Fresh pasta enrichment with protein concentrate of tilapia: nutritional and sensory characteristics.

With the goal of developing and characterizing the nutritional and sensory aspects of fresh pasta supplemented with tilapia protein concentrate, four types of pasta were prepared, with inclusion of 0, 10, 20, or 30% of tilapia protein concentrate. Linear effects were observed (P < 0.01) in crude protein, total lipids, ash, carbohydrate, and caloric values; these parameters increased with increasing amounts of tilapia protein concentrate in the pasta. The concentration of Na, P, Ca, Mg, and Zn increased linearly (P < 0.01) in correlation with the increase in protein concentrate content, while Fe content decreased linearly (P < 0.01). In the sensory analysis, texture, overall impression, and the acceptance index demonstrated a cubic regression (P < 0.05), with the inclusion of 20% protein concentrate yielding the best scores. Including up to 30% of tilapia protein concentrate in pasta yields an increased nutritional value, but based on the sensory results, 20% of tilapia protein concentrate in pasta is the recommended maximum level.

No evidence of transmission of grapevine leafroll-associated viruses by phylloxera (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae).

Abstract Grapevine leafroll disease is associated with several species of phloem-limited grapevine leafrollassociated viruses (GLRaV), some of which are transmitted by mealybugs and scale insects. The grape phylloxera, Daktulosphaira vitifoliae (Fitch) Biotype A (Hemiptera: Phylloxeridae), is a common vineyard pest that feeds on the phloem of vine roots. There is concern that these insects may transmit one or more GLRaV species, particularly GLRaV-2, a species in the genus Closterovirus. A field survey was performed in vineyards with a high incidence of grapevine leafroll disease and D. vitifoliae was assessed for acquisition of GLRaV. In greenhouse experiments, the ability of D. vitifoliae to transmit GLRaV from infected root sections or vines to co-planted virus-free recipient vines was tested. There were no GLRaV-positive D. vitifoliae in the field survey, nor did D. vitifoliae transmit GLRaV- 1, ?2, ?3, or -4LV in greenhouse transmission experiments. Some insects tested positive for GLRaV after feeding on infected source vines in the greenhouse, however there was no evidence of virus transmission to healthy plants. These findings, in combination with the sedentary behaviour of the soil biotype of D. vitifoliae, make it unlikely that D. vitifoliae is a vector of any GLRaV.