Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-10T20:33:23.265Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Nutritive value of groundnut (Arachis hypogaea)

2.* Biological evaluation of different varieties of groundnut grown in the Punjab

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

A. K. Chopra  and
G. S. Sidhu
A. K. Chopra
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
G. S. Sidhu
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, India
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. The nutritive values of nine varieties of groundnut were determined by the nitrogen balance method in diets containing 10% protein. The results indicated that the varietal differences did not affect the biological values significantly.

2. Three varieties showing small but significant differences of approximately 5% in methionine content were further assayed for protein efficiency ration at the 10% level of protein for a period of 4 weeks. No significant differences in per were obtained, but the least significant difference that could have been detected under these conditions was approximately 8%.

Type
Research Article
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , September 1967 , pp. 583 - 586
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1967

References

Association of Official Agricultural Chemists (1960). Official Methods of Analysis, 9th ed. Washington, DC: Association of Official Agricultural Chemists.Google Scholar
Balasundaram, S., Cama, H. R., Malik, D. A. & Venkateshan, C. (1958). J. Nutr. 66, 75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Block, R. J. & Mitchell, H. H. (1946–1947). Nutr. Abstr. Rev. 16, 249.Google Scholar
Bosshardt, D. K. & Barnes, R. H. (1946). J. Nutr. 31, 13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. A. (1961). Methodology of Protein Evaluation, Nutrition Document R. 10/Add. 37, WHO/FAO/UNICEF-PAG. New York: International Nutrition Conference.Google Scholar
Chopra, A. K. & Sidhu, G. S. (1967). Br. J. Nutr. 21, 519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, R. M., Vaughan, L. & Yohe, M. (1958). J. Nutr. 64, 291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grau, C. R. (1946). J. Nutr. 32, 303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hawk, B. P., Oser, L. B. & Summerson, H. W. (1954). Practical Physiological Chemistry, 13th ed. New York: The Blakistan Co. Inc.Google Scholar
Henry, K. M. & Kon, S. K. (1957). Br. J. Nutr. 11, 305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, D. B. & Widness, K. D. (1946). J. Nutr. 31, 675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. (1923–1924). J. biol. Chem. 58, 873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. & Beadles, J. R. (1937). J. Nutr. 14, 597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H., Burroughs, W. & Beadles, J. R. (1936). J. Nutr. 11, 257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, H. H. & Carman, G. G. (1926). J. biol. Chem. 68, 183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, F. B. (1936). Feeds and Feeding, 20th ed., p. 1050. Ithaca N.Y.: Morrison Publishing Co.Google Scholar
Nirmala, P. S., Girijabai, R. & Devadass, R. P. (1966). J. Nutr. Diet. 3, 6.Google Scholar
Rao, R. G., Murthy, H. B. N. & Swaminathan, M. (1953). Bull. Cent. Fd Technol. Res. Inst., Mysore 3, 44.Google Scholar