Food & Nutrition

Arab Journal of Food & Nutrition
18. The Nutritional Quality of Some Locally Marketed Cereal and Milk-Based
Infant Foods (1995)
Lina Zuheir Rushdi Al-Juneidi\ University of Jordan
Supervisor: Dr. Salma K. Tukan
This study was earned out to investigate the nutritional quality of six locally
marketed cereal and milk-based infant food brands (A, B, C, D, E, and F). Crude
protein, crude fat, ash, crude fiber and moisture contents were determined, the
composition of the different infant food brands varied. Four of them complied with the
specified limits set by the Jordanian Standards (JS), and two brands (E and F) were of
lower protein contents (11.1 % and 10.2 % respectively) than the specified limits.
Chemical composition determined for most infant food brands tended to agree with
that declared on the label except for minerals.
Reducing and non-reducing sugars were determined. The results showed that all
the studied brands contain high amounts of sugars, particularly brand F which contains
24% non-reducing sugars, and 36% total Sugars.
Mineral and vitamin contents were also determined. Although the results of
mineral analyses showed a wide variation among different infant food brands, most
brands were good sources of most minerals except calcium, iron and zinc.
The results of vitamin analyses indicated that all tested brands are considered
good sources of thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin C and vitamin A. However, brand
B had high amounts of vitamin A (12520 IU/100g) about ten times greater than the
declared value.
Protein quality of the five brands (A, B, C, D and E) were determined using net
protein utilization (NPU), net dietary protein energy percentage (NDpE %) and protein
digestibility coefficient. The results indicated that brand A has the highest values for
NPU (op), NPU (st), and NDpE % (85.9, 91.4, and 8.6 respectively). Brands A and C
had significantly higher values than casein (80.3, 91 .0 and 8.2 for brand C and 73.7,
83.9, 7.9 for casein respectively); the values for brand D were comparable to casein
and brands B and E had lower values than casein (52.4, 56.7, and 5.4 for brand B and
52.0, 56.6 and 5.5 for brand E respectively).
NDpE % values indicated that brands A, C, and D) were suitable for infant
feeding, while brands B and E cannot be depended upon as a single food for infant
feeding. Protein digestibility coefficient was high for all brands (ranged from 87.4 to
94.4), but with significant differences among the brands.
According to the calculated index of nutritional quality (INQ) and animal
experimentation, three of the six brands can be considered nutritious and of good
protein quality.
164
Volume 11, No. 25, 2011
165