4.6 Article

Carotenoid-biofortified maize maintains adequate vitamin A status in Mongolian gerbils

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
卷 136, 期 10, 页码 2562-2567

出版社

AMER SOCIETY NUTRITIONAL SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1093/jn/136.10.2562

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Efforts to biofortify maize with provitarnin A carotenoids have been successful, but the impact on vitamin A (VA) status has not been determined. We conducted two studies that investigated the bioefficacy of provitamin A carotenoids from maize and compared maize percentage and carotenoid concentrations on VA status in VA-depleted Mongolian gerbils (Meriones unguiculatus). Gerbils (n = 40/study) were fed a white maize diet 4 wk prior to treatment. In study 1, treatments (n 10/group) included oil control, 60% high-beta-carotene maize, and beta-carotene or VA supplements (matched to high,G-carotene maize). In study 2, gerbils were fed 30 or 60% orange or yellow maize diets. Gerbils were killed after 4 wk. In study 1, liver VA concentrations, compared with the high-beta-carotene maize group (0.25 +/- 0.15 mu mol/g), were higher in the VA group (0.56 +/- 0.15 mu mol/g, P < 0.05), lower in the control (0.10 +/- 0.04 mu mol/g, P < 0.05), and did not differ in the P-carotene group (0.25 +/- 0.08 mu mol/g). Bioconversion was similar to 3 mu g beta-carotene to 1 mu g retinol (1.5 mol beta-carotene to 1 mol retinol). The liver beta-carotene content was greater in the high-beta-carotene maize group (26.4 +/- 6.0 nmol) than in the beta-carotene supplement group (14.1 +/- 6.0 nmol; P < 0.05). In study 2, the gerbils' VA status improved with increasing dietary 0-carotene. Liver VA in gerbils fed orange maize was greater than in those fed yellow maize, regardless of maize percentage (P < 0.05). Biofortified maize adequately maintained VA status in Mongolian gerbils and was as efficacious as,B-carotene supplementation. In populations consuming maize as a staple food, using orange instead of white maize could dramatically affect VA status.

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

4.6
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