Journal of Nutrition Animal Diets/Enrichment Products...

Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Journal of Nutrition Vol. 125 No. 8 August 1995, pp. 2145-2155
Copyright
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rubio, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Pusztai, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rubio, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Pusztai, A.

The Utilization of Lupin (Lupinus angustifolius) and Faba Bean Globulins by Rats Is Poorer than of Soybean Globulins or Lactalbumin but the Nutritional Value of Lupin Seed Meal Is Lower only than That of Lactalbumin1,2,

Luis A. Rubio3, George Grant, Piotr W.O. Scislowski, David Brown, Susan Bardocz and Arpad Pusztai

The Rowett Research Institute, Bucksburn, Aberdeen AB2 9SB, United Kingdom

The effects of dietary sweet lupin (Lupinus angustifolius, Unicrop) seed meal or its insoluble fiber (nonstarch polysaccharides + lignin) on performance, digestibility and nitrogen utilization in growing rats were studied in four experiments. Globulin proteins isolated from lupin, faba bean (Vicia faba L. minor) or soybean (Glycine max) were also incorporated into purified diets as replacements for lactalbumin (control) and the nutritional effects were evaluated. Isocaloric, legume-based diets supplemented with amino acids were used. Final weight gain, gain:feed ratios, nitrogen retention and net protein utilization of the animals fed whole lupin meal-based diets for 10 d were inferior to those of controls. In contrast, adding lupin insoluble fiber to a control diet produced no adverse effects. Ileal starch and apparent nitrogen digestibilities, and fecal digestibility of starch in lupin-fed rats were higher than those of controls, but fecal true nitrogen digestibility was lower. Replacement of lactalbumin with globulin proteins from lupin or faba bean depressed food intake and protein utilization, but only performance was affected by consumption of soybean globulins. Rats consuming lupin or faba bean globulins excreted significantly more nitrogen, particularly as urea through the urine. This did not occur in rats fed soybean globulins. Urea concentration in plasma was higher in rats fed diets containing lupin meal or legume globulins. The concentrations of urea, arginine and ornithine in plasma increased significantly compared with control values after 3 to 9 h of a lupin diet. After 9 h, plasma lysine was also decreased. We concluded that the main reasons for the low nutritional value of sweet lupin seed meal are likely to be related to the chemical structure of the globulin proteins and their adverse effects on growth and nitrogen metabolism, and not to any known antinutritional factor or poor digestibility.


KEY WORDS: • lupin seed meal • lupin insoluble fiber • legume globulin proteins • nitrogen utilization • rats

1 Supported by the Scottish Office of Agriculture and Fisheries Department (SOAFD). A.P. is indebted to the Leverhulme Trust for an Emeritus fellowship and to the Royal Society of Edinburgh for the Auber bequest award. L.R. was awarded a postdoctoral fellowship from the EEC. This collaborative work is a part of a European FLAIR Concerted Action Programme No. 9 coordinated by A.P. with financial support from the Commission of European Communities.

2 The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 USC section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

3 To whom correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed.

Manuscript received 19 July 1994. Revision accepted 7 February 1995.







Home Help [Feedback] [For Subscribers] [Archive] [Search] [Contents]