Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T18:45:11.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Energy balances of eight volunteers fed on diets supplemented with either lac ti to1 or saccharose

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 March 2007

A. J. H. Van Es ,
Lisette De Groot  and
J. E. Vogt
A. J. H. Van Es
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Agricultural University, 10 Haarweg, 6709 PJ Wageningen, The Netherlands
Lisette De Groot
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Agricultural University, 10 Haarweg, 6709 PJ Wageningen, The Netherlands
J. E. Vogt
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Physiology, Agricultural University, 10 Haarweg, 6709 PJ Wageningen, The Netherlands
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

1. Complete 24 h energy and nitrogen balances were measured for eight subjects both while consuming a basal diet supplemented with 49 g saccharose/d (diet S) and while consuming the same basal diet but supplemented with 50 g lactitol monohydrate/d (diet L).

2. The subjects ate the two diets for 8 d. Faeces and urine were collected for the final 4 d. Exchange of respiratory gases (oxygen, carbon dioxide, hydrogen and methane) was measured during the final 72 h while the subjects stayed in an open-circuit respiration chamber, 11 m3, and simulated office work. Before eating diet L, subjects ate 50 g lactitol daily for 10 d.

3. On diets L and S, faecal moisture content averaged 0.787 and 0.753 g/g respectively, the difference being significant (P < 0.05). On diet L, energy and nitrogen digestibilities and energy metabolizability averaged 0, 922, 0.836 and 0-881 respectively, and on diet S 0.935, 0.869 and 0.896 respectively; the differences were also significant (P < 0.05). Urinary energy losses and N balances were not significantly different for the two diets.

4. In all subjects only traces of methane were produced but hydrogen production differed significantly (P < 0.05) for diets L and S, being 2.3 and 0.4 litres (normal temperature and pressure)/d respectively.

5. Intakes of metabolizable energy (ME) were corrected, within subjects, to energy equilibrium and equal metabolic body-weight. The corrected ME intakes did not show differences between diets. However, when on diet L the subjects were probably less active than when on diet S because differences within subjects of ankle actometer counts between diets showed a high correlation with the corresponding differences in corrected ME intakes (r 0.92). Further correction of ME intake toward equal actometer activity showed a significant (P < 0.05) difference between diets: for maintaining energy equilibrium 5.6 (SE 0.8; P < 0.05) % more ME from diet L was needed than from diet S. The reliability of this 5.6% difference depends on whether or not one ankle actometer gives an accurate picture of the subject's physical activity.

6. The energy contribution to the body is clearly smaller from lactitol than from saccharose, certainly due to the effect of lactitol on digestion, and probably also due to the effect on the utilization of ME.

Type
Papers of direct relevance to Clinical and Human Nutrition
Information
British Journal of Nutrition , Volume 56 , Issue 3 , November 1986 , pp. 545 - 554
Copyright
Copyright © The Nutrition Society 1986

References

REFERENCES

Bird, S. P., Hewitt, D. & Gurr, M. I. (1985). Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 44, 40A.Google Scholar
Blaxter, K. L. (1962). The Energy Metabolism of Ruminants, pp. 231–232. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Brouwer, E. (1958). In Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Energy Metabolism, European Association for Animal Production Publication no. 8, pp. 182–192 [Thorbek, G. and Aersoe, H., editors]. Copenhagen: Statens Husdyrbrugsudvalg.Google Scholar
Brouwer, E. (1965). In Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on Energy Metabolism, European Association for Animal Production Publication no. 11, pp. 441–443 [Blaxter, K. L., editor]. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bryant, M. P. (1979). Journal of Animal Science 48, 193–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de boer, J. O. (1985). Energy requirements of lean and overweight women, assessed by indirect calorimetry, pp. 20–33. PhD Thesis, University of Wageningen.Google Scholar
International Organization for Standardization (1979). International Standard no. 5983.Google Scholar
Saris, W. H. M. & Binkhorst, R. A. (1977). European Journal of Applied Physiology 37, 229–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Es, A. J. H., Vogt, J. E., Niessen, J. E., Veth, J., Rodenburg, L., Teeuwse, V., Dhuyvetter, J., Deurenberg, P., Hautvast, J. G. A. J. & van der Beek, E. (1984). British Journal of Nutrition 52, 429–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Health Organization (1985). Food Additives Series no. 18, p. 91. Geneva: WHO.Google Scholar