| Literature DB >> 29670845 |
Fataneh Hashempour-Baltork1, Mohammadali Torbati1, Sodeif Azadmard-Damirchi2,3, Geoffrey Peter Savage4.
Abstract
Purpose: Nutritional quality and oxidation stability are two main factors in the evaluation of edible oils. Oils in their pure form do not have an ideal fatty acid composition or suitable oxidative stability during processing or storage.Entities:
Keywords: Linseed oil; Nutrition; Oil blending; Olive oil; Rheology; Sesame oil
Year: 2018 PMID: 29670845 PMCID: PMC5896384 DOI: 10.15171/apb.2018.013
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Adv Pharm Bull ISSN: 2228-5881
Free fatty acid (% oleic acid) and peroxide values (meq O2/kg) contents of oil blends during storage up to 90 days (mean ± SD)
|
|
|
| ||
|
|
|
| ||
| Day 1 | Free Fatty acid | 0.75 ± 0.03 | 0.71 ± 0.02 | 0.69 ± 0.01 |
| Peroxide | 5.23 ± 0.25 | 4.83 ± 0.31 | 4.63 ± 0.31 | |
| Day 30 | Free Fatty acid | 0.81 ± 0.02 | 0.78 ± 0.03 | 0.74 ± 0.02 |
| Peroxide | 6.77 ± 0.26 | 8.90 ± 0.20 | 9.40 ± 0.25 | |
| Day 60 | Free Fatty acid | 0.92 ± 0.02 | 0.89 ± 0.02 | 0.91 ± 0.02 |
| Peroxide | 9.47 ± 0.15 | 9.83 ± 0.15 | 11.10 ± 0.36 | |
| Day 90 | Free fatty acid | 1.08 ± 0.03 | 1.00 ± 0.02 | 0.99 ±0.02 |
| Peroxide | 10.97 ± 0.15 | 13.63 ± 0.15 | 16.00 ± 0.36 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
| Storage | 3 | ** | ** | |
| Oil blend | 2 | ** | ** | |
| Storage× Oil blend | 6 | * | ** | |
| LSD Storage 5% | - | 0.0213 | 0.25 | |
| LSD Oil blend 5% | - | 0.0185 | 0.21 | |
| LSD Storage × Oil blend 5% | - | 0.0369 | 0.43 | |
** P < 0.01; * P < 0.05 LSD: least significant difference.
Fatty acid composition (%) and nutritional quality of pure oils and their blends (mean ± SD).
| - |
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| C16:0 | 6.7 ± 0.20 | 10.7 ± 0.2 | 13.2 ± 0.15 | 12.1 ± 0.3 | 11.6 ± 0.1 | 11.6 ± 0.2 |
| C18:0 | 2.5 ± 0.4 | 6.5 ± 0.4 | 4.0 ± 0.3 | 4.0 ± 0.5 | 4.13 ± 0.15 | 3.8 ± 0.3 |
| C20:0 | 0.2 ± 0.05 | 0.25 ± 0.2 | 0.6 ± 0.05 | 0.2 ± 0.05 | 0.2 ± 0.1 | 0.2 ± 0.1 |
| C24:0 | - | - | 0.5 ± 0.02 | - | - | - |
| Total SFA | 9.43 ± 0.15 | 17.4 ± 0.3 | 18.9 ± 0.4 | 16.3 ± 1 | 16.9 ± 0.4 | 14.6 ± 0.3 |
| C18:1 (ω9) | 20.3 ± 0.3 | 41.8 ± 0.2 | 69.1 ± 0.1 | 58.8 ± 0.8 | 54.2 ± 0.2 | 51.4 ± 0.1 |
| C16:1 | - | - | 3.0 ± 0.1 | 2.0 ± 0.05 | 2.0 ± 0.3 | 1.5 ± 0.2 |
| Total MUFA | 20.0 ± 0.88 | 41.8 ± 0.1 | 72.03 ± 0.2 | 58.8 ± 0.8 | 54.2 ± 0.2 | 51.4 ± 0.1 |
| C18:2 (ω6) | 12.90 ± 0.4 | 40.09 ± 0.05 | 11.4 ± 0.2 | 22.2 ± 0.1 | 23.9 ± 0.2 | 35.3 ± 0.3 |
| C18:3 (ω3) | 57.1 ± 0.2 | 0.8 ± 0.2 | 1.2 ± 0.1 | 4.3 ± 0.1 | 8.2 ± 0.2 | 11.4 ± 0.4 |
| Total PUFA | 70 ± 0.2 | 40.9 ± 0.4 | 12.6 ± 0.3 | 26.5 ± 0.3 | 32.1 ± 0.1 | 35.3 ± 0.3 |
| PUFA:SFA | 7.42 ± 0. 2 | 2.35 ± 0.2 | 0.66 ± 0.04 | 1.62 ± 0.02 | 1.8 ± 0.3 | 2.41 ± 0.4 |
| ω6:ω3 ratio | 0.22 ± 0.01 | 50.1 ± 0.1 | 8.46 ± 1.5 | 5.1 ± 0.1 | 2.9 ± 0.2 | 2.0 ± 0.5 |
| HH1 | 13.24 ± 0.11 | 7.72 ± 0.02 | 6.14 ± 0.1 | 6.88 ± 0.3 | 7.20 ± 0.2 | 8.03 ± 0.03 |
| AI2 | 0.00 ± 0.1 | 0.13 ± 0.3 | 0.15 ± 0.04 | 0.14 ± 0.2 | 0.13 ± 0.03 | 0.12 ± 0.1 |
| TI3 | 0.04 ± 0.01 | 0.26 ± 0.35 | 0.38 ± 0.03 | 0.30 ± 0.1 | 0.26 ± 0.1 | 0.20 ± 0.1 |
For treatments see Table 1.
1 Hypercholesterolemic ratio , 2Atherogenic index , 3Thrombogenic index
Figure 1
Figure 2