and the United States require protein quality assessments. A tripartite workshop identified the need to (i) harmonize, (ii) update existing amino acid composition and digestibility databases, (iii) develop non-animal bioassays, and (iv) evaluate the impact of protein claims on human health. The Protein-Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score method is recommended for current regulatory use in Canada.

scholarly journals A Comparison of Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score with Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score to Evaluate Protein Quality of Raw and Roasted Pistachio Nuts

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. 680-680
Author(s):  
Hannah Bailey ◽  
Arianna Carughi ◽  
Hans Stein
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Growing Pigs ◽  
Protein Source ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Indispensable Amino Acid ◽  
Food And Agriculture Organization ◽  
Pistachio Nuts ◽  
Amino Acid Score

Abstract Objectives The objectives of this research were to determine the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS) and the digestible indispensable amino acid score (DIAAS) for raw and roasted American pistachio nuts in growing pigs, and to assess the effect of roasting on these measures of protein quality. Methods Twelve ileal cannulated barrows (body weight: 60.9 ± 3.2 kg) were randomly allotted to a 2-period switch-back design with 3 diets and 4 replicate pigs per period. Roasted pistachio nuts and raw pistachio nuts (American cultivated pistachio nuts) were each added to a single diet as the only protein source, and the third diet was a nitrogen-free diet that was used to measure basal endogenous losses of AA. Experimental periods were 9 d with the initial 5 d for adaptation to the diets. On d 6 and 7, fecal samples were collected, and on d 8 and 9, ileal digesta samples were collected for 9 h each day. The PDCAAS and DIAAS were calculated according to the Food and Agriculture Organization. Results The standardized ileal digestibility (SID) of all indispensable AA, except Arg and Phe, was less (P &lt; 0.05) in roasted than in raw pistachio nuts. Raw pistachio nuts had a PDCAAS of 73 and roasted pistachio nuts had a PDCAAS of 81, calculated for children 2 to 5 yr, and the first limiting AA when compared to human requirements was Thr for both pistachio nuts. The DIAAS calculated for children older than 3 years, adolescents, and adults was 86 and 83 for raw and roasted pistachio nuts, respectively. The limiting AA in both raw and roasted pistachio nuts that determined the DIAAS for this age group was Lys. Conclusions Results of this research illustrate that raw and roasted pistachio nuts can be considered a good quality protein source with DIAAS greater than 75, however, heating conditions associated with roasting may decrease the digestibility of AA in pistachio nuts. Funding Sources The U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Agricultural Marketing Service. Product was supplied by the American Pistachio Growers.

scholarly journals A Rat Study to Evaluate the Protein Quality of Three Green Microalgal Species and the Impact of Mechanical Cell Wall Disruption

Foods ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. 1531
Author(s):  
Yanwen Wang ◽  
Sean M. Tibbetts ◽  
Fabrice Berrue ◽  
Patrick J. McGinn ◽  
Scott P. MacQuarrie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Wall ◽  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
In Vitro Protein Digestibility ◽  
Cell Wall Disruption ◽  
Amino Acid Score ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Vitro Protein

The present study was conducted to evaluate the protein quality of microalgae species Chlorella vulgaris (CV), Chlorella sorokiniana (CS), and Acutodesmus obliquus (AO) and assess the impact of mechanical cell wall disruption. Male Sprague–Dawley rats, around 156 g after adaptation, were placed in metabolic cages and fed experimental diets that were either protein-free or contained 10% protein solely from one of the undisrupted or disrupted CV, CS, and AO. After 3 days, feces were collected for a period of 5 days and analyzed together with diet samples for crude protein contents. Apparent protein digestibility, true protein digestibility, amino acid score, and protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score were calculated. In vitro protein digestibility was measured using the pepsin–pancreatin method and the in vitro protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score was calculated. The crude protein contents of CV, CS, and AO were 53.5, 50.2, and 40.3%, respectively. The amino acid score of the first limiting amino acid was 1.10, 1.27, and 0.86, true protein digestibility was 64.7, 59.3, and 37.9% and protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score was 0.63, 0.64, and 0.29, respectively, for CV, CS, and AO. Mechanical cell disruption significantly improved protein digestibility without a substantial impact on the amino acid profile and score, resulting in the increase of protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score to 0.77, 0.81, and 0.46, respectively, for disrupted CV, CS, and AO. There was a strong correlation between in vitro protein digestibility and apparent protein digestibility (r = 0.986), and also between in vitro protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score and in vivo protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score (r = 0.994). The results suggest that the CV and CS are acceptable sources of protein for humans and animals and quality can be markedly improved by mechanical cell wall disruption. Additionally, in vitro protein digestibility measured using the pepsin–pancreatin method may be used to screen protein product candidates, save animals, reduce cost, and accelerate product development.

scholarly journals AMINO ACID PROFILE AND IN VITRO PROTEIN DIGESTIBILITY-CORRECTED AMINO ACID SCORE (PDCAAS) OF READY-TO-EAT BREAKFAST CEREALS: AN ASSESSMENT OF PROTEIN QUALITY

2021 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 203-210
Author(s):  
Mustafa Yaman ◽  
Hafsa Sena Sargın ◽  
Ömer Faruk Mızrak ◽  
Halime Uğur ◽  
Jale Çatak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Amino Acid Content ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
In Vitro Protein Digestibility ◽  
Breakfast Cereal ◽  
Breakfast Cereals ◽  
Amino Acid Score ◽  
Vitro Protein

The aim of this study was to determine the amino acid content and in vitro protein digestibility of breakfast cereals and evaluate their protein quality using in vitro protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS) methods. Statistically big differences were found in the proportions of essential amino acids between breakfast cereals. Higher protein digestibility was found in samples containing rice and corn than those containing oats. The first limiting amino acid score (AAS) in 6 out of 12 samples was methionine + cysteine, in 4 out of 12 samples was lysine, and in 2 out of 12 samples was tryptophan. According to the first limiting AAS, the in vitro PDCAAS ranged from 0.19±0.01 to 0.86±0.02 in breakfast cereals. When we evaluated the first limiting AAS, lysine, methionine+cysteine and tryptophan predominantly determined PDCAAS. As a result, the PDCAAS, which is an indicator of protein quality, was generally low in breakfast cereal products.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document