Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Topping, David L.; Bajka, Balazs H.; Bird, Anthony R.; Clarke, Julie M.; Cobiac, Lynne; Conlon, Michael A.; Morell, Matthew K.; Toden, Shusuke (2011)
Publisher: Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease
Journal: Microbial Ecology in Health and Disease
Languages: English
Types: Article

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: digestive system diseases, food and beverages
Non-starch polysaccharides (NSP; major components of dietary fibre) have been rather disappointing in the prevention and management of large bowel inflammatory diseases (IBD) or colorectal cancer (CRC). Resistant starch (RS) is that starch which escapes small intestinal digestion and enters the large bowel. RS contributes to total dietary fibre and could be as important as NSP in promoting large bowel health and preventing IBD and CRC. Indeed, it appears that some societies historically at low risk for these conditions eat relatively little NSP but have diets high in RS through their culinary practices. RS acts largely through its large bowel bacterial fermentation products which are, in adults, short chain fatty acids (SCFA). Collectively, SCFA have several non-specific positive actions on large bowel physiology including lowering of luminal pH. Of the major acids, butyrate has attracted the most attention. It is a major metabolic fuel for and promoter of a normal phenotype in colonocytes. Recent data from our laboratory support the latter suggestion.We have shown that, in rats, higher dietary protein (as casein, red meat or soy) increases colonocyte genetic damage and thinning of the colonic mucus barrier. However, feeding of RS as a high amylose maize starch opposed both of these changes in proportion to increased colonic butyrate. These data accord with prospective population data showing lower CRC risk with consumption of total dietary fibre. RS intakes appear to be low in most affluent industrialized countries, so increasing its consumption by modifying consumer foods is one strategy to improve public health. CSIRO and its partners are developing new high amylose cereal cultivars for this purpose. Colonic delivery of specific SCFA could also be useful clinically and we have shown that acetylated, propionylated and butyrylated starches resist small intestinal amylolysis. The bound SCFA are released by the large bowel microflora, raising their digesta levels, with the greatest increase being in the esterified acid. Feeding studies with butyrylated starch in rats have confirmed the opposition of diet-induced genetic damage, supporting a role for this SCFA in lowering risk of CRC and IBD. Further human and animal interventions are planned to determine the potential of these new types of RS in enhancing colonic health.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Jemal A, Ward E, Hao Y, Thun M. Trends in the leading causes of death in the United States, 1970 2002. JAMA. 2005;/294:/1255 9.
    • 2. Mascie-Taylor CG, Karim E. The burden of chronic disease. Science. 2003;/302:/1921 2.
    • 3. Adamson AJ, Mathers JC. Effecting dietary change. Proc Nutr Soc. 2004;/63:/537 47.
    • 4. Baghurst KI, Hope AK, Down EC. Dietary fibre intake in a group of institutionalized elderly and the effects of a fibre supplementation program on nutrient intake and weight gain. Community Health Stud. 1985;/9:/99 108.
    • 5. Baghurst PA, Baghurst KI, Record SJ. Dietary fibre, nonstarch polysaccharides and resistant starch a review. Food Aust. 1996;/48(Suppl):/S3 S35.
    • 6. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare and Australasian Association of Cancer Registries. Cancer in Australia 2001. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (Cancer Series 28), 2004.
    • 7. Park Y, Hunter DJ, Spiegelman D, Bergkvist L, Berrino F, van den Brandt PA, et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk of colorectal cancer: a pooled analysis of prospective cohort studies. JAMA. 2005;/294:/2849 57.
    • 8. Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Corle D, Lance P, Iber F, Caan B, et al. Lack of effect of a low-fat, high-fiber diet on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. Polyp Prevention Trial Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2000;/342:/1149 55.
    • 9. Bingham SA, Day NE, Luben R, Ferrari P, Slimani N, Norat T, et al. Dietary fibre in food and protection against colorectal cancer in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): an observational study. Lancet. 2003;/ 361:/1496 501.
    • 10. Burkitt DP. Some diseases characteristic of western civilisation. BMJ. 1973;/2:/274 8.
    • 11. Spiller GA. Definition of dietary fiber. In: Spiller GA, editor. CRC handbook of dietary fiber in human nutrition. Boca Raton: CRC Press; 1993. p. 15.
    • 12. Topping DL, Clifton PM. Short chain fatty acids and human colonic function roles of resistant starch and non-starch polysaccharides. Physiol Rev. 2001;/81:/1031 64.
    • 13. Lewis SJ, Heaton KW. The intestinal effects of bran-like plastic particles: is the concept of 'roughage' valid after all? Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1997;/9:/553 7.
    • 14. O'Keefe SJ, Kidd M, Espitalier-Noel G, Owira P. Rarity of colon cancer in Africans is associated with low animal product consumption, not fiber. Am J Gastroenterol. 1999;/94:/1373 80.
    • 15. Asp N-G. Resistant starch. Eur J Clin Nutr. 1992;/46(Suppl 2):/S1.
    • 16. Anderson IH, Levine AS, Levitt MD. Incomplete absorption of the carbohydrate in an all purpose wheat flour. N Engl J Med. 1981;/304:/891 2.
    • 17. Ramakrishna BS, Venkataraman S, Srinivasan S, Dash P, Young GP, Binder HJ. Amylase-resistant starch plus oral rehydration solution for cholera. N Engl J Med. 2000;/342:/ 308 13.
    • 18. Brouns F, Kettlitz B, Arrigoni E. Resistant starch and the ''butyrate revolution''. Trends Food Sci Tech. 2002;/13:/251 61.
    • 19. Van Munster IP, Tangerman A, Nagengast FM. Effect of resistant starch on colonic fermentation, bile acid metabolism and mucosal proliferation. Dig Dis Sci. 1994;/39:/834 42.
    • 20. Ahmed R, Segal I, Hassan H. Fermentation of dietary starch in humans. Am J Gastroenterol. 2000;/95:/1017 20.
    • 21. Segal I. Physiological small bowel malabsorption of carbohydrates protects against large bowel diseases in Africans. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2002;/17:/249 52.
    • 22. O'Keefe SJ, Chung D, Mahmoud N, Sepulveda AR, Manafe M, Arch J, et al. Why do African Americans get more colonic cancer than native Africans? J Nutr. 2007;/137(Suppl 1):/ 175S 82S.
    • 23. Le Leu RK, Brown IL, Hu Y, Morita T, Esterman A, Young GP. Effect of dietary resistant starch and protein on colonic fermentation and intestinal tumorigenesis in rats. Carcinogenesis. 2007;/28:/240 5.
    • 24. Moreau NM, Martin LJ, Toquet CS, Laboisse CL, Nguyen PG, Siliart BS, et al. Restoration of the integrity of rat caecocolonic mucosa by resistant starch, but not by fructooligosaccharides in dextran sulphate sodium-induced experimental colitis. Br J Nutr. 2003;/90:/75 85.
    • 25. Cassidy A, Bingham SA, Cummings JH. Starch intake and colorectal cancer risk: an international comparison. Br J Cancer. 1994;/69:/937 42.
    • 26. Norat T, Bingham S, Ferrari P, Slimani N, Jenab M, Mazuir M, et al. Meat, fish, and colo-rectal cancer risk: the European Prospective Investigation into cancer and nutrition. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;/97:/906 16.
    • 27. Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. Resistant starch attenuates colonic DNA damage induced by high dietary protein in rats. Nutr Cancer. 2005;/51:/45 51.
    • 28. Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. Dose-dependent reduction of dietary protein-induced colonocyte DNA damage by resistant starch in rats correlates more highly with caecal butyrate than with other short chain fatty acids. Cancer Biol Ther. 2007;/6:/253 8.
    • 29. Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. Resistant starch prevents colonic DNA damage induced by high dietary cooked red meat or casein in rats. Cancer Biol Ther. 2006;/5:/ 267 72.
    • 30. Toden S, Bird AR, Topping DL, Conlon MA. Differential effects of dietary whey, casein and soy on colonic DNA damage in rats. Br J Nutr. 2007;/97:/535 43.
    • 31. Brown IL, McNaught KJ, Moloney E. Hi-MaizeTM new directions in starch technology and nutrition. Food Aust. 1995;/47:/272 5.
    • 32. Brown IL. Applications and uses of resistant starch. J AOAC Int. 2004;/87:/727 32.
    • 33. Noakes M, Clifton PM, Nestel PJ, Leu R, Mcintosh G. Effect of high amylose starch and oat bran on metabolic variables and bowel function in subjects with hypertriglyceridemia. Am J Clin Nutr. 1996;/64:/944 51.
    • 34. Symonds EL, Kritas S, Omari TI, Butler RN. A combined 13CO2/H2 breath test can be used to assess starch digestion and fermentation in humans. J Nutr. 2004;/134:/1193 6.
    • 35. Morell MK, Kosar-Hashemi B, Cmiel M, Samuel MS, Chandler P, Rahman S, et al. Barley sex6 mutants lack starch synthase IIa activity and contain a starch with novel properties. Plant J. 2003;/34:/172 84.
    • 36. Bird AR, Flory C, Davies DA, Usher S, Topping DL. A novel barley cultivar (Himalaya 292) with a specific gene mutation in starch synthase IIa resulting in altered grain starch and non-starch polysaccharide composition raises large bowel starch and short chain fatty acids in rats. J Nutr. 2004;/134:/ 831 5.
    • 37. Bird AR, Jackson M, King RA, Davies DA, Usher S, Topping DL. A novel barley cultivar (Himalaya 292), high in amylose and soluble and insoluble non-starch polysaccharides, lowers plasma cholesterol and alters indices of large bowel health in pigs. Br J Nutr. 2004;/97:/607 15.
    • 38. Regina A, Bird A, Topping D, Bowden S, Freeman J, Barsby T, et al. A high amylose wheat generated by RNA-interference improves indices of large bowel health in rats. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2006;/103:/3546 51.
    • 39. Annison G, Illman RJ, Topping DL. Acetylated, propionylated or butyrylated starches raise large bowel short-chain fatty acids preferentially when fed to rats. J Nutr. 2003;/133:/ 3523 8.
    • 40. Morita T, Kasaoka S, Kiriyama S, Brown IL, Topping DL. Comparative effects of acetylated and unmodified high amylose maize starch in rats. Starch/Sta¬®rke. 2005;/57:/246 53.
    • 41. Bajka B, Topping DL, Cobiac L, Clarke JM. Butyrylated starch is less susceptible to enzymic hydrolysis and increases large-bowel butyrate more than high-amylose maize starch in the rat. Br J Nutr. 2006;/95:/1 8.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Collected from