WO1989001295A1

WO1989001295A1 - Cholesterol reducing food containing sugar cane parenchyma cell wall

Info

Publication number: WO1989001295A1
Application number: PCT/AU1988/000317
Authority: WO
Inventors: Mark Humphrey O'sullivan; Ronald Lee Sampson
Original assignee: Fractionated Cane Technology Ltd.
Priority date: 1987-08-21
Filing date: 1988-08-18
Publication date: 1989-02-23
Also published as: JP2672138B2; JPH02504580A

Abstract

Food for humans and other animals, particularly avian species and monogastric mammals, containing effective amounts of parenchyma cell walls from sugar cane. Such foodstuffs reduce the cholesterol and/or body fat content of the animal when the parenchyma cell wall material comprises an effective amount of the animals' diet.

Description

CHOLESTEROL REDUCING FOOD CONTAINING SUGAR CANE PARENCHYMA CELL WALL

TECHNICAL FIELD

The present invention relates to a method of feeding animals, particularly monogastric animals, so as to reduce the cholesterol content thereof, and to a foodstuff for use in this method.

BACKGROUND ART

It has been previously found that some complex carbohydrates derived from certain types of plant have the capacity to reduce blood cholesterol and/or body fat levels in animals including avian species and man and other mammalian species. Such complex carbohydrates have recently been obtained from oat bran and have been known for many years to be present in substantial amounts in ispaghula husks. Foodstuffs for man and other animals have been prepared which include such plant derived^' complex carbohydrates and have been used as part of the diet of the animal in order to reduce the cholesterol and/or the body fat content of the animal. The known complex carbohydrates of plant origin which have been found to be able to reduce cholesterol and/or body fat levels of animals have been relatively expensive and/or difficult to obtain because of the relative scarcity of the plants or the small amount of such complex carbohydrate in the plant. The present inventors have discovered that certain parts of sugar cane plant

(Saccharum officinarum) contain ingredients, probably complex carbohydrates, which are capable of reducing the cholesterol and/or body fat levels of animals consuming effective amounts of those parts of the sugar cane.

The stem or stalk of the sugar cane plant is that portion above ground which bears leaves and inflorescence. It is cylindrical in shape and is divided into joints. Each cane joint includes a node and an elongate, cylindrical, internode region. The internode region comprises an outer rind made up of several layers of liguified sclerenchy a cells; and the inner pith which is made up of bundles of vascular sclerenchyma cells and the ground tissue containing parenchyma cells, which are the storage cells containing the major part of the plant juices from which sugar is recovered.

It has now been found that surprisingly the parenchyma cell wall fraction of sugar cane when fed to animals, particularly monogastric animals, produces animals having lower cholesterol levels and lower body fat levels than animals fed conventional feed rations. DISCLOSURE OF THE INVENTION

The present invention therefore comprises a method for lowering the cholesterol, and/or body fat content of animals, particularly monogastric animals, comprising the step of including in the feed rations of the animals an effective amount of parenchyma cell wall of sugar cane, preferably substantially free of fibrous sclerenchyma cells therefrom. As used herein the expression parenchyma cells is taken to mean fresh parenchyma cell wall, dried parenchyma cell wall obtained by freeing fresh parenchyma cells from sugar cane and drying them, and dried parenchyma cells obtained by separating dried parenchyma cells or cell wall material from dried or extracted sugar cane such as bagasse. In the lattermost case sugars may be added back to the dried cell wall material to provide a sugar content at least substantially equal to that of a whole dried parenchyma cells. The parenchyma cell wall material may comprise adhered bundles of parenchyma cells or fragments of cell wall obtained by grinding or otherwise comminuting the parenchyma cells in a fresh or dried condition.

In another aspect the present invention consists in an animal feed or human food for lowering the cholesterol and/or body fat content of animals containing an effective amount of parenchyma cell wall of sugar cane, preferably substantially free of fibrous sclerenchyma cells therefrom. For human use foodstuffs containing from 1 to 20% by weight of parenchyma cell wall are preferred whereas for feeding livestock, higher percentages, e.g. 5 to 30% are preferred.

In a further aspect the present invention consists in a feedstuff comprising parenchyma cell wall material from sugar cane finely ground and sieved to remove particles larger than 100 microns.

The animal feed preferably contains additional balanced nutritional components sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of the animal to be fed such nutritional components include vitamins, minerals and protein supplements. It is also possible that the additivies such as crude fibre may be desired to be added to the animal feed particularly if it is to be consumed by ruminant animals. In this case it may be desirable to add to the feed a proportion of the sclerenchyma cell material from sugar cane, particularly the sclerenchyma cell derived from the vascular bundles of the sugar cane.

The present invention is hereinafter described with reference to experiments conducted with pigs and chickens. It will be recognized by persons skilled in the art that this invention is not limited to the feeding of pigs and chickens but may be used to reduce cholesterol levels in other animals, and particularly avian species and monogastric mammals including man. The pig is recognised as a good model for human nutritional studies and the results obtained from studies on pigs are readily useable in assessing the utility of the present invention in humans. BEST MODE OF CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

Hereinafter given by way of example only are preferred embodiments of the present invention. A substantially non-fibrous fraction of sugar cane, largely comprising dried parenchyma cells thereof, was prepared as described in Australian patent specification 61724/86 the contents whereof are herein incorporated by reference. This non-fibrous fraction of sugar cane is hereinafter called Sucrafeed 1 and comprises parenchyma cell walls and the dried sugar therefrom substantially free of sclerenchyma cells. CHEMICAL ANAYLSIS Analysis of the Sucrafeed 1 yield the results set out hereunder in Tables I, II and III. TABLE I. Ma or com onent distribution in su ar cane

A. chloroform-soluble material, e.g. lipidε, pigments, waxes, etc. B. 80% ethanol-soluble material, e.g. free sugars, free phenolics, etc. C. 80% ethanol-insoluble material, e.g. polysaccharides, lignin. Note; (i) B is considered highly digestible and the components are not bound to cell-wall polymers, (ii) There should be very little protein in the sample (cell wall), (iii) The total analytical procedure was performed in duplicate (samples 1 and 2). TABLE II. Components in 80% ethanol-soluble fraction (B in Table I) as % fraction.

Sample Total free^a Total free¹³ Unaccounted for^c phenolics sugars material

1 1.4 54.9 43.7

2 1.2 53.0 45.8

^aby Folin-Ciocalteu reagent against p-coumaric acid standard, bby phenol-sulphuric acid against D-glucose standard. ^cby difference (pigments, flavonoids). Note: Sample aliquot with cone, sulphuric acid gave a noticeable pink colour indicative of flavonoid compounds, e.g. anthocyanidins. TABLE III. Composition of sugar cane parenchyma cell-wall fraction (C in Table I) as % fraction.

Sample Neutral sugars⁵ Uronic^D Apparent⁰ Unaccounted^ Ara Xyl Glc acids lignin for material

1 3.1 19.9 33.2 3.0 24.2 16.6 2 3.2 20.1 33.5 3.1 27.8 12.3

^aby g.l.c. of alditol acetates; trace amounts of mannose, galactose. bby 3-pehnylphenol method against D-glucuronic acid standard. ^cthis will include minerals insoluble in 72% sulphuric acid (ash) .

^by difference (e.g. polyphenols soluble in acid and experimental error associated with methodology). EVALUATION OF ANIMAL FEED - PIGS

The evaluation of Sucrafeed 1 as a dietary energy source for pigs consisted of two separate experiments. Firstly, the digestible energy content of the sugar cane extract was determined in 4 individually-fed pigs (approximately 30 kg liveweight).

Secondly, diets were formulated incorporating 0, 15 or 30% of Sucrafeed 1 in the diet. The diets were formulated to meet the needs of the growing/finishing pig using the digestible energy value of the extract obtained from the first experiment. Each diet was pelleted and fed to a total of 30 pigs (male and female) maintained under commercial piggery conditions (3 pens each containing 10 pigs) . EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS

EXPERIMENT 1 - Determination of the digestible energy content.

Four pigs (30 kg liveweight) were maintained in individual metabolism cages and fed Sucrafeed 1 ad libitum for a 4 day preliminary period. Faecal output and feed intake of the pigs was subsequently measured over a 3 day period. The gross energy content of the feed and faeces was determined by bomb calorimetry and the digestible energy (DE) content of the diet was calculated. EXPERIMENT 2 - Determination of the food intake and growth of pigs.

Diets Diets were formulated at The University of Queensland and prepared by Cheethams Feed Pty. Ltd., Wacol, Brisbane, Australia, to meet the standard requirements of the growing/finishing pig (Table IV). After mixing the ingredients the diets were pelletized. TABLE IV. Composition and analysis of diets.

Level of Feed Supplement According to this Invention Ingredients % 0 15 30

(36 females and 54 males) were used in the experiment. A comparison of the growth of 10 pigs fed diets containing either 0, 15 or 30% Sucrafeed 1 was temporally replicated, using in total 30 pigs (3 pens of 10 pigs) on each dietary treatment.

The mean starting weight of pigs in the experiment was 30 kg and the animals were slaughtered when they reached 80 kg. Slaughtering was conducted at Queensland Bacon Abattoir, Murarrie, after an overnight fast. Backfat thickness was measured by the Abattoir on each animal and random carcasses were sectioned to measure eye muscle area and to obtain fat samples for cholesterol and long chain fatty acid (LCFA) analysis. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION EXPERIMENT 1. The mean digestible energy content of the diet was found to be 11.5 + 0.2 MJ DE/kg DM in the four pigs. Given the gross energy of the diets (16.7 MJ GE/kg DM), the apparent energy digestibility was 0.69 (69%). From these results it can be calculated that approximately 30% of the fibre in the extract must have been digested by the pigs, presumably in the large intestine. EXPERIMENT 2. After 3 weeks of the experiment, one pig fed the control diet (0% Sucrafeed 1) died of gastric ulceration, otherwise there were no signs of disease or adverse nutritional factors. Such gastric ulcerations are observed regularly in pigs fed conventional pig diets. Thus it is of interest that no cases of ulceration were observed in the pigs fed diets containing 15 or 30% Sucrafeed 1.

There were no significant differences in feed intake, liveweight gain and therefore feed conversion efficiency of the pigs fed the three dietary regimens (Table V). The liveweight gains are comparable with superior industry levels of 700-800 g/day for pigs of the same weight range. These results indicate that the diets containing Sucrafeed 1 were highly acceptable to the pigs, had no deleterious effects and resulted in substantial liveweight gains.

TABLE V. Growth performance of pigs fed diets containing 0, 15 or 30% Sucrafeed 1.

Level of Sucrafeed 1 in diet(%) SEM Parameter 0 15 30

Liveweight gain (g/d) 802 797 790 9.00

Feed intake (kg/d) 2.33 2.31 2.36 .03

Feed conversion* 2.91 2.90 2.94 .01

Kg feed/kg liveweight gain. The carcass characteristics of pigs fed the dietary treatments are presented in Table VI. There was a small (non-significant) reduction in the dressing percentage of the carcasses of pigs fed Sucrafeed. This was due to the higher levels of fibre in the diet of the pigs fed Sucrafeed 1, resulting in a greater weight of the gastrointestinal tract.

TABLE VI. Carcass characteristics of pigs fed diets containing varying levels of Sucrafeed 1.

Level of Sucrafeed 1 in diet(%) SEM Parameter 0 15 30

Dressing percentage (%) 75.1 74.1 73.1 0.35 Backfat thickness (mm) 17.9 16.5 14.8 0.25 Eye muscle area (cm²) 47.8 48.0 54.2 2.30

Proportion of individual fatty acids in backfat (%)

(mg/lOOg fatty tissue)

Backfat thickness was significantly less in pigs fed Sucrafeed 1, the lowest thickness being recorded for the pigs fed 30% of Sucrafeed 1 (Table VI). The eye muscle area of only 5 pigs on each treatment were measured.

Nevertheless, there was a significant linear relationship between level of Sucrafeed 1 and eye muscle area. Although the muscle of pigs contains relatively low levels of fat (due to the lack of marbling as seen in beef), the lower amount of backfat thickness and the greater eye muscle area are significant findings and should be exploitable as selling points. The pig industry is attempting to reduce the fat cover of pigs and increase eye muscle, both by nutritional and genetic means, Sucrafeed 1 can be utilised on this basis as a valuable feed ingredient.

Cholesterol levels in the fatty tissues were measured in 15 pigs only. There are obvious and exciting differences in the mean values and there is a substantial reduction in the cholesterol levels as the level of Sucrafeed 1 was increased from 0 to 15% to 30%.

There was no change in the fatty acid composition of the depot fats in the pigs.

SUMMARY

1. The digestible energy content for growing pigs of Sucrafeed 1^* was found to be 11.5 ± 0.2 MJ DE/kg DM. The digestibility of the extract was 0.69 (69.0%).

2. Diets containing up to 30% of the Sucrafeed 1 can be easily pelletized and are very acceptable to young pigs.

3. The sugar cane extract does not appear to contain any anti-nutritive factors which alter feed intake, growth or any other aspect of performance.

4. Although the fibre content of the experimental diet containing 30% of the extract was higher than considered optimal for growing pigs, the substitution of 30% of Sucrafeed 1 had no adverse effects on food intake and growth rate.

5. The highest rate of Sucrafeed 1 inclusion (30%) resulted in significantly less backfat than the controls (0% inclusion). There was a significant positive relationship between the dietary level of Sucrafeed 1 and eye muscle area; when more Sucrafeed 1 was fed the eye muscle area was greater. These two results highlight the positive benefits of including Sucrafeed 1 in diets for pigs. 6. There were marked differences in cholesterol levels in the fatty tissues.

7. The fatty acid composition of the backfat of the pigs was not affected by including Sucrafeed 1 in the diets. EVALUATION OF ANIMAL FEED - CHICKENS Four experiments with chickens were conducted. Experiments 3 and 4 were conducted between October and December 1986 at the University of Queensland's Veterinary Science Farm at Pinjarra Hills. Experiment 3 was a growth trial undertaken using meat-type chickens from four to eight weeks of age. Experiment 4 was undertaken using adult cockerels to determine metabolising energy of Sucrafeed 1 and of prepared diets. Experiments 5 and 6 were undertaken at the University of New England in Armidale. Experiment 5 was a growth trial undertaken using 6 week old crossbred cockerels and Experiment 6 was an egg laying trial undertaken using old hens and pullets.

EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS EXPERIMENT 3 Diets Four diets were formulated to contain 0, 10, 20 and 30% of Sucrafeed 1 on an iso-energetic and iso-nitrogenous basis. An attempt was also made to obtain similar essential amino acid profiles.

Significant compensation was required for the low protein level in Sucrafeed 1 (approximately 2%). This meant an increase in protein supplements such as soyabean meal and fishmeal. Further, because of the lower ME value of Sucrafeed 1 than of the grains used, and because of the need for increased inclusion of low energy protein supplements, it was necessary to add extra oil to diets containing Sucrafeed 1 to adjust the ME value. the diets are shown in Table IV. Because of the low density of Sucrafeed 1 and the problems experienced in the ME study, diets B, C and D were pelleted. Experimental Birds

Chickens from two lines selected for five generations for either high (F) or low (L) abdominal fat were used in the study. The lines were originally derived from a commercial broiler line. Birds were individually identified with wingbands.

TABLE VII. Composition and analysis of diets given to chickens in the growth experiment from 4 to 8 weeks of age,

Ingredient Inclusion level (g/kg) diet A B C D

* Calculated ** Analysed

The birds were reared in intermingled groups to 4 weeks of age in battery brooders and were given a typical commercial broiler starter diet containing 13.0 MJ ME and 230g crude protein (CP)/kg. The diet was in mash form. Experimental Cages and Management

At four weeks of age the birds were transferred to individual cages each with a separate feeder. Twenty birds from each line were given one of the four diets and allowed food ad lib for the 28 day experimental period. Birds were individually weighed at 4 and at 8 weeks of age when the experiment was terminated. Individual food consumption over the period was measured and food conversion efficiency was calculated. Following overnight withdrawal of feed, the birds were processed and abdominal fat was removed and weighed. Results

Growth, Food Intake and Food Conversion Efficiency TABLE VIII. The effect of diet upon weight gain, food consumption and food conversion efficiency.

Least square means + Standard error Diet Weight gain Food Consumption Food conversion ratio ( S_) 3J (FCR) A 982 + 21 2378 + 39 2.44 + .03

B 991 + 20 2370 + 37 2.41 + .03

C 974 + 20 2370 + 37 2.45 + .02 D 979 + 20 2385 + 38 2.46 + .03

As shown in Table VIII, there was no effect of diet upon weight gain, food consumption or FCR. ^• In fact, the means are remarkably similar indicating that provided energy and protein are adjusted to compensate for the values in Sucrafeed 1, there are no antinutritional factors in this material which would prevent its inclusion in meat chicken diets up to 30% of the diet. Abdominal Fat

The result of the abdominal fat measurements are shown in Table IX. There was a lower level of abdominal fat in the chickens fed Sucrafeed 1. This was significant at the 90% level using an orthogonal contrast method of analysis. TABLE IX. The effect of diet, upon the proportion of abdominal at in the carcasses of birds given diets containing different levels of Sucrafeed 1.

Least square means + Standard error

Diet Abdominal fat (q/kg)

A 24.1 + 1.3

B 21.9 + 1.2 C 20.8 + 1.2

D 22.0 + 1.2

EXPERIMENT 4

Adult cockerels were used to determine ME in the four diets used in the growth experiment. The study was undertaken to firstly determine ME of the four diets and secondly to provide an estimate of the ME of Sucrafeed 1. The latter estimate was unlikely to be precise .since there were a number of differences in ingredient composition between the diets.

Twelve adult cockerels were used, with each diet allocated to three cockerels. The testing procedures used in the first ME study were again applied in this experiment. Results

ME's calculated in the four diets were: A 12.8; B 13.1; C 13.5 and D 13.2.

As shown in Table VII, these values are in reasonable agreement with the estimated values assuming a value of 9.0 MJ/kg for Sucrafeed 1. However, whilst not conforming to a close linear fit, there is a tendency for the diets containing higher levels of Sucrafeed 1 to have higher ME. Using regression analysis this yields an estimate of ME for Sucrafeed 1 of 11.5 MJ/kg, a value in keeping with data being collected from other species. In conclusion it is important to note, as shown in Table VIII, there was no difference in the growth rate, or food conversion efficiency or food consumption of the birds on the different diets containing various amounts of Sucrafeed 1. EXPERIMENT 5

Sucrafeed fed to crossbred cockerels Birds 6 weeks old crossbred cockerels + 850 gm

4 birds per cage, 3 cages per treatment Diets a) Control - complete b) Choice fed - protein concentrate plus Sucrafeed 1 - separate containers Time 3 periods of 1 week each

Recordings a) Weekly body weight increases b) Weekly feed intakes

TABLE X. Body weight gain in grams

Week

* One bird sick with Marek's disease, TABLE XI. Food conversion.

It can be seen that the birds fed Sucrafeed 1 had significantly lower fat pad weights than the birds fed the control diet. EXPERIMENT 6

LAYING TRIALS 1. Old Hens - choice fed protein concentrate and whole wheat or Sucrafeed 1 with 3 hens per treatment. Results were as shown in Table XIII. TABLE XIII

Egg production

Diet July August September Total

2. Pullets - same diets - 4 pullets per treatment, Results were as shown in Table XIV. TABLE XIV

Egg production

Diet July August September Total

The lipid and cholesterol content of the pullet eggs were determined and the results were as indicated in Table XV. TABLE XV. Analysis of pullet eggs.

Wheat diet Sucrafeed 1 Diet

LIPIDS Aug. 87 9 . 3% 8.2% Sept. 87 10 .7% 9.6% Oct. 87 10 . 3% 10.1% Nov. 87 10 . 2% 9.8%

CHOLESTEROL (total egg)

Aug. 87 401 MG/lOOg 369 MG/lOOg

Sept. 87 496 MG/lOOg 436 MG/lOOg

It can be seen that egg production was increased with the hens and pullets fed Sucrafeed 1 and that the lipid and cholesterol contents of the eggs produced by^"these birds were lower.

PREPARATION OF HUMAN FOODSTUFFS Bread was prepared for human consumption using the ingredient as shown in Table XVI. TABLE XVI

All of the above breads mixed like a standard bread and rose well. The "cane flour" referred to above is the Sucrafeed 1 material finely ground and passed through a 100 micron sieve.

Claims

1. A method for lowering the cholesterol and/or body fat content of animals comprising the step of feeding to the animals an effective amount of parenchyma cell wall of sugar cane.

2. A method as claimed in claim 1 in which the feed rations of the animals are substantially free of fibrous sclerenchyma cells derived from sugar cane.

3. A method as claimed in claim 1 in which the feed rations of the animals contain parenchyma cell walls of sugar cane together with an amount of free sugar at least equal to that naturally present in the parenchyma cells from which the cell wall is obtained.

4. A method as claimed in claim 3 in which the feed ration of the animal contains dried whole parenchyma cells together with the dried natural contents of those cells.

5. A method as claimed in claim 1 in which the parenchyma cell wall material constitutes from 1 to 30% by weight of the feed ration.

6. A method as claimed in claim 1 in which the animals are selected from^"the group comprising avian species and monogastric mammals.

7. A method as claimed in claim 6 in which the animals are selected from the group comprising humans, pigs and chickens.

8. An animal food for lowering the cholesterol and/or body fat levels of animals containing an effective amount of parenchyma cell wall of sugar cane.

9. An animal food as claimed in claim 8 in which the animal food is substantially free of fibrous sclerenchyma cells from sugar cane.

10. An animal food as claimed in claim 8 in which the animal food contains parenchyma cell wall together with an amount of free sugar at least equal to that naturally present in the parenchyma cells from which the cell wall is obtained.

11. An animal food as claimed in claim 10 in which the animal food contains dried whole parenchyma cells together with the dried natural contents of those cells.

12. An animal food as claimed in any one of claims 8 to

11 in which the animal food additionally contains balanced nutritional components sufficient to satisfy the dietary needs of the animal to be fed.

13. An animal food as claimed in any one of claims 8 to

12 in which the parenclyma cell wall material is present in the food in an amount of from 1% to 30% by weight.

14. An animal food comprising parenclyma cell wall material from sugar cane finely ground and sieved to remove particles larger than 100 microns.

15. Non-human animals and non-human animal products having reduced cholesterol and/or body fat contents produced by a method as claimed in any one of claims 1 to 7.