Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-17T04:43:15.418Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nutritive value of proteins of pearl millet of high-yielding varieties and hybrids

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

A. K Goswami ,
K. P Sharma  and
K. L SEHGAL
A. K Goswami
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
K. P Sharma
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
K. L SEHGAL
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

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. Two high-yielding varieties and three hybrids of pearl millet were evaluated for their chemical composition and protein efficiency ratio (PER) for rats at a level of 6.38% dietary protein. PER values ranged from 0.94 to 1.21 and were significantly different.

2. Tryptophan contents of the proteins were above the optimum level of the FAO reference protein. Lysine content was deficient in all the samples and was probably the limiting amino acid in the PER test.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , November 1969 , pp. 913 - 916
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1969

References

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (1960). Official Methods of Analysis, 9th ed.Washington, D.C.: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar
Campbell, J. A. (1961). Methodology of Protein Evaluation. Nutrition Document R 10/Add. 37, WHO/FAO/UNICEF-PAG.Google Scholar
Chapman, D. G., Castillo, R. & Campbell, J. A. (1959). Can.7. Biochem. Physiol. 37, 679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO (1957). F.A.O. Nutr. Stud. no. 16.Google Scholar
Gopalan, C. & Balasubramanyan, S. C. (1963). Spec. Rep. Ser. Indian Coun. Med. Res. no. 42, 6th ed., revised. Appendix 2.Google Scholar
Hawk, P. B., Oser, B. L. & Summerson, W. H. (1947). Practical Physiological Chemistry, 12th ed.London: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc.Google Scholar
Horn, M. J., Jones, D. B. & Blum, A. E. (1946). J. biol. Chem. 166, 313.Google Scholar
Kurion, P. P., Swaminathan, M. & Subrahmanyan, V. (1961). Fd Sci. 10, 3.Google Scholar
McKenzie, H. A. & Wallace, H. S. (1954). Aust. J. Chem. 7, 55.Google Scholar
Moore, S., Spackman, D. H. & Stein, W. H. (1958). Analyt. Chem. 30, 1185.Google Scholar
Moore, S. & Stein, W. H. (1954). J. biol. Chem. 211, 907.Google Scholar
Phansalkar, S. V., Ramachandran, M. & Patwardhan, V. N. (1957). Indian J. med. Res. 45, 611.Google Scholar
Phul, P. S., Rana, N. D. & Goswami, A. K. (1969). Curr. Sci. 39, 247.Google Scholar
Ramachandran, M. & Phansalkar, S. V. (1956). Indian J. med. Res. 44, 501.Google Scholar
Rama Rao, G., Murthy, H. B. N. & Swaminathan, V. (1953). Bull. cent. Fd technol. Res. Inst., Mysore 3, 44.Google Scholar
Smith, A. M. & Agiza, A. H. (1951). Analyst, Lond. 76, 623.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swaminathan, M. (1937). Indian J. med. Res. 24, 767.Google Scholar