Content uploaded by Nagendra Prasad M N
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Nagendra Prasad M N on May 09, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
December 2017 | Volume 9 | Supplement 1
Pharmacognosy Research • Volume 9 • Supplement 1 • December 2017 • Pages XXX-XXX
spine
5.5 mm
S74 © 2017 Pharmacognosy Research | Published by Wolters Kluwer ‑ Medknow
Assessment of Nutritional Quality and Global Antioxidant
Response of Banana(Musa sp. CV. Nanjangud Rasa Bale)
Pseudostem and Flower
Ramith Ramu, Prithvi S. Shirahatti, K. R. Anilakumar1, Shivasharanappa Nayakavadi2, Farhan Zameer3,
B. L. Dhananjaya4, M. N. Nagendra Prasad5
Department of Biotechnology, Sri Dharmasthala Manjunatheshwara College of Post Graduate Centre, Dakshina Kannada, 1Food Quality and Assurance Department,
Biochemistry and Nutrition Discipline, Defence Food Research Laboratory, 3Department of Studies in Biotechnology, Microbiology and Biochemistry, Mahajana Life
Science Research Centre, Pooja Bhagavat Memorial Mahajana Post Graduate Centre, 5Department of Biotechnology, Sri Jayachamarajendra College of Engineering,
Mysore, 4Toxinology/Toxicology and Drug Discovery Unit, Centre For Emerging Technologies, Jain University, Bengaluru, 2Department of Veterinary Pathology,
Animal Science Section, ICAR-Central Coastal Agricultural Research Institute, Ela, Goa, India
ABSTRACT
Background: The assessment of the nutritional composition and
phytochemical screening of banana pseudostem (PB) and ower (FB)
advocate this nonconventional food source for routine consumption,
considering its various health benets. Objectives: The aim is to assess the
proximate nutrient composition, fatty acids, minerals, amino acid prole,
and global antioxidant response(GAR) of PB and FB. Methods: Standard
analytical procedures were used to determine the nutritional quality and
GAR of PB and FB. Results: The chemical analysis illustrated that functional
prole (water holding capacity, oil holding capacity, swelling power, and
solubility), and proximate (ash, moisture, protein, fat, dietary ber, and
carbohydrate) contents were substantially high in FB than PB. With a
well‑proportionate amino acid prole, PB(0.56) and FB (0.54) comprised
of a high ratio of essential to nonessential amino acids than those of
FAO/WHO requirement (0.38). The mineral analysis revealed that PB and
FB were rich in macro and micro minerals in the order K>Ca>Mg>P
> Na and K>Mg>Na>Ca>P, respectively. Linoleic acid was found to
be the major component in PB and FB. Besides, total antioxidant activity
conducted for PB and FB by GAR method, measuring both bio‑accessible
and insoluble fractions, revealed that the soluble fraction fared better than
the chemical extracts. Conclusion: The results revealed high nutritional
qualities of the byproducts of banana and the low cost of its production
promotes their use as a prospective nonconventional food resource with
high nutraceutical value.
Key words: Amino acid, fatty acid, global antioxidant response, mineral
element, proximate composition
SUMMARY
• AOAC: Association of Analytical Communities
• FAO/WHO: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations/World
health organization
Abbreviations Used: Banana ower was more potent than banana
pseudostem in terms of its nutritional quality and total antioxidant
capacity afrming their usefulness (of both the secondary products) in the
pharmaceutical sector as a nutritional supplement due to the health‑related
properties of dietary fibre and associated bioactive compounds.
Correspondence:
Dr.M. N. Nagendra Prasad,
Department of Biotechnology,
Sri Jayachamarajendra College of Engineering,
JSS Institution Camp, Manasagangothri,
Mysore‑570006, Karnataka, India.
E‑mail:npmicro8@yahoo.com
DOI: 10.4103/pr.pr_67_17
INTRODUCTION
e population explosion has exemplied a substantial rise in the
demand for food resources which has shied the attention of the global
food market to nonconventional food resources.[1] Several by‑products
of cultivation, once discarded as wastes, are studied for their nutritive
values to advocate their use as routine food sources meeting the
expanding demands of the industry. Such by‑productshave proved to be
economical and hence are well‑accepted in the global market considering
the present scenario.[2] India contributes a major portion of the total
banana production in the world, whereas it is a conventional form of
food and commercial food as well. Banana cultivation comprises of the
secondary products, banana pseudostem(PB), and banana ower(FB)
which have been discarded as wastes, fed to cattle or used for composting.
More recently, some studies have reported its use in the production of
alcohol, methane, food for livestock, or adsorbents for water purification.
Amassive quantity(about 40%) of the total fresh weight of banana plant
Access this article online
Website: www.phcogres.com
Quick Response Code:
ORIGINAL ARTICLEPharmacogn. Res.
A multifaceted peer reviewed journal in the eld of Pharmacognosy and Natural Products
www.phcogres.com|www.phcog.net
Cite this article as: Ramu R, Shirahatti PS, Anilakumar KR, Nayakavadi S,
Zameer F, Dhananjaya BL, et al. Assessment of nutritional quality and global
antioxidant response of banana (Musa sp. CV. Nanjangud Rasa Bale) pseudostem
andower.PhcogRes2017;9:S74‑83.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix,
tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited
and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
For reprints contact: reprints@medknow.com
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017 S75
comprises of PB and FB, and hence, it can be useful as an alternative
food resource.[3] However, to accomplish the potential health benets of
these, a detailed study of its nutritional value needs to be carried out with
special emphasis on the inuence of a particular variety on its nutritional
composition. In vitro and invivo studies using the extracts have proven
PB and FB as antihyperglycemic,[4,5] antimicrobial, hypolipidemic,
and anti‑hypertensive agents thus upholding their health benecial
properties.[6] e dietary ber content, antioxidant compounds and
several other macro‑ and micro‑nutrients are responsible for these
health benets, and thus, the present study was designed to assess the
composition of PB and FB in terms of its nutritional value.
Further, it is well‑known that diseases either acute or chronic induce the
generation of reactive oxygen species which are also the main factors
responsible for tissue damage and aging.[7] To ameliorate these damages,
a mode of treatment which also has antioxidant properties has improved
the condition and hence, this study also aims to evaluate the antioxidant
potential of PB and FB. Several procedures are available to assess the
antioxidant properties of food, and its potency depends upon either the
method of assessment or the method of extraction of samples. In this
regard, the total antioxidant capacity(TAC) can be determined aer
analyzing the mode of action likely to be either radical scavenging or
metal ion chelating activity.[8] In addition, the extraction procedure
plays a signicant role for its TAC since irrespective of the extraction
procedure; some fraction of the extract always remains insoluble and
not involved in the activity. More recently, a method developed by
Vural etal.[9] known as Quencher is being widely accepted for TAC
evaluation since the method is carried out without extraction and
thus the entire sample is tested in its solid state. e acceptance of this
method is also armed because it resembles the condition similar to
the physiological conditions where antioxidants are not extracted and
administered directly, but instead, it needs to be released from the food
source during digestion. Similar to the physiological conditions, aer the
enzymatic digestion, the extractable antioxidants play their role, and the
nonextracted materials enter the intestine where they are acted on by the
intestinal microora and continue the digestion process. e extracted
antioxidants are estimated by conventional methods, and the undigested
material is evaluated for its antioxidant capacity using the Quencher
method thus attaining athe global antioxidant response(GAR). is
method provides a summation of the complete antioxidant potential of
the food source the same way as it exists invivo and hence, the method
is widely accepted.[10]
With this background, the objectives of this study are an evaluation of
the nutritional composition and TAC of PB and FB to advocate this
nonconventional food source for routine consumption, considering its
various health benets.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Samples
Flawless inorescences and pseudostems of Musa sp. cv. Nanjangud rasa
bale were harvested from the banana cultivatingfarms of Nanjangud,
Karnataka, India. e specimen was identied by the Department
of Horticulture, Government of Karnataka, Mysore, India. Peeling
the thick outer leaf‑sheath of the tender pseudostems, the inner pith
region was collected and owers were separated from the inorescences
by discarding the spathe. For isolation, pseudostems (PB) and FBs
were gutted, chopped and allowed to dry in an oven(40⁰C). is was
pulverized, using a homogenizer and further stored at 4°C until use.
Proximate analysis
Moisture (method 44‑15A), ash (method 08–01), crude
ber (method 32–10), fat (method 30–25), and carbohydrate
content of PB and FB were determined according to the AACC
method.[11] Total carbohydrates were expressed as residual percent weight
by the formula:[100‑(moisture + ash+ fat + bre+ protein)]. Crude
protein (method 46–13) was estimated by the procedure described
by Kjeldahl.[12] e total dietary ber content(method 991.43) in PB
and FB was estimated by food‑enzymatic‑gravimetric method.[13] e
procedure described by omas etal.[14] was used to determine neutral
detergent ber(NDF), acid detergent ber(ADF), lignin, hemicellulose,
and cellulose content in PB and FB. Hemicellulose and cellulose were
estimated according to the formula: [Hemicellulose = NDF– ADF];
and [Cellulose = ADF– lignin], respectively. Water holding
capacity (WHC), oil holding capacity (OHC), swelling power (g of
swollen granules/g of dry weight of sample), and solubility(%) of PB and
FB were performed as per the method described by Noor etal.[15] WHC
and OHC were expressed as grams of water or oil/grams of dry weight
of samples, respectively. Starch and uronic acid content were determined
by the method described by Jamuna etal.[16] e phytochemical analysis
and the vitamin content of PB and FB were determined.[17‑19] e sugar
composition was performed according to AACC[20] for PB and FB using
high‑performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with dierential
refractive index detector(RID‑10A, Shimadzu, Japan).
Fatty acid prole by gas chromatography‑mass
spectrometry
Before gas chromatography‑mass spectrometry (GC‑MS) analysis,
derivatization was performed for PB and FB samples using BF3‑methanol
as derivatizing reagent.[21] Once the conversion of non‑volatile fatty acids
into volatile fatty acid methyl esters(FAMEs) through methylation[22] was
achieved, the samples were subjected to GC(Clarus 500, Perkin Elmer,
AOC‑20i autosampler; Perkin Elmer, California, USA) interfaced with
a mass spectrometer equipped with an Elite‑5MS(5% diphenyl/95%
dimethyl polysiloxane) fused to a capillary column(30nm× 0.25mm
ID×0.25 μm film thickness, DF). To achieve a good resolution of FAMEs,
chromatographic parameters were optimized as per Ramith etal.[5] with
slight modications in the oven temperature. It was programmed at the
rate of 10°C/min(no hold) up to 200°C, later at the rate of 5°C/min up
to 280°C for a 9min hold. In comparison to the acquired mass spectra
of PB and FB with the standard mass spectra of NIST Library(NIST 05),
the phytocomponents present were recognized.
Mineral analysis
PB and FB were assessed for comprehensive mineral analysis(Li, B, Na,
Mg, Al, K, Ca, Cr, Mn, Fe, Cu, Ni, Cs, Zn, and Pb) using inductively
coupled plasma atomic emission spectrometry(ICP‑AES, Varian Vista
MPX, USA) as per the official method 985.01.[23] Ahead of subjecting to
ICP‑AES, the dry samples were ashed in a muffle furnace at 400°C–500°C
and acid digested.[23,24] On the other hand, the concentrations of Mo,
Se, P, As, Cd, and Sb were determined using flame atomic absorption
spectroscopy(AAS, Varian 240, USA) according to the method described
by Vikas etal.[25] Phosphoric acid and boric acid were measured
according to the method described by Pearson[26] and method 970.33.[27]
e elemental analysis of PB and FB was performed on a Perkin Elmer
2400 elemental analyzer.
Amino acid composition
Amino acid composition of PB and FB was analyzed according to
the standard AOAC procedure (method 994.12).[28] For hydrolysis,
methods of Wong and Peter[29] were employed. Before the analysis of
the samples through automated amino acid analyzer(L 8900, Hitachi,
Japan), ltration was performed using a 0.45mm nylon membrane lter.
Subsequently, following the prehydrolysis oxidation with performic
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
S76 Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017
by the ltering of individual extracts from solvents. e three ltrates
were then stored at−20°C until used for the analysis of total phenolic
content and antioxidant activity. All the samples were analyzed in
triplicates. e phenolic component separation of PB and FB extracts
was performed on a reverse phase C18(250mm×4.6mm, Supelco) and
the compounds were monitored by PDA (photodiode array) detector
HPLC system(Agilent Technologies Inc., USA). Column temperature
was maintained at 37°C and ow rate was set to 0.8ml/min. e solvent
system used was 0.1% formic acid(solvent A) and methanol(solvent B).
e solvent gradient elution program was: 0–55min 85% of A and 15%
of B; 55–57min 20% of A and 80% of B; 57–60min 85% of A and 15%
of B. Avolume of 20 μl of the sample was injected(auto‑injection) into
the column and the phenolic acids were detected at 280nm. e sample
was quantied by comparing the retention time/peak areas with those of
standards, namely, gallic acid, p‑hydroxybenzoic acid, chlorogenic acid,
sinapic acid, caeic acid, vanillin, p‑coumaric acid, quercetin, catechin,
and epicatechin. e Quencher procedure described by Vural etal.[9]
was employed to determine antioxidant activity of the solid sample. In
addition, enzymatic dismutase (SOD), ascorbate peroxidase (APX),
glutathione reductase (GR), and catalase (CAT) activities were
determined by following the method of Moaed etal.[33] and Manoj etal.[1]
Statistical analysis
All data were expressed as mean±standard deviation(n=3). Results
were determined using one‑way analysis of variance(ANOVA), followed
by Duncan’s multiple range test using SPSS Soware (version 21.0,
Chicago, USA). e results were considered as statistically signicant if
the P<0.05.
acid, cysteine, and methionine (sulfur‑containing amino acids) were
determined.[30] In comparison with the FAO/WHO(1985)[31] reference
amino acid pattern, the composition of dierent amino acids recovered
was presented as mg/g of protein. e essential amino acid(EAA) score
was evaluated using the equation of FAO/WHO described: (Score of
EAA=mg of EAA in 1g of test protein/mg of EAA in 1g of reference
protein) × 100.
Antioxidant potential
To measure antioxidants in PB and FB, dierent procedures were
established using (i) GAR method (GAR); (ii) Sequential solvent
extraction method and(iii) without extraction. In GAR, physiological
extraction by the means of invitro gastrointestinal digestion was done as
described by Pastoriza etal.[7] e invitro GAR method is performed to
mimic digestion(through gastrointestinal tract) to discharge antioxidants
from foods into soluble(bio‑accessible) and insoluble(nonaccessible)
fractions, which is summarized in Figure1. ree diverse conventional
protocols(DPPH, ABTS, and FRAP) dened by Cristina etal.[32] for the
soluble fractions obtained by gastrointestinal digestion was followed.
In all cases, the results were expressed as mmol equivalents of Trolox
per kg of sample.[32] To determine the antioxidant activity of lyophilized
insoluble fractions obtained by gastrointestinal digestion, the Quencher
procedure was conducted as described by Vural etal.[9] Calibration curve
was obtained using Trolox solutions and microcrystalline cellulose as
the blank. Results were expressed as mmol equivalents of Trolox per
kg of sample. Second the coarse powder was subjected to successive
extraction with methanol, ethanol and water in a Soxhlet apparatus.
Extraction was done twice with each of the solvents(500ml) followed
Figure 1: A procedure to determine global antioxidant response of banana pseudostem and ower
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017 S77
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Dietary ber composition
e proximate composition of PB and FB are dened in Table1 which
suggests a high total dietary ber content. Adiet comprising of high
dietary ber is ecient in generating early satiety signal by increasing
the food retention time in the stomach and also reduces risk towards
the development of gastric ulcers. Of the total dietary bers, while
the soluble bers possess the property of higher expansion volume
rendering bulk density of the food materials, insoluble bers swell on
encounter with water promoting the elimination of waste materials by
increasing bowel movement. us, a ber‑rich diet facilitates digestion,
as well as elimination of wastes and also prevents constipation.[34] In
this study, the IDF was found to be more than the soluble dietary
ber in both the byproducts tested and on the whole, dietary ber in
FB(70.1%) was found to be higher than PB(61.1%). In support to the
present ndings, a previous study suggested IDF as the major fraction in
the dietary ber composition of banana(Musa acuminata×balbisiana
Colla cv. Awak) pseudostem flour and boiled tender core of the PB
flour.[15] As well, a similar trend was observed in banana and plantain
peels.[14] In summary, despite the dierence in the ber content in
comparison to other studies, the dietary ber content of PB from Musa
sp. cv. Nanjangud rasa bale was higher than PB from Musa sp. cv. elakki
bale, which had a value of 28.8%.[16] Such dierences may be attributed
to the dierent botanical origins, geographical conditions such as soil,
climate, and collection time. ese results indicate the potential of
banana by‑products soon to replace oats and sorghum as berenriched
food source.
Contrary to Insoluble dietary ber (IDF), NDF includes a complex of
cellulose, lignin and insoluble hemicellulose. Accordingly, NDF values
are always higher than those of the IDF and present study results support
this as it is clear from Table1. ADF and NDF content of FB(58.78 and
75.61, respectively) was more than PB(51.88 and 61.25, respectively)
while both were higher than Musa acuminata x balbisiana Colla cv.
Awak pseudostem tender core our(ADF: 32.02; NDF: 43.89) reported
by omas etal.[14] e present study shows that cellulose was the most
abundant component, followed by hemicellulose and then lignin in both
PB and FB. ese components are considered insoluble and thus are not
digested. Overall, the relative amounts of hemicellulose and cellulose in
the study were higher than those published by Samrat etal.[35](14.98%
hemicellulose and 31.27% cellulose) and omas etal.[14](18%
hemicellulose and 42% cellulose) PB fibers of Musa sapientum andMusa
acuminata x balbisiana Colla cv. Awak, respectively. Cellulose constitutes
the major component or primary and secondary cell walls, thus
explaining their presence at high levels. However, the cellulose content
of PB and FB reported in this study is less than the cellulose content in
the outer bark material of pseudostems of M. acuminate Colla(40.2%)
and pseudostem tender core our as reported by Cordeiro etal.[36] and
omas etal.[14] respectively. On the contrary, the lignin content of both
PB and FB was higher than banana pulp(6.0%), wheat(0.88%), and soy
meal(0.58%), as reported by Jrgen[37] and are considerably lower with
other wood‑based materials such as sawdust(20.33%), Musa sapientum
species(15.07%) and plantain(green banana)(14.3%).
Functional properties
e functional properties such as WHC, OHC, solubility, and swelling
capacity(SWC) of banana by‑products were measured and are presented
in Table1. From the physiological standpoint, the ability of any material
to retain water when subjected to an external centrifugal gravity force
or compression is its WHC. e study suggests that FB exhibited
highest WHC (23.9 g water/g dry weight of samples) compared to
PB (15.4 g water/g of dry weight of samples). Meanwhile, PB and FB
exhibited greater WHC than those of cereals which showed<5.5g water/g,
such as rice bran(5.21g water/g) and durum wheat(1.5–2.1g water/g).
is minute disparity may be due to the structural dierences in cell wall
components between the stem and ower fibers. Subsequently, the SWC
of PB and FB were assessed which is directly attributed to the amount of
cellulose in the dietary ber. e extent of water retained in the swollen
granules of FB(16.02g of swollen granules/g of dry weight of sample) was
significantly(P<0.05) greater than PB(12.58g of swollen granules/g of
dry weight of sample) with no statistically significant(P<0.05) dierences
in solubility between them, suggesting them to be more potent than some
of the exotic fruits such as pineapple and mango concentrates(7.2, 6.6
and 4.60ml water/g sample, respectively). Furthermore, the OHC of PB
and FB were assessed which is attributed to the chemical and physical
Table1: Nutritional composition of banana pseudostem and banana ower
PB FB
Proximate analysis
Moisture(%) 12.30±0.87b8.33±0.79a
Ash(%) 4.93±1.42a6.51±1.05b
Fat(%) 0.98±3.27a5.79±1.78b
Total carbohydrates(%) 46.58±2.33a53.78±6.58a
Starch(%) 21.06±0.87b0.61±0.79a
Energy 64.40±1.25b63.20±0.86a
Uronic acid(%) 31.87±3.55b27.72±4.10a
Protein(%) 7.34±3.60a19.60±5.08b
Total dietary ber(%) 61.14±0.34a70.07±0.25b
Insoluble dietary ber(%) 59.10±0.99a62.93±1.01b
Soluble dietary ber(%) 02.04±0.28a07.14±0.56b
Neutral detergent ber(%) 66.25±0.67a75.61±1.43b
Acid detergent ber(%) 51.88±2.35a58.78±3.03b
Cellulose(%) 44.02±0.91a47.30±0.87a
Hemicellulose(%) 24.37±1.57a16.83±1.13b
Lignin(%) 07.86±0.56a11.48±0.37b
Water holding capacity 15.40±3.90a23.95±2.72b
Oil holding capacity 04.75±4.33a08.00±2.50b
Solubility 12.52±2.07a13.08±1.98a
Swelling power 12.58±1.67a16.02±1.24b
Phytochemical constituents(mg/100 g)
Phenols 188.64±0.88a201.12±1.05b
Flavonoids 78.60±1.18a83.49±0.61b
Alkaloids 62.32±0.39a71.09±0.48a
Tannins 07.86±0.21a86.87±2.43b
Saponins 305.45±0.60a387.51±1.79a
Oxalates 25.56±0.51a20.54±2.08a
Phytates 34.56±3.85a28.78±2.72a
Vitamin(mg/100 g)
Ascorbic acid 8.81±0.20a9.50±0.05b
Riboavin 0.08±0.18a0.13±0.07b
Niacin 0.73±0.19a0.90±0.27b
iamine 0.15±0.06a0.18±0.04b
β‑Carotene 0.08±0.24a0.12±0.16b
Vitamin E 0.12±0.04a0.17±0.12b
Pyridoxine 0.33±0.16b0.28±0.04a
Pantothenic acid 0.34±0.08b0.26±0.20a
Sugar composition(mg/kg)
Fructose 0.01±0.44a4.43±0.08b
Glucose 0.01±0.43a5.33±0.14b
Sucrose 10.27±0.02b7.74±0.06a
Maltose 0.02±0.08a9.38±0.30
Xylose 0.04±0.12b0.02±0.18a
Arabinose 10.60±0.20 1.53±0.10a
Rhamnose 0.62±0.25b0.05±0.08a
Values are expressed as mean±SD(n=3). Means in the same row with distinct
superscripts are significantly dierent(P≤0.05) as separated by Duncan multiple
range test. PB: Banana pseudostem; FB: Banana ower; SD: Standard deviation
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
S78 Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017
structure of the plant polysaccharides. With an OHC value of 4.75 of
oil/g of dry weight in PB and 8.0g of oil/g of dry weight of sample in
FB, they fared better than dietary fibres obtained from commercial
preparations(1.29 g of oil/g of dry matter) and other fibrous residues,
such as coconut fibre (5.3 g oil/g fibre or banana fibre‑rich powder
(2.2g oil/g fibre). With these results, PB and FB can be advocated for use
in stabilizing emulsions and as a dietary ber reservoir.[14,38]
Sugars
Sugars are the main source of bio‑available energy, and hence, it is
important to assess the sugar content as well as the type of sugars present
in the food. e digestible sugar content in PB was 21.57mg/kg, and
FB was 28.48mg/kg samples[Ta b l e 1] and was not as high as banana
fruit and other tropical fruits.[18] Further, the sugar prole of PB revealed
the presence of sucrose and arabinose, which contributed 47.6% and
49.1% to total sugars, respectively while FB revealed the presence of
several types of sugars, namely, maltose, sucrose, glucose, fructose, and
arabinose. Despite the quick metabolism of these sugars, their presence
at low levels prevents the use of PB and FB as an alternative energy
resource. While the present study revealed the absence of galactose and
rhamnose, a previous GC‑MS study of polysaccharide fractions of Musa
sp. cv. elakki bale suggested their presence[16] which might be due to the
dierence in the banana cultivars used in the study. In addition, the level
of sucrose was higher than glucose in both PB and FB. Other studies
with banana peel exhibited high fructose while banana pulp showed the
presence of glucose, fructose, and sucrose with lower sucrose levels as
compared to other sugars.[39]
Phytochemicals
A class of alkaloids, flavonoids, tannins, saponins and more complex
phenolic, phytosterols, oxalates, and phytates are collectively known as
phytochemicals which not only impart color to the fruits and vegetables
but also possess several physiological functions, including antioxidant
properties.[40] Table1 elaborates on the phytochemicals and their amount
in PB and FB which reveal that the most abundant phytochemical
in this study are phenols and saponins. Furthermore, high tannin
content(86.9mg/100g) in FB as comp ared to PB was witnessed. All these
phytochemicals are proven to possess antimicrobial, antioxidant, and
hormone modulatory activities. e study also revealed high amounts
of avonoids, which are well‑known for their antioxidant properties.
e higher avonoids and saponins were present in PB and FB than in
banana owers of two cultivars[41] Baxijiao(saponins: 0.11 g/100g and
avonoids: 5.90mg/100g) and Paradisiacal(saponins: 0.12 g/100g and
avonoids: 5.27. mg/100g) and considering these benets, the potential
of PB and FB for their health beneciary properties is upheld.
Vitamins
Vitamins are the micronutrients required in minute amounts to the
body, deciency of which adversely aect the metabolism of the body.
In the present study, Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) was present in the
highest quantity with a mean content of 9.50 and 8.81mg/100g of FB
and PB, respectively. While ascorbic acid is among the most important
antioxidants involved in the prevention or minimization of the formation
of carcinogenic substances from dietary material by preventing the
oxidation of nitrate, its deciency causes impaired functioning of the
intracellular substances in the body including collagen, bone matrix, and
tooth dentine.[40] In addition to ascorbic acid, riboavin, niacin, thiamine,
β‑carotene, vitamin E, pyridoxine, and pantothenic acid were observed
in PB and FB in quantities signicant to create a nutritional impact by the
food source[Table1]. Vitamin C content in FB and PB was lower than
banana fruit(10mg/100g) but higher than other tropical fruits, namely,
blueberries(6mg/100g) pears(3mg/100g), and grapes(3mg/100g).
Furthermore, the vitamin B complex was present in a signicant amount
which emphasizes these by‑products for their potential in the treatment
of various diseases including prostate cancer.[18]
Fatty acids
Fatty acid composition as given in Tab l e 2 suggests that linoleic acid
and palmitic acid were the major components in both the parts of the
banana. FB contained 84.8% linoleic acid of its total fatty acid content,
while PB contained 72.8%, which was followed by palmitic acid, which
was high in PB (18.9%) compared to FB (14.8%). ese results were
similar to banana fruit peels of the Musa Genus: French Clair (FC),
Grande Naine (GN), Big Ebanga (BE), pelipita (PPT), Yankambi
Km5(YKm5), and CRBP039039 had high proportions of unsaturated
fatty acid, especially linoleic acid.[40] Linoleic acid is a precursor fatty acid
for cell membrane components as well as other compounds involved in
physiological responses and its presence in this study proves benecial.
Further, some of the less common fatty acids in PB were stearic acid and
arachidic acid and FB was eicosenoic acid. Further, the polyunsaturated
fatty acid levels were greater in this study as against Musa spp. Baxijiao
and Paradisiacal owers.[41] Such variations may be attributed to the stage
of ripening at harvest, changes in the climate, soil conditions, and genetic
variations between the sources. e online Dr.Duke’s phytochemical and
ethnobotanical database‑assisted in ascertaining the biological activity
of the compounds and the same are tabulated in Table 2.
Minerals
Based on the amount required for the human body, minerals are classied
as macro‑and micro‑elements. e minerals present in PB and FB are
given in Tab l e 3 which suggests the presence of Na, K, Ca, Mg, and P with
K being the major mineral in both PB and FB. However, minerals in FB
were about 2–5‑fold higher than the levels in PB. e levels of minerals
in FB were in the order K>Mg>Na>Ca>P while that of PB was in
the order K>Ca>Mg>P > Na. While Na and K are involved in the ion
pumps in several metabolic pathways, Mg regulates over300 metabolic
reactions by acting as cofactors to several enzymes, P is involved in almost
every chemical reaction taking place in the body in the form of ATP and
Ca along with P forms Ca3(PO4) 2 and are essential for bone and teeth
formation.[42] Overall, the levels of these minerals were in agreement
with that of Musa spp. Baxijiao and Paradisiacal ower variety,[41] but
slightly lower than the limiting contents found in banana peels and pulps
determined by Shaida etal.[43] In summary, the peel had a higher content
of minerals than the pulp and the potassium content was lower to banana
fruits and other tropical fruits such as pears, blueberries, and grapes.[18]
Along with these macro minerals, the micro minerals in PB and FB were
also evaluated which showed the presence of Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Al, and
several others are listed in Table 3. e levels of these elements in FB were
found to be higher than PB and overall higher than those of other tropical
fruits, including banana when compared with the data given by e
Department of Health(2013).[18] Similar to the various macro‑elements,
microelements also have several vital biological functions. Zn is
involved in various reactions of the body to construct and maintain
DNA, required for the growth and repair of body tissues and iron along
with manganese, copper, and zinc are constituents of various important
proteins and enzymes involved in macro‑nutrient metabolism and body
function.[42] Considering the several vital functions of the macro‑and
micro‑elements, their high contents in FB and PB could contribute to
explain their use in folk medicine.
Further, a thorough analysis to evaluate the elements present in the
banana byproducts was performed, and the results are tabulated in
Tabl e 3. Carbon was present in the highest amounts in FB (47.1%)
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017 S79
compared to PB(35.5%) which was contrary to the hydrogen content
which was higher in PB(6.01±0.02) as against FB(3.21±0.02). e
present ndings were on par with the composition of principal elements
of banana(Musa acuminate) pseudostem by Ketty etal.,[44] i. e.,(carbon:
36.83%, hydrogen: 5.19%, and nitrogen: 0.93%). e composition of
hydrogen was higher in PB than FB and this is due to the high moisture
composition of that compared to the FB[Tabl e 1]. e moisture content
of the present study was higher in case of PB(13.3%) over FB(8.33%)
suggesting the dierence in the hydrogen content of both the byproducts.
Overall, the moisture content of both PB and FB were lower than
commercial wheat flour, which had a value of 12.36%[44] and PB and FB
of elakki bale cultivar as reported by Jamuna etal.[16]
In support to the above ndings, the ash content that is directly
proportional to the mineral content was also estimated which suggested
the presence of it at high levels. It is clear from our studies that the highest
levels of ash content were recorded for Musa sp. cv. Nanjangud rasa
bale(PB and FB of 4.9 and 6.5%, respectively), and was comparatively
higher than those Musa sp. cv. elakki bale(0.3 and 0.5%, respectively),[16]
banana fruit of 1.1%.[18] Whereas it was comparable with banana
(Musa acuminata x balbisiana Colla cv. Awak) pseudostem flour(3.03%)
[15] and lower than banana peel and pulps(6.4%–12.8%).[39]
Amino acids
e quality of EAAs suggests the nutritional value of dietary proteins,
and hence the amino acid content in PB and FB were tested. An overall
picture of the amino acid content present in PB and FB is given in
Tabl e4 suggest that all the EAAs according to the FAO classication[31]
are present in them with FB having a major amino acid content
compared to PB. Ahigh glutamic acid content(63.8 and 152.9mg/g
of protein) followed by aspartic acid, leucine, alanine, proline,
arginine, cysteine, serine, and lysine was witnessed in both FB and PB,
respectively. e importance of glutamine is learnt during critical illness
where it acts as a prime carrier of ammonia to the splanchnic area and
the immune system. In addition while the sulfur‑containing amino
acids were above the FAO/WHO,[31] requirement(score ranged from
99 to 240), the other EAAs met FAO/WHO,[31] requirement pattern.
Further, the concentration of the amino acids that are lower than the
FAO standard protein value is considered as limiting concentration,
and in this context, in the present study, lysine was at the limiting
concentration and the same has been reported by omas etal.[39]
Table2: Fatty acid prole of banana pseudostem and banana ower by gas chromatography‑mass spectrometry
Compounds detectedaTrivial name of fatty acid Total percentage composition Activityb
PB
Hexadecanoic acid, methyl ester Palmitic acidx18.93 Lubricant, 5 alpha reductase inhibitor,
antiandrogenic and antioxidants
9,12‑octadecadienoic acid(Z, Z)‑, methyl ester Linoleic acidy72.85 Antiarthritic, anti‑inammatory,
hepatoprotective, hypocholesterol and
5 alpha reductase inhibitor
Octadecanoic acid, methyl ester Stearic acidx6.80 Cosmetics, lubricant, avor,
hypocholesterol and 5 alpha reductase
inhibitor
9‑octadecanoic acid(Z)‑, methyl ester Oleic acidz0.47 Cancer‑preventive, avor,
hypocholesterol and anti‑inammatory
Eicosanoic acid, methyl ester Arachidic acidx0.94 **
FB
Hexadecanoic acid, methyl ester Palmitic acidx14.89 Lubricant, 5 alpha reductase inhibitor,
antiandrogenic and antioxidants
9,12‑octadecadienoic acid(Z, Z)‑, methyl ester Linoleic acidy84.84 Antiarthritic, anti‑inammatory,
hepatoprotective, hypocholesterol and
5 alpha reductase inhibitor
11‑eicosenoic acid, methyl ester Eicosenoic acidx0.27 **
aCompounds were identied by referring to NIST05 library; bActivities were acknowledged by Dr Duke’s phytochemical and ethnobotanical databases; **Activity not
reported; xSaturated fatty acid; yPolyunsaturated omega‑6 fatty acid; zMonounsaturated omega‑9 fatty acid. PB: Banana pseudo stem; FB: Banana ower
Table3: Mineral composition of banana pseudostem and banana ower
PB FB
Macroelements(mg/g)
Sodium(Na) 0.02±0.02a18.34±0.12b
Potassium(K) 10.63±0.10a51.29±0.04b
Calcium(Ca) 4.01±0.07a10.65±0.05b
Magnesium(Mg) 1.55±0.18a23.55±0.21b
Phosphorus(P) 2.09±0.04a4.10±0.16b
Microelements(ppm)
Iron(Fe) 30.65±0.16a405.50±0.04b
Lithium(Li) 0.012±0.01a0.034±0.01b
Boron(B) 39.88±0.04b34.53±0.01a
Aluminium(Al) 7.67±0.01a18.43±0.02b
Chromium(Cr) 5.04±0.04b3.93±0.02a
Manganese(Mn) 27.86±0.09a133.80±0.06b
Copper(Cu) 0.02±0.01a0.52±0.03b
Nickel(Ni) 0.46±0.04a0.99±0.02b
Cobalt(Co) 3.79±0.01a19.44±0.04b
Zinc(Zn) 16.60±0.01a207.90±0.10b
Lead(Pb) 0.15±0.01a0.42±0.02b
Molybdenum(Mo) 0.028±0.01a0.042±0.01b
Antimony(Sb) <0.01 <0.01
Cadmium(Cd) 1.06±0.01a1.50±0.01b
Arsenic(As) 0.015±0.01a0.016±0.01a
Selenium(Se) 0.010±0.01a0.010±0.01a
Phosphoric
acid(mg/g)
6.72±0.07a13.12±0.03b
Boric acid 66.66±0.02a150.0±0.01b
Elemental analysis(%)
C 35.53±0.07a47.19±0.02b
H 6.01±0.02b3.21±0.02a
N 1.35±0.01a1.96±0.03b
S 0.07±0.01a0.17±0.01a
O 52.78±0.06b43.08±0.04a
Values are expressed as mean±SD(n=3). Means in the same row with distinct
superscripts are significantly dierent(P≤0.05) as separated by Duncan multiple
range test. SD: Standard deviation; PB: Banana pseudo stem; FB: Banana ower
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
S80 Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017
in fruit peels of the Musa Genus: FC, GN, BE, PPT, YKm5, and 039,
obtained at three dierent stages of ripeness, namely, stage 1(Green),
stage 5(More yellow than green), stage7(yellow/a few brown spots).
e ratio of essential to non‑EAAs for PB and FB were 0.56 and 0.54,
respectively, which was substantially higher than their requirement in
adults(0.38) as recommended by the WHO. In addition, the protein
values of PB(7.3%) and FB(19.3%) in the present study were marginally
higher than the values reported for Musa spp. Baxijiao and Paradisiaca
owers (1.62%–2.7%), elakki bale cultivar (PB: 2.5 and FB: 12.5%),
banana fruit peels(ranged from 8.3%–10.2%), banana(Musa acuminata
x balbisiana Colla cv. Awak) pseudostem flour(0.89%–3.52%), banana
peels of yelakki bale(7.7%), pachabale(6.7%) and nendrabale(4.6%)
and green banana Cavendish(AAA) our (4.1%). Proteins being the
source for the supplementation of amino acids, it can thus be suggested
that PB and FB are potent sources of EAAs.[3,14‑16]
Antioxidants
Antioxidant adjuncts have proven beneciary in many diseases where
they play a protective role in the prevention of ROS mediated damage
to the cells and tissues. Hence, in the present study, we have evaluated
the antioxidant potential of PB and FB and the results thus obtained
are tabulated in Table5a. Studies have suggested both PB[45] and FB[4,16]
of banana as potent antioxidants extractable with aqueous and organic
solvents. Most antioxidant studies involve its evaluation using the
extractable form which creates a lacuna in assessing the nonextractable
substance for their antioxidant capacity and hence, we evaluated
the GAR according to Pastoriza etal.[7] Further, antioxidant activity
using a single assay does not give conclusive evidence hence, three
common radical scavenging assays namely ABTS which determines
the single electron‑transfer capabilities, DPPH which evaluates the
hydrogen‑donating potency and Fe + 3 (FRAP) which reflects the
reductive antioxidant power of the antioxidant compounds[9] were
carried out to assess inv itro antioxidant activity of PB and FB [Figure 5b].
As mentioned previously, along with the method of evaluation, another
factor contributing to the antioxidant potential of the samples is the
method of extraction and hence, a conventional solvent extraction(with
dierent solvents), a direct measure using the QUENCHER procedure,
an invitro gastrointestinal digestion, and the combination of the latter
with the application of the QUENCHER procedure[10] to the insoluble
fraction [termed henceforth the GAR method] are the methods of
extraction employed in the present study. e results provide promising
evidence for the need for employing such methods of antioxidant
estimation since the chemical extraction method(solvents and aqueous)
gave lower results, ranging from 2 to 2.5times lower in comparison with
the Quencher and GAR methods. ey are in agreement with the previous
reports for 27 fresh and cooked foods, estimated by Pastoriza etal.[7] On
the other hand, with regard to the chemical extraction method, both PB
and FB extracted with the solvent ethanol fared better than methanol
and aqueous counterparts. ey were also higher than the Quencher
method, but lower than GAR method of antioxidant evaluation. e
previous phytochemical analysis also reports high amounts of total
phenolic content in the ethanolic extract of PB and FB[4,5] which are
well‑known as the major phytochemicals(phenolic acids and flavonoids)
to possess antioxidant activities in fruits and vegetables.
Further, to acquire a detailed phenolic composition of the extracts,
HPLC analysis was performed and the results are detailed in Table5c
suggesting the presence of diverse phenolic acids, namely, gallic acid,
p‑hydroxybenzoic acid, chlorogenic acid, sinapic acid, caeic acid,
Table4: Amino acid prole of banana pseudostem and banana ower
Amino acids Content(mg/g protein) Reference(mg/g protein)xScore(%)
PB FB PB FB
Leucine 27.2a63.2b66c41 96
Phenylalanine + tyrosine 20.2a55.6b63c32 88
Lysine 12.5a40.0b58c22 69
Valine 10.4a36.6c35b30 105
reonine 9.4a33.0b34b28 97
Isoleucine 11.1a28.0b28b40 100
Methionine + cysteine 24.8b60.0c25a99 240
Tryptophan 3.7a12.5c11b34 114
Valine 10.37±0.06a36.64±0.02b
Lysine 12.46±0.05a39.95±0.07b
Leucine 27.19±0.02a63.19±0.08b
Isoleucine 11.05±0.01a28.02±0.02b
Phenylalanine 13.52±0.02a31.03±0.01b
reonine 9.43±0.01a33.01±0.03b
Histidine 7.51±0.02a16.60±0.02b
Methionine 8.14±0.04a18.11±0.02b
Tryptophan 3.70±0.03a12.48±0.05b
Arginine 14.25±0.04a41.98±0.02b
Proline 19.82±0.02a50.28±0.01b
Aspartic acid 24.19±0.03a78.87±0.03b
Glutamic acid 63.75±0.05a152.92±0.08b
Serine 10.50±0.03a40.65±0.02b
Glycine 14.44±0.06a30.58±0.04b
Alanine 14.05±0.02a51.25±0.07b
Cysteine 16.63±0.04a41.89±0.04b
Tyrosine 6.65±0.02a24.56±0.02b
Total essential amino acids 103.37±0.01a279.03±0.01b
Total nonessential amino acids 184.28±0.02a512.98±0.03b
Ratio(essential/nonessential) 0.56±0.01a0.54±0.02c0.38b
Values are expressed as mean±SD(n=3). Means in the same row with distinct superscripts are significantly dierent(P≤0.05) as separated by Duncan multiple range
test. xAmino acid pattern of preschool children(2–5years)(FAO/WHO/UNU, 1985). SD: Standard deviation; PB: Banana pseudostem; FB: Banana ower
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017 S81
Table 5: Enzymatic antioxidant potential and global antioxidant response of banana pseudostem and banana ower using dierent methods and distribution
of antioxidant activity in soluble and insoluble fractions after in vitro digestion (a); yield, total phenolic content and antioxidant activity of banana pseudostem
and banana ower sequential solvent extracts (b) and phenolic acids identication (c)
(a)
Methods PB FB
Enzymatic antioxidantswSuperoxide dismutase 14.56±0.70a19.08±1.66b
Catalase 3.68±0.54a7.86±1.01b
Ascorbate peroxidase 0.32±0.44a0.49±1.89b
glutathione reductase 0.76±2.61a1.53±0.47b
GARABTSvTot a l 54.07±0.25a70.15±0.55b
Soluble 37.58±1.88a45.62±1.38b
Insoluble 15.41±3.33a22.99±2.96b
Quencherx 17.86±0.69a24.05±1.98b
GARDPPHvTotal 0.78±0.60a1.37±2.09b
Soluble 0.49±1.60a0.99±1.23b
Insoluble 0.21±0.75a0.27±3.08b
Quencherx 0.33±0.38a0.42±1.08b
GARFRAPvTotal 3.47±1.65a6.53±1.34b
Soluble 2.02±1.03a4.99±1.77b
Insoluble 1.26±0.50a1.44±1.04b
Quencherx 1.59±0.54a2.78±0.82b
(b)
Extracts Yield (g/kg) TPCyABTSvDPPHvFRAPv
PB Methanol 25.45±0.46a98.98±0.58a11.98±1.87a0.22±0.17b1.23±1.01b
Ethanol 91.20±0.48c211.43±1.98c21.87±0.40b0.43±0.34c3.33±0.33c
Wat e r 89.09±0.58b122.34±0.41b10.64±1.50a0.20±0.67a1.06±0.46a
FB Methanol 61.37±0.55a121.59±0.58b18.80±1.31a0.25±1.24a1.58±1.79b
Ethanol 126.87±1.74c228.87±2.05c24.03±1.00b0.73±0.27b4.83±0.51c
Wat e r 101.84±0.54b105.78±0.48a18.08±0.98a0.24±2.50a1.44±2.00a
(c)
Phenolic acid PB (µg/mg) extract FB (µg/mg) extract
Methanol Ethanol Water Methanol Ethanol Water
Gallic acid 5.82 31.13 15.88 73.44 61.20 73.76
p‑hydroxybenzoic acid 11.48 62.68 32.78 61.65 94.97 19.43
Chlorogenic acid 6.09 11.87 8.61 14.08 13.76 14.42
Sinapic acid 14.91 37.06 3.19 2.02 3.22 9.81
Caeic acid 25.33 19.11 4.06 1.59 1.07 ‑
Vanillin 14.80 7.17 2.69 1.95 7.62 3.38
p‑coumaric acid 7.58 2.09 4.29 0.25 1.45 ‑
Epicatechin 3.07 0.72 5.37 0.52 0.75 ‑
Catechin 9.34 4.12 1.76 0.91 2.63 ‑
Quercetin 4.39 6.06 1.19 0.32 1.67 ‑
wUnits/min/mg of protein; vMmol equivalents of trolox/kg sample; xDirect procedure without extraction of PB and FB and expressed as in GAR (mmol equivalents of
trolox/kg sample); yMg equivalents of gallic acid/g. Values are expressed as mean±SD (n=3). Means in the same row with distinct superscripts are significantly dierent
(P≤0.05) as separated by Duncan multiple range test. SD: Standard deviation; PB: Banana pseudostem; FB: Banana ower; GAR: global antioxidant response; TPC:
Total phenolic content; ABTS: 2,2’‑azino‑bis, DPPH: 2,2‑diphenyl‑1‑picrylhydrazyl, FRAP: Ferric reducing antioxidant power
vanillin, p‑coumaric acid, quercetin, catechin, and epicatechin at dierent
concentrations. Ethanol extracts in both PB and FB were found to contain
high concentrations of phenolic acids in comparison to methanol and
aqueous extract. p‑hydroxybenzoic acid was the most predominant
phenolic acid recorded in PB and FB (62.7 μg/mg and 95 μg/mg),
followed by gallic acid(31.1 and 61.3μg/mg, respectively) with varying
concentrations. Caeic acid was predominant in the methanol extract
of PB (23.3 μg/mg), whereas gallic acid was predominant in that of
FB(73.4μg/mg). Although methanol and aqueous extract had phenolic
acids, the concentration was lesser than the ethanol extract[Table5c].
However, under physiological conditions, these results cannot be
reproduced by administering the extracted antioxidants directly.
Irrespective of the extraction method, some amount of the sample always
remains insoluble in one or the other solvent and hence Arda etal.[46]
developed a direct procedure(QUENCHER) to evaluate the TAC of
foods without an extraction step. Since, this method cannot dierentiate
between the physiologically active fraction and the insoluble one, a
combination of enzymatic digestion step for the soluble fraction and
the Quencher method for the insoluble fraction thus furnish an optimal
antioxidant potential of the given sample.
e results of the antioxidant activity using Quencher method[Table5a]
for PB and FB(ABTS: 17.8 and 24; DPPH: 0.33 and 0.42; FRAP: 1.59
and 2.78 mmol equivalents of the standard Trolox per kg of sample,
respectively) were in accordance with the results obtained by Arda
etal.[46] for dierent cereal products. e order of magnitude was same
as the GAR method for PB and FB samples despite a 2–3times reduction
in most parts of the results. Such a reduction could be attributed to the
absence of the enzymatic digestion step which could otherwise result in
dierent compounds obtained aer the enzymatic reactions. Overall,
the best results were obtained by the GAR method which exhibited
highest antioxidant activity with FB faring better than PB. In particular,
the insoluble fraction exhibited about 40%–50% of the total antioxidant
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
S82 Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017
activity and since this fraction is excluded during the extraction process,
this is the most recommended method for the measurement of TAC.
Although the antioxidant role of the insoluble fraction is questioned
since they are not extractable, they are expected to exert their eect by the
surface reaction phenomenon. Furthermore, some part of the insoluble
fraction may undergo digestion by the intestinal microora thus
releasing some substances which can also exert antioxidant properties
and considering these; it would be essential to measure the antioxidant
capacity of even the insoluble fraction of the digested food.[47]
Further, with respect to the antioxidant assays, the dierent anities of
the radicals to scavenge various antioxidant groups present in dierent
samples suggest the need to use more than a single assay to determine the
antioxidant potential of a particular sample. In this regard, in the present
study, the TAC as measured with two radical scavenging assays(ABTS
and DPPH) fared dierently for both the byproducts. In support of
these results, Roger etal.[48] demonstrated that the macromolecules are
seldom attacked by the hydrophobic radicals, which could be the reason
for the lower activity in DPPH as compared to the ABTS assay wherein
DPPH is a hydrophobic radical while ABTS is more of a hydrophilic
probe. Furthermore, DPPH being more selective in the reaction with
H‑donors, it could also be the reason for its lower TAC values in this
assay. Further, the FRAP activity which is based on the reduction of the
Fe+3–TPTZ complex in the ferrous form at low pH, exhibited 6.5 mmol
Trolox Eq./Kg for FB and for PB with a statistically signicant dierence
in the values(P>0.05). e results, however, in comparison with ABTS
were lower, but better than the DPPH assay.[49]
In addition, enzymatic(SOD, CAT, APX, and GR) antioxidant potential
has been evaluated for the FB and PB. As evident from Tab l e 5a, FB
showed maximum activity of SOD(19.1 U/min/mg protein) followed
by catalase(7.9 U/min/mg protein), GR(1.5 U/min/mg protein) and
APX(0.49 U/min/mg protein). On the other hand, PB also exhibited
enzymatic activities for SOD (14.6 U/min/mg protein) followed
by catalase (3.7 U/min/mg protein), GR (0.76 U/min/mg protein),
APX(0.32 U/min/mg protein) and found was to be lower in comparison
to FB. Higher SOD, APX, and GR enzymatic antioxidant activities in
PB and FB clearly indicates their greater ability to detoxify ROS such
as superoxide, hydroxyl, and peroxide radicals formed in human cell by
endogenous and exogenous factors which in turn could lead to geriatric
degenerative conditions, cancer and a wide range of other human
diseases.
CONCLUSION
In summary, the present study manifests that both PB and FB possess
rich nutraceutical properties because of the presence of various bioactive
ingredients with numerous benets. It provides evidence that the two
banana byproducts are rich in proximate nutrient composition, minerals,
fatty acids, and antioxidants(both enzymatic and nonenzymatic) and
hence could be used in the human diet. e beneciary properties are
mainly derived from their minerals, carbohydrates, dietary bers and
proteins together with the low content of fat and calories. Furthermore,
as a rich source of phytochemicals, minerals and vitamins reside in
PB and FB they can be further evaluated for use as a key ingredient
forvaluable drugs. To add to these, the high total dietary fiber content
and a balanced ratio between insoluble dietary fiber and soluble dietary
fiber in both PB and FB are attractive targets for the food industry. ese
could be used in the development of a nutritional supplement because of
their health‑related properties of dietary fiber and associated bioactive
compounds.
In addition to the strong basis provided by the nutritional aspects
of PB and FB, their potential as antioxidants are also conrmed by
a series of studies which included dierent methods of extraction as
well as dierent assays to determine their antioxidant potential. It is
demonstrated that the GAR method exhibited antioxidant activity higher
than that reported with traditional procedures, which asserts the role of
both insoluble as well as soluble fractions of the digested food to possess
antioxidant properties. To summarize on the whole, this paper reinforces
the concept that PB and FB are potent sources of several biologically
active ingredients and also possess rich antioxidant property.
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conicts of interest
ere are no conicts of interest.
REFERENCES
1. ManojK, VishalG, PujaK, ReddyCR, JhaB. Assessment of nutrient composition
and antioxidant potential of Caulerpaceae seaweeds. J Food Comp Anal
2011;24:270‑8.
2. AfsharMA, NaserMS. Nutritive value of some agro‑industrial By‑products for
Ruminants–A review. World J Zoo 2008;3:40‑6.
3. DebabandyaM, SabyasachiM, NamrataS. Banana and its by‑product utilization:
An overview. JSci Ind Res 2010;69:323‑9.
4. RamithR, PrithviSS, FarhanZ, LakshmiVR, NagendraPM. Inhibitory effect of
banana(Musa sp. var. Nanjangud rasa bale) flower extract and its constituents
Umbelliferone and Lupeol on α‑glucosidase, aldose reductase and glycation at
multiple stages. SAfr J Bot 2014;95:54‑63.
5. RamuR, ShirahattiPS, ZameerF, PrasadMN. Investigation of antihyperglycaemic
activity of banana(Musa sp. Var. Nanjangud rasa bale) pseudostem in normal
and diabetic rats. JSci Food Agric 2015;95:165‑73.
6. JamunaJB. Effect of Banana Flower and Pseudostem on Advanced Glycation
end Products and Glucose Transporters in Kidney During Diabetes. Ph.D.
Thesis. University of Mysore, India; 2015.
7. Pastoriza S, Delgado AC, Haro A, Rufian HJ. Aphysiologic approach to test
the global antioxidant response of foods. The GAR method. Food Chem
2011;129:1926‑32.
8. JaraPJ, SaraA, MariaT, ElenaDR, JoseS, Isabel G, et al. Update methodology
to determine antioxidant capacity in plant foods, oils and beverages: Extraction,
measurement and expression of results. Food Res Int 2008;41:274‑85.
9. VuralG, ArdaS, VincenzoF. Direct measurement of the total antioxidant capacity
of foods: The ‘QUENCHER’ approach. Trends Food Sci Tech 2009;20:278‑88.
10. ArdaS, VuralG, VincenzoF. Solvent effects on total antioxidant capacity of foods
measured by direct QUENCHER procedure. JFood Comp Anal 2012;26:52‑7.
11. American Association of Cereal Chemists(AACC). Approved Methods of Analysis
10thed. St. Paul, MN, USA: American Association of Cereal Chemists; 2000.
12. KjeldahlJZ. Anew method for the determination of nitrogen in organic matter.
Anal Chem 1883;22:366.
13. Association of Official Analytical Chemists(AOAC). AOAC Method 991.43. Total,
Insoluble and Soluble Dietary Fibre in Food‑Enzymatic‑Gravimetric Method,
MES‑TRIS Buffer. In: Ofcial Methods of Analysis. 16thed. Gaithersburg, MD:
AOAC International; 1995. p.71‑2.
14. Happi EmagaT, Robert C, RonkartSN, WatheletB, Paquot M. Dietary bre
components and pectin chemical features of peels during ripening in banana
and plantain varieties. Bioresour Technol 2008;99:4346‑54.
15. NoorAA, LeeHH, BaharinA, RajeevB, LaiHC, MohamadNM. Chemical and
functional properties of the native banana(Musa acuminataxBalbisiana Colla
cv. Awak) pseudo‑stem and pseudo‑stem tender core flours. Food Chem
2011;128:748‑53.
16. Bhaskar JJ, Mahadevamma S, Chilkunda ND, Salimath PV. Banana (Musa
sp. Var. Elakki bale) ower and pseudostem: Dietary ber and associated
antioxidant capacity. JAgric Food Chem 2012;60:427‑32.
1 7. Sofowora A. Medicinal Plants and Traditional Medicine in Africa. 1st ed.
Chichester, NewYork: John Wiley and Sons; 1982. p.256.
18. Department of Health 2013. Nutrient Analysis of Fruit and Vegetables:
Analytical Report. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/
system/uploads/attachment_data/le/167944/Nutrient_analysis_of_fruit_and_
vegetables_‑_Analytical_Report.pdf.[Last accessed on 2014May24].
19. TreaseGE, EvansWC. Pharmacognsy. 11thed. UK: Macmillian Publishers; 1989.
20. American Association of Cereal Chemists(AACC). Determination of Simple
Sugars in Cereal Products—HPLC Method(Method 80‑04), MN. St. Paul, USA:
American Association of Cereal Chemists; 1994.
21. AhmadS, AhmadS, BibiA, IshaqMS, AfridiMS, KanwalF, etal. Phytochemical
RAMITH RAMU, et al.: Nutritional Quality of Banana Flower and Pseudostem
Pharmacognosy Research, Volume 9, Supplement 1, December 2017 S83
analysis, antioxidant activity, fatty acids composition, and functional group
analysis of heliotropium bacciferum. ScienticWorldJournal 2014;2014:829076.
22. HarbornJB. Phytochemical Method. AOAC 991.39. 17thed. Ch. 41. FAO; 2000.
23. Association of Ofcial Analytical Chemists(AOAC). Ofcial Methods of Analysis
of AOAC International. 17thed. Gaithersburg, MD, USA: Association of Official
Analytical Chemists; 2000.
24. HueNV, Uchida R, Ho MC. Sampling and analysis of soils and plant tissues.
In: SilvaJA, UchidaRS, editors. Plant Nutrient Management in Hawaii’s Soils.
College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii; 2000. p.23‑6.
25. Vikas N, Sarkara BC, Sharmaa HK, Bawa AS. Physico‑chemical properties
and estimation of mineral content in honey produced from different plants in
Northern India. JFood Comp Anal 2003;16:613‑9.
26. Pearson D. The Chemical Analysis of Foods. 7thed. London: Churchill Living
Stone; 1976.
27. Association of Ofcial Analytical Chemists. Boric Acid and borates in food,
qualitative test, nal action. A.O.A.C. International. Method no. 970.33,
Procedure 47.3.07. 16thed., Vol.2. Arlington, VA, USA: Association of Ofcial
Analytical Chemists; 1996. p.11.
28. Association of Ofcial Analytical Chemists(AOAC). Ofcial Methods of Analysis
of AOAC International. 18thed. Gaithersburg, MD, USA: Association of Ofcial
Analytical Chemists; 2005.
29. WongKH, PeterCK. Nutritional evaluation of some subtropical red and green
seaweeds Part I – Proximate composition, amino acid proles and some
physico‑chemical properties. Food Chem 2000;71:475‑82.
30. RonnyH, NavamH, KannanA, PengyinC. Proximate composition and amino
acid and mineral contents of Mormordica charantia L. pericarp and seeds at
different maturity stages. Food Chem 2010;122:1111‑5.
31. FAO/WHO/UNU. Energy and Protein Requirements, Report of a Joint
FAO/WHO/UNU Expert Consultation. World Health Organisation and UnitedNations
University. Technical Rep. Ser. 724. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO; 1985.
32. CristinaDA, Jose AC, AnaH, Silvia PD, JoseAR. A combined procedure to
evaluate the global antioxidant response of bread. JCereal Sci 2010;52:239‑46.
33. AlmeselmaniM, DeshmukhPS, SairamRK, KushwahaSR, SinghTP. Protective
role of antioxidant enzymes under high temperature stress. Plant Sci
2006;171:382‑8.
34. AndersonJW, BairdP, Davis RH Jr., FerreriS, KnudtsonM, Koraym A, et al.
Health benets of dietary ber. Nutr Rev 2009;67:188‑205.
35. Samrat M, Raul F, Yusuf A, Ulku S. Banana bers – Variability and fracture
behaviour. JEng Fibers Fabr 2008;3:39‑45.
36. CordeiroN, Belgacem MN, TorresIC, Moura JC. Chemical composition and
pulping of banana pseudo‑stems. Ind Crops Prod 2004;19:147‑54.
37. Möller J. Gravimetric determination of acid detergent ber and lignin in feed:
Interlaboratory study. JAOAC Int 2009;92:74‑90.
38. Martínez R, Torres P, Meneses MA, Figueroa JG, Pérez‑Álvarez JA,
Viuda‑MartosM, etal. Chemical, technological and invitro antioxidant properties
of mango, guava, pineapple and passion fruit dietary bre concentrate. Food
Chem 2012;135:1520‑6.
39. ThomasHE, RadoHA, BernardW, JeanTT, Michel P. Effects of the stage of
maturation and varieties on the chemical composition of banana and plantain
peels. Food Chem 2007;103:590‑600.
40. Okwu DE. Phytochemicals, Vitamins and mineral contents of two Nigerian
medicinal plants. Int J Mol Med Adv Sci 2005;1:375‑81.
41. ZhanWS, WeiHM, ZhiQJ, YangB, ZhiGS, Hua TD, etal. Investigation of dietary
ber, protein, Vitamin E and other nutritional compounds of banana ower of
two cultivars grown in China. Afri J Biotech 2010;9:3888‑95.
42. JosephM, CharlesA, AlexRV. Phytochemical screening and bioactivity studies
of Phyllanthus wightianus. JPharm Res 2013;6:188‑92.
43. ShaidaFS, NorAM, IbrahimME, EngMS, AzlianaAB, SupriatnoKL. Correlation
between total phenolic and mineral contents with antioxidant activity of eight
Malaysian bananas(Musa sp.). JFood Comp Anal 2011;24:1‑10.
44. BilbaK, ArseneMA, OuensangaA. Study of banana and coconut bers botanical
composition, thermal degradation and textural observations. Bioresour Technol
2007;98:58‑68.
45. SaravananK, Aradhya SM. Polyphenols of pseudostem of different banana
cultivars and their antioxidant activities. JAgric Food Chem 2011;59:3613‑23.
46. Arda S, Vural G, Nicoletta P, Vincenzo F. Direct measurement of the total
antioxidant capacity of cereal products. JCereal Sci 2008;48:816‑20.
47. SerpenA, Gökmen V, FoglianoV. Total antioxidant capacities of raw and cooked
meats. Meat Sci 2012;90:60‑5.
48. DeanRT, HuntJV, GrantAJ, YamamotoY, NikiE. Free radical damage to proteins:
The inuence of the relative localization of radical generation, antioxidants, and
target proteins. Free Radic Biol Med 1991;11:161‑8.
49. SerpenA, Capuano E, FoglianoV, Gökmen V. Anew procedure to measure
the antioxidant activity of insoluble food components. J Agric Food Chem
2007;55:7676‑81.
