Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T12:40:31.393Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Quantification of vitamin D3 and 25(OH)D3 in commercial pork products by LC- MS/M

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2023

E.J. Taylor
Affiliation:
Nutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK
E.J. Rosbotham
Affiliation:
Nutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK
C.I.R. Gill
Affiliation:
Nutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK
E.J. McDonald
Affiliation:
Devenish Nutrition Ltd, Belfast, UK
W.C. McRoberts
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast, UK
N. Rainey
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast, UK
R. Loy
Affiliation:
Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute, Belfast, UK
H.R. Neill
Affiliation:
Nutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK
U. O'Neill
Affiliation:
Karro Food Group, Cookstown, UK
S. Smyth
Affiliation:
John Thompsons and Sons, Belfast, UK
L.K. Pourshahidi
Affiliation:
Nutrition Innovation Centre for Food and Health (NICHE), School of Biomedical Sciences, Ulster University, Coleraine, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Abstract
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

Vitamin D deficiency is a growing concern in the UK with many failing to consume the recommended nutrient intake of 10–20 μg/day(Reference Neill, Gill and McDonald1). Meat and meat products are one of the largest contributors to vitamin D intakes in the UK, of which, pork and pork products are among the top three most commonly consumed(2). Therefore, it is important to understand the total vitamin D content of such products currently available to consumers. The aim of this study was to quantify vitamin D3 and 25(OH)D3 concentrations in commercial pork products; bacon, sausages, and gammon, in comparison to McCance and Widdowson composition of foods integrated dataset (CoFID)(3).

Branded pork products: unsmoked streaky bacon, unsmoked back bacon, thick sausages, and unsmoked prime gammon joint (3 packs of each), were provided by a local producer (Karro Food Group, Cookstown, UK). All products were oven roasted (180°C) until an internal temperature of >75°C was reached. Cooked samples were homogenised thoroughly by product type and stored at -80°C prior to analysis. Cooked samples (n = 3; 1 sample per pack) were analysed in duplicate by Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry (LC-MS/MS)(Reference Neill, Gill and McDonald1) for vitamin D3 and 25(OH)D3 concentrations (μg/100g). Vitamin D activity was calculated: vitamin D3 + 25(OH)D3 x 5(Reference Cashman4).

The mean ± SD vitamin D3 and 25(OH)D3 concentrations of each product (per 100g) were quantified as follows: back bacon (0.25 ± 0.06 and 0.11 ± 0.01 μg); streaky bacon (0.32 ± 0.04 and 0.15 ± 0.03 μg); sausages (0.66 ± 0.01 and 0.13 ± 0.01 μg), and gammon (0.60 ± 0.02 and 0.15 ± 0.01 μg), respectively. One Sample T-Test revealed a higher vitamin D activity in sausages and gammon (per 100g), in comparison to comparable data published in CoFID(3): sausages (1.32 ± 0.03 vs 1.1 μg, P = 0.007) and gammon (1.34 ± 0.08 vs 0.8 μg, P = 0.007). In bacon, vitamin D activity was not significantly different compared to

CoFID(3) values: back bacon (0.81 ± 0.11 vs 0.6 μg, P = 0.079); streaky bacon (1.05 ± 0.17 vs 0.7 μg, P = 0.064).

Vitamin D concentrations may vary between pork products owing to differences in animal husbandry practices (e.g., indoor vs outdoor housing/feed composition), processing techniques (e.g., fat trimming) and/or analytical factors (e.g., range of samples analysed/method of quantification)(Reference Neill, Gill and McDonald5). Data within the current analysis may inform future new product development (e.g., products targeted for biofortification or another reformulation). Continued monitoring of food composition data including a larger range of samples is warranted to ensure food composition data are reflective of current nutrient supply within the food supply chain.

Acknowledgments

This study was funded by the Agri-Food Quest Competence Centre (AFQCC), supported by Devenish Nutrition Limited and conducted in collaboration with Agri-Food and Bioscience Institute (AFBI). First Author funded by Department of Economy (DfE) PhD studentship at Ulster University.

References

Neill, HR, Gill, CIR, McDonald, EJ et al. (2021) Frontiers in Nutrition, 8.Google Scholar
Public Health England (2020) NDNS: results from years 9 to 11 [Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/ndns-results-from-years-9-to-11-2016-to-2017-and-2018-to-2019].Google Scholar
Public Health England (2015) Composition of foods integrated dataset (CoFID) [Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/composition-of-foods-integrated-dataset-cofid].Google Scholar
Cashman, K (2012) Food Nutr Res 56, 1810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neill, HR, Gill, CIR, McDonald, EJ et al. (2023) Meat Science 199, 109115.Google Scholar