IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/aesjfr/404983.html

A Comparison of Two Extraction Methods for Food Oxalate Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Al-Wahsh, Ismail
  • Wu, Yan
  • Liebman, Michael

Abstract

Hyperoxaluria is a primary risk factor for the formation of calcium oxalate-containing kidney stones. Increased dietary oxalate intake and/or intestinal absorption may provide the critical quantity of additional oxalate that triggers the formation of kidney stones. The accurate determination of food oxalate is highly dependent on oxalate extraction, the first step in oxalate analysis. Potential problems include the possibility of elevated oxalate due to in vitro conversion from various oxalate precursors such as ascorbate and failure to dissolve all pre-existing calcium oxalate crystals. The primary objective was to compare the efficiency of the hot and cold extraction methods in extracting oxalate from 50 dry herb and 10 fresh fruit samples. Regardless of the method of extraction, leaves of Atriplex halimus and kiwifruit exhibited the highest concentrations of both total and soluble oxalate among the herbs and the fruits, respectively. The hot extraction method appeared to extract more total oxalate compared to the cold extraction method while there was no significant difference between the methods in efficiency of extracting soluble oxalate. The overall data suggested that the use of the hot acid method will yield a more accurate assessment of the total oxalate content of foods.

Suggested Citation

  • Al-Wahsh, Ismail & Wu, Yan & Liebman, Michael, 2012. "A Comparison of Two Extraction Methods for Food Oxalate Assessment," Journal of Food Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 1(2).
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aesjfr:404983
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/404983/files/14140-53246-1-PB.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:aesjfr:404983. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.ccsenet.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.