Cited by 55Nutritional Studies and DietMuscle metabolism and nutritionFood and Agricultural Sciences

Identification of biomarkers for intake of protein from meat, dairy products and grains: a controlled dietary intervention study

Open access
Altorf-van der Kuil, Wieke, Brink, Elizabeth J., Boetje, Martine, Siebelink, Els, Bijlsma, Sabina, Engberink, Marielle F., Veer, Pieter van 't, Tomé, Daniel +3 more·2013·British Journal Of Nutrition

Abstract

In the present controlled, randomised, multiple cross-over dietary intervention study, we aimed to identify potential biomarkers for dietary protein from dairy products, meat and grain, which could be useful to estimate intake of these protein types in epidemiological studies. After 9 d run-in, thirty men and seventeen women (22 (SD 4) years) received three high-protein diets (aimed at approximately 18% of energy (en%)) in random order for 1 week each, with approximately 14 en% originating from either meat, dairy products or grain. We used a two-step approach to identify biomarkers in urine and plasma. With principal component discriminant analysis, we identified amino acids (AA) from the plasma or urinary AA profile that were distinctive between diets. Subsequently, after pooling total study data, we applied mixed models to estimate the predictive value of those AA for intake of protein types. A very good prediction could be made for the intake of meat protein by a regression model that included urinary carnosine, 1-methylhistidine and 3-methylhistidine (98% of variation in intake explained). Furthermore, for dietary grain protein, a model that included seven AA (plasma lysine, valine, threonine, α-aminobutyric acid, proline, ornithine and arginine) made a good prediction (75% of variation explained). We could not identify biomarkers for dairy protein intake. In conclusion, specific combinations of urinary and plasma AA may be potentially useful biomarkers for meat and grain protein intake, respectively. These findings need to be cross-validated in other dietary intervention studies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0007114512005788

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a randomized controlled feeding trial, glycine concentrations were slightly lower on a meat protein-based diet than on a plant protein-based diet, despite the meat diet providing about 50% more glycine.

    “In a randomized controlled feeding trial, glycine concentrations were slightly lower in response to a meat protein-based diet compared with a plant protein-based diet, whereas the amount of glycine provided by the meat diet was about 50% higher (39).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Altorf-van der Kuil, W., Brink, E. J., Boetje, M., Siebelink, E., Bijlsma, S., Engberink, M. F., Veer, P. V. '., Tomé, D., Bakker, S. J. L., van Baak, M. A., & Geleijnse, J. M.
Affiliations
  • TiFN (NL)
  • Wageningen University & Research (NL)
  • Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research (NL)
  • AgroParisTech (FR)
  • University Medical Center Groningen (NL)
Venue
British Journal Of Nutrition
Published
2013-03-04
Volume
110
Issue
5
Pages
810-822
ISSN
  • 0007-1145 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-2662
OpenAlex
W2084917802
Cited by
55
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • British Journal Of Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Socio-Environmental Systems Modeling (acceptedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • TNO Repository (submittedVersion)
  • Repository hosted by TU Delft Library (TU Delft) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Research Publications (Maastricht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cell Biology › Muscle metabolism and nutrition
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Food and Agricultural Sciences
Keywords
protein intake, biomarkers, meat proteins, grain protein, milk protein, amino acids, urinary amino acids, plasma amino acids, carnosine, 1-methylhistidine, 3-methylhistidine, high-protein diet, dietary assessment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Amino Acids, Animals, Edible Grain, Dairy Products, Diet, Dietary Proteins, Female, Humans, Male, Meat, Biomarkers, Cross-Over Studies, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review