Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
addClaim

Refining in vitro digestibility assays: fractionation of digestible and indigestible peptides.

Authors: Y, Qiao; X, Lin; J, Odle; A, Whittaker; T A T G, van Kempen;

Refining in vitro digestibility assays: fractionation of digestible and indigestible peptides.

Abstract

Typically, in vitro methods used for estimating the amount of ileal digestible AA do not exhaustively digest samples, and arbitrary methods for separating digestible from indigestible protein are used. This may lead to over- or underestimation of digestibility coefficients. A method that exhaustively digests proteins using pepsin and pancreatin was developed, and the first objective of this research was to confirm that exhaustive digestion was indeed appropriate and to determine the fractionation method for separating digestible from indigestible proteins. For this, three homoarginine-labeled animal proteins were prepared. Samples were subsequently digested in vivo and in vitro to determine which fraction should be considered indigestible, and in vitro followed by in vivo to determine whether the extent of digestion in vivo was improved by predigestion. In vivo, soluble but unabsorbed peptides were smaller than 1 kDa, suggesting that the size of soluble peptides is not what prevents their absorption. Thus, all in vitro-soluble proteins should be considered digestible. In vitro, 88 +/- 3% of the soluble peptides were smaller than 1 kDa, with the remainder between 1 and 5 kDa, suggesting that in vitro digestion is less complete. Predigested samples were digested in vivo to the same size distribution as the nonpredigested samples. The second objective was to test whether in vitro digestibility assays based on these principles equaled in vivo digestibility. For this, digestibility data for 25 animal proteins were compared. Results showed a lack of correlation between lysine digestibility coefficients; however, across samples, the extent of digestion did not differ for lysine (P = 0.71), threonine (P = 0.26), methionine (P = 0.18), or valine (P = 0.66), whereas in vitro digestibility coefficients were lower for (the less water-soluble) histidine (P = 0.05), isoleucine (P < 0.01), leucine (P < 0.01), and phenylalanine (P = 0.05). In conclusion, in vitro digestibility assays should exhaustively digest proteins to mimic in vivo digestibility. All in vitro-soluble peptides could be considered digestible, because in vivo, no large soluble peptides were observed whose size prevented them from being absorbed. However, an in vitro assay based on these principles lacked precision for highly water-soluble AA, and underestimated digestibility for other AA. Better solubilization of the digesta and more replicates may improve the in vitro assay further.

Keywords

Male, Swine, In Vitro Techniques, Animal Feed, Homoarginine, Random Allocation, Solubility, Ileum, Chromatography, Gel, Animals, Digestion, Dietary Proteins, Amino Acids, Particle Size

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    20
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
20
Top 10%
Top 10%
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!