↓ Skip to main content

Nutritional quality of the protein in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa, Willd) seeds

Overview of attention for article published in Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, January 1992
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#22 of 747)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
13 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
4 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
155 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
230 Mendeley
Title
Nutritional quality of the protein in quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa, Willd) seeds
Published in
Plant Foods for Human Nutrition, January 1992
DOI 10.1007/bf02196067
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jenny Ruales, Baboo M. Nair

Abstract

The nutritional quality of protein in quinoa seeds has been determined by amino acid assay and by animal feeding experiments. The amino acid composition of the protein in raw quinoa and washed quinoa show similar pattern. The first limiting amino acids were the aromatic amino acids thyrosine + phenylalanine giving a chemical score of 86 for protein in raw quinoa and 85 for protein in washed quinoa. Threonine was the next limiting amino acid followed by lysine. The amount of lysine and sulfur amino acids (methionine + cystine) was relatively high. In general, the content of essential amino acids in quinoa is higher than in common cereals. The animal experiments showed NPU values of 75.7, BV of 82.6 and TD value of 91.7 for the protein in raw quinoa. Results of the in-vitro enzymatic methods showed that the digestibility of the protein in quinoa is comparable to that of other high quality food proteins. The corresponding experiments carried out with samples of guinoa seeds, which have been processed to remove the saponins, showed that, the saponins do not exert any negative effect on the nutritive quality of the protein.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 13 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 230 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 <1%
Chile 1 <1%
Argentina 1 <1%
Unknown 226 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 39 17%
Student > Master 35 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 13%
Researcher 28 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 35 15%
Unknown 52 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 69 30%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 9%
Engineering 21 9%
Chemistry 10 4%
Chemical Engineering 7 3%
Other 39 17%
Unknown 63 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 56. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 August 2023.
All research outputs
#751,585
of 25,339,932 outputs
Outputs from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#22
of 747 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#274
of 63,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Plant Foods for Human Nutrition
#2
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,339,932 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 747 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 63,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.