VARIABILITY IN THE NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THREE NEW LIMA BEAN (PHASEOLUS LUNATUS L. WALP.) BREEDING LINES

Article Id: ARCC3626 | Page : 25 - 31
Citation :- VARIABILITY IN THE NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THREE NEW LIMA BEAN (PHASEOLUS LUNATUS L. WALP.) BREEDING LINES.Legume Research-An International Journal.2006.(29):25 - 31
Sunday Y. Giami
Address : Department of Food Science and Technology, Rivers State University of Science and Technology, Port Harcourt, Nigeria

Abstract

Chemical composition and protein quality of raw and heat-processed (boiled and autoclaved) samples of selected advanced breeding lines of lima beans (Tpl 1B, Tpl 7A and Tpl 175A), part of a larger collection developed by the International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (IITA), and evaluated in agronomic field trials in Nigeria, were studied. Protein quality was evaluated using weanling albino rats fed diets which we formulated to supply 10% protein using lima bean samples with casein as a control. Raw seeds contained 24.0–27.8% crude protein, 6.8–7.7 mg iron per 100g, 55.7–79.0 mg polyphenol per 100g and 118.8–225.9 mg phytic acid per 100g seed flour. Tpl 1B had higher crude protein and mineral (calcium, iron and sodium) contents, and lower amounts of polyphenol and phytic acid compared with Tpl 7A and Tpl 175A. Boiling (moist heat) was more effective than autoclaving (dry heat) for reducing the levels of antinutrients and improving the protein quality of the beans, as shown by the higher values for weight gain, protein efficiency ratio (PER), net protein ratio (NPR) and true digestibility (TD) of boiled samples. There were no significant (p > 0.05) differences between the values obtained for PER, NPR, and TD of diets formulated with boiled samples of Tpl 1B and casein, indicating the superiority of the protein quality of this lima bean line compared with Tpl 7A and Tpl 175A.

Keywords

References

  1. Ali, M.A.M. et al. (2003). Food Chem., 80: 51-54.
  2. AOAC (1984). Official methods of Analysis, 14th Edn. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington DC.
  3. Apata, D.F. and Ologhobo, A.D. (1994). Food Chem., 49: 333-338.
  4. Duncan, D.B. (1955). Biometrics, 11: 1-5.
  5. Ene-bong, H.N. and Carnvale, E. (1992). Food Chem., 43:169-175.
  6. Fetuga, B.L. et al. (1973). J. Sci. Food Agric., 24: 1515-1523.
  7. Giami, S.Y. and Wachuku, O.C. (1997). Plant Foods Hum. Nutr., 50: 27-36.
  8. Giami, S.Y. (2001). Plant Foods Hum. Nutr., 56: 325-333.
  9. Giami, S.Y. et al. (2001a). Plant Foods Hum. Nutr., 56: 61-73.
  10. Giami S.Y. et al. (2001b). Plant Foods Hum. Nutr., 56: 117-126.
  11. Giami, S.Y. (2002). J. Sci. Food Agric., 82: 1735-1739.
  12. Giami, S.Y. (2003). J. Dairying, Foods and Home Sci., 22: 95-100.
  13. Igbedioh, S.O. et al. (1994). Food Chem., 50: 147-151.
  14. Kadam, S.S. et al. (1987). J. Sci. Food Agric., 39: 267-275.
  15. Khokhar, S. and Chauhan, B.M. (1986). J. Food Sci., 51: 591-594.
  16. Lopez, H.W. et al. (2002). Int. J. Food Sci. Technol., 37: 727-739.
  17. 30 LEGUME RESEARCH
  18. Luse, R.H. (1979). The role of grain legumes. In: Luse, R.W. and Rachie, K.O. (Eds.) Tropical Nutrition, Ibadan:
  19. International Institute for Tropical Agriculture, pp 249-254.
  20. Ologhobo, A.D. (1986). Nigerian Food J., 4: 34-44.
  21. Ologhobo, A.D. and Fetuga, B.L. (1984). Trop. Agric., 61: 261-264.
  22. Pellet, P.I. and Young V.R. (1980). Food Nutr. Bull. Suppl.No. 4, U.N.U. World Hunger Programme, Japan.
  23. Singh, U. et al. (1991). J. Food Sci. Technol., 28: 345-347.
  24. Stanley, D.W. and Aguilera, J.M. (1985). J. Food Biochem., 9: 277-323.
  25. Tan, N.H. et al. (1984). J. Agric Food Chem., 32: 819-822.
  26. Wahua, T.A.T. (1999). Applied Statistics for Scientific Studies, African, Link Press, Aba, Nigeria.
  27. Walker, A.F. and Kochhar, N. (1982). Proc. Nutr. Soc., 41: 41-51.
  28. Wheeler, E.L. and Ferrel, R.E. (1971). Cereal Chem., 48: 312-316.
  29. Wilson, M.F. and Blunden, C.A. (1983). J. Sci. Food Agric., 34: 973-978

Global Footprints