4.5 Article

Glycemic potency of muffins made with wheat, rice, corn, oat and barley flours: a comparative study between in vivo and in vitro

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
Volume 54, Issue 8, Pages 1281-1285

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00394-014-0806-9

Keywords

Amylose; Cereal grains; Glycemic index; Glycemic response

Funding

  1. Singapore Institute for Clinical Sciences, A*Star

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Muffins made with wheat flour are a popular snack consumed in western and emerging countries. This study aimed to examine the content of amylose, glycemic response (GR) and glycemic index (GI) of muffins baked with refined wheat and rice flours, as well as wholegrain corn, oat and barley flours. This study adopted a randomized, controlled, crossover, non-blind design. Twelve healthy participants consumed wheat, rice, corn, oat and barley muffins once and the reference glucose solution three times in a random order on non-consecutive day. Capillary blood samples were taken every 15 min in the first 60 min and every 30 min for the remaining 60 min for blood glucose analysis. The Megazyme amylose/amylopectin assay procedure was employed to measure amylose content. The GR elicited from the consumption of wheat, rice and corn muffins was comparable between these samples but significantly greater when compared with oat and barley muffins. Consumption of wholegrain muffins, apart from corn muffin, blunted postprandial GR when compared with muffins baked with refined cereal flours. Muffins baked with wheat, rice, corn, oat and barley flours gave rise to GI values of 74, 79, 74, 53 and 55, respectively. The content of amylose was significantly higher in corn, oat and barley muffins than wheat and rice muffins. The greater content of amylose and fibre may play a part in the reduced glycemic potency of oat and barley muffins. Wheat flour can be substituted with oat and barley flours for healthier muffins and other bakery products.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available