Journal of Nutrition Animal Diets/Enrichment Products...

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


     


Journal of Nutrition Vol. 73 No. 4 April 1961, pp. 363-368
Copyright © 1961 by American Society for Nutrition
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 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 Richardson, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Ritchey, S. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Richardson, L. R.
Right arrow Articles by Ritchey, S. J.

Comparative Vitamin B6 Activity of Frozen, Irradiated and Heat-Processed Foods1

L. R. Richardson, Stella Wilkes and S. J. Ritchey

Department of Biochemistry and Nutrition, The Agricultural and Mechanical College of Texas, Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, College Station, Texas

The vitamin B6 content of 6 foods which had been frozen, canned by conventional heat treatment and irradiated with 2.79 and 5.58 megarads of gamma rays was obtained using the growth of rats as the assay procedure. The vitamin B6 activity of beef liver, cabbage, boned chicken, green beans, lima beans and sweet potatoes was obtained initially and after 9 and 15 months' storage. The vitamin B6 activity in every treatment of beef liver, boned chicken, cabbage and green beans was less after the food had been stored 15 months than initially. Every treatment of lima beans and sweet potatoes resulted in the same or a higher activity after storage for the same period. The vitamin B6 activity of the heat-treated and irradiated foods was approximately 40 to 60% of the activity of the frozen foods at each corresponding storage period.


1 These studies were supported by the Office of the Surgeon General Department of the Army under contract DA-49-007-MD-582. The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Department of the Army.

Manuscript received 20 October 1960.





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