Rat bioassay of the protein nutritional quality of soy-fortified sorghum biscuits for supplementary feeding of school-age children

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Authors

Serrem, C.A. (Charlotte Atsango)
De Kock, Henrietta Letitia
Oelofse, Andre
Taylor, J.R.N. (John Reginald Nuttall)

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

Publisher

Wiley

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Protein-Energy Malnutrition (PEM) remains a major deficiency disease among children in developing countries. The protein nutritional quality of soy fortified sorghum biscuits was evaluated with respect to their potential as a protein-rich supplementary food. Three isonitrogenous diets based on: 50:50 ratio decorticated sorghum: defatted soy flour biscuits, 100% sorghum biscuits, casein, and a protein-free diet were fed to male Sprague Dowley weanling rats. RESULTS: Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) for the sorghum-soy biscuit diet was equivalent to the reference casein diet, and zero for the 100% sorghum diet. Faecal bulk for 100% sorghum diet was 1.5 times higher than sorghum-soy and casein diets. True protein digestibility of the three diets was high, 88 to 95%, agreeing with previous rat studies with sorghum. Biological Value and Net Protein Utilization of sorghum-soy biscuit diet were similar to the casein diet, but lower that the 100% sorghum biscuit diet CONCLUSION: Not withstanding limitations of rat bioassay for assessing sorghum food protein quality, the higher PER of defatted soy flour fortified sorghum biscuits (sorghum: soy 50:50 ratio) indicates they have considerable potential as a supplementary food to young children to alleviate PEM.

Description

Keywords

Protein Efficiency Ratio, Protein-Energy Malnutrition, Rat bioassay, School-age children, Sorghum, Supplementary feeding

Sustainable Development Goals

Citation

Serrem, CA, De Kock HL, Oelofse, A & Taylor JRN 2011, 'Rat bioassay of the protein nutritional quality of soy fortified sorghum biscuits for supplementary feeding of school-age children', Journal of The Science of Food and Agriculture, vol. 91, no. 10, pp. 1814-1821.