الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 206 |  |  |
| | | from | 206 | | |
Abstract
Nutsare a natural healthy food product. They have a high nutritional
value because of their fiber, protein, vitamin and mineral content. Another
advantage to the health of nuts is because of their favorable fatty acid
composition, 80-90% of the fats being unsaturated fats. Unsaturated fats
appear to be relevant in relation to the prevention of cardiovascular diseases.
Also, nuts can be helping to regulate body weight, protect against typeΠ
diabetes, healthy for kidney, blood Pressure Control.
Yoghurt is one of the oldest most fermented dairy milk products and the
most popular of these products in Egypt and worldwide. It has a sharp
refreshing acid taste and typical flavour described as being similar to
walnuts. The value of yoghurt in human diet is determined by the nutritive
value of milk from which it is made and increased digestibility, but also on
the beneficial effect of intestinal microflora, prophylactic and healing
effects. Many health benefits have been attributed to yoghurt such as
improved lactose tolerance, protection against gastrointestinal infection,
effective treatment for specific types of diarrhea, relief of constipation
improved immunity, cholesterol reduction against cancer.
Summray
130
Adding nuts to dairy products (yoghurt) will be achieved two
objectives, the first is making this product more tasteful and the second is
boosting the dairy products effectiveness for biological activity.
This study was conducted to investigate the effect of adding almond
and peanut to yoghurt as dairy products to boost its effectiveness for
biological activity on rats feeding with different concentrations (3%, 5% and
7%) almond to yoghurt and different concentration also (3%, 5% and 7%) of
peanuts to yoghurt and there were feeding by basal diet as a –ne group and
+ve group which feeding by basal diet and yoghurt without any adding(as
control).
Thirty-two adult male albino rats, weighting 120± 5 g were used and
divided into eight groups each group there were four rats. Rats were housed
in wire cages under the normal laboratory condition and were fed on basal
diet for a week as an adaptation period.
Rats were divided into the following groups:
(4 rats pear each group)
Group 1: negative control group ,in this group rats were kept on basal
diet and tap water
Summray
131
Group 2: positive control group In this group rats were feed on basal
diet plus( 5 g from yoghurt without any adding ).
Group 3: basal diet plus 5 g yoghurt with treated 3% almonds.
Group 4: basal diet plus 5 g yoghurt with treatment 5% almonds.
Group 5: basal diet plus 5g yoghurt with treatment 7 % almonds.
Group 6: basal diet plus 5 g yoghurt with treatment 3% peanuts.
Group 7: basal diet plus 5 g yoghurt with treatment 5% peanuts.
Group 8: basal diet plus 5 g yoghurt with treatment 7 % peanuts.
At the same time, the organs of heart, liver, kidney, lung and spleen
were moved from each rat and weight,and then saved in formalin solution
10% for histopathological examination.
Statistical analysis:
Data were analyzed using a completely randomized design (SAS,
1985) when a significant main effect was detected, the means were separated
with the student-Newman-Keuls Test. Differences between treatments of
(P≤0.05) were considered significant
The obtain result can be summarize as following :
The chemical analysis results.
It could be observe that the tested fruits (almondsand peanuts) in all
have a modest contents of protein and ash , higher contents of fats and a
markedly contents of carbohydrates and fibers.
Almond:
Summray
132
(Moisture 5.39 g%, Protein 18g% , Fat 53.4 g% , Ash 8.9 g%,
Carbohydrates11.3 g% , Fiber 2.9 g%, Calories 591 g%).
Peanut:
(Moisture4.6 g% , Protein 25 g%, Fat 50 g%, Ash 3.2 g%,
Carbohydrates 11.8 g %, Fiber 5.4 g%, Calories 603g%).
Yoghurt:
(Moisture 86.04 g% , Protein 3.56 g%, Fat 4.0 g%, Ash 3.2 g%,
Carbohydrates 5.28 g %, Calories 72.46g%).
The Biological Result
The effect of experimental diets on BWG% , FI and FER
Thebody weight gain (B .W. G %) of negative control was
significantly (p ≤0.01 ) lower as compared with positive control , which was
9.69 ± 1.47 , 37.52 ± 1.38%, respectively. While the mean value all groups
didn’t show any significant differences when compared with positive control.
The food intake (F.I) for negative control was highly significantly
( p ≤0.01 ) comparing with positive control which ,being 301± 6.8 and
483.6 ± 3.0 , respectively. While the mean value all groups didn’t show any
significant differences when compared with positive control.
Summray
133
The food efficiency ratio ( F.E.R) of all groups which were didn’t
significantly differ when compared with positive control
The effect of experimental diets on weight of internal organs:
As for relative weight of liverof negative control was significantly
( p ≤ 0.01 )higher as compared with positive control , which was being3.46 ±
0.104% and 3.27 ± 0.26 g% ,respectively.
The mean value of relative weight ofheart of negative control was
significantly (p ≤ 0.05) less as compared with positive control , which was
being 0.44 ± 0.15 and 0.497 ± 0.096%,respectively .While the mean value
all groups didn’t show any significant differences when compared with
positive control. The mean value of relative weight of lung of all groups
didn’t significantly differ when compared with positive control.
The mean value of relative weight of spleen of negative control was
significantly ( p ≤0.01 ) higher as compared with positive control , which
was being 0.597 ± 0.045 and 0.157 ± 0.135 % ,respectively. While the
mean value of groups (G3 ,G5 and G6) didn’t show any significant
differences when compared with positive control. But the mean value of
groups (G1, G2 and G4) was significant different when compared with
positive control
Summray
134
The mean value of relative weight of kidney of negative control was
significantly (p ≤0.01 ) more as compared with positive control , which was
being 1.06± 0.131% and
0.68 ± 0.078% , respectively. While the mean value all groups didn’t
show any significant differences when compared with positive control
The mean value of relative weight of lung of all groups didn’t
significantly differ when compared with positive control
The effect of experimental diets on liver function :
The mean value of ALP of negative control was significantly( p ≤ 0.01)
less as compared with positive control , which was 86.67 ± 1.52 u/l
and 93.3 ± 2.51 u/l respectively .whereas the mean value groups ( G1,
G2, G4,G5 and G6) was significantly different when compared with
positive control . While the mean value group ( G3 ) didn’t show any
significant difference when compared with positive control
As for , the mean value of GPT of all groups which were didn’t
significantly differ when compared with positive control.
As shown the mean value ofGOT of negative control was significantly (
p≤ 0.01 ) less as compared with positive control , which was116.3 ± 6.43 u/l
and 124 ± 4.58 u/l , respectively.While the mean value of group G4 and G6
didn’t show any significant difference when compared with positive
control.whereas the mean value groups ( G1, G2 ,G3 and G5 ) were
significant different when compared with positive control
Summray
135
The effect of experimental diets onKidney function:
As shown the mean value of creatinin of negative control was
significantly ( p ≤0.01 ) less as compared with positive control , which was
0.85 ± 0.06 mg/dl and 0.99 ± 0.096 mg/dl , respectively. While the mean
value of group G1, G2, G4, G5 and G6 didn’t show any significant
differences as compared with positive control. whereas the mean value
groups (G3) showed significant difference when compared with positive
control .
As shown the mean value of urea of negative control was significantly
(p ≤ 0.01) lower as compared with positive control , which was 31.3 ± 1.53
mg/dl and39 ± 2.00 mg/dl , respectively. While the mean value of groups
(G1 – G2) didn’t show any significant difference when compared with
positive control whereas the mean value of groups G3, G4, G5 and G6 were
no significantly differed when compared with positive control.
As for the mean value of uric acid of all groups values didn’t significant
difference when compared with positive control.
The effect of experimental diets on serum Lipids profile:
The mean value of LDL of negative control were significantly( p ≤0.01)
more as compared with positive control , which were 103 ± 5.69 mg/dl and
98.21 ± 5 mg/dl ,respectively . While the mean value of groups G2, G3 and
G5 didn’t show any significantly difference when compared with positive
control. whereas the mean value of groups G1, G4 and G6 were
significantly difference when compared with positive control
Summray
136
As for mean value of HDL of positive control was significantly
( p ≤0.01 ) lower as compared with negative control , which was being
34 ± 1 mg/dl and 45 ± 5 mg/dl , respectively. While the mean value of
groups G1, G2 and G5 didn’t show any significantly differences when
compared with positive control .whereas the mean value of groups G3, G4
and G6 were significant different when compared with positive control .
As for the mean value of TG of negative control was significantly
( p ≤ 0.01) higher as compared with positive control , which was being 161.3
± 4.73 mg/dl and 150.3 ± 4.04 mg/dl, respectively . While the mean value
group G1, G2, G4 and G5 didn’t show any significantly difference when
compared with positive control. whereas the mean value groups G3 and G6
were significantly different when compared with positive control.
As shown the mean value of TC of negative control was significantly
(p ≤0.01 ) less as compared with positive control , which was being 169 ±
6.08 mg/dl and 173.03 ± 3.51 mg/dl respectively .While the mean value
group G1, G3, G4 and G6 didn’t show any significantly differences when
compared with positive control. whereas the mean value groups G2 and G5
were significantly different when compared with positive control.
As for the mean value of VLDL of negative control was significantly
(p ≤ 0.01 ) more as compared with positive control , which was32 ± 1
mg/dl and 30.01 ± 0.81mg/dl, respectively. While the mean value of groups
G1, G3, G4, G5 and G6didn’t show any significant differences when
Summray
137
compared with positive control .whereas the mean value of group G2 was
significantly different when compared with positive control.
As for as the mean value of TLC of negative control was significantly
( p ≤ 0.01 ) lower as compared with positive control , which was 3.5 ± 0.39
mg/dl and 4.1 ± 0.11 mg/dl ,respectively. While the mean value of groups
G1, G 2, G3 and G4didn’t show any significant differences when compared
with positive control .whereas the mean value of groups G5 and G6 were
significantly different when compared with positive control
The Effect of Experimental Diets onspleen function
The mean value of glucose of negative control was nonsignificantly
different ( p ≤ 0.01 ) as compared with positive control , which was 151 ±
6.08 and 141 ± 9.64 mg/dl respectively. While the mean value group
(G1 –G3 – G4 – G5 – G6) didn’t show any significant differences when
compared with positive control .whereas the mean value of group G2 was
significantly different when compared with positive control. from the
results, it could be noticed that yoghurt combined with almonds or
peanutsG1, G2, G3 and G4 significantly decreased glucose in serum as
compared to negative control
The effect of experimental diets onfasting plasma hemoglobin , red
cell, platetsent, staff, segment,lyimphocy , monocytes , eosino and
haematocrte
Summray
138
the mean value of HB of negative control was significantly ( p ≤ 0.01 )
lower as compared with positive control , which was being 9.4 ± 0.67g/dl
and 11.5 ± 0.32g/dl, respectively. While the mean value of group G1, G2,
G3, G5 and G6 didn’t show any significant differences when compared with
positive control .whereas the mean value groups G4 was a significant
differences when compared with positive control .
As for the mean value of red cell of negative control was
significantly (p ≤ 0.01) lower as compared with positive control , which was
3.5 ± 0.39 and 4.08 ± 0.11, respectively . While the mean value group G1,
G2, G3 and G4 didn’t show any significantly difference when compared with
positive control .whereas the mean value of groups G5and G6 were
significantly different when compared with positive control.
As for the mean value of platetsent of negative control was
significantly ( p≤0.01 ) higher as compared with positive control , which was
being 395.3 ± 25.3 Cmm and 291.6 ± 10.4 Cmm, respectively. While the
mean value of groups G2, G4 , G5 and G6 didn’t show any significant
difference when compared with positive control . whereas the mean value
groups G1 and G3 was significantly differences when compared with
positive control .
As for , the mean value of staff of all groups they were didn’t
significantly when compared with positive control . As for as the mean value
of segment of negative control it was non significantly ( p≤ 0.01 ) differed
as compared with positive control , which was 58.7 ± 1.5 % and 56 ± 1% ,
respectively. Also the mean value of groups G1, G2, G4 and G5 didn’t show
Summray
139
any significant difference when compared with positive control. whereas the
mean value of groups G4 and G6 were non significantly differences when
compared with positive control.
The mean value of lyimphocy of negative control was significantly
( p≤ 0.01 ) less as compared with positive control , which was being 34 ±
3.6% and 38.3 ± 0.53% respectively. While the mean value of groups G1,
G2, G3, G4 and G5 didn’t show any significant differences when compared
with positive control . whereas the mean value of group G6 was
significantly different when compared with positive control
As for , the mean value of monocytes of all groups didn’t significantly
differ when compared with positive control .
As for , the mean value of eosinophils of all groups didn’t significantly
differ when compared with positive control .
The mean value of haematocrte of negative control was significantly
( p ≤ 0.01 ) lower as compared with positive control , which was being 32.2
± 2.3% and 37.1 ± 0.3% respectively .While the mean value of groups G1 ,
G2 , G3 and G6 didn’t show any significant difference when compared with
positive control, whereas the mean value groups G4 and G5 was
significantly different when compared with positive control
The effect of almond and peanut on yoghurt as a sensory
evaluation.
Summray
140
As shows the mean value of all groups didn’t show any significant
differences when compared with negative control. from the results, it could
be concluded that the sensory evaluation for the yogurt which supplemented
with either almonds or peanuts concentration didn’t reveal any significant
difference compered to control (-)
The Histopathological Result:
Liver:
Microscopically, liver of control –ve rat revealed the normal
histological structure of hepatic bobluemeanwhile, liver of control the rat
showed fatty degeneration of centerobobuler hepatocytes, kupffer cells
activation, necrosis of sporadic hepatocytes and portal infiltration with
lwucocytes.Someexamenied sections from group 1( yoghurt + 3% almond)
revealed focal hepatic mecrosis associated with leucocytic cells infiltration,
whereas, other sections from this group shpuld slight kupffer cells
activation no histopathological changes were noticed in liver rat from group
2( youghurt+ 5%almond). Examined section from group 3 should kupffer
cells activation some examined section from group 4( yoghurt + 7%
almond) should fatty degeneration of centrolobular hepatocytes, whereas,
other sections from this group revealed no histopathological changes Also,
some sections from group 5( yoghurt + 3% peanut ) revealed kupffer cells
activation and sinusoidal from this groupshould no histopathological
changes Slight kupffer cells activation is the only change oliserved in liver
of rat from group 6 ( yoghurt + 5% peanut).
Summray
141
Kidneys :
Microscopically, Kidneys of rat from control – ne group revealed the
normal histological structure of revalparenchyma . However, examined
sections from control + ve rat showed vacuilations of epithelial pining renal
tubules and endothelial lining glomerular tufts kidneys of rat from group 1
revealed vacuolations of endothelial lining glomerular tufts no
histopathological changes were noticed in kidneys of rat from groups 2.3. 4.
Slight congestion of glomerular tufts were noticed in kidneys of rats from
group 5 and some sections from group 6. Some examined sections from
group 6 revealed vacuolations of epithelial liming renal tubules and
interstitial nephritis.
Heart :
Microscopically, heart of rat from control – ve rat revealed normal
cordiacmyocytes however, heart of control + ne rat sowed congestion of
blood ressels and granularity of the sarcoplasm of myocytes .No
histopathological changes were noticed in heart of rats from groups 1 & 2.
Intermyocardialoedema was noticed in heart of rat from group 3 .However,
hearts of rats from groups 4 , 5 & 6 revealed no histopathological changes.
Lung :
Microscopically, lung of control – ve rat revealed no histophological
changes mean while, lung of control + ne rat showed congestion of control
+ ve rat showed congestion of pulmonary blood vessels, and interstitial
pneumonia . No histopathological changes were noticed in lung of rat from
Summray
142
group 1. However, lung of rats from group 2 & 3 should focal interstitial
pneumonia and thickening of interstitial tissue. Mean while, lung of rat from
group 4 revealed no histopathological changes. Examined sections from
group 5 revealed focal emphysema and from focal to diffuse interstitial
pneumonia . No histopathological changes were noticed in lung of rat from
group 6.
Spleen :
Microscopically, Spleen of control – ve rat revealed the normal
lymphoid follicles. However, spleen of control + ve rat showed slight
lymphocytic necrosis and depletion .Meanwhile, spleen of rats from groups
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 & 6 revealed no histopathological changes .
The important recommendation of this study was using nuts as a
function food which plays a vital role in biological activity for human not
only for fun and it has a lot of benefit. Also, nuts can make the yoghurt
tasteful as more.