Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 11 (2010) 707–711

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies

j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w. e l s ev i e r. c o m / l o c a t e / i f s e t

Nutritional characterization of tomato fiber as a useful ingredient for food industry

P. García Herrera, M.C. Sánchez-Mata, M. Cámara ⁎
Departamento de Nutrición y Bromatología II, Facultad de Farmacia, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Plaza de Ramón y Cajal s/n, Madrid 28040, Spain

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Tomato by-product consists of peels and seeds, presenting peel high fiber content. In this work, “tomato
Received 14 May 2010 fiber” (TF) samples, obtained from tomato peels (after tomato processing) by a patented process, were
Accepted 26 July 2010 characterized in terms of fiber and macronutrients (proteins, ash, total available carbohydrates and soluble
Editor Proof Receive Date 26 August 2010 sugars). From our results, TF is mainly composed by carbohydrates, with an average value of 80% of total
dietary fiber (much higher than other vegetable by-products), being insoluble fiber the major component.
Keywords: The results obtained in this study reveal the high interest of TF as a food ingredient to be used as a valuable
Tomato ingredient of new functional foods, enhancing insoluble fiber intake in the population.
Dietary fiber Industrial Relevance: The use of tomato by-product reduces costs and justifies new investments in equipment,
By-products providing a correct solution for the pollution problem connected with tomato processing. The results obtained in
Functional ingredients this study reveal the high interest of TF as a food ingredient to be used as a valuable ingredient of new functional
foods, enhancing insoluble fiber intake in the population. According to the Regulation 1924/2006, the product TF
characterized in this study can be considered under the denomination of “Source of Fiber” (more than 3 g/100 g),
and for that reason food products containing the above mentioned fiber in quantities equal or superior to 3.9%,
could also include the same declaration of nutritional properties in their labeling.
© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.), is one of the most important
crop in the industrialized world. Significant amounts are consumed
either as fresh fruit or as processed products, most of which are obtained
from the mature fruit crushed, sieved and concentrated, to reach
different soluble solid contents (°Brix): tomato juice (at least 5°Brix);
tomato paste (12–18°Brix) or tomato concentrate (28–32°Brix).
During industrial transformation of tomato for concentrate, the yield
of production can range between 95 and 98%, which means that about
4% solid tomato by-product is generated (Del Valle, Cámara, & Torija,
2006). Considering that the production of tomato for processing in Spain
was 2355.5 × 103 tons of tomatoes in 2009, an estimated amount of
94,220 tons of tomato by-product was produced (MARM, 2009).
Although food by-products can be used for animal feeding, they
usually represent an environmental problem for the industry, and
many studies have been carried out about the potential utilization of
several vegetable origin by-products for their inclusion in the human
diet, which could reduce industrial costs and justify new investments
in equipment, providing a correct solution for the pollution problem
connected with food processing (Lario et al., 2004).These new
ingredients could be of great interest for food, pharmaceutical,
chemical and cosmetic industries.
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel./fax: + 34 91 394 17 99.
E-mail address: mcamara@farm.ucm.es (M. Cámara).
According to Del Valle, Cámara, and Torija (2005) tomato by-
products, consisting of peel and seeds, are rich in nutrients and bioactive
compounds (as sugars, organic acids, pigments, fiber, proteins, oils,
antioxidants and vitamins). In agreement with different authors, peels
present high fiber values (41%) and significant amount of proteins
(14%), being fat only 3%. This profile is inverted in the case of the seeds,
in which proteins are the major component (32%) followed by total fat
(27%) and fiber (18%). This information suggests that solid tomato by-
product may have a great nutritional and technological interest.
Fiber is not a simple and well defined chemical compound, but a
combination of chemical substances on composition and structure,
such as cellulose, hemicelluloses, lignin, etc. being defined as “edible
parts of plants or analogous carbohydrates that are resistant to
digestion and absorption in the human small intestine with complete
or partial fermentation in the large intestine” (Mongeau, 2003). Fiber
includes: insoluble fiber (lignin, cellulose and hemicelluloses) and
soluble fiber (pectins, β-glucans, galactomanan gums, and a large
range of nondigestible oligosaccharides including inulin).
The interest of fiber in human nutrition appeared from Burkitt's
work (Burkitt, Walker, & Painter, 1974) who studied the relationship
between the inadequate fiber intake, and the progressive increase of
degenerative diseases, in the developed societies. Nowadays, research
show that the ingestion of suitable quantities of food fiber produces
many beneficial effects on the digestive tract, such as the regulation of
the intestinal function, improvement of the tolerance to glucose in
diabetics, or prevention of chronic diseases as colon cancer (Mongeau,
2003; Pérez Jiménez et al., 2008). In addition, soluble fiber (mainly

1466-8564/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ifset.2010.07.005
708 P. García Herrera et al. / Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 11 (2010) 707–711
pectins) influences fat level and arteriosclerosis in humans and animals
(Yamada, 1996). Diverse in vivo studies have demonstrated that an
ingestion of insoluble fiber from fruits and vegetables can produce a
significant decrease of the plasmatic concentration of cholesterol, which
implies a decrease of the risk of suffering cardiovascular disease, colon
cancer, diabetes and obesity. Also a regulatory activity of the immune
system has been attributed to dietary fiber (Brett & Waldron, 1996). For
all those reasons, the current fiber intake recommended by the Food and
Nutrition Board (Trumbo, Schlicker, Yates, & Poos, 2002) in adults is 21–
38 g/day, depending on life stage groups. According to Martínez Alvarez
et al. (2003) the current Europe consumption of fiber is 20 g/person/
day, so an increase of fiber consumption is needed, and a way to achieve
that goal is by supplementing the diet with commercial fiber-rich
products.
Dietary fiber intake is not only desirable for its nutritional properties
but also for its functional and technological properties (Thebaudin,
Lefebvre, Harrington, & Bourgeois, 1997). The necessity of exploring
new raw materials, with a balanced composition of fiber fractions and
containing a high amount of associated bioactive compounds has been
recognized. In this respect, tomato fruits are good candidates, with the
advantage of its natural color which makes tomato fiber an attractive
alternative for fiber enrichment of commercial food products, as pasta,
snacks, candies, etc.
For all these reasons, previous studies have reported the usefulness
of high dietary fiber powder for the enrichment of usually consumed
foods or for the production of dietary fiber tablets (Larrauri, 1999). All
fiber enriched food products are now subject to regulation regarding the
nutrition and health claims in their labelling. In this respect, Regulation
(EC) No. 1924/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20
December 2006, states that in EU, a food product can only be declared as
a source of fiber if the product contains as minimum 3 g of fiber per
100 g or, as minimum, 1.5 g of fiber per 100 kcal.
Last trends in Food Science and Technology research are focused
on developing Functional Foods especially of vegetable origin, with a
higher added value. In this line, this paper is aimed to characterize the
commercial product “tomato fiber” in terms of nutrients and fiber as a
bioactive compound, to be used in food industry for fiber enrichment
purposes.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Samples
Tomato fiber samples were obtained from Agrogal tomato proces-
sing industry (Mengabril, Spain), where the tomato by-product (peels
and seeds) were separated and peels were grounded and dried to obtain
the “tomato fiber” (TF) by a patented process, Patent no.: p200001264
(Bernalte et al., 2000). Samples of TF were taken in two different tomato
seasons (2005 and 2006). In each year, 3 batches of TF were considered
for analysis (all samples were analysed on triplicate). To avoid sample
alteration they were stored in hermetic bags protected from light and
moisture, at room temperature.
2.2. Analytical methods
Moisture content was evaluated after drying in an air forced oven at a
temperature 100 ± 2 °C, during 3 h (AOAC, 2005); total mineral content
was quantified by a dry ashing technique at 450 °C (AOAC, 2005); total
protein by Kjeldahl method (AOAC, 2005); total available carbohydrates
were determined after hydrolysis of complex carbohydrates with
perchloric acid, using the anthrone colorimetric method (Osborne &
Voogt, 1986). The calibration curve was obtained by triplicate from a
standard of glucose (Sigma-Aldrich, Inc.) in concentrations of 20 to
100 μg/ml. Soluble sugars were quantified by high-performance liquid
chromatography with IR detector, after extraction in 80% ethanol
(Mollá, Cámara, Díez, & Torija, 1994; Sánchez-Mata, Peñuela-Teruel,
Cámara-Hurtado, Díez-Marqués, & Torija-Isasa, 1998). Soluble sugar
standards (glucose, fructose and sucrose) were provided by Sigma-
Aldrich, Inc. and fructooligosaccharides (kestose, nystose and fructosyl-
nystose) were provided by Megazyme, Wicklow, Ireland. Calibration
curves were performed using standard solutions with good linearity and
sensitivity parameters, as it is shown in Table 1. Total, soluble and
insoluble fiber were determined by enzymatic–gravimetric methods
(AOAC, 2005; Prosky, Asp Nils Georg Scheizer, DeVries, & Furda, 1998).
2.3. Instrumentation
Analytical equipments used were: UV–visible spectrophotometer
EZ210 model (Perkin Elmer, Waltham, MA,USA) working at 630 nm
(Lambda Software PESSW ver.1.2), and HPLC system equipped with a PU II
isocratic pumping system (Micron Analítica, SA, Spain); a Rheodyne valve,
and a differential refractometer R401 detector (Jasco, Madrid, Spain).
Chromatographic column was Luna 5 μ NH2 100R (250 mm×4.6 mm)
(Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, USA). All chromatograms were processed
using Biocrom 2000, 3.0 software (Micron Analítica, SA, Spain).
Chromatographic conditions were: acetonitrile/water 80/20 as mobile
phase and 0.9 ml/min as flow-rate.
2.4. Statistical analysis
Statistical analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed with
Statgraphics plus 4.1 software. Multivariate ANOVA test of two factors
was applied i) between TF batches of the same year and ii) the year of
tomato campaign, in order to study their influence in all the
parameter analysed. Also a Multiple Range Test (LSD Test, considering
a significant level of 5%) was carried out, to know which values were
different from others, and in this way, look for further explanation of
the variability of tomato fiber.
3. Results and discussion
Results of the proximate analysis of tomato fiber (TF) are shown in
Table 2 and Fig. 2. All data related to TF is expressed and discussed on
wet weight basis. Moisture content of TF ranged between 25.9 and
33.0 g kg− 1, lower values than other vegetable by-products as
deseeded grape pomace (60.0 g kg− 1), cauliflower, artichoke, or
chicory (90.0 g kg− 1) (Canett Romero, Ledesma Osuna, & Robles
Sánchez, 2004; Femenia, Robertson, Waldron, & Selvendran, 1998).
Low water content of TF was very stable in all the samples (no
statistically significant differences between batches and years) and
provides good properties for an easy preservation and microbiological
stability.
Considering that protein content in tomato pomace (fresh peels and
seeds) reported by Del Valle et al. (2006) is 44.8 g kg− 1, protein content
of TF (as dry peels with a moisture content less than 35 g kg− 1) is much
higher due to the high moisture content of tomato pomace. A little
variability of protein content of TF between batches (in a range between
57.9 and 71.1 g kg− 1) was found. This is probably due to the original
material composition changes during the tomato season, although
considering the average values for TF protein content of each campaign
Table 1
Calibration parameters and sensitivity of the HPLC method, for soluble sugar and
fructooligosaccharides analysis.
Equation Range (μg) r2 (%) LD (μg)
Glucose A = 4001c − 45,622 34–170 99.97 30.20
Fructose A = 2553c − 10,243 33–134 99.94 12.04
Sucrose A = 2439.8 c + 381 47–235 99.78 0.45
Kestose A = 1478 c − 3222.3 26.4–132 99.90 13.40
Nystose A = 1383.2 c − 2401.6 21.2–106 99.48 10.67
Fructosilnystose A = 1221.7c + 4861.8 45–90 99.71 11.93
LD = limit of detection, A = peak area, c = concentration (μg/ml).
 P. García Herrera et al. / Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 11 (2010) 707–711 709

Table 2
Proximate composition of tomato fiber (wet weight basis).

Batch Moisture (g kg− 1) Total available carbohydrates (g kg− 1) Total fiber (g kg− 1) Proteins (g kg− 1) Ashes (g kg− 1)

Mean value Mean value Mean value Mean value Mean value
ab a b a
2005 1 31.51 131.06 857.46 58.12 19.70ab
2 31.13ab 133.76a 846.80b 71.06b 19.84a
3 33.04b 136.58a 770.63a 57.87a 21.24ab
2006 1 25.87a 96.70b 811.73ab 60.91a 22.41b
2 34.97b 98.44b 825.70ab 70.37b 21.21ab
3 26.70a 125.28a 852.67b 60.25a 21.94ab

Results expressed as mean values (n = 3). Different letters mean statistical significant differences, p b 0.05 (between batches of each year and between the two years).

(2005 and 2006) there were not statistically significant differences. This
protein content found in TF is lower than other fiber products reported
by previous authors who indicated values from 122.5 to 636 g kg− 1 for
deseeded grape pomace, cauliflower, artichoke, chicory processing by-
products (Canett Romero et al., 2004; Femenia et al., 1998).
Total mineral content of TF was quite stable and very similar
between batches and campaign. Although the average values were very
close (20.2 g kg− 1 for 2005 and 21.8 g kg− 1 for 2006) significant
differences were found (pb 0.05). Comparing with Del Valle et al.
(2006) total mineral content in TF is lower than in tomato pomace
(39.2 g kg− 1), but similar in either protein and ash contents to other
fiber obtained from fruit by-products as apple, orange or peach
(Grigelmo-Miguel & Martín-Belloso, 1999).
The carbohydrate fraction was the major component of TF. Total
available carbohydrates were a stable parameter on different batches of
each campaign but with significant differences between the two years
considered (2005 and 2006), ranging between 96.7 and 136.5 g kg− 1.
These differences can be due to the fruit composition of each campaign
influenced by climatic and growing conditions. Cauliflower, artichoke
and chicory witloof by-products presented higher values (480 g kg− 1–
868 g kg− 1) and tomato pomace lower values (64.5 g kg− 1) than
tomato fiber (Del Valle et al., 2006; Femenia et al., 1998).
Although fructooligosaccharides (kestose, nystose and fructosylnys-
tose ) can be present in tomato fruits in a very low concentration, as it has
been reported by Hogarth, Hunter, Jacobs, Garleb, and Wolf (2000) who
found 0.30 gkg− 1 of kestose, 0.20 gkg− 1 of nystose and 2.20 gkg− 1 of
fructosylnystose in tomato paste, other authors (Campbell et al., 1997;
Muir et al., 2009) did not detect any fructooligosaccharides in tomato
juice, puree and sauce, considering a detection limit of 0.20 gkg− 1. In the
TF analysed in this study, the HPLC method was optimized for
fructooligosaccharides determination, but only fructose and glucose
were identified and quantified (Fig. 1 and Table 3). Fructooligosacchar-
ides were not identified in any of the TF analysed samples; according to
the limits of detection of the analytical applied method, it can be
concluded that TF samples analysed contain less than 0.32, 0.26 and
0.60 gkg− 1of kestose, nystose and fructosylnystose, respectively.
The variability in soluble sugar contents was higher than in other
parameters, because sugar content is more influenced by factors as
variety, environment or degree of fruit maturity used as materials for
processing. As fructose and glucose are the predominant sugars in
tomato fruits with levels of 3–30 g kg− 1 of fructose and 5–43 g kg− 1 of
glucose, according to Fernandez-Ruiz (2003), and the content of soluble
sugars diminishes during the process of elaboration of the tomato fiber
with regard to the initial raw material being most of them extracted into
the tomato juice (Del Valle et al., 2006).
Fructose and glucose contents in TF were similar within the same
campaign, but they presented statistically significant differences
between years, as can be seen in Table 3 and Fig. 2, being the remaining
amount in the TF of 2.861 g kg− 1 and 6.461 g kg− 1, respectively for 2005
and 2006 campaigns. The ratio fructose/glucose in TF is near to 1 (1.141–
1.307), as it is the case of fresh tomato fruit (Fernandez-Ruiz, 2003), so
both compounds showed similar behaviour regarding their retention in
TF. Sucrose was not detected in TF (limit of detect. 2.3× 10−4 g kg− 1),
since it is present in very low amounts in the raw material, as reported
by Fernandez-Ruiz (2003).
The difference between total available carbohydrates and total
content of soluble sugars would be other available carbohydrates
(mainly starch), which represent 10.484 g kg− 1 and 4.220 g kg− 1,
respectively in 2005 and 2006 campaigns. These mean a very different
proportion between total soluble sugars/other available carbohy-
drates between campaigns, being 21.4/78.5 in 2005, and 60.5/39.5 in
2006. These differences could be attributed to a higher degree of
maturity of the fruits used for TF elaboration.
Fiber represented more than 80% of TF, being insoluble fiber content
(726–798 g kg− 1) much higher than soluble fiber (44–85 g kg− 1), with
no statistically significant differences between campaigns (Table 4 and
Fig. 3).
Comparing the TF by-product with other commercial vegetable by-
products, it can be observed that fiber content in TF (average value of
827.0 g kg− 1 of total fiber) is much higher than in cauliflower by-
product (23 g kg− 1 of total fiber in floret and 31 g kg− 1 in upper stem),
artichoke by-product (32 g kg− 1 in receptacle and 36 g kg− 1 in stem) or
than chicory by-product (7 g kg− 1 in leaf bud and 48 g kg− 1 in root)

Table 3
Soluble sugars content by HPLC in tomato fiber.

Batch Fructose (g kg− 1) Glucose (g kg− 1)

Mean value Mean value

2005 1 1.340a 1.350a

2 1.381a 1.417a
3 1.852a 1.242a
2006 1 3.834b 2.867b
2 3.459b 2.944b
3 3.691b 2.589b

Fig. 1. HPLC profile of soluble sugars in tomato fiber (column: Luna 5 μ NH2; eluant: Results expressed as mean values (n = 3). Different letters mean statistical significant
acetonitrile/water 80/20; 0.9 ml/min; refraction index detection). differences, p b 0.05 (between batches of each year and between the two years).
710 P. García Herrera et al. / Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 11 (2010) 707–711

Fig. 2. Multiple range test (LSD, 95.0%) applied to the data of proximal composition and soluble sugar content of tomato fiber (different letters mean statistically significant
differences).

(Femenia et al., 1998), as well as different types of grape pomace (about enough to meet the legal requirements to use the nutritional claim
544 g kg− 1 according to Canett Romero et al., 2004), which provides by- “Source of Fiber”. Results obtained in this study contribute to
products with levels of dietary fiber close to TF, as it is the case of grape demonstrate that TF meets many of the requirements for an “ideal
antioxidant dietary fiber (730 g kg− 1) (Pérez Jiménez et al., 2008). Del dietary fiber” reported by Larrauri (1999). Further research would be
Valle (2004) reported 803.9 g kg− 1 of insoluble fiber and 85.36 g kg− 1 desirable, to assess the physiological effects of this fiber in the human
of soluble fiber in tomato by-product, which are in concordance with body, as well as the physico-chemical effects in the food products
those obtained in the present study on TF. However, the ratio between enriched with “tomato fiber”.
insoluble and soluble fiber in TF (near 10:1) is more similar to grains
than to other fruit products (Grigelmo-Miguel & Martín-Belloso, 1999).
From all the obtained results it can be concluded that the TF is mainly
composed by carbohydrates, with an average value of 80% of total
dietary fiber (much higher than other vegetable by-products), being
insoluble fiber the major component, which might justify its use as a
functional ingredient for the elaboration of food ingredients with
potential health-promoting effects. Its inclusion in fiber poor products
could contribute to enrich the insoluble fiber content, and thus enhance
the fiber intake in the population. According to the Regulation 1924/
2006, the product TF characterized in this study can be considered under
the denomination of “Source of Fiber”, since its contents surpass 3 g/
100 g (see Table 2). Considering the mean fiber content of TF product, a
minimum addition of 3.9 g of TF per 100 g of final product will be

Table 4
Fiber fractions in tomato fiber.

Batch Insoluble fiber (g kg− 1) Soluble fiber (g kg− 1)

Mean value Mean value

2005 1 782.87ab 74.59ab

2 767.47ab 79.33ab
3 726.06a 44.58a
2006 1 746.11ab 65.63ab
2 740.06a 85.64b
3 798.48b 54.19ab

Results expressed as mean values (n = 3). Different letters mean statistical significant Fig. 3. Multiple range test (LSD, 95.0%) applied to the data of fiber fractions of tomato
differences, p b 0.05 (between batches of each year and between the two years). fiber (different letters mean statistically significant differences).
 P. García Herrera et al. / Innovative Food Science and Emerging Technologies 11 (2010) 707–711
Acknowledgment
This work has been funded by the research project UCM-PR1/06-
144423.
References
AOAC (2005). In W. Horwitz, & G. W. Latimer (Eds.), Official methods of analysis of AOAC
International (pp. 2200)., 18th ed. Gaithersburg: AOAC.
Bernalte, M.J., Castro Gómez, F.J., Gervasini Rodriguez, C., Hernández Méndez, M.T.,
Lozano Ruiz, M. & Montero de Espinosa Tena, V. (2000). New product based on fiber
of tomato. Department of Biology and Production of the Vegetables. University and
Extremadura. Patent p200001264. Registred Name Dates 19/05/2000.
Brett, C., & Waldron, K. (1996). Physiology and biochemistry of plant cell walls, 2a ed.
London: Chapman & Hall.
Burkitt, D. P., Walker, A. R. P., & Painter, N. S. (1974). Dietary fibre and disease. JAMA,
229, 1068−1074.
Campbell, J. M., Bauer, L. L., Fahey, G. C., Hogart, A. J. C. L., Wolf, B. W., & Hunter, D. E.
(1997). Selected fructooligosaccharide (1-kestose, nystose, and 1F-b-fructofurano-
sylnystose) composition of foods and feeds. Journal of Agricultural and Food
Chemistry, 45, 3076−3082.
Canett Romero, R., Ledesma Osuna, A. I., & Robles Sánchez, R. M. (2004). Caracterización
de galletas elaboradas con cascarilla de orujo de uva. ALAN, 54(1), 93−99.
Del Valle, M. (2004). Utilidad del subproducto obtenido en la elaboración de derivados de
tomate. Doctoral thesis, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain.
Del Valle, M., Cámara, M. M., & Torija, M. E. (2005). Aprovechamiento de residuos
vegetales: subproducto de tomate. Alimentación, Equipos y Tecnología, 201, 87−93.
Del Valle, M., Cámara, M. M., & Torija, M. E. (2006). Chemical characterization of tomato
pomace. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 86, 1232−1236.
Femenia, A., Robertson, J. A., Waldron, K. W., & Selvendran, R. R. (1998). Cauliflower
(Brassica oleracea L), globe artichoke (Cinara scolymus) and chicory witloof
(Cichorium intybus) processing by-products as sources of dietary fibre. Journal of
the Science of Food and Agricultural, 77, 511−518.
Fernandez-Ruiz, V. (2003). Selección de índices de calidad para la mejora de tomate.
Doctoral thesis. Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain.
Grigelmo-Miguel, N., & Martín-Belloso, O. (1999). Comparison of dietary fiber from by-
products of processing fruits and greens and from cereals. Lebensmittel-Wissenschaft und
Technologie, 32, 503−508.
Hogarth, A. J. C. L., Hunter, D. E., Jacobs, W. A., Garleb, K. A., & Wolf, B. W. (2000). Ion
chromatographic determination of three fructooligosaccharide oligomers in
711
prepared and preserved foods. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 48,
5326−5330.
Lario, Y., Sendra, E., García-Pérez, J., Fuentes, C., Sayas-Barberá, E., Fernández-López, J., et al.
(2004). Preparation of high dietary fiber powder from lemon juice by-products.
Innovative Food Science & Emerging Technologies, 5(1), 113−117.
Larrauri, J. A. (1999). New approaches in the preparation of high dietary fibre powders
from fruit by-products. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 10, 3−8.
MARM (2009). Avances de producciones y superficies agrícolas. Cultivos industriales.
Boletín Mensual de Estadística. Madrid: MARM (http://www.mapa.es/es/estadistica/
pags/superficie/superficie.htm (last access 29 June 2010)).
Martínez Alvarez, J. R., de Arpe Muñoz, C., Urrialde de Andrés, R., Fontecha, J., Murcia
Tomás, M. A., Gómez Candela, C., et al. (2003). Nuevos alimentos para nuevas
necesidades. Nutrición y Salud (pp. 188). Madrid: Consejería de Sanidad.
Mollá, E., Cámara, M. M., Díez, C., & Torija, M. E. (1994, Jul-Agost). Estudio de la
determinación de azúcares en frutas y derivados. Alimentaria, 87−93.
Mongeau, R. (2003). Dietary fibre. In R. Macrae, R. K. Robinson, & M. J. Sadler (Eds.),
Encyclopaedia of food science and nutrition (pp. 1362−1387). New York: Academic Press.
Muir, J. G., Rose, R., Rosella, O., Liels, K., Barret, J. S., Sheperd, S. J., et al. (2009).
Measurement of short-chain carbohydrates in common Australian vegetables and
fruits by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Journal of Agricultural
and Food Chemistry, 57, 554−565.
Osborne, D. R., & Voogt, P. (1986). Análisis de los nutrientes de los alimentos (pp. 258).
Zaragoza: Acribia.
Pérez Jiménez, J., Serrano, J., Tabernero, M., Arranz, S., Díaz-Rubio, M. E., García-Diz, L.,
et al. (2008). Effects of grape antioxidant dietary fiber in cardiovascular disease risk
factors. Nutrition, 24(7–8), 646−653.
Prosky, L., Asp Nils Georg Scheizer, F. T., DeVries, W. J., & Furda, I. (1998). Determination
of insoluble, soluble and total dietary fiber in food products: Interlaboratory study.
Journal Association Official Analitical Chemistry, 71, 1017−1023.
Sánchez-Mata, M. C., Peñuela-Teruel, M. J., Cámara-Hurtado, M., Díez-Marqués, C., &
Torija-Isasa, M. E. (1998). Determination of mono-, di, and oligosaccharides in
legumes by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography, using an amino-bonded
silica column. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 48, 3648−3652.
Thebaudin, J. Y., Lefebvre, A. C., Harrington, M., & Bourgeois, C. M. (1997). Dietary fibers:
Nutritional and technological interest. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 8,
41−48.
Trumbo, P., Schlicker, S., Yates, A. A., & Poos, M. (2002). Dietary reference intakes for
energy, carbohydrate, fiber, fat, fatty acids, cholesterol, protein and amino acids.
Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 102, 1621−1630.
Yamada, H. (1996). Contributions of pectins on health care. Pectins and pectinases.
Progress in Biotechnology, 14, 173−190.