ArticleFrontiers in toxicology2026
Protein quality and allergenicity assessment of chia seeds (
Article in Frontiers in toxicology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to assess the protein quality and allergenic potential of chia seeds ( Methods: Three chia flour samples-partial defatted flour as reference, standardised partial defatted flour, and protein concentrate-were analysed. Protein content was determined by Kjeldahl method. Protein quality was evaluated based on the amino acid profile and the estimation of amino acid score. Proteins were identified by SDS-PAGE through comparison with existing literature and then confirmed by in solution tryptic digestion coupled with high-resolution mass spectrometry analysis. Allergenicity was assessed by Results: The protein content ranged from 25% to 26% in the raw materials to 56% in the concentrate. Furthermore, SDS-PAGE profiles were comparable between samples, confirming the effectiveness of the extraction method applied. All samples showed balanced amino acid profiles and amino acid scores above one, meeting FAO/WHO requirements for adults and children. The main proteins identified in chia were 11S and 7S globulins, albumins and oleosins. The identified chia peptides were used to obtain a coverage of these with sesame protein sequences, confirming the attended homology. The potential cross-reactivity with sesame proteins, primarily retrieved from the literature, was then confirmed Conclusion: This study provided insights on the effectiveness of the extraction method applied on chia protein quality, which is essential for their inclusion in balanced food formulations. The approach used for assessing allergenicity also highlighted that the level of molecular and immunological knowledge can differ among novel foods, making it challenging to define a general methodological framework for evaluating their allergenic potential and cross-reactivity risks. These results can be useful both as starting point for the inclusion of protein extracts from chia seeds as safe ingredient, while also highlighting the current lack of comprehensive molecular characterization-including incomplete sequence data and uncharacterized potential epitopes-which limits the full assessment of their allergenic risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.