Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T16:28:02.610Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the response of Lactobacillus casei to folate vitamin in foods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

D. R. Phillips  and
A. J. A. Wright
D. R. Phillips
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council, Food Research Institute, Colney Lane, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UA
A. J. A. Wright
Affiliation:
Agricultural Research Council, Food Research Institute, Colney Lane, Norwich, Norfolk NR4 7UA
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. Folate was measured microbiologically with Lactobacillus casei in extracts from a range of different foods at two incubation pH values, 6·2 and 6·8.

2. The values for folate content obtained at pH 6·2 were, in several instances, considerably higher than at pH 6·8. The ‘positive drift’ seen in the values for dilutions incubated at pH 6·8 were absent from results at pH 6·2.

3. A comparison was made of the ability of the two main sources (hog kidney and chicken pancreas) of deconjugase enzyme to produce measurable folate and the hog-kidney enzyme was shown to produce consistently higher values.

4. The results presented here will have significance for studies of folate intake using calculations from food composition tables, in the light of the apparent discrepancy between calculated folate intake and the recommended daily allowances for the UK.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 49 , Issue 2 , March 1983 , pp. 181 - 186
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1983

References

REFERENCES

Bates, C. J., Black, A. E., Phillips, D. R., Wright, A. J. A. & Southgate, D. A. T. (1982). Hum. Nutr.: Appl. Nutr. 36A, 422.Google Scholar
Bell, J. G. (1974). Lab. Pract. 23, 235.Google Scholar
Bird, O. D. & McGlohon, V. M. (1972). Analytical Microbiology, Vol. 2, p. 409 [Kavanagh, F. editor]. New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Department of Health (1979). In Report on Health and Social Subjects. no. 15, London: HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Henderson, G. B. & Huennekens, F. M. (1974). Archs Biochem. Biophys. 164, 722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herbert, V. (1966). J. clin. Path. 19, 12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leichter, J., Butterworth, C. E. & Krumdieck, C. L. (1977). Proc. Soc. exptl Biol. Med. 154, 98.Google Scholar
Malin, J. D. (1974). J. Sci. Fd Agric. 25, 1051.Google Scholar
Mims, V., Swendseid, M. E. & Bird, O. D. (1947). J. biol. Chem. 170, 367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1977). Household Food Consumption and Expenditure: 1976. London: HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1980). US Recommended Dietary Allowances. 9th revised ed., p. 106. Washington DC: National Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Paul, A. A. & Southgate, D. A. T. (1978). McCance and Widdowson's The Composition of Foods. London: HM Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Phillips, D. R. & Wright, A. J. A. (1982). Br. J. Nutr. 47, 183.Google Scholar
Scott, J. M. & Weir, D. G. (1976). Clinics in Haematology, Vol. 5, London: W. B. Saunders Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Shane, B. & Stokstad, E. L. R. (1975). J. biol. Chem. 250, 2243.Google Scholar
Shane, B. & Stokstad, E. L. R. (1976). J. biol. Chem. 251, 3405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spring, J. A., Robertson, J. & Buss, D. H. (1979). Br. J. Nutr. 41, 487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tamura, T., Shin, Y. S., Williams, M. A. & Stokstad, E. L. R. (1972). Analyt. Biochem. 49, 517.Google Scholar
Waters, A. H. & Mollin, D. L. (1961). J. clin. Path. 14, 335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Health Organization (1972). Tech. Rep. Ser., no. 452. Geneva:WHO.Google Scholar