Absorption of iron from edible house crickets: a randomized crossover stable-isotope study in humans.
Acheta domestica
Netherlands
anemia
bioavailability
chitin
edible insects
fractional iron absorption
human
iron
stable isotopes
Journal
The American journal of clinical nutrition
ISSN: 1938-3207
Titre abrégé: Am J Clin Nutr
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0376027
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 10 2022
06 10 2022
Historique:
received:
28
03
2022
accepted:
24
08
2022
pubmed:
27
8
2022
medline:
12
10
2022
entrez:
26
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Edible insects are a novel source of animal protein. Moreover, edible insects contain iron concentrations similar to meat, potentially making them a valuable iron source for human consumers. Yet, it is unknown to what extent iron from insects is absorbed in humans. In this exploratory study, we assessed fractional iron absorption from house crickets (Acheta domesticus) consumed with refined (low-phytate, noninhibiting) or nonrefined (high-phytate, inhibiting) meals. Intrinsically [57Fe]-labeled and control crickets were reared. Six iron-balanced experimental meals were randomly administered crossover to 20 iron-depleted females (serum ferritin <25 µg/L; 18-30 y old), in 2 time-blocks of 3 consecutive days, 2 wk apart. Three meals consisted of refined maize flour porridge with either [57Fe]-labeled crickets, [58Fe]SO4 (reference meal), or unlabeled crickets plus [54Fe]SO4. The other 3 meals consisted of nonrefined maize flour porridge with the same respective additions. Blood samples were drawn to assess the 14-d isotope enrichment in erythrocytes, and meal-specific fractional iron absorption was calculated. In vitro digestion was used to explore possible explanations for unexpected findings. Mean fractional iron absorption from 57Fe-labeled house crickets with refined maize porridge (3.06%) and from refined maize porridge with unlabeled crickets (4.92%) was lower than from the reference meal (14.2%), with respective mean differences of -11.1% (95% CI: -12.6%, -9.68%) and -9.29% (95% CI: -10.8%, -7.77%). Iron absorption from all meals based on unrefined maize porridge was low (<3%), and did not differ for the 2 meals with crickets compared with the reference meal. In vitro digestion showed that chitin, chitosan, and calcium limited iron bioaccessibility to a large extent. Iron absorption from house crickets and fortified maize porridge with crickets is low, which may be explained by the presence of chitin and other inhibitors in the cricket biomass.This trial was registered at https://www.trialregister.nl as NL6821.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Edible insects are a novel source of animal protein. Moreover, edible insects contain iron concentrations similar to meat, potentially making them a valuable iron source for human consumers. Yet, it is unknown to what extent iron from insects is absorbed in humans.
OBJECTIVES
In this exploratory study, we assessed fractional iron absorption from house crickets (Acheta domesticus) consumed with refined (low-phytate, noninhibiting) or nonrefined (high-phytate, inhibiting) meals.
METHODS
Intrinsically [57Fe]-labeled and control crickets were reared. Six iron-balanced experimental meals were randomly administered crossover to 20 iron-depleted females (serum ferritin <25 µg/L; 18-30 y old), in 2 time-blocks of 3 consecutive days, 2 wk apart. Three meals consisted of refined maize flour porridge with either [57Fe]-labeled crickets, [58Fe]SO4 (reference meal), or unlabeled crickets plus [54Fe]SO4. The other 3 meals consisted of nonrefined maize flour porridge with the same respective additions. Blood samples were drawn to assess the 14-d isotope enrichment in erythrocytes, and meal-specific fractional iron absorption was calculated. In vitro digestion was used to explore possible explanations for unexpected findings.
RESULTS
Mean fractional iron absorption from 57Fe-labeled house crickets with refined maize porridge (3.06%) and from refined maize porridge with unlabeled crickets (4.92%) was lower than from the reference meal (14.2%), with respective mean differences of -11.1% (95% CI: -12.6%, -9.68%) and -9.29% (95% CI: -10.8%, -7.77%). Iron absorption from all meals based on unrefined maize porridge was low (<3%), and did not differ for the 2 meals with crickets compared with the reference meal. In vitro digestion showed that chitin, chitosan, and calcium limited iron bioaccessibility to a large extent.
CONCLUSIONS
Iron absorption from house crickets and fortified maize porridge with crickets is low, which may be explained by the presence of chitin and other inhibitors in the cricket biomass.This trial was registered at https://www.trialregister.nl as NL6821.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36026477
pii: S0002-9165(23)03632-8
doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqac223
pmc: PMC9535517
doi:
Substances chimiques
Isotopes
0
Phytic Acid
7IGF0S7R8I
Ferritins
9007-73-2
Chitosan
9012-76-4
Iron
E1UOL152H7
Calcium
SY7Q814VUP
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1146-1156Subventions
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 106856/Z/15/Z
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society for Nutrition.
Références
Eur J Clin Nutr. 1989 Aug;43(8):547-57
pubmed: 2598894
J Biol Inorg Chem. 2012 Feb;17(2):301-9
pubmed: 22002846
Annu Rev Entomol. 2013;58:563-83
pubmed: 23020616
Food Nutr Bull. 2010 Jun;31(2 Suppl):S134-46
pubmed: 20715598
J Clin Invest. 1962 Dec;41:2182-90
pubmed: 14015940
Crit Rev Microbiol. 2014 May;40(2):155-75
pubmed: 23488873
Lancet. 2007 Aug 11;370(9586):511-20
pubmed: 17693180
Nutrients. 2021 Apr 06;13(4):
pubmed: 33917531
Angiology. 2015 May;66(5):416-21
pubmed: 25037700
Nutr Rev. 1997 Apr;55(4):102-10
pubmed: 9197130
PLoS One. 2010 Dec 29;5(12):e14445
pubmed: 21206900
Ann Nutr Metab. 2007;51(3):244-51
pubmed: 17587796
Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 27;9(1):2967
pubmed: 30814530
Br J Nutr. 2001 May;85 Suppl 2:S181-5
pubmed: 11509108
Biomed Mater. 2018 Jan 30;13(2):025009
pubmed: 29182521
PLoS One. 2015 Dec 23;10(12):e0144601
pubmed: 26699129
Am J Clin Nutr. 2010 May;91(5):1461S-1467S
pubmed: 20200263
Adv Exp Med Biol. 1989;249:117-32
pubmed: 2658489
Eur J Clin Nutr. 2016 Mar;70(3):285-91
pubmed: 26373961
Sci Rep. 2018 Jul 17;8(1):10762
pubmed: 30018370
Mar Drugs. 2020 Dec 09;18(12):
pubmed: 33317025
J Clin Invest. 1967 Jan;46(1):1-9
pubmed: 6018746
Nutr Res Rev. 2018 Dec;31(2):248-255
pubmed: 30033906
Biosci Biotechnol Biochem. 1995 Jul;59(7):1211-6
pubmed: 7670180
J Agric Food Chem. 2016 Nov 9;64(44):8420-8424
pubmed: 27731991
Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2010 Sep 27;365(1554):2793-807
pubmed: 20713385
Food Funct. 2014 Jun;5(6):1113-24
pubmed: 24803111
Compr Rev Food Sci Food Saf. 2019 Jul;18(4):1166-1191
pubmed: 33336989
J Nutr. 2013 Sep;143(9):1376-82
pubmed: 23884388