4.6 Article

Folate content of Norwegian and Swedish flours and bread analysed by use of liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

Journal

JOURNAL OF FOOD COMPOSITION AND ANALYSIS
Volume 22, Issue 7-8, Pages 649-656

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jfca.2009.02.007

Keywords

Folate; Vitamin; Flour; Bread; Cereal products; Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry; Folate determination; Norway; Sweden; Food analysis; Food composition

Funding

  1. Norwegian Research Council
  2. Natural Resources and Agriculture, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS) was used to determine folate profiles for various flours and bread from Norway and Sweden. The following ranges in total folate (expressed in mu g folic acid equivalents/100 g fresh weight (FW)) were found in Norwegian/Swedish samples: sifted wheat flour (14-20/4-7), wholegrain wheat flour (34-47/20-40), wheat bran (94/109), sifted rye flour(12-30/26-31),wholegrain rye flour (23-50/48-79), rolled oats (21/26), oat bran (27/46), soft bread (17-33/14-40), and crisp bread (40-80, all from Sweden). Generally, Norwegian sifted and wholegrain wheat flours were richer in folate compared with Swedish samples. Conversely, Swedish rye flours were richer in folate than Norwegian samples. Folate content in bread was slightly higher in Swedish samples, especially for crisp bread. The major folate forms found in cereals were 5-HCO-H(4)folate, 10-HCO-H(4)folate and 5-CH(3)-H(4)folate. A higher content of 5-CH(3)-H(4)folate was found in bread than in flour, due to yeast; indeed, 45-70% of the folate found in bread was estimated to originate from baker's yeast. Among the breads, those with the highest folate content were crisp bread made from rye and yeast. Most soft breads were moderate folate sources, even though they were baked with wholemeal flours. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available