Diferenzas entre revisións de «Luteína»

A diferencia funcional entre a luteína (forma libre) e os [[éster]]es da luteína non se coñece ben. Suxírese que a [[biodispoñibilidade]] é máis baixa para os ésteres da luteína, pero o debate aínda continúa.<ref name="pmid12468605">{{cite journal |author=Bowen PE, Herbst-Espinosa SM, Hussain EA, Stacewicz-Sapuntzakis M |title=Esterification does not impair lutein bioavailability in humans |journal=J Nutr |volume=132 |issue=12 |pages=3668–73 |year=2002 |pmid=12468605}}</ref>
Como [[aditivo alimentario]], a luteína ten o [[número E]] E161b e extráese dos pétalos da planta [[asterácea]] ''[[Tagetes erecta]]''.<ref name="Ref_d">[http://www.codexalimentarius.net/gsfaonline/additives/details.html?id=384 WHO/FAO Codex Alimentarius General Standard for Food Additives]</ref> O seu uso está aprobado na [[Unión Europea]].<ref>UK Food Standards Agency: {{cite web |url=http://www.food.gov.uk/safereating/chemsafe/additivesbranch/enumberlist |title=Current EU approved additives and their E Numbers |accessdate=2011-10-27}}</ref> and Australia and New Zealand<ref>
Algúns alimentos considéranse boas fontes deste composto:<ref name="PMID17846363">{{cite journal |author=SanGiovanni JP, Chew EY, Clemons TE, et al. |title=The relationship of dietary carotenoid and vitamin A, E, and C intake with age-related macular degeneration in a case-control study: AREDS Report No. 22 |journal=Arch. Ophthalmol. |volume=125 |issue=9 |pages=1225–32 |date=September 2007 |pmid=17846363 |doi=10.1001/archopht.125.9.1225 |url=http://archopht.ama-assn.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=17846363}}</ref><ref name="Ref_e">[http://www.reuters.com/article/2007/09/10/us-eyesight-nutrients-idUSN0746200620070910 Reuters, Study finds spinach, eggs ward off cause of blindness]</ref><ref name="Ref_USDA">[http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/ USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 23 (2010)]</ref><ref name="nasturtium">{{Cite journal | doi = 10.1111/j.1365-2621.2005.tb08336.x