Functional characterization of hempseeds for nutritional applications

Protein-energy malnutrition is a global challenge that requires atten tion, especially with population growth and ongoing food security plans. Therefore, nutritional research is investigating new protein sources for the food/feed sector, that can ensure a high nutritional profile and a key role in environmental protection. Among these, industrial hemp (Cannabis sativa L.) can be a promising source of high-quality nutrients. Today, following the re-establishment of the cultivation of hemp plants (<0.2–0.3% of delta-9-tetrahydrocannab inol), there is a growing interest in the production of the seeds due to their relevant nutritional value. While the nutritional profile of hempseeds (HSs) is mostly described in the literature, the functional aspect requires further studies. The aim of the study was to assess the total phenolic content (TPC) by the Folin-Ciocalteu method and the antioxidant activity by the ABTS assay of HSs, comparing them to linseeds (LSs), matrix widely used in feed sector, following in vitro and ex vivo digestion protocols. At the same time, the efficacy of the two models was evaluated. For the in vitro protocol, 0.5 g of sample was subjected to oral, gastric (39 °C × 2 h) and intestinal (39 °C × 4 h) digestion using commercial enzymes. Considering ex vivo digestion, after col lecting gastric and intestinal fluids in piglets (days 40, n=24), they were pooled. Then, 0.5 g of sample was subjected to gastric digestion (39 °C × 2 h) in gastric fluid, and further exposed to intestinal fluid (39 °C × 2h). Collected data showed that dry matter digestibility was not sta tistically significant between ex vivo and in vitro protocols (48.13±1.10% vs 56.01±0.50%, respectively). The same trend was observed for protein digestibility. Simultaneously, HSs showed an interesting functional profile. More specifically, HSs, after in vitro digestion, showed a higher TPC (846.18±23.81mg Acid Ascorbic Equivalent (AAE)/100 g), although not statistically significant compared to that of LSs (451.44±59.29mg AAE/100 g). This trend was also confirmed for the antioxidant profile of HSs and LSs (2368.58±117.89 vs 1334.45±43.59mg Trolox Equivalent/100 g, respectively), showing statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). These results encourage further investigation of the bioefficacy of HSs including both the identification of molecules involved and the setting up of in vivo trial, to identify the best level of inclusion of this matrix to ensure high animal performance and welfare