ANFs_2.pptx it will be useful for agriculture students

Antinutritional Factors in Leguminous Vegetables
Anusha S.R.
UHS21PGM1480
Sr. M.Sc.(Hort.)
Department of Vegetable Science

1 Introduction on Antinutritional factors
2
3
4
5
6
Antinutritional factors in legumes
Impact of ANFs on health
Case Studies
Conclusion
CONTENT
Methods of reducing ANFs
21-12-2023 5

Antinutritional factors
 Anti-nutritional factors are natural or synthetic
compounds that interfere with the absorption of
nutrients.
 Defined as a chemical substance, which, when
present in human or animal food, impairs
growth and normal functioning of the body.
21-12-2023 6

21-12-2023 7
Safer limits of consumption on antinutritional factors
Antinutritional factors Safer limits Reference
Tannins 1.5-2.5g daily intake Rao and Prabhavathi 1982
Saponins 200mg daily intake Bhosale et al., 2021
Phytates 2g per day Sanchis et al., 2018
Cyanogenic glucoside 0.09 mg per body weight WHO | JECFA
Oxalate 50mg per day The Toxin Hiding in
Superfoods | Bottom Line
Inc

21-12-2023 8
Antinutrient
Tannins
Saponins
Trypsin
inhibitors
Protease
inhibitiors
Lectins
Phytic
acid
Antinutritional factors in legumes

TANNINS
 Tannins are complex, astringent and water-
soluble polyphenols
 In legumes, the condensed tannins are the
predominant polyphenols, mainly occurring in
the seed coat.
 Interfere with iron absorptions and digestive
action of trypsin and alpha-amylase.
21-12-2023 9
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 10
Effect on human health
Antinutritional
eﬀect
Enhanced
indigestibility
Mutagenic Carcinogenic
HepatotoXic
activities
They inhibit the activities of digestive enzymes, namely amylase, lipase
and proteases, and this, in turn, is responsible for lowering the nutritional
quality of the food

21-12-2023 11
PHYTIC ACID
 Also called Myo-inositol hexakis dihydrogen
phosphate, is the major storage form of P in seeds.
 The phytates form insoluble complexes with
minerals, especially essential minerals such as iron,
zinc, magnesium and calcium, exhibiting ‘chelating
effect’.
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 12
 Also called as phytohaemagglutinins due to their
ability to agglutinate red blood cells.
 Lectins reduce the bioavailability of nutrients, which
is due to direct action of lectin on digestive enzymes
thereby reducing the in vitro digestibility of proteins.
Das et al., 2022
LECTINS

21-12-2023 13
Food poisoning
Deleterious
effects on
humans
Vomiting
Bloating
Diarrhoea
Obesity
Chronic
inﬂammation
Autoimmune
diseases
Irritable bowel
disorder
Nausea
Das et al., 2022

TRYPSIN INHIBITORS AND THEIR EFFECTS
 These inhibit the activity of trypsin.
 Interfere with digestibility of dietary proteins and
reduce their utilization.
 Pancreas enlargement and growth retardation occurs
in animals by consuming it.
 The tension on the pancreas contributes to abnormal
modiﬁcations in pancreatic cells that resemble
hypertrophy and hyperplasia.
21-12-2023 14
Das et al., 2022

 Glycosides of high molecular weight mainly present in
soyabeans
 Saponins are not readily hydrolysed by the human
digestive enzymes, rather bind to small intestine cells and
reduce intestinal absorption of many nutrients.
 They act as potent inhibitors of the key enzymes in
digestion of carbohydrates, lipids and proteins.
 Absorption and activity of sterols are also inhibited,
because saponins form complexes with them.
21-12-2023 15
SAPONINS AND ITS EFFECT ON HEALTH

21-12-2023 16
CYANOGENIC GLUCOSIDE
These are Glycosides of 𝛼-hydroXynitriles
The key characteristic feature of cyanogenic glycosides is
cyanogenesis, Liberation of HCN,
Invoking cyanide poisoning.
They interfere with the iodine uptake by the thyroid gland,
decreases thyroid hormone production, thereby establishing
goitre.
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 17
Cyanide
poisoning is
expressed in
the form
Hypotension
Trachypnea
Tachycardia
Headache
Dizziness
Vomiting
Diarrhoea
Stupor
Twitching
Convulsion
Das et al., 2022

Vicine and Covicine
 These are pyrimidine glycoside
 They occur almost solely in broad beans.
 Causes hemolytic anemia (FAVISM)
 Mainly affect those who suffer from genetically
inherited glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase
deficiency.
21-12-2023 18
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 19
Conventional methods for removing ANF’S in legumes
https://krishijagran.com/featured/anti-nutritional-factors-in-pulses

21-12-2023 20
1. Dielectric heating:
• The contents of TI, tannins, saponins and IP6
can be decreased by both the radio frequency
(RF) and microwave heating treatments.
• The advantages of this include a decreases
cooking time, safety, convenience in use and
low maintenance cost.
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 21
2. Infrared heating:
 Infrared (IR) heating (micronisation)
is based on the use of electromagnetic
radiation with frequencies operating at
1.8-3.4 𝜇m (between visible and
microwave).
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 22
𝛾-Irradiation
Attempts have been made to use 𝛾-rays for
inactivation or removal of certain antinutrients in
legumes. 𝛾-Irradiation at 5 and 10 kGy on both raw
and processed soya ﬂour reduced the contents of
tannins and Trypsin inhibitors.
Bioprocessing:
This technique, based on sprouting (germination)
and incubation with enzymes or microorganisms,
is applied to reduce or eliminate antinutrients in
legumes.
Das et al., 2022

CASE STUDY - 1
The Diversity of Four Anti-nutritional Factors in Common Bean
Horticultural Plant Journal
NAAS Rating : 9.03
Shang Rui et al., (2016)
Objective:
• To detect the contents of lectin, saponin, trypsin inhibitor and phytic acid in fresh
pods of 56 selected common bean cultivars.
• To screen for low or non-toxic common bean cultivars.
12-04-2023 24

 Location : Experimental plot Jianghan University
Caidian District, Wuhan City, China
 Plant materials : 56 French bean cultivars
 Design : Randomized Block Design.
 Replication : 3
 Plot size : 10m × 1.6m
 Spacing : 0.25m × 0.85m.
Material and Methods
21-12-2023 25
Shang Rui et al., 2016

21-12-2023 26
Accession Name Source Characteristics
1 Xinshuangqingwang snap bean Jixian, Tianjin Early maturity, trailing, green pod
2 Baizi snap bean Nanning, Guangxi Medium maturity, trailing, green pod
3 Chunqiu Dazipao Liaoyang, Liaoning Medium maturity, trailing, purple pod
4 97-5 Jiadouwang Liaoyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, green pod
5 Jinlongwang Xinji, Hebei Early maturity, trailing, green pod
6 Kangre Jiadou Shijiazhuang, Hebei Early maturity, trailing, white pod
7 Honghua snap bean Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, light green pod
8 Baibulao Yangyuan, Hebei Early maturity, trailing, white pod
9 Jiulibai Wuhan, Hubei Early maturity, trailing, white pod
10 Jingdian Baifengwang Huairou, Beijing Early maturity, trailing, light green pod
11 Jinshulu 97-5 Xinji, Hebei Early maturity, trailing, light green pod
12 Jingxuan 97-5 Liaoyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, light green pod
13 Lüningbaiyun Jinzhou, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, white pod
14 Thailand Jiangdouwang 1 Wuhan, Hubei Early maturity, trailing, green pod
15 Jiulihong Shenyang, Liaoning Medium maturity, trailing, purple pod
16 Chaoji Baidajia Liaoyang, Liaoning Medium maturity, trailing, white pod
17 Teji Shilichang Liaoyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, purple pod
18 WS5 Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, light green pod
20 WS20 Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, white pod
24 WS24 Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, purple pod
26 Gailiang Jiulibai Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, white pod
27 Chunqiu Wujia snap bean Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, erection, green pod
28 Xinxuan Lülong Jiadou Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, green pod
Table 1: Sources and main characteristics of 56 cultivars of common bean

21-12-2023 27
29 Yuanzhong Didouwang Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, erection, white pod
30 Thailand Jiadouwang 2 Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, green pod
31 Jiadouwang 6 Wuhan, Hubei Medium maturity, trailing, green pod
32 Garden Bean Gold Rush America Early maturity, erection, light green pod
33 Garden Bean Blue Lake 274 America Early maturity, erection, light green pod
34 Garden Bean Blue Lake Stringless America Late maturity, trailing, green pod
35 Garden Bean Improved Tendergreen America Early maturity, erection, light green pod
36 Garden Bean Kentucky Wonder America Late maturity, trailing, green pod
37 Bean State Half Runner America Early maturity, trailing, green pod
38 Bean White Rice America Medium maturity, erection, light green pod
39 Bean Mayflower America Late maturity, trailing, light green pod
40 Bean Saint Esprit a Oeil Rouge America Medium maturity, erection, light green pod
41 Bean Contender America Medium maturity, erection, light green pod
42 Bean Royalty Purple Pods America Medium maturity, erection, purple pod
43 Cobra England Medium maturity, erection, light green pod
44 Cobra America Medium maturity, erection, light green pod
45 97-5 Jiadou Wuhan, Hubei Late maturity, trailing, green pod
46 923 Shenyang, Liaoning Late maturity, trailing, light green pod
47 Dazipao Shenyang, Liaoning Medium maturity, trailing, green pod
48 Baizi snap bean Shenyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, light green pod
49 Honghua snap bean Shenyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, light green pod
50 Zijiadouwang Shenyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, purple pod
51 Ziyu Shenyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, purple pod
52 Yundou Shenyang, Liaoning Early maturity, trailing, light green pod
53 Qiangfeng 15 Kunming, Yunnan Medium maturity, trailing, light green pod
54 Thailand Jiangdouwang 3 Kunming, Yunnan Late maturity, trailing, light green pod
55 Thailand Wujindou Kunming, Yunnan Late maturity, trailing, light green pod

21-12-2023
Accession Content of lectin
mg/g
Content of
saponin mg/g
Activity of trypsin inhibitor
mg/g
Content of phytic
acid mg/g
1 1.462 ± 0.009 2.623 ± 0.017 2.522 ± 0.027 3.215 ± 0.005
2 1.439 ± 0.001 3.144 ± 0.029 0.709 ± 0.005 2.915 ± 0.007
3 1.706 ± 0.022 3.629 ± 0.029 0.454 ± 0.007 3.067 ± 0.005
4 0.595 ± 0.011 7.449 ± 0.049 1.009 ± 0.002 2.949 ± 0.013
5 1.463 ± 0.009 4.241 ± 0.028 0.103 ± 0.001 2.797 ± 0.012
6 4.361 ± 0.004 3.697 ± 0.113 0.745 ± 0.001 2.789 ± 0.010
7 1.162 ± 0.015 3.023 ± 0.012 1.092 ± 0.002 3.115 ± 0.020
8 0.690 ± 0.066 3.471 ± 0.065 1.863 ± 0.006 3.364 ± 0.014
9 1.096 ± 0.036 5.836 ± 0.047 0.016 ± 0.001 2.941 ± 0.007
10 0.912 ± 0.027 3.367 ± 0.043 0.792 ± 0.028 2.918 ± 0.016
11 0.736 ± 0.012 4.159 ± 0.086 0.463 ± 0.001 3.007 ± 0.019
12 1.637 ± 0.017 6.105 ± 0.100 0.818 ± 0.001 2.952 ± 0.015
13 1.318 ± 0.031 4.448 ± 0.031 0.195 ± 0.004 2.971 ± 0.020
14 1.375 ± 0.009 3.792 ± 0.024 0.055 ± 0.001 3.012 ± 0.007
15 1.460 ± 0.013 4.129 ± 0.063 4.296 ± 0.051 3.714 ± 0.028
16 1.510 ± 0.021 5.231 ± 0.089 0.020 ± 0.00 1 3.039 ± 0.018
17 1.357 ± 0.041 3.948 ± 0.018 1.031 ± 0.009 3.157 ± 0.014
18 1.318 ± 0.050 2.810 ± 0.018 2.895 ± 0.011 3.640 ± 0.002
19 1.280 ± 0.036 4.057 ± 0.087 0.416 ± 0.017 3.023 ± 0.034
20 1.653 ± 0.033 7.856 ± 0.068 0.381 ± 0.002 3.105 ± 0.003
21 1.461 ± 0.006 4.153 ± 0.069 0.355 ± 0.013 2.821 ± 0.014
22 1.770 ± 0.030 3.216 ± 0.022 0.621 ± 0.005 2.876 ± 0.007
23 1.260 ± 0.003 4.913 ± 0.059 0.030 ± 0.00 3 2.918 ± 0.008
24 1.166 ± 0.013 4.041 ± 0.022 1.849 ± 0.012 2.301 ± 0.071
25 1.329 ± 0.002 3.309 ± 0.058 1.025 ± 0.007 2.065 ± 0.018
Table 2 : The results of four anti-nutritional factors levels of common bean cultivars tested in this study

21-12-2023 29
26 0.515 ± 0.010 3.942 ± 0.069 2.088 ± 0.004 2.690 ± 0.0154
27 1.338 ± 0.010 2.381 ± 0.042 0.783 ± 0.013 2.701 ± 0.007
28 0.921 ± 0.071 6.113 ± 0.085 2.294 ± 0.004 2.913 ± 0.011
29 1.454 ± 0.007 5.239 ± 0.096 2.145 ± 0.020 3.659 ± 0.030
30 1.281 ± 0.013 2.780 ± 0.055 0.199 ± 0.005 2.866 ± 0.020
31 1.279 ± 0.035 3.856 ± 0.105 0.724 ± 0.003 2.869 ± 0.004
32 1.460 ± 0.020 2.293 ± 0.015 1.807 ± 0.012 3.091 ± 0.010
33 4.999 ± 0.003 0.966 ± 0.037 0.646 ± 0.001 2.999 ± 0.005
34 1.653 ± 0.019 2.334 ± 0.016 0.591 ± 0.003 2.800 ± 0.020
35 1.707 ± 0.034 2.028 ± 0.024 0.689 ± 0.001 3.183 ± 0.024
36 1.045 ± 0.007 3.853 ± 0.044 1.011 ± 0.008 3.078 ± 0.010
37 1.540 ± 0.026 2.137 ± 0.050 1.782 ± 0.030 3.231 ± 0.006
38 9.829 ± 0.126 2.032 ± 0.054 2.500 ± 0.008 3.564 ± 0.039
39 1.229 ± 0.004 3.382 ± 0.013 1.537 ± 0.031 3.299 ± 0.016
40 10.850 ± 0.112 2.570 ± 0.043 10.000 ± 0.185 4.039 ± 0.007
41 1.337 ± 0.031 7.059 ± 0.130 7.092 ± 0.026 5.120 ± 0.053
42 1.365 ± 0.004 2.140 ± 0.034 0.331 ± 0.007 2.957 ± 0.009
43 1.736 ± 0.018 2.545 ± 0.046 1.054 ± 0.007 2.918 ± 0.015
44 4.392 ± 0.008 6.965 ± 0.032 15.947 ± 0.164 4.986 ± 0.015
45 0.025 ± 0.003 3.287 ± 0.070 0.336 ± 0.003 2.727 ± 0.041
46 1.465 ± 0.024 5.770 ± 0.039 0.194 ± 0.004 2.941 ± 0.006
47 0.900 ± 0.010 2.314 ± 0.013 1.261 ± 0.012 3.049 ± 0.003
48 1.880 ± 0.044 2.315 ± 0.035 2.925 ± 0.141 3.139 ± 0.032
49 1.372 ± 0.002 3.152 ± 0.057 2.424 ± 0.003 3.275 ± 0.006
50 1.608 ± 0.023 2.454 ± 0.066 0.622 ± 0.003 2.966 ± 0.023
51 0.673 ± 0.027 4.047 ± 0.141 2.974 ± 0.041 3.663 ± 0.010
52 1.078 ± 0.004 4.538 ± 0.035 0.753 ± 0.004 2.918 ± 0.016
53 0.429 ± 0.014 2.075 ± 0.013 1.901 ± 0.020 2.687 ± 0.013
54 0.039 ± 0.002 3.087 ± 0.013 0.362 ± 0.004 2.768 ± 0.007
55 1.718 ± 0.019 2.037 ± 0.062 0.473 ± 0.004 3.065 ± 0.007
56 0.981 ± 0.023 2.526 ± 0.012 2.851 ± 0.011 2.860 ± 0.012
Minimum 0.025 0.966 0.016 2.065
Maximum 10.850 7.856 15.947 5.120
Mean 1.743** 3.730** 1.680** 3.102**
CV/% 108.898 40.571 153.752 16.053

21-12-2023 30
INDEX Lectin Saponin
Trypsin
inhibitor
Phytic acid
Lectin 1
Saponin 0.179 1
Trypsin
inhibitor
0.466** 0.206 1
Phytic acid 0.365** 0.290* 0.789** 1
Table 3 : Correlation analysis of four anti-nutritional factors content/activity
Note: ** or * demonstrates correlated extremely significantly and significantly between the two indices

21-12-2023 31
Fig. 1 Cluster analysis of 56 cultivars of common bean based on anti-nutritional factor level
INFERENCE

Antinutritional Factors of Five Selected Underutilized Legumes
Objective: To evaluate the concentrations of the common antinutritional factors in
selected underutilized legumes.
Food Science and Quality Management
Impact Factor : 4.5
Soetan, K.O. 2018
CASE STUDY - 2
21-12-2023 32

• Location: International Institute for Tropical Agriculture (I.I.T.A), Ibadan, Nigeria.
• Plant Material Used:
 Winged bean (WB) (Psophocarpus tetragonolobus) (Tpt-48),
 Lima bean (LB) (Phaseolus lunatus) (2006- 009),
 Bambara groundnut (BG) (Vigna subterranea) (TVSU- 1482),
 Jack bean (JB) (Canavalia ensiformis) (Tce-4) and
 Sword bean (SB) (Canavalia gladiata) (Tcg-4)
21-12-2023 33
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 34
Table 4: Trypsin Inhibitors content of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged
beanTpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab
bean
Trypsin
Inhibitors
(mg/g)
24.08+ 0.02 13.76+ 0.02 29.75+ 0.04
35.79+ 0.03
39.71+ 0.04 39.5 + 0.29
to 44.8 + 0.57
 They inhibit the activity of the enzymes trypsin and chymotrypsin in the gut,
thus preventing protein digestion.
 There is also reduced nitrogen and sulfur absorption.
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 35
Table 5 : Hydrogen Cyanides content of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab bean
HCN (mg/g)
21.15+0.03 9.30+0.02 24.35+0.03 37.27+0.04 41.41+0.04 175+0.00 to
195+0.57
 Cyanogenic glucosides are hydrolysed to yield toxic hydrocyanic acid (HCN).
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 36
Table 6 : Oxalates content of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab bean
Oxalates
(%)
0.34+0.00 0.21+0.00 0.11+0.00 0.35+0.001 0.38+0.001
8.2+0.12 to
9.8+0.17
 Oxalates (oxalic acid) forms strong bonds with various other minerals like calcium,
potassium, sodium and magnesium rendering them inaccessible to the body.
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 37
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab bean
Phytates
(%)
0.57+ 0.00 0.42+ 0.00 0.24+ 0.00 0.63+ 0.001 0.69+ 0.002 13.6+0.27 to
14.4+0.06
Table 7 : Phytates content of selected Underutilized legumes
 Phytates are known to bind many minerals like calcium, iron, magnesium and zinc,
making them unavailable for normal body processes
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 38
Table 8 : Saponins content of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab bean
Saponins
(%)
0.22+0.00 0.27+0.00 0.35+0.00 0.24+0.002 0.29+0.002 11.3+0.17 to
12.1+0.06
 Saponins are reported to reduce the uptake of some nutrients.
 The structural complexity of saponins results in many of biological and chemical
properties like bitterness, foaming and emulsifying and haemolytic properties
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 39
Table 9 : Tannins content of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab
bean
Tannins
(%)
0.04+
0.00
0.07+
0.00
0.06+
0.00
0.07+
0.003
0.08+
0.003
3.5+0.84 to
4.7+0.06
• It binds with dietary protein and some digestive enzymes forming undigestible complexes.
Tannins also decreased palatability of animal feed and their growth rate.
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 40
Table 10 : Alkaloids content of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab
bean
Alkaloids
(%)
0.14+
0.00
0.15+
0.00
0.18+
0.00
0.16+
0.003
0.17+
0.003
3.7+0.15 to
6.8+0.15
• Alkaloids are reported to cause gastrointestinal and neuron disorders and they also reduce
appetite.
Soetan, K.O. 2018

21-12-2023 41
Table 11 : Haemagglutinins units of selected Underutilized legumes
Legumes
Winged bean
Tpt-48
Lima bean
2006-009
Bambara
Groundnut
TVSU-1482
Jack bean
Tce-4
Sword bean
Tcg-4
Soetan,K O
2012
Lablab
bean
Haemagluttinins
(HU/mg)
46.16+
0.02
25.27+
0.01
66.92+
0.04
62.83+
0.03
66.36+
0.02
18.7+0.17 to
28.6+0.06
• Haemagglutinins are capable of damaging the intestinal mucosa, thus reducing the permeability of
the mucosa, subsequently affecting the reabsorption of nutrients also damages the immune system.
Soetan, K.O. 2018
INFERENCE

International Journal for Innovative Research in Multidisciplinary Field
Impact factor : 7.581
Objective: To determine the effect of processing (soaking, dehulling, roasting
and germination) on the (antinutrients) phytic acid and polyphenols of the peas.
CASE STUDY - 3
21-12-2023 42
Effect of processing methods on antinutritional factors of field
pea (Pisum sativum)
Sharma et al., 2017

• This study was carried out in the Department of Foods and Nutrition, CCS Haryana
Agricultural University, Hissar (Haryana),India
• Four varieties of field pea, namely HFP-4, HFP-529, HFP-9907B and HFP-9426
Processing of field pea varieties :
 Soaking :The cleaned field pea seeds were soaked in distilled water (1:4 w/v) for 12
hours at room temperature, andthen washed and rinsed with distilled water.
Dehulling :After soaking the seeds overnight (12 hours), hulls were removed manually.
Roasting : Seeds soaked for 4 hours, sun dried and then roasted in an open pan.
Germination: Soaked seeds (12 hrs) were kept in Petridishes lined with wet filter paper
for germination in anincubator at 37ºC for 24 hours.
21-12-2023 43
Sharma et al., 2017

21-12-2023 44
Table 12: Effect of processing methods on phytic acid content of field pea varieties
(mg/100g, on dry matter basis)
Processing
Methods
Varieties
HFP-4 HFP-529 HFP-9907B HFP-9426 Mean
Control
(unprocessed) 717.3±11.62 682.7±11.62 616.0±9.24 762.7±5.33 704.66±12.75
Soaking
706.7±7.05
(-1.47)
610.7±7.05
(-10.54)
600.0 ±5.33
(-5.63)
649.3±5.81
(-14.86)
641.67±10.67
Dehulling
585.3±6.67
(-18.40)
512.2.±3.53
(-29.97)
560.0±2.67
(-9.09)
510.3.±1.33
(-33.09)
541.95±5.01
Roasting
704.0±4.62
(-1.85)
570.6±2.67
(-16.42)
600.0±2.67
(-2.59)
634.7±5.33
(-16.78)
627.10±14.34
Germination
592.0±8.0
(-17.46)
520.0±4.62
(-23.83)
570.3±11.6
(-7.46)
520.0±4.62
(-31.82)
550.57±11.74
Mean 661.06±19.98 579.24±27.72 589.26± 23.97 615.4±27.61
CD (P=0.05) Varieties: 8.65 Methods: 9.67 Interaction (Varieties X Methods): 19.34
Sharma et al., 2017

21-12-2023 45
Fig. 2 : Per cent decrease in phytic acid content during different processing
methods
9.09
33.09
1.85
16.78
7.46
31.82
1.47
14.86
Sharma et al., 2017

21-12-2023 46
Table 13: Effect of processing methods on polyphenols content of field pea varieties
(mg/100g, on dry matter basis)
Processing
Methods
Varieties
HFP-4 HFP-529 HFP-9907B HFP-9426 Mean
Control
(unprocessed)
162.15±1.11 185.48±4.44 139.94±3.84 165.49±1.11 163.26±5.04
Soaking
141.05±1.11
(-13.02)
168.82±2.22
(-8.98)
127.72±1.11
(-8.73)
152.16±1.11
(-8.05)
147.43±4.59
Dehulling
113.29±3.33
(-30.13)
147.72±2.22
(-20.36)
102.18±2.22
(-26.98)
118.84±2.22
(-28.18)
120.51±5.18
Roasting
148.83±2.94
(-8.21)
173.26±1.92
(-6.58)
125.50±4.84
(-10.31)
145.49±2.21
(-12.08)
148.27±5.29
Germination
123.28±3.33
(-23.97)
149.94±3.33
(-19.16)
121.06±2.22
(-13.49)
139.94±1.92
(-15.43)
133.55±3.79
Mean 137.72±4.79 165.04±3.99 123.28±3.49 144.38±4.16
CD (P=0.05) Varieties: 3.42 Methods: 3.82 Interaction (Varieties X Methods): 7.64
Sharma et al., 2017

21-12-2023 47
Fig. 3 : Per cent decrease in polyphenol content during different processing methods
20.36
30.13
23.96
15.43
6.58
12.08
8.05
10.02
Sharma et al., 2017
INFERENCE

Nigerian Food Journal
NAAS Rating : 6.29
Enzymatic Reduction of Anti-nutritional Factors in Fermenting Soybeans
by Lactobacillus plantarum Isolates from Fermenting Cereals
Objective : To use microorganisms, specifically Lactobacillus plantarum and the
enzymes it produces to reduce anti-nutritional factors and improve the nutritional
composition.
Adeyemo and Onilude (2013)
CASE STUDY - 4
21-12-2023 48

• Nine strains of Lactobacillus plantarum isolated from spontaneously fermenting
cereals, identified and were selected based on the abundant production of alpha-
galactosidase for the fermentation of the legume.
• Samples were subjected to fermentation for 5 days and the reduction of anti-nutritional
factors was monitored.
• Anti-nutritional factors and alpha-galactosidase were determined by
UV-spectrophotometry
21-12-2023 49

21-12-2023 50
Table 14 : Production of a-Galactosidase enzyme (Unit/ml) by selected L. plantarum isolates
Isolate code Conc (units/ml)
L. plantarum TV 1 *1.114 ± 0.020
L. plantarum TV 2 1.102 ± 0.003
L. plantarum TV 3 1.108 ± 0.025
*L. plantarum Lv1 1.818 ± 0.002
*L. plantarum Lv2 1.820 ± 0.025
*L. plantarum Lv3 1.805 ± 0.010
L. plantarum Co1 1.217 ± 0.020
*All value recorded are means of replicate determination +SE
• LV1, LV2, LV3 – L. plantarum selected for fermentation.

21-12-2023 51
Table 15 : Anti-nutritional factors (mg/g) in the milled soybeans after the pre-treatment of the
samples and fermentation for 5 days
A.N.F.
Raw (Day 0)
(Before Fermentation)
Cooked Roasted
Fermented with
L.plantarum
isolates (Day 5)
Tannin 1.93 + 0.19a 1.12 + 0.02c 0.49 + 0.12d 0.120 + 0.05e
Phytate 1.16 + 0.05a 0.28 + 0.02c 0.25 + 0.03d 0.047 + 0.03e
Trypsin Inhibitor 1.20 + 0.12a 0.05 + 0.05c 0.02 + 0.25d 0.010 + 0.02e
Protease Inhibitor 1.20 + 0.02a 0.05 + 0.05c 0.03 + 0.03d 0.020 + 0.03e

21-12-2023 52
Table 16: Nutritional analysis of milled soybean samples before and after fermentation with L. plantarum
Parameters Raw Roasted Cooked
Roasted and fermented
with L. plantarum
Moisture content % *11.2 + 0.02 8.7 + 0.14 48.8 + 0.20 42.1 + 0.20
Protein % 30.5 + 0.25 31.8 + 0.10 17.3 + 0.10 33.2 + 0.20
Ether extract (Fat) % 22.1 + 0.10 23.4 + 0.25 12.9 + 0.03 14.1 + 0.20
Ash % 4.3 + 0.02 4.5 + 0.03 2.7 + 0.25 1.3 + 0.02
Crude fibre % 2.9 + 0.05 3.1 + 0.03 1.8 + 0.22 1.2 + 0.10
Carbohydrate (by difference) % 29.0 + 0.02 28.5 + 0.02 16.5 + 0.14 8.1 + 0.11
Ascorbic Acid (mg/100 g) 18.3 + 0.03 6.5 + 0.05 12.8 + 0.50 16.3 + 0.14
Reducing sugar % 1.1 + 0.02 0.4 + 0.05 0.5 + 0.50 0.8 + 0.15
Total sugar % 2.4 + 0.10 1.2 + 0.02 1.5 + 0.10 1.8 + 0.14
Thiamine (mg/100 g) 1.0 + 0.10 0.4 + 0.25 0.5 + 0.05 1.8 + 0.33
Riboflavin (mg/100 g) 0.5 + 0.05 0.2 + 0.25 0.3 + 0.50 0.8 + 0.33
Niacin (mg/100 g) 2.2 + 0.25 1.6 + 0.25 1.2 + 0.14 2.7 + 0.13
Ca++(mg/100 g) 175 + 0.05 170+ 0.33 145 + 0.03 180 + 0.30
Fe++ (mg/100 g) 5.5 + 0.02 4.3 + 0.33 4.0 + 0.33 4.9 + 0.30
P04 ++ (mg/100 g) 280 + 0.10 275 + 0.33 220 + 0.25 285 + 0.25
inference

CASE STUDY - 5
Food Research
Impact factor: 1.169
Effects of cooking on antinutrients and antioxidant properties of different
accessions of winged bean (Psophocarpus tetragonolobus)
Objective: To examine the effects of cooking on the antinutrients and antioxidant
potentials of five different accessions of winged bean.
Maimako et al., 2022
12-04-2023 53

• Location : College of Agricultural Sciences, Landmark University, Omu-Aran (Nigeria).
• Material : Five distinct varieties of P. tetragonolobus consisting of one indigenous (designated as local) and
four improved varieties (designated: Tpt- 11, Tpt-31, Tpt-125, and Tpt-154)
• Samples of the five varieties raw and cooked were represented thus;
 Local Raw (LR);
 Local Cooked (LC);
 Tpt-11 Raw (T11R);
 Tpt-11 Cooked (T11C);
 Tpt-31 Raw (T31R);
 Tpt-31 Cooked (T31C);
 Tpt-125 Raw (T125R);
 Tpt-125Cooked (T125C);
 Tpt-154 Raw (T154R) and
 Tpt-154 Cooked (T154C).
21-12-2023 54

21-12-2023 55
Figure 4. Effect of cooking on phytate concentration in five different varieties of P. tetragonolobus.
* - significant difference.
8.77
3.00

21-12-2023 56
Figure 5. Effect of cooking on cyanogenic glycoside content in five different varieties of P.
tetragonolobus. LOCAL – indigenous variety, T11, T31, T125, T154 (improved variety),
462.80
170.50

21-12-2023 57
Figure 6. Effect of cooking on phenolic content in five different varieties of
P. tetragonolobus. LOCAL – indigenous variety, T11, T31, T125, T154 (improved variety),
0
100
200
300
400
500
Samples
m
g
(G
A
E
)/g
LOCAL
T11
T31
T125
T154
*
1 = raw
2 = cooked
2
1 1 2 2
1 1 2 1 2
28.63
402.90

21-12-2023 58
Figure 7. Effect of cooking on tannin content in five different varieties of P. tetragonolobus.
402.10
92.75

21-12-2023 59
Figure 8. Effect of cooking on % DPPH in five different varieties of P. tetragonolobus.
31.85
95.56

21-12-2023 60
• Data obtained showed that the cooking process reduced the phytate, cyanogenic
glycosides and tannin levels in the T11 variety while only the tannin level in T125 variety
was significantly reduced. However, theantioxidant activity of P.tetragonolobus was not
significantly impacted by cooking.
inference

21-12-2023 61
Conclusion
 Legumes being nutrient-dense and offering various health benefits are widely
recognised as a healthy dietary choice
 Antinutritional factors in legumes may have some negative effects on nutrient
absorption and utilization
 Fortunately, antinutritional factors in legumes can be reduced by proper
processing methods. Additionally, it is important to note that these factors may
also have potential health benefits.
 However, it’s crucial to consider individual dietary requirments, sensitivites,
and proper preparation methods while consuming legumes.

21-12-2023 63
Is there any benificial effects of ANFs???

21-12-2023 64
Phytic
acid
Antidiabetic
Litholytic
Anticarcinogenic
Antioxidative
Vicine
and
covicine
Antimalarial
Antiarrhythmics
Antitumour
Anti-
inﬂammatory
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 65
Antimicrobial
Antitumour
Antibacterial
Antiglycemic
Insecticidal
Antioxidative
Lectins
Anti-
inﬂammatory
Antiallergic
Antibacterial
Anthelmintic
Antidiabetic
AntioXidative
Tannins
Das et al., 2022

21-12-2023 66
Saponi
n
Antibacterial
Insecticidal
Molluscicidal
activities
Antiprotozoal
Anti
cholesteremic
Enzyme inhibitor
Protease inhibitors
Have
anticarcinogenic
properties
Amylase inhibitors
Are used to control
diabetes mellitus
Das et al., 2022

ANFs_2.pptx it will be useful for agriculture students

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ANFs_2.pptx it will be useful for agriculture students

Similar to ANFs_2.pptx it will be useful for agriculture students (20)

More from Moksha34

More from Moksha34 (8)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ANFs_2.pptx it will be useful for agriculture students