Resumen

Objective: To identify, fro m a sample of 24 species, the marine fish which are beneficial for kidney patients by evaluating the relationship phosphorus (P): n-3 fatty acids (n-3 FA). Materials and methods: 15 fishes per species were randomly selected, filleted and homogenized in order to obtain 100 g of sample; then, chemical analysis were performed in triplicate (n=3) according to AOAC techniques. Crude protein (Cp) was analyzed in automatic Kjeltec equipment. Potassium and calcium were analyzed by atomic absorption, and phosphorus was analyzed by UV/Visible spectrophotometer. Results: The values of (Pr) ranged fro m 15 g/100g-fillet (pompano) to 28.21 g/100 g-fillet (big head tile fish). Fish with the highest content of (P) (mg/100 g) were pompano (287), Spanish mackerel (274), king mackerel (257), big head tilefish (255), and pacific barracuda (252). The species with the lowest ratio P:n-3 FA were slender frostfish (0.09), albacore (0.17), king mackerel (0.40) and Spanish mackerel (0.45); the species with the highest ratio was blue bobo (45.20). Fishes with the highest content of n-3 FA/g Pr were albacore (71.20), king mackerel (35.96), Spanish mackerel (32.50) and rooster hind (21.76). There was significant difference (p < 0.05) in the content of (P) in fishes classified according to the fat content in muscle (mg/100 g): lean (193), semi-fat (235), and fatty fishes (244). Conclusions: Fishes which have a low input of n-3 FA/g of Pr and are not recommended for the diet of kidney patients are blue bobo, parrot sandbass, and yellowedge grouper; fishes recommended because of their low P/g of Pr are chilhuil sea catfish, broomtail grouper, yellow tail snapper, southern flounder, parrot sandbass, and big head tilefish. Albacore, king mackerel, Spanish mackerel, and rooster hind are recommended because of their content of high biological value protein, their P:n-3 FA rate, and their low content of potassium and calcium.

Palabras clave: Phosphorus n-3 fatty acids protein marine fish kidney patients.

2010-10-07   |   817 visitas   |   Evalua este artículo 0 valoraciones

Vol. 62 Núm.1. Enero-Febrero 2010 Pags. 44-53 Rev Invest Clin 2010; 62(1-ENGLISH)