4.7 Article

Use of in vitro digestion method and theoretical calculations to evaluate the bioaccessibility of Al, Cd, Fe and Zn in lettuce and cole by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry

期刊

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 119, 期 -, 页码 152-158

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2014.12.002

关键词

Bioaccessibility; Theoretical calculations; In vitro gastrointestinal digestion

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [2013/26855-2, 2012/15020-4]
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)
  3. National Institute of Advanced Analytical Science and Technology (INCTAA) [573894/2008-6, 2008/57808-1]
  4. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [12/15020-4] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Theoretical calculations of the binding energies of metal-polyphenols and metal-cellulose, as well as the hydration energies of metal-polyphenols were used to support the results obtained for the bioaccessibility of aluminium, cadmium, iron and zinc from four types of lettuce and one type of cole that were evaluated using an in vitro gastrointestinal digestion model and inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. The bioaccessibility of Al found in the vegetables were less than 11% of the total Al content, whereas Cd exhibited average bioaccessibility of approximately 14% for the fresh samples and 41% considering the dried vegetables studied. However, the results indicated average bioaccessibility of 35% and 26% for Zn and average bioaccessibility of 19% and 21% for Fe in fresh and dried samples, respectively. The low bioaccessibility of Al is due to its strong binding with all of the vegetable components, whereas the low bioaccessibility of Fe and Zn are due to their interactions with phytates. Cd was observed to be the most bioaccessible element in the dried samples because of its weak interaction with other compenents in the vegetables. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据