Preview

Food systems

Advanced search

Optimization of food compositions according to the ideal protein profile

https://doi.org/10.21323/2618-9771-2021-4-1-4-11

Full Text:

Abstract

The paper emphasizes the importance of not only the quantitative but also qualitative composition of protein in nutrition. The authors propose protein classification into three main groups according to the concept of reference (ideal) protein. A mathematical model is examined to solve the task of rational mixture production upon the given profile of reference protein. Two variants of the criterion for formation of optimal composition are described. One of them presents the classical sum of squares of the residual for essential amino acid scores and 1. The second also presents the sum of squares of the residual for essential amino acid scores and 1 but with regard to only those amino acids, which scores are less than 1. The minima of these criteria at the set of variants for the content of ingredients are taken as targeted functions. The algorithm and the program of calculation were realized in the program environment Builder C++ 6.0. The macro flowchart of the algorithm is presented and detailed description of each block is given. The program interface before and after the start of the calculation module is shown. The main windows and interpretation of the presented data are described. An example of realization of the proposed mathematical apparatus when calculating a food model composition is given. Plant components (white kidney beans, flax, peanut, grit “Poltavskaya», dry red carrot) were used as an object of the research. Most plant proteins were incomplete. It is possible to regulate the chemical composition including correction of a protein profile by combination of plant raw materials. Analysis of alternative variants demonstrated that minimum essential amino acid score in the first composition was 0.79 (by the first criterion), in the second 1.0 (by the second criterion); the reference protein proportion in the mixture was 10.8 and 13.5, respectively, according to the first and second criterion. The comparative results by other quality indicators for protein in the mixture are also presented: the coefficient of amino acid score difference (CAASD), biological value (BV), coefficient of utility, essential amino acids index (IEAA).

About the Authors

S. V. Zverev
All-Russian Scientific Research Institute for Grain and Products of its Processing — Branch of the V.M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems, RAS
Russian Federation

Sergey V. Zverev — doctor of technical sciences, professor, head of laboratory Technology and technique of cereal production.

127434, Moscow, Dmitrovskoe shosse, 11 Tel.: +7–903–533–38–43



V. I. Karpov
K.G. Razumovsky Moscow State University of technology and management (First Cossack University)
Russian Federation

Valeriy I. Karpov — doctor of technical Sciences, Professor, professor of the Department of Information Technologies and Systems.

109004, Moscow, Zemlyanoy Val str., 73. Tel.: +7–916–583–34–93



M. A. Nikitina
V.M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation

Marina A. Nikitina — candidate of technical sciences, docent, leading scientific worker, the Head of the Direction of Information Technologies, Center of Economic and Analytical Research and Information Technologies.

109316, Moscow, Talalikhina str., 26 Tel: +7–495–676–92–14



References

1. Burlacu, R. (2018). Mathematical model of optimization energy metabolism and protein quality to swine. Scientific Papers. Series D. Animal Science, LXI(1), 115–120.

2. Stein, H. (2016). Evaluating protein quality of human foods using the pig as a model. Journal of animal science, 94(suppl_2), 20–21. https://doi.org/10.2527/msasas2016–045

3. Ouyang, J.Q., Huang, N.Q., Jiang, Y.Q. (2020). A single-model quality assessment method for poor quality protein structure. BMC Bioinformatics, 21(1), Article 157. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859–020–3499–5

4. Wolfe, R.R., Rutherfurd, S.M., Kim, I.-Y., Moughan, P.J. (2016). Protein quality as determined by the Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score: evaluation of factors underlying the calculation. Nutrition reviews, 74(9), 0584–599. https://doi.org/10.1093/nutrit/nuw022

5. Uziela, K., Menéndez Hurtado, D., Shu, N., Wallner, B., Elofsson, A. (2018). Improved protein model quality assessments by changing the target function. Proteins-structure function and bioinformatics, 86(6), 654–663. https://doi.org/10.1002/prot.25492

6. Rogov, I.A., Antipova, L.V., Dunchenko, N.I., Zherebtsov, N.A. (2000). Chemistry of the food. Book 1. Proteins: structure, functions, role in nutrition. Moscow: Kolos. 384 p. ISBN 5–10–003538–2

7. Nechaev, A.P., Traubenberd, S.E., Kochetkova, A.A., Kolpakova, V.V., Vitol, I.S., Kobeleva, I.B. (2015). Food chemistry. Saint-Petersburg: GIORD. 672 p.

8. Kochetkova, A.A. (2012). Food chemistry. Мoscow: Giord. 389 p.

9. Dietary protein quality evaluation in human nutrition: Report of an FAO Expert Consultation. Rome: FAO, 2013. — 66 p.

10. Boye, J., Wijesinha-Bettoni, R., Burlingame, B. (2012). Protein quality evaluation twenty years after the introduction of the protein digestibility corrected amino acid score method. British Journal of Nutrition, 108(SUPPL. 2), S183-S211. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007114512002309

11. Zverev, S.V., Nikitina, M.A. (2017). Evaluation of the quality of leguminous protein. Feed, 4, 37–41.

12. Zverev S. V., Nikitina M. A. (2019). Balance protein supplements on the criterion of convertible protein. Food systems, 2(1), 16–19. https://doi.org/10.21323/2618–9771–2019–2–1–16–19

13. Zverev, S., Sesikashvili, O., & Pruidze, E. (2020). Enrichment of protein barley and triticale groats by adding chickpea. Journal of Food and Nutrition Research, 59(3), 202–206.

14. Nesmeyanov, A.N., Belikov, V.M. (1965). The problem of food synthesis. Report at the plenary session of the XI Mendeleev Congress on General and Applied Chemistry. Moscow: Nauka. 24 p.

15. FAO (1970). Amino-Acid content of foods and biological data on proteins. FAO food and nutrition series. Rome, Italy. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/ac854t/ac854t00.htm. Accessed January 09, 2019.

16. FAO/WHO (1973). Energy and protein requirements: Report of a joint FAO/WHO ad hoc expert committee. — Rome: FAO Nutrition Meetings Report Series No. 52. Geneva: WHO Technical Report Series No. 522.

17. FAO/WHO-UNU. (1985). Energy and Protein Requirements: Report of a Joint FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation, WHO Tech Report Series no.724, Geneva: WHO. ISBN 92–4–120724–8 Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/doCReP/003/aa040e/AA040E00.htm Accessed November 09, 2020.

18. FAO/WHO. (1991) Protein Quality Evaluation: Report of the Joint FAO/ WHO Expert Consultation, FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 51. Rome, FAO. — 72 p. ISBN 92–5–103097–9

19. FAO/WHO (2001). Report of the FAO/WHO Working Group on Analytical Issues Related to Food Composition and Protein Quality. Rome: FAO.

20. Skurikhin, M.I. (1987). Chemical composition of food products. Book 1. Мoscow: Agropromizdat. 224 p.

21. Nikitina M. A., Lisitsyn A. B., Zakharov A. N., Sus E. B., Pilugina S. A., Dydykin A. S., Ustinova A. V. Food product. Certificate of registration of the database RU, no. 2015620557, 2015.

22. Block, R.J., Mitchell, H.H. (1946). The Correlation of the Amino Acid Composition of Proteins with Their Nutritive Value. Nutrition Abstracts & Reviews,16, 249–278.


For citation:


Zverev S.V., Karpov V.I., Nikitina M.A. Optimization of food compositions according to the ideal protein profile. Food systems. 2021;4(1):4-11. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21323/2618-9771-2021-4-1-4-11

Views: 215


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2618-9771 (Print)
ISSN 2618-7272 (Online)