Literature DB >> 24744316

The metabolizable energy of dietary resistant maltodextrin is variable and alters fecal microbiota composition in adult men.

David J Baer1, Kim S Stote2, Theresa Henderson2, David R Paul2, Kazuhiro Okuma3, Hiroyuki Tagami3, Sumiko Kanahori3, Dennis T Gordon3, William V Rumpler2, Maria Ukhanova4, Tyler Culpepper4, Xiaoyu Wang4, Volker Mai4.   

Abstract

Resistant maltodextrin (RM) is a novel soluble, nonviscous dietary fiber. Its metabolizable energy (ME) and net energy (NE) values derived from nutrient balance studies are unknown, as is the effect of RM on fecal microbiota. A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind crossover study was conducted (n = 14 men) to determine the ME and NE of RM and its influence on fecal excretion of macronutrients and microbiota. Participants were assigned to a sequence consisting of 3 treatment periods [24 d each: 0 g/d RM + 50 g/d maltodextrin and 2 amounts of dietary RM (25 g/d RM + 25 g of maltodextrin/d and 50 g/d RM + 0 g/d maltodextrin)] and were provided all the foods they were to consume to maintain their body weight. After an adaptation period, excreta were collected during a 7-d period. After the collection period, 24-h energy expenditure was measured. Fluorescence in situ hybridization, quantitative polymerase chain reaction, and 454 titanium technology-based 16S rRNA sequencing were used to analyze fecal microbiota composition. Fecal amounts of energy (544, 662, 737 kJ/d), nitrogen (1.5, 1.8, 2.1 g/d), RM (0.3, 0.6, 1.2 g/d), and total carbohydrate (11.1, 14.2, 16.2 g/d) increased with increasing dose (0, 25, 50 g) of RM (P < 0.0001). Fat excretion did not differ among treatments. The ME value of RM was 8.2 and 10.4 kJ/g, and the NE value of RM was -8.2 and 2.0 kJ/g for the 25 and 50 g/d RM doses, respectively. Both doses of RM increased fecal wet weight (118, 148, 161 g/d; P < 0.0001) and fecal dry weight (26.5, 32.0, 35.8 g/d; P < 0.0001) compared with the maltodextrin placebo. Total counts of fecal bacteria increased by 12% for the 25 g/d RM dose (P = 0.17) and 18% for the 50 g/d RM dose (P = 0.019). RM intake was associated with statistically significant increases (P < 0.001) in various operational taxonomic units matching closest to ruminococcus, eubacterium, lachnospiraceae, bacteroides, holdemania, and faecalibacterium, implicating RM in their growth in the gut. Our findings provide empirical data important for food labeling regulations related to the energy value of RM and suggest that RM increases fecal bulk by enhancing the excretion of nitrogen and carbohydrate and the growth of specific microbial populations.
© 2014 American Society for Nutrition.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24744316     DOI: 10.3945/jn.113.185298

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Nutr        ISSN: 0022-3166            Impact factor:   4.798


  24 in total

Review 1.  Resistant starch for modulation of gut microbiota: Promising adjuvant therapy for chronic kidney disease patients?

Authors:  Cristiane Moraes; Natália A Borges; Denise Mafra
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2016-01-30       Impact factor: 5.614

Review 2.  Linking dietary patterns with gut microbial composition and function.

Authors:  Amy M Sheflin; Christopher L Melby; Franck Carbonero; Tiffany L Weir
Journal:  Gut Microbes       Date:  2016-12-14

3.  The gut microbiome composition associates with bipolar disorder and illness severity.

Authors:  Simon J Evans; Christine M Bassis; Robert Hein; Shervin Assari; Stephanie A Flowers; Marisa B Kelly; Vince B Young; Vicky E Ellingrod; Melvin G McInnis
Journal:  J Psychiatr Res       Date:  2016-12-10       Impact factor: 4.791

4.  Ultra-processed Foods and Risk of Crohn's Disease and Ulcerative Colitis: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Chun-Han Lo; Neha Khandpur; Sinara Laurini Rossato; Paul Lochhead; Emily W Lopes; Kristin E Burke; James M Richter; Mingyang Song; Andres Victor Ardisson Korat; Qi Sun; Teresa T Fung; Hamed Khalili; Andrew T Chan; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan
Journal:  Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol       Date:  2021-08-28       Impact factor: 13.576

5.  The effect of inulin and resistant maltodextrin on weight loss during energy restriction: a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded intervention.

Authors:  Anne Lundby Hess; Alfonso Benítez-Páez; Trine Blædel; Lesli Hingstrup Larsen; Jose Ramón Iglesias; Carmen Madera; Yolanda Sanz; Thomas Meinert Larsen
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2019-10-11       Impact factor: 5.614

6.  Transmissible microbial and metabolomic remodeling by soluble dietary fiber improves metabolic homeostasis.

Authors:  Baokun He; Kazunari Nohara; Nadim J Ajami; Ryan D Michalek; Xiangjun Tian; Matthew Wong; Susan H Losee-Olson; Joseph F Petrosino; Seung-Hee Yoo; Kazuhiro Shimomura; Zheng Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Contribution of diet to the composition of the human gut microbiota.

Authors:  Daniela Graf; Raffaella Di Cagno; Frida Fåk; Harry J Flint; Margareta Nyman; Maria Saarela; Bernhard Watzl
Journal:  Microb Ecol Health Dis       Date:  2015-02-04

8.  Continuous intake of resistant maltodextrin enhanced intestinal immune response through changes in the intestinal environment in mice.

Authors:  Shoko Miyazato; Yuka Kishimoto; Kyoko Takahashi; Shuichi Kaminogawa; Akira Hosono
Journal:  Biosci Microbiota Food Health       Date:  2015-08-25

9.  Effect of Adding Resistant Maltodextrin to Pasteurized Orange Juice on Bioactive Compounds and Their Bioaccessibility.

Authors:  Elías Arilla; Purificación García-Segovia; Javier Martínez-Monzó; Pilar Codoñer-Franch; Marta Igual
Journal:  Foods       Date:  2021-05-26

10.  High amylose resistant starch diet ameliorates oxidative stress, inflammation, and progression of chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Nosratola D Vaziri; Shu-Man Liu; Wei Ling Lau; Mahyar Khazaeli; Sohrab Nazertehrani; Seyed H Farzaneh; Dorothy A Kieffer; Sean H Adams; Roy J Martin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.