4.7 Review

Effects of Different Processing Methods on the Micronutrient and Phytochemical Contents of Maize: From A to Z

Journal

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12216

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. PepsiCo, Inc.
  2. Global Health Funds at the Univ. of Wisconsin-Madison

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Maize is a staple human food eaten by more than a billion people around the world in a variety of whole and processed products. Different processing methods result in changes to the nutritional profile of maize products, which can greatly affect the micronutrient intake of populations dependent on this crop for a large proportion of their caloric needs. This review summarizes the effects of different processing methods on the resulting micronutrient and phytochemical contents of maize. The majority of B vitamins are lost during storage and milling; further loss occurs with soaking and cooking, but fermentation and nixtamalization (soaking in alkaline solution) can increase bioavailability of riboflavin and niacin. Carotenoids, found mainly in the kernel endosperm, increase in concentration after degermination, while other vitamins and minerals, found mainly in the germ, are reduced. Mineral bioavailability can be improved by processing methods that reduce phytic acid, such as soaking, fermenting, cooking, and nixtamalization. Losses of micronutrients during processing can be mitigated by changes in methods of processing, in addition to encouraging consumption of whole-grain maize products over degermed, refined products. In some cases, such as niacin, processing is actually necessary for nutrient bioavailability. Due to the high variability in the baseline nutrient contents among maize varieties, combined with additional variability in processing effects, the most accurate data on nutrient content will be obtained through analysis of specific maize products and consideration of in vivo bioavailability.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available