Behall K M, Howe J C
Diet and Human Performance Laboratory, Agricultural Research Service, US Department of Agriculture, Beltsville, Maryland 20705-2350, USA.
J Am Coll Nutr. 1996 Jun;15(3):248-54. doi: 10.1080/07315724.1996.10718595.
This study was designed to compare the metabolizable energy of two starch sources, standard cornstarch and high amylose cornstarch.
Diets containing 70% amylose (AM) or 70% amylopectin (AP) cornstarches were fed to 10 control and 14 hyperinsulinemic men for 14 weeks. During the last 4 weeks of each period, subjects were fed a controlled diet containing 34% of total energy from fat, 15% from protein and 51% from carbohydrate (55% of carbohydrate provided AM or AP). Duplicate food and all urine and feces were collected during the second week of the controlled diets for energy, nitrogen, fiber and starch determinations. Metabolizable energy (ME) was calculated as [energy intake minus (fecal plus urinary energy excretion)].
Total fiber uncorrected for resistant starch was 35.2 g and 48.8 g in the AP and AM diets, respectively. The AM diet contained an average of 29.7 g resistant starch (16% of total starch) while the AP diet averaged 0.8 g (less than 0.01%). ME was not significantly different between the AM and AP diets nor between the control and hyperinsulinemic subjects. Fecal energy and nitrogen was significantly higher after the AM compared to AP diet. Based on energy intake and fecal excretion from all subjects, the partial digestible energy value for the resistant starch averaged 11.7 kJ/g resistant starch which was 67.3% of the energy of standard cornstarch. Control and hyperinsulinemic subjects differed in their ability to digest resistant starch, averaging 81.8% and 53.2, respectively. The hyperinsulinemic, but not control, subjects had significantly higher breath hydrogen expirations (LS means, p > 0.05) in the fasting, 1-5 hours and 7 hour collections after consuming the AM when compared to the AP tolerance meal.
The type of starch consumed in the diet did not statistically affect metabolizable energy. Based on ME and breath hydrogen expiration, amylose and the resistant starch from amylose appears to be utilized as an energy source. Resistant starch averaged 2.8 kcal/g for all 24 subjects but only 2.2 kcal/g in the hyperinsulinemic subjects.
本研究旨在比较两种淀粉来源，即标准玉米淀粉和高直链玉米淀粉的可代谢能量。
将含有70%直链淀粉（AM）或70%支链淀粉（AP）玉米淀粉的日粮喂给10名对照男性和14名高胰岛素血症男性，为期14周。在每个时期的最后4周，给受试者喂食一种控制饮食，其中脂肪提供总能量的34%，蛋白质提供15%，碳水化合物提供51%（碳水化合物的55%为AM或AP）。在控制饮食的第二周收集双份食物以及所有尿液和粪便，用于能量、氮、纤维和淀粉的测定。可代谢能量（ME）计算为[能量摄入量减去（粪便和尿液能量排泄量）]。
未校正抗性淀粉的总纤维在AP和AM日粮中分别为35.2克和48.8克。AM日粮平均含有29.7克抗性淀粉（占总淀粉的16%），而AP日粮平均为0.8克（小于0.01%）。AM和AP日粮之间以及对照和高胰岛素血症受试者之间的ME没有显著差异。与AP日粮相比，AM日粮后的粪便能量和氮显著更高。根据所有受试者的能量摄入量和粪便排泄量，抗性淀粉的部分可消化能量值平均为11.7千焦/克抗性淀粉，为标准玉米淀粉能量的67.3%。对照和高胰岛素血症受试者消化抗性淀粉的能力不同，分别平均为81.8%和53.2%。与AP耐受餐相比，高胰岛素血症受试者（而非对照受试者）在食用AM后禁食、1 - 5小时和7小时收集时的呼气氢气量显著更高（最小二乘均值，p>0.05）。
饮食中消耗的淀粉类型对可代谢能量没有统计学上的影响。基于ME和呼气氢气量，直链淀粉以及直链淀粉中的抗性淀粉似乎被用作能量来源。所有24名受试者的抗性淀粉平均为2.8千卡/克，但高胰岛素血症受试者中仅为2.2千卡/克。
