| Literature DB >> 19781071 |
Liza A H Rosén1, Lorena O Blanco Silva, Ulrika K Andersson, Cecilia Holm, Elin M Ostman, Inger M E Björck.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rye products have previously been shown to induce comparatively low post-prandial insulin responses; irrespectively of their glycaemic indices (GI). However, the mechanism behind this lowered insulin demand remains unknown. An improved insulin economy might contribute to the benefits seen in epidemiological studies with whole grain diets on metabolic risk factors and weight regulation. The objective of this study was to explore the mechanism for a reduced post-prandial insulin demand with rye products.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19781071 PMCID: PMC2761418 DOI: 10.1186/1475-2891-8-42
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutr J ISSN: 1475-2891 Impact factor: 3.271
Bread ingredients.
| 360 g water | 950 g water | 1020 g water | 995 g water | 1100 g water |
| 540 g white wheat flour | 348 g white wheat flour | 348 g white wheat flour | 348 g white wheat flour | 905 g white wheat flour |
| 4.8 g dry yeast | 1044 g endosperm rye flour | 1044 g whole grain rye flour | 1044 g whole grain rye flour | 487 g rye bran flour |
| 4.8 g NaCl | 24 g dry yeast | 24 g dry yeast | 24 g dry yeast | 24 g dry yeast |
| 12 g monoglycerides | 12 g NaCl | 12 g NaCl | 12 g NaCl | 12 g NaCl |
| 25 g lactic acid |
The breads were divided into portions contributing with 40 g of available starch.
Porridge ingredients.
| 231.6 g water | 182 g water | 204.5 g water |
| 57.9 g white wheat flour | 15.2 g white wheat flour | 17.0 g white wheat flour |
| 0.5 g NaCl | 45.4 g endosperm rye flour | 51.1 g whole grain rye flour |
| 0.5 g NaCl | 0.6 g NaCl |
The porridges contributed with 40 g of available starch.
Composition and HI of the test meals.
| WWB | 101.1 | 40.0 | 6.2 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.8 | 1.8 | 100 a |
| WWP | 273.3 | 38.2 | 5.7 | 1.1 | 2.1 | 0.5 | 2.6 | 85 ± 4.4 bc |
| ERB | 106.2 | 40.0 | 5.2 | 1.3 | 4.2 | 2.5 | 6.7 | 83 ± 1.8 bc |
| ERP | 227.6 | 37.7 | 4.6 | 1.3 | 4.9 | 1.7 | 6.5 | 89 ± 3.6 b |
| WGRB | 123.4 | 40.0 | 6.5 | 1.9 | 6.8 | 2.8 | 9.6 | 101 ± 3.1 a |
| WGRB-lac | 122.6 | 40.0 | 6.3 | 2.0 | 7.4 | 2.9 | 10.2 | 94 ± 4.4 ab |
| WGRP | 258.2 | 38.6 | 5.4 | 1.7 | 7.9 | 2.2 | 10.1 | 72 ± 2.4 c |
| RBB | 141.7 | 40.0 | 9.7 | 2.6 | 10.3 | 2.0 | 12.3 | 93 ± 2.3 ab |
HI values are means ± SEM, n = 6. Products not sharing the same letters were significantly different, p < 0.05 (ANOVA, followed by Tukey's test).
Blood glucose responses after the test meals
| % | |||||
| WWB | 37.0 ± 5.6 b | 100 ± 0.0 b | 34.6 ± 4.1 a | 167.5 ± 17.8 a | 100 ± 0.0 a |
| WWP | 35.2 ± 5.0 b | 107 ± 15.6 b | 34.2 ± 4.7 a | 119.0 ± 13.0 ab | 77 ± 9.8 ab |
| ERB | 69.2 ± 10.1 a | 200 ± 24.9 a | 17.0 ± 3.2 c | 104.0 ± 15.9 b | 64 ± 7.5 b |
| ERP | 49.7 ± 6.3 ab | 145 ± 18.6 ab | 25.7 ± 3.0 abc | 103.1 ± 7.6 b | 70 ± 6.3 b |
| WGRB | 51.0 ± 7.0 ab | 142 ± 11.5 ab | 22.1 ± 3.6 bc | 118.9 ± 21.8 ab | 71 ± 9.7 ab |
| WGRB-lac | 74.3 ± 9.7 a | 226 ± 32.9 a | 17.9 ± 3.1 c | 113.6 ± 11.0 b | 74 ± 9.5 b |
| WGRP | 39.7 ± 7.3 b | 111 ± 17.7 b | 31.5 ± 3.8 ab | 110.0 ± 14.4 b | 72 ± 10.2 b |
| RBB | 35.7 ± 3.4 b | 113 ± 17.7 b | 33.5 ± 3.0 a | 147.2 ± 23.1 ab | 87 ± 6.7 ab |
Values are means ± SEM, n = 11 (WGRP: n = 10). Products not sharing the same letters were significantly different, p < 0.05 (ANOVA, followed by Tukey's test).
Figure 1Incremental change (Δ) in blood glucose in breads (A) and porridges (B). Incremental change (Δ) in serum insulin in breads (C) and porridges (D). WWB is visible in all graphs. Values are means ± SEM, n = 11 for blood glucose and n = 12 for serum insulin (WGRP: n = 10 resp. 11). Significant treatment effect and time × treatment interactions were found, p < 0.0001 for both blood glucose and serum insulin (PROC MIXED in SAS).
Serum insulin responses after the test meals
| % | ||||
| WWB | 0.168 ± 0.011 ab | 1.42 ± 0.15 ab | 8.35 ± 0.50 ab | 100 ± 0.0ab |
| WWP | 0.201 ± 0.029 a | 1.96 ± 0.32 a | 7.19 ± 0.66 bc | 87 ± 7.8 bc |
| ERB | 0.089 ± 0.011 d | 0.76 ± 0.12 c | 4.99 ± 0.57 d | 61 ± 8.1 d |
| ERP | 0.131 ± 0.018 bc | 1.49 ± 0.24 ab | 5.77 ± 0.55 cd | 71 ± 6.9 cd |
| WGRB | 0.124 ± 0.013 bcd | 1.03 ± 0.16 bc | 6.06 ± 0.59 cd | 73 ± 7.5 cd |
| WGRB-lac | 0.103 ± 0.014 cd | 0.91 ± 0.20 bc | 5.98 ± 0.70 cd | 71 ± 8.9 cd |
| WGRP | 0.177 ± 0.019 ab | 1.93 ± 0.31 a | 7.31 ± 0.69 bcd | 88 ± 8.7 bcd |
| RBB | 0.202 ± 0.016 a | 1.87 ± 0.22 a | 10.45 ± 1.06 a | 128 ± 15.9 a |
Values are means ± SEM, n = 12 (WGRP: n = 11). Products not sharing the same letters were significantly different, p < 0.05 (ANOVA, followed by Tukey's test).
Plasma ghrelin responses and subjective satiety responses after the test meals
| WWB | -20.5 ± 2.4 a * | 17.1 ± 4.6 a * | 220 ± 71 c |
| WWP | -17.2 ± 1.9 a * | 15.5 ± 4.7 a * | 371 ± 78 abc |
| ERB | -16.7 ± 2.9 a * | 8.0 ± 4.3 ab | 465 ± 146 abc |
| ERP | -16.9 ± 3.6 a * | 14.4 ± 5.2 ab * | 716 ± 109 a |
| WGRB | -16.9 ± 2. 8 a * | 11.1 ± 5.4 ab | 321 ± 99 bc |
| WGRB-lac | -18.1 ± 3.5 a * | 1.3 ± 3.4 b | 570 ± 126 abc |
| WGRP | -18.3 ± 2.1 a * | 7.0 ± 4.0 ab | 718 ± 162 a |
| RBB | -20.3 ± 1.8 a * | 12.2 ± 4.0 ab * | 587 ± 154 ab |
Values are means ± SEM, n = 12 (WGRP: n = 11). Products not sharing the same letters were significantly different, p < 0.05 (ANOVA, followed by Tukey's test). * indicates significant difference from fasting concentration (p < 0.05, ANOVA, followed by Tukey's test).
Figure 2Incremental change (Δ) in plasma ghrelin in breads (A) and porridges (B). Incremental change (Δ) in subjective satiety scores in breads (C) and porridges (D). WWB is visible in all graphs. Values are means ± SEM, n = 12 (WGRP: n = 11). A significant treatment effect was found (p < 0.0001), but no significant time × treatment interaction, p = 0.67 for ghrelin and p = 0.97 for subjective feeling of satiety) (PROC MIXED in SAS)
Correlations between blood glucose, serum insulin, plasma ghrelin and subjective satiety responses following the test meals
| NS | NS | NS | NS | -0.28* | |
| -0.40 *** | 0.33 ** | 0.34 ** | NS | 0.26* | |
| -0.43 *** | 0.22 * | 0.38 *** | -0.39 *** | ||
| NS | 0.35 ** | NS | |||
| -0.64 *** | 0.72 *** | ||||
| -0.48 *** | |||||
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, NS = non significant. (Spearman's partial coefficients controlling for subjects (two-tailed test)).