Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Mendoza, C. et al.

Mendoza, Viteri, Lönnerdal, Raboy, Young, Brown,

Absorption of iron from unmodified maize and genetically altered, low-phytate maize fortified with ferrous sulfate or sodium iron EDTA.

BACKGROUND: Reducing the phytate content in grains by genetic manipulation is a novel approach to increasing nonheme-iron absorption from mixed diets. Fractional iron absorption from a genetically modified strain of low-phytate maize (LPM) increased significantly, by 50%. OBJECTIVE: We assessed iron absorption from porridges prepared from the same LPM (lpa-1-1 mutant) and unmodified wild-type maize (WTM), both of which were fortified with either ferrous sulfate or sodium iron EDTA. DESIGN: Porridges providing 3.4 mg Fe were fortified with either ferrous sulfate or sodium iron EDTA to provide an additional 1 mg Fe/serving. In 14 nonanemic women, iron absorption was measured as the amount of radioiron incorporated into red blood cells (extrinsic tag method) 12 d after consumption of the study diets. RESULTS: No significant effect of phytate content on iron absorption was found when porridge was fortified with either sodium iron EDTA or ferrous sulfate. Fractional absorption of iron from WTM porridge fortified with sodium iron EDTA (5.73%) was 3.39 times greater than that from the same porridge fortified with ferrous sulfate (1.69%). Fractional absorption of iron from the sodium iron EDTA-fortified LPM porridge (5.40%) was 2.82 times greater than that from LPM porridge fortified with ferrous sulfate (1.91%) (P<0.0001 for both comparisons, repeated-measures analysis of variance). Thus, the previously identified benefit of LPM was no longer detectable when maize porridge was fortified with additional iron. CONCLUSION: Iron was absorbed more efficiently when the fortificant was sodium iron EDTA rather than ferrous sulfate, regardless of the type of maize.[1]

References

Absorption of iron from unmodified maize and genetically altered, low-phytate maize fortified with ferrous sulfate or sodium iron EDTA. Mendoza, C., Viteri, F.E., Lönnerdal, B., Raboy, V., Young, K.A., Brown, K.H. Am. J. Clin. Nutr. (2001) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.