| Literature DB >> 20646299 |
Marian K Malde1, Susanne Bügel, Mette Kristensen, Ketil Malde, Ingvild E Graff, Jan I Pedersen.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Calcium (Ca) - fortified foods are likely to play an important role in helping the consumer achieve an adequate Ca intake, especially for persons with a low intake of dairy products. Fish bones have a high Ca content, and huge quantities of this raw material are available as a by-product from the fish industry. Previously, emphasis has been on producing high quality products from fish by-products by use of bacterial proteases. However, documentation of the nutritional value of the enzymatically rinsed Ca-rich bone fraction remains unexplored. The objective of the present study was to assess the bioavailability of calcium in bones of Atlantic salmon (oily fish) and Atlantic cod (lean fish) in a double-blinded randomised crossover design.Entities:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20646299 PMCID: PMC2916003 DOI: 10.1186/1743-7075-7-61
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr Metab (Lond) ISSN: 1743-7075 Impact factor: 4.169
Figure 1Time schedule for each of the three test periods starting in November, January and March. The three test meals contained 800 mg of calcium from three different calcium sources: cod bones, salmon bones and control (CaCO3). The calcium absorption was measured in 10 healthy young men using 47Ca whole body counting in a double-blinded randomised crossover design.
Age, body mass index, estimated energy intake, estimated calcium intake (food frequency questionnaire) and chemical analysed calcium content of breakfast given in the experimental period (two days before and two days after ingestion of the test meal), a separate breakfast was provided the test day, containing 800 mg calcium for all subjects.
| Subject | Age | Body mass index (kg/m | Energy intake (MJ) | Total Ca intake (mg/d) | Ca content, breakfast (mg/d) | Ca intake, beverages (mg/d) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 24 | 20.9 | 14 | 1644 | 1172 | 22.8 |
| 2 | 22 | 22.7 | 14 | 817 | 343 | 24.8 |
| 3 | 22 | 24.9 | 15 | 679 | 153 | 44.0 |
| 4 | 27 | 25.6 | 18 | 1512 | 896 | 37.0 |
| 5 | 27 | 28.1 | 16 | 1096 | 582 | Not reported |
| 6 | 34 | 24.7 | 16 | 1909 | 1362 | 32.9 |
| 7 | 26 | 21.6 | 14 | 1215 | 736 | 29.1 |
| 8 | 26 | 23.7 | 12 | 456 | 71 | Not reported |
| 9 | 27 | 24.7 | 18 | 1675 | 1053 | 43.5 |
| 10 | 22 | 23.2 | 12 | 1456 | 1038 | 31.8 |
Proximal, mineral and elemental composition of different Ca sources.
| Component | Salmon bone (protease)1 | Salmon bone (boiling)1 | Salmon bone (protease) | Cod bone (boiling) | Calcium supplement from Pharmacy or health store | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | B | C | D1 | |||||
| Ash (g/100 g) | 55.5 | 43 | 67.8 | 65.7 | 0 | 2.8 | 90.9 | 78.9 |
| Protein (g/100 g) | 36 | 35.7 | 26.6 | 32.4 | 0.46 | 0.50 | 0.74 | 0.56 |
| Fat (g/100 g) | 3.0 | 17.8 | <0.2 | 7.9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Ca | 208 | 157 | 261 | 248 | 0.04 | 24 | 336 | 324 |
| K | 1.3 | 3.2 | 0.03 | 2.3 | 0.069 | 0.083 | 1.3 | 0.095 |
| Mg | 4.1 | 2.6 | 3.2 | 3.5 | 0.004 | 0.085 | 29 | 1.8 |
| Na | 1.9 | 3.1 | 2.1 | 6.0 | 0.024 | 0.28 | 5.9 | 0.27 |
| P | 156 | 89 | 151 | 180 | <0.04 | <0.04 | 0.95 | 0.77 |
| Cu | 17.1 | 4.5 | 0.5 | 3.9 | <0.3 | <0.3 | 1.0 | 0.6 |
| Fe | 24 | 20 | 69 | 19 | < 0.5 | 7.0 | 3500 | 150 |
| I | 0.28 | <0.02 | 0.14 | 3.7 | n.d. | 0.11 | 16.2 | 0.06 |
| Mn | 66 | 36 | 3.2 | 28 | <0.02 | 4.2 | 141.8 | 15.5 |
| Se | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.4 | <0.1 | <0.1 | 0.2 | <0.1 |
| Zn | 174 | 106 | 57 | 58 | <0.1 | 0.5 | 8.4 | 1.9 |
| As | 0.34 | 1.5 | 0.11 | 0.61 | <0.01 | 0.01 | 2.53 | 1.07 |
| Cd | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.12 | 0.08 |
| Hg | 0.01 | 0.02 | <0.03 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 | <0.01 |
| Pb | 0.11 | 0.05 | <0.04 | 0.06 | <0.02 | 0.03 | 3.03 | 0.09 |
Fish bones were rinsed for soft tissue by boiling or use of industrialised produced enzymes (proteases).
1Malde et al. [11].
Figure 2Results of Ca absorption and vitamin D status in 10 healthy young men. The calcium absorption was measured using 47Ca whole body counting in a double-blinded randomised crossover design. In Figure 2A, Ca absorption from the three different Ca sources; cod bones, salmon bones, and control (CaCO3), respectively, is given. In Figure 2B, Ca absorption in each period independent of treatment is given. Vitamin D concentrations in the young men studied, regardless of treatment are given in Figure 2C. All results are mean values ± SEE. * indicate significant differences.
Individual data of Ca absorption (%) of ten men given enzymatically rinsed salmon (B) or cod bones (C) in a test meal.
| Subject (N = 10) | Order of test meal administration | Control (A) | Salmon (B) | Cod (C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CAB | 26 | 20 | 15 |
| 2 | BCA | 27 | 24 | 20 |
| 3 | CAB | 28 | 24 | 18 |
| 4 | BCA | 25 | 15 | 23 |
| 5 | BCA | 30 | 19 | 21 |
| 6 | ABC | 23 | 23 | 30 |
| 7 | CAB | 22 | 32 | 26 |
| 8 | ABC | 21 | 24 | 23 |
| 9 | CAB | 30 | 25 | 22 |
| 10 | ABC | - | 20 | 18 |
CaCO3 (A) was given as control.