| Literature DB >> 33175890 |
Bo-Jane Woods1, Sonia Gallego-Castillo2, Elise F Talsma1, Daniel Álvarez2.
Abstract
Zinc deficiency is a major public health problem in vulnerable populations of Latin America and the Caribbean. Biofortification of rice (Oryza sativa L.) with zinc has the potential to alleviate zinc deficiencies. However, as plant breeding processes can alter grain culinary quality and favorable sensory attributes, grain quality and consumer acceptability need to be assessed prior to releasing a variety to the public. A grain quality characterization and a sensory acceptability analysis were carried out with two varieties of zinc biofortified rice and a local control both in Bolivia and Colombia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the physicochemical parameters that are significant in consumer acceptance and to determine the acceptability of zinc biofortified rice by consumers. Results of physicochemical parameters were analyzed using ANOVA. The sensory acceptability was evaluated in 243 adults utilizing a 7-point hedonic scale and a Wilcoxon's signed rank test was used to determine the overall acceptability of the varieties. Biofortified rice variety T2-11 and MAC-18 -control 1- were equally accepted by consumers in Bolivia with no significant differences (p<0.05). The grain quality analysis reported that both presented long and slender rice grains (L>7.5 mm and L/B>3), an intermediate to high amylose content (>25%) and a similar level of chalkiness. In Colombia, the biofortified variety 035 presented a higher score in overall acceptance in comparison to biofortified variety 021 and the local variety CICA4 -control 2-. However, no significant differences were observed (p<0.05). Conversely to the other two varieties, the biofortified variety 035 presented the largest size grain (L/B = 2.97), a lower chalkiness and an amylose content above 25%. This study shows that the grain quality properties of rice have an influence on acceptability and that zinc biofortified rice varieties are accepted by consumers.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33175890 PMCID: PMC7657500 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0242202
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Physicochemical characteristics for the rice varieties.
| Country | Sample | Size (L/B) | Chalkiness | Kett degrees (%) | Amylose content (%) | Cooking time (min) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bolivia | Control 1 | 4.27 ± 0.04 | 0.42 ± 0.03b | 44.87 ± 0.45c | 32.50 ± 0.60 | 27.0 ± 1.0 |
| T2-10 | 3.66 ± 0.10b | 1.17 ± 0.15 | 50.13 ± 0.64 | 32.23 ± 0.42 | 26.3 ± 1.5 | |
| T2-11 | 4.24 ± 0.05 | 0.43 ± 0.06b | 48.73 ± 0.15b | 33.10 ± 0.53 | 27.0 ± 1.0 | |
| Colombia | Control 2 | 2.25 ± 0.14b | 2.02 ± 0.18 | 46.50 ± 0.20 | 24.57 ± 0.97b | 26.7 ± 0.6 |
| 021 | 2.76 ± 0.09 | 1.33 ± 0.06b | 46.23 ± 1.07 | 31.87 ± 1.05 | 27.0 ± 1.0 | |
| 035 | 2.97 ± 0.06 | 1.00 ± 0.40b | 46.03 ± 1.16 | 30.23 ± 0.93 | 26.0 ± 0.6 |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. Means with different superscript letters (a,b,c) in the same column by country are significantly different with Tukey’s test (p<0.05); n = 3 sample replicates.
aL = length and B = breadth in mm.
Zinc and phytic acid content for the rice varieties.
| Country | Sample | Zinc (mg/kg) | Phytic Acid (mg/g) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bolivia | Control 1 | 17.33 ± 2.42b | 0.61 ± 0.02b |
| T2-10 | 22.03 ± 0.64ab | 0.86 ± 0.11ab | |
| T2-11 | 24.70 ± 0.78a | 1.02 ± 0.02a | |
| Colombia | Control 2 | 18.35 ± 2.05b | 2.66 ± 0.08ab |
| 021 | 26.77 ± 1.00a | 2.80 ± 0.00a | |
| 035 | 26.57 ± 0.72a | 2.45 ± 0.08b |
Values are presented as mean ± SD. Means with different superscript letters (a,b) in the same column by country are significantly different with Tukey’s test (p<0.05); n = 3 sample replicates for zinc, except control 2 in Colombia where n = 2 sample replicates; n = 2 sample replicates for phytic acid.
Daily zinc intake values and EAR estimate for the rice varieties per study site.
| Population | Country | Sample | Zn (mg/kg) | Rice consumption | Zn intake | Contribution to EAR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Children | Bolivia | Control 1 | 17 | 42 | 0.6 | 12 |
| T2-10 | 22 | 42 | 0.7 | 16 | ||
| T2-11 | 25 | 42 | 0.8 | 18 | ||
| Colombia | Control 2 | 18 | 59 | 0.8 | 18 | |
| 021 | 27 | 59 | 1.2 | 27 | ||
| 035 | 27 | 59 | 1.2 | 27 | ||
| Women | Bolivia | Control 1 | 17 | 114 | 1.5 | 16 |
| T2-10 | 22 | 114 | 2.0 | 20 | ||
| T2-11 | 25 | 114 | 2.2 | 22 | ||
| Colombia | Control 2 | 18 | 114 | 1.6 | 16 | |
| 021 | 27 | 114 | 2.4 | 24 | ||
| 035 | 27 | 114 | 2.4 | 24 |
aChildren: Bolivia = 42 mg (South American average in children 3–5 y consumption [57]; no official data for Bolivia); Colombia = 59 mg (children 1–4 y consumption [15]). Women: Bolivia = 114 g (food balance sheets [28]); Colombia = 114 g (women 13–17 y consumption [15]).
bZinc cooking retention = 78% [30, 31].
cEstimated Average Requirements (EAR) for zinc: children 4–6 y = 4.6 mg/d; women = 9.9 mg/d, assuming a 30% absorption efficiency [56].
Descriptive characteristics of participants by study site.
| Variables | Bolivia | Colombia | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n) | (n = 97) | (n) | (n = 146) | |
| AGE | 34 ± 12.3 | 24 ± 8.9 | ||
| AGE GROUP (years) | ||||
| 18–24 | 30 | 30.9 | 109 | 74.7 |
| 24–34 | 29 | 29.9 | 23 | 15.8 |
| 35–44 | 17 | 17.5 | 6 | 4.1 |
| 45–64 | 21 | 21.6 | 8 | 5.5 |
| GENDER | ||||
| Female | 37 | 38.1 | 65 | 44.8 |
| Male | 60 | 61.9 | 80 | 55.2 |
| EDUCATION | ||||
| Primary | 4 | 4.1 | 6 | 4.1 |
| Secondary | 14 | 14.1 | 29 | 29.9 |
| Further education | 79 | 81.4 | 111 | 76.0 |
| OCCUPATION | ||||
| Employed | 47 | 49.5 | 20 | 13.7 |
| Housewife | 10 | 10.5 | 1 | 0.7 |
| Farmer/Student | 19 | 20.0 | 121 | 82.9 |
| None | 19 | 20.0 | 4 | 27.0 |
| FREQUENCY OF RICE CONSUMPTION | ||||
| Daily | 94 | 97.9 | 134 | 92.4 |
| Weekly/1-2 times a week | 2 | 2.1 | 11 | 7.6 |
Values are presented as mean (± SD) for continuous variables and as percentages (%) for categorical variables.
Comparison of overall hedonic liking scores per study site and rice variety.
| Country | Rice sample | Overall hedonic liking scoresa | Differences between varieties |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bolivia | Control 1 | 5.8 (5.2, 6.4) | -2.31 |
| T2-10 | 5.6 (5.0, 6.0) | -0.08 | |
| T2-11 | 5.8 (5.4, 6.4) | -2.71 | |
| Colombia | Control 2 | 5.3 (4.2, 5.8) | -0.54 |
| 021 | 5.4 (4.4, 5.8) | -1.69 | |
| 035 | 5.5 (4.6, 6.0) | -1.37 |
aValues are presented as median differences in study samples across settings and are shown as medians and interquartile ranges (25, 75).
bValues with different superscript letters (a,b) are significantly different with Wilcoxon’s non-parametric z-test (p<0.05).
Median hedonic scores of sensory attributes of the local control varieties and the biofortified varieties with comparisons across study sites.
| Country | Variety | Color | Size | Smell | Taste | Texture |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bolivia | Control 1 | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 6.0 (6, 7)a | 6.0 (5, 7)a | 6.0 (5, 7)a | 6.0 (5, 7)a |
| T2-10 | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 6.0 (5, 6)b | 6.0 (5, 6)b | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 5.0 (5, 6)a | |
| T2-11 | 6.0 (6, 7)a | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 6.0 (6, 7)a | 6.0 (5, 6)a | |
| Colombia | Control 2 | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 5.0 (4, 6)a | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 6.0 (4, 6)a | 5.0 (3, 6)a |
| 021 | 6.0 (6, 6)b | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 5.0 (4, 6)b | 5.0 (4, 6)a | 5.0 (3.7, 6)a | |
| 035 | 6.0 (6, 6)b | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 6.0 (5, 6)a | 5.0 (4, 6)a | 5.0 (3.7, 6)a |
Values are presented as median values of individual attributes per rice variety and interquartile ranges (25, 75). Medians per column by attribute with a different superscript letter (a,b) significantly differ using Wilcoxon’s non-parametric z- test (p<0.05).