Repository hosted by TU Delft Library

Home · Contact · About · Disclaimer ·

In vitro fermentability of differently digested resistant starch preparations

Publication files not online:

Author: Fässler, C. · Arrigoni, E. · Venema, K. · Brouns, F. · Amadò, R.
Institution: TNO Kwaliteit van Leven
Source:Molecular Nutrition and Food Research, 12, 50, 1220-1228
Identifier: 239639
doi: doi:10.1002/mnfr.200600106
Keywords: Nutrition · Biomedical Research · Batch in vitro fermentation · Dynamic in vitro fermentation · Resistant starch type 2 · Resistant starch type 3 · Short chain fatty acids · ammonia · butyric acid derivative · starch · volatile fatty acid · article · bacterium · digestion · feces · fermentation · human · in vitro study · metabolism · microbiology · Ammonia · Bacteria · Butyrates · Digestion · Fatty Acids, Volatile · Feces · Fermentation · Humans · Starch


The in vitro fermentability of two resistant starch preparations type 2 (RS2) and type 3 (RS3) was investigated using human colonic microbiota. Prior to the fermentation experiments, samples were digested using two in vitro models, a batch (ba) and a dynamic (dy), as well as an in vivo method (il) for RS3. Digestion residues were fermented in vitro using a simple batch model lasting 24 h and a more sophisticated dynamic model enduring 72 h. During batch fermentation, metabolite productions and starch degradation rates were similar for RS2 and RS3 but higher for dy- compared to ba-digested samples. RS3il led to the lowest fermentability. Furthermore, increased butyrate ratios were observed for all preparations. The varying RS preparations behaved similarly in the dynamic fermentation but showed high SDs. Moreover, the fermentability was slow during the first 24 h, indicating that the microbiota needed an adaptation period to ferment RS. Propionate ratios increased at the expense of butyrate with exception for RS2dy showing an increase in acetate only. Differences in fermentability observed between the dynamic model, allowing a closer simulation of the in vivo behavior, and the batch model, recommended for screening purposes, could be due to the varying microbiota used. © 2006 Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA.