comparison of nutrient density and nutrient-to-cost between cooked and canned beans比较之间的营养密度和nutrient-to-cost煮熟的豆类罐头.pdfVIP

Food and Nutrition Sciences, 2011, 2, 66-73 doi:10.4236/fns.2011.22009 Published Online April 2011 (/journal/fns) Comparison of Nutrient Density and Nutrient-to-Cost between Cooked and Canned Beans 1 1* 2 Michael Zanovec , Carol E. O’Neil , Theresa A. Nicklas 1School of Human Ecology, Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Baton Rouge, LA, USA; 2USDA/ARS Children’s Nutri- tion Research Center, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. E-mail: coneil1@ th th th Received January 6 , 2011; revised February 9 , 2011; accepted March 4 , 2011. ABSTRACT Consumption of nutrient rich foods such as beans and peas is recommended because these foods provide key nutrients and relatively little energy. Many consumers are unfamiliar with dried beans or do not have the time to prepare them. The purpose of this study was to compare nutrient density and nutrient-to-cost among dried cooked, canned (liquid and solids), and canned/drained black, garbanzo, kidney, lima, pinto, white beans, and black-eyed peas. Prices were ob- tained from 60 grocery stores in January 2009. Nutrient content per 100 g was calculated using the U.S. Department of Agriculture Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 22, and Nutrition Data System for Research (for canned/drained). Nutrient density scores were estimated using the Nutrient Rich Food Index 9.3 (NRF9.3). Nutri- ent-to-cost ratio (NTCR) was computed as the NRF 9.3 score (per 100 kcal) divided by the cost per half-cup servings per package (12) or per can (3.5). Compared to canned beans, dried cooked beans were significantly more energy dense, contained more protein, fiber, iron, potassium and magnesium; and less sodium t