Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/15Nutritional-Value-Of-10-Traditional-D 👈

1. This article was downloaded by: [ UAE University] , [ Hosam M. Habib]
On: 11 November 2011, At: 08: 37
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Ecology of Food and Nutrition
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http:/ / www.tandfonline.com/ loi/ gefn20
Nutritional Value of 10 Traditional Dishes
of the United Arab Emirates
Hosam M. Habib
a
, Habiba I. Ali
a
, Wissam H. Ibrahim
a
& Hanan S.
Afifi
b
a
Department of Nutrition and Health, Faculty of Food and
Agriculture, United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab
Emirates
b
Department of Food Science, Faculty of Food and Agriculture,
United Arab Emirates University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
Available online: 11 Nov 2011
To cite this article: Hosam M. Habib, Habiba I. Ali, Wissam H. Ibrahim & Hanan S. Afifi (2011):
Nutritional Value of 10 Traditional Dishes of the United Arab Emirates, Ecology of Food and Nutrition,
50:6, 526-538
To link to this article: http:/ / dx.doi.org/ 10.1080/ 03670244.2011.620880
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http: / / www.tandfonline.com/ page/ terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation
that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any
instructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primary
sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,
demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

2. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 50:526–538, 2011
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 0367-0244 print/1543-5237 online
DOI: 10.1080/03670244.2011.620880
Nutritional Value of 10 Traditional Dishes
of the United Arab Emirates
HOSAM M. HABIB, HABIBA I. ALI, and WISSAM H. IBRAHIM
Department of Nutrition and Health, Faculty of Food and Agriculture, United Arab Emirates
University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
HANAN S. AFIFI
Department of Food Science, Faculty of Food and Agriculture, United Arab Emirates
University, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates
In the present study, 10 traditional dishes commonly consumed
in the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) were chemically analyzed
for proximate composition and mineral content. In addition,
exchange lists for meal planning were developed for those dishes.
Significant variations in nutritional value were found among the
dishes. Protein content was lowest in chicken harese (3.33%) and
highest in maleh (23.57%). The fat content ranged from 1.19%
in ragag bread to15.47% in legemat (a sweet dish) while carbo-
hydrate levels ranged from traces in maleh to 76.83% in ragag
bread. Significant variations were also observed in major elements
and trace elements among the dishes. Data from this study will
be useful in calculating nutrient contributions from common tra-
ditional dishes in the U.A.E. as well as in planning normal and
therapeutic diets. Further studies on the nutritional contributions
of other traditional dishes in the U.A.E. are needed.
KEYWORDS traditional foods, proximate composition, nutri-
tional value, exchange lists for meal planning, major elements,
trace elements
Obesity and related chronic diseases, such as type 2 diabetes and cardio-
vascular disease, have increased dramatically in the United Arab Emirates
(U.A.E.) in recent years (Department of Preventive Medicine 2006). The
rapid increase in obesity and related chronic diseases are largely attributed to
Address correspondence to Dr. Hosam M. Habib, Department of Nutrition and Health,
Faculty of Food and Agriculture, United Arab Emirates University, P.O. Box 17555, Al Ain,
U.A.E. E-mail: hosamh@uaeu.ac.ae
526
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

3. Traditional Dishes of the United Arab Emirates 527
changes in diet and physical activity levels of Emirati nationals as the coun-
try undergone a rapid socioeconomic changes within the past four decades
fuelled by oil revenues. According to the International Diabetes Federation
(IDF; 2010), U.A.E., with diabetes prevalence of 18.7%, is considered the
country with the second highest prevalence of type 2 diabetes. A nationwide
study reported that three-quarters of study participants are either overweight
or obese (Malik et al. 2005).
Although the current diet of Emirati citizens incorporates many
imported foods, traditional foods which are either home-prepared or pur-
chased from restaurants still contribute a significant proportion of the diet.
Evaluation of the nutritional composition of traditional foods commonly con-
sumed in U.A.E. is necessary in order to determine their contribution to the
dietary intakes of U.A.E. citizens. Nutritional evaluations of traditional foods
have been conducted in other Arab Gulf countries (Sawaya, Al-Awadi, et al.
1998; Musaiger and Al-Dallal 1985; Al-Jebrin et al. 1983; Al-Nagdy, Sawsan,
and Musaiger 1994; Musaiger, Ahmed, and Rao 1998). Despite the existence
of nutritional-composition data of traditional dishes similar to those con-
sumed in the U.A.E. from the other Arab Gulf countries, there are limited
nutritional-composition data on traditional foods consumed in the U.A.E. It is
essential to determine the nutritive values of U.A.E. traditional foods since
possible variations resulting from use of different ingredients and prepa-
ration methods across countries in the gulf region may exist. Evaluating
the nutritional composition of U.A.E. traditional foods is crucial to assessing
dietary intakes of Emirati nationals, evaluating the relationships between diet
and chronic diseases, formulating dietary recommendations to individuals
for management and prevention of diet-related chronic diseases, and evalu-
ating community-based interventions aimed at improving dietary intakes of
Emirati citizens.
Meal planning exchange lists were initially developed by the American
Diabetes Association and the American Dietetic Association for people with
diabetes (Franz et al. 1987) to incorporate a variety of foods into their diets
while maintaining same levels of energy, carbohydrate, protein, and fat.
However, in recent years, meal planning exchange lists found wider appli-
cations than diabetes management, for example in weight management.
Dietitians in the U.A.E. often use meal planning exchange lists developed
for diabetes to plan meals for Emirati citizens, however, a main limitation
of these meal-planning tools is the lack of nutritional composition data
on U.A.E. traditional foods, making it a challenging task for dietitians to
design meal plans that are culturally-sensitive for their clients. Although
nutrient-analysis software is useful in estimating energy and nutrient intake
of individuals, and is often used by dietitians and researchers to estimate the
nutritional values of U.A.E. traditional foods, chemical analysis of the foods
provides the most accurate data on nutritional contribution.
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

4. 528 H. M. Habib et al.
Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine the proximate
composition and mineral content of 10 traditional foods commonly con-
sumed in the U.A.E., and to develop exchange lists for meal planning for
these 10 dishes based on the results from the proximate analysis.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials
Ten traditional foods commonly consumed in the U.A.E. (3 primary and
7 composite dishes) were purchased from restaurants: (1) Meat machbous,
(2) chicken machbous, (3) meat harese, (4) chicken harese, (5) meat salona,
(6) maleh, (7) ragag, (8) gurus, (9) legemat, and (10) balaleet. Three samples
for each dish, obtained from various regions of the country, were included
and each sample was analyzed in duplicate. Major ingredients commonly
used in the preparation of each of the dishes are given in table 1. Since
data on the nutritional composition of U.A.E. traditional foods are not cur-
rently available, individual ingredient proportions reported in the literature
for some of the similar Kuwaiti traditional foods (although differences in
proportions are expected) are included in table 1.
Methods
CHEMICAL ANALYSIS
Dry matter. Analysis of dry matter was determined according to the
Association of Official Analytical Chemists (2003; 934.01).
Protein content. Total protein was determined by the Kjeldahl method.
Protein was calculated using the general factor (6.25; El-Shurafa, Ahmed,
and Abou-Naji 1982).
Fat content. Fat was measured by extraction with light petroleum ether,
and then removing the solvent by distillation. The residue was dried at 103◦
C
and the fat content determined gravimetrically (Besbes et al. 2004).
Mineral content. Samples were prepared for the determination of min-
erals as described by Heckman (1971). The minerals were determined by
using Inductively Coupled Plasma Atomic Emission Spectrometry, ICP-AES
Varian-Vista-MPX; Varian, Inc. Palo Alto, California, USA) as outlined in the
manufacturer’s manual.
Carbohydrate content. Carbohydrate content was estimated by differ-
ence of mean values (i.e., 100; sum of percentages of moisture, ash, protein,
and lipids; Dashti et al. 2001).
Energy content. Energy content was calculated by multiplying the pro-
tein, fat, and carbohydrates by factors of 4, 9, and 4, respectively (Dashti
et al. 2001).
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

5. Traditional Dishes of the United Arab Emirates 529
TABLE 1 Major Ingredients of 10 United Arab Emirates Traditional Foods
Dish Major ingredients
Proportions (%) reported in the
literature
Meat machbous (rice
with meat)
Rice, beef, tomato, onion,
potatoes, carrots, tomato
paste, vegetable oil, spices,
water
Unavailable
Chicken machbous
(rice with chicken)
Rice, chicken, tomatoes,
onion, potatoes, carrots,
tomato paste, vegetable oil,
spices, water
Unavailable
Meat harese (crushed
wheat with meat)
Crushed wheat, beef, salt,
water
Unavailable
Chicken harese
(crushed wheat
with chicken)
Crushed wheat, chicken, salt,
water
Unavailable
Meat salona (meat
stew)
Beef, potatoes, onions,
tomatoes, green pepper,
tomato paste, cauliflower,
squash, vegetable oil, spices,
water
Unavailable
Maleh (dried, salted
fish)
Fish, salt Unavailable
Ragag (ragag bread) Whole wheat flour, salt, water Whole wheat flour 46.15; oil 4.30;
salt 0.63; cardamom 0.30; water
48.62 (Sawaya, Al-Awadi, et al.
1998).
Gurus (fried bread) Wheat flour, vegetable oil, salt,
water
Unavailable
Legemat (doughnut
cake)
Wheat flour, milk powder (or
yogurt), egg, sugar, oil, salt,
yeast
White flour 20.071; brown flour
25.55; yogurt 24.59; water 28.59;
yeast 1.2 (Dashti et al. 2001).
Balaleet (fried
vermicelli)
Vermicelli, sugar, egg, water Vermicelli 25.99; eggs 13.46; sugar
11.52; oil 2.85; cardamom 0.25;
saffron 0.05; rosewater 1.26; salt
0.44; water 44.81 (Sawaya,
Al-Awadi, et al. 1998).
Development of Exchange Lists
The macronutrient values obtained during the proximate analysis (per 100 g
food) were used to determine the number of carbohydrate, protein, and
fat exchanges using the rounding-off method described by Wheeler and
colleagues for fitting recipes into exchange lists (Wheeler et al. 1996).
Briefly, number of carbohydrate, protein, and fat exchanges are calculated
as follows.
CARBOHYDRATE EXCHANGE
If food portion had 1 g to 5 g carbohydrate, it was not counted as a serving.
If it had 6 g to 10 g carbohydrates, it was counted as half a serving and if it
had 11 g to 20 g carbohydrates, it was counted as one serving.
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

6. 530 H. M. Habib et al.
PROTEIN EXCHANGE
If food portion had 0 g to 3 g protein from the meat and meat substitutes
list, it was not counted as a serving. If it had 4 g to 10 g protein, it was
counted as one serving.
FAT EXCHANGE
If food portion had 0 g to 2 g fat, it was not counted as a serving. If it had 3 g
fat, it was counted as half a serving and if it had 4 g to 7 g fat, it was counted
as one serving. In addition, the amount of the dish (in grams) that would
provide 1 carbohydrate, 1 protein and 1 fat exchange was also calculated
using the results from the proximate composition by dividing carbohydrate
grams, protein grams, and fat grams by 15, 7, and 5, respectively.
Statistical Analysis
All analytical determinations were performed in duplicate. Statistical analysis
was performed using SPSS for windows (version 17; SPSS Inc., Chicago,
Illinois, USA). Data obtained was analyzed using analysis of variances to
determine the significance (p < .05) of the main effects followed by Tukey’s
multiple comparison test for significance of differences. Values of different
parameters are expressed as the mean ± standard deviation.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Data on the proximate analysis per 100 g of each dish is given in table 2.
There were considerable variations in the nutritional composition of the ana-
lyzed dishes as well as among the samples of the same dish due to different
ingredients and preparation methods. Moisture content ranged from 8.63% in
ragag bread to 81.17% in meat salona. Protein content was lowest in chicken
harese (3.33%) and highest in maleh (23.57%). Preparation of maleh (salted
fish) involves cutting the fish into large pieces, adding salt, storing it in lay-
ers in a tightly sealed jar, and leaving the jar in the sun for about 2 weeks.
Legemat, a sweet dish, contained the highest amount of fat (15.47%) of the
dishes analyzed and was much higher than the 7.85% reported in Kuwait
(Dashti et al. 2001). Significant differences in nutritional composition of the
two bread items (ragag and gurus) were found. Ragag bread contained
higher amount of protein (10.89% vs. 7.06%) and carbohydrate (76.83% vs.
48.64%) while gurus bread was significantly higher in moisture (38.94% vs.
8.63%) and fat content (4.04% vs. 1.19%) compared to ragag. On the other
hand, there were no significant differences in moisture, fat, protein, car-
bohydrate or energy levels in meat harese and chicken harese. Similarly,
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

7. TABLE 2 Proximate Analysis of United Arab Emirates Traditional Dishes1,2
Dish Moisture Protein Fat Ash Carbohydrate Energy
Meat machbous 64.420 ± 1.480cd
6.710 ± 0.860c
2.300 ± 0.170ab
1.280 ± 0.200bcd
25.270 ± 1.280c
148.650 ± 5.830b
Chicken
machbous
65.910 ± 4.860cd
6.140 ± 1.280bc
2.640 ± 0.540abc
1.380 ± 0.290bcd
23.910 ± 3.510c
144.030 ± 17.950b
Meat harese 79.070 ± 2.040e
4.000 ± 0.680a
2.460 ± 0.550ab
0.750 ± 0.160ab
13.710 ± 1.870b
93.010 ± 6.010a
Chicken harese 79.910 ± 2.050e
3.330 ± 0.150a
1.430 ± 0.160a
1.040 ± 0.090bc
14.270 ± 1.740b
83.330 ± 8.340a
Meat salona 81.170 ± 4.580e
7.820 ± 2.690c
5.130 ± 3.130d
1.740 ± 0.810d
4.110 ± 0.760a
93.970 ± 28.440a
Maleh 66.360 ± 1.230d
23.570 ± 1.160e
4.430 ± 0.380cd
5.610 ± 0.440f
0.010 ± 0.020a
134.290 ± 2.390b
Ragag 8.630 ± 4.680a
10.890 ± 1.180d
1.190 ± 0.800a
2.430 ± 0.250e
76.830 ± 3.810f
361.680 ± 20.470e
Gurus 38.930 ± 12.400b
7.060 ± 1.520c
4.040 ± 1.570bcd
1.310 ± 0.330bcd
48.640 ± 9.710e
259.200 ± 53.220d
Legemat 33.030 ± 3.540b
7.810 ± 0.960c
15.470 ± 1.570e
1.540 ± 0.720cd
42.130 ± 2.880e
339.060 ± 10.510e
Balaleet 57.700 ± 8.450c
4.560 ± 1.460ab
3.580 ± 0.370bcd
0.370 ± 0.020a
33.760 ± 8.400d
185.550 ± 32.560c
1
Data are expressed as g/100 g on a fresh weight basis for moisture, protein, fat, ash, and carbohydrates and kcal/100 g on a fresh weight basis for energy.
2
Different letters in a column denote significant differences, p < .05.
531
Downloaded by [UAE University], [Hosam M. Habib] at 08:37 11 November 2011

8. 532 H. M. Habib et al.
meat machbous and chicken machbous contained comparable amounts of
macronutrients and energy (table 2).
However, it is possible that although the total fat content of the dishes
is similar, differences in the fatty acid profiles may still exist which has impli-
cations for nutritional health, since high intake of saturated fats is considered
a risk factor for coronary heart disease.
In a previous study involving traditional dishes of Oman, high levels of
palmitic acid were found in meat machbous and chicken machbous (54.7%
and 48.4%, respectively; Musaiger et al. 1998). Since available data on the
nutritional composition of traditional foods consumed in the U.A.E. is lim-
ited, results obtained from this study were compared with data from food
composition tables from other countries in the Arabian Gulf (Musaiger 2006)
in particular the fat content of these foods. Fat content of the foods con-
sumed in the U.A.E. is particularly important given the high prevalence rates
of obesity and cardiovascular disease in the country. Fat content in meat
machbous was half of the level reported in Kuwaiti meat machbous (2.3%
and 4.8%, respectively; Sawaya, Al-Awadi, et al. 1998) and chicken mach-
bous fat content was slightly higher than that reported for the Omani dish
(2.64 and 2.0, respectively). Higher fat contents in chicken machbous were
reported in other Arab Gulf countries (ranges 5.4% in Kuwait to 14.4% in
Qatar; Musaiger 2006) compared to the present study. Fat levels in meat
harese reported in other Arab gulf countries range from 0.4% (Saudi Arabia)
to 2.6% (Kuwait; (Musager 2006). A previous study (Musaiger et al. 1998a)
found lower fat levels in Omani meat harese compared to meat machbous
and chicken machbous (1.4, 2.2, and 2.2%, respectively). Fat content of
chicken harese is not currently available from other studies conducted in
Arab gulf countries; however, the level found in this study is similar to
Omani meat harese (1.44% and 1.40%, respectively). Meat salona contained
much higher level of fat compared to a similar Kuwait dish (5.13% and 3.7%,
respectively). The contribution of fat in meat salona is important since it is
commonly eaten with rice in the U.A.E. Results from this study show that
the fat content of dishes prepared with chicken (chicken harese and chicken
machbous) were not significantly different from those prepared with meat
(meat harese and meat machbous). However, since the fatty acid profile of
the dishes were not investigated in this study, it is possible that the contri-
bution of fatty acids in the meat and chicken-based dishes may be different.
Major and trace element levels of the dishes analyzed are presented in
tables 3, 4, and 5. Maleh, a dried salted fish, contained the highest amount
of calcium (170.87 mg/100 g) followed by legemat (46.97 mg/100 g). Ragag
bread contained the highest amounts of K, P, and Mg compared to other
dishes. Although ragag bread contained similar level of calcium compared
to gurus bread, it was significantly higher in phosphorus, sodium, and mag-
nesium compared to gurus bread. Sawaya, Al-Awadhi, and colleagues (1998)
reported higher levels of Na, K, P, and Mg (400, 240, 220, and 91 mg/100 g,
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

9. TABLE 3 Micronutrients (Major Elements) Composition of United Arab Emirates Traditional Dishes1,2
Dish Ca P Na K Mg
Meat machbous 16.240 ± 4.820a
48.680 ± 4.790a
364.740 ± 97.910b
86.650 ± 16.400bc
11.120 ± 2.000a
Chicken
machbous
17.660 ± 6.770a
60.880 ± 15.570ab
402.730 ± 81.010bc
109.010 ± 21.930cd
13.760 ± 4.780abc
Meat harese 13.750 ± 1.090a
43.710 ± 3.940a
211.410 ± 74.750ab
57.690 ± 5.920b
11.890 ± 1.040ab
Chicken harese 28.410 ± 12.720ab
39.920 ± 1.310a
374.800 ± 96.800b
48.660 ± 1.520ab
14.100 ± 0.550abc
Meat salona 32.580 ± 26.260ab
68.300 ± 26.680abc
355.830 ± 195.830b
18.220 ± 4.540a
12.760 ± 3.920ab
Maleh 170.870 ± 36.070c
136.440 ± 11.470d
1414.110 ± 131.430d
108.390 ± 23.960cd
21.410 ± 2.680bc
Ragag 37.930 ± 8.330ab
158.650 ± 3.000d
574.210 ± 60.940c
171.530 ± 7.660e
51.420 ± 0.880e
Gurus 22.310 ± 6.080ab
90.730 ± 49.830bc
293.490 ± 96.730b
118.290 ± 52.120cd
34.200 ± 17.790d
Legemat 46.970 ± 25.820b
95.560 ± 25.650c
319.470 ± 237.770b
145.220 ± 46.450de
22.930 ± 2.730c
Balaleet 18.790 ± 0.690a
66.100 ± 6.440abc
49.970 ± 17.990a
52.700 ± 12.250ab
9.420 ± 4.810a
1
Data are expressed as mg/100 g on a fresh weight basis.
2
Different letters in a column denote significant differences, p < .05.
533
Downloaded by [UAE University], [Hosam M. Habib] at 08:37 11 November 2011

10. 534 H. M. Habib et al.
TABLE 4 Micronutrient (Essential Trace Elements) Composition of United Arab Emirates
Traditional Dishes1,2
Dish Fe Zn Cu Mn
Meat
machbous
1.110 ± 0.440abc
0.650 ± 0.360ab
0.080 ± 0.010ab
0.230 ± 0.030ab
Chicken
machbous
0.630 ± 0.250ab
0.090 ± 0.030ab
0.090 ± 0.030ab
0.230 ± 0.080ab
Meat harese 0.630 ± 0.170ab
0.630 ± 0.180ab
0.040 ± 0.010a
0.430 ± 0.080bc
Chicken harese 0.370 ± 0.060a
0.620 ± 0.350ab
0.050 ± 0.010a
0.280 ± 0.020ab
Meat salona 0.770 ± 0.290abc
1.160 ± 0.500cd
0.050 ± 0.000a
0.060 ± 0.010a
Maleh 1.270 ± 0.100bcd
1.400 ± 0.480d
0.470 ± 0.050d
0.110 ± 0.030a
Ragag 2.060 ± 0.150de
1.000 ± 0.320bcd
0.160 ± 0.080bc
1.630 ± 0.260e
Gurus 1.610 ± 0.650cde
0.770 ± 0.310abc
0.130 ± 0.070abc
1.020 ± 0.340d
Legemat 2.200 ± 1.400e
0.800 ± 0.500abc
0.130 ± 0.030abc
0.640 ± 0.130c
Balaleet 1.270 ± 0.510bcd
0.500 ± 0.020a
0.180 ± 0.120c
0.240 ± 0.020ab
1
Data are expressed as mg/100 g on a fresh weight basis.
2
Different letters in a column denote significant differences, p < .05.
TABLE 5 Micronutrient (Possibly Essential Trace Elements) Composition of United Arab
Emirates Traditional Dishes1,2
Dish Al Cr V Sr
Meat machbous 2.610 ± 3.220b
0.006 ± 0.000a
0.001 ± 0.000ab
0.176 ± 0.140ab
Chicken
machbous
0.480 ± 0.190a
0.009 ± 0.000a
0.001 ± 0.000ab
0.246 ± 0.130ab
Meat harese 0.130 ± 0.120a
0.003 ± 0.000a
0.000 ± 0.000a
0.081 ± 0.012a
Chicken harese 0.260 ± 0.300a
0.001 ± 0.000a
0.000 ± 0.000a
0.174 ± 0.110ab
Meat salona 0.460 ± 0.060a
0.003 ± 0.000a
0.001 ± 0.000ab
0.364 ± 0.220b
Maleh 7.690 ± 0.800c
0.014 ± 0.000a
0.000 ± 0.000a
0.632 ± 0.370c
Ragag 0.450 ± 0.410a
0.008 ± 0.000a
0.000 ± 0.000a
0.378 ± 0.030b
Gurus 0.260 ± 0.100a
0.069 ± 0.090a
0.000 ± 0.000a
0.285 ± 0.130ab
Legemat 0.280 ± 0.050a
0.019 ± 0.010a
0.002 ± 0.000b
0.198 ± 0.040ab
Balaleet 0.250 ± 0.090a
0.020 ± 0.010a
0.001 ± 0.000ab
0.109 ± 0.040a
1
Data are expressed as mg/100 g on a fresh weight basis.
2
Different letters in a column denote significant differences, p < .05.
respectively) in Kuwaiti ragag bread. Higher levels of P, K, and Mg in ragag
bread compared to gurus is due to higher content of whole wheat flour
which is commonly used in ragag. As expected, maleh contained the highest
level of sodium.
Trace elements were generally low in the dishes studied (tables 4 and 5).
The two types of bread contained almost similar amounts of zinc, iron,
and copper; however, ragag bread had significantly higher level of man-
ganese (1.63 mg and 1.02 mg/100 g, respectively) than gurus, probably
due to whole wheat flour usually used in ragag bread. Legemat, ragag and
gurus bread contained the highest amount of iron of the dishes studied
(ranges 1.61 in gurus to 2.20 mg/100 g in legemat). The level of iron in
ragag (2.06 mg/100 g) was slightly lower than that reported for Kuwait
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

11. Traditional Dishes of the United Arab Emirates 535
(2.88 mg/100 g) (Sawaya, Al-Awadi, et al. 1998). Although, the iron and
zinc levels in the foods were low in all the dishes examined they were
higher in the flour-based dishes (ragag, gurus, legemat) (table 4). However,
it is known that bioavailability of minerals in plant-based foods are lower
compared to animal sources.
Iron deficiency anemia is a common nutrition deficiency in the U.A.E.,
especially among female college students (Sultan 2007), pregnant women
(Fareh et al. 2005), and young children (Miller et al. 2003; Miller et al.
2004), highlighting the importance of adequate iron from the commonly
consumed food items in the country. Results of the U.A.E. traditional food
analysis show levels of iron between 0.37 mg/100 g in chicken harese to
2.20 mg/100 g in legemat. Legemat is a sweet dish with high fat content and
thus cannot be considered an ideal source of iron. Iron content of legemat
was reported to be 0.80 mg/100 g in Kuwait (Dashti et al. 2004). The level
of iron in meat machbous (1.1 mg/100 g) was almost similar to that of
Kuwait dish (1.14mg/100g) and higher than Omani dish (0.54 mg/100 g;
Musaiger 1998). On the other hand, U.A.E. chicken machbous dish had
lower iron levels compared to those reported in studies conducted in Qatar
(1.3 mg/100 g), Kuwait (1 mg/100 g), and Bahrain (0.92 mg/100 g) but was
higher than that reported for the Omani dish (0.4 mg/100 g; Musaiger 2006).
These results show that although similar traditional dishes may be con-
sumed in Arab gulf countries, there is variability in nutrient values of these
foods.
Further analyses were carried out to determine the levels of possi-
bly essential trace elements in the traditional dishes (table 5). All dishes
contained similar levels of Cr, while maleh and meat machbous had sig-
nificantly higher levels of aluminum compared to other foods, 7.69 and
2.61 mg/100 g respectively. The level of Sr in the dishes was highest in
maleh (0.632 mg/100 g) and lowest in meat harese (0.081 mg/100 g).
The number of carbohydrate, protein, and fat exchanges calculated
from the macronutrient values obtained during the proximate analysis in
100 g of each of the 10 dishes are shown in table 6. All dishes contained
at least one exchange of starch except meat salona and maleh. Legemat,
a sweet dish contained the highest number of carbohydrate exchanges.
Chicken harese contained less than 4 g of protein per 100 g portion and thus
was too small to be counted as a source of protein exchanges. Legemat, a
fried dish contained the highest number of fat exchanges while meat mach-
bous, chicken machbous, meat harese, chicken harese, and ragag bread
contained less than one-half of fat exchanges per 100-g portions.
In addition to the number of carbohydrate, protein, and fat exchanges,
the amount of the dish that would provide one exchange of carbohydrate,
protein or fat was calculated based on the macronutrient composition of
each dish. As expected, smaller food portions of the dishes with high
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

12. 536 H. M. Habib et al.
TABLE 6 Meal Planning Exchange Lists for 10 United Arab Emirates Traditional Dishes
Macronutrients
(g/100 g)
Number of
Exchanges per 100 g
food
Amount of food that
provides 1
exchange (g)
Dish CHO Protein Fat CHO Protein Fat CHO Protein Fat
Meat machbous 25.3 6.7 2.3 11
/2 1 ∗
59 104 217
Chicken machbous 23.9 6.1 2.6 11
/2 1 ∗
63 113 185
Meat harese 13.7 4.0 2.5 1 1 ∗
109 175 200
Chicken harese 14.3 3.3 1.4 1 ∗ ∗
105 212 357
Meat salona 4.1 7.8 5.1 ∗
1 1 366 137 98
Maleh Traces 23.6 4.4 ∗
3 1 ∗∗
30 114
Ragag 76.8 10.9 1.2 5 1 ∗
20 64 417
Gurus 48.6 7.1 4.0 3 1 1 31 99 125
Legemat 42.1 7.8 15.5 3 1 3 36 90 32
Balaleet 33.8 4.6 3.6 2 1 1
/2 44 152 139
∗
Too small to be counted.
∗∗
Does not contain carbohydrates.
carbohydrate, protein, or fat content would provide one starch, meat, or
fat exchanges, respectively (table 6). The calculated exchange lists from the
proximate analysis will assist dietitians in designing culturally appropriate
meal plans for Emirati citizens, especially those with diabetes. Moreover, it
will assist persons with diabetes to monitor food portions of these traditional
dishes for effective diabetes management.
Evaluation of the nutritional composition of traditional foods is essential
in order to accurately estimate population dietary intakes (Harrison 2004)
and identify the role of these foods on health and disease prevention. The
present study determined the proximate composition and mineral content
of 10 common U.A.E. traditional foods.
The main limitation of the study is that only the proximate composition
and selected minerals involving a limited number of U.A.E. traditional dishes
were examined. Moreover, since the foods were commercially prepared
proportions of the individual ingredients of the dishes are not available.
We provided individual ingredient amounts available from the literature
(table 1); however, relevant information for all the dishes we analyzed is
not available. Furthermore, there are variations in ingredient proportions
and preparation methods among traditional dishes from various countries in
the Arabian Gulf region.
Finally, the fatty acid profiles of the dishes were not analyzed in this
study. In spite of these limitations, this study contributes to the existing litera-
ture on food composition of the Arab Gulf countries by providing proximate
composition and mineral content of 10 U.A.E. traditional foods. Furthermore,
meal planning exchange lists from the results of the chemical analysis of the
dishes were calculated to assist in diabetes meal planning.
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

13. Traditional Dishes of the United Arab Emirates 537
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The findings of this study will be useful in calculating nutrient contributions
from common traditional dishes in the U.A.E. and have potential useful
applications in planning normal and therapeutic diets. Further research
on the nutritional contributions of other commonly consumed traditional
dishes in the U.A.E. is needed. Future studies should also examine the
fatty acid profiles of U.A.E. traditional dishes given the high prevalence of
cardiovascular disease in the country (Department of Preventive Medicine
2006).
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thank students and laboratory staff who
contributed to the chemical and statistical analysis.
REFERENCES
Al-Jebrin, A., W. Sawaya, J. Salji, M. Ayaz, and J. Khalil, J. 1983. Chemical and
nutritional quality of some Saudi Arabian dishes based on cereals and legumes.
I. Proximate composition, amino acid content and nutritive value. Ecology of
Food and Nutrition 17:157.
Al-Nagdy, S. A., A. A. Sawsan, and A. O. Musaiger. 1994. Chemical assessment of
some traditional Qatari dishes. Journal of Food Chemistry 49:261–264.
Association of Official Analytical Chemists. 2003. Official methods of analyses.
Washington, DC: Association of Official Analytical Chemists.
Besbes, S., C. Blecker, C. Deroanne, N. E. Drira, and H. Attia. 2004. Date seeds:
Chemical composition and characteristic profiles of the lipid fraction. Journal
of Food Chemistry 84:577–585.
Dashti, B. H., F. Al-Awadi, M. S. Khalafawi, S. Al-Zenki, and W. Sawaya. 2001.
Nutrient contents of some traditional Kuwaiti dishes: Proximate composition,
and phytate content. Journal of Food Chemistry 74:169–175
Dashti, B., F. Al-Awadi, R. AlKandari, A. Ali, and J. Al-Otaibi. 2004. Macro- and
microelements contents of 32 Kuwaiti composite dishes. Journal of Food
Chemistry 85:331–337.
Department of Preventive Medicine. 2006. Annual Report 2004. Abu Dhabi, UAE:
Ministry of Health.
El-Shurafa, M. Y., H. S. Ahmed, and S. E. Abou-Naji. 1982. Organic and inorganic
constituent of dates palm pit (seeds). Journal of Date Palm 2:275–284.
Fareh, O. I., D. E. Rizk, L. Thomas, and B. Berg. 2005. Obstetric impact of anaemia in
pregnant women in United Arab Emirates. Journal of Obstetrician Gynecology
25 (5): 440–444.
Franz M. J., P. Barr, H. Holler, M. A. Powers, M. L. Wheeler, and J. Wylie-Rosett.
1987. Exchange lists: Revised 1986. Journal of the American Dietetic Association
87:28–34.
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011

14. 538 H. M. Habib et al.
Harrison, G. G. 2004. Fostering data quality in food composition databases:
Applications and implications for public health. Journal of Food Composition
and Analysis 17:259–265.
Heckman, M. 1971. Collaborative study of copper in feeds by atomic absorption
spectrophotometry. Journal of the Association of Official Analytical Chemists
54:666–668.
International Diabetes Federation. 2009. Diabetes atlas. http://www.idf.org/latest-
diabetes-figures-paint-grim-global-picture (accessed April 28, 2011).
Malik, M., A. Bakir, A., B. Abi Saab, and H. King. 2005. Glucose intolerance and asso-
ciated factors in the multi-ethnic population of the United Arab Emirates: Results
of a national survey Journal of Diabetes Clinical Practice 69 (2): 188–195.
Miller, C. J., E. V. Dunn, S. F. Abdouni, H. M. Shaheen, and M. S. Ullah. 2004.
Factors associated with iron depletion and iron deficiency anemia among Arabic
preschool children of the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Medical Journal 25 (7):
843–847.
Miller, C. J., E. V. Dunn, B. Berg, and S. F. Abdouni. 2003. A hematological survey of
preschool children of the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Medical Journal 24(6):
609–613.
Musaiger, A. O., M. A. Ahmed, and M. V. Rao.1998. Chemical composition of some
traditional dishes of Oman. Journal of Food Chemistry 61:17–22.
Musaiger, A., and Z. Al-Dallal. 1985. Food composition tables for use in Bahrain.
1st ed. Bahrain: Ministry of Health.
Musaiger, A. O. 2006. Food composition tables for Arab Gulf countries (Gulffoods).
Manama, Bahrain: Arab Center for Nutrition.
Sawaya, W., F. Al-Awadhi, A. Al-Rashdan, B. T. Hahjoub, and H. Al Amiri. 1998.
Nutritional profile of Kuwaiti composite dishes: Minerals and vitamins. Journal
of Food Composition & Analysis 11:70–88.
Sawaya, W., F. Al-Awadi, N. Eid, and B. Dashti. 1998. Food composition, Kuwaiti
composite dishes. 1st ed. Kuwait: Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research.
Sultan, A. H. 2007. Anemia among female college students attending the University
of Sharjah, UAE: Prevalence and classification. Journal of Egypt Public Health
Association 82 (3–4): 261–271.
Wheeler, M. L., M. Franz, P. Barrier, H. Holler, N. Cornmiller, and L. Delahanty.
1996. Macronutrient and energy database for 1995 exchange system for meal
planning: A rationale for clinical practice decisions. Journal of the American
Dietetic Association 96:1167–1171.
Downloaded
by
[UAE
University],
[Hosam
M.
Habib]
at
08:37
11
November
2011