The effect of different processing methods on nutrient and isoflavone content of soymilk obtained from six varieties of soybean grown in Rwanda.

Glycine max (L.) Merrill chemical composition fat minerals protein

Journal

Food science & nutrition
ISSN: 2048-7177
Titre abrégé: Food Sci Nutr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101605473

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Feb 2019
Historique:
received: 18 06 2018
revised: 31 08 2018
accepted: 31 08 2018
entrez: 9 3 2019
pubmed: 9 3 2019
medline: 9 3 2019
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Soymilk is rich in nutrients and isoflavones, and could greatly promote nutrition and health. However, this product is not widely accepted due to an objectionable beany flavor. Several methods involving heat treatment and soaking in basic solutions prior to soymilk extraction have been reported to reduce the objectionable flavor. However, the effects of such treatments on the nutritional value and isoflavone content of soymilk, and the responses of different soybean varieties to nutrient extraction by these methods is not well studied. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of three processing methods on protein, fat, minerals, and isoflavone content in soymilk from six soybean varieties grown in Rwanda (Peka-6, SB 24, Sc. Sequel, Sc, Squire, and a local variety) to find the best variety and processing method. The first method (M1) involved soaking soybeans in water for 12 hr prior to milk extraction, M2 involved blanching in NaHCO

Identifiants

pubmed: 30847123
doi: 10.1002/fsn3.812
pii: FSN3812
pmc: PMC6392869
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

457-464

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

None.

Références

J Nutr. 1999 Mar;129(3):758S-767S
pubmed: 10082786
J Food Sci. 2015 May;80(5):C983-8
pubmed: 25827234
J Agric Food Chem. 2010 Aug 25;58(16):8958-65
pubmed: 20681554
J Food Sci. 2011 Jan-Feb;76(1):S20-5
pubmed: 21535711
J Agric Food Chem. 2009 Feb 25;57(4):1213-8
pubmed: 19199598
Nutr Hosp. 2008 Jul-Aug;23(4):305-12
pubmed: 18604315
Food Sci Nutr. 2018 Oct 25;7(2):457-464
pubmed: 30847123
J Agric Food Chem. 2012 Aug 1;60(30):7457-62
pubmed: 22812487
J Nutr. 1995 Sep;125(9):2307-15
pubmed: 7666247
J Natl Cancer Inst. 1991 Apr 17;83(8):541-6
pubmed: 1672382
J Biol Chem. 1951 Nov;193(1):265-75
pubmed: 14907713
Br J Cancer. 2005 Jul 11;93(1):15-22
pubmed: 15942624
J AOAC Int. 2008 May-Jun;91(3):489-500
pubmed: 18567292

Auteurs

Marguerite Niyibituronsa (M)

Rwanda Agriculture Board Kigali Rwanda.
Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology Nairobi Kenya.
Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa-International Livestock Research Institute Hub Nairobi Kenya.

Arnold Nola Onyango (AN)

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology Nairobi Kenya.

Svetlana Gaidashova (S)

Rwanda Agriculture Board Kigali Rwanda.

Samuel Imathiu (S)

Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture and Technology Nairobi Kenya.

Mathilde Uwizerwa (M)

Rwanda Agriculture Board Kigali Rwanda.

Emelda Phillis Ochieng (EP)

Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa-International Livestock Research Institute Hub Nairobi Kenya.

Fredrick Ng'ang'a (F)

Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa-International Livestock Research Institute Hub Nairobi Kenya.

Josephine Birungi (J)

Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa-International Livestock Research Institute Hub Nairobi Kenya.

Sita Ghimire (S)

Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa-International Livestock Research Institute Hub Nairobi Kenya.

Jagger Harvey (J)

Biosciences Eastern and Central Africa-International Livestock Research Institute Hub Nairobi Kenya.
Feed the Future Innovation Lab for the Reduction of Post-Harvest Loss, and Department of Plant Pathology Kansas State University Manhattan New York.

Classifications MeSH