Physiological Effects Associated with Quinoa Consumption and Implications for Research Involving Humans: a Review
Quinoa is a pseudo-grain consumed as a dietary staple in South America. In recent years, consumer demand for quinoa in the developed world has grown steadily. Its perceived health benefits have been cited as a driving force behind this trend, but there are very few human studies investigating the impact of quinoa consumption. The aim of this review was to identify physiological effects of quinoa consumption with potential for human health. A critical evaluation of animal model studies was conducted. The quality of identified studies was assessed using a methodological quality assessment tool and summative conclusions were drawn to guide the direction of future human research. The majority of studies were of fair quality. Purported physiological effects of quinoa consumption included decreased weight gain, improved lipid profile and improved capacity to respond to oxidative stress. These physiological effects were attributed to the presence of saponins, protein and 20-hydroxyecdysone in the quinoa seed. The implications of these findings are that human studies should investigate the impact of quinoa consumption on weight gain and lipid levels. The role of quinoa as an antioxidant is still unclear and requires further elucidation in animal models.
KeywordsQuinoa Animal Weight gain Lipids Antioxidant effects Saponins
Ferric reducing antioxidant power
Methodological quality assessment
This research was supported by a RIRDC Postgraduate Scholarship (PRJ-009683) and a GRDC Grains Industry Research Scholarship (GRS10698).
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest
Compliance with Ethics
The procedures performed in seven of the included animal studies were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution at which the studies were conducted. Eleven of the included studies did not explicitly state that the experimental procedures were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution that the study was performed at.
- 1.FAO (2014) Food and nutrition in numbers. Food and Agriculture Organisation, Rome, Accessed 27 March 2015Google Scholar
- 2.Van der Kamp JW, Poutanen K, Seal CJ, Richardson DP (2014) The HEALTHGRAIN definition of ‘whole grain’. Food Nutr Res 58. doi: 10.3402/fnr.v58.22100
- 3.U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (2010) Dietary guidelines for Americans. US Govt Printing Office, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- 4.National Health and Medical Research Council & Department of Health and Ageing (2013) Eat for health Australian dietary guidelines summary. NHMRC, CanberraGoogle Scholar
- 6.FAOSTAT (2014) Download. FAOSTAT. http://faostat3.fao.org/faostat-gateway/go/to/download/Q/QC/E. Accessed 12 June 2014
- 7.Jancurova M, Minarovicova L, Dandar A (2009) Quinoa - a review. Czech J Food Sci 27(2):71–79. http://www.agriculturejournals.cz/publicFiles/06732.pdf
- 8.Ziebell P (2015) Emerging commodities: quinoa. National Australia Bank, Acessed 28 February 2015Google Scholar
- 10.Ranhotra GS, Gelroth JA, Glaser BK, Lorenz KJ, Johnson DL (1993) Composition and protein nutritional quality of quinoa. Cereal Chem 70(3):303–305Google Scholar
- 25.Improta F, Kellems RO (2001) Comparison of raw, washed and polished quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) to wheat, sorghum or maize based diets on growth and survival of broiler chicks. Livest Res Rural Dev 13(1):1–10. http://www.lrrd.org/lrrd13/1/impr131.htm
- 28.Mithila MV, Khanum F (2015) Effectual comparison of quinoa and amaranth supplemented diets in controlling appetite; a biochemical study in rats. J Food Sci Technol 1–7Google Scholar
- 30.Diaz J, Diaz MF, Cataneda S (1995) A note on the use of Chenopodium quinoa forage meal in pre-fattening pigs. Cuban J Agric Sci 29(2):223–226Google Scholar
- 36.WHO (2015) Obesity and overweight. World Health Organisation. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/. Accessed 21 March 2015