Advertisement

Food Science and Biotechnology

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 1055–1062 | Cite as

Effect of soaking, dehulling, and cooking methods on certain antinutrients and in vitro protein digestibility of bitter and sweet lupin seeds

  • Hassan El-Sayed EmbabyEmail author
Research Article

Abstarct

Effect of several physical treatments (soaking, dehulling, ordinary cooking, microwave cooking, and autoclaving) on the level of antinutrients and in vitro protein digestibility of bitter and sweet lupin seeds were investigated. The raw bitter and sweet lupin seeds were found to contain phytic acid, tannins, trypsin inhibitor activity, and lectin activity, but α-amylase inhibitor was absent. Dehulling significantly increased the levels of phytic acid (PA), trypsin inhibitor activity (TIA), and tannins, but lectin activity was not changed. Also soaking in bitter (for 96 hr) and sweet (for 24 hr) seeds caused a significant increase in these factors except lectin activity. Cooking methods differently affected the levels of the antinutrients. Thus, PA increased but tannins were not changed, on the other hand TI and lectin activities were inactivated; ordinary cooking and autoclaving were the most effective in both seeds. For combination effect, soaking following cooking treatments significantly decreased PA, tannins, and lectin activity, but increased TIA in both seeds. Moreover, dehulling following soaking and cooking methods resulted in a significant increase of PA, TIA, and tannins. In vitro protein digestibility (IVPD) of raw bitter and sweet lupin seeds were 78.55 and 79.46%, respectively and it was improved by all processing methods; soakingdehulling after autoclaving was the most effective in both seeds. Although some treatments increased the level of antinutrients, they improved IVPD. Therefore, the studied antinutrients are not the only responsible factor for lowering IVPD.

Keywords

lupin antinutrient protein digestibility cooking Soaking 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Huyghe C. White lupin (Lupinus albus L.). Field Crop Res. 53: 147–160 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lampart-Szczapa E. Preparation of protein from lupin seeds. Nahrung 40: 71–74 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Erbas M, Certel M, Uslu MK. Some chemical properties of white lupin seeds (Lupinus albus L.). Food Chem. 89: 341–345 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martýnez-Villaluenga C, Frýas J, Vidal-Valverde C. Functional lupin seeds (Lupinus albus L. and Lupinus luteus L.) after extraction of α-galactosides. Food Chem. 98: 291–299 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martín-Cabrejas MA, Aguilera Y, Pedrosa MM, Cuadrado C, Hernandez T, Diaz S, Esteban RM. The impact of dehydration process on antinutrients and protein digestibility of some legume flours. Food Chem. 114: 1063–1068 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alonso R, Aguirre A, Marzo F. Effects of extrusion and traditional processing methods on antinutrients and in vitro digestibility of protein and starch in faba and kidney beans. Food Chem. 68: 159–165 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wang N, Hatcher DW, Toews R, Gawalko EJ. Influence of cooking and dehulling on nutritional composition of several varieties of lentils (Lens culinaris). LWT-Food Sci. Technol. 42: 842–848 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Embaby HE. Antinutritional factors in some Egyptian cereals and legumes. MS thesis, Food Technology Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Suez Canal University, Ismailia, Egypt (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hajós G, Osagie AU. Technical and biotechnological modifications of antinutritional factors in legumes and oilseeds. pp. 293–305. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Antinutritional Factors in Legume Seeds and Oilseeds. March 8–10, Toledo, Spain. Wageningen: EAAP (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Habiba RA. Changes in anti-nutrients, protein solubility, digestibility, and HCl-extractability of ash and phosphorus in vegetable peas as affected by cooking methods. Food Chem. 77: 187–192 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang N, Hatcher DW, Gawalko EJ. Effect of variety and processing on nutrients and certain anti-nutrients in field peas (Pisum sativum). Food Chem. 111: 132–138 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Egounlety M, Aworh OC. Effect of soaking, dehulling, cooking, and fermentation with Rhizopus oligosporus on the oligosaccharides, trypsin inhibitor, phytic acid, and tannins of soybean (Glycine max Merr.), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata L. Walp), and groundbean (Macrotyloma geocarpa Harms). J. Food Eng. 56: 249–254 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rehman Z, Shah WH. Thermal heat processing effects on antinutrients, protein, and starch digestibility of food legumes. Food Chem. 91: 327–331 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    ElMaki HB, AbdelRahaman SM, Idris WH, Hassan AB, Babiker EE, El Tinay AH. Content of antinutritional factors and HClextractability of minerals from white bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) cultivars: Influence of soaking and/or cooking. Food Chem. 100: 362–368 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Duhan A, Khetarpaul N, Bishnoi S. Content of phytic acid and HClextractability of calcium, phosphorus, and iron as affected by various domestic processing and cooking methods. Food Chem. 78: 9–14 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mubarak AE. Nutritional composition and antinutritional factors of mung bean seeds (Phaseolus aureus) as affected by some home traditional processes. Food Chem. 89: 489–495 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vijayakumari K, Pugalenthi M, Vadivel V. Effect of soaking and hydrothermal processing methods on the levels of antinutrients and in vitro protein digestibility of Bauhinia purpurea L. seeds. Food Chem. 103: 968–975 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nithya KS, Ramachandramurty B, Krishnamoorthy VV. Effect of processing methods on nutritional and anti-nutritional qualities of hybrid (COHCU-8) and traditional (CO7) pearl millet varieties in India. J. Biol. Sci. 7: 643–647 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Latta M, Eskin M. Simple and rapid colorimetric method for phytate determination. J. Agr. Food Chem. 28: 1313–1315 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vaintraub IA, Lapteva NA. Colorimetric determination of phytate in unpurified extracts of seed and the products of their processing. Anal. Biochem. 17: 227–230 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alonso R, Orue E, Marzo F. Effects of extrusion and conventional processing methods on protein and antinutritional factor contents in pea seeds. Food Chem. 63: 505–512 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    AOAC. Official Method of Analysis of AOAC Intl. 14th ed. Method 9.110–9.112. Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Arlington, VA, USA (1984)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kakade M, Rackis JJ, McGhee JE, Puski G. Determination of trypsin inhibitor activity of soy products: A collaborative analysis of an improved procedure. Cereal Chem. 51: 376–382 (1974)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hamerstrand GE, Black LT, Glover JD. Trypsin inhibitors in soy products: Modification of the standard analytical procedure. Cereal Chem. 58: 42–45 (1981)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Paredes-Lopez O, Schevenin ML, Guevara-Lara F. Thermal inactivation of hemagglutinating activity of normal and geneticallyimproved common bean varieties: A kinetic approach. Food Chem. 31: 129–137 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hsu HW, Vavak DL, Saterlee LD, Miller GA. Multi-enzyme technique for estimating protein digestibility. J. Food Sci. 42: 1269–1273 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ejigui J, Savoie L, Marin J, Desrosiers T. Influence of traditional processing methods on the nutritional composition and antinutrtional factors of red peanuts (Arachis hypogea) and small red kidney beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). J. Biol. Sci. 5: 597–605 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Osman MA. Effect of different processing methods, on nutrient composition, antinutrional factors, and in vitro protein digestibility of Dolichos lablab bean [Lablab purpuresus (L) Sweet]. Pakistan J. Nutr. 6: 299–303 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lampart-Szczapa E, Korczak J, Nogala-Kalucka M, Zawirska-Wojtasiak R. Antioxidant properties of lupin seed products. Food Chem. 83: 279–285 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shimelis EA, Rakshit SK. Effect of processing on antinutrients and in vitro protein digestibility of kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties grown in East Africa. Food Chem. 103: 161–172 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Grant G, More LJ, McKenzie NH, Pusztai A. The effect of heating on the haemagglutination activity and nutritional properties of bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) seeds. J. Sci. Food Agr. 33: 1324–1326 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lis H, Sharon N. Biological properties of lectins. pp. 265–291. In: The Lectins: Properties, Functions, and Applications in Biology and Medicine. Liener IE, Sharon N, Goldstein IJ (eds). Academic Press, Orlando, FL, USA (1986)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Batra VIP. Effects of cooking and germination on haemagglutinating activity in lentil. Indian J. Nutr. Diet. 24: 15–19 (1987)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Yagoub AA, Abdalla AA. Effect of domestic processing methods on chemical composition, in vitro digestibility of protein and starch and functional properties of bambara groundnut (Voandzeia subterranea) seed. Res. J. Agr. Biol. Sci. 3: 24–34 (2007)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Genovese MI, Lajolo FM. In vitro digestibility of albumin proteins from Phaseolus vulgaris L. effect of chemical modification. J. Agr. Food Chem. 44: 3022–3028 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Swaisgood E, Catignani LG. Protein digestibility in vitro methods of assessment. pp. 185–230. In: Advances in Food and Nutrition Research. Kinsella JE (ed). Academic Press, San Diego, CA, USA (1991)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Acton JC, Breyer L, Satterlee LD. Effect of dietary fiber constituents on the in vitro digestibility of casein. J. Food Sci. 47: 556–560 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    López G, Ros G, Rincón F, Ortufio J, Periago MJ, Martinez MC. Amino acids and in vitro protein digestibility changes in green asparagus (Asparagus oficinalis, L.) during growth and processing. Food Res. Int. 29: 617–625 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean Society of Food Science and Technology and Springer Netherlands 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Food Technology Department, Faculty of AgricultureSuez Canal UniversityIsmailiaEgypt

Personalised recommendations