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 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 Protein intakes in India

2012 ◽  
Vol 108 (S2) ◽  
pp. S50-S58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sumathi Swaminathan ◽  
Mario Vaz ◽  
Anura V. Kurpad
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Intake ◽  
Fruits And Vegetables ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Dietary Quality ◽  
Protein Energy ◽  
Amino Acid Score ◽  
Pe Ratio

Indian diets derive almost 60 % of their protein from cereals with relatively low digestibility and quality. There have been several surveys of diets and protein intakes in India by the National Nutrition Monitoring Board (NNMB) over the last 25 years, in urban and rural, as well as in slum dwellers and tribal populations. Data of disadvantaged populations from slums, tribals and sedentary rural Indian populations show that the protein intake (mainly from cereals) is about 1 gm/kg/day. However, the protein intake looks less promising in terms of the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS), using lysine as the first limiting amino acid, where all populations, particularly rural and tribal, appear to have an inadequate quality to their protein intake. The protein: energy (PE) ratio is a measure of dietary quality, and has been used in the 2007 WHO/FAO/UNU report to define reference requirement values with which the adequacy of diets can be evaluated in terms of a protein quality corrected PE ratio. It is likely that about one third of this sedentary rural population is at risk of not meeting their requirements. These levels of risk of deficiency are in a population with relatively low BMI populations, whose diets are also inadequate in fruits and vegetables. Therefore, while the burden of enhancing the quality of protein intake in rural India exists, the quality of the diet, in general, represents a challenge that must be met.

Evaluation Of Protein Digestibility-Corrected Amino Acid Score Method For Assessing Protein Quality Of Foods

1990 ◽  
Vol 73 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-356 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghulam arwar ◽  
Frank E Mcdonough
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Quality Measurement ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
True Digestibility ◽  
Score Method ◽  
Amino Acid Score

Abstract The current concepts of protein quality evaluation were reviewed. A detailed examination of existing animal assays and more promising amino acid scoring methods has been carried out by an Ad Hoc Working Group on Protein Quality Measurement for the Codex Committee on Vegetable Proteins during the last 5 years. Several factors such as Inadequacies of protein efficiency ratio (PER, the poorest test) and other animal assays, advancements made In standardizing methods for amino acid analysis and protein digestibility, availability of data on digestibility of protein and Individual amino acids in a variety of foods, and reliability of human amino acid requirements and scoring patterns were evaluated. On the basis of this evaluation, amino acid score, corrected for true digestibility of protein, was recommended to be the most suitable routine method for predicting protein quality of foods for humans. Amino acid scores corrected for true digestibility of protein (as determined by rat balance method) were termed "protein digestibility-corrected amino acid scores." A detailed method for the determination of the protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score was proposed, and information about the range of scores to be expected In foods or food products was provided In the present Investigation. The protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score method Is a simple and scientifically sound approach for routine evaluation of protein quality of foods. Accuracy of the method would, however, be confirmed after validation with growth or metabolic balance studies In humans.

scholarly journals Brief Research Report: Estimation of the Protein Digestibility-Corrected Amino Acid Score of Defatted Walnuts

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly A. Lackey ◽  
Stephen A. Fleming
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Essential Fatty Acids ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Research Report ◽  
Tree Nuts ◽  
Amino Acid Score ◽  
True Protein ◽  
True Protein Digestibility

Introduction: Walnuts are considered a good source of essential fatty acids, which is unique among tree nuts. Walnuts are also composed of about 10–15% protein, but the quality of this protein has not been evaluated. Pistachios and almonds have been evaluated for their protein content using a protein digestibility-corrected amino acid score (PDCAAS), but it is unclear how the quality of protein in walnuts relates to that in other commonly consumed tree nuts. The objective of this study was to substantiate the protein quality of walnuts by determining their PDCAAS.Methods: A small, 10-day dietary intervention trial was conducted using male Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 8, 4 per group) with two diets: a nitrogen-free diet and a diet containing protein exclusively from defatted walnuts. Feed intake and fecal output of nitrogen were measured to estimate the true protein digestibility, and the amino acid compositions of walnuts compared to child and adult populations were used to calculate amino acid scores (AAS) and PDCAAS.Results: The true protein digestibility score of raw walnuts was calculated to be 86.22%. Raw walnuts contained 15.6 g protein/g walnut with AAS of 0.45 and 0.63 for children aged 6 months to 3 years and 3–10 years, respectively. For each population, a PDCAAS of 39 and 46% was calculated, respectively, using a protein conversion constant of 5.30. Using a protein constant of 6.25, a PDCAAS of 39% (6 months - 3 years) or 46% (3-10 years) was calculated.Conclusions: This is the first known assessment of the PDCAAS of walnuts. Like almonds, they appear to have a low-to-moderate score, indicating they are not a quality source of protein.

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 The effect of increasing intakes of plant protein on the protein quality of Canadian diets

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher P.F. Marinangeli ◽  
Hrvoje Fabek ◽  
Mavra Ahmed ◽  
Diana Sanchez-Hernandez ◽  
Samara Foisy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Amino Acid ◽  
Protein Quality ◽  
Protein Digestibility ◽  
Canadian Community Health Survey ◽  
Plant Protein ◽  
Time Interval ◽  
Time Intervals ◽  
Plant Foods ◽  
Protein Consumption

The 2015 Canadian Community Health Survey was used to investigated the protein content and protein quality of the diets consumed by adults (≥ 19 years) when plant protein is increased. Individuals (n=6498) were allocated to quartiles of increasing proportions of protein from plant foods (Q1:0-24.9%; Q2:25%-49.9%; Q3:50-74.9%; Q4:75-100%). The Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) of diets were estimated using indispensable amino acid concentrations of foods and an assumed digestibility coefficient of 0.8. Corrected protein intakes were determined by aggregating foods consumed over 24hrs and as the sum of corrected protein consumed at eating events within six, four-hour time intervals. Most individuals (51%) consumed 25-49.9% of protein from plant foods. Cereal-based foods represented the majority of plant protein consumed. PDCAAS of diets remained ≥0.87 for Q1-3, but decreased (p<0.0001) to 0.71±0.018 in Q4 vs. Q2 (0.96±0.004). Corrected protein intakes in Q2 (80.66±1.21 g/day; 1.07±0.03 g protein/kg BW) decreased to 37.13±1.88 g/day (0.54±0.03 g/kg BW) in Q4 (p<0.0001). Aggregated daily corrected protein intake strongly correlated (r=0.99; p<0.001) with the sum of corrected protein consumed within time intervals. Intra-time interval analysis revealed that the relative proportions of animal and plant proteins changed at eating events over 24hrs; and did not reflect the allocation to quartiles based on the daily proportion of plant protein consumption. Various tools should be explored and developed to assist Canadians in effectively incorporating plant protein foods into dietary patterns. Novelty: ●Corrected protein intakes decreased as plant protein consumption increased. ●PDCAAS was ≥0.87 for diets with ≤74.9% plant protein.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document