No abstract

Coconut meal (CM) is an industrial byproduct of coconut oil and coconut milk production which may be modified for use as fodder. Here we study the effects of the physical modification of CM. Four modification methods were tested: water soaking, microwave-, γ-, and electron-beam irradiation. We determined the CM chemical composition, physicochemical properties, and in vitro carbohydrate digestibility by digestive enzyme extracts from Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) and silver barb (Barbonymus gonionotus). CM modifications decreased the level of crude fibre but increased the available carbohydrates (p < 0.05). Furthermore, water soaking changed the physicochemical properties including pH, water solubility, microstructure, thermal properties, and crystallinity. Water soaking also increased the carbohydrate digestibility by the fish enzymes tested. The findings of this study therefore suggest that the quality of CM as a feedstuff can be improved by water soaking.

The hydrogen breath analysis test was performed in healthy Thai adults to determine lactitol tolerance. The study was conducted in 39 individuals (11 males and 28 females) aged 18-41 years. All volunteers agreed to participate in this study after the risks and benefits had been fully explained. Subjects were requested not to consume milk, milk products, or high-vegetable diets for a day and to fast from 10 p.m. of the day preceding the test day. After consumption of the test diet (12 and 20 g of lactose or lactitol, respectively, in 250 mL water), the subjects recorded the severity of symptoms for 24 hours. Breath samples were collected after fasting and after consumption of the test diet at 30 min intervals over the 7-hour study period. Breath samples were analyzed for hydrogen using gas chromatography. After consumption of 12 g lactose, the prevalence of lactose malabsorbers was established. The increment of a peak breath hydrogen level of > or = 20 ppm above the baseline level was used as an indicator of lactose malabsorption. The lactose malabsorbers were further classified as lactose tolerance or lactose intolerance according to the gastrointestinal symptoms observed. All 39 healthy Thai adults could be classified into 3 groups as follows: 9 (23%) lactose absorbers (LA), 15 (38.5%) lactose mal-absorber/tolerance (LMT), and 15 (38.5%) lactose mal-absorber/intolerance (LMI). Using the hydrogen breath test, 67% of the subjects were identified as lactitol intolerance after the consumption of 12 g lactitol. The lactitol intolerance comprised 53.8% of LMI, 34.6% of LMT, and 11.5% of LA. Among all subjects, one third of LA (33%), two thirds of LMT (60%), and 93% of LMI were lactitol intolerant. In addition, gastrointestinal symptoms such as flatulence and abdominal pain were most pronounced in LMI. Diarrhea was also a prominent manifestation after consumption of 12 g lactitol. Therefore, it was finally decided that 20 g lactose or lactitol were not given to LMI because of the risk of gastrointestinal symptoms. After high doses (20 g) of lactose and lactitol consumption, most LMT developed more symptoms than did LA and the main symptom was diarrhea. Consumption of 20 g lactose resulted in fewer symptoms than 20 g lactitol in both LA and LMT. On the basis of the hydrogen breath test, most LA tolerated 12 g lactitol without gastrointestinal symptoms except some flatulence whereas most LMT and LMI did not. Twenty g lactitol was not tolerated by both LA and LMT because there was diarrhea among the subjects, especially in LMT. Although the hydrogen breath analysis test is the best method for identification of lactose malabsorption, it is not the best method to identify lactitol intolerance. A hydrogen concentration of 15 ppm above the baseline level was found to be the best cut-off point to indicate lactitol intolerance although sensitivity was 85% and specificity only 38% in this study. It was further concluded that there is a greater susceptibility to lactitol in human lactose malabsorbers than in lactose absorbers. Ou...

The study was conducted to evaluate if the recovery of lactitol and its cleavage products varied when different doses of this disaccharide sugar alcohol (150 and 1,200 mg/kg body weight, respectively) were given by gastric gavage to unadapted male rats. Phenol red added to the test solution as marker dye served to determine the intestinal transit and distribution areas. Marker transit revealed that the test substance did not reach the cecum in all series. Gastric emptying was more retarded after the high dose. Administration of low doses did not alter intestinal transit and luminal volume as compared to control animals. But a much larger luminal volume was found in the third intestinal quarter after the high doses, although the marker transit through this segment was equal under all experimental conditions. The total gastrointestinal recovery of lactitol at 63.2 (+/- 3.9) and 75.5 (+/- 4.5)% was significantly different (p < 0.001) 1 hour after administration of 150 mg and 1200 mg/kg body weight, respectively. Only free sorbitol was detected in the gastrointestinal contents in both dosage groups. Based on these results and correcting the values for marker recovery (85% in both groups), it is reasonable to assume that the maximum amount of lactitol that can be hydrolyzed and absorbed by the small intestine is 11.2 and 25.2%, respectively, and not zero. In conclusion, the caloric availability of lactitol is dose-dependent and should be determined under normal conditions in which the laxative threshold is not exceeded.

No abstract