TYPE Mini Review

PUBLISHED 05 July 2024

DOI 10.3389/fnut.2024.1378556

A review on nutritional quality of

OPEN ACCESS animal and plant-based milk
alternatives: a focus on protein
EDITED BY
Melanie Charron,
Soremartec Italia Srl, Italy

REVIEWED BY
Alessandra Mazzocchi, Romdhane Karoui * and Inès Bouaicha
University of Milan, Italy
Univ. Artois, Univ. Lille, Univ. Littoral Côte d’Opale, Univ. Picardie Jules Verne, Univ. de Liège, INRAE,
*CORRESPONDENCE Junia, Lens, France
Romdhane Karoui
romdhane.karoui@univ-artois.fr

RECEIVED 29January 2024 In recent years, the demand of consumers for products rich in protein is of
ACCEPTED 11 June 2024 significant growth. Due to its structure in tissues, protein is considered an
PUBLISHED 05 July 2024
essential nutrient for maintenance and growth. It is well known that dairy foods
CITATION differ from plant-based milk alternatives in their composition. In addition to
Karoui R and Bouaicha I (2024) A review on
protein content, nutrients in milk and plant-based beverages vary greatly in
nutritional quality of animal and plant-based
milk alternatives: a focus on protein. composition and content, such as: Calcium, fiber and fat. The nutritional quality
Front. Nutr. 11:1378556. of dairy protein sources depends on both their amino acid composition and
doi: 10.3389/fnut.2024.1378556
bioavailability. Indeed, dairy products are considered to be excellent sources
COPYRIGHT of proteins with high Digestible Indispensable Amino Acid Score (DIAAS) values
© 2024 Karoui and Bouaicha. This is an
open-access article distributed under the
varying from 100 to 120. However, plant proteins are considered to have generally
terms of the Creative Commons Attribution lower essential amino acid contents and lower DIAAS values than dairy proteins.
License (CC BY). The use, distribution or For example, pea and rice proteins are known to have medium and lower DIAAS
reproduction in other forums is permitted,
provided the original author(s) and the
with values of 62 and 47, respectively. The present review is dedicated to study
copyright owner(s) are credited and that the the nutritional quality of animal and plant-based milk alternatives, where a focus
original publication in this journal is cited, in on protein composition and amount are determined.
accordance with accepted academic
practice. No use, distribution or reproduction
is permitted which does not comply with KEYWORDS
these terms.
animal dairy products, plant-based milk alternatives, protein, nutritional, quality

1 Introduction
In recent years, consumers have increasingly opted for plant-based diets (1, 2). In fact,
according to Battisti et al. (3), plant-based milk alternatives are one of the emerging areas in
the food industry, as the consumption of plant-based milk alternatives has increased
significantly and is rapidly gaining popularity, mainly due to its nutritional value and numerous
positive effects and health benefits to humans (4). Given that approximately 65% of the world’s
population has reduced lactose digestibility and allergies, reliance on plant-based milk
alternatives has emerged as an ideal alternative to meet the daily nutritional needs of
these consumers.
In this context, both research and industry are interested in developing plant-based milk
alternatives as an alternative to animal milk products. The market is expected to reach $66.9
billion by 2030, according to a new report from Grand View Research, Inc. as indicated in
previous research studies (5, 6). As depicted by Pritulska et al. (6), plant-based milk alternatives
could be produced from nuts (almond milk), grains (oat milk), legumes (soy milk), seeds
(hemp milk) and so on.
Numerous research studies were conducted to determine the quality, functionality, and
nutritional properties of plant-based milk alternatives. For example, Le Roux et al. (7) depicted
that plant-based milk alternatives produced with pea and faba beans presented protein
digestibility varying between 51–66 and 42–73% for static and dynamic digestion systems,

Frontiers in Nutrition 01 frontiersin.org

Karoui and Bouaicha 10.3389/fnut.2024.1378556

respectively. In another approach, Khalesi and FitzGerald (8) blended for histidine. Lower DIAAS values were determined for individual
soybean or pea protein at a level of 25% with animal milk protein and amino acids for the other plant-based beverages. Indeed, for soy plant-
observed an amelioration in the digestibility level since soy and animal based beverages, the lowest DIAAS values (111%) was noted for valine
milk protein blend was found to be digested in the gastric phase, while and tryptophan and the highest one (164%) for histidine. Again, all
pea and animal milk protein blend was mainly digested during the DIAAS values for soy beverages were higher than 100%. Regarding oat
intestinal phase. beverages, histidine and lysine presented, respectively, the highest
Despite the popularity of plant-based milk alternatives, these (183%) and the lowest (73%) DIAAS values, respectively. For the oat
products sometimes presented some unpleasant sensory notes such as almond beverages, lysine, threonine and tryptophan presented the
beany off-flavor, chalky or grainy mouthfeel, darker appearance, lowest DIAAS values, respectively: 34, 93 and 94%. The highest
instability manifested by liquid separation (9, 10). To counteract these DIAAS values was noted for Histidine with 187%.
disadvantages and increase the acceptability of plant-based milk
alternatives, flavorings and stabilizers are used in the formulation of
plant-based milk alternatives (11). However, the use of additives in the
formulation of plant-based milk alternatives may lead to concerns 2.1 Soybean milk
among consumers who are increasingly scrutinizing the nature of
ingredient lists (12). To address this problem, recent research studies The production and consumption of soybean milk have increased
have been conducted by combining different plant proteins such as significantly over the last two decades due to its nutritional value and
soy and almond milk blend, oat, and cashew blend, and flaxmilk and health benefit (25, 26). For example, besides the absence of lactose and
pea protein allowing to produce products with a high nutritional value cholesterol in soy milk, its protein composition is quite similar to that
(12). Therefore, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive review of of cow milk (27).
the quality of plant-based milk alternatives compared to animal dairy According to the United States Department of Agriculture Food
products by focusing on protein. Composition Databases, soybean milk contains a protein level of
3.65 g/100 g. In order to increase the bioavailability of bioactive
compounds present in soybean milk, a fermentation process could
be applied. Indeed, it has been reported that the fermentation process
2 Milk and milk analogs in terms of reduced anti-nutritional factors (proteinase- inhibitors, phytic acid,
their composition in protein and urease, oxalic acids) and increase the bioavailability of bioactive
digestibility components (28). The authors explained this trend by the fact that
during the fermentation process, micro-organisms break down
Dairy milk is considered to be a source of protein, fat, mineral complex organic substances into simpler molecules increasing the
especially calcium and phosphorus, and several other micronutrients number of free isoflavones and peptides (28). In another approach,
(Table 1). For the production of plant-based milk alternatives, different Sanjukta and Rai (29) fermented soybean with B. subtilis MTCC5480
ingredients such as: (i) vitamins A and D, minerals and so on (16); and and observed a higher amount of free amino acids level due to the
(ii) sugars, flavors, are used to improve taste and texture, thus affecting protein hydrolysis. The authors mentioned that B. subtilis increase the
the overall health profile. free radical scavenging property to an appreciable level and inhibits
Protein is fundamental to maintain human body function. The
nutritional quality of proteins is affected by their amino acid TABLE 2 Nitrogen to protein conversion factor for animal and plant
composition and bioavailability. The protein level is calculated using protein.

the nitrogen conversion factor, depending on the protein’s origin. Protein type Factor Reference
Table 2 expressed the nitrogen to protein conversion factor for animal
Milk 6.38 (17)
and plant protein, while Table 3 indicated the amino acid composition
varied according to the plant-based milk alternatives (25–27). Almond 5.18 (18)

The digestible indispensable amino acid score (DIAAS) of some Rice 5.95 (17)
plant-based milk alternatives has recently determined by Khamzaeva Soybean 5.71 (17)
et al. (27) (Table 4). For cow’s milk, all DIAAS were higher than 100%
Coconut 5.31 (19)
with the lowest one (117%) for tryptophan and the highest one (198%)

TABLE 1 Composition of bovine milk compared to some plant-based milk alternatives.

Macromolecules Minerals References

Milk type Protein (%) Fat (%) Carbohydrates (%) Ca (mg/100 g) P (mg/100 g)
Bovine milk 2.9–6 3.4–6.4 3.20–5.40 122–134 119–121 (13)

Almond milk 1.9–2.50 3.20–3.60 4.30–4.70 13.05–13.15 75.03–75.33 (14)

Soy milk 3.82–3.98 3.1–4.3 4.64–4.92 4–5.4 49–62.6 (14)

Rice milk 0.28–1.26 0.97–1.11 9.41–12.7 118–121.35 55.91–56.86 (15)

Coconut milk 0.59–2 4.12–6 3.75–9.41 176–178.1 240–256.35 (15)

Frontiers in Nutrition 02 frontiersin.org

Karoui and Bouaicha 10.3389/fnut.2024.1378556

TABLE 3 Comparative overview of some amino acid profile of bovine milk with commercially nondairy plant-based milk alternatives.

Some amino acids (mg/100 g) References

Milk type Lysine Methionine phenylalanine tryptophan Leucine Histidine Valine
Bovine milk 49–96 17–27 38–56 n.d. 90–108 15–26 33–53 (5, 20)

Soy bean milk 0.88–3.92 0.31–0.85 1.86–2.79 0.3–0.8 2.94–4.24 0.55–1.49 1.32–2.59 (5, 21)

Almond milk 36.2–57.4 27.1–27.95 50.9–50.55 13.9–13.98 83.2–83 21.8–25.7 38.3–73.6 (5)

Rice milk 118.4–179.4 155.6–168.9 393.3–448.5 n.d. 496.9–585.2 186.6–206.6 306.2–375.2 (5, 22)

Peanut milk 36.75–36.7 n.d. n.d. 30.02–30.3 64.5–64.3 27.2–27.73 32.63–32.79 (5, 23)

Coconut milk 3.50–5.1 1.2–2.9 2.7–5.9 3.20–3.30 3.9–6.5 1.8–1.9 3.5–7.5 (5, 24)
n.d., not determined.

TABLE 4 Digestible indispensable amino acid score (DIAAS)a ratio for Histidine, Threonine, Valine, Isoleucine, Leucine, Lysine and Tryptophan in soy,
oat, and almond plant-based beverages and cow’s milk (27).

DIAA reference ratio

Histidine Threonine Valine Isoleucine Leucine Lysine Tryptophan
Cow’s milk 1.98 1.48 1.35 1.51 1.38 1.60 1.17

Soy beverage 1.64 1.39 1.11 1.47 1.14 1.24 1.11

Oat beverage 1.83 1.17 1.24 1.30 1.18 0.73 0.95

Almond beverage 1.87 0.93 1.08 1.26 1.10 0.34 0.94

a
The DIAA reference ratio was calculated by dividing the content of the indispensable amino acid by the reference pattern of the respective amino acid (27).

angiotensin I-converting enzyme resulting in decreasing blood and again found that cow milk scored higher than almond milk (1 vs.
pressure level. Recently, Battisti et al. (3) analyzed 15 different 0.4, respectively). One of the main conclusions of their study was that
commercial soy milk using a label-free quantitative proteomics almond milk is not a substitute for cow’s milk because of its lower
approach and found different levels of essential amino acids and DIAAS value.
non-essential amino acids. The authors depicted a relative lower Almond is ranked as fourth among other tree nuts allergy that
amount of histidine, methionine, tryptophan and cysteine in soy milk could be presented as mild such as simple oral allergy and complex as
and recommended the necessity of fortifying commercial soy milk fatal anaphylaxis. Among allergy compounds, amandin is the major
with these amino acids. The obtained results are confirmed, recently, protein in almond, legumin, and pruning. The amandin allergen is
by others who depicted the absence of tryptophan in soybean highly resistant to heat treatments but sensitive to pepsin enzyme (34).
grain (27). As for soy bean milk, the application of mechanical and fermentation
treatments removed easily allergen proteins allowing almond milk to
make its position among other plant-based milk alternatives
substitutes in the market.
2.2 Almond milk

Almond is considered one of the “brain-foods” since it is 2.3 Rice milk

considered to promote mental alertness, concentration, recall skills,
memory and helps to get good sleep when taken at night (30). Patients Rice milk is made primarily from ground rice and water. It is
who are suffering from lactose intolerance are advised to consume easy to digest, and suitable for allergy sufferers. Like other plant-
almond milk instead of soy milk (31). Recently, Ashkanani (32) based beverages, rice milk presents a creamy texture that resembles
compared the nutritional quality of almond and oat milk and found dairy milk (35). Although rice contains a relatively high level of
that the former was more effective to increase protein level among proteins (10%), it suffers from the absence of threonine and lysine.
others. Ashkanani (32) depicted that the in vitro digestion of almond On the contrary, it contains significant amounts of ferulic acid,
proteins by pepsin led to the destabilization and coalescence of sinapic acid and p-coumaric acid. The most abundant amino acids
almond oil bodies that did not significantly affect the rate of protein in black rice milk are leucine, glutamic acid, serine, and aspartic acid
delivery to the small intestine. (36). The low protein content in black rice milk contributed to the
In a different approach, Wang et al. (33) determined the DIAAS low number of amino acids in agreement with the findings of
of almond milk compared to cow milk. It is well known that the higher others (35).
the DIAAS score, the greater the quality of the protein material in the It has been reported that soaking is effective in increasing the
food. The authors depicted a DIAAS of 0.39 and 1.45 for almond and minerals and vitamins (B6 and B12), insoluble fiber and bioactive
cow milk, respectively indicating the higher digestibility of the former components in rice (37). As for soy and almond milk, fermentation
milk. The same authors used another universal score called PDCAAS with the use of lactic acid bacteria breaks down the anti-nutritional

Frontiers in Nutrition 03 frontiersin.org

Karoui and Bouaicha 10.3389/fnut.2024.1378556

factors and enhances calcium, magnesium, and iron levels, and helps 3 Conclusion
in the digestion and immunity of other internal organs (37).
Plant-based milk alternatives will continue to be an important
research area in the new product development category of food science
2.4 Coconut milk and technology by setting a more strategic direction for innovation and
next-generation protein blends. Plant-based milk alternatives meet the
Coconut milk is prepared by a mechanical method that starts by changing consumer behavior toward novel plant-based milk
shelling the nut and separating the meat, which is cleaned and grated. alternatives, the scientific community expects continuous efforts to
Mixing with warm water to extract oil, milk, and aromatic components improve plant-based milk alternatives quality through R&D activities
(38). Different parameters such as grinding time and incubation time and technological interventions. It is noted that deep and continuous
present a major impact on coconut milk yield production. Coconut research studies should be realized in the next years to ameliorate the
milk contains protein, fat, carbohydrates, minerals (calcium, nutritional quality of plant -based milk, particularly in their
phosphorus, and potassium), and vitamins (vitamins B1, B3, B5, and composition in amino acids. This could be achieved by combining
B6, C, E) (39). Coconut protein presents a large number of essential different plant proteins that induce an amelioration in the composition
amino acids, which are more easily digested and absorbed with a of amino acids of plant-based milk alternatives. In addition, research
DIAAS value of 0.79 versus 1.45 for cow milk (40). on plant-based milk alternatives should be deepened regarding the
Thaiphanit and Anprung (41) produced yoghurt samples with amelioration of their organoleptic properties and the prolongation of
different ratios of cow and coconut milk (100:0, 80:20, 60:40, their shelf life. This can be achieved by inactivating plant enzymes
50:50, 40:60, 20:80, 0:100). The authors found that producing using new process techniques such as high-pressure treatment, pulsed
yoghurt with cow and coconut blends is more nutritious than the electric fields, ohmic heating and cold plasma.
ordinary one and suggested more exploration of the use of coconut
and cow blend milk for the production of yoghurt.
Author contributions
2.5 Oat milk RK: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project
administration, Supervision, Validation, Writing – review & editing.
Oat presents nutritional components including phenolic IB: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft.
compounds, saponin, sterol, phytic acid and other anti-oxidant
components. Oat contains various fiber components such as
polysaccharides, oligosaccharides, lignin. Plant-based beverages Funding
containing lentils and peas or just adding peas to oat drinks increase
the concentration of amino acids (42). The authors found that the The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for
most ideal mixture to obtain a complete amino acid composition was the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
obtained with: (i) a raw material containing 1.1% oat protein, 1.5%
each pea and lentil protein; (ii) 1.1% oat protein, 2.9% pea protein; (iii)
0.8% oat protein, 1.1% pea protein, and 2.1% lentil protein. These Conflict of interest
mixtures were found to significantly increase the amounts of
phenylalanine, leucine, and threonine, and to a lesser extent isoleucine, The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
valine, methionine, histamine and lysine. One of the main conclusions absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could
of their study is that most plant-based beverages made from single- be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
plant ingredients do not have an amino acid profile that meets
human needs.
As observed for other plant-based milk alternatives, the Publisher’s note
fermentation process induces the formation of active ingredients
improving thus the quality of plant-based milk alternatives, plant All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
based dairy products (43). In this context, germinated oat beverages and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations,
fermented with Lactobacillus reuteri, Lactobacillus plantarum B28, and or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product
Streptococcus thermophilus was found to present health benefits for that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its
consumers (44, 45). manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

References
1. Herreman L, Nommensen P, Pennings B, Laus MC. Comprehensive overview of 3. Battisti I, Ebinezer LB, Lomolino G, Masi A, Arrigoni G. Protein
the quality of plant- and animal-sourced proteins based on the digestible indispensable profile of commercial soybean milks analyzed by label-free quantitative
amino acid score. Food Sci Nutr. (2020) 8:5379–91. doi: 10.1002/fsn3.1809 proteomics. Food Chem. (2021) 352:129299. doi: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2021.
129299
2. Mathai JK, Liu Y, Stein HH. Values for digestible indispensable amino acid scores
(DIAAS) for some dairy and plant proteins may better describe protein quality than 4. Sethi S, Tyagi SK, Anurag RK. Plant-based milk alternatives an emerging segment
values calculated using the concept for protein digestibility-corrected amino acid scores of functional beverages: a review. J Food Sci Technol. (2016) 53:3408–23. doi: 10.1007/
(PDCAAS). Brit J Nut. (2017) 117:490–9. doi: 10.1017/S0007114517000125 s13197-016-2328-3

Frontiers in Nutrition 04 frontiersin.org

Karoui and Bouaicha 10.3389/fnut.2024.1378556

5. Walther B, Guggisberg D, Badertscher R, Egger L, Portmann R, Dubois S, et al. 26. Aydar EF, Tutuncu S, Ozcelik B. Plant-based milk substitutes: bioactive
Comparison of nutritional composition between plant-based drinks and cow's milk. compounds, conventional and novel processes, bioavailability studies, and health effects.
Front Nutr. (2022) 9:988707. doi: 10.3389/fnut.2022.988707 J Funct Foods. (2020) 70:103975. doi: 10.1016/j.jff.2020.103975
6. Pritulska N, Motuzka I, Koshelnyk A, Motuzka O, Yashchenko L, Jarossová M, et al. 27. Khamzaeva N, Kunz C, Schamann A, Pferdmenges L, Briviba K. Bioaccessibility
Consumers preferences on the mrket of plant-based milk analogues. Potravinarstvo. and digestibility of proteins in plant-based drinks and cow’s milk: antioxidant potential
(2021) 15:131–42. doi: 10.5219/1485 of the bioaccessible fraction. J Agric Food Chem. (2024) 72:2300–8. doi: 10.1021/acs.
jafc.3c07221
7. Le Roux L, Menard O, Chacon R, Dupont D, Jeantet R, Deglaire A, et al. Are faba
bean and pea proteins potential whey protein substitutes in infant formulas? An in vitro 28. Sanjukta S, Rai AK, Muhammed A, Jeyaram K, Talukdar NC. Enhancement of
dynamic digestion approach. Food Secur. (2020) 9:362. doi: 10.3390/foods9030362 antioxidant properties of two soybean varieties of Sikkim Himalayan region by
proteolytic Bacillus subtilis fermentation. J Func Foods. (2015) 14:650–8. doi: 10.1016/j.
8. Khalesi M, FitzGerald RJ. In vitro digestibility and antioxidant activity of plant
jff.2015.02.033
protein isolate and milk protein concentrate blends. Catalysts. (2021) 11:787. doi:
10.3390/catal11070787 29. Sanjukta S, Rai AK. Production of bioactive peptides during soybean fermentation
and their potential health benefits. Trends Food Sci Technol. (2016) 50:1–10. doi:
9. Sakthi TS, Meenakshi V, Kanchana S, Vellaikumar S. Study on standardisation and
10.1016/j.tifs.2016.01.010
quality evaluation of peanut milk by different processing methods. Eur J Nut Food Safety.
(2020) 12:60–72. doi: 10.9734/ejnfs/2020/v12i530228 30. Grundy MM, Carrière F, Mackie AR, Gray DA, Butterworth PJ, Ellis PR. The role
499 of plant cell wall encapsulation and porosity in regulating lipolysis during the
10. Vanga SK, Singh A, Raghavan V. Review of conventional and novel food processing
digestion of almond 500 seeds. Food Funct. (2016) 7:69–78. doi: 10.1039/C5FO00758E
methods on food allergens. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. (2015) 57:2077–94. doi:
10.1080/10408398.2015.1045965 31. Lee J, Townsend JA, Thompson T, Garitty T, De A, Yu Q, et al. Analysis of the
cariogenic potential of various almond Milk beverages using a Streptococcus mutans
11. Pua A, Tang VCY, Goh RMV, Sun J, Lassabliere B, Liu SQ. Ingredients, processing, biofilm model in vitro. Caries Res. (2018) 52:51–7. doi: 10.1159/000479936
and fermentation: addressing the organoleptic boundaries of plant-based dairy
analogues. Food Secur. (2022) 11:875. doi: 10.3390/foods11060875 32. Ashkanani RHH. Comparative study of the use of Cow's Milk and plant-based
alternatives such as almond Milk and oat Milk on diabetic rats. Int J Food Sci. (2023)
12. Lee PY, Leong SY, Oey I. The role of protein blends in plant-based milk alternative: 6:50–64. doi: 10.47604/ijf.2212
a review through the consumer lens. Trend Food Sci Technol. (2024) 143:104268. doi:
10.1016/j.tifs.2023.104268 33. Wang X, Ye A, Singh H. Structural and physicochemical changes in almond milk
during in vitro gastric digestion: impact on the delivery of protein and lipids. Food Func.
13. Guetouache M, Guessas B, Medjekal S. Composition and nutritional value of raw (2020) 11:4314–26. doi: 10.1039/C9FO02465D
milk. Issues Bio Sci Pharma Res. (2014) 2350:115–22. doi: 10.15739/ibspr.005
34. Moore SS, Costa A, Pozza M, Vamerali T, Niero G, Censi S, et al. How animal milk
14. Alozie YE, Udofia US. Nutritional and sensory properties of almond (Prunus and plant-based alternatives diverge in terms of fatty acid, amino acid, and mineral
amygdalu Var. Dulcis) seed milk. World J Dairy Food Sci. (2015) 10:117–21. doi: 10.5829/ composition. npj Sci Food. (2023) 7:50. doi: 10.1038/s41538-023-00227-w
idosi.wjdfs.2015.10.2.9622
35. Mandalari G, Mackie AR. Almond allergy: an overview on prevalence, thresholds,
15. Chalupa-Krebzdak S, Long CJ, Bohrer BM. Nutrient density and nutritional value regulations and allergen detection. Nutrients. (2018) 10:1706. doi: 10.3390/nu10111706
of milk and plant-based milk alternatives. Int Dairy J. (2018) 87:84–92. doi: 10.1016/j.
idairyj.2018.07.018 36. Romulo A, Sadek NF. Fatty acids and amino acids profile of organic black rice
(Oryza sativa L.) milk. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. (2022) 980:012032. doi:
16. Vanga SK, Raghavan V. How well do plant based alternatives fare nutritionally 10.1088/1755-1315/980/1/012032
compared to cow’s milk? J Food Sci Technol. (2018) 55:10–20. doi: 10.1007/
s13197-017-2915-y 37. Sharma NM, Vishnu GR, Priya V. Assessment of nutritional value of overnight
soaked cooked rice over unsoaked cooked rice. Int J Res Pharma Sci. (2018) 9:616–9.
17. FAO. Food energy–methods of analysis and conversion factors. Rome: FAO
(2003). 38. Wijaya C, Romulo A. Proximate analysis and antioxidant activity of red rice (Oryza
sativa L.) Milk. J Phys Conf Ser. (2021) 2049:12012. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/2049/1/012012
18. Mariotti F, Tomé D, Mirand P. Converting nitrogen into protein – beyond 6.25 and
Jones’ factors. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. (2008) 48:177–84. doi: 10.1080/10408390701279749 39. Chen Y, Chen Y, Fang Y, Pei Z, Zhang W. Coconut milk treated by atmospheric
cold plasma: effect on quality and stability. Food Chem. (2024) 430:137045. doi:
19. Petrozzi S. Practical instrumental analysis: methods, quality assurance, and 10.1016/j.foodchem.2023.137045
laboratory management. Weinheim: Wiley-Vch (2012).
40. Belewu MA, Belewu KY. Comparative Physico chemical evaluation of tiger nut,
20. Rafiq S, Huma N, Pasha I, Sameen A, Mukhtar O, Khan MI. Chemical soybean, and coconut milk sources. Int J Agric Biol. (2007) 5:787.
composition, nitrogen fractions and amino acids profile of milk from different animal
species. Asian-Austr J Anim Sci. (2015) 29:1022–8. doi: 10.5713/ajas.15.0452 41. Thaiphanit S, Anprung P. Physico-chemical and emulsion properties of edible
protein concentrate from coconut (Cocos nucifera L.) processing by-products and the
21. Carrera CS, Reynoso CM, Funes GJ, Martınez MJ, Dardanelli J, Resnik SL. Amino influence of heat treatment. Food Hydrocoll. (2016) 52:756–65. doi: 10.1016/j.
acid composition of soybean seeds as affected by climatic variables. Pesqui Agropecu foodhyd.2015.08.017
Bras. (2011) 46:1579–87. doi: 10.1590/S0100-204X2011001200001
42. Peters OO, Afolabi MO, Makinde FM. Chemical, physico-chemical and sensory
22. Freitas JB, Fernandes DC, Czeder LP, Lima JCR, Sousa AG, Naves MMV. Edible properties of yoghurt and yoghurt simulates produced from the blends of cow milk and
seeds and nuts grown in Brazil as sources of protein for human nutrition. Food Nut Sci. coconut milk. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. (2023) 1219:12020. doi:
(2012) 3:857–62. doi: 10.4236/fns.2012.36114 10.1088/1755-1315/1219/1/012020
23. Mota C, Santos M, Mauro R, Samman N, Matos AS, Torres D, et al. Protein content 43. Bonke A, Sieuwerts S, Petersen IL. Amino acid composition of novel plant drinks
and amino acids profile of pseudocereals. Food Chem. (2016) 193:55–61. doi: 10.1016/j. from oat, lentil and pea. Food Secur. (2020) 9:429. doi: 10.3390/foods9040429
foodchem.2014.11.043
44. Yu Y, Li X, Zhang J, Li X, Wang J, Sun B. Oat milk analogue versus traditional milk:
24. Patil U, Benjakul S. Coconut milk and coconut oil: their manufacture associated comprehensive evaluation of scientific evidence for processing techniques and health
with protein functionality. J Food Sci. (2018) 83:2019–27. doi: 10.1111/1750-3841.14223 effects. Food Chem. (2024) 19:100859. doi: 10.1016/j.fochx.2023.100859
25. Badger TM, Ronis MJJ, Simmen RCM, Simmen FA. Soy protein isolate and 45. Angelov A, Gotcheva V, Kuncheva R, Hristozova T. Development of a new oat-
protection against Cancer. J Am College Nut. (2005) 24:146S–9S. doi: based probiotic drink. Int J Food Microb. (2006) 112:75–80. doi: 10.1016/j.
10.1080/07315724.2005.10719456 ijfoodmicro.2006.05.015

Frontiers in Nutrition 05 frontiersin.org