Tormási Judit, Benes Eszter, Kónya Éva Lengyel, Berki Mária, Abrankó László
Institute of Food Science and Technology, Department of Food Chemistry and Analysis, Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences (MATE), Budapest, Hungary.
Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 18;15(1):9388. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-94072-4.
A comprehensive overview of commercially available protein bars, focusing on their protein content, protein source(s) and nutritional composition. Four protein bars were selected based on the quality of their protein sources; (i) plant only (pea and rice); (ii) animal only (milk proteins); (iii) mix of animal (milk and egg) and plant (soy); (iv) mix of animal (milk and collagen) and plant (soy) to assess the relationship between protein sources and protein nutritional quality. Data analysis was conducted on data from an online consumer-generated database (OpenFoodFacts.org). Indeces of protein nutritional quality, DIAAS and PDCAAS, were determined after in vitro digestion simulation using the Infogest method. Of the 1641 bars, 81% had sufficient protein to be classified as "high in protein" (protein content > 20E%). However, the results show that lower protein digestibility values (between 47 and 81%) were measured when the proteins were included as a component of the protein bar matrix than when the digestibility of the same proteins was evaluated in a pure format. All measured in vitro-DIAAS and PDCAAS values were relatively low with the highest DIAAS = 61(Trp) and PDCAAS = 62(Trp) obtained for a protein bar containing only milk proteins (WPC, MPC). Although most protein bars are labelled 'high in protein', their protein nutritional quality could be very low based on DIAAS. The low numbers are most probably due to application of lower-nutritional-quality proteins (such as collagen) and of other ingredients such as carbohydrates, fats and fibres, that might deteriorate the bioaccessibility of essential amino acids.
对市售蛋白棒的全面概述，重点关注其蛋白质含量、蛋白质来源和营养成分。根据蛋白质来源的质量选择了四种蛋白棒：(i) 仅植物源（豌豆和大米）；(ii) 仅动物源（乳蛋白）；(iii) 动物源（牛奶和鸡蛋）与植物源（大豆）的混合；(iv) 动物源（牛奶和胶原蛋白）与植物源（大豆）的混合，以评估蛋白质来源与蛋白质营养质量之间的关系。数据分析基于在线消费者生成的数据库（OpenFoodFacts.org）中的数据进行。使用Infogest方法进行体外消化模拟后，确定了蛋白质营养质量指标DIAAS和PDCAAS。在1641种蛋白棒中，81%含有足够的蛋白质，可被归类为“高蛋白”（蛋白质含量>20E%）。然而，结果表明，当蛋白质作为蛋白棒基质的成分时，测得的蛋白质消化率值较低（在47%至81%之间），而当以纯形式评估相同蛋白质的消化率时则较高。所有测得的体外DIAAS和PDCAAS值都相对较低，仅含乳蛋白（乳清浓缩蛋白、乳清分离蛋白）的蛋白棒获得的最高DIAAS = 61（色氨酸）和PDCAAS = 62（色氨酸）。尽管大多数蛋白棒都标有“高蛋白”标签，但基于DIAAS，它们的蛋白质营养质量可能非常低。这些低数值很可能是由于使用了营养质量较低的蛋白质（如胶原蛋白）以及其他成分，如碳水化合物、脂肪和纤维，这些成分可能会降低必需氨基酸的生物可及性。
