4.7 Review

A review of dietary polyamines:: Formation, implications for growth and health and occurrence in foods

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 90, 期 1-2, 页码 219-230

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2004.03.044

关键词

polyamines; putrescine; spermidine; spermine; foods

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The polyamines putrescine, spermidine and spermine commonly occur in the cells of living organisms where they fulfil an array of physiological roles. Their participation in human cell growth and proliferation has been of great interest for their role in tumour growth. However, polyamines could be useful for post-operation patients, during wound healing and for growth and development of the neonate digestive system. Both endogenous and dietary polyamines participate in such processes. Data on polyamine contents in foods are limited and diffused in literature and dieticians have thus limited plausible information. This review briefly summarizes current knowledge on the biological implications of dietary polyamines for human health and collects the data on their formation and contents in manifold foods. While putrescine content increases by bacterial activity during inappropriate storage and processing of foods of animal origin, spermidine and spermine originate mainly from raw materials. Higher contents of spermidine as compared to spermine are typical for foods of plant origin, while an opposite relation is characteristic for foods of animal origin. The highest contents of all polyamines were determined in cheeses, mainly in ripened types. High putrescine levels were reported in citrus fruits and juices, sauerkraut, ketchup, fermented soybean products and fish sauce. Legumes, cauliflower and broccoli are foods with high spermidine content, while meat, meat products and legumes are high in spermine. Commonly, polyamine contents range widely within the individual food items. Extensive research is needed to extend the current limited database. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. 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