4.7 Article

Comparison of the effect of various sources of saturated fatty acids on infant follow-on formulas oxidative stability and nutritional profile

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 429, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.136854

关键词

Infant formula; Nutritional needs; Fortification; Palm oil; Lipid oxidation; Docosahexaenoic acid (DHA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aimed to improve the nutritional profile and oxidative stability of infant follow-on formulas (IFF) fortified with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA). Model IFF were formulated using different lipid and emulsifier sources. It was found that red palm oil and dairy fat with dairy phospholipids had improved oxidative stability, likely due to the presence of compounds such as carotenoids and sphingomyelin acting synergistically with tocopherols. Incorporating dairy lipids and carotenoids into DHA-enriched IFF compositions seems promising to enhance their stability and nutritional quality.
Fortification of infant follow-on formulas (IFF) with docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), which is prone to lipid oxidation, is required by European regulation. This study aimed to identify lipid formulation parameters that improve the nutritional profile and oxidative stability of IFF. Model IFF were formulated using different lipid and emulsifier sources, including refined (POM) or unrefined red palm oil (RPOM), coconut oil (COM), dairy fat (DFOM), soy lecithin, and dairy phospholipids (DPL). After an accelerated storage, RPOM and DFOM with DPL had improved oxidative stability compared to other IFF. Specifically, they had a peroxide value twice lower than POM and 20% less loss of tocopherols for DFOM-DPL. This higher stability was mainly explained by the presence of compounds such as carotenoids in RPOM and sphingomyelin in DFOM-DPL very likely acting synergistically with tocopherols. Incorporation of dairy lipids and carotenoids into DHA-enriched IFF compositions seems promising to enhance their stability and nutritional quality.

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