Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T02:45:38.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effects of condensed tannins prepared from leaves of fodder plants on digestive enzymes in vitro and in the intestine of rats

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

T. Horigome ,
R. Kumar  and
K. Okamoto
T. Horigome
Affiliation:
College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Tsushima, Okayama 700, Japan
R. Kumar
Affiliation:
College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Tsushima, Okayama 700, Japan
K. Okamoto
Affiliation:
College of Agriculture, Okayama University, Tsushima, Okayama 700, Japan
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Of the nineteen plants screened, six were found to contain large quantities of condensed tannins. Black locust (Robinia pseudo-Acacia), bush clover (Lespedeza bicolor), wistaria (Wistaria floribunda) and Japanese knotgrass (Reynoutria japonica) were used for the present experiment. Tannins of the investigated plants were fractionated into three or four molecular forms, according to the degree of polymerization, by chromatography on a column of Sephadex LH-20.

2. The protein-precipitating capacity of the fractionated tannins increased with the increase in degree of polymerization. The inhibitory effect of tannins on trypsin (EC 3.4.21.4), a-amylase (EC 3.2.1.1) and lipase (EC 3.1.1.3) activities in vitro also increased with the increase in degree of polymerization. The digestion of tannin-bovine serum albumin complex by trypsin was related to the degree of polymerization of tannins complexed.

3. Inclusion of black locust tannins in the diet (10 g/kg) depressed the activities of trypsin and α-amylase in the upper, middle and lower parts of the intestine of the rats, but the lipase activity was increased in the middle part and remained unaffected in the upper and lower parts. It is presumed that the tannins have little affinity for lipase.

4. Digestion trials, when the microflora level of the alimentary canal of rats was reduced by dietary antibiotic treatment, revealed that the inclusion of tannins in the diet (20 g/kg) depressed the digestibilities of proximate constituents, except crude fat, and increased faecal bile acid excretion.

Type
General Nutrition papers
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 60 , Issue 2 , September 1988 , pp. 275 - 285
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1988

References

Barry, T. N. (1985). British Journal of Nutrition 54, 211–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bate-Smith, E. C. (1973). Phytochemistry 12, 907–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernfeld, P. (1955). In Methods of Enzymology, pp. 149–150 [Colwick, S.B., Kaplan, N. O., editors]. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, L. G., Price, M. L. & Brotherton, J. E. (1982). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 30, 1087–1089.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, S. I. & Fuller, H. L. (1964). Poultry Science 43, 30–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eggum, O. B., Fekadu, M., Wolstrup, J., Sauer, W. C. & Just, A. (1979). Journal of the Science and Food and Agriculture 30, 177–184.Google Scholar
Erlanger, B. F., Kokowsky, N. & Choen, W. (1961). Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 95, 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ford, J. E. & Hewitt, D. (1979). British Journal of Nutrition 42, 325–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goering, H. K. & Van Soest, P. J. (1970). Agricultural Handbook no. 379. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
Goldstein, J. L. & Swain, T. (1965). Phytochemistry 4, 185–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffiths, D. W. & Moseley, G. (1980). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 31, 255–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harper, A. E. (1959). Journal of Nutrition 68, 405–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslam, E. (1974). Biochemical Journal 139, 285–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, W. T., Broadhurst, R. B. & Lyttleton, J. W. (1976). Phytochemistry 15, 1407–1409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalek, H. D., Stellaard, F., Kruis, W. & Paumgartner, G. (1984). Clinica Chimica Acta 140, 85–90.Google Scholar
Kumar, R. & Horigome, T. (1986). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 34, 487–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLeod, M. N. (1974). Nutrition Abstracts and Reviews 44, 803–815.Google Scholar
Marquardt, R. R., Ward, A. T., Campbell, L. D. & Cansfield, P. E. (1977). Journal of Nutrition 107, 1313–1324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxson, E. D., Rooney, L. W., Lewis, R. W., Clark, L. E. & Johnson, J. W. (1973). Nutrition Reports International 8, 145–152.Google Scholar
Phillips, P. H. & Hart, E. B. (1935). Journal of Biological Chemistry 109, 657–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rostagno, H. S., Featherston, W. R. & Rogler, J. C. (1973). Poultry Science 52, 765–772.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roy, D. M. & Schneeman, B. O. (1981). Journal of Nutrition 111, 878–885.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seligman, A. M. & Nachlas, M. M. (1963). In Methods in Enzymatic Analysis, 776&778 [Bergmeyer, H. U., editor]. New York: Verlag Chemie.Google Scholar
Sklan, D. (1980). Journal of Nutrition 110, 989–994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamir, M. & Alumot, E. (1969). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture 20, 199–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar