USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 25

Abstract

Full database download: http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=22771

Full text

Composition of Foods
Raw, Processed, Prepared
USDA National Nutrient Database for
Standard Reference, Release 25
September 2012
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Agricultural Research Service
Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center
Nutrient Data Laboratory
10300 Baltimore Avenue
Building 005, Room 107, BARC-West
Beltsville, Maryland 20705

i
Suggested Citation:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2012. USDA National
Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 25. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home
Page, http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/ndl
Disclaimers:
Mention of trade names, commercial products, or companies in this publication is solely
for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or
endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture over others not mentioned.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs
and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where
applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual
orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an
individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited
bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for
communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should
contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a
complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400
Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272
(voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Issued September 2012

ii
The USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 25 was
prepared by the following staff members of the Nutrient Data Laboratory, Beltsville
Human Nutrition Research Center, Agricultural Research Service, U.S. Department of
Agriculture:
Coordinator David B. Haytowitz
Senior Scientists Jaspreet K.C. Ahuja
Jacob Exler
David B. Haytowitz
Pamela R. Pehrsson
Janet Roseland
Scientists Mona Khan
Melissa Nickle
Kris Patterson
Bethany Showell
Meena Somanchi
Robin Thomas
Juhi Williams
Research Leader Paul Cotton (Acting)
Joanne Holden (Ret.)
IT Support Kim Klingenstein
Cevon McLean
Administrative Support Carole Miller
Acknowledgements: The authors gratefully acknowledge the constructive
contributions of the peer reviewers: Carol J. Boushey, University of Hawaii Cancer
Center and Diane C. Mitchell, Department of Nutritional Sciences, Pennsylvania State
University.

iii
Contents
Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1
Specific Changes for SR25 ............................................................................................. 1
Database Reports ........................................................................................................... 3
Database Content ........................................................................................................... 4
Food Descriptions ....................................................................................................... 4
Food Group ............................................................................................................. 5
LanguaL .................................................................................................................. 5
Nutrients ...................................................................................................................... 6
Nutrient Retention and Food Yield .......................................................................... 8
Proximates ............................................................................................................ 11
Minerals ................................................................................................................. 13
Vitamins ................................................................................................................ 13
Lipid Components ................................................................................................. 20
Amino Acids .......................................................................................................... 24
Weights and Measures .............................................................................................. 24
Sources of Data ........................................................................................................ 25
Explanation of File Formats ........................................................................................... 26
Relational Files .......................................................................................................... 26
Food Description File ............................................................................................ 28
Food Group Description File ................................................................................. 29
LanguaL Factor ..................................................................................................... 29
LanguaL Factors Description File .......................................................................... 30
Nutrient Data File .................................................................................................. 30
Nutrient Definition File ........................................................................................... 32
Source Code File .................................................................................................. 33
Data Derivation Code Description File .................................................................. 33
Weight File ............................................................................................................ 34
Footnote File ......................................................................................................... 35
Sources of Data Link File ...................................................................................... 35
Sources of Data File .............................................................................................. 36
Abbreviated File ........................................................................................................ 37
Update Files .............................................................................................................. 39
Summary ....................................................................................................................... 41
References Cited in the Documentation ........................................................................ 42

iv
Contents (Continued)
Notes on Foods ............................................................................................................. 49
Introduction ............................................................................................................... 49
National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program .......................................................... 49
Identify Key Foods and critical nutrients for sampling and analysis ...................... 50
Evaluate existing data for scientific quality ............................................................ 50
Devise and implement a probability-based sampling survey of U.S. foods ........... 51
Analyze sampled foods under USDA-supervised laboratory contracts ................. 52
Compile newly generated data to update the National Nutrient Databank ............ 55
Beef Products (Food Group 13) ................................................................................ 59
Breakfast Cereals (Food Group 08) .......................................................................... 70
Cereal Grains and Pasta (Food Group 20) ................................................................ 74
Eggs (Food Group 01)............................................................................................... 79
Legumes and Legume Products (Food Group 16) .................................................... 81
Nut and Seed Products (Food Group 12) .................................................................. 89
Pork Products (Food Group 10) ................................................................................ 97
Poultry Products (Food Group 05) .......................................................................... 106
Vegetable and Vegetable Products (Food Group 11) ............................................. 111
Appendix A. Abbreviations Used in Short Descriptions ................................................ A-1
Appendix B. Other Abbreviations ................................................................................. B-1

1
Introduction
The USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (SR) is the major source
of food composition data in the United States. It provides the foundation for most food
composition databases in the public and private sectors. As information is updated, new
versions of the database are released. This version, Release 25 (SR25), contains data
on 8,194 food items and up to 146 food components. It replaces SR24 issued in
September 2011.
Updated data have been published electronically on the USDA Nutrient Data Laboratory
(NDL) web site since 1992. SR25 includes composition data for all the food groups and
nutrients published in the 21 volumes of “Agriculture Handbook 8” (U.S. Department of
Agriculture 1976-92), and its four supplements (U.S. Department of Agriculture 1990-
93), which superseded the 1963 edition (Watt and Merrill, 1963). SR25 supersedes all
previous releases, including the printed versions, in the event of any differences.
In July 2001, when NDL converted to a new version of its Nutrient Databank System
(NDBS), formats were changed and fields added to improve the descriptive information
for food items and the statistical information about the nutrient values. While data in
previous releases have been moved to the new NDBS, they may not have been
updated through the complete system. Therefore, many of these new fields contain data
only for those items that have been processed through the new NDBS and it will take a
number of years before they are populated for all food items in the database.
Data have been compiled from published and unpublished sources. Published data
sources include the scientific literature. Unpublished data include those obtained from
the food industry, other government agencies, and research conducted under contracts
initiated by USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS). These contract analyses are
currently conducted under the National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program (NFNAP),
in cooperation with the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and other offices and institutes of
the National Institutes of Health (Haytowitz et al., 2008). Data from the food industry
represents the nutrient content of a specific food or food product at the time the data is
sent to NDL. The values may change due to reformulations or other processing
changes by individual companies between the time that SR is released and the next
update of SR. Values in the database may be based on the results of laboratory
analyses or calculated by using appropriate algorithms, factors, or recipes, as indicated
by the source code in the Nutrient Data file. Every food item does not contain all of the
nutrients/components released in SR.
Specific Changes for SR25
The major changes to the database since the last release are listed below.
 Nutrient profiles were added for new foods and existing nutrient profiles were
updated for SR25 using data generated by USDA through the NFNAP or submitted

2
by the food industry. Foods added or updated include: Greek yogurt, taco shells,
canned spaghetti and meatballs, frozen chicken tenders, barbecue rotisserie
chicken (breast, drumstick, thigh, wing, and back (with and without skin)), sliced
ready-to-eat luncheon meats (bologna, chicken, and salami), and bacon (regular,
low-sodium and pre-cooked), frozen meat and cheese lasagna, pot pie, dried and
frozen egg products, protein shakes, regular and light mayonnaise, regular and
light Italian dressing, lightly salted mixed nuts, and iced tea. A major focus of this
effort was to expand and monitor those foods which are major contributors of
sodium to the diet, as well as to provide data on formulated foods, produced by the
food industry to replace food items in the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary
Studies (FNDDS) which previously relied on home-prepared recipes. Nutrient data
for other food items were updated and expanded in response to specific requests
from the Food Surveys Research Group (FSRG) to support future releases of the
FNDDS. A complete list of the added food items can be found in the ADD_FOOD
file and the updated nutrients in the CHG_NUTR file. The formats of these files
can be found on p. 40.
 Over 200 food industry items for baked products and mixed dishes have been
added for SR 25. Several generic items have been updated, as well. Sodium
values have been reviewed and updated for over 100 foods in these groups.
 A study was conducted to obtain nutrient values for specific cuts of raw Australian
beef, veal, and lamb. Australian scientific collaborators sent samples to Texas
Tech University, where they were homogenized, composited, and analyzed for
nutrients needed for labeling. Beef cuts from grass-fed beef and from Wagyu beef
(from cattle breeds originating in Japan) were analyzed. The grass-fed beef cuts
were: boneless tenderloin, boneless top loin, boneless top sirloin cap-off, boneless
ribeye roast cap-on, boneless bottom round¸ boneless top round cap-off, and 85%
lean ground beef. The Wagyu beef cuts, from two different Australian yield grades
(yield grade 4/5 and yield grade 9), were: boneless tenderloin, boneless top loin,
and small end rib roast. The veal cuts analyzed were rib roast, fore shank, and
hind shank. Ground lamb sold as 85% lean was also analyzed.
 A study was conducted to determine the nutrient composition of whole turkey.
Whole turkeys, enhanced with added water, salt, and sodium phosphate, were
obtained from 11 different retail locations according to the NFNAP nationwide
sampling plan. Measurements of weight of meat, with and without skin, were
determined. Samples were homogenized, composited, and analyzed at
commercial laboratories for nutrient content in both raw and roasted forms. As a
result of this study, data has been generated to create new SR items for these
enhanced whole turkey items: light meat (with and without skin), dark meat (with
and without skin), gizzard, heart, liver, neck, and skin. Nutrient profiles for many
turkey items such as “fryer-roaster”, “hen”, and “tom” have been removed. This
change has been made since the new SR25 turkey values represent one or more
unidentified market classes.

3
 A study of non-enhanced/natural whole turkeys was also conducted. Since non-
enhanced turkeys were not readily available in the NFNAP national retail locations,
samples were obtained locally. Measurements of weight of meat, with and without
skin, were determined. Samples of whole turkeys from 4 different retail outlets
were homogenized, composited, and analyzed at commercial laboratories for
nutrient content in both raw and roasted forms. As a result of this study data has
been generated to update existing SR items, which are from non- enhanced whole
turkey, for these items: light meat (with and without skin), dark meat (with and
without skin), gizzard, heart, liver, neck, and skin.
 Products, such as mixed dishes and breakfast cereals no longer on the market or
without current data, have been removed. A complete list of deleted food items
can be found in the DEL_FOOD file. The format of the file is given on p. 40.
 The food group, “Ethnic Foods” has been renamed “American Indian/Alaska Native
Foods” to better reflect its contents. Food Groups are described in greater detail
below (p. 5).
 A section on Notes on Foods has been added to the documentation and placed
after the references. When the earlier paper copies of Agriculture Handbook No.
8, Composition of Foods: Raw, Processed, Prepared were released in separate
sections by food group there was a section for each food group called Notes on
Foods. The Notes gave additional information about the foods, such as the
definitions of lean and fat for meats or enrichment for grain products. For some
food groups, a brief description of research projects conducted to generate nutrient
data were described. In this release Notes on Foods were added for Breakfast
Cereals and Poultry Products. When applicable, “Notes on Foods” released earlier
have been updated to include new information.
Data Files
The data files for SR25 are available in ASCII format and as a Microsoft Access 2003
database. A description of each field in these files and the relationships between each
begins on p. 26. The Access database contains all the SR25 files and relationships, with
a few sample queries and reports. An abbreviated file (p. 37), with fewer nutrients (46)
but all the food items, is also included. A Microsoft Excel 2003 spreadsheet of this file is
also provided. These database and spreadsheet files are generally compatible with later
releases of the same software package or with other software packages released at the
same time.
Database Reports
The data in SR25 are available as reports in two different presentations. The first
presents items in SR25 as page images containing all the data for each food. These
data are separated into files by food groups. The second presentation contains selected

4
foods and nutrients in SR25. Those reports are sorted either alphabetically by food
description or in descending order by nutrient content in terms of common household
measures. The food items and weights in these reports are adapted from those in the
“U.S. Department of Agriculture Home and Garden Bulletin 72, Nutritive Value of Foods”
(Gebhardt and Thomas, 2002).
Adobe Reader is needed to see these files. There is a link from the NDL web site to
Adobe’s web site where it can be downloaded at no charge.
Database Content
The database consists of several sets of data: food descriptions, nutrients, weights and
measures, footnotes, and sources of data. The sections below provide details about the
information in each. More extensive details on many specific foods are available in the
printed “Agriculture Handbook 8” sections (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1976-92).
Food Descriptions
This file includes descriptive information about the food items. For more details on the
format of the Food Description file, see “Food Description File Formats” (p. Error!
Bookmark not defined.). A full description (containing the name of the food with
relevant characteristics, e.g., raw or cooked, enriched, color) and a short description
(containing abbreviations) are provided. Abbreviations used in creating short
descriptions are given in Appendix A. In creating the short description, the first word in
the long description is not abbreviated. In addition, if the long description is 25
characters or less, the short description contains no abbreviations. Abbreviations used
elsewhere are given in Appendix B. Brand names used in food descriptions are in
upper case. Scientific names, common names, manufacturers’ names, amounts of
refuse, and refuse descriptions are provided where appropriate. The common name
field includes alternative names for a product, e.g., soda or pop, for a carbonated
beverage. In addition this field also includes Uniform Retail Meat Identity Standard
(URMIS) identification numbers and USDA commodity codes as appropriate. The food
group to which the food item belongs is also indicated. A code is also provided
indicating if the item is used in the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies
(FNDDS; USDA, ARS, 2012). The factors used to calculate protein from nitrogen are
included, as well as those used to calculate kilocalories. There are no factors for items
prepared using the recipe program of the NDBS or for items where the manufacturer
calculates protein and kilocalories.
The refuse and refuse description fields contain amounts and descriptions of inedible
material (for example, seeds, bone, and skin) for applicable foods. These amounts are
expressed as a percentage of the total weight of the item as purchased, and they are
used to compute the weight of the edible portion. Refuse data were obtained from
NFNAP and other USDA-sponsored contracts and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Handbooks 102 (Matthews and Garrison, 1975) and 456 (Adams, 1975). To calculate

5
the “amount of nutrient in edible portion of 1 pound (453.6 grams) as purchased,” use
the following formula:
Y = V*4.536*[(100-R)/100]
where
Y = nutrient value per 1 pound as purchased,
V = nutrient value per 100 g (Nutr_Val in the Nutrient Data file), and
R = percent refuse (Refuse in the Food Description file).
For meat cuts containing bone and connective tissue, the amount of connective tissue is
included in the value given for bone. Separable fat is not shown as refuse if the meat is
described as separable lean and fat. Separable fat generally refers to seam fat and
external trim fat. Separable lean refers to muscle tissue that can be readily separated
from fat, bone, and connective tissue in the intact cut; it includes any fat striations
(marbling) within the muscle. For boneless cuts, the refuse value applies to connective
tissue or connective tissue plus separable fat. The percentage yield of cooked, edible
meat from 1 pound of raw meat with refuse can be determined by using the following
formula:
Y = (Wc/453.6)*100
where
Y = percentage yield of cooked edible meat per 1 pound as purchased, and
Wc = weight of cooked, edible meat in grams.
Food Group. To facilitate data retrieval the food items in SR are organized into food
groups. Currently there are 25 food groups, which are listed in the FD_GROUP file.
For more details on the format of the Food Group Description file, see “Food Group
Data File Formats” (p. 29). Starting with SR25, the food group, “Ethnic Foods” has
been renamed “American Indian/Alaska Native Foods” to better reflect its contents.
Data on other ethnic foods are contained in their respective food groups, for example
data on plantains, a Latino ethnic food are in food group 9 (Fruit and Fruit Juices, while
the Asian foods, miso and natto, are entered in food group 16 (Legumes and Legume
Products). Food group 36 contains foods sampled at various restaurants (not fast food,
which are in food group 21), and are different from the home prepared items or
prepared frozen entrees included in Food Group 22, Meals, Entrees, and Sidedishes
Some food items, such as beverages and rice, though obtained at restaurants are
included in their respective food groups. At this time Restaurant Foods contains food
items obtained from family-style restaurants, Latino restaurants, and Chinese
restaurants.
LanguaL. To address the needs of diverse users of the USDA food composition
databases in addition to the food descriptions, starting with SR23 NDL is providing an
expanded standardized food description for selected food groups (spices and herbs,
fruits and fruit juices, pork products, vegetables and vegetable products, and beef

6
products) based on the LanguaL Thesaurus (Moeller and Ireland, 2009). The use of
this multi-hierarchical food classification system will permit the harmonization of food
description terms and definitions across many cultures and languages to support food
research, food safety, nutrition monitoring, and food marketing.
LanguaL stands for "Langua aLimentaria" or "language of food". The work on LanguaL
was started in the late 1970's by the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition
(CFSAN) of the United States Food and Drug Administration as an ongoing co-
operative effort of specialists in food technology, information science, and nutrition.
Since then, LanguaL has developed in collaboration with the NCI, and, more recently,
its European partners, notably in France, Denmark, Switzerland, and Hungary. Since
1996, the European LanguaL Technical Committee has administered the thesaurus.
The thesaurus provides a standardized language for describing foods, specifically for
classifying food products for information retrieval. LanguaL is based on the concept that:
 Any food (or food product) can be systematically described by a combination of
characteristics or facets
 These characteristics can be categorized into viewpoints and coded for computer
processing
 The resulting viewpoint/characteristic codes can be used to retrieve data about the
food from external databases
The current facets for foods in SR25 include: product type; food source; part of plant or
animal; physical state, shape or form; extent of heat treatment; cooking method;
treatment applied; preservation method; packing medium; container or wrapping; food
contact surface; consumer group/dietary use/label claim; geographic places and
regions; and adjunct characteristics of food.
The specific tables added to SR are the LanguaL Factor File (p. 29) and the LanguaL
Factors Description File (p. 30). For more information on LanguaL, see the web site:
www.langual.org
Nutrients
The Nutrient Data file contains mean nutrient values per 100 g of the edible portion of
food, along with fields to further describe the mean value. The following statistical
attributes are provided to better describe the data:
 Nutrient value – the mean of the data values for a specific parameter. Nutrient
values have been rounded to the number of decimal places for each nutrient as
specified in the Nutrient Definition file (p. 32).
 Number of data points – the number of data points used to estimate the mean.
 Standard error – the standard error of the mean: a measure of variability of the

7
mean value as a function of the number of data points.
 Number of studies—the number of analytical studies used to generate the mean.
A study is a discrete research project conducted or reported for a specific food. A
study can be the analysis of one nutrient in one food, one nutrient in many foods,
or many nutrients in many foods.
 Minimum value—the smallest observed value in the range of values.
 Maximum value—the largest observed value in the range of values.
 Degrees of freedom—the number of data values that are free to vary after certain
restrictions are placed on the estimates; used in probability calculations.
 Lower- and upper-error bounds—represents a range of values within which the
population mean is expected to fall, given a pre-specified confidence level. For
SR25 and related releases, the confidence level is 95 percent.
 Statistical comments—provide additional details about certain assumptions made
during statistical calculations. The definition of each comment is given after the
description of the Nutrient Data file under “File Formats” (p. 29).
Other fields provide information on how the values were generated, as follows:
 Derivation code—gives more information about how a value was calculated or
imputed. Procedures used to impute a nutrient value are described by Schakel et
al. (1997).
 Reference NDB number—indicates the NDB number of the food item that was
used to impute a nutrient value for another food. This field is only populated for
items which have been added or updated since SR14 for which an imputed value
is provided.
 Added nutrient marker—a “Y” indicates that a mineral or vitamin was added for
enrichment or fortification. This field is populated for ready-to-eat breakfast
cereals and many brand-name hot cereals in food group 08. In future releases,
this field will be populated for other food groups, where applicable.
 AddMod_Date—indicates when a value was either added to the database or last
modified. This field was first added with SR24. Data, which have not been
updated since SR14 (2001) carry the date when that section of AH-8 was
published. When the nutrient values are reviewed, but not modified, there is no
change in the AddMod_Data. Hence, the field may not accurately reflect the
currency of the data. Dates associated with calculated values (carbohydrate by
difference, energy, vitamin A (IU and RAE), and folate DFE) may carry newer
dates reflecting their recalculation when other values in the profile of a particular
food item were updated, though the values from which the specific value was
calculated may not have changed. Only values added or modified since SR14 will
have newer dates. To determine if the date has changed the values between the
current and preceding releases are compared to the number of decimal places
specified in the Nutr_Def table. The date associated with the source documents
used to determine the mean can be found in the Src_Data file. The description of
this file can be found on p. 35.
 Confidence code—indicates the relative quality of the data. This code is derived

8
using the data quality criteria first described by Mangels et al. (1993). These
criteria have been expanded and enhanced for the NDBS (Holden et al., 2002).
This field is included as a placeholder for future releases.
For more details on the Nutrient Data file, see “Nutrient Data File Formats” (p. 29).
Nutrient values indicate the total amount of the nutrient present in the edible portion of
the food, including any nutrients added in processing. Table 1 gives an idea of the
comprehensiveness of the database by listing for each nutrient the number of food
items that contain data.
In general, levels of fortified nutrients are the values calculated by the manufacturer or
by NDL, based on the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) label declaration of
% Daily Value (DV) (CFR, Title 21, Pt. 101) (U.S. Food and Drug Administration–
Department of Health and Human Services, 2012). Such values represent the minimum
nutrient level expected in the product. If analytical values were used to estimate levels
of added nutrients, a number is present in the sample count field for these nutrients.
Nutrient Retention and Food Yield. When nutrient data for prepared or cooked
products are unavailable or incomplete, nutrient values are calculated from comparable
raw items or by recipe. When values are calculated in a recipe or from the raw item,
appropriate nutrient retention (USDA, 2007) and food yield factors (Matthews and
Garrison, 1975) are applied to reflect the effects of food preparation on food weights
and nutrient content. To obtain the content of nutrient per 100 g of cooked food, the
nutrient content per 100 g of raw food is multiplied by the nutrient retention factor and,
where appropriate, adjustments are made for fat and moisture gains and losses.
Nutrient retention factors are based on data from USDA research contracts, research
reported in the literature, and USDA publications. Most retention factors were calculated
by the True Retention Method (%TR) (Murphy et al., 1975). This method, as shown
below, accounts for the loss or gain of moisture and the loss of nutrients due to heat or
other food preparation methods:
%TR = (Nc*Gc) / (Nr*Gr) * 100
Where
TR = true retention
Nc = nutrient content per g of cooked food,
Gc = g of cooked food,
Nr = nutrient content per g of raw food, and
Gr = g of food before cooking.

9
Table 1.—Number of Foods in the Database (n = 8,194) Containing a Value for the
Specified Nutrient
Nutr.
No. Nutrient Number
of Foods
255 Water 8188
208 Energy 8194
203 Protein 8194
204 Total lipid (fat) 8194
207 Ash 7855
205 Carbohydrate, by difference 8194
291 Fiber, total dietary 7498
269 Sugars, total 6139
210 Sucrose 1373
211 Glucose (dextrose) 1376
212 Fructose 1375
213 Lactose 1355
214 Maltose 1343
287 Galactose 1225
209 Starch 895
301 Calcium, Ca 7830
303 Iron, Fe 8047
304 Magnesium, Mg 7451
305 Phosphorus, P 7570
306 Potassium, K 7732
307 Sodium, Na 8111
309 Zinc, Zn 7437
312 Copper, Cu 6977
315 Manganese, Mn 6159
317 Selenium, Se 6425
313 Fluoride, F 552
401 Vitamin C, total ascorbic
acid 7395
404 Thiamin 7473
405 Riboflavin 7495
406 Niacin 7468
410 Pantothenic acid 6179
415 Vitamin B-6 7201
417 Folate, total 7042
431 Folic acid 6391
432 Folate, food 6590
435 Folate, DFE 6381
421 Choline, total 4192
454 Betaine 1848
Nutr.
No. Nutrient Number
of Foods
418 Vitamin B-12 6966
578 Vitamin B-12, added 4257
320 Vitamin A, RAE 6674
319 Retinol 6360
321 Carotene, beta 4827
322 Carotene, alpha 4740
334 Cryptoxanthin, beta 4731
318 Vitamin A, IU 7479
337 Lycopene 4705
338 Lutein + zeaxanthin 4681
323 Vitamin E (alpha-
tocopherol) 5054
573 Vitamin E, added 4082
341 Tocopherol, beta 1509
342 Tocopherol, gamma 1504
343 Tocopherol, delta 1489
328 Vitamin D (D2 + D3) 4763
325 Vitamin D2 (ergocalciferol) 52
326 Vitamin D3 (cholecalciferol) 1373
324 Vitamin D 4761
430 Vitamin K (phylloquinone) 4620
429 Dihydrophylloquinone 1299
428 Menaquinone-4 477
606 Fatty acids, total saturated 7855
607 4:0 5072
608 6:0 5117
609 8:0 5361
610 10:0 5755
611 12:0 6021
696 13:0 238
612 14:0 6395
652 15:0 1801
613 16:0 6608
653 17:0 2012
614 18:0 6596
615 20:0 2108
624 22:0 1751
654 24:0 1480
645 Fatty acids, total
monounsaturated 7491

10
Nutr.
No. Nutrient Number
of Foods
625 14:1 2010
697 15:1 1497
626 16:1 undifferentiated 6359
673 16:1 c 686
662 16:1 t 566
687 17:1 1704
617 18:1 undifferentiated 6624
674 18:1 c 1171
663 18:1 t 1185
859 18:1-11t (18:1t n-7) 154
628 20:1 5750
630 22:1 undifferentiated 5169
676 22:1 c 604
664 22:1 t 488
671 24:1 c 788
646 Fatty acids, total
polyunsaturated 7498
618 18:2 undifferentiated 6642
675 18:2 n-6 c,c 1129
670 18:2 CLAs 782
669 18:2 t,t 216
666 18:2 i 60
665 18:2 t not further defined 651
619 18:3 undifferentiated 6540
851 18:3 n-3 c,c,c (ALA) 1308
685 18:3 n-6 c,c,c 1113
856 18:3i 126
627 18:4 5101
672 20:2 n-6 c,c 1784
689 20:3 undifferentiated 1602
852 20:3 n-3 487
853 20:3 n-6 568
620 20:4 undifferentiated 5761
855 20:4 n-6 7
629 20:5 n-3 (EPA) 5183
857 21:5 102
Nutr.
No. Nutrient Number
of Foods
858 22:4 630
631 22:5 n-3 (DPA) 5136
621 22:6 n-3 (DHA) 5139
605 Fatty acids, total trans 2606
693 Fatty acids, total trans-
monoenoic 1156
695 Fatty acids, total trans-
polyenoic 906
601 Cholesterol 7834
636 Phytosterols 514
638 Stigmasterol 128
639 Campesterol 127
641 Beta-sitosterol 128
501 Tryptophan 4797
502 Threonine 4843
503 Isoleucine 4847
504 Leucine 4846
505 Lysine 4860
506 Methionine 4857
507 Cystine 4786
508 Phenylalanine 4843
509 Tyrosine 4812
510 Valine 4847
511 Arginine 4832
512 Histidine 4840
513 Alanine 4789
514 Aspartic acid 4792
515 Glutamic acid 4792
516 Glycine 4789
517 Proline 4780
518 Serine 4790
521 Hydroxyproline 1175
221 Alcohol, ethyl 4887
262 Caffeine 4657
263 Theobromine 4633
*Indicates the 65 nutrients included in the USDA Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary
Studies (FNDDS).
† Nutrients included in the Abbreviated file (p. 37).

11
Proximates. The term proximate component refers to those macronutrients that include
water (moisture), protein, total lipid (fat), total carbohydrate, and ash. To be included in
the database, a nutrient profile must have values for the proximate components and at
least one other nutrient.
Protein. The values for protein were calculated from the amount of total nitrogen (N) in
the food, using the specific conversion factors recommended by Jones (1941) for most
food items. The analytical methods used to determine the nitrogen content of foods are
AOAC 968.06 (4.2.04), 992.15 (39.1.16), and 990.03 (combustion); and 991.20
(Kjeldahl) (AOAC, 2010). The specific factor applied to each food item is provided in the
N_Factor field in the Food Description file. The general factor of 6.25 is used to
calculate protein in items that do not have a specific factor. When the protein content of
a multi-ingredient food (e.g., beef stew) is calculated using the recipe program of the
NDBS the specific nitrogen to protein conversion factors are applied at the ingredient
level. Therefore, the N-factor field will remain empty. When the manufacturer calculates
protein the N-factor field will also be empty.
Protein values for chocolate, cocoa, coffee, mushrooms, and yeast were adjusted for
non-protein nitrogenous material (Merrill and Watt, 1973). The adjusted protein
conversion factors used to calculate protein for these items are as follows:
chocolate and cocoa 4.74
coffee 5.3
mushrooms 4.38
yeast 5.7
When these items are used as ingredients, such as chocolate in chocolate milk or yeast
in bread, only their protein nitrogen content was used to determine their contribution to
the calculated protein and amino acid content of the food. Protein calculated from total
nitrogen, which may contain non-protein nitrogen, was used in determining
carbohydrate by difference. This unadjusted protein value is not given in the Nutrient
Data file for SR25; rather, it was previously included as a footnote in printed sections of
“Agriculture Handbook 8.”
For soybeans, nitrogen values were multiplied by a factor of 5.71 (Jones, 1941) to
calculate protein. The soybean industry, however, uses 6.25 to calculate protein. To
convert these values divide the proteins value by 5.71, and then multiply the resulting
value by 6.25. It will also be necessary to adjust the value for carbohydrate by
difference (Nutr. No. 205).
Total Lipid. The total lipid (fat) content of most foods obtained through NFNAP are
determined by gravimetric methods, including acid hydrolysis (AOAC 922.06, 925.12,
989.05, or 954.02) and extraction methods using a mixed solvent system of chloroform
and methanol (AOAC 983.25 or Folch et al.). Older values may have been obtained by
ether extraction (AOAC 920.39, 933.05, or 960.39). Total lipid determined by extraction
is reported as Nutrient No. 204. It is sometimes referred to as “crude fat” and includes

12
the weight of all lipid components, including glycerol, soluble in the solvent system.
Nutrient No. 204 may not be identical to the fat level declared on food labels under the
NLEA, where fat is expressed as the amount of triglyceride that would produce the
analytically determined amount of lipid fatty acids and does not include other lipid
components not soluble in the solvent system. The term “NLEA fat” is commonly
referred to as “total fatty acids expressed as triglycerides.”
Ash. The ash content of foods is determined by gravimeteric methods (AOAC 923.03,
942.05, or 945.46).
Moisture. The moisture (or water) content of foods is determined by vacuum oven
(AOAC 934.01, 934.06, 964.22) or forced air (AOAC 950.46).
Carbohydrate. Carbohydrate, when present, is determined as the difference between
100 and the sum of the percentages of water, protein, total lipid (fat), ash, and, when
present, alcohol. Total carbohydrate values include total dietary fiber. Available
carbohydrate, which is used in some countries, can be calculated if desired by the user,
by subtracting the sum of the percentages of water, protein, total lipid (fat), ash, total
dietary fiber, and, when present, alcohol from 100. Carbohydrate in beer and wine is
determined by methods 979.06 (27.1.21) and 985.10 (28.1.18) of AOAC International
(AOAC, 2010), respectively. Total dietary fiber content is determined by enzymatic-
gravimetric methods 985.29 or 991.43 of the AOAC (2010). Total sugars is the term
used for the sum of the individual monosaccharides (galactose, glucose, and fructose)
and disaccharides (sucrose, lactose, and maltose). Analytical data for individual sugars
obtained through NFNAP were determined by liquid chromatography (AOAC 982.14).
Earlier values were also determined using AOAC methods (2010), with either high-
performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) or gas-liquid chromatography (GLC). When
analytical data for total sugars are unavailable for items in the FNDDS, values are
imputed or obtained from manufacturers and trade associations. Starch is analyzed
using the AOAC method 966.11 (2010) or by a polarometric method (The Feedings
Stuffs Regulations 1982). Because the analyses of total dietary fiber, total sugars, and
starch are performed separately and reflect the analytical variability inherent to the
measurement process, the sum of these carbohydrate fractions may not equal the
carbohydrate-by-difference value.
Food Energy. Food energy is expressed in kilocalories (kcal) and kilojoules (kJ). One
kcal equals 4.184 kJ. The data represent physiologically available energy, which is the
energy value remaining after digestive and urinary losses are deducted from gross
energy. Energy values, with the exception of multi-ingredient processed foods, are
based on the Atwater system for determining energy values. Derivation of the Atwater
calorie factors is discussed in “Agriculture Handbook 74” (Merrill and Watt, 1973). For
multi-ingredient processed foods, kilocalorie values (source codes 8 or 9; for more
information on source codes, see p. 33) generally reflect industry practices (as
permitted by NLEA) of calculating kilocalories as 4, 4, or 9 kilocalories per gram of
protein, carbohydrate, and fat, respectively, or as 4, 4, or 9 kilocalories per gram of
protein, carbohydrate minus insoluble fiber, and fat. The latter method is often used for

13
high-fiber foods.
Calorie factors for protein, fat, and carbohydrates are included in the Food Description
file. For foods containing alcohol, a factor of 6.93 is used to calculate kilocalories per
gram of alcohol (Merrill and Watt, 1973). No calorie factors are given for items prepared
using the recipe program of the NDBS. Instead, total kilocalories for these items equal
the sums of the kilocalories contributed by each ingredient after adjustment for changes
in yield, as appropriate. For multi-ingredient processed foods, if the kilocalories
calculated by the manufacturer are reported, no calorie factors are given.
Calorie factors for fructose and sorbitol, not available in the Atwater system, are derived
from the work of Livesay and Marinos (1988). Calorie factors for coffee and tea are
estimated from those for seeds and vegetables, respectively.
Minerals. Minerals included in the database are calcium, iron, magnesium, phosphorus,
potassium, sodium, zinc, copper, manganese, selenium, and fluoride. Levels of
minerals for most foods are determined by methods of the AOAC (2010). Calcium, iron,
magnesium, phosphorus, sodium, potassium, zinc, copper, and manganese are usually
determined by inductively coupled plasma emission spectrophotometry (AOAC 984.27)
or, except for phosphorus, by atomic absorption (AOAC 985.35) with phosphorus
determined colorimetrically by AOAC 2.019, 2.095 and 7.098.
Analytical data for selenium were published earlier by USDA (1992) and were
determined by the modified selenium hydride and fluorometric methods. Selenium
values for foods analyzed between 1998 and 2008 for NFNAP are determined by either
the modified selenium hydride (AOAC 986.15) or stable isotope dilution gas
chromatography-mass spectrometry (Reamer and Veillon, 1981) methods. The
selenium content of plants, in particular cereal grains, is strongly influenced by the
quantity of biologically available selenium in the soil in which the plants grow, that is, by
their geographical origin (Kubota and Allaway, 1972). The values given are national
averages and should be used with caution when levels of selenium in locally grown
foods are of interest or concern.
Beginning with SR19 (2006), Values for fluoride, previously released in the USDA
National Fluoride Database of Selected Beverages and Foods, Release 2 (USDA,
2005), are included in SR. Other analyzed values in the Fluoride Database, including
regional values, are not included in SR. Samples are analyzed using a fluoride ion-
specific electrode, direct read method (VanWinkle, 1995) for clear liquids and a micro-
diffusion method (VanWinkle, 1995) for other food samples. As with selenium, the
values for fluoride are national averages and should be used with caution when levels of
fluoride in locally produced foods and beverages are of interest or concern.
Vitamins. Vitamins included in the database are ascorbic acid (vitamin C), thiamin,
riboflavin, niacin, pantothenic acid, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, folate, total choline and
betaine, vitamin A (individual carotenoids, and retinol), vitamin E (tocopherol), vitamin K
(phylloquinone, dihydrophylloquinone and menaquinone-4), and vitamin D (D2 and D3).

14
Ascorbic acid. In the current database system, nearly all data for ascorbic acid listed
under Nutrient No. 401, total ascorbic acid, have been determined by the
microfluorometric method (AOAC 967.22). Older values which have not been updated
are primarily for reduced ascorbic acid and were determined by the dichloroindophenol
method (AOAC 967.21)
Thiamin, Riboflavin, and Niacin. Thiamin is determined chemically by the fluorometric
method (AOAC 942.23). Fluorometric (AOAC 970.65) or microbiological (AOAC 940.33)
methods are used to measure riboflavin. Niacin is determined by microbiological
methods (AOAC 944.13). The values for niacin are for preformed niacin only and do not
include the niacin contributed by tryptophan, a niacin precursor. The term “niacin
equivalent” applies to the potential niacin value; that is, to the sum of the preformed
niacin and the amount that could be derived from tryptophan (the mean value of 60 mg
tryptophan is considered equivalent to 1 mg niacin (IOM, 1998)). Although not included
in SR, niacin equivalents can be estimated for those foods where amino acids are
given:
mg Niacin equivalents = mg niacin + (mg tryptophan / 60)
Pantothenic acid, Vitamins B6, and B12. Pantothenic acid (AOAC 945.74 or 992.07),
vitamin B6 (AOAC 961.15), and vitamin B12 (AOAC 952.20) are determined by
microbiological methods. Vitamin B12 is found intrinsically in foods of animal origin or
those containing some ingredient of animal origin, e.g., cake that contains eggs or milk.
For foods that contain only plant products, the value for vitamin B12 is assumed to be
zero. Some reports contain values for vitamin B12 in certain fermented foods (soy sauce
and miso). It is believed that this B12 is synthesized not by the microorganisms
responsible for the fermentation of the food, but rather by other contaminating
microorganisms. Therefore, one should not consider these foods to be a consistent
source of vitamin B12 (Liem et al., 1977) and these values are not included in the
database.
The Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI) report on vitamin B12 recommended that people
older than 50 years meet their Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) mainly by
consuming foods fortified with vitamin B12 or a vitamin B12-containing supplement (IOM,
1998). Since vitamin B12 added as a fortificant may provide a significant source of the
vitamin in the diet, a nutrient number (#578) for “added vitamin B12” has been added to
the database. In this release, there are about 260 foods fortified with vitamin B12. The
vast majority are breakfast cereals, infant formulas, and plant-based meat substitutes.
For these foods, the value for total vitamin B12 is used for “added vitamin B12.” Only a
few cereals containing a milk ingredient would contain any intrinsic vitamin B12. Milk-
based infant formulas should contain intrinsic vitamin B12. However, infants are not the
population of concern for intake of fortified vitamin B12. Plant-based meat substitutes
should not contain intrinsic vitamin B12.

15
Folate. Values are reported for folic acid (Nutr. No. 431), food folate (Nutr. No. 432), and
total folate reported in μg (Nutr. No. 417) and as dietary folate equivalents (DFEs) (Nutr.
No. 435). These varied folate forms are included and defined as described in the DRI
report on folate (IOM, 1998). RDAs for folate are expressed in DFEs, which take into
account the greater bioavailability of synthetic folic acid compared with naturally
occurring food folate.
To calculate DFEs for any single food, it is necessary to have separate values for
naturally occurring food folate and added synthetic folic acid in that item.
μg DFE = μg food folate + (1.7 * μg folic acid)
Folate values for foods analyzed through NFNAP are generated using the trienzyme
microbiological procedure (Martin et al., 1990). For a small number of foods, total folate
was determined as the sum of one or more individual folate vitamers (5-
methyltetrahydrofolate, 10-formyl folic acid, 5-formyltetrahydrofolic acid, and
tetrahydrofolic acid); these are indicated in the footnotes. Microbiological methods
measure μg total folate; for enriched foods, folic acid and food folate are not
distinguished from each other. Therefore, to be able to calculate DFE, multi-ingredient
enriched foods are analyzed by an additional microbiological procedure without
enzymes to estimate the amount of added folic acid (Chun et al., 2006). Food folate is
then calculated by difference.
The addition of folic acid to enriched cereal-grain products subject to standards of
identity began in the United States on January 1, 1998 (CFR, Title 21, Pts. 136B137).
These products include flour, cornmeal and grits, farina, rice, macaroni, noodles, bread,
rolls, and buns. Folic acid may continue to be added (with some restrictions on
amounts) to breakfast cereals, infant formulas, medical foods, food for special dietary
use, and meal replacement products.
For unenriched foods, food folate would be equivalent to total folate since folic acid
(pteroylmonoglutamic acid) occurs rarely in foods. Therefore, the same value with its
number of data points and standard error, if present, is used for total folate and food
folate. The folic acid value is assumed to be zero.
For enriched cereal-grain products with standards of identity (flour, cornmeal and grits,
farina, rice, macaroni, noodles, bread, rolls, and buns), the folic acid value is calculated
by subtracting the analytical folate value before fortification from the analytical value for
the fortified product.
Enriched ready-to-eat (RTE) cereals have generally included folic acid fortification for
over 25 years. Therefore, food folate values (before fortification) were not readily
available for these products. Food folate was estimated by means of the NDBS
formulation program for a variety of high-consumption cereals. Mean folate values were
calculated for categories of RTE cereals based on grain content. Added folic acid was
then calculated by subtracting estimated food folate from the total folate content.

16
Generally, food folate values represent a small proportion of the total folate in the
fortified products.
Choline. Beginning with SR19 (2006), total choline and betaine values from the USDA
Database for the Choline Content of Common Foods (USDA, 2004) have been
incorporated into SR. Values for the individual metabolites have not been added to SR,
but are available in the USDA Database for the Choline Content of Common Foods.
For analysis, choline compounds are extracted, partitioned into organic and aqueous
phases using methanol and chloroform, and analyzed directly by liquid chromatography-
electrospray ionization-isotope dilution mass spectrometry (LC-ESI-IDMS) (Koc et al.,
2002). Samples are analyzed for betaine and these choline-contributing compounds:
free choline (Cho), glycerophosphocholine (GPC), phosphocholine (Pcho),
phosphatidylcholine (Ptdcho), and sphingomyelin (SM).
Because there are metabolic pathways for the interconversion of Cho, GPC, Pcho,
PtdCho, and SM (Zeisel et al., 1994), total choline content is calculated as the sum of
these choline-contributing metabolites. Betaine values are not included in the
calculation of total choline since the conversion of choline to betaine is irreversible
(Zeisel et al., 2003).
Vitamin A. Beginning with SR15 (2002) values for vitamin A in μg of retinol activity
equivalents (RAEs) and μg of retinol are reported. At the same time, values in μg of
retinol equivalents (REs) were dropped from the database.
This change responded to new reference values for vitamin A in the DRI report issued
by the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies (IOM, 2001). The report
recommended changing the factors used for calculating vitamin A activity from the
individual provitamin A carotenoids and introduced RAE as a new unit for expressing
vitamin A activity. One μg RAE is equivalent to 1 μg of all-trans-retinol, 12 μg of all-
trans-β-carotene, or 24 μg of other provitamin A carotenoids. The RAE conversion
factors are based on studies showing that the conversion of provitamin A carotenoids to
retinol was only half as great as previously thought.
Vitamin A is also reported in international units (IU), and will continue to be reported
because it is still the unit used for nutrition labeling in the U.S. One IU is equivalent to
0.3 μg retinol, 0.6 μg β-carotene, or 1.2 μg other provitamin-A carotenoids (NAS/NRC,
1989) and thus over-estimates bioavailabilty.
Individual carotenoids (β-carotene, α-carotene, β-cryptoxanthin, lycopene, and
lutein+zeaxanthin) are reported. The analytical data are from NFNAP, generated using
HPLC methodology (AOAC 941.15 or Craft, 2001). Most analytical systems do not
separate lutein and zeaxanthin, so these carotenoids are shown combined. These
values supersede those in Holden et al., 1999. Vitamin A activity values in RAE and IU
were calculated from the content of individual carotenoids (β-carotene, α-carotene, and
β-cryptoxanthin) using the appropriate factors. For food items used in the FNDDS,

17
carotenoid values are imputed if analytical data are not available. For many of these
items data are only available for vitamin A in IU. The variability in carotenoid levels due
to cultivar, season, growing area, etc., as well as rounding within the NDBS, increases
the difficulty in matching the calculated vitamin A activity values from imputed individual
carotenoids to the existing IU values. As a result, the vitamin A IU value agrees within
±15 IU of the value calculated from individual carotenoids.
When individual carotenoids are not reported for plant foods (i.e. fruits, vegetables,
legumes, nuts, cereal grains, and spices and herbs), μg RAE are calculated by dividing
the IU value by 20. In foods of animal origin, such as eggs, beef, pork, poultry, lamb,
veal, game, and fish (except for some organ meats and dairy), all of the vitamin A
activity is contributed by retinol. For these foods, where analytical data are not available,
μg RAE and μg of retinol are calculated by dividing the IU value by 3.33.
In foods that contain both retinol and provitamin A carotenoids, the amount of each of
these components must be known to calculate RAE. Previously, most of the vitamin A
data in the database were received as IU. Therefore, the amounts of the provitamin A
carotenoids and retinol were then estimated from the ingredients. Once the components
had been estimated, μg RAE were calculated as (IU from carotenoids/20) + (IU from
retinol/3.33). Micrograms of retinol were calculated as IU from retinol/3.33.
Vitamin D Due to considerable public health interest in vitamin D, a multi-year project
was undertaken by NDL to expand and update the relatively small existing dataset of
vitamin D values in SR. Much of the original data for vitamin D had been published
earlier in USDA’s Provisional Table (PT-108) (Weihrauch and Tamaki, 1991), with
values for fortified foods updated as needed with data received from the food industry.
Earlier data collected between 1999 and 2008 utilized AOAC methods 982.29 or
992.26.
The availability of vitamin D data for foods permitting subsequent dietary intake
assessment is expected be a useful tool in investigating dietary requirements of vitamin
D in vulnerable groups, one of the specific research recommendations of the 2005
Dietary Guidelines Committee (DGAC. 2004). An Institute of Medicine Committee to
Review Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin D and Calcium was convened in 2009 to
assess current relevant data and revise, as appropriate, the DRIs for vitamin D and
calcium. Their report was issued in 2011 (IOM).
Before foods could be analyzed for vitamin D for inclusion in SR, analytical methodology
had to be developed that could be used for a variety of food matrices (Byrdwell, 2008).
Although a single method is not required for USDA-sponsored analyses, all participating
laboratories must demonstrate that their analysis of quality control materials falls within
an acceptable range of values. For vitamin D, all methods involved extraction with
solvent(s), cleanup steps, and quantification by HPLC or by HPLC and LC/MS. In the
absence of certified quality control materials for vitamin D, NDL, in collaboration with
Virginia Tech, developed five matrix-specific materials, one of which was sent with
every batch of foods to be analyzed. The materials were: vitamin D3 fortified fluid milk, a

18
vitamin D3 fortified multigrain ready-to-eat cereal, orange juice fortified with calcium and
vitamin D3, pasteurized process cheese fortified with vitamin D3, and canned red
salmon, a natural source of D3 (Phillips et al. 2008). Vitamin D may also be present as
25-hydroxycholecalciferol in some foods such as fish, meat, and poultry. At this point
the analytical methodology used to determine this metabolite of vitamin D has not been
sufficiently validated; when work on this validation is completed 25-
hydroxycholecalciferol values will be provided in future releases of SR.
Once an improved method of analysis was developed (Byrdwell, 2008), and the
laboratories certified, a selection of foods, representing natural vitamin D sources and
fortified sources, were chosen for sampling and analysis under the NFNAP (Haytowitz
et al. 2008). Analyses have been completed for raw eggs and the following fortified
products: fluid milk at 4 fat levels, reduced fat chocolate milk, fruit yogurt, and orange
juice. Current analytical values for fish are based on limited analyses; additional
samples are being analyzed and values will be updated in future SR releases. Vitamin
D analyses have also been completed for selected cuts/pieces of chicken, pork, and
beef. These data have been determined by a new LC/MS/MS method (Huang and
Winters, 2011).
Cholecalciferol (vitamin D3; Nutr. No. 326) is the form naturally occurring in animal
products and the form most commonly added to fortified foods. Ergocalciferol (vitamin
D2; Nutr. No. 325) is the form found in plants and is sometimes added to fortified foods,
such as soy milk. In SR25, vitamin D (Nutr. No. 328) is defined as the sum of vitamin
D2 and vitamin D3.
Vitamin D values in SR25 are provided in both micrograms (μg) and International Units
(IU) to support both the analytical unit (μg) and the unit (IU) that is currently used in
nutrient labeling of foods in the U.S. The biological activity of vitamin D is given as 40
IU/μg. Where available, specific isomers of vitamin D are reported only in μg.
Calculations for vitamin D in SR include:
Vitamin D, μg (Nutr. No. 328) = vitamin D2, μg + vitamin D3, μg
Vitamin D, IU (Nutr. No. 324) = vitamin D, μg x 40
Vitamin D values in μg (Nutr. No. 328) are provided for all items in SR25 used to create
the FNDDS.
In some cases, it was possible to identify food groups for which the foods do not provide
or only contain trace amounts of vitamin D. Values for those foods were set to zero.
For example, except for mushrooms, plant foods are not expected to contain any
appreciable levels of vitamin D. In order to provide vitamin D estimates for the rest of
the foods provided to create the FNDDS, data for other foods have been taken from the
scientific literature or from other food composition databases, calculated from industry-
declared % DV fortification levels, determined by formulation/recipe techniques, or
estimated by other USDA imputation methods.

19
Fluid milk available at the retail level is fortified. The dairy industry provided guidance
that most dairy products used as ingredients in formulated (commercial multi-ingredient)
food, are not likely to be fortified with vitamin D. Likewise, margarine used in
commercial products is generally not vitamin D-fortified; a relatively low percentage of
vitamin D-fortified margarines and spreads are available in the retail market. For
ingredients that could be fortified at the retail level, but generally are not fortified at the
food processing level, two related profiles are available in SR – one with added vitamin
D and one without. When estimates were calculated for formulated foods, the
unfortified profile was used. For home-prepared foods, such as pudding prepared with
milk, the fortified ingredient(s) was selected for use in the recipe calculation of vitamin
D. In the case of margarine, a market-share blend of fortified and unfortified product
was used.
For some retail products, such as yogurt, there is considerable brand-to-brand
difference in vitamin D fortification practices. One brand or line of products may be
fortified with vitamin D, whereas another brand may not. Both types are included in the
database. The market changes quickly and consumers concerned about vitamin D
intake should always confirm vitamin D content by checking the product label.
Vitamin E. The DRI report (IOM, 2000) defines vitamin E as the naturally occurring form
(RRR-α-tocopherol) and three synthetic forms of α-tocopherol. Since the release of
SR16-1 (2003), NDL has reported vitamin E as mg of α-tocopherol (Nutr. No. 323) in
accordance with the DRI report. Analytical values for tocopherols found in the database
are determined by gas-liquid chromatography (GLC) or high-performance liquid
chromatography (HPLC; Ye et al., 2000). Although β, γ, and δ-tocopherol do not
contribute to vitamin E activity, they are included in the database when analytical data
are available
In the 2000 DRI report, a revised factor was recommended for calculation of the
milligram amounts of α-tocopherol contributed by synthetic forms of vitamin E, since all
rac-α-tocopherol contains 2R-stereoisomeric and 2S-stereoisomeric forms in equal
amounts. Vitamin E activity is limited to the 2R-stereoisomeric forms of α-tocopherol to
establish recommended intakes (IOM, 2000).
However, the unit for vitamin E required by the NLEA is IU and is based on the 1968
RDA definitions for vitamin E (CFR, Title 21, Pt. 101) (U.S. Food and Drug
Administration–Department of Health and Human Services, 2004).
When NDL receives vitamin E data from the food industry expressed as IU, the values
are converted to mg amounts based on the conversions of vitamin E in IU to mg as
defined by the DRI report:
One mg of α-tocopherol = IU of the all rac-α-tocopherol compound × 0.45; and
One mg of α-tocopherol = IU of the RRR-α-tocopherol compound ×0.67.
The basis of the vitamin E tolerable upper intake level (UL), another important reference

20
value defined in the DRI report, was established using all forms of supplemental α-
tocopherol (IOM, 2000). Although the 2S-stereoisomers do not contribute to dietary
requirements for vitamin E (IOM, 2000), they do contribute to the total intake relative to
the UL. Nutrient number 573 is used to identify quantities of “added vitamin E.” In this
release, there are about 140 food items that have values for added vitamin E greater
than 0. For the majority of these food items, the form added is all rac-α-tocopherol;
these values should be multiplied by 2 to relate intakes of this form to the UL. Items
that are fortified with RRR-α-tocopherol are identified by a footnote and the added
vitamin E value can be used directly to estimate its contribution to the UL.
Vitamin K. Much of the data for vitamin K has been generated under NFNAP and
supersedes the values in the USDA Provisional Table (PT-104) (Weihrauch and Chatra,
1994). Vitamin K is extracted with hexane, purified with solid phase extraction using
silica columns, and quantitated using HPLC with chemical reduction and fluorescence
detection. Losses are corrected using vitamin K1(25) as the internal standard (Booth et al.
1994). Starting with SR23, in addition to data on vitamin K1 (Nutr. No. 430), data on
dihydrophylloquinone (Nutr. No.429) and menaquinone-4 (Nutr. No. 428) are also
released. Dihydrophylloquinone is created during the commercial hydrogenation of
plant oils. Menaquinone-4 is formed from vitamin K1 and/or the synthetic form of vitamin
K found in animal feed, and is found primarily in meats and meat products.
Lipid Components. Fatty acids are expressed as the actual quantity of fatty acid in g
per 100 g of food and do not represent fatty acids as triglycerides. Historically, most
fatty acid data were obtained as the percentage of fatty acid methyl esters and
determined by GLC analyses (AOAC 996.06). These data were converted to g fatty acid
per 100 g total lipid using lipid conversion factors and then to g fatty acid per 100 g
edible portion of food using the total lipid content. Details of the derivation of lipid
conversion factors were published by Weihrauch et al., 1977.
In the redesigned NDBS, fatty acid data may be imported in a variety of units and
converted within the system. No conversions are required if data are received as g fatty
acid per 100 g edible portion of food. Data received as fatty acid esters and as
triglycerides are converted to fatty acids using Sheppard conversion factors. Sheppard
conversion factors are based on the molecular weights of the specific fatty acid and its
corresponding esters (butyl or methyl) and triglyceride (Sheppard, 1992). When fatty
acid data are received as percentages of fatty acid methyl esters, methyl esters are
converted to fatty acids using Sheppard conversion factors and then multiplied by total
lipid (Nutrient No. 204) to give g fatty acid per 100 g edible portion of food. Occasionally,
total lipid values are available from a variety of data sources, but individual fatty acids
are available from fewer sources. In those cases, it may be necessary to normalize the
individual fatty acids to the mean fat value of the food item. In the case of normalized
fatty acids, the sum of the individual fatty acids will equal the mean fat value multiplied
by the Weihrauch (1977) lipid conversion factor for that food item. No statistics of
variability are reported for normalized fatty acids.
Individual Fatty Acids. The basic format for describing individual fatty acids is that the

21
number before the colon indicates the number of carbon atoms in the fatty acid chain,
and the number after the colon indicates the number of double bonds. For unsaturated
fatty acids, additional nutrient numbers have been added to accommodate the reporting
of many specific positional and geometric isomers. Of the specific isomers, there are
two basic classifications considered: omega double bond position and cis/trans
configuration of double bonds.
Omega-3 (n-3) and omega-6 (n-6) isomers are denoted in shorthand nomenclature as
n-3 and n-6. The n- number indicates the position of the first double bond from the
methyl end of the carbon chain. The letter c or t indicates whether the bond is cis or
trans. For polyunsaturated fatty acids, cis and trans configurations at successive double
bonds may be indicated. For example, linoleic acid is an 18 carbon omega-6 fatty acid
with 2 double bonds, both in cis configuration. When data are isomer specific, linoleic
acid is described as 18:2 n-6 c,c. Other isomers of 18:2, for which nutrient numbers
have now been assigned, include 18:2 c,t; 18:2 t,c; 18:2 t,t; 18:2 t not further defined;
and 18:2 i. 18:2 i is not a single isomer but includes isomers other than 18:2 n-6 c,c with
peaks that cannot be easily differentiated in the particular food item. Systematic and
common names for fatty acids are given in Table 2.
Table 2 is provided for the convenience of users in attaching common names or
systematic names to fatty acids in this database. Though individual fatty acids are more
specific than in past releases, it is not possible to include every possible geometric and
positional isomer. Where specific isomers exist for a fatty acid, the common name of the
most typical isomer is listed for the undifferentiated fatty acid and an asterisk (*)
designates the specific isomer by that name. For example, the most typical isomer for
18:1 is oleic. Thus, the specific isomer by that name, 18:1 c, is designated in Table 2 as
oleic.
Table 2.—Systematic and Common Names for Fatty Acids
Fatty acid Systematic name Common name of
most typical isomer
Nutrient
number
Saturated fatty acids
4:0 butanoic butyric 607
6:0 hexanoic caproic 608
8:0 octanoic caprylic 609
10:0 decanoic capric 610
12:0 dodecanoic lauric 611
13:0 tridecanoic 696
14:0 tetradecanoic myristic 612
15:0 pentadecanoic 652
16:0 hexadecanoic palmitic 613
17:0 heptadecanoic margaric 653
18:0 octadecanoic stearic 614
20:0 eicosanoic arachidic 615
22:0 docosanoic behenic 624

22
Fatty acid Systematic name Common name of
most typical isomer
Nutrient
number
24:0 tetracosanoic lignoceric 654
Monounsaturated fatty acids
14:1 tetradecenoic myristoleic 625
15:1 pentadecenoic 697
16:1 undifferentiated hexadecenoic palmitoleic 626
16:1 cis 673*
16:1 trans 662
17:1 heptadecenoic 687
18:1 undifferentiated octadecenoic oleic 617
18:1 cis 674*
18:1 trans 663
20:1 eicosenoic gadoleic 628
22:1 undifferentiated docosenoic erucic 630
22:1 cis 676*
22:1 trans 664
24:1 cis cis-tetracosenoic nervonic 671
Polyunsaturated fatty acids
18:2 undifferentiated octadecadienoic linoleic 618
18:2 trans not further
defined
665
18:2 i (mixed isomers) 666
18:2 n-6 cis, cis 675*
18:2 trans, trans 669
18:2 conjugated linoleic
acid (CLAs)
670
18:3 undifferentiated octadecatrienoic linolenic 619
18:3 n-3 cis, cis, cis alpha-linolenic 851*
18:3 n-6 cis, cis, cis gamma-linolenic 685
18:3 trans (other isomers) 856
18:4 octadecatetraenoic parinaric 627
20:2 n-6 cis, cis eicosadienoic 672
20:3 undifferentiated eicosatrienoic 689
20:3 n-3 852
20:3 n-6 853
20:4 undifferentiated eicosatetraenoic arachidonic 620
20:4 n-6 855
20:5 n-3 eicosapentaenoic (EPA) timnodonic 629
21:5 857
22:4 858
22:5 n-3 docosapentaenoic (DPA) clupanodonic 631
22:6 n-3 docosahexaenoic (DHA) 621
* Designates the specific isomer associated with the common name; the typical isomer
is listed for the undifferentiated fatty acid.

23
Fatty acid totals. Only a small portion of the fatty acid data received for release in SR25
contains specific positional and geometric isomers. Therefore, it has been necessary to
maintain the usual nutrient numbers corresponding to fatty acids with no further
differentiation other than carbon length and number of double bonds. To aid users of
our data, specific isomers are always summed to provide a total value for the
undifferentiated fatty acid. For example, mean values for the specific isomers of 18:2
are summed to provide a mean for 18:2 undifferentiated (Nutrient No. 618). Other fatty
acid totals provided are (1) the sum of saturated, monounsaturated, and
polyunsaturated fatty acids and (2) the sum of trans-monoenoic, the sum of trans-
polyenoic, and the sum of all trans fatty acids.
Values for total saturated, monounsaturated, and polyunsaturated fatty acids may
include individual fatty acids not reported; therefore, the sum of their values may exceed
the sum of the individual fatty acids. In rare cases, the sum of the individual fatty acids
may exceed the sum of the values given for the total saturated fatty acids (SFA),
monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA), and polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). These
differences are generally caused by rounding and should be relatively small.
For multi-ingredient processed brand-name foods, industry data are often available for
fatty acid classes (SFA, MUFA, and PUFA) but are lacking for individual fatty acids. In
these cases, individual fatty acids are calculated from the fatty acids of the individually
listed ingredients and normalized to the total fat level. A best-fit approximation has been
made to fatty acid classes, but unavoidably, calculated sums of individual fatty acid
totals do not always match industry data for fatty acid classes. Zero values for individual
fatty acids should be understood to mean that trace amounts may be present. When g
fatty acids per 100 g of total lipid are converted to g fatty acids per 100 g of food, values
of less than 0.0005 are rounded to 0.
Cholesterol. Cholesterol values are generated primarily by gas liquid chromatographic
procedures (AOAC 994.10). Recent meat data has been determined by a GC method
without derivitization (Dinh et al. 2008). It is assumed that cholesterol is present only in
foods of animal origin and foods containing at least one ingredient of animal origin (for
example, cake that contains eggs). For mixtures containing ingredients derived from
animal products, the cholesterol value may be calculated from the value for those
ingredients. For foods that contain only plant products, the value for cholesterol is
assumed to be zero.
Plant sterols. Data on plant sterols (campesterol, stigmasterol, and β-sitosterol) are
obtained by gas-chromatographic procedures (AOAC 967.18) and summed to calculate
total phytosterols (Nutr. No. 636). Plant sterols for a number of nuts, seeds,
mushrooms, and other food items were determined by a gas-chromatographic method
developed by Phillips et al. (2005) which includes an acid hydrolysis step. These data
include additional sterols such as ergosterol or delta-5-avenasterol and various stanols
plus some minor sterols that are not disseminated in SR. When available, data on
these phytosterols are provided in a footnote for the specific food item. In these cases,

24
Nutrient No. 636, total phytosterols, is not disseminated for these food items.
Amino Acids. Amino acid data for a class or species of food are aggregated to yield a
set of values that serve as the pattern for calculating the amino acid profile of other
similar foods. The amino acid values for the pattern are expressed on a per-gram-of-
nitrogen basis. Amino acids are extracted in three groups—tryptophan, sulfur-containing
amino acids (methionine and cystine), and all others. Tryptophan is determined by
alkaline hydrolysis/HPLC (AOAC 988.15), methionine and cystine by performic
oxidation/HPLC (AOAC 994.12) and all others by acid hydrolysis/HPLC (AOAC
982.30). Hydroxyproline in meats has been determined using a colorimetric method
(AOAC 990.26 ). The amino acid patterns and the total nitrogen content are used to
calculate the levels of individual amino acids per 100 g of food, using the following
formula:
AAf = (AAn*Vp )/Nf
Where:
AAf = amino acid content per 100 g of food,
AAn = amino acid content per g of nitrogen,
Vp = protein content of food, and
Nf = nitrogen factor.
For foods processed in the NDBS since SR14 (2001), the number of observations used
in developing an amino acid pattern will be released only with the pattern. The amino
acid profiles calculated from these patterns will show the number of data points to be
zero. In the past, the number of data points appeared only for the food item for which
the amino acid pattern was developed, not on other foods that used the same pattern. It
referred to the number of observations used in developing the amino acid pattern for
that food.
If amino acid values are presented for an item with more than one protein-containing
ingredient, the values may be calculated on a per-gram-of-nitrogen basis from the
amino acid patterns of the various protein-containing ingredients. Then the amino acid
contents for an item on the 100-g basis are calculated as the sum of the amino acids in
each protein-containing ingredient multiplied by total nitrogen in the item. The number of
data points for these values is given as zero.
Weights and Measures
Information is provided on household measures for food items (for example, 1 cup, 1
tablespoon, 1 fruit, 1 leg). Weights are given for edible material without refuse, that is,
the weight of an apple without the core or stem, or a chicken leg without the bone, and
so forth. The Weight file contains the gram weights and measure descriptions for each
food item. This file can be used to calculate nutrient values for food portions from the
values provided per 100 g of food. The following formula is used to calculate the nutrient
content per household measure:

25
N = (V*W)/100
Where:
N = nutrient value per household measure,
V = nutrient value per 100 g (Nutr_Val in the Nutrient Data file), and
W = g weight of portion (Gm_Wgt in the Weight file).
The Weight file can be used to produce reports showing the household measure and
nutrient values calculated for that portion. The weights are derived from published
sources, industry files, studies conducted by USDA (Adams, 1975; Fulton et al., 1977),
and the weights and measures used in the FNDDS (2012). However, weight
information is not available for all food items in the database. Though special efforts
have been made to provide representative values, weights and measures obtained from
different sources vary considerably for some foods. The format of this file is described
on p. 34.
Footnotes
Footnotes are provided for a few items where information about food description,
weights and measures, or nutrient values could not be accommodated in existing fields.
For example, if citric acid is added to a juice drink, this is indicated in the footnote. The
format of this file is described on p. 35.
Sources of Data
The Sources of Data file (previously called References) was first added with SR14
(2001). The name of the file and fields reflect the fact that not all sources are journals or
published literature, but also include the results of unpublished data from USDA-
sponsored research and from research sponsored by others either separately or in
collaboration with USDA. It contains data sources for the nutrient values and links to an
identification number on each nutrient record. Since some of the data in this release
were carried forward from SR13 (1999), nutrient-specific source documentation is not
electronically available. As new data for these foods are generated and as additional
documentation is entered into the new NDBS, data source information will increase in
future releases. The format of this file is described on p. 35.
A file, the Sources of Data Link file, is provided to allow users to establish a relationship
between the Sources of Data file and the Nutrient Data file. This lets the user identify
specific sources of data for each nutrient value. For example, the user can use these
files to determine the dates associated with source documents for a particular data
value. These files can also be used to determine values obtained from a particular data
source, for example where NFNAP data is used in the database. The format of this file
is described on p.35.

26
Explanation of File Formats
The data appear in two different organizational formats. One is a relational format of
four principal and six support files making up the database. The relational format is
complete and contains all food, nutrient, and related data. The other is a flat abbreviated
file with all the food items, but fewer nutrients, and not all of the other related
information. The abbreviated file does not include values for starch, individual sugars,
fluoride, betaine, vitamin D2 or D3, added vitamin E, added vitamin B12, alcohol,
caffeine, theobromine, phytosterols, individual amino acids, or individual fatty acids. See
p. 37 for more information on this file.
Relational Files
The four principal database files are the Food Description file, Nutrient Data file, Gram
Weight file, and Footnote file. The six support files are the Nutrient Definition file, Food
Group Description file, Source Code file, Data Derivation Code Description file, Sources
of Data file, and Sources of Data Link file. Table 3 shows the number of records in each
file. In a relational database, these files can be linked together in a variety of
combinations to produce queries and generate reports. Figure 1 provides a diagram of
the relationships between files and their key fields.
Table 3. – Number of Records in Principal and Support Files
File name
Table name Number
of records
Principal files
Food Description FOOD_DES 8,194
Nutrient Data NUT_DATA 595,359
Weight WEIGHT 14,162
Footnote FOOTNOTE 525
Support files
Food Group Description FD_GROUP 25
LanguaL Factor LANGUAL 39,085
LanguaL Factors Description LANGDESC 774
Nutrient Definition NUTR_DEF 146
Source Code SRC_CD 10
Data Derivation Description DERIV_CD 54
Sources of Data DATA_SRC 610
Sources of Data Link DATSRCLN 187,720

27
The relational files are provided in both ASCII format and a Microsoft Access 2003
database. Tables 4 through 13 describe the formats of these files. Information on the
relationships that can be made among these files is also given. Fields that always
contain data and fields that can be left blank or null are identified in the “blank” column;
N indicates a field that is always filled; Y indicates a field that may be left blank (null)
(Tables 4-13). An asterisk (*) indicates primary key(s) for the file. Though keys are not
identified for the ASCII files, the file descriptions show where keys are used to sort and
manage records within the NDBS. When importing these files into a database
management system, if keys are to be identified for the files, it is important to use the
keys listed here, particularly with the Nutrient Data file, which uses two.
Figure 1. Relationships among files in the USDA National Nutrient Database for
Standard Reference *
Food Description File
NDB No.
Food Group Code
Nutrient Data File
NDB No.
Nutrient No.
Source Code
Derivation Code
Gram Weight File
NDB No.
Food Group Description File
Food Group Code
Nutrient Definition File
Nutrient No.
Source Code File
Source Code
Footnote File
NDB No.
Data Derivation File
Data Derivation Code
Sources of Data Link File
NDB No,
DataSrc ID
Sources of Data File
DataSrc ID
LanguaL Factor File
NDB No
Factor Code
LanguaL Factors Description File
Factor Code
* Underlined items denote key fields.

28
ASCII files are delimited. All fields are separated by carets (^) and text fields are
surrounded by tildes (~). A double caret (^^) or two carets and two tildes (~~) appear
when a field is null or blank. Format descriptions include the name of each field, its type
[N = numeric with width and number of decimals (w.d) or A = alphanumeric], and
maximum record length. The actual length in the data files may be less and most likely
will change in later releases. Values will be padded with trailing zeroes when imported
into various software packages, depending on the formats used.
Food Description File (file name = FOOD_DES). This file (Table 4) contains long and
short descriptions and food group designators for 8,194 food items, along with common
names, manufacturer name, scientific name, percentage and description of refuse, and
factors used for calculating protein and kilocalories, if applicable. Items used in the
FNDDS are also identified by value of “Y” in the Survey field.
 Links to the Food Group Description file by the FdGrp_Cd field
 Links to the Nutrient Data file by the NDB_No field
 Links to the Weight file by the NDB_No field
 Links to the Footnote file by the NDB_No field
 Links to the LanguaL Factor file by the NDB_No field
Table 4.—Food Description File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N 5-digit Nutrient Databank number that uniquely
identifies a food item. If this field is defined as
numeric, the leading zero will be lost.
FdGrp_Cd A 4 N 4-digit code indicating food group to which a food
item belongs.
Long_Desc A 200 N 200-character description of food item.
Shrt_Desc A 60 N 60-character abbreviated description of food item.
Generated from the 200-character description using
abbreviations in Appendix A. If short description is
longer than 60 characters, additional abbreviations
are made.
ComName A 100 Y Other names commonly used to describe a food,
including local or regional names for various foods,
for example, “soda” or “pop” for “carbonated
beverages.”
ManufacName A 65 Y Indicates the company that manufactured the
product, when appropriate.

29
Field name Type Blank Description
Survey A 1 Y Indicates if the food item is used in the USDA Food
and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (FNDDS)
and thus has a complete nutrient profile for the 65
FNDDS nutrients.
Ref_desc A 135 Y Description of inedible parts of a food item (refuse),
such as seeds or bone.
Refuse N 2 Y Percentage of refuse.
SciName A 65 Y Scientific name of the food item. Given for the least
processed form of the food (usually raw), if
applicable.
N_Factor N 4.2 Y Factor for converting nitrogen to protein (see p. 11).
Pro_Factor N 4.2 Y Factor for calculating calories from protein (see p.
12).
Fat_Factor N 4.2 Y Factor for calculating calories from fat (see p. 12).
CHO_Factor N 4.2 Y Factor for calculating calories from carbohydrate
(see p. 12).
* Primary key for the Food Description file.
Food Group Description File (file name = FD_GROUP). This file (Table 5) is a
support file to the Food Description file and contains a list of food groups used in SR25
and their descriptions.
 Links to the Food Description file by FdGrp_Cd
Table 5.—Food Group Description File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
FdGrp_Cd A 4* N 4-digit code identifying a food group. Only the first 2
digits are currently assigned. In the future, the last 2
digits may be used. Codes may not be consecutive.
FdGrp_Desc A 60 N Name of food group.
* Primary key for the Food Group Description file.
LanguaL Factor File (File name = LANGUAL). This file (Table 6) is a support file to the
Food Description file and contains the factors from the LanguaL Thesaurus used to
code a particular food.

30
 Links to the Food Description file by the NDB_No field
 Links to LanguaL Factors Description file by the Factor_Code field
Table 6.—LanguaL Factor File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N 5-digit Nutrient Databank number that uniquely
identifies a food item. If this field is defined as
numeric, the leading zero will be lost.
Factor_Code A 5* N The LanguaL factor from the Thesaurus
* Primary key for the LanguaL Factor file.
LanguaL Factors Description File (File name = LANGDESC). This file (Table 7) is a
support file to the LanguaL Factor file and contains the descriptions for only those
factors used in coding the selected food items codes in this release of SR.
 Links to the LanguaL Factor File by the Factor_Code field
Table 7.—LanguaL Factors Description File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
Factor_Code A 5* N The LanguaL factor from the Thesaurus. Only those
codes used to factor the foods contained in the
LanguaL Factor file are included in this file
Description A 140 N The description of the LanguaL Factor Code from the
thesaurus
* Primary key for the LanguaL Factor Description file.
Nutrient Data File (file name = NUT_DATA). This file (Table 8) contains the nutrient
values and information about the values, including expanded statistical information.
 Links to the Food Description file by NDB_No.
 Links to the Food Description file by Ref_NDB_No.
 Links to the Weight file by NDB_No.
 Links to the Footnote file by NDB_No and when applicable, Nutr_No.
 Links to the Nutrient Definition file by Nutr_No.
 Links to the Source Code file by Src_Cd
 Links to the Derivation Code file by Deriv_Cd

31
Table 8.—Nutrient Data File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N 5-digit Nutrient Databank number.
Nutr_No A 3* N Unique 3-digit identifier code for a nutrient .
Nutr_Val N 10.3 N Amount in 100 grams, edible portion †.
Num_Data_Pts N 5.0 N Number of data points (previously called Sample_Ct)
is the number of analyses used to calculate the
nutrient value. If the number of data points is 0, the
value was calculated or imputed.
Std_Error N 8.3 Y Standard error of the mean. Null if cannot be
calculated. The standard error is also not given if the
number of data points is less than three.
Src_Cd A 2 N Code indicating type of data.
Deriv_Cd A 4 Y Data Derivation Code giving specific information on
how the value is determined
Ref_NDB_No A 5 Y NDB number of the item used to impute a missing
value. Populated only for items added or updated
starting with SR14.
Add_Nutr_Mark A 1 Y Indicates a vitamin or mineral added for fortification
or enrichment. This field is populated for ready-to-eat
breakfast cereals and many brand-name hot cereals
in food group 8.
Num_Studies N 2 Y Number of studies.
Min N 10.3 Y Minimum value.
Max N 10.3 Y Maximum value.
DF N 4 Y
Degrees of freedom.
Low_EB N 10.3 Y Lower 95% error bound.
Up_EB N 10.3 Y Upper 95% error bound.
Stat_cmt A 10 Y Statistical comments. See definitions below.
AddMod_Date A10 Y Indicates when a value was either added to the
database or last modified.

32
Field name Type Blank Description
CC A 1 Y Confidence Code indicating data quality, based on
evaluation of sample plan, sample handling,
analytical method, analytical quality control, and
number of samples analyzed. Not included in this
release, but is planned for future releases.
* Primary keys for the Nutrient Data file.
† Nutrient values have been rounded to a specified number of decimal places for each
nutrient. Number of decimal places is listed in the Nutrient Definition file.
Definitions of each statistical comment included in the Nutrient Data table follow:
1. The displayed summary statistics were computed from data containing some less-
than values. Less-than, trace, and not-detected values were calculated.
2. The displayed degrees of freedom were computed using Satterthwaite’s
approximation (Korz and Johnson, 1988).
3. The procedure used to estimate the reliability of the generic mean requires that the
data associated with each study be a simple random sample from all the products
associated with the given data source (for example, manufacturer, variety, cultivar,
and species).
4. For this nutrient, one or more data sources had only one observation. Therefore, the
standard errors, degrees of freedom, and error bounds were computed from the
between-group standard deviation of the weighted groups having only one
observation.
Nutrient Definition File (file name = NUTR_DEF). This file (Table 9) is a support file to
the Nutrient Data file. It provides the 3-digit nutrient code, unit of measure, INFOODS
tagname, and description.
 Links to the Nutrient Data file by Nutr_No.
Table 9.—Nutrient Definition File Format
Field
name
Type Blank Description
Nutr_No A 3* N Unique 3-digit identifier code for a nutrient.
Units A 7 N Units of measure (mg, g, μg, and so on).
Tagname A 20 Y International Network of Food Data Systems (INFOODS)
Tagnames.† A unique abbreviation for a nutrient/food
component developed by INFOODS to aid in the
interchange of data.
NutrDesc A 60 N Name of nutrient/food component.

33
Field
name
Type Blank Description
Num_Dec A 1 N Number of decimal places to which a nutrient value is
rounded.
SR_Order N 6 N Used to sort nutrient records in the same order as various
reports produced from SR.
* Primary key for the Nutrient Definition file.
† INFOODS, 2009.
Source Code File (file name = SRC_CD). This file (Table 10) contains codes indicating
the type of data (analytical, calculated, assumed zero, and so on) in the Nutrient Data
file. To improve the usability of the database and to provide values for the FNDDS, NDL
staff imputed nutrient values for a number of proximate components, total dietary fiber,
total sugar, and vitamin and mineral values.
 Links to the Nutrient Data file by Src_Cd
Table 10.—Source Code File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
Src_Cd A 2* N 2-digit code.
SrcCd_Desc A 60 N Description of source code that identifies the type of
nutrient data.
* Primary key for the Source Code file.
Data Derivation Code Description File (file name = DERIV_CD). This file (Table 11)
provides information on how the nutrient values were determined. The file contains the
derivation codes and their descriptions.
 Links to the Nutrient Data file by Deriv_Cd
Table 11.—Data Derivation Code File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
Deriv_Cd A 4* N Derivation Code.
Deriv_Desc A 120 N Description of derivation code giving specific
information on how the value was determined.
* Primary key for the Data Derivation Code file.
For example, the data derivation code that indicates how α-tocopherol (Nutrient No.
323) in Emu, fan fillet, raw (NDB. No. 05623) was calculated is BFSN. The breakdown

34
of the code is as follows:
B = based on another form of the food or a similar food;
F = concentration adjustment used;
S = solids, the specific concentration adjustment used; and
N = retention factors not used
The Ref_NDB_No is 05621 Emu, ground, raw. This means that the analytical
α-tocopherol value in the total solids of emu, ground, raw is used to calculate the α-
tocopherol in the total solids of emu, fan fillet, raw.
N
t = (Ns*Ss)/St
where
N
t = the nutrient content of the target item,
N
s = the nutrient content of the source item,
For NDB No. 05621, α-tocopherol = 0.24 mg/100 g
S
s = the total solids content of the source item, and
For NDB No. 05621, solids = 27.13 g/100 g
S
t = the total solids content of the target item.
For NDB No. 05623, solids = 2538 g/100 g
So, using this formula for the above example:
N
t = (0.24 × 25.38)/27.13 = 0.22 mg/100 g α-tocopherol in Emu, fan fillet, raw
Only items that were imputed starting with SR14 (2001) will have both derivation codes
and reference NDB numbers. Other items that have been imputed outside the NDBS
will have data derivation codes, but the Ref_NDB_No field will be blank.
Weight File (file name = WEIGHT). This file (Table 12) contains the weight in grams of
a number of common measures for each food item.
 Links to Food Description file by NDB_No.
 Links to Nutrient Data file by NDB_No.
Table 12.— Weight File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N 5-digit Nutrient Databank number.
Seq A 2* N Sequence number.
Amount N 5.3 N Unit modifier (for example, 1 in “1 cup”).
Msre_Desc A 84 N
Description (for example, cup, diced, and 1-inch
pieces).

35
Field name Type Blank Description
Gm_Wgt N 7.1 N Gram weight.
Num_Data_Pts N 3 Y Number of data points.
Std_Dev N 7.3 Y Standard deviation.
* Primary key for the Weight file.
Footnote File (file name = FOOTNOTE). This file (Table 13) contains additional
information about the food item, household weight, and nutrient value.
 Links to the Food Description file by NDB_No.
 Links to the Nutrient Data file by NDB_No and when applicable, Nutr_No.
 Links to the Nutrient Definition file by Nutr_No, when applicable.
Table 13.—Footnote File Format
Field
name
Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5 N 5-digit Nutrient Databank number.
Footnt_No A 4 N Sequence number. If a given footnote applies to more than
one nutrient number, the same footnote number is used.
As a result, this file cannot be indexed.
Footnt_Typ A 1 N Type of footnote:
D = footnote adding information to the food
description;
M = footnote adding information to measure description;
N = footnote providing additional information on a nutrient
value. If the Footnt_typ = N, the Nutr_No will also be filled
in.
Nutr_No A 3 Y Unique 3-digit identifier code for a nutrient to which
footnote applies.
Footnt_Txt A 200 N Footnote text.
Sources of Data Link File (file name = DATSRCLN). This file (Table 14) is used to link
the Nutrient Data file with the Sources of Data table. It is needed to resolve the many-to-
many relationship between the two tables.
 Links to the Nutrient Data file by NDB No. and Nutr_No.
 Links to the Nutrient Definition file by Nutr_No
 Links to the Sources of Data file by DataSrc_ID.

36
Table 14.—Sources of Data Link File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N 5-digit Nutrient Databank number.
Nutr_No A 3* N Unique 3-digit identifier code for a nutrient.
DataSrc_ID A 6* N Unique ID identifying the reference/source.
* Primary key for the Sources of Data Link file.
Sources of Data File (file name = DATA_SRC). This file (Table 15) provides a citation
to the DataSrc_ID in the Sources of Data Link file.
 Links to Nutrient Data file by NDB No. through the Sources of Data Link file
Table 15.—Sources of Data File Format
Field name Type Blank Description
DataSrc_ID A 6* N Unique number identifying the reference/source.
Authors A 255 Y List of authors for a journal article or name of
sponsoring organization for other documents.
Title A 255 N Title of article or name of document, such as a report
from a company or trade association.
Year A 4 Y Year article or document was published.
Journal A 135 Y Name of the journal in which the article was
published.
Vol_City A 16 Y Volume number for journal articles, books, or reports;
city where sponsoring organization is located.
Issue_State A 5 Y Issue number for journal article; State where the
sponsoring organization is located.
Start_Page A 5 Y Starting page number of article/document.
End_Page A 5 Y Ending page number of article/document.
* Primary key for the Sources of Data file.

37
Abbreviated File
The Abbreviated file (file name = ABBREV) is available in ASCII format and as a
Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. It contains all the food items found in the relational
database, but with fewer nutrients and other related information. The abbreviated file
does not include values for starch, fluoride, betaine, vitamin D2 and D3, added vitamin E,
added vitamin B12, alcohol, caffeine, theobromine, phytosterols, individual amino acids,
individual fatty acids, or sugars. Table 16 lists all the nutrients included in the
abbreviated file. Starting with SR22 (2009), Vitamin D in μg and IU was added to the
Abbreviated file. The ASCII file (Table 16) is in delimited format. Fields are separated by
a caret (^) and text fields are surrounded by tildes (~). Data refer to 100 g of the edible
portion of the food item. Decimal points are included in the fields. Missing values are
denoted by the null value of two consecutive carets (^^) or two carets and two tildes
(~~). The file is sorted in ascending order by the NDB number. Two common measures
are provided, which are the first two common measures in the Weight file for each NDB
number. To obtain values per one of the common measures, multiply the value in the
desired nutrient field by the value in the desired common measure field and divide by
100. For example, to calculate the amount of fat in 1 tablespoon of butter (NDB No.
01001),
V
H=(N*CM)/100
where:
Vh = the nutrient content per the desired common measure
N = the nutrient content per 100 g
For NDB No. 01001, fat = 81.11 g/100 g
CM = grams of the common measure
For NDB No. 01001, 1 tablespoon = 14.2 g
So using this formula for the above example:
Vh = (81.11*14.2)/100 = 11.52 g fat in 1 tablespoon of butter
This file is a flat file and is provided for those users who do not need a relational
database. It contains the information in one record per food item and is suitable for
importing into a spreadsheet. The data file has been imported into a Microsoft Excel
2003 spreadsheet for users of that application. Users of other software applications can
import either the Microsoft Excel 2003 spreadsheet or the ASCII files. If additional
information is needed, this file can be linked to the other SR files by the NDB number.
Table 16.—Abbreviated File Format
Field name Type Description
NDB_No. A 5* 5-digit Nutrient Databank number.
Shrt_Desc A 60 60-character abbreviated description of food item.†

38
Field name Type Description
Water N 10.2 Water (g/100 g)
Energ_Kcal N 10 Food energy (kcal/100 g)
Protein N 10.2 Protein (g/100 g)
Lipid_Tot N 10.2 Total lipid (fat)(g/100 g)
Ash N 10.2 Ash (g/100 g)
Carbohydrt N 10.2 Carbohydrate, by difference (g/100 g)
Fiber_TD N 10.1 Total dietary fiber (g/100 g)
Sugar_Tot N 10.2 Total sugars (g/100 g)
Calcium N 10 Calcium (mg/100 g)
Iron N 10.2 Iron (mg/100 g)
Magnesium N 10 Magnesium (mg/100 g)
Phosphorus N 10 Phosphorus (mg/100 g)
Potassium N 10 Potassium (mg/100 g)
Sodium N 10 Sodium (mg/100 g)
Zinc N 10.2 Zinc (mg/100 g)
Copper N 10.3 Copper (mg/100 g)
Manganese N 10.3 Manganese (mg/100 g)
Selenium N 10.1 Selenium (μg/100 g)
Vit_C N 10.1 Vitamin C (mg/100 g)
Thiamin N 10.3 Thiamin (mg/100 g)
Riboflavin N 10.3 Riboflavin (mg/100 g)
Niacin N 10.3 Niacin (mg/100 g)
Panto_acid N 10.3 Pantothenic acid (mg/100 g)
Vit_B6 N 10.3 Vitamin B6 (mg/100 g)
Folate_Tot N 10 Folate, total (μg/100 g)
Folic_acid N 10 Folic acid (μg/100 g)
Food_Folate N 10 Food folate (μg/100 g)
Folate_DFE N 10 Folate (μg dietary folate equivalents/100 g)
Choline_Tot N 10 Choline, total (mg/100 g)
Vit_B12 N 10.2 Vitamin B12 (μg/100 g)
Vit_A_IU N 10 Vitamin A (IU/100 g)

39
Field name Type Description
Vit_A_RAE N 10 Vitamin A (μg retinol activity equivalents/100g)
Retinol N 10 Retinol (μg/100 g)
Alpha_Carot N 10 Alpha-carotene (μg/100 g)
Beta_Carot N 10 Beta-carotene (μg/100 g)
Beta_Crypt N 10 Beta-cryptoxanthin (μg/100 g)
Lycopene N 10 Lycopene (μg/100 g)
Lut+Zea N 10 Lutein+zeazanthin (μg/100 g)
Vit_E N 10.2 Vitamin E (alpha-tocopherol) (mg/100 g)
Vit_D_mcg N 10.1 Vitamin D (μg/100 g)
Vit_D_IU N 10 Vitamin D (IU/100 g)
Vit_K N 10.1 Vitamin K (phylloquinone) (μg/100 g)
FA_Sat N 10.3 Saturated fatty acid (g/100 g)
FA_Mono N 10.3 Monounsaturated fatty acids (g/100 g)
FA_Poly N 10.3 Polyunsaturated fatty acids (g/100 g)
Cholestrl N 10.3 Cholesterol (mg/100 g)
GmWt_1 N 9.2 First household weight for this item from the
Weight file.‡
GmWt_Desc1 A 120 Description of household weight number 1.
GmWt_2 N 9.2 Second household weight for this item from the
Weight file.‡
GmWt_Desc2 A 120 Description of household weight number 2.
Refuse_Pct N 2 Percent refuse.§
* Primary key for the Abbreviated file.
† For a 200-character description and other descriptive information, link to the Food
Description file.
‡ For the complete list and description of the measure, link to the Weight file.
§ For a description of refuse, link to the Food Description file.
Update Files
The update files contain changes made between SR24 (2011) and SR25 (2012).
Update files in ASCII are provided for those users who reformatted previous releases
for their systems and wish to do their own updates. If a release earlier than SR24 is
used, it is necessary to first obtain the update files for that release through SR24,
update the database to SR24, and then use the update files provided with SR25. The

40
earlier update files are available on NDL’s web site:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata.
New data added to SR25 are given in the following files:
 ADD_FOOD for descriptions of the new items,
 ADD_NUTR for added nutrient data,
 ADD_WGT for added weight and measure data,
 ADD_FTNT for added footnotes,
These files are in the same formats as the Food Description file, the Nutrient Data file,
the Weight file, and the Footnote file.
Five files contain changes made since SR24 (2011):
 CHG_FOOD contains records with changes in the descriptive information for a food
item.
 CHG_NUTR contains changes to the following fields: nutrient values, standard
errors, number of data points, source code, and data derivation code. CHG_WGT
contains records with changes to the gram weights or measure information.
 CHG_FTNT contains records with changes to footnotes.
 CHG_NDEF contains records with changes to the nutrient definitions.
 CHG_FDGP contains records with changes to the food group descriptions.
If the values in any fields have changed, the entire record is included for that file. These
files are in the same format as the Food Description, Nutrient Data, Weight, Nutrient
Definition and Food Group files.
Four files contain records that were deleted since SR24 (2011):
 DEL_FOOD file (Table 17) lists those food items that were deleted from the
database.
 DEL_NUTR file (Table 18) lists those nutrient values that were removed from the
database.
 DEL_WGT contains any gram weights that were removed. These records are in the
same format as the Weight file (Table 12).
 DEL_FTNT contains any footnotes that were removed from the database (Table 19).
Starting with SR19, if a given footnote applied to more than one nutrient number, the
same footnote number can be used. When these footnote numbers are updated, the
extra footnotes are deleted.
Table 17.—Foods Deleted Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N Unique 5-digit number identifying deleted item.
Shrt_Desc A 60 N 60-character abbreviated description of food item.
* Primary key for Foods Deleted file.

41
Table 18. —Nutrients Deleted Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N
Unique 5-digit number identifying the item that
contains the deleted nutrient record.
Nutr_No A 3 N Nutrient number of deleted record.
* Primary key for Nutrients Deleted file.
Table 19.—Footnotes Deleted Format
Field name Type Blank Description
NDB_No A 5* N Unique 5-digit number identifying the item that
contains the deleted nutrient record.
Footnt_No A 4 N Sequence number.
Footnt_Typ A 1 N Type of footnote of deleted record.
* Primary key for Footnotes Deleted file.
Update files in ASCII are also provided for the Abbreviated file:
 CHG_ABBR file contains records for food items where a food description,
household weight, refuse value, or nutrient value have been added, changed, or
deleted since SR24. This file is in the same format as the Abbreviated file (Table
16).
 DEL_ABBR contains food items that have been removed from the database; it is in
the same format as DEL_FOOD.
 ADD_ABBR contains food items added since SR24; it is also in the same format as
the Abbreviated file.
Summary
A number of food items have been added to the database using new data from NFNAP,
the food industry, and other sources. Other foods have had nutrient values updates. In
particular, the sodium content of those foods which are major contributors of sodium to
the diet—primarily processed foods— has been targeted for nutrient analysis. A
number of food items, no longer on the market, such as certain processed foods, have
been removed. These are described in “Specific Changes for SR25” (p. 1). The next
release, SR26, available during summer 2013, will contain additional items and
updates.

42
References Cited in the Documentation
Adams, C.F. 1975. Nutritive Value of American Foods in Common Units. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Handbook 456.
AOAC International. 2010. Official Methods of Analysis, 18th ed., AOAC International,
Gaithersburg, MD. http://www.aoac.org
Booth, S.L., K.W. Davidson, and J.A. Sadowski. 1994. Evaluation of an HPLC method
for the determination of phylloquinone (vitamin K1) in various food matrices. Journal of
Agricultural and Food Chemistry 42:295-300.
Byrdwell, W. C., J. Devries, J. Exler, J.M. Harnly, J.M. Holden, M.F. Holick, B.W. Hollis,
R.L. Horst, M. Lada, L.E. Lemar, K.Y. Patterson, K.M. Philips, M.T. Tarrago-Trani, W.R.
Wolf. 2008. Analyzing vitamin D in foods and supplements: methodologic challenges.
American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 88(2):554S-557S.
Chun, J., Martin, J.A., Chen, L., Lee, J., Ye, L., Eitenmiller, R. 2004. A differential assay
of folic acid and total folate in foods containing enriched cereal-grain products to
calculate μg dietary folate equivalents (μg DFE). Journal of Food Composition and
Analysis 19(2-3):182-187.
Craft, N. 2001. Chromatographic techniques for carotenoid separation. In Current
Protocols Food Analytical Chemistry. F2.3.1−F2.3.15. Wrolstad, R. E., Acree, T. E.,
Decker, E. A., Penner, M. H., Reid, D. S., Schwartz, S. J., Shoemaker, C. F., Sporns,
P., Editors. Wiley. New York.
Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC). 2004. The Report of the Dietary
Guidelines Advisory Committee on Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2005. Available
from http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/report/default.htm (accessed
07/06/2012).
Dinh, T.T.N., Blanton Jr., J.R., Brooks, J.C., Miller, M.F., Thompson, L.D. 2008. A simplified
method for cholesterol determination in meat and meat products. Journal of Food Composition
and Analysis 21:306-314.
Fulton, L., E. Matthews, and C. Davis. 1977. Average Weight of a Measured Cup of
Various Foods. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Home Economics Research Report 41.
Gebhardt, S.E., and R.G. Thomas. 2002. Nutritive Value of Foods. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Home and Garden Bulletin 72.*
Haytowitz, D.B., P.R. Pehrsson, and J.M Holden. 2008. The national food and nutrient
analysis program: a decade of progress. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis
21(Supp. 1):S94-S102.*

43
Holden, J.M., S.A. Bhagwat, and K.Y. Patterson. 2002. Development of a multi-nutrient
data quality evaluation system. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 15(4):339–
348.*
Holden, J.M., A.L. Eldridge, G.R. Beecher, Buzzard, I.M. Bhagwat, S.A., Davis, C.S.,
Douglass, Larry W., Gebhardt, S.E., Haytowitz, D.B., and Schakel, S.. 1999. Carotenoid
content of U.S. foods: An update of the database. Journal of Food Composition and
Analysis 12:169–196.*
Huang M., Winters, D. 2011. Application of Ultra-Performance Liquid
Chromatography/Tandem Mass Spectrometry for the Measurement of Vitamin D in
Foods and Nutritional Supplements. Journals of AOAC International 94:211-223.
INFOODS. 2012. Tagnames for Food Components. INFOODS web site.
http://www.fao.org/infoods/tagnames_en.stm. (Accessed 7/6/2012).
Institute of Medicine. 1998. Dietary reference intakes for thiamin, riboflavin, niacin,
vitamin B6, folate, vitamin B12, pantothenic acid, biotin, and choline. National Academy
Press, Washington, DC.
Institute of Medicine. 2000. Dietary reference intakes for vitamin C, vitamin E, selenium,
and carotenoids. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Institute of Medicine. 2001. Dietary reference intakes for vitamin A, vitamin K, arsenic,
boron, chromium, copper, iodine, iron, manganese, molybdenum, nickel, silicon,
vanadium, and zinc. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Institute of Medicine. 2011. Dietary reference intakes for vitamin D and Calcium.
National Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Jones, D.B. 1941. Factors for Converting Percentages of Nitrogen in Foods and Feeds
into Percentages of Protein. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Circular 83, slight revision.*
Koc, H., Mar, M. H., Ranasinghe, A., Swenberg, J. A., and Zeisel, S. H. 2002.
Quantitation of choline and its metabolites in tissues and foods by liquid
chromatography/electrospray ionization-isotope dilution mass spectrometry. Analytical
Chemistry 74:4734-4740.
Korz, S., and N.L. Johnson. 1988. Encyclopedia of Statistical Sciences. Vol. 8, pp. 261–
262, John Wiley and Son, New York, NY.
Kubota, J., and W.H. Allaway. 1972. Geographic distribution of trace element problems.
In J.J. Mortvedt, ed., Micronutrients in Agriculture: Proceedings of Symposium held at
Muscle Shoals, Alabama, pp. 525–554. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, WI.

44
Leonard, S.W., C.K. Good, E.T. Gugger, and M.G. Traber. 2004. Vitamin E
bioavailability from fortified breakfast cereal is greater than that from encapsulated
supplements. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 79:86–92.
Liem, I.I.H., K.H. Steinkraus, and J.C. Cronk. 1977. Production of vitamin B12 in tempeh:
A fermented soybean food. Applied Environmental Microbiology 34:773–776.
Livesay, G., and E. Marinos. 1988. Estimation of energy expenditure, net carbohydrate
utilization, and net fat oxidation and synthesis by indirect calorimetry: Evaluation of
errors with special reference to the detailed composition of fuels. American Journal of
Clinical Nutrition 47:608–628.
Mangels, A.R., J.M. Holden, G.R. Beecher, et al. 1993. Carotenoid content of fruits and
vegetables: An evaluation of analytic data. Journal of the American Dietetic Association
93:284–296.
Martin, J.I., W.O. Landen, A.M. Soliman, and R.R. Eitenmiller. 1990. Application of a tri-
enzyme extraction for total folate determination in foods. Journal of the Association of
Analytical Chemistry 73:805–808.
Matthews, R.H., and Y.J. Garrison. 1975. Food Yields Summarized by Different Stages
of Ppreparation. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 102.*
Merrill, A.L., and B.K. Watt. 1973. Energy Value of Foods: Basis and Derivation,
revised. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 74.*
Møller A., and Ireland J. 2009. LanguaL 2009 – The LanguaL thesaurus. EuroFIR
Technical Report D1.8.43. Danish Food Information. LanguaL Web site:
http://www.langual.org/langual_literature.asp (Accessed 7/6/2012)
Murphy, E.W., P.E. Criner, and B.C. Gray. 1975. Comparison of methods for
determining retentions of nutrients in cooked foods. Journal of Agriculture and Food
Chemistry 23:1153.*
National Research Council. 1989. Recommended dietary allowances, 10th ed. National
Academy Press, Washington, DC.
Phillips, K.M., Ruggio, D.M., and Ashraf-Khorassani , M. 2005. Phytosterol composition
of nuts and seeds commonly consumed in the United States. Journal of Agricultural
and Food Chemistry 53(24): 9436-9445.
Phillips K.M., W.C. Byrdwell, J. Exler, J.M. Harnly, J.M. Holden, M.F. Holick, B.W.
Hollis, R.L. Horst, L.E. Lemar, K.Y. Patterson, M.T.Tarrago-Trani, and W.R. Wolf. 2008.
Development and validation of control materials for the measurement of vitamin D3 in
selected US foods. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 21:527-534.

45
Reamer, D.C., and C. Veillon. 1981. Determination of selenium in biological materials
by stable isotope dilution gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Analytical Chemistry
53(14):2166–2169.
Schakel, S.F., I.M. Buzzard, and S.E. Gebhardt. 1997. Procedures for estimating
nutrient values in food composition databases. Journal of Food Composition and
Analysis 10:102–114.*
Sheppard, A.J. 1992. Lipid Manual: Methodology Suitable for Fatty acid-Cholesterol
Analysis. William C. Brown Publishers, Dubuque, IA.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1976. Composition of
Foods: Dairy and Egg products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–1.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1977. Composition of
Foods: Spices and herbs; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–2.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1978. Composition of
Foods: Baby foods; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–3.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1979. Composition of
Foods: Fats and oils; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–4.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1979. Composition of
Foods: Poultry products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–5.
U.S Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1980. Composition of
Foods Soups, sauces, and gravies; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook
8–6.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1980. Composition of
Foods Sausages and luncheon meats; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook
8–7.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1982. Composition of
Foods Breakfast cereals; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–8.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1982. Composition of
Foods Fruits and fruit juices; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–9.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1992. Composition of
Foods Pork products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–10.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1984. Composition of
Foods Vegetables and vegetable products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture
Handbook 8–11.

46
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1984. Composition of
Foods Nut and seed products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–12.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1990. Composition of
Foods Beef products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–13.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1986. Composition of
Foods Beverages; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–14.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1987. Composition of
Foods Finfish and shellfish products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook
8–15.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1986. Composition of
Foods Legumes and legume products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook
8–16.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1989. Composition of
Foods Lamb, veal, and game products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture
Handbook 8–17.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1992. Composition of
Foods Baked products; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–18.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1991. Composition of
Foods Snacks and sweets; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–19.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1989. Composition of
Foods Cereal grains and pasta; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–20.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1988. Composition of
Foods Fast foods; raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8–21.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1990. Composition of
Foods Raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8, 1989 Supplement.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1991. Composition of
Foods Raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8, 1990 Supplement.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1992. Composition of
Foods Raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8, 1991 Supplement.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1993. Composition of
Foods Raw, processed, prepared. Agriculture Handbook 8, 1992 Supplement.

47
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 1992. Provisional Table
on the Selenium Content of Foods. USDA, HNIS, PT–109.
U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2007. USDA Table of Nutrient Retention Factors,
Release 6. Nutrient Data Laboratory Home Page at
http://www.ars.usda.gov/Main/docs.htm?docid=9448. (Accessed 7/6/2012)*
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2004. USDA Database
for the Choline Content of Common Foods. Nutrient Data Laboratory web site:
http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata/choline. (Accessed 7/6/2012)*
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2005. USDA National
Fluoride Database of Selected Beverages and Foods - Release 2. Nutrient Data
Laboratory web site: http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata/fluoride. (Accessed
7/6/2012)*
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2012. USDA Food and
Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (release 5.0) [database]. Food Surveys Research
Group web site: http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/fsrg (Accessed 7/6/2012)
U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services. 2012.
Food Labeling. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 21, Pt. 101. U.S. Government
Printing Office web site:
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collectionCfr.action?collectionCode=CFR (Accessed
7/6/2012).
Van Winkle S, Levy S.M., Kiritsy M.C., Heilman J.R., Wefel J.S., Marshall T. 1995.
Water and formula fluoride concentrations: Significance for infants fed formula. Pediatric
Dentistry. 17(4):305-310.
Watt, B.K., and A.L. Merrill. 1963. Composition of Foods Raw, Processed, Prepared.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agriculture Handbook 8.
Weihrauch, J.L., and A.S. Chatra. 1994. Provisional Table on the Vitamin K Content of
Foods, Revised. USDA, HNIS, PT–104.*
Weihrauch, J.L., L.P. Posati, B.A. Anderson, and J. Exler. 1977. Lipid conversion
factors for calculating fatty acid content of foods. Journal of the American Oil Chemists
Society 54:36–40.
Weihrauch, J.L., and J. Tamaki. 1991. Provisional Table on the Vitamin D Content of
Foods. USDA, HNIS, PT–108.*

48
Williams, J., Patterson, K., Howe, J. (Retired), Snyder, C., Boillot, K., Lofgren, P.,
Thompson, L., Luna, A., Nalawade, A., Douglass, L., Holden, J. 2009. Nutrient
Composition in Ground Pork using Regression Techniques (Poster). Institute of Food
Technologists Annual Meeting + Food Expo. Anaheim, CA. June 6-9, 2009,
http://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/12354500/Articles/IFT09_GrdPork.pdf
(Accessed 7/6/2012) *
Ye, L., Landen, W.O., and Ronald R. Eitenmiller, R.R. 2000. Ye, Landen, Eitenmiller
Liquid Chromatographic Analysis of all-trans-Retinyl Palmitate, β-Carotene, and Vitamin
E in Fortified Foods and the Extraction of Encapsulated and Nonencapsulated Retinyl
Palmitate. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 48(9):4003-8.
Zeisel, S. H., and Blusztajn, J. K. 1994. Choline and human nutrition. Annual Reviews of
Nutrition. 14:269-296
Zeisel, S.H., Mar, M.H., Howe, J. C., Holden, J. M 2003. Concentrations of choline –
containing compounds and betaine in common foods. Journal of Nutrition 133:1302-
1307; Erratum. 2003. Journal of Nutrition. 133:2918-2919
_______________
* Available on NDL’s web site: http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata

49
Notes on Foods
Introduction
The information contained in ”Notes on Foods” was initially published in printed copies
of Agriculture Handbook No. 8 (AH-8), which were presented as individual sections by
food groups. In addition to a description of the tables and how nutrient values were
determined, each food group section included a portion, called “Notes on Foods” with
information specific to each food group. The information on the database, nutrient
values and formats has been published separately as the documentation accompanying
each release of the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (SR;
NDL, 2011). At this time, “Notes on Foods” are included in this document for only some
of the sections previously available in the printed copies. It is anticipated that this
document will expand, as information for the remaining food groups is added.
Data are obtained from a variety of sources. These include the scientific literature, data
provided by food companies and trade associations, other government agencies and
USDA-sponsored contracts. In a number of cases, various trade associations have
worked with the Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL) to design analytical studies to obtain
new data on various food items. These studies are described in greater detail in their
respective sections below. Since 1997, USDA-sponsored contracts have been
conducted under the aegis of the National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program
(NFNAP), which is described below.
National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program
In 1997, the NDL, in cooperation with the National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and
other Institutes and Offices of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), instituted the
National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program. In 2005, The National Cancer Institute
took over the lead role in coordinating the program at NIH. The goals of NFNAP are to
improve the quantity and quality of data in the USDA National Nutrient Databank which
has resulted in annual updates of the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard
Reference (NDL, 2011) and a number of Special Interest Databases: isoflavones (NDL,
2008), choline (NDL, 2004a), proanthocyanidins (NDL, 2004b), fluoride (NDL, 2005),
and flavonoids (NDL, 2011). To achieve these goals, five principle aims were
established:
1. Identify and rank foods and nutrients for analysis
2. Evaluate existing data for foods and nutrients
3. Develop strategies for sampling
4. Process and analyze foods
5. Review and disseminate results
Since its inception in 1997, over 1,900 food items have been sampled and analyzed
under NFNAP. To date, values for over 1,600 of these food items have been

50
incorporated into SR. The process of acquiring, evaluating, and disseminating food
composition data is continuous. At any time, new samples are being collected,
prepared and analyzed and data for samples already analyzed are being revised and
processed through NDL’s Nutrient Data Bank System (NDBS). Details of these studies
are described in specific chapters on each food group, which follow this section. A
number of trade associations in the food industry, such as the National Cattleman’s
Beef Association, the National Pork Board, the Produce for Better Health Foundation,
the Mushroom Council, the American Egg Board and others have worked with NDL to
analyze food items in their product category sectors, using protocols adapted as part of
NFNAP. Details of each of these studies are described in the specific chapter for each
food group.
Identify Key Foods and critical nutrients for sampling and analysis
To identify and rank foods and nutrients for analysis, the Key Foods approach
(Haytowitz et al., 2000; Haytowitz et al., 2002) was used. Key Foods are those foods
which in aggregate contribute 75% of the nutrient intake for selected nutrients of public
health importance from the diet. The most current Key Foods list was generated using
weighted data for two-day food consumption data from the National Health and Nutrition
Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007-08 Data Files (NCHS, 2010) and food
composition data from SR22 (issued in 2009). For the current Key Foods list, targeted
nutrients (total fat, food energy, total sugar, total dietary fiber, calcium, iron, potassium,
sodium, β-carotene, α-tocopherol, vitamin C, vitamin B12, choline, cholesterol and
saturated fatty acids) were those identified in the Dietary Guidelines Advisory
Committee Report on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010 (DGAC, 2010) and
the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010 (USDA & USDHHS, 2010) as “shortfall”
nutrients (limited in the diet) or nutrients of excess consumption, in particular those
associated with poor health outcomes. Other nutrients of concern such as trans fatty
acids and added sugar were considered but not included in the Key Foods algorithm as
only those nutrients included in the Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Surveys
(FNDDS), 5.0 (USDA-ARS, 2012) can be used. The Key Foods approach has allowed
NDL to concentrate analytical resources on those foods that contribute significant
amounts of nutrients of public health interest to the diet.
Evaluate existing data for scientific quality
At the initiation of NFNAP in 1997, the food composition values in SR were reviewed for
scientific quality by NDL staff. Data for many of the foods in the database at that time
were found to be more than 10 years old, based on a limited number of values, lacking
in complete and accurate documentation, and including some samples of uncertain
origin. To assess the quality of existing data and to improve the level of documentation,
NDL scientists developed an expert system for evaluating data quality (Holden et al.,
2002; Holden et al., 2005). The expert system focuses on evaluation and
documentation of five data quality indicators: 1) sampling plan; 2) sample handling; 3)
number of samples analyzed; 4) analytical methodology; and 5) analytical quality
control. This system has been used in the production of a number of special interest

51
databases including isoflavones (NDL, 2008), choline (NDL, 2004a), proanthocyanidins
(NDL, 2004b), fluoride (NDL, 2005), and flavonoids (NDL, 2007). This process is used
to provide information on the data quality assessment for all of the analytical nutrient
profiles for foods in SR. Many of the food profiles in the database lacked some or all of
the data quality information. For these reasons, and to establish a core set of data of
known sampling, analytical methodology, and quality control, NDL determined that
comprehensive updates of the food items on the Key Foods list would be needed.
Devise and implement a probability-based sampling survey of U.S. foods
A probability-proportional-to-size (PPS) food sampling plan was developed by NDL staff
in collaboration with statisticians from the National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA
(Pehrsson et al., 2000). This approach allows the development of nationally
representative data for a given food. The original NFNAP food product sampling design
was based on a stratified design including each of four regions across the 48
conterminous states of nearly equal in population size. A revised PPS sampling design
was developed with 2000 U.S. Census data (Perry et al., 2003) and was based on a
stratified three-stage design using 2001 Census Bureau projected state population sizes
and Census regions (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002). Forty-eight geographically dispersed
counties were selected at the first stage, supermarket outlets at the second stage, and
specific food products at the third stage. Subsets of these locations can be selected
according to the requirements of the specific food item and nutrients, weighing
variability vs. reliability. Multiples of these geographic locations can also be employed
for studies requiring more samples, i.e., where wide variability in a nutrient is expected
and/or existing data are limited or nonexistent. Fluoride, for example, is highly variable
in drinking water; in a national USDA study, drinking water was sampled in 144
locations and over two seasons (Pehrsson et al., 2006). Another consideration in
designing the sampling strategy was that fewer samples would be analyzed for lower
consumption foods as identified during the Key Foods process or for nutrients in foods
which were not significant contributors to the diet or present in low or trace
concentrations. Details of the sampling design are discussed in Perry et al. (2003). This
sampling plan will be updated in the future to use data from the 2010 U.S. Census.
Specific food products were selected according to a sampling approach based on
market share. For example, after examining the Key Foods list, it was determined that
pizza was a major contributor of many nutrients. However, the FNDDS does not
differentiate between pizzas purchased from a fast food pizza restaurant vs. those
purchased frozen and heated and served at home. Consequently, NDL undertook the
analysis of both types. Several different types (e.g., cheese, pepperoni, pepperoni and
sausage, and meat/vegetable combinations) and brands (e.g., major national brands
and store brands) were purchased in supermarkets as described above. Later, several
different types (e.g., cheese, pepperoni, and deluxe) of fast food restaurant pizza from
major national chains were purchased from individual restaurants. For frozen pizzas,
national composites of each type and brand were prepared. For the fast food restaurant
pizzas, four composites of three randomly drawn samples of each type and brand were

52
prepared.
Foods were purchased under contract by a USDA-directed professional product pickup
company using tested selection protocols in retail outlets. The foods were shipped to
the Food Analysis Laboratory Control Center (FALCC) at Virginia Polytechnic Institute
and State University in Blacksburg, Virginia for sample preparation. Procedures were
developed for sample unit receipt, preparation, and storage which can be modified as
needed for new food samples. FALCC continuously develops protocols for
homogenizing and compositing samples based on instructions from NDL. FALCC also
collects relevant weights and dissection information for edible and non-edible portions
as required, and documents processing and preparation procedures. Processed
samples are shipped to USDA-qualified analytical laboratories for analysis as directed
by NDL. Reserve and archive samples of each food are maintained at FALCC.
The sampling plan can be modified to meet the requirements of a specific study of
specific nutrients or unique foods, e.g., the sampling of tap water in homes to determine
fluoride levels. With modifications, the sampling plan can be used for special population
groups located in geographically distinct areas (e.g., American Indians and Alaska
Natives on reservations, and Hispanic Americans (Perry et al. 2002)).
Analyze sampled foods under USDA-supervised laboratory contracts
NDL employs a two-step process for awarding contracts for analysis of foods. The first
step requires prospective contractors to submit a formal proposal. Prospective
contractors are asked to include a study plan in their proposal with detailed plans and
procedures for conducting the nutrient analysis of Key Foods, as well as identifying the
analytical methods and procedures they will use to complete each task. The description
of analytical methods includes sample handling and storage, extraction or digestion,
analysis, and quantification steps performed as part of the analysis. The laboratories
propose specific analytical methods, based on their expertise, which are examined by
NDL during the review of the proposals. A detailed discussion of day-to-day quality
control (QC) procedures is requested to facilitate the assessment of accuracy and
precision for the unknown samples. The commercial laboratory proposals are evaluated
by a panel consisting of NDL and other ARS staff members. The proposals are
reviewed and scored against criteria delineated in the Request for Proposals.
Those offerors whose proposals are deemed technically acceptable are sent “check”
samples by FALCC for analysis. These are Certified Reference Materials (CRMs)
procured from a variety of sources, both in the U.S. and at the global level. Nutrient-
specific analytical results generated by offerors for these samples are evaluated against
acceptable ranges prepared by NDL. Offerors with the best written proposals and
analytical results on the check samples may be awarded a contract for specific
nutrients. Specific work orders under each contract are awarded such that contractors
will not be given analytical work for nutrients where results for the check samples were
outside the acceptable range.

53
Aliquots of each food composite are sent to the laboratories by FALCC for analysis
according to the work plans developed by NDL. The methods of analysis employed by
the various analytical laboratories are given in Table 20. Along with the samples,
FALCC includes a QC material, which is either a control composite developed at
FALCC or a CRM purchased from a certifying organization (Phillips et al., 2006). The
laboratories are required to provide the results of their in-house quality control runs with
the results for the analytical samples. The results from the laboratories are then
reviewed by a quality control committee comprised of NDL and FALCC staff. The QC
data for CRMs are compared to the certificate values for the material and the results for
control composites are compared to a database of all results obtained for the particular
control composites. Analytical data for food samples are compared to existing data for
that food or a similar food. Questions are referred to the laboratories, and, if necessary,
the analyses are repeated.
Table 20. Methods of analysis used by NFNAP laboratories
Nutrient Technique Methods Identification
Protein (Nitrogen) Combustion AOAC 968.06 (4.2.04) Protein (Crude) in Animal Feed
Combustion AOAC 990.03 Protein (Crude) in Animal Feed
Combustion AOAC 992.15 (39.1.16) Crude Protein in Meat and Meat Products
Including Pet Foods
Kjeldahl AOAC 991.20 Nitrogen (Total) in Milk
Total Fat Acid hydrolysis AOAC 989.05 (33.2.26) Fat in Milk, Mojo, Acid Hydrolysis
Acid hydrolysis AOAC 922.06 (32.1.14) Fat in Flour, Acid Hydrolysis Method
Acid hydrolysis AOAC 925.12 (32.5.05) Fat in Macaroni Products
Acid hydrolysis AOAC 954.02 (4.5.02 or 7.063) Fat (Crude) or Ether Extract in Pet
Food
Extraction AOAC 920.39 Fat (Crude) or Ether Extract in Animal Feed
Extraction AOAC 933.05 Fat in Cheese
Extraction AOAC 960.39 (39.1.05) Fat (Crude) or Ether Extract in Meat
Extraction AOAC 983.23 (45.4.02) Fat in Foods, Chloroform-Methanol
Extraction Method
Extraction Folch et al., (1957) J. Biol. Chem., 226; 497-509.
Extraction Phillips et al. Simplified Gravimetric Determination of Total Fat in
Mixed Food Composites After Chloroform/Methanol Extraction J.
Amer. Oil Chem. Soc., 74 (1997)p. 137-142
Extraction AOAC 989.05 Fat in Milk
Ash Gravimetric AOAC 923.03 (32.1.05 or 14.006) Ash of Flour
Gravimetric AOAC 942.05 (4.1.10) Ash of Animal Feed
Gravimetric AOAC 945.46 Ash of Milk
Moisture Vacuum oven AOAC 934.01 (4.1.03) Moisture in Animal Feed
Vacuum oven AOAC 934.06 (37.1.10) Moisture in Fruits, Vegetables, and their
Products
Vacuum oven AOAC 964.22 (42.1.05) Solids (Total) in Canned Vegetables:
Gravimetric Method
Forced air AOAC 950.46 (39.1.02) Moisture in Meat
Fiber Enzymatic-
gravimetric
AOAC 991.43 (32.1.17) Total, Soluble, and Insoluble Dietary Fiber in
Foods
Enzymatic-
gravimetric
AOAC 985.29 (45.4.07) Total Dietary Fiber in Foods
Starch Enzymatic-
colorimetric
AOAC 979.10 (32.2.05) Starch in Cereals, Glucoamylase Method

54
Nutrient Technique Methods Identification
Polarimetric The Feedings Stuffs (Sampling and Analysis) Regulations 1982 No.
1144, Agriculture, London
Sugars LC AOAC 982.14 (32.2.07) Glucose, Fructose, Sucrose, and Maltose in
Presweetened Cereals
Minerals ICP AOAC 984.27 Ca, Cu, Fe, Mg, Mn, P, K, Na and Zn in Infant Formula
Atomic
absorption
Laboratory modified AOAC 968.08 (4.8.02) + 985.35 (50.1.14) +
965.05 (2.6.01) Metals in Food by AAS
ICP Laboratory modified AOAC 985.01 (3.2.06) + 984.27 (50.1.15)
Metals in Food by ICP
Selenium Isotope dilution
GC/MS
Reamer & Veillon, Anal. Chem., 53, (1981) 2166
Hydride
generation
AOAC 986.15 (9.1.01) Arsenic, Cadmium, Lead, Selenium and Zinc
in Human and Pet Foods
Retinol HPLC AOAC 974.29 (modified for HPLC) Vitamin A in Mixed Feeds,
Premixes, and Foods and Int'l Vitamin Nutrition (1992) (modified for
HPLC determination) or a laboratory modified method with UV &
fluorescent detection
Fluoride Specific ion
electrode
VanWinkle, Levy et al., Pediatr. Dent., 17 (1995) p305 (direct-read)
Microdiffusion VanWinkle, Levy et al., Pediatr. Dent., 17 (1995) p305
(microdiffusion)
Vitamin E GC Cort et al., J Agr Food Chem (1983) 31:1330-1333 + Speek et al., J
Food Sci (1985) 50:121-124 + McMurray et al., J AOAC (1980)
63:1258-1261
LC Ye, Landen, Eitenmiller J Agric Food Chem. 2000 Sep;48(9):4003-8.
Carotenoids HPLC AOAC 941.15 (45.1.03) modified by Quackenbush, J. Liq. Chroma.
(1987) 10:643-653
HPLC Craft, N. 2001. Chromatographic techniques for carotenoid
separation. In Current Protocols in Food Analytical Chemistry.
F2.3.1−F2.3.15. Wrolstad, R. E., Acree, T. E., Decker, E. A.,
Penner, M. H., Reid, D. S., Schwartz, S. J., Shoemaker, C. F.,
Sporns, P., Editors. Wiley. New York.
Thiamin Fluorometric AOAC 942.23 Thiamine (B1) in Foods
Riboflavin Microbiological Laboratory modified AOAC 940.33 (45.2.06) Riboflavin (Vitamin B2)
in Vitamin Preparations
Fluorometric AOAC 970.65 Riboflavin (Vitamin B2) in Foods and Vitamin
Preparations (Fluorometric)
Niacin Microbiological Laboratory modified AOAC 944.13 (45.2.04) Niacin and Niacinamide
(Nicotinic Acid and Nicotinamide) in Vitamin Preparations
Pantothenic acid Microbiological AOAC 945.74 (45.2.05) Pantothenic Acid in Vitamin Preparations
Microbiological AOAC 992.07 (50.1.22) Pantothenic Acid in Milk-Based Infant
Formula
Vitamin B6 Microbiological AOAC 961.15 (45.2.08) Vitamin B6 (Pyridoxine, Pyridoxal, and
Pyridoxamine) in Food Extracts (Microbiological)
Vitamin B12 Microbiological AOAC 952.20 (45.2.02) Cobalamin (Vitamin B12 Activity) in
Vitamin Preparations
Total folate Microbiological Martin et al. J Assoc Off Anal Chem. 1990 Sep-Oct;73(5):805-8.
Choline LC/ESI/MS Koc et al. (Zeisel), Quantitation of Choline and its Metabolites in
Tissues and Foods by LC/ESI/MS. Anal. Chem. (2002) 74:4734-
4740

55
Nutrient Technique Methods Identification
Vitamin D LC AOAC 995.05 (50.1.23) Vitamin D in Infant Formulas and Enteral
Products
HPLC AOAC 982.29 (45.1.22) Vitamin D in Mixed Feeds, Premixes, and
Pet Foods
HPLC Birdwell et al. Am J Clin Nutr 88 (2008) 554S-557S
LC/MS/MS Huang, Luzerne, Winters & Sullivan, JAOAC Int., 92 (2009) p1327-
1335
Vitamin C Microfluorometric AOAC 967.22 (45.1.15) Vitamin C (Total ) in Vitamin Preparations
Vitamin K HPLC Booth & Sadowski, Methods Enzymol., (1997) 282:446 (HPLC)
Cholesterol GC/Direct
saponification
AOAC 994.10 (45.4.10) Cholesterol in Foods
GC/Direct
saponification
Dinh et al. J Food Comp Anal, 21 (2008) p306-314
Acid Hydrolysis-
HPLC
AOAC 982.30 (45.3.05) (modified) Protein Efficiency Ratio (Ninhydrin
post column)
Alk. hydrolysis-
HPLC
AOAC 988.15 (modified) Tryptophan in Foods and Food and Feed
Ingredients
Colorimetric 990.26 (39.1.27) Hydroxyproline in Meat and Meat products
Performic
oxidation-HPLC
994.12 (4.1.11) (modified) Amino Acids in Feed (OPA post column)
Amino acids Alk. hydrolysis-
HPLC
AOAC 988.15 (modified) Tryptophan in Foods and Food and Feed
Ingredients
Performic
oxidation-HPLC
AOAC 994.12 (4.1.11) (modified) Amino Acids in Feed (OPA post
column)
Acid Hydrolysis-
HPLC
AOAC 982.30 (45.3.05) (modified) Protein Efficiency Ratio (Ninhydrin
post column)
Colorimetric AOAC 990.26 (39.1.27) Hydroxyproline in Meat and Meat products
Fatty acids GLC CE 1-62 (1997) Fatty Acid Composition by Gas Chromatography
GLC AOCS Ce 1-62 for GC, and Ce 2-66 for prep of methyl esters
GLC AOAC 996.06 (41.1.28A) Fat (Total, Saturated and
Monounsaturated) in Foods
GLC AOAC 996.06 (41.1.28A) Fat (Total, Saturated, and Unsaturated) in
Foods & AOCS Ce 1c-89 Fatty Acid Composition by Gas
Chromatography (modified)
Compile newly generated data to update the National Nutrient Databank
The acceptable data from the analytical laboratories are then combined with the
descriptive information collected on the sample units and are migrated to NDL’s Nutrient
Databank System, which was designed with three levels (Initial, Aggregated, and
Compiled) to manage and process food composition data (Haytowitz et al, 2009). In the
Initial step, all the individual data points are maintained along with complete information
on methods of analysis, analytical quality control, sample handling, common measures,
component and refuse data, and the source and sampling information for each sample
unit. Information is also retained on how individual sample units are composited.
Values are converted to standard units of measure per 100 g, but the “as received” data
values are also retained. In the Aggregated step, NDL scientists make decisions on how
to group the data (e.g., combining data from different sources or a single source),
weight the data (usually by market share or production information), and/or handle new

56
data when data already exist for a food item (i.e., replace the old data or combine it with
new data). Specialized statistical procedures are used to aggregate the groups of data
and generate descriptive statistics which take into consideration the grouping and
nature of the data. NDL scientists also use statistical procedures within the NDBS to
compare sets of data and test for outliers. For food items used in the FNDDS, missing
data are imputed according to scientific principles (Schakel et al., 1998) at the Compiled
step. Missing values can be calculated using the recipe or formulation modules within
the databank system. These modules are based on linear regression and are often
used to generate a few missing values for some foods and complete nutrient profiles for
other foods. The formulation regression program uses nutrient values and ingredients
(in a specified order) from product labels. The recipe program uses known amounts
from authoritative sources to generate a specific food nutrient profile. Finally, the name
of the food item is finalized, common measures are selected and ranked, and the item is
approved for release. Prior to release, the data are sent to experts for review; brand
name items are sent to food companies or appropriate trade associations, and other
foods are sent to analysts or other specialists familiar with the food and its nutrient
content. The experts indicate if the data are acceptable based on their knowledge of the
products and if any changes are recommended. If changes are made, the data are
disseminated in annual releases of the SR database.
References for Notes on Foods – National Food and Nutrient Analysis
Program
Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC). 2010. Report of the Dietary Guidelines
Advisory Committee on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010.
http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-DGACReport.htm (Accessed 7/6/2012).
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services (USDHHS). Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010. 7th Edition.
http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-PolicyDocument.htm (Accessed 7/6/2012).
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service. 2012. USDA Food and
Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies (release 5.0) [database]. Food Surveys Research
Group web site: http://www.ars.usda.gov/ba/bhnrc/fsrg (Accessed 7/6/2012)
Haytowitz, D.B., Pehrsson, P.R., Holden, J.M. 2000. Setting Priorities for Nutrient
Analysis in Diverse Populations. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 13, 425-
433.
Haytowitz, D.B., Pehrsson, P.R., Holden, J.M. 2002. The Identification of Key Foods for
Food Composition Research. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 15, 183-194.
Haytowitz, D.B., Lemar, L.E., Pehrsson, P.R. 2009. USDA’s Nutrient Databank
System—A tool for handling Data from Diverse Sources. Journal of Food Composition

57
and Analysis. 22, 433-441.
Holden, J.M., Bhagwat, S.A, Patterson, K.Y. 2002. Development of a Multi-Nutrient
Data Quality Evaluation System. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 15, 339-
348.
Holden, J.M., Bhagwat, S.A., Haytowitz, D., Gebhardt, S., Dwyer, J., Peterson, J.,
Beecher, G.R., Eldridge, A.L. 2005. Development of a database of critically evaluated
flavonoid data: application of USDA’s data quality evaluation system. Journal of Food
Composition and Analysis 18, 829-844.
National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), Center for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). 2010. National
Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2007-2008 Data Files.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/nhanes2007-2008/nhanes07_08.htm (Accessed
7/6/2012).
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). 2004a. USDA Database on the Choline Content of Common
Foods - 2004. http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata
.
(Accessed 7/6/2012).
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). 2004b. USDA Database for the Proanthocyanidin Content of
Foods - 2004. http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata. (Accessed 7/6/2012).
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). 2005. USDA National Fluoride Database of Selected Beverages
and Foods, Release 2 (2005). http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata. (Accessed
7/6/2012).
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). 2011. National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference,
Release 24. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=8964 (Accessed
7/6/2012).
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). 2011. USDA Database on the Flavonoid Content of Foods,
Release 3.0 – 2011. http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata (Accessed 7/6/2012).
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture. 2008. USDA for the Isoflavone Content of Selected Foods, Release 2.0.
http://www.ars.usda.gov/nutrientdata. (Accessed 7/6/2012).

58
Nutrient Data Laboratory (NDL), Agricultural Research Service (ARS), U.S. Department
of Agriculture (USDA). 2010. National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference,
Release 23. http://www.ars.usda.gov/Services/docs.htm?docid=22115. (Accessed
7/6/2012).
Pehrsson PR, Haytowitz DB, Holden JM, Perry CR, Beckler DG. 2000. USDA’s National
Food and Nutrient Analysis Program: Food Sampling. Journal of Food Composition and
Analysis 12, 379-89.
Pehrsson, P.R., Perry, C.R., Cutrufelli, R.L., Patterson, K.Y., Wilger, J., Haytowitz, D.B.,
Holden, J.M., Day, C.D., Himes, J.H., Harnack, L., Levy, S., Wefel, J., Heilman, J.,
Phillips, K., Rasor, A. 2006. Sampling and initial findings for a national study of fluoride
in drinking water. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 19, S45-S52.
Perry, C.P., Beckler, D.G., Bellow M.E., Gregory L.G., Pehrsson, P.R. 2002. Alaska
Native and American Indian Tribe Sampling Frame Construction and Sample Design for
the National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program. 2001. 2001 Proceedings of the
American Statistical Association
http://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/proceedings/y2001f.html (Accessed 7/6/2012)
Perry, C.R, Pehrsson P.R., Holden J. 2003. A Revised Sampling Plan for Obtaining
Food Products for Nutrient Analysis for the USDA National Nutrient Database. 2003
Proceedings of the American Statistical Association (CD-ROM).
http://www.amstat.org/sections/srms/proceedings/y2003f.html. (Accessed 7/6/2012)
Phillips, K.M, Wunderlich, K.M, Holden, J.M., Exler, J., Gebhardt, S.E., Haytowitz, D.,
Beecher, G.R., Doherty, R.F. 2005. Stability of 5-methyltetrahydrofolate in frozen fresh
fruits and vegetables. Food Chem. 92:587-595.
Phillips, K.M., Patterson, K.Y., Rasor, A.S., Exler, J., Haytowitz, D.B., Holden, J.M.,
Pehrsson, P.R. 2006. Quality-control materials in the USDA National Food and Nutrient
Analysis Program (NFNAP). Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 384(6):1341-1355.
Schakel, S.F., Buzzard, I.M., Gebhardt, S.E. 1998. Procedures for Estimating Nutrient
Values for Food Composition Databases. J. Food Comp. Anal. 10:102-114.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2002. U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimates 2001.
http://www.census.gov/popest/data/historical/2000s/vintage_2002/index.html (Accessed
7/11/2012)

59
Beef Products (Food Group 13)
Introduction
Data for beef products are presented in the USDA National Nutrient Database for
Standard Reference. For most retail cuts, nutrient values are presented for cuts
trimmed to 1/8-inch and 0-inch fat and for Choice or Select quality grades. Nutrient
values reported as “All Grades” were estimated by combining the nutrient values for
Choice and Select grades, weighted by their market proportions. A few Prime cuts
trimmed at 1/8 inch external fat are also included.
The data in SR represent the amount of each constituent in 100 grams of edible portion.
The edible portion in beef may be represented as “separable lean and fat” or as
“separable lean only”. In both cases, bone and connective tissue are removed from the
cut and reported as refuse. In the case of “separable lean and fat”, it is assumed that all
fat present is consumed. For items described as “separable lean only”, all external trim
fat and seam fat are removed from the cut, weighed, and included in the reported
refuse. Weights are determined for the whole retail cut as purchased, and for each
component (e.g., separable lean, separable fat, refuse, etc.). Nutrient analyses are
conducted on the separable lean and the separable fat. The external trim fat and the
seam fat are combined for analyses and reported as separable fat. The nutrient values
for separable lean and separable fat are weighted for their respective contributions to
the whole retail cut and reported as “separable lean and fat”. For cooked beef cuts, the
cuts are cooked with the separable fat intact. Nutrient data for separable fat, separable
lean only, and separable lean and fat of cooked cuts are analyzed or calculated as
described above.
The analytical nutrient data include the mean nutrient value, the standard error given to
three decimal places, and the number of observations on which the values are based.
For many food items, mean values are given without an accompanying standard error
and number of samples. These values are either calculated by pooling data by or by
weighting means (e.g. All Grades), by applying cooking yields or nutrient retention
factors, or by imputation from a different, closely related food. For raw beef items and
unheated cured items, nutrient values are estimated on the known content of that
nutrient in the lipid (fatty acids), total solids (cholesterol), moisture-free, fat-free solids
(minerals), or protein (water-soluble vitamins) fraction of a similar food.
Nutrients
Nutrient information for SR can be found under “File Content” in the documentation.
However, some nutrient information specific to beef products are included here. Nutrient
data are obtained for moisture, protein, ash and total fat. The values for protein are
calculated from the content of total nitrogen (N) in the food using the conversion factor
recommended by Jones (Jones, D.B., 1941). The specific factor applied to beef items
is 6.25. The carbohydrate content of uncured products (except some organ meats)

60
consisting entirely of beef is negligible. For such foods, the carbohydrate content is
assigned a zero value. The sum of the percentages of water, protein, total lipid, and
ash may not necessarily equal 100 percent for those foods showing zero carbohydrate
because the amounts of each of these constituents are determined independently.
For heart, liver, kidney, tongue, and cured products (foods expected to contain
carbohydrate), the carbohydrate value is calculated as the difference between 100 and
the sum of the percentages of water, protein, total lipid, and ash. If the total of these
constituents for any item is more than 100 due to analytical variation, the carbohydrate
content is assigned a zero value.
Food energy is expressed in terms of both kilocalories and kilojoules. (One kilocalorie
equals 4.184 kilojoules.) The data are for physiologic energy values remaining after
losses due to digestion and metabolism have been deducted. Further discussions on
energy and caloric factors used in SR can be found in the “Food Description File” of the
general documentation.
The specific calorie factors used for calculating energy values in beef products are:
Kcal/g
Protein……………….4.27
Fat…………………...9.02
Carbohydrate……….3.87
The carbohydrate factor of 3.87 is used for some organ meats and some cured
products. The factor of 4.11 is used for tongue. The factors are based on the Atwater
system for determining energy values. Details of the derivation of these factors are
outlined in Agriculture Handbook No. 74 (Merrill, A.L. and Watt, B.K., 1973). Because
the level of carbohydrate in separable lean and separable fat is insignificant, no
carbohydrate factor is needed for most beef products.
Description of Projects
The studies documented in these notes on beef represent only data collected since
1998.
Selected cuts, 1/8 inch external trim fat.
A collaborative study was funded by the Beef Checkoff Program and conducted by
USDA, America’s Beef Producers, and Texas A&M University to determine the food and
nutrient composition of 13 raw and cooked retail cuts for inclusion in the USDA National
Nutrient Database for Standard Reference.
Sampling and fabrication. Carcasses (n=20) were selected from two packing plants,
one in the Texas Panhandle and the other in Nebraska. Ten USDA Choice and ten
USDA Select carcasses (yield grade 2 and 3) were selected for the study. These

61
carcasses represented the approximate distribution found in the US beef supply
according to the National Quality Beef Audit – 1998 (Boleman, S.L. et al., 1998). All
carcasses were shipped to Texas A&M University for fabrication of the following retail
cuts: arm roast, bottom round roast, bottom round steak, brisket – flat half, eye of round
roast, flank steak, round tip roast, small-end rib steak, tenderloin steak, tri-tip (bottom
sirloin butt) roast (boneless and defatted), top loin steak, top round steak, and top sirloin
steak. Cuts were assigned randomly to the following external fat trim levels: 0.0 cm (0
inch trim), 0.3 cm (1/8 inch trim), or 0.6 cm (1/4 inch trim). External fat was measured at
five points, the points connected, and with a scalpel, the fat was removed half the
thickness of the cut. This procedure was repeated on the other side, thus removing the
excess fat completely. One additional steak was assigned to a raw treatment and
trimmed to 0.3 cm. Three of the cuts (flank steak, round tip roast, and tri-tip roast) had
no external fat and were therefore assigned to the 0.0 cm group for both preparations
(raw and cooked). Dried surfaces, extending chine bones, minor muscles, and muscle
pieces were trimmed from all cuts. All cuts were vacuum packed individually, labeled,
and frozen at -23°C for further dissection and cooking. Additional details on fabrication
have been previously published (Wahrmund-Wyle, J.L. et al., 2000).
Cooking procedures. (Wahrmund-Wyle, J.L. et al., 2000). Retail cuts destined for
cooking were thawed overnight in a cooler at 5°C, weighed, and cooked as follows: arm
roast, bottom round steak, and brisket were braised; bottom round roast, eye of round
roast, round tip roast, and tri-tip roast were roasted; and flank steak, small-end rib steak,
tenderloin steak, top loin steak, top round steak, and top sirloin steak were broiled.
For braising, cuts were browned for 4-8 min (time being size-dependent) in a preheated
Farberware Dutch Oven placed on top of a conventional range. After browning, the cuts
were covered with 90-180ml distilled water, placed in a preheated conventional gas
oven at 325F (163°C) and simmered in a covered vessel to an internal temperature of
185F (85°C).
Cuts for roasting were placed on wire racks with the fat side up, when possible, and
cooked in a conventional gas oven (preheated to 325F (163°C) to an internal
temperature of 140F (60°C). For broiling, cuts were cooked on electric Farberware
Open-Hearth Broilers (model 350A) to an internal temperature of 149F (65°C). The
internal temperature of each retail cut was monitored by inserting copper constantan
thermocouples into the geometric center of the cut and recording the data on Honeywell
recorders. After cooking, cuts were wrapped in plastic wrap and chilled (2-3°C)
overnight (Jones, D.K. et al., 1992). Each cut was weighed prior to and after cooking
for calculation of cooking yield.
Sample preparation. Individual samples from all cuts, both raw and cooked, were
carefully dissected to separate and weigh the various cut components. These
components included separable lean, external fat, seam fat, and waste such as bone
and heavy (non-edible) connective tissue. The separable lean included muscle,
intramuscular fat, and connective tissue that would be considered edible. External fat is
the fat on the outside of the cut. Seam fat included intermuscular fat depots within the

62
cut. Separable fat from all cuts was pooled to form raw and cooked composites.
Separable fat included both external and seam fat in these composites. Separable lean
was placed in a Cuisinart® food processor and homogenized for 35 seconds. Sample
aliquots were frozen at -10°C until analysis.
Sample analyses. Proximate nutrients (moisture, total fat, ash, and protein) were
determined on individual samples and composites of the separable fat. Raw and
cooked samples of separable fat and the separable lean from the arm roast, bottom
round steak, and top loin steak, trimmed to 1/8 inch external fat, were also analyzed for
minerals (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium,
selenium, sodium, and, zinc) and vitamins (niacin, thiamin, riboflavin, vitamins B6, and
B12). Samples from the raw and cooked arm roast and separable fat were analyzed for
vitamins A and E, total folate, and pantothenic acid. Raw samples from the arm roast
were analyzed for amino acids. Data were released in SR16 (2003).
Grass-fed Beef
A collaborative study (Leheska, J.M. et al., 2008) was funded by the Beef Checkoff
Program and conducted by America’s Beef Producers, Texas Tech University, and
USDA to determine the nutrient composition of grass-fed beef in the United States for
inclusion in SR. The demand for grass-fed products has increased in recent years due
to increased public interest in grass-fed production practices and nutrition. Crop variety,
season, and geographic location can have an affect on the nutrient content of
feedstuffs. In turn, the different types of feed given to cattle can affect weight gain,
carcass characteristics, and nutrient content.
Sampling. Ground beef and strip steaks were collected on 3 separate occasions from
15 producers of grass-fed beef, representing 13 different states (Alabama, Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New
Mexico, Texas, and Virginia). The sample collection protocol required that 2 steaks from
3 different animals be collected by each producer on each of the 3 separate occasions.
The steaks were cut 2.54 cm thick from the 13th rib position of the strip loin. Similarly,
454 g of ground beef targeting 85% lean and 15% fat was collected by each producer
from 3 different carcasses on each of 3 different occasions. When the specified lean to
fat ratio (85/15) was not available they were asked to provide the next leanest ground
beef (e.g., 88/12). The samples were then packaged appropriately and shipped frozen
to Texas Tech University.
Sample preparations, grass-fed ground beef samples. After the ground beef
samples had thawed properly they were frozen in liquid nitrogen and homogenized.
Once homogeneity was reached aliquots of the samples were double bagged in labeled
Whirl-Pak bags and stored at -80°C until subsequent analysis.
Sample preparations grass-fed strip steak samples: After proper thawing, the strip
steak samples were weighed and dissected. The lean, fat, and refuse (connective tissue

63
and scrap) of each steak was separated and weighed individually. Samples of cubed
strip steak were frozen in liquid nitrogen and homogenized using the same protocol as
ground beef samples. Aliquots of the homogenized samples were double bagged in
labeled Whirl-Pak bags and stored at -80°C until subsequent analyses.
Chemical Analysis. Analyses of proximate nutrients were performed at Texas Tech
University. Following ether extraction, fat was determined in each sample using the
Soxhlet method according to Official Method 991.36. Percent protein was determined
by combustion using a LECO FP 2000 following AOAC Official Method 992.15. Percent
moisture of the samples was analyzed by oven drying according to AOAC Official
Method 8.2.1.1 and percent ash was determined by difference. Fatty acid analysis and
cholesterol content was performed by a commercial laboratory using gas
chromatography according to AOAC Official Methods 963.22 and 994.15. The
University of North Carolina analyzed the grass-fed beef samples for choline by
extracting choline compounds and quantifying by liquid chromatography-electrospray
ionization-isotope dilution mass spectrometry. Total choline content of the samples was
calculated as the sum of choline-contributing metabolites. Total fat, thiamin, vitamin B12,
and minerals (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium,
selenium, sodium, and, zinc) were analyzed by a commercial laboratory using AOAC
Official Methods. To validate all analytical procedures, quality control was monitored by
insertion of certified reference materials and blind duplicates into the sampling course.
Data on Grass-fed beef was released with SR21 (2008).
Ground Beef Products.
The USDA, in collaboration with America’s Beef Producers and the University of
Wisconsin, undertook a study funded by the Beef Checkoff Program to update the
nutrient composition data for ground beef products in SR. None of the ground beef
products contained extenders. According to Federal regulations, ground beef has no
added water, phosphates, binders, or extenders, and shall not contain more than 30
percent fat (USDA, FSIS, Code of Federal Regulations). Ground beef is a unique meat
product in that a wide range of formulations for this product are available in most US
retail stores. In order to provide consumers and industry with the nutrient composition
information for this variable product, the study was designed to establish the
mathematical relationship between the various nutrients and the total fat content of raw
ground beef through regression techniques. The ultimate aim was to use these
relationships for predicting the nutrient composition for raw and prepared ground beef.
Sampling. Ground beef samples for each of three fat categories (label declarations of
<12% fat, 12-22% fat, or >22% fat) were purchased from 24 retail outlets nationwide. In
this sampling plan developed for the NFNAP (Pehrsson, P.R. et al., 2000), the country
was divided into 4 regions, with 3 consolidated metropolitan statistical areas (CMSA)
within each region; 2 retail stores were selected within each CMSA.
Sample preparation. Ground beef products were analyzed in raw and cooked form.
To achieve uniform sizing for broiled and pan-broiled patties, 112 g of ground beef were

64
pressed into a patty mold. Patties were broiled in a preheated conventional oven for 8.7
min (final internal temperature of 160F (71°C). Pan-broiled patties were broiled in a
pre-heated Westbend electric skillet for 11.75 min (final internal temperature of 160F
(71°C). Patties were cut in half to evaluate degree of doneness based on color.
Ground beef crumbles were cooked in a pre-heated Westbend electric skillet for 5.3 min
(final internal temperature of 160F (71°C)), and drained in a colander. The loaf was
baked in a conventional oven at 325°F (163C) for 41 min (final internal temperature of
160F (71°C)). No fat was added during cooking. After cooking, all samples were
stored at –24°C in sealed vacuum bags until homogenization and analysis.
Sample analyses. Raw samples and broiled patties from each location and for each
fat level (n=72) were analyzed for moisture, nitrogen, total fat, ash, and selenium.
Samples were pooled based on CMSA (n=36) for analyses of minerals (calcium,
copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium, sodium, and, zinc),
niacin, thiamin, riboflavin, vitamins B6 and B12 and cholesterol; twelve samples (pooled
by region) were analyzed for total choline, vitamin K, amino acids (raw samples only),
and fatty acids (C8 - C22); composites of 12 locations (n=6) were analyzed for folate,
pantothenic acid, retinol, and vitamin E. Proximate components for pan-broiled patties
and pan-browned crumbles were analyzed on the samples pooled by CMSA; minerals,
including selenium, niacin, thiamin, riboflavin, vitamins B6 and B12, and cholesterol were
analyzed in samples pooled by region; fatty acids, folate, pantothenic acid, retinol, and
vitamin E and were analyzed on the 6 composites of 12 locations each. For the baked
loaf samples, proximate components, minerals, including selenium, niacin, thiamin,
riboflavin, vitamins B6 and B12, and cholesterol were analyzed on regional composites;
fatty acids, folate, pantothenic acid, retinol, and vitamin E were analyzed on the 6
composites of 12 locations each.
Nutrient analyses were conducted at either University laboratories or at a commercial
testing laboratory using AOAC methods. Quality control measures included duplicate
sampling, and the use of control composites and NIST certified reference materials
(SRM 1546: Meat Homogenate).
Statistics. Data were analyzed using mixed model regression analysis to obtain a
regression equation for each nutrient and preparation method (SAS, 2004).
Nutrient values were released in SR15 (2002) for ground beef products containing 5%,
10%, 15%, 20%, 25%, and 30% fat. The prepared ground beef values included raw
samples, broiled patties, pan-broiled patties, pan-browned crumbles, and baked loaf.
The ground beef calculator, released on the NDL web site in 2006, computes the
nutrient profile for raw and prepared ground beef products of intermediate fat content.
Beef Value Cuts
A new line of single–muscle roasts and steaks, fabricated from the outside round, the
knuckle, and the chuck shoulder clod, were introduced to the retail market in 2001-
2002. These cuts, the top blade steak (Infraspinatus), shoulder top and center steaks

65
(Triceps brachii), shoulder tender (Teres major), tip center (Rectus femoris), tip side
(Vastus lateralis), and bottom round (Biceps femoris), were tested for palatability and
functionality. Furthermore, five of the six major cuts met the USDA definition of lean or
extra-lean. USDA, in collaboration with America’s Beef Producers and the University of
Wisconsin, conducted a study funded by the Beef Checkoff Program to determine the
nutrient profile of the Beef Value Cuts for inclusion in SR.
Sampling. Animal products were obtained from an IBP (Tyson) plant near Sioux City,
Iowa. This plant draws cattle from a large number of feedlots and has nationwide
product distribution. Twelve carcasses were identified by quality grade (high choice,
average choice, and select) with yield grades of 2 or 3. Two carcasses were used for
reserves and for training the meat cutting staff. There was sufficient product from 1
knuckle, 1 outside round, and 1 chuck clod to sample, prepare, and analyze five of the
cuts. The Teres major is a very small muscle (~8 oz from 1 side) and would not provide
a sufficient amount for all analyses. Therefore, one 15 pound box of choice (quality
grade unknown) and one box of select Teres major muscles were purchased from the
same plant. Removed beef value muscles were trimmed free of all external fat and
heavy connective tissue. The denuded muscles were vacuum packaged and stored at -
20°F until steak preparation.
Sample preparation. Muscles were cut into 1-inch thick steaks and weighed. Steaks
were removed in pairs, one steak for raw analyses, the other to be cooked and
analyzed in the cooked state. Steaks were cooked by grilling over a preheated portable
gas grill. Steaks were turned when the internal temperature reached the midway point
between the starting temperature and the final internal temperature (including post-
cooking temperature rise) of 160°F (71C) (medium degree of doneness). Steaks were
placed on a wire rack for 3 min and then weighed to obtain the cooked weight. Raw
and cooked steaks were stored at -20°F (-29C) until time for nutrient analyses.
Sample analyses. Proximate nutrients (moisture, total fat, ash, and protein) and
cholesterol were determined on individual muscle samples from the chuck clod, bottom
round, and the knuckle, both raw and cooked. Composites of three samples from each
of these muscle groups were pooled into composites and analyzed for fatty acid
content. Individual samples from the knuckle muscles were also analyzed for of
minerals (calcium, copper, iron, magnesium, manganese, phosphorus, potassium,
selenium, sodium, and, zinc) and vitamins (niacin, riboflavin, thiamin, vitamins B6 and
B12). Samples from the raw and cooked knuckle muscles were also analyzed for
vitamins A and E. No vitamins or minerals were analyzed on samples from the chuck
clod or bottom round; NDL imputed these values based on nutrient values from the arm
roast and bottom round. Cooking yields calculations were based on initial (raw) and
final cooked weights from all samples. These data were disseminated in SR18 (2005).
Beef Nutrient Database Improvement Study:
A collaborative research study was undertaken by NDL with scientists at the National
Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), Colorado State University (CSU), Texas A & M

66
University (TAMU), and Texas Tech University (TTU) to update nutrient information in
the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference (SR). This entailed
updating the food and nutrient composition for beef cuts currently in SR, and adding
new cuts, which had been introduced in the market place. The first phase of this study
involved cuts from the chuck: Brisket, Mock Tender Steaks, Top Blade Steaks, Shoulder
Steaks Boneless, Shoulder Clod Roasts, Boneless Chuck Short Ribs, Denver Steaks,
Chuck Eye Steaks, Country Style Ribs, America’s Beef Roast, Underblade Steaks and
Roasts, and Beef for Stewing. Most of these cuts are new with the exception of the
Shoulder Steaks which replaced the older Clod Steak data (NDB#s 23533, 13943,
23536, 13946, 23554, 23516). The second phase of this study involved cuts from the rib
and plate: Back Ribs, Rib Eye Roast, Rib Eye Steak, Outside Skirt, and Inside Skirt.
During the second phase of NDI, a separate study on Beef Alternative Merchandising
(BAM) beef cuts was also conducted. BAM cuts were developed by the beef industry
to utilize all the potential meat from today’s larger subprimals and traditional subprimals,
and to respond to customers’ desire for leaner, more health-conscious portions. BAM
cuts are leaner and smaller than more traditional cuts. The boneless beef cuts added to
SR from the BAM study were: Ribeye Filet, Ribeye Petite Roast, Ribeye Cap Steak,
Top Loin Filet, Top Loin Petite Roast, Top Sirloin Filet, Top Sirloin Cap Steak, and Top
Sirloin Petite Roast.
Sampling: Beef carcasses for the study were selected from six different major packing
plants, representing the different regions of the U.S. Each university was assigned two
different packing plants. The sampling plan was developed for 36 animals. In order to
get true retention and yield data, an A and a B side of the animal carcass was needed;
thus the total animal count came to 72. When selecting the carcasses certain properties
were considered as part of the sampling plan protocol: quality grade (upper choice,
lower choice, select), yield grade (YG2, YG3), gender (steer or heifer), and genetics
(dairy or non-dairy). Each university was responsible for identifying and obtaining beef
chucks that fit into the sampling matrix. The universities assessed and recorded carcass
data at the packing plants, properly identified each selected cut and shipped the product
back to their respective meat laboratories. Products were fabricated into the needed
retail cuts for this study within 14-21 days postmortem. Retail cuts were properly
identified and vacuum packaged and held frozen until cooking or dissection. The retail
product was cooked according to protocols developed for each cut. Cooked and raw
products were dissected; weights for each component (separable lean, separable fat,
and refuse) were obtained. Total weights of raw and cooked (prior to and after cooking)
cuts were obtained. Samples were then homogenized and composited.
The compositing plan was developed to establish an effective and efficient statistical
design for nutrient analyses of the beef cuts. The plan consisted of 4 different
compositing levels: an animal level (36 animals) where all the samples were analyzed; a
six composite level; a three composite level; and a national composite level. This was
done for both raw and cooked samples. Different nutrients were analyzed at each
composite level.

67
Sample preparation: The various beef cuts were analyzed in raw and cooked form.
The following cooking methods were used: grilling, roasting, and oven-braising. Frozen
raw samples were tempered under refrigeration (0-4°C) for 24-48 h based on the
appropriate size and weight of the cut. The appropriate temperatures and weights were
recorded prior to cooking. The thermocouple was placed in the geometric center or
thickest portion of the meat piece. The probe positioning did not affect the product’s
contact with the cooking surface. For small or thin beef cuts, the thermocouple was
used periodically to check the internal temperature of samples throughout the cooking
process.
Cooking Procedure:
Grilling - The grill was pre-heated to 195°C. The beef samples were evenly spaced in
center of cooking grate. The grill lid was closed and the sample was cooked to an
internal temperature of 70°C. Tongs or spatulas were used to remove samples from the
grill. Beef samples were allowed to stand while monitoring the internal temperature rise
until temperatures began to decline. The point right before the temperature declines
(highest temperature reached) was considered the final internal temperature of the
cooked sample. Beef samples were then chilled uncovered in the refrigerator (2-4° C)
for 24 ± 1 hr before dissection.
Roasting - The oven was pre-heated to 160°C (325°F). The beef sample(s) were
positioned in the center of the rack in the roasting pan, no oil or water was added, and
the pan was not covered. The roasting pan with the beef sample was positioned on the
oven rack in center of oven and roasted to an internal temperature of 60°C. The beef
samples were removed from the oven. The thermocouple probe remained in place and
samples were allowed to stand while monitoring the internal temperature rise until
temperatures began to decline. The point right before the temperature declines (highest
temperature reached) was considered the final internal temperature of the cooked
sample. The beef samples were then chilled uncovered in refrigeration (2-4° C) for 24 ±
1 hr before dissection.
Oven-Braising - The beef samples were placed in a pre-heated pan and were
“browned/seared”, turning as needed for even browning on all sides. The pan drippings
were poured off and the volume (mL) of drippings was measured. The thermocouple
was then applied in the geometric center or thickest portion of the meat piece. A small
amount of distilled, deionized water was added until the water reached one third-the
thickness of the meat. The liquid was held at a simmer, the pan was covered with a lid,
and placed in the Dutch oven. The Dutch oven was then placed in a preheated 120°C
(250°F) oven. The beef samples simmered and cooked until an internal temperature of
85°C was reached. The samples were removed from the oven keeping the
thermocouple probe in place and were allowed to stand while monitoring the internal
temperature rise until temperatures began to decline. The point right before the
temperature declines (highest temperature reached) was considered the final internal
temperature of the cooked sample. The beef sample(s) were removed from the cooking
liquid and the cooking liquid yield and volume were documented. The beef samples

68
were then chilled uncovered in the refrigerator (2-4° C) for 24 ± 1 hr before dissection.
In phase two, the Back Ribs were oven-braised and the “browned/seared” step was not
performed.
Nutrient Analysis:
At the animal level only proximates were analyzed. At the next level, the six composite
level, the following nutrients were analyzed: Proximates (fat, moisture, protein, and
ash), fatty acids including long-chain fatty acids and CLAs, total cholesterol, minerals
(Ca, Fe, Mg, P, K, Na, Zn, Cu and Mn), selenium, vitamin E, vitamin D and the B-
vitamins including B12, B6, riboflavin, and niacin. At the 3 composite level amino acids
and retinol were analyzed. At the final National composite level total choline and the
other B-vitamins, thiamin and pantothenic acid, were analyzed. The pooled fat samples,
both raw and cooked, from all the cuts were analyzed for all nutrients.
The techniques for analyzing the proximate nutrients are as follows: Protein by
combustion, total fat by extraction and acid hydrolysis, ash by gravimetric, and moisture
by forced air. For the minerals calcium, magnesium, iron, zinc, copper, and manganese,
they were analyzed by atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS), potassium and sodium
by emission spectrometry, and selenium by hydride generation. Retinol, vitamin E, and
vitamin D were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) methods.
Choline was analyzed by liquid chromatography-electrospray ionization-isotope dilution
mass spectrometry (LC/ESI/IDMS). B-vitamins such as thiamin and riboflavin were
analyzed by fluorometric methods and niacin, pantothenic acid, vitamin B6, and vitamin
B12 by microbiological methods. Amino acids such as tryptophan were analyzed by
alkaline hydrolysis-HPLC, cystine and methionine by performic oxidation-HPLC, and all
other amino acids by acid hydrolysis-HPLC. Hydroxyproline was analyzed using a
colorimetric method, cholesterol by a gas chromatographic (GC)/direct saponification
method not using derivativation, and fatty acids by gas-liquid chromatography (GLC).
References for Notes on Foods – Beef Products
Boleman, S.L., S.J. Boleman, W.W. S.J., Morgan, D.S. W.W., Hale, D.B. D.S., Griffin,
J.W. D.B., Savell, R.P. J.W., Ames, M.T. R.P., Smith, J.D. M.T., Tatum, T.G. J.D., Field,
G.C. T.G., Smith, B.A. G.C., Gardener, J.B. B.A., Morgan, S.L. J.B., Northcutt, H.G.
S.L., Dolezal, D.R. H.G., Gill, D.R., and F.K. Ray., F.K. 1998 National Beef Quality
Audit- 1995: Survey of producer-related defects and carcass quality and quality
attributes. J. Anim. Sci. 76:96-103.
Code of Federal Regulations. Animals and Animal Products; Food Safety and
Inspection Service, Meat and Poultry Inspection, U.S. Department of Agriculture;
Definitions and Standards of Identity. 9 CFR 319.
Jones, D.B. 1941. Factors for Converting Percentages of Nitrogen in Foods and Feeds
into Percentages of Protein. Rev. U.S. Dept. of Agric., Circ. 183, 22 pp.

69
Jones, D.K., J.W. Savell, J.W., and H.R. Cross., H.R. 1992. Effects of fat trim on the
composition of beef retail cuts – 1. Separate tissue components. J. Muscle Foods 3: 45-
56.
Leheska, J.M., L.D. Thompson, J.C. L.D., Howe, E. J.C., Hentges, J. E., Boyce, J.C. J.,
Brooks, B. J.C., Shriver, L. B., Hoover, L., and M.F. Miller., M.F. 2008. Effects of
conventional and grass feeding systems on the nutrient composition of beef. J Animal
Sci
Merrill, A.L., and B.K. Watt. 1973. Energy Value of Foods—Basis and Derivation. Rev.
U.S. Dept. of Agric., Agric. Handb. No. 74, 105 pp.
Pehrsson, P. R., D.B. Haytowitz, J.M. D.B., Holden, C.R. J.M., Perry, C.R. and D.G.
Beckler., D.G. 2000. USDA’s National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program: food
sampling. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis 13:379-389.
SAS, 2004 - SAS Institute Inc. 2004. SAS OnlineDoc® 9.1.2. Cary, NC: SAS Institute
Inc.
Wahrmund-Wyle, J.L., K.B. Harris, K.B., and J.W. Savell., J.W. 2000. Beef Retail Cut
Composition: 1. Separable Tissue Components. J. Food Comp. and Anal. :13:, 233-
242.

70
Breakfast Cereals (Food Group 08)
Introduction
Food Group 08 foods are identified as breakfast cereals to clearly distinguish them from
cereal products used mainly as ingredients or typically consumed at meals other than
breakfast (see Food Group 20 Cereal Grains and Pasta). The Breakfast Cereals group
of about 370 items includes two major sections: ready-to-eat (RTE) and to-be-cooked
(hot) cereals. The majority of breakfast cereals are listed by brand name. The number
and level of fortification nutrients differ appreciably between breakfast cereals, resulting
in many unique products that can’t adequately be described generically. The majority of
major brand breakfast cereals are included in SR, accounting for over 80% of the retail
market.
Breakfast cereals generally consist of one or more cereal grains, either as whole grains
or milled portions, as a major constituent. The continuum of grain content goes from
less than 50% for some presweetened RTE cereals and approaches 100% for hot
cereals. The predominant grains for RTE cereals are corn, wheat, oats and rice.
Additional ingredients such as sweeteners, flavoring or texturizing macroingredients
(including fruit, nuts, and oil), microingredient flavors or colors, and nutritional fortificants
and shelf life preservatives may be added (Caldwell, 2000). Manufacturing processes
generally used for RTE cereals include: flaked, extruded flakes, gun-puffed whole
grains, extruded gun-puffed, oven-puffed, shredded whole grains, and extruded
shredded methods.
Fortification: Addition of vitamins and/or minerals to grain products began in the late
1930’s with selected nutrients (primarily thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, iron, and calcium)
being added in amounts to restore the natural content of the grain which may have been
modified during processing (enrichment). A standard of identity, effective in 1942,
established standards for unenriched and enriched farina. Enrichment standards were
developed for corn grits in 1947 (Park, 2001; FDA 2012). In 1955, nutrients were first
added to breakfast cereals in amounts higher than those of the whole grain itself. By
1969 many RTE cereals were fortified with 25% of the U.S. RDA for thiamin, riboflavin,
niacin, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, A, C, and folic acid; with iron at 10 to 25% RDA; and
some cereals with vitamin D at 10% RDA (Steele, 1976). A recognition of the
importance of folate in prevention of neural tube defects led to an FDA regulation,
effective in 1998, requiring folate fortification of specific flours and grains (see Table of
Standards of Enrichment, in Notes on Foods for Cereal Grains and Pasta), including
enriched farina, which is used as a hot cereal (Phillips, 2010; Rader, 2000). Ready-to-
eat cereals were not affected by the regulation. Today, nearly all processed ready-to-
eat breakfast cereals are fortified with vitamins and/or minerals at varying levels.
Addition of nutrients presents technological problems – some vitamins are not heat
stable; others are affected by pressure; and some can produce undesirable tastes and
odors (Steele, 1976). Incorporation of fortificants before processing provides uniform
distribution of the nutrients, but may lead to undesirable loss of nutrients and flavor

71
changes. Thus, some cereals are exposed to multiple coating processes for topical
application of the added nutrients. A phase 1 coating may include vitamin addition, then
phase 2 may include coating with slurries of sugars, honey and flavoring agents.
Coatings may be applied by spraying the product as it passes down a conveyer belt or
may be added by means of a coating drum (Burns, 2000). Manufacturers generally add
nutrients at a higher level than labeled to compensate for possible losses during
processing, thus ensuring that content of fortification nutrients in the packaged cereal
meets or exceeds the declared level (FDA, 2010).
Nutrient data: Due to the frequency of reformulations of breakfast cereals and brand
name specificity of most items in this food group, the Nutrient Data Laboratory relies
heavily on the cereal industry to provide current nutrient data for breakfast cereals in
SR. Kellogg and General Mills typically supply data each year, while Quaker and Post
contribute data some years. Breakfast cereal manufacturers generally can provide data
for proximates, all fortification vitamins and minerals and some non-fortification vitamins
and minerals. Data for fatty acid classes (total saturated, monounsaturated and
polyunsaturated fatty acids) are generally provided, but individual fatty acids rarely so.
Industry-provided fortification nutrient values are based on the label-declared values,
representing the minimum amount of that fortified nutrient that should be present in the
cereal. Although industry does not provide values for all non-fortification vitamins and
minerals, a portion of these nutrients (e.g., magnesium and vitamin C) are generally
industry-supplied. Some nutrient values are derived from the product’s nutrition facts
label, as well.
Every few years, beginning in 2002, various RTE cereals with a high market share have
been selected for statistically representative nationwide sampling and nutrient analysis
as part of the USDA National Food and Nutrient Analysis Program (NFNAP). Regular
and instant oatmeal, corn grits, and cream of wheat were sampled through NFNAP, as
well. The NFNAP sampling method is described in detail elsewhere (p. 49). The most
recent sampling was for Kellogg’s Rice Krispies, Frosted Flakes, and Raisin Bran;
General Mills Lucky Charms and Cheerios; and Post Honey Bunches of Oats. Regular,
cinnamon and spice, and raisin spice instant oatmeal were sampled, as well. The
results are in SR25.
Approximately 200 breakfast cereals are included in a subset of foods supplied for the
Food and Nutrient Database for Dietary Studies, which is used for national nutrition
monitoring. For these products, there is a list of mandatory nutrients for which values
must be provided. A variety of standard imputing methods are available in NDL’s
databank system for estimating missing nutrient values. The predominant imputation
method for RTE cereals is by NDL’s formulation estimation procedures. These
estimation procedures were incorporated into the databank system; they include linear
programming techniques to estimate ingredient proportions by weight and calculate a
full nutrient profile based on this estimated commercial recipe (i.e. formulation)
(Haytowitz, 2009). Individual fatty acids, choline, vitamin K, carotenoids, caffeine and
theobromine are generally derived by the formulation method. In the absence of
analytical data, added folic acid is calculated by subtracting estimated natural food

72
folate from the total folate value provided by the manufacturer.
In general, a profile is calculated by recipe for the cooked version of hot cereals that are
sold in bulk, such as rolled oats or farina. The yield and retention factors are applied to
the recipe to estimate the effects of cooking on moisture and nutrient levels. For brand
name instant hot cereals sold in single serve packets, a nutrient profile is generally
provided only for the dry cereal, since there will be practically no difference between the
nutrients contained in one packet of the dry cereal and the nutrients in one packet
prepared by adding hot water.
Food Group 08 items in SR include data for both ready-to-eat and hot breakfast cereals
that are derived from cereal manufacturers, food labels, lab analyses, formulation and
other estimations. Recent trends show a decrease in sugar and sodium levels and
increase in fiber levels. NDL will continue to monitor these and other changes.
References for Notes on Foods – Breakfast Cereals
Burns, R.E., Caldwell, E.F., Fast, R.B., and Jones, W.H. 2000. Ch. 7 in: Breakfast
Cereals and How They Are Made, 2nd ed. R.B. Fast, R.B. and E. F. Caldwell, eds.
American Association of Cereal Chemists: St. Paul, MN.
Caldwell, E.F., Johnson, L.E. and Labuza, T.P. 2000. Ch. 10 in: Breakfast Cereals and
How They Are Made, 2nd ed. R.B. Fast and E. F. Caldwell, eds. American Association of
Cereal Chemists: St. Paul, MN.
Haytowitz, D.B., Lemar, L.E., and Pehrsson, P.R. (2009). USDA's Nutrient Databank
System – A tool for handling data from diverse sources. Journal of Food Composition
and Analysis. 22:433-441.
Park, Y.K. 2001. History of cereal-grain product fortification in the United States.
Nutrition Today 36(3) 124-137.
Phillips, K.M., Ruggio, D.M., Ashraf-Khorassani, M., Eitenmiller, R.E., Cho, S., Lemar,
L.E., Perry, C.R., Pehrsson, P.R., and Holden, J.M. 2010. Folic Acid Content of Ready-
to-Eat Cereals Determined by Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry: Comparison
to Product Label and to Values Determined by Microbiological Assay. Cereal Chem.
87(1):42–49.
Rader, J.I., Weaver, C.M., and Angyal, G. 2000. Total folate in enriched cereal-grain
products in the United States following fortification. Food Chem. 70: 275-289.
Steele, C.J. 1976. Cereal fortification – technological problems. Cereal Foods World
21(10) 538-540.

73
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Department of Health and Human Services.
2012. Cereal Flours and Related Products. Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR 137,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Department of Health and Human Services.
2010. Nutrition labeling of food. Code of Federal Regulations, 21 CFR 101, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

74
Cereal Grains and Pasta (Food Group 20)
There are over 180 food items in the Cereal Grains and Pasta food group in the SR.
The sources of nutrient data for these items are mainly analytical obtained from the
scientific literature or analytical studies. These include data collected by nationwide
sampling under NDL’s NFNAP program, described earlier.
Federal Definitions and Standards of Identity have been published for a number of
cereal grain and pasta products appearing on the market today (FDA, 2008a, 2008b).
Federal Enrichment Standards exist for wheat flour, cornmeal, rice, and macaroni and
noodle products (FDA, 2008a, 2008b). These standards do not mandate the
enrichment of the products, but if it is labeled as “enriched,” specified nutrient levels
must be present. Federal standards specify enrichment levels or ranges for thiamin,
riboflavin, niacin, iron, and folic acid in most enriched products. The Federal
Enrichment Standard for riboflavin in enriched rice has been stayed since 1958, and
hence riboflavin is not currently added to enriched rice. The standards for enriched
grain products were amended to require the addition of folic acid beginning in 1998.
Addition of calcium to most enriched products is optional, but if added must meet
specified levels. However, consistency in levels of enrichment may be an issue
(Guerrero et al, 2009). The current Federal Enrichment Standards are listed in Table 21.
In the Cereal Grains and Pasta food group, data are presented for the enriched and
unenriched forms of commonly enriched products.
Table 21. Standards for Enrichment1
Food Item Thiamin Riboflavin Niacin Iron Folic Acid Calcium
2
--- milligrams per pound ---
Wheat flour 2.9 1.8 24 20 0.7 960
Self-rising
wheat flour
2.9 1.8 24 20 0.7 960
Cornmeal 2.0-3.0 1.2-1.8 16-24 13-26 0.7-1.0 500-750
Self-rising
cornmeal
2.0-3.0 1.2-1.8 16-24 13-26 0.7-1.0 500-750
Rice 2.0-4.0 1.2-2.4
3
16-32 13-16.5 0.7-1.4 500-1,000
Macaroni and
noodle products
4.0-5.0 1.7-2.2 27-34 13-16.5 0.9-1.2 500-625
1. A range of figures indicates minimum and maximum levels. A single figure is the
minimum level, with overages left to good manufacturing practice.
2. Calcium enrichment is optional in these products.
3. The enrichment standard for riboflavin in enriched rice has been stayed since
1958.
In 2010, the U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services released
the seventh edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which set evidence-based
recommendations for the public to help prevent disease (U.S. Departments of

75
Agriculture and Health and Human Services, 2010). The guidelines emphasize
consumption of whole grain foods, stating at least half of an individual’s recommended
total grain intake should be whole grains to reduce the risk of several chronic diseases
and help with weight maintenance.
The AACC International definition of whole grains is “Whole grains shall consist of the
intact, ground, cracked or flaked caryopsis, whose principal anatomical components -
the starchy endosperm, germ and bran - are present in the same relative proportions as
they exist in the intact caryopsis.”
In 2006, FDA issued draft guidance for Industry and FDA Staff on Whole Grain Label
Statements. It can be accessed at:
http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatory
Information/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/ucm059088.htm.
Cereal grains.—The majority of the cereal grains included in Food Group 20 are
cultivated grasses belonging to the Poaceae (alt.Gramineae) family and are thus true
cereals. Amaranth, buckwheat, and quinoa differ botanically from true cereals, and are
referred to as pseudo cereals because they are grown and used like cereal grains
(Brouk, 1975). Arrowroot flour is derived from arrowroot and tapioca is produced from
cassava root, which are both non-cereal-grain plants, but used in ways similar to cereal
grains.
The scientific name is given for the most unprocessed form of the cereal grain in the
database. The Germplasm Resources Information Network (GRIN) was used as the
basic reference for the scientific names and preferred common names (USDA, 2011).
With the exception of corn (maize), which is native to the Americas, nearly all true
cereal grains originated in Europe and Asia (Brouk, 1975). Buckwheat is native to
central Asia. Amaranth and quinoa are native to Central and South America,
respectively.
Kasha, a buckwheat product, originated in Russia. Buckwheat groats, which are
roasted to develop a distinctive nutty flavor, may be packaged in the whole form or
milled to either coarse, medium, or fine granulations. Kasha is usually cooked as a hot
cereal or prepared in combination with other foods and ingredients.
Corn and corn products appearing in Food Group 20 are restricted to field corn varieties
and do not represent the varieties (sweet corn) used mainly as a vegetable. Corn and
cornmeal products are available in white, yellow, and blue varieties. Yellow corn
varieties have higher vitamin A values due to the presence of the provitamin-A
carotenoids, alpha- and beta-carotene. Yellow corn also has much higher levels of
lutein + zeaxanthin. With the exception of these nutrients, the composition profiles of
white and yellow corn are similar.
Self-rising cornmeals and wheat flours have more calcium, phosphorus, and sodium

76
due to the addition of chemical leavening agents and salt. Sodium bicarbonate,
monocalcium phosphate, sodium acid pyrophosphate, and sodium aluminum phosphate
are the most commonly used leavening agents. Salt is also usually added to self-rising
products for flavor. Bolted cornmeal has had most of the bran removed during milling,
but contains most of the germ present in the whole-grain corn.
Masa corn flour is milled from corn which has been steeped in a lime (calcium
hydroxide) solution. This is done both to facilitate the removal of the outer hull of the
corn grain and to impart the characteristic flavor of authentic corn tortillas and other
related products. As a result of the use of lime in processing, masa corn flour is higher
in calcium than other corn products.
Brown rice has the bran layers intact. Rice that has been milled to remove the bran
layers is referred to as white rice in this database.
Bulgur, a wheat product, has been produced in the Middle East and northern Africa
since ancient times. Bulgur is produced by parboiling, drying, and then cracking wheat
kernels. It is usually consumed as a cooked cereal or as an ingredient in other dishes.
Couscous is coarse-ground wheat endosperm made from durum wheat or another hard
wheat variety. Couscous is a popular food in northern Africa and in the Middle East. It
is usually eaten as a hot cereal or combined with other foods.
Wheat flour tortilla mix is used for making flour tortillas and other related products. This
product is higher in calcium than other wheat flour products because calcium carbonate
is added.
Bread flour, approximately 13% protein, is milled primarily from hard wheats. Cake
flour, approximately 9% protein, is milled from soft wheats. Semolina is coarse-ground
endosperm from durum wheat, and is used chiefly for making pasta.
Teff is an ancient crop believed to have been domesticated in the northern highlands of
Ethiopia. It is used alone or in combination with sorghum to prepare the fermented flat
bread, injera (Dendy, 1995).
Corn grits, farina, rolled oats or oatmeal, and toasted wheat germ are included in Food
Group 08, Breakfast Cereals.
Nutrient data for different forms and products of each cereal grain were not obtained
from the same sample or source. For example, a single source of wheat was not
processed to all forms given in the database: whole-grain, bran, germ, and various flour
products. The data were obtained from many sources at different times for analysis and
are affected by different variables: growing locations, crop years, cultivars, natural
variability, milling and processing techniques, laboratories, and possibly methods of
analysis. Therefore, in a comparison of different forms and products of a cereal grain,
nutritional differences may not measure precisely the effect of processing or preparation

77
methods.
Pasta.—Under Federal Standards of Identity, there are two broad categories of pasta
products: macaroni and noodle products (FDA, 2008b). Macaroni products are formed
by extrusion of the pasta dough into a variety of shapes and sizes including elbows,
spirals, shells, twists, wheels, etc. Specific shapes of macaroni products have unique
names such as rigatoni, manicotti, ziti, linguini, and spaghetti which are recognized by
the consumer.
Although spaghetti is defined under Federal standards as a macaroni product, it is
included as a separate category due to its unique market identity. However, the nutrient
composition of spaghetti and that of other forms of macaroni products are the same on
an equal weight basis.
Noodle products are also available in a variety of sizes and shapes. Federal Standards
of Identity specify that noodle products must contain not less than 5.5 percent by weight
of the solids of egg or egg yolk (FDA, 2008b).
Various forms of vegetable macaroni and noodle products are available today. Federal
standards specify that these products must contain a minimum of 3 percent by weight of
the solids of tomatoes (red varieties), artichoke, beet, carrot, parsley, or spinach ((FDA,
2008b). Spinach noodles and tricolor-type (red, green, and regular) macaroni are the
most commonly available products of this type on the market.
Protein-fortified macaroni products, both with and without added vegetable solids, are
also available. These products usually contain wheat germ, dried yeast, or other
ingredients which increase the protein content of the product. If a macaroni product is
labeled as “with Fortified Protein,” under Federal standards it must have a protein
content of at least 20 percent on a 13-percent moisture basis and protein quality not
less than 95 percent of that of casein (FDA, 2008b).
Corn pasta is available on the market to meet the needs of those who are allergic to
wheat and hence must avoid foods containing wheat ingredients. Corn pasta is made
exclusively from corn flour. Since it contains no wheat flour ingredients, corn pasta is
not required to meet Federal standards for macaroni or noodle products.
Fresh-refrigerated pasta has a higher moisture content than dry pasta and must be kept
under refrigeration until prepared. Data are presented for plain and spinach types, both
of which contain egg. Stuffed pasta such as ravioli and tortellini are listed in Food
Group 22, Meals, Entrees, and Side Dishes.
Data are presented for the cooked forms of both egg-containing and non-egg-containing
homemade pasta. The recipe used for each item is footnoted.
Oriental noodles do not fall under Federal Standards of Identity. Although these
products may be labeled as noodles, they usually do not contain eggs. Chinese-style

78
pasta products currently in SR include rice noodles, chow mein noodles, and fried flat
noodles. Two Japanese noodles are currently in SR: soba noodles are made with