Advertisement

Food Analytical Methods

, Volume 10, Issue 6, pp 1909–1913 | Cite as

The Implications of Sample Preparation on the Quantification of Resistant Starch Type 1 and Related Nutritional Starch Fractions in Plantain (Musa AAB)

  • Ebun-Oluwa Oladele
Article

Abstract

Sample preparation is a critical step in any analysis and could influence the reliability of results. Analysing some dietary carbohydrates using flours and milled samples could affect the results obtained. The resistant starch type 1 (RS1) content from many foods has not been reported. This may be due to the fact that many investigations on the quantification of resistant starches have been centred on measuring resistant starch in starches/flours, and the consequences are that intact food matrices that would have aided the identification of RS1 in the foods would have been disrupted by milling.

In this study, enzyme hydrolysis was used to quantify RS1 in raw and boiled plantain, and two sample pre-treatments were compared. The two types of samples used were (i) samples prepared in the ‘as eaten’ manner, which reflect in vivo conditions in exactly the way the food is consumed and (ii) samples prepared in the conventional dry powder method.

RS1 was quantified in the samples analysed on ‘as eaten’ basis, while RS1 was not detected in the dried and powdered samples. Raw unripe plantain had the highest quantity of RS1 (7.3 ± 2.9 g/100 g) while no RS1 was detected in boiled ripe plantain. Dry powder analyses of boiled unripe plantain samples indicated a loss of RS1, slowly digestible starch (SDS) and a corresponding increase in rapidly digestible starch (RDS). The implication of this is that available carbohydrates will be overestimated using this method, which may further affect glycaemic index (GI) measurements.

Keywords

RS1 Sample preparation Rapidly digestible Resistant starch Plantain Glycaemic index 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author gratefully acknowledges the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission, United Kingdom, for funding this research work and the School of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Leeds for providing support.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

This study was funded by the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission, United Kingdom (grant number NGCA-2009-51).

Conflict of Interest

Ebun-Oluwa Oladele declares that she has no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was not applicable.

References

  1. Aurore G, Parfait B, Fahrasmane L (2009) Bananas, raw materials for making processed food products. Trends Food Sci Tech 20:78–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Birt DF, Boylston T, Hendrich S, Jane JL, Hollis J, Li L, McClelland J, Moore S, Phillips GJ, Rowling M, Schalinske K, Scott MP, Whitley EM (2013) Resistant starch: promise for improving human health. Adv Nutr 4:587–601CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brouns F, Bjorck I, Frayn KN, Gibbs AL, Lang V, Slama G, Wolever TMS (2005) Glycaemic index methodology. Nutr Res Rev 18(1):145–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Brown IL, Mcnaught KJ, Moloney E (1995) Hi-maize (TM)—new directions in starch technology and nutrition. Food Australia 47:272–275Google Scholar
  5. Englyst HN, Cummings JH (1985) Digestion of the polysaccharides of some cereal foods in the human small intestine. Am J Clin Nutr 42:778–787Google Scholar
  6. Englyst HN, Cummings JH (1986) Digestion of the carbohydrates of banana (Musa paradisiaca sapientum) in the human small intestine. Am J Clin Nutr 44:42–50Google Scholar
  7. Englyst HN, Cummings JH (1987) Digestion of polysaccharides of potato in the small intestine of man. Am J Clin Nutr 45:423–431Google Scholar
  8. Englyst HN, Cummings JH (1990) Non-starch polysaccharides (dietary fiber) and resistant starch. Adv Exp Med Biol 270:205–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Englyst K, Englyst H (2004) Detecting nutritional starch fractions. In: Eliasson AC (ed) Starch in food: structure, function and applications. Woodhead, Cambridge, pp. pp541–pp559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Englyst KN, Englyst HN (2005) Carbohydrate bioavailability. Brit J Nutr 94:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Englyst HN, Kingman SM (1990) Dietary fibre and resistant starch. A nutritional classification of plant polysacchrides. In: Kritchevsky D, Bonfield C, Anderson JW (eds) Dietary fiber. Plenum Press, New York, pp. 49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Englyst H, Wiggins HS, Cummings JH (1982) Determination of the non-starch polysaccharides in plant foods by gas-liquid chromatography of constituent sugars as alditol acetates. Analyst 107:307–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Englyst HN, Kingman SM, Cummings JH (1992) Classification and measurement of nutritionally important starch fractions. Eur J Clin Nutr 46:S33–S50Google Scholar
  14. Englyst HN, Kingman SM, Hudson GJ, Cummings JH (1996) Measurement of resistant starch in vitro and in vivo. Brit J Nutr 75:749–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. EURESTA (1992) Resistant starch – Proceedings from the second plenary meeting of EURESTA: European FLAIR Concerted Action No. 11 on physiological implications of the consumption of resistant starch in man. Preface. Eur J Clin Nutr 46 (Suppl 2):S1.Google Scholar
  16. Neil R, Ellis PR, Butterworth PJ (2005) Starch molecular and nutritional properties: a review. Advances in Mol Med 1:5–14Google Scholar
  17. Ovando-Martinez M, Sayago-Ayerdi S, Agama-Acevedo E, Goni I, Bello-Perez LA (2009) Unripe banana flour as an ingredient to increase the undigestible carbohydrates of pasta. Food Chem 113:121–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Pelissari FM, Andrade-Mahecha MM, Sobral PJD, Menegalli FC (2012) Isolation and characterization of the flour and starch of plantain bananas (Musa paradisiaca). Starch-Starke 64:382–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sajilata MG, Singhal RS, Kulkarni PR (2006) Resistant starch—a review. Compr Rev Food Sci F 5:1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Silvester KR, Englyst HN, Cummings JH (1995) Ileal recovery of starch from whole diets containing resistant starch measured in vitro and fermentation of ileal effluent. Am J Clin Nutr 62:403–411Google Scholar
  21. Soares CA, Peroni-Okita FHG, Cardoso MB, Shitakubo R, Lajolo FM, Cordenunsi BR (2011) Plantain and banana starches: granule structural characteristics explain the differences in their starch degradation patterns. J Agr Food Chem 59:6672–6681CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Food Chemistry Unit, Department of ChemistryFederal University of TechnologyAkureNigeria

Personalised recommendations