Article

Antioxidant Activity of Free and Bound Compounds in Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) Seeds in Comparison with Durum Wheat and Emmer.

Authors Laus, Gagliardi, Soccio, Flagella, and Pastore are with Dip. di Scienze Agrarie, degli Alimenti e dell'Ambiente, Univ. degli Studi di Foggia, Via Napoli 25-71122 Foggia, Italy. Authors Laus, Soccio, Flagella, and Pastore are with Centro di Ricerca Interdipartimentale BIOAGROMED, Univ. degli Studi di Foggia, Via Napoli 52-71122 Foggia, Italy. Direct inquiries to author Pastore (E-mail: ).
Journal of Food Science (Impact Factor: 1.78). 10/2012; DOI: 10.1111/j.1750-3841.2012.02923.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT   Antioxidant activity (AA) of quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.) seeds, as well as of durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. ssp. durum Desf.) and of emmer (T. turgidum L. ssp. dicoccum Schübler) grains, was evaluated by studying hydrophilic (H), lipophilic (L), free-soluble (FSP) and insoluble-bound (IBP) phenolic extracts using the new lipoxygenase/4-nitroso-N,N-dimethylaniline (LOX/RNO) method, able to simultaneously detect different antioxidant mechanisms, as well as using the Oxygen Radical Absorbance Capacity (ORAC) and the Trolox Equivalent Antioxidant Capacity (TEAC) assays, which measure the scavenging activity against peroxyl and ABTS [2,2'-azino-bis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulfonate)] radicals, respectively. The species under study were compared with respect to the sum of AA values of H, L and FSP extracts (AA(H+L+FSP) ), containing freely solvent-soluble antioxidants, and AA values of IBP extracts (AA(IBP) ), representing the phenolic fraction ester-linked to insoluble cell wall polymers. The LOX/RNO and ORAC methods measured in quinoa flour a remarkable AA(H+L+FSP) higher than durum wheat, although lower than emmer; according to the same assays, the IBP component of quinoa resulted less active than the durum wheat and emmer ones. The TEAC protocol also revealed a high AA(H+L+FSP) for quinoa. Interestingly, the ratio AA(H+L+FSP) /AA(H+L+FSP+IBP) , as evaluated by the LOX/RNO and ORAC assays, resulted in quinoa higher than that of both durum wheat and emmer, and much higher than durum wheat, according to the TEAC protocol. This may suggest that antioxidants from quinoa seeds may be more readily accessible with respect to that of both the examined wheat species. Practical Applications:  Quinoa seeds may represent an excellent source of natural antioxidant compounds and, in particular, of the free-soluble antioxidant fraction. These compounds may improve nutritive and health-beneficial properties of quinoa-based gluten-free products, thus expanding interest for quinoa utilization from celiac patients to the general population.

1 Bookmark
 · 
196 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract A prospective and double-blind study was conducted on 35 women with weight excess who consumed 25 grams of quinoa flakes (QF) or corn flakes (CF) daily during a period of four consecutive weeks. At the beginning (T1) and at the end (T2) of the intervention, total calorie intake was evaluated, anthropometric assessment was performed, blood was collected for the determination of glucose, total cholesterol and fractions, oxidative stress markers, vitamin E and enterolignans. Significant reductions were detected in serum triglyceride (CF group = 133.9 ± 89.4 to 113.7 ± 57 mg/dl and QF group = 112.3 ± 35 to 107.9 ± 33.1 mg/dl), TBARS (CF group = 3.2 ± 0.8 to 2.9 ± 0.5 µmol/l and QF group = 3.06 ± 0.6 to 2.89 ± 0.5 µmol/l) and vitamin E concentrations (CF group = 19.5 ± 5 to 17.9 ± 4 µM and QF group = 17.9 ± 4 to 16.9 ± 3 µM) and an increase in urinary excretion of enterolignans (CF group = 2.05 ± 1.3 to 2.24 ± 1.4 nm/ml and QF group = 2.9 ± 1.6 to 3.2 ± 2.7 nm/l), in both study groups. The reduction of total cholesterol (191 ± 35 to 181 ± 28 mg/dl) and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) (129 ± 35 to 121 ± 26 mg/dl), and the increase in GSH (1.78 ± 0.4 to 1.91 ± 0.4 µmol/l) occurred only in the QF group, showing a possible beneficial effect of QF intake.
    International Journal of Food Sciences and Nutrition 12/2013; · 1.26 Impact Factor