Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T23:36:40.202Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Comparison of chemical and microbiological methods in the estimation of methionine in cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) seeds

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 January 2017

I. Marta Evans ,
J. E. Ford ,
L. C. Hannah  and
D. Boulter
I. Marta Evans
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University of Durham, Durham
J. E. Ford
Affiliation:
National Institute for Research in Dairying, Shinfield, Reading RGz 9AT
L. C. Hannah
Affiliation:
Vegetable Crops Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA
D. Boulter
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, University of Durham, Durham
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Meals were prepared from the seeds of fifteen varieties of cowpea (Vigna unguiculata), one of lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus) and one of yam bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa), and their methionine content was determined by six different methods.

2. Total methionine content was determined by two chemical methods (ion-exchange chromatography and a colorimetric procedure) and by two microbiological methods. The ‘available’ methionine content was determined by microbiological assay with Streptococcus zymogenes.

3. All the different methods for total methionine determination gave similar results, with much the same high extent of precision.

4. The values for ‘available’ methionine content were similar to or marginally higher than the corresponding microbiological assay values for total methionine content. There was no indication that the methionine in any of the test samples was not completely available.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , September 1976 , pp. 289 - 293
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1976

References

Boyne, A. W., Ford, J. E., Hewitt, D. & Shrimpton, D. H. (1975). Br. J. Nutr. 34, 153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellinger, G. M. & Palmer, R. (1969). Proc. Nutr. Soc. 28, 42A.Google Scholar
Evans, I. M. & Boulter, D. (1974e). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 25, 311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, I. M. & Boulter, D. (19746). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 25, 919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, J. E. (1962). Br. J. Nutr. 16, 409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehrke, C. W. & Neuner, T. E. (1974). J. Ass. off. Analyt. Chem. 57, 682.Google Scholar
Njaa, L. R. (1962). Acta chem. scand. 16, 1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar