RESISTANT STARCH: BENEFIT AND APPLICATION IN FOOD PREPARATION.

-SUMAN DHITAL, MS FOOD SCIENCE

Email: dhital8080@yahoo.com KASETSART UNIVERSITY, BANGKOK, THAILAND

INTRODUCTION
Starch Starch is main source of energy in the human diet and animal feed. It is the most abundant and universally distributed forms of storage polysaccharide in plants, and occurs as granules in the chloroplast of green leaves and amyloplast of seeds, pulses and tubers (Tester, Karkalas, and Qi, 2004). Starch granule organization is very complicated and depends strongly on the botanical origin. Starch exists naturally in the form of discrete granules within plant cells. The starch granule is mainly composed of a mixture of two polymers: an essential linear polysaccharide called amylose and highly branched polysaccharide called amylopectin. Amylose portion of starch contains the linear glucose chain joining each other by (1-4) glycosidic linkage, and some branch chain also present, once in every 180-320 units, or 0.3-0.5% of the linkages. The average molecular weight of amylose molecule is about 106 g/mol and degree of polymerization (DP) of 6000. The chains can easily form single or double helices. (Whistler and BeMiller, 1997). Amylopectin portion is highly branched has an average molecular weight range from 107 to 5X108 g/mol and DP of 2X 106. This makes it one of the largest polymers in nature. It consists of thousands of short linear chain of (1-4) linked D-glucopyranosyl units, linked to each other by -(1-6) linkages. The branch point linkages constitute 4-5% of the total linkages (Whistler and BeMiller, 1997).

Nutritional classification of starch based on the extent of digestibility on this basis starch can be classified as follows: (Englyst and Hudson, 1996; Englyst and Hudson, 1997).

Rapidly digestible starch Rapidly digestible starch (RDS) consists mainly of amorphous and dispersed starch. It is digested quickly in the small intestine. In vitro testing, it is hydrolyzed to the constituent glucose molecules in 20 min. RDS is best exemplified by freshly cooked starchy foods, such as mashed potatoes. In this case, starch granules have been gelatinized and are more accessible to enzymatic digestion. Slowly digestible starch Slowly digestible starch (SDS) likes RDS, it is expected to be completely digestion in the small intestine but it is digested more slowly than RDS. During in vitro hydrolysis, SDS is converted to glucose between 20 and 100 min. This category consists of physically inaccessible amorphous starch and raw starch with a type A and type C crystalline structure, such as cereals. Resistant starch Resistant starch (RS) is a small fraction of starch that was not hydrolyzed after 120 min of in vitro hydrolysis by -amylase and pullulanase treatment. RS is now defined as that fraction of dietary starch, which escapes digestion in the small intestine. It passes into the large intestine and more or less fermented by gut microflora.

Definition and classification of resistant starch RS is defined as the sum of starch and products of starch degradation not absorbed in the small intestine of healthy individuals (Eliasson, A.C., 2004). Most foods
2

are heat processed prior to consumption. Although heat processing increases the availability of starch to enzyme, a fraction of starch remains resistant to amylase hydrolysis in the human gastrointestinal tract. This fraction is called resistant starch (RS). The resistant starch can be produced by repeated cycles of autoclaving and cooling. Amylose content, processing temperature and water content are factors known to influence the yields of resistant starch. Resistant starches have been obtained in high yields from high-amylose maize starch (2348%) and from debranched potato and waxy maize amylopectins (47% and 34%, respectively). Without debranching, waxy maize and potato amylopectin produce very little resistant starch (0.2% and 4.2%, respectively (Jane,2009). It is subdivided into 4 categories regarding the mechanism that prevents its enzymatic digestion (Englyst,et al., 1992) as follows: Resistant starch type I Resistant starch type I (RS1) represents starch that is resistant because it is physically inaccessible to digestion by entrapment in a non-digestible matrix such as partly milled grains and seeds and in some very dense types of processed starchy food such as intact cells in legumes. RS1 is heat stable in most normal cooking operation and enables its use as an ingredient in wide variety of conventional foods. Resistant starch type II Resistant starch type II (RS2) represents starch that is a certain granular form and resistant to enzyme digestion. In starch granules, starch is tightly packed in a radical pattern and is relatively dehydrated. This compact structure limits the accessibility of digestive enzymes and accounts for the resistant nature of RS2 such as un-gelatinized starch, crystalline regions of native starch granules and retrograded amylopectin. Examples of native RS2 are found in green bananas, uncooked potatoes, and peas. A RS2 starch derived from high amylose cornstarch (NOVELOSE 240, National Starch and Chemical Company) has been commercially developed.

Resistant starch type III Resistant starch type III (RS3) represents the most resistant starch fraction and is mainly retrograded starch formed during cooling of gelatinized starch such as cooked and cooled baked potatoes, breakfast cereals, retrograded amylose. NOVELOSE 330, National Starch and Chemical Company, is commercially developed RS3 starch derived from high amylose corn starch. Resistant starch type IV Resistant starch type IV (RS4) represents the chemically modified starch such as hydroxypropyl starch, cross linking starch and distarch phosphate starch. This starch has not been authorized in Europe however Japan authorized its usages. (Starch in food, Amm charlet). Resistant starch as a component of Dietary fibre Dietary fibre (DF) can be defined from different points of views, including legal, technological, chemical, nutritional and functional. Hipsley defined fibre in 1953 (Buttriss & Stokes, 2008) but, dietary fibre is not an entity, but a collective term for a complex mixture of substances with different chemical and physical properties, which exert different types of physiological effects. Dietary fibre was first defined as nondigestible components of plants that make up the plant cell wall: cellulose, hemicelluloses (both non-starch polysaccharides) and lignin. The Codex Alimentarius Commissions Committee on Nutrition and Foods for Special Dietary Uses, adopted a new definition of dietary fibre for inclusion in the Guidelines on Nutrition and Health Claims. The committee defined dietary fibre as carbohydrate polymers with 10 or more monomeric units, which are not hydrolyzed by the endogenous enzymes in the small intestine of humans. The committee also allowed

local authorities to decide whether to include or exclude polymers with 39 monomeric units (Mermelstein, 2009). The Commission of The European Communities (2008) defines fibre as carbohydrate polymers with three or more monomeric units, which are neither digested nor absorbed in the small intestine. In 2001, the Institute of Medicines Panel on the Definition of Dietary Fibre provided an updated definition of dietary fibre and defined total fibre as the sum of dietary fibre and functional fibre. They defined dietary fibre as non-digestible carbohydrates and lignin that are intrinsic and intact in plants, where non-digestible means not digested or absorbed in the human small intestine, and functional fibre as isolated, non-digestible carbohydrates that have beneficial physiological effects in humans (Mermelstein,2009). Food having greater nutritional properties getting popularities these days due to the higher consumer awareness, considerable importance is given to functional foods, which, in principle, apart from their basic nutritional functions, provide physiological benefits and/or reduce the risk of chronic diseases. Functional foods either contain (or add) a component with a positive health effect or eliminate a component with a negative one. One of the added components could be resistant starch (RS) (Mikulkov, Masr, & Kraic, 2008), which is widely used as a functional ingredient, especially in foods containing high dietary fibre levels. So resistant starch (RS) has gained importance as a new source of dietary fibre (Sanz et al., 2008). The general behavior of RS is physiologically similar to that of soluble, fermentable fibre, like guar gum. The most common results include increased fecal bulk and lower colonic pH (Slavin, Stewart, Timm, & Hospattankar, 2009). Additional observations suggest that resistant starch, such as soluble fibre, has a positive impact on colonic health by increasing the crypt cell production rate, or decreasing colonic epithelial atrophy in comparison with non-fibre diets. There are indications that resistant starch, like guar, a soluble fibre, influences tumorigenesis, and reduces serum cholesterol and triglycerides. Overall, since resistant starch behaves physiologically as a fibre, it should be retained in the total dietary fibre
5

assay (Haralampu, 2000). The recent increased interest in RS is related to its effects in the gastrointestinal tract, which in many ways are similar to these of dietary fibre. Like soluble fibre, RS is a substrate for the colonic microbiota, forming metabolites including short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), i.e. mainly acetic, propionic and butyric acid. Butyric acid is largely metabolised by the colonocyte, and is the most import energy source for the cell (Elmstahl, 2002). RS consumption has also been related to reduce postprandial glycemic and insulinemic responses, which may have beneficial implications in the management of diabetes (Tharanathan & Mahadevamma, 2003). Therefore, there is wide justification for assuming that RS behaves physiologically like fibre (Sajilata et al., 2006). RS is not a cell wall component but is nutritionally more similar to non starch polysaccharides than to digestible starch. Of late, RS has been considered a new ingredient for creating fibre-rich foods, although one of the problems of including RS is that it does not have all the properties of soluble and insoluble fibre together (Sharma et al., 2008). Food source of resistant starch Starch is the major dietary source of carbohydrates, and is most abundant storage polysaccharide in plants, and occurs as granules in the chloroplast of green leaves and the amyloplast of seeds, pulses, and tubers (Sajilata et al., 2006). Resistant starch is naturally found in cereal grains, seeds and in heated starch or starch-containing foods (Charalampopoulos et al., 2002). Physical form of grains or seeds in which starch is located, size and type of starch granules, cooking and food processing, especially cooking and cooling (Slavin, 2004) are the factors which determine the digestibility of starch.The digestibility of starch in rice and wheat is increased by milling to flour (Sajilata et al., 2006). Unripe banana is considered the RS-richest non-processed food. Several studies have suggested that consumption of unripe bananas confers beneficial effects for human
6

health, a fact often associated with its high resistant starch (RS) content, which ranges between 47% and 57%. Recently, the preparation of unripe banana flour was described, with 73.4% total starch content, 17.5% RS content and a dietary fibre level of 14.5%. Although banana represents an alternative source of indigestible carbohydrates, mainly RS and dietary fibre, its native RS is rendered digestible when it cooked. (Rodrguez, et al. 2008). On the basis of percentage of total starch, potato starch has the highest RS concentration and corn starch has the lowest. Raw potato starch contain 75% RS as a percentage of Total Starch (TS). Starches from tubers such as potatoes tend to exhibit Btype crystallinity patterns that are highly resistant to digestion. Amylomaize contains mostly amylose, which has been shown to lower not only digestibility but also blood insulin and glucose values in humans (Bednar et al., 2001). Whole grains are rich sources of fermentable carbohydrates including dietary fibre, resistant starch and oligosaccharides (Slavin, 2004). Fibre provided by the whole grain includes a substantial resistant starch component, as well as varying amounts of soluble and fermentable fibres, depending on the whole grain source (Lunn & Buttriss, 2007). The RS concentrations are five times higher in the cereal grains than in the flours (Bednar et al., 2001).But the flour contain higher RDS and SDS than grain. Legumes are known for their high content of both soluble and insoluble dietary fibre. Pulse grains are high in RS and retain their functionality even after cooking (Rochfort & Panozzo, 2007). Legumes has high TDF and RS concentrations (mean 36.5% and 24.7%,respectively). RS concentrations generally constituted the highest proportion of the starch fractions of legumes. Leguminous starches display a C-type pattern of crystallinity. This type of starch is more resistant to hydrolysis than that with an A-type crystallinity pattern and helps explain why legumes have high amounts of RS. Another possible reason for the higher RS concentrations in legumes could be the relationship between starch and protein. When red kidney beans are preincubated with pepsin, there is an increase in their susceptibility to amylolytic attack (Bednar et al.,
7

2001). Cooked legumes are prone to retrograde more quickly, thereby lowering the process of digestion. Processed legumes contain significant amount of RS3. The digestibility of legume starch is much lower than that of cereal starch. The higher content of amylose in legumes, which probably leads to a higher RS content, may account for their low digestibility. High-amylose cereal starch has been shown to be digested at a significantly lower rate (Tharanathan & Mahadevamma, 2003). There is a very high diversity of the content of resistant starch in seeds of leguminous plants (from 80% to only a few percent).

Health Benefit of Resistant Starch

Resistant starch, RS has received much attention for both its health benefits and functional properties (Sajilata et al., 2006). Resistant starch is one of the most abundant dietary sources of non-digestible carbohydrates (Nugent, 2005) and could be as important as non-starch polysaccharides, NSP in promoting large bowel health and preventing bowel inflammatory diseases (IBD) and colorectal cancer (CRC) (Topping, Anthony, & Bird, 2003). Prevention of colonic cancer RS escapes digestion in the small intestine. It is slowly fermented by the intestine microflora in the large intestine producing a wide range of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), primarily acetate, propionate and butyrate. SCFA production had a positive impact on bowel health, including epithelial proliferation and lowers colonic pH. The butyrate is a main energy substrate for large intestinal epithelial cells and inhibits the malignant transformation of such cells in vitro. These effects may lead to the decreased incidence of colon cancer, atherosclerosis, and obesity- related complications in human (Haralampu, 2000).RS supplementation in diet may enhance fermentation of starch in the large intestine is a decrease in faecal pH and a reduction in the concentrations of products of protein fermentation in the faeces, i.e. decreased levels of ammonia and
8

phenol and an increased excretion of nitrogen. Dramatically changes in faecal pH and bulking as well as greater production of SCFA in the colon of rats fed with RS preparations were reported (Ferguson,et. al., 2000). This suggested that RS resembled the effects of soluble dietary fiber. However, when RS was combined with an insoluble dietary fiber such as wheat bran, much higher SCFA, in particular butyrate was observed in the feces.In conlusion it can be said that RS can improve certain markers of colonic function in humans e.g. increase faecal output, faecal bulk and transit time and decrease pH and ammonia levels, increase SCFA and decrease bile salts in faecal water. (Nugent , 2005) Hypoglycemic effects The glycemic index (GI) is a physiological concept used to classify carbohydrate containing foods. It is closely tied in with the term glycemic response. Both refer to the ability of a particular food to elevate postprandial blood glucose concentrations. GI is measured as the incremental area under the blood glucose curve after consumption of 50 gm of available carbohydrate from a test food, divided by the area under the curve after eating a similar amount of available carbohydrate in a control food (generally white bread or glucose) (Ludwig & Eckel 2002). Foods with high GI value release glucose rapidly into the blood stream (i.e. elicit a rapid glycemic response), while foods with a low GI value release glucose more slowly into the bloodstream and result in improved glycemic and insulinaemic responses. The glycemic index of starchy foods depends upon various factors such as the amylose/amylopectin ratio, gelatinization of starch, water content and baking temperature of the processed foods, this shows the factors affecting the GI values of starch are in accordance with those of RS formation. GI values range from about 10 for starch from legumes to close to 100 in certain potato or rice products and breakfast cereals (Sharma et al., 2008).

Insulin is a hormone that enables glucose uptake by muscle and adipose cells, thereby lowering blood glucose levels. It also inhibits the use of stored body fat and together with an array of other physiological signals can modulate appetite and satiety signals. RS-rich foods release glucose slowly and therefore one would expect this to result in a lowered insulin response, greater access to and use of stored fat and, potentially, a muted generation of hunger signals. These conditions help not only in the management of diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance, but also in the treatment of obesity and in weight management. (Nugent ,2005) Foods containing RS moderate the rate of digestion. The slow digestion of RS has implications for its use in controlled glucose release applications. Numerous studies measured glycemic response in food containing RS, in healthy non-diabetic, non-insulindependent diabetes mellitus and hyperinsulinemic subjects. These studies showed a consistent trend whereby RS had an impact on the glycaemic response, including lower maximum blood-glucose response, lower maximum blood-insulin response, reduced area under the blood-glucose response curve and the blood-insulin response curve. The RS3containing bar decreased postprandial blood glucose and might play a role in providing an improved metabolic control in type II diabetes (noninsulin dependent) (Higgins et al., 2004). Behall & Hallfrisch 2002; Brown et al. 2003; Higgins 2004, researchers found that RS consumption may confer a small decrease in postprandial glycaemia, but is associated with more physiologically significant reductions in postprandial insulinaemia and also found that RS must contribute at least 14% of total starch intake in order to confer any benefits to glycaemic or insulinaemic Prebiotic potential Prebiotics are non-digestible food ingredients that beneficially affect the host by selectively stimulating the growth and/or activity of one or more bacteria (probiotics) in the gastrointestinal tract and thereby exert a health-promoting effect (Scholz-Ahrens et
10

al., 2007; Roberfroid, 2000). Various experimental studies on pigs and humans have revealed a time-dependent shift in fecal and large bowel SCFA profiles, suggesting the possible interaction of RS with the ingested bacteria (Topping et al., 2003). RS has been suggested for use in probiotic compositions to promote the growth of beneficial microorganisms such as bifidobacteria and lactobacilli (David, 1999). Since RS almost entirely passes the small intestine, it can behave as a substrate for growth of the probiotic microorganisms. Hypocholesterolaemic effects Hypocholesterolemic effects of RS have been proved by several studies. A study in rats shows, RS diets (25% raw potato) markedly raised the cecal size and the cecal pool of short-chain fatty acids (SCFA), as well as SCFA absorption and lowered plasma cholesterol and triglycerides. Furthermore, there was a lower concentration of cholesterol in all lipoprotein fractions, especially the high-density lipoprotein (HDL1) and a decreased concentration of triglycerides in the triglyceride-rich lipoprotein fraction (Ranhotra,et al., 1997; Kim et al., 2003). There are two mechanisms involved. The first one is resistant starch binding bile acids and leading to an increased fecal bile acid excretion. Which result the less bile acid recycled. In order to compensate for the excreted bile acid, the liver synthesizes new bile acids from cholesterol and thereby reducing serum cholesterol level. Second mechanism for lowering serum cholesterol level has been proposed. In this mechanism RS is believed to aid in shifting bile acid pools away from cholic acid to chenodeoxycholic acid. Chenodeoxycholic acid appears to be an inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl (HMG) CoA reductase, a regulatory enzyme necessary for cholesterol biosynthesis (Groff and Gropper, 1999). As HMG CoA reductase activity lowers, the production of cholesterol subsequently decreases therefore resulting in lower serum cholesterol. According to several studies, RS ingestion may decrease the serum cholesterol level in rats fed a cholesterol-free diet (De-Deckere, Kloots, & Van-Amelsvoort, 1993;
11

Hashimoto et al., 2006).Some earlier studies in humans reported the beneficial effect of RS on fasting plasma triglyceride and cholesterol levels. However, some other studies indicate that RS consumption does not affect the measures of total cholesterol in humans. Therefore it is evident that more research is needed to help us better understand the effects of RS on lipid metabolism in humans (Nugent, 2005). Inhibition of fat accumulation It is proposed that eating a diet rich in RS may increase the mobilization and use of stored fat as a result of a reduction in insulin secretion (Tapsell, 2004). Studies in humans indicate that diets rich in RS do not affect total energy expenditure, carbohydrate oxidation or fat oxidation (Ranganathan et al., 1994; Tagliabue et al., 1995). In another study on human volunteers, breads rich in RS imparted greater satiety than white breads between 70 and 120 min after eating (De Roos, Heijnen, & De Graff, 1995). Higgins et al. (2004) examined the relationship between the RS content of a meal and postprandial fat oxidation, finding that replacing 5.4% of total dietary carbohydrates with RS could significantly increase postprandial lipid oxidation and probably reduce fat accumulation in the long term. The use of resistant starch in the diet as a bioactive functional food component is a natural, endogenous way to increase gut hormones that are effective in reducing energy intake, so may be an effective natural approach to the treatment of obesity (Keenan et al., 2006). Mineral absorption Resistant starch enhances the ileal absorption of a number of minerals in rats and humans. Lopez et al. (2001) and Younes et al. (1995) reported an increased absorption of calcium, magnesium, zinc, iron and copper in rats fed RS-rich diets. In humans, these effects appear to be limited to calcium (Trinidad et al. 1996; Coudray et al. 1997). RS may therefore improve the ileal absorption of a number of dietary minerals but any effect in humans is likely to be small. Meal containing 16.4% RS resulted in a greater apparent absorption of calcium and iron as compared with a completely digestible starch (Morais,
12

et a1., 1996). Which shows RS could have a positive effect on intestinal calcium and iron absorption. Reduction of gall stone formation Digestible starch contributes to gall stone formation through a greater secretion of insulin, and insulin in turn leads to the stimulation of cholesterol synthesis, so RS reduces the incidence of gallstones. Gallstones are less frequent where whole grains are consumed rather than flour. The dietary intake of RS is 2- to 4-fold lower in the United States, Europe, and Australia, compared with populations consuming high-starch diets, such as in India and China, which may be reflected in the difference in the number of gallstone cases in the latter countries (Sajilata et al., 2006). Resistant Starch and Cholera Treatment Cholera is a bacterial infection characterized by severe diarrhoea, vomiting, and dehydration. Resistant starch has health promoting effects on the colonic microflora. Bacteria in the colon ferment these carbohydrates producing short chain fatty acids that boost fluid absorption, helping to prevent dehydration. (Shetty, 1996) Accelerated recovery from infectious diarrhoea has been shown in humans as well as in animals. Ramakrishna et al.( Ramkrishna,2000) randomly assigned 48 adolescents and adults with cholera into three treatment groups, (a) receiving standard rehydration solution (SRS), (b) SRS + 50g of rice flour per liter of SRS and (c) SRS + 50 g of maize starch per liter of SRS (that resist digestion), respectively. Results showed that fecal weight were significantly lower and the duration of diarrhoea was significantly shorter for patients given the amylase resistant maize starch. Both RS (as green bananas) and NSP have been found to facilitate recovery from other forms of infectious diarrhoea in children, (Rabbani,2001). Feeding with cooked rice, an established source of RS (Marsono 1993) lowers the severity and incidence of diarrhoeal disease in pigs ( Hampson, 2000). This benefit of RS in lowering the severity of diarrohoea seems to be due to increased fluid absorption along with cations (Na+, K+, and Ca2+) by SCFA helping to reverse
13

dehydration(Shetty, 1986) and modulation of muscular activity of the large bowel. The cholera microorganisms in the gut may also adhere to starch granules in same way as bifidobacteria limiting their viability and thus removing them from site of infection.( Topping,2003) While these findings suggest that RS appears to limit dehydration, it may not apply to diarrhoea that is not due to cholera. A better oral rehydration solution should be effective for treating all types of diarrhoea, and it should be easy to prepare, store and administer,(Rabbani, 2001).

APPLICATION IN FOOD
Application of RS in food preparation is important due to these two reasons: Fiber fortification and potential physiological benefits of resistant starch, which may similar to fiber. Unique functional properties, yielding high quality products not attainable otherwise with traditional insoluble fibers ( Yue and Waring,1998). RS, having functionality of dietary fiber, provide desirable properties of low water holding capacity, small particle size, and bland flavor. Studies have shown that granular resistant starch provides better appearance, texture, and mouthfeel than do conventional fiber sources and improves expansion and crispness in certain food applications. This greatly increases the likelihood that consumers will accept these foods and hence increase their dietary fibre intake (Buttriss and Stokes, 2008). RS has desirable physicochemical properties such as swelling, viscosity increase, gel formation and water holding capacity making it useful in a variety of foods.( Roberfroid,1993) These properties make it possible to use RS to replace flour without significantly affecting dough rheology, taste and flavor along with fortifying fiber in the food. Otherwise it is not attainable in high fiber foods(Heitman et al.,1992). Resistant starch are mainly used in moderate and low-moisture products. Many baked goods and cereals are known to provide a source of fiber. Some, like high-fiber bread, bran muffins, and breakfast
14

cereals, are abundant in the marketplace. Others, such as butter-flavored cookies, cakelike muffins, and brownies, are considered desserts and do not normally come to mind in relation to healthy eating patterns or fiber fortification. However, such products can be prepared when using resistant starch as a source of fiber. Historically, fibre-containing foods have been coarser, denser and sometimes less palatable than refined, processed foods. The use of resistant starches as food ingredients typically does not change the taste or significantly change the texture, but may improve sensory properties compared with many of the traditionally used fibers, such as bran and gums (Sajilata et al., 2006). The amount of RS used to replace flour depends on the starch being used, the application, the desired fiber level, and in some cases, the desired structure-function claims (Brown, 2004). Therefore, appropriate inclusion levels can vary, but are easily determined for each end use. From a quality standpoint, some applications are more sensitive to flour replacement than others. For example, in bread and rolls, which generally have a bland flavor, are low in fat and require a minimum amount of gluten for structure, the maximum flour replacement is typically 1020% without noticeably changing the texture. Vital wheat gluten would then be added to bring the gluten back to its original value. However, for chemically leavened products, flour replacement levels can be much higher and no additional vital wheat gluten is required. Sweet products in particular lend themselves to high RS levels because they tend to be high in fat and sugar, which helps compensate for changes in flavor and mouthfeel. In these applications, flour replacement can be as high as 75 %.( Brown, 2004). The incorporation of RS in baked products, pasta products and beverages imparts improved textural properties and health benefits (Premavalli,et al., 2006). A panel rated 40% TDF RS loaf cakes as best for flavor, grittiness moisture perception, and tenderness 24 hour after baking. Similar result has been obtained on sensory evaluation by a trained panel of toasted waffles for initial crispness, crispness after 3 min, moistness and overall texture, RS waffle showed greater crispness than control or traditional fibre. RS can improve expansion in extruded cereals and snacks. RS may also be used in thickened,
15

opaque health beverages in which insoluble fibre is desired. Insoluble fibers generally require suspension and add opacity to beverages. Compared with insoluble fibres, RS imparts a less gritty mouth feel and masks flavors less (Sajilata et al., 2006). Bread containing 40% TDF RS had greater loaf volume and better cell structure compared with traditional fibers tested (Baghurst,et al, 1996). Resistant starch successfully replaced most or all of the fat in imitation cheese without adversely affecting meltability or hardness and presenting the well-established benefit of resistant starch as a functional fibre. In addition, low-fat, starch-containing imitation cheese has been demonstrated to have the potential to expand during microwave heating. Since this type of imitation cheese expands on microwave heating, it can be presented as a stand-alone snack, Pre-expanded or as a home expansion product. (Arimi,et al,. 2008) RS were incorporated in a variety of baked goods, many of which include batter systems, such as in cakes, cake-like muffins, or brownies. In general, application tests showed that RS acts as texture modifier, imparting a favorable tenderness to the crumb. A low-fat, loaf cake was formulated with RS and various fibers to obtain approximately 3% TDF or 2.5 g of fiber per 80 g serving. These included a 40% TDF RS (Novelose 240 starch), oat fiber, a blend of oat fiber with Novelose 240 starch in a 50/50 ratio based on TDF contribution, and a 23% TDF RS (Hylon VII starch). The baked cakes made with RS were similar to that containing oat fiber and the control in the amount of moisture loss after baking, height, specific volume, and density. A panel rated the 40% TDF RS loaf cakes as the best for flavor, grittiness, moisture perception, and tenderness 24 h after baking. (Sajilata et al., 2006). RS can be used as an ingredient that improves crispness in foods where high heat is applied to a products surface during processing. French toast and waffles, especially frozen reheated types, represent foods in which surface crispness is desired (Sajilata et al., 2006). Along with textural enhancement, RS can improve expansion in extruded cereals and snacks. Various cereals were formulated to contain 40% TDF RS (Novelose 240

16

starch) alone and in combination with oat fiber in ratios of 50/50 and 25/75 based on weight. The cereal with RS and no oat fiber had greater volumetric expansion than the control. In blends with oat fiber, the cereal containing 75% of RS had better expansion than the one containing only 50%. Dried pasta products containing up to 15% RS can be made with little or no effect on dough rheology during extrusion. Although the resultant pasta was lighter in color, a firm al dente texture was obtained in the same cooking time as a control that had no added fiber. RS may also be used in thickened, opaque health beverages in which insoluble fiber is desired. Insoluble fibers generally require suspension and add opacity to beverages. Compared with insoluble fibers, RS imparts a less gritty mouthfeel and masks flavors less. (Sajilata et al., 2006).

References
Arimi, J. M., Duggan, E., ORiordan, E. D., OSullivan, M., and Lyng, J. G. 2008. Microwave expansion of imitation cheese containing Journal of Food Engineering, 88:254262. Baghurst, P. A., Baghurst, K. I., and Record, S. J. 1996. Dietary fiber, non-starch polysaccharides and resistant starch A review. Food Australia, 48:335. Bednar, G. E., Patil, A. R., Murray, S. M., Grieshop, C. M., Merchen, N. R., and Fahey, G. C. 2001. Starch and fiber fractions in selected food and feed resistant starch.

ingredients affect their small intestinal digestibility and fermentability and their large bowel fermentability 131:276286. Bednar, G. E., Patil, A. R., Murray, S. M., Grieshop, C. M., Merchen, N. R., & Fahey, G. C. 2001. Starch and fiber fractions in selected food and feed ingredients affect their small intestinal digestibility and fermentability and their large bowel fermentability in vitro in a canine model. The Journal of Nutrition, 131: 276286. in vitro in a canine model. The Journal of Nutrition,

17

Behall, K. M., and Hallfrisch, J. 2002. Plasma glucose and insulin reduction after consumption of breads varying in amylose content. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 56: 913920. Brown, I.L. 2004 Applications and Uses of Resistant Starch. Journal AOAC Intrernational.87(3): 727732. Brown, M. A., Storlien, L. H., and Brown, I. L. 2003. Cooking attenuates the ability of high amylose meals to reduce plasma insulin concentrations in rats. British Journal of Nutrition. 90: 823827. Buttriss, J. L., and Stokes, C. S. 2008. Dietary fibre and health: An overview. British Nutrition Foundation, Nutrition Bulletin. 33:186200. Charalampopoulos, D., Wang, R., Pandiella, S. S., and Webb, C. 2002.Application of cereals and cereal components in functional foods: A review. International Journal of Food Microbiology.79: 131141. Commission of the European Communities. 2008. Draft commission directive:Amending directive 90/496/EEC. Available source: http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/consultation/cwd>. Cited in Zaragoza E.S., Navarrete M.J.R., Zapata E.S., Alvarez J.A.P. 2010. Resistant starch as functional ingredient: A review. Food Research International. 43: 931942. Coudray, C., Bellanger, J., Castiglia-Delavaud, C., Rmsy, C., Vermorel, M., and Rayssignuier, Y. 1997. Effect of soluble or partly soluble dietary fibres

supplementation on absorption and balance of calcium, magnesium, iron and zinc in healthy young men. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 51:375380. David, R.L. 1999. The chemistry of complex carbohydrates. In: S.S. Cho, L. Prosky and M. Dreher (eds.). Complex carbohydrates in foods. New York: Marcel Dekker.

18

De Deckere EAM, Kloots WJ and van Amelsvoort JMM. 1993. Resistant starch decreases serum total cholesterol and triacylglycerol concentrations in rats. Journal of Nutrition.123: 214251. De Roos, N., Heijnen, M. L., and De Graff, C. 1995. Resistant starch has little effect on appetite, food intake and insulin secretion of healthy young men. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 49:532541. De-Deckere, E. A. M., Kloots, W. J., and Van-Amelsvoort, J. M. M. 1993. Resistant starch decreases serum total cholesterol and triacylglycerol concentrations in rats. Journal of Nutrition.123: 21422151. Eliasson A.C.2004. Starch in food: structure function and applications. Woodland publishing UK. Elmstahl, H. L. 2002. Resistant starch content in a selection of starchy f oods on the

Swedish market. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 56: 500505. Englyst, H.N., and Hudson, G.J. 1996. The classification and measurement of dietary carbohydrates. Food Chemistry. 57(1): 15- 21. Englyst, H.N., and Hudson, G.J. 1997. Starch and health In: P.J. Farazier, Donald A.M. and P. Richmoand (eds.). Starch: structure and functionality. Cambridge, UK: Thomas Graham House. pp 820.

Englyst, H.N., Kingman, S.M., and Cummings, J.H. 1992. Classification and measurement of nutritionally important starch fractions. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 46 (Suppl. 2): 33-50. Ferguson, L. R., Tasman-Jones, C., Englyst, H., and Harris, P. J. 2000. Comparative effects of three resistant starch preparations on transit time and short-chain fatty acid production in rats. Nutrition and Cancer.36: 230237.

19

Groff, J.L. and Gropper, S.J.1999.Advance nutritional human metabolism. California:Delmar. Hampson, D.J., Robertson, I.D.,La, T., Oxberry, S.L., Pethick, D.W.2000. Influences of Diet and Vaccination on Colonisation of Pigs by the Intestinal Spirochaete Brachyspira( Serpulina) pilosicoli. Veterinary Microbiology. 73:7584. Haralampu, S. G. 2000. Resistant starch: A review of the physical properties and biological impact of RS3.Carbohydrate Polymers.41:285292. Haralampu, S. G. 2000. Resistant starch: A review of the physical properties and biological impact of RS3. Carbohydrate Polymers.41: 285292. Hashimoto, N., Ito, Y., Han, K. H., Shimada, K., Sekikawa, M., Topping,D. L.2006. Potato pulps lowered the serum cholesterol and triglyceride levels in rats. Journal of Nutritional Science and Vitaminology.52: 445450 Heitman, D.W.,Hardman, W.E., Cameron, I.L.1992. Dietary Supplementation with Pectin and Guar Gum on 1, 2 Dimethylhydrazine induced Colon Carcinogenesis in Rats. Carcinogenesis. 13: 815818. Higgins, J. A. 2004. Resistant starch: Metabolic effects and potential health benefits. Journal of the AOAC International. 87: 761768. Higgins, J. A., Higbee, D. R., Donahoo, W. T., Brown, I. L., Bell, M. L., and Bessesen, D. H. 2004. Resistant starch consumption promotes lipid oxidation. Nutrition and Metabolism, 1:8. International Association for Cereal Science and Technology (ICC), 13 July 2009, Vienna, Austria. Jane J. 2009. Structural Features of Starch Granules II, in Starch chemistry and technology, third edition. Edited by James Bemiller and Roy Whistler. Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier, USA.
20

Keenan, M. J., Zhou, J., Mccutcheon, K. L., Raggio, A. M., Bateman, H. G.,Todd, E. 2006. Effects of resistant starch, a non-digestible fermentable fiber, on reducing body fat. Obesity. 14: 15231534. Kim, W.K., Chung, M.K., Kang, N.E., Kim, M.H., and Park, O.J. 2003. Effect of resistant starch from corn or rice on glucose control,colonic events, and blood lipid concentrations in streptozotocin-induced diabetic rats. Journal of Nutritional Biochemistry. 14:166172. Lopez, H. W., Levrat-Verny, M. A., Coudray, C., Besson, C., Krespine, V.,Messager, A. 2001. Class 2 resistant starches lower plasma and liver lipids and improve mineral retention in rats. Journal of Nutrition.131, 12831289.

Ludwig DS and Eckel RH. 2002. The glycaemic index at 20y. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.76: 264269. Lunn, J., and Buttriss, J. L. 2007. Carbohydrates and dietary fibre. Nutrition Bulletin. 32: 2164. Marsono, Y., Illman, R.J., Clarke, J.M., Trimble, R.P., Topping, D.L. 1993. Plasma Lipids and Large Bowel Volatile Fatty Acids in Pigs Fed White Rice, Brown Rice and Rice Bran. British Journal Nutrition. 70: 503513. Mermelstein, N. H. 2009. Analyzing for resistant starch. Food Technology.4: 8084. Mikulkov, D., Masr, S., and Kraic, J. 2008. Biodiversity of legume health-promoting starch. Starch. 60: 426432. Morais, M. B., Feste, A., Miller, R. G., and Lifichitz, C. H. 1996. Effect of resistant starch and digestible starch on intestinal absorption of calcium, iron and zinc in infant pigs. Paediatric Research. 39:872 876.

Nugent, A. P. 2005. Health properties of resistant starch. British Nutrition Foundation, Nutrition Bulletin. 30:2754.
21

Premavalli, K. S., Roopa, S., and Bawa, A. S. 2006. Resistant starch A functional dietary fiber. Indian Food Industry. 25: 4045. Rabbani, G.H., Teke, T., Zaman, B., Majid, N., Khatun, M., Fuchs, G.J. 2001. Clinical Studies in Persistent Diarrhoea: Dietary Management with Green Bananas or Pectin in Bangladeshi Children. Gastroenterology. 121: 554560. Ramkrishna, B.S., Venkataraman,S. Srinivasan, P., Dash, P., Young, G.P., Binder, H.J.2000. Amylase Resistant Starch Plus Oral Rehydration Solution for Cholera. New England J. Medicine. 342: 308313. Ranganathan, S., Champ, M., Pechard, C., Blanchard, P., Nguyen, M., Colonna, P. 1994. Comparative study of the acute effects of resistant starch and dietary fibres on metabolic indexes in men.American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 59: 879883. Ranhotra, G.S., Gelroth, J.A., and Leinen, S.D. 1997. Hypolipidemic effect of resistant starch in hamsters is not dose dependent.Nutrition Research.17: 317-323. Roberfroid, M. B. 2000. Prebiotics and probiotics: Are they functional foods?. American Journal of clinical Nutrition. 71: 16821687 Roberfroid, M.B. 1993.Role of Dietary Factors in Modulation of Cancer Induction. In: Food and Cancer Prevention: Chemical and Biological Aspects: Waldron K.W., Johnson, I.T., Fenwick, G.R., Eds., Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, UK. pp 255. Rochfort, S., and Panozzo, J. 2007. Phytochemicals for health, the role of pulses. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. 55:79817994. Rodrguez, S. L., Islas, J. J., Agama, E., Tovar, J., and Bello, L. A. 2008. Characterization of a fibre-rich powder prepared by liquefaction of unripe banana flour. Food Chemistry. 107:15151521.

22

Sajilata, M. G., Singhal, R. S., and Kulkarni, P. R. 2006. Resistant starch A review. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety.5: 117. Sanz, T., Salvador, A., and Fiszman, S. M. 2008. Evaluation of four types of resistant starch in muffin baking performance and relationship with batter rheology. European Food Research and Technology.227: 813819. Scholz-Ahrens, E., Ade, P., Marten, B., Weber, P., Timm, W.,Yahya, A., 2007. Prebiotics, probiotics, and synbiotics affect mineral absorption, bone mineral content, and bone structure. Journal of Nutrition, 137, 838846. Sharma, A., Yadav, B. S., and Ritika. 2008. Resistant starch: Physiological roles and food applications. Food Reviews International. 24: 193234. Shetty, P.S., Kurpad, A.V. 1986. Increasing Starch Intake in the Human Diet Increases Fecal Bulking. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 43: 210212. Slavin, J. 2004. Whole grains and human health. Nutrition Research Reviews. 17: 99 110. Slavin, J., Stewart, M., Timm, D., and Hospattankar, A. 2009. Fermentation patterns and short chain-fatty acid (scfa) profiles of wheat dextrin and other functional fibers. In Proceedings of 4th international dietary fibre conference, Vienna. pp 35. Tagliabue, A., Raben, A., Heijnen, M. L., Deurenberg, P., Pasquali, E., and Astrup, A. 1995. The effect of raw potato starch on energy expenditure and substrate oxidation. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.61: 10701075. Tapsell, L. C. 2004. Diet and metabolic syndrome: Where does resistant starch fit in? Journal of the Association of Analytical Chemists International. 87: 756760.

Tester, R.F, Karkalas, J., and Qi, X. (2004). Starch-composition, fine structure andarchitecture. Journal of Cereal Science. 39: 151-165.

23

Tharanathan, R. N., and Mahadevamma, S. 2003. Grain legumes: A boon to human nutrition. Trends in Food Science and Technology, 14,50718. Topping, D. L., Anthony, M. F., and Bird, F. 2003. Resistant starch as prebiotic and synbiotic: State of the art. Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 62: 171176. Trinidad, T. P., Wolever, T. M. S., and Thompson, L. U. 1996. Effect of acetate and

propionate on calcium absorption from the rectum and distal colon of humans. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 63: 574578. Whistler, R.L., and BeMiller, J.N. (1997). Carbohydrate chemistry for food scientists. Minnesota: Eagan Press. Younes, H., Levrat, M. A., Demige, C., and Remesy, C. 1995. Resistant starch is more effective than cholestyramine as a lipid-lowering agent in the rat. Lipids. 30: 847 853. Yue, P., Waring, S. 1998. Resistant Starch in Food Applications. Cereal Foods World. 43: 690695.

24