Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-5bvrz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-06T10:39:33.742Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Phaseolin type and heat treatment influence the biochemistry of protein digestion in the rat intestine

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

Carlos A. Montoya
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, UMR1079 SENAH, F-35590Saint-Gilles, France Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Departamento de Produccion Animal, Carrera 32 Chapinero, Palmira (Valle), Colombia
Pascal Leterme
Affiliation:
Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Departamento de Produccion Animal, Carrera 32 Chapinero, Palmira (Valle), Colombia Prairie Swine Centre, 2105 8th Street East, Saskatoon, SK, S7H 5N9, Canada
Stephen Beebe
Affiliation:
Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical, AA 6713, Cali, Colombia
Wolfgang B. Souffrant
Affiliation:
FBN, Department of Nutritional Physiology ‘Oskar Kellner’, Wilhelm-Stahl-Allee 2, 18196Dummerstorf, Germany
Daniel Mollé
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, UMR1253 STLO, 65 rue Saint-Brieuc, 35042Rennes Cedex, France
Jean-Paul Lallès*
Affiliation:
Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, UMR1079 SENAH, F-35590Saint-Gilles, France
*
*Corresponding author: Dr Jean-Paul Lallès, fax +33 (0)2 23 48 50 80, email Jean-Paul.Lalles@rennes.inra.fr
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The study aimed to investigate the in vivo digestion of Phaseolus vulgaris phaseolin types differing in their subunit pattern composition. Diets contained either casein as the sole source of protein or a mixture (1:1) of casein and pure Sanilac (S), Tendergreen (T) or Inca (I) phaseolin either unheated or heated. Rats were fed for 11 d with the experimental diets. Their ileal content and mucosa were collected and prepared for electrophoresis, Western blotting, densitometry and MS. Differences in digestion among native phaseolin types were observed for intact phaseolin at molecular weights (MW) of 47–50·5 kDa and for an undigested fragment at MW of 19–21·5 kDa in ileal digesta. In both cases, the concentration of these protein bands was lower for I phaseolin than for S or T phaseolin (P < 0·05). In the mucosa, the concentration of a protein band at MW of 20·5–21·5 kDa was lower for S phaseolin as compared to T or I phaseolin (P < 0·001). The presence of phaseolin subunits and their fragments was confirmed by Western blotting. MS analysis revealed the presence of undigested α and β subunit fragments from phaseolin and endogenous proteins (anionic trypsin I and pancreatic α-amylase) in ileal digesta. Thermal treatment improved digestion (P < 0·01), acting on both dietary and endogenous protein components. In conclusion, this study provides evidence for differences in intestinal digestion among phaseolin types, S phaseolin being more resistant and I phaseolin more susceptible. These differences were affected by the origin of the phaseolin subunit precursor. Heat treatment enhanced phaseolin digestion.

Information

Type
Full Papers
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 2007
Figure 0

Table 1 Ingredients and analytical composition of the experimental diets

Figure 1

Fig. 1 SDS–PAGE and Western blotting analysis of casein (C) and Sanilac (S), Tendergreen (T) and Inca (I) phaseolins. Molecular weight (MW) markers are indicated. ▸, bands characterized by MS in Table 2.

Figure 2

Table 2 Molecular weight search (MOWSE) score for MS identification of protein bands in pure unheated phaseolin

Figure 3

Fig. 2 SDS–PAGE (A) and Western blotting (B) analysis of ileal digesta of rats fed diets with casein (C) or Sanilac (S), Tendergreen (T) and Inca (I) phaseolins in unheated or heated form. Molecular weight (MW) markers are indicated. ▸, bands characterized by densitometry in Table 3 and by MS in Table 4.

Figure 4

Table 3 Densitometry analysis (arbitrary density units) of SDS–PAGE and Western blotting patterns of ileal digesta of rats fed with different types of phaseolin either unheated or heated, and casein (C) as control (five rats per treatment)

Figure 5

Table 4 Molecular weight search (MOWSE) score for MS identification of protein bands in intestinal digesta of rats fed with a diet containing casein or a mixture of unheated casein and phaseolins

Figure 6

Fig. 3 SDS–PAGE (A) and Western blotting (B) analysis of ileal mucosa of rats fed with casein (C) or Sanilac (S), Tendergreen (T) and Inca (I) phaseolins in unheated or heated form. Molecular weight (MW) markers are indicated. ▸, bands characterized by densitometry in Table 5 and by MS in Table 6.

Figure 7

Table 5 Densitometry analysis (arbitrary density units) of SDS–PAGE and Western blotting patterns of ileal mucosa of rats fed with different types of phaseolin either unheated or heated, and casein (C) as control (five rats per treatment)

Figure 8

Table 6 Molecular weight search (MOWSE) score for MS identification of protein bands in ileal mucosa of rats fed with a diet containing casein or a mixture of unheated casein and phaseolins