sign in sign up
<<
Home , Isomaltooligosaccharide, Trisaccharide

fschrfidvgtbesac tpclycr rcassava/tapioca) (TG) or transglycosylation corn the (typically involves vegetable A saccharified Method of methods. 2 of 1 origi- (2010). 2016), others and others Goffin and by (Shi proposed via centose-type nally usually novel residue, the single or a also linkages, beyond are but extend 2, may type chains or side via 1 type the to either branched of chains . linear IMT-type are as 3 Type , to representative referred henceforward, the are, as and (IMT) linear isomaltotriose are Type include oligodextrans, here. as oligosaccharides, ho- known PAN-type also and as 2, trisaccharide, to representative referred are the mologs is an Panose via linkage. glucose to sidic terminated chains linear oligoglucan are 1,6 “MIMOs,” or “6-O- “maltosylisomaltooligosaccharides,“ as Type known types. 3 into 1, Medicine subdivided be of can and homooligomers, Library glucooligosaccharide (GlcOS) an are (National either (IMOs) 2 link” Isomaltooligosaccharides by between 2011). beta-glycosidic connected of or consisting alpha- “ 10 DP as “oligosaccharides and or or 9 2014), to (Jones 3 2” from (DP) polymerization of Introduction Oswald Jack and Swann, Peter Stanley, Sarah II, Madsen R. Lee Ingredients Food -Based Available Commercially of Survey A ute erdcinwtotpriso sprohibited is permission without reproduction Further 10.1111/1750-3841.13623 doi: ihIOhie L,98 icvr ld ut 3,Mnsa,V 20109, [email protected]). VA (E-mail: Manassas, II 133, Madsen author Suite to Blvd. inquiries Discovery Direct U.S.A. 9385 LLC, ISOThrive, with FS21-63Sbitd1//06 cetd1/921.Atosare Authors 12/19/2016. Accepted 10/5/2016, Submitted JFDS-2016-1643 C 07Isiueo odTechnologists Food of Institute 2017 h rdcino Mssuidhri sacmlse via accomplished is herein studied IMOs of production The degree in ranging small are Oligosaccharides idsra”IOmyb nossetwt h rdc aeigado etfiae faayi ihrsett overall to on those respect and with patients diabetic analysis for of inappropriate thus certificates are diets. and/or and ketogenic) containing response example, labeling products glycemic (for product and and low- ingredients the content, the fiber with of inconsistent content, impact fiber glycemic be fermentation potential may bacterial the enzyme IMO that via glucosyltransferase suggests “industrial” a (a) digestibility by to mediated with either respect acceptor starch produced hydrolyzed with of a results those transglycosylation of presence via of IMO- the (b) available typical in or commercially (dextransucrase), are of 7 MIMO) ingredients compare or The to IMO used (“fermented” ingredients. high-pressure are food and detection a bulk detection index as refractive containing amperometric or and/or differential g/item pulsed fiber,” 15 with with than soluble chromatography chromatography more “prebiotic example, liquid exchange for fiber,” anion amounts, “high high-pressure significant in Herein, as present serving. Marketed be may supplements. IMO sweetener,” dietary glycemic low other “low-calorie, and shakes, bars, tein/fiber nktgncdes npriua)wiemsedn tes(hs nlwcroyrt it) ecnld htlabeling that patients conclude epileptic We and diets). patients carbohydrate type. low (diabetic this on populations of (those products certain for others to and reconsidered misleading hazard calorie,” be “zero while health should glycemic,” a particular) requirements “oligosac- “low pose in of as may content diets, such to and ketogenic claims, respect false, on because with certainly significant particularly are is and like, This definition, the mislabeled. of fiber,” way by “dietary are, and products charides” these of most that demonstrates rcia Application: Practical Keywords: Abstract: abhdae ibts itr br lgschrds prebiotics oligosaccharides, fiber, dietary diabetes, carbohydrates smlolgschrds(Ms r nlddi aycmecal vial odpout nldn pro- including products food available commercially many in included are (IMOs) Isomaltooligosaccharides α ioatoioy--ats, “IMOMs,” -isomaltooligosyl-D-maltose,” α -1,2, hsaayi oprn omrilyaalbeioatoioacaiebsdfo ingredients food isomaltooligosaccharide-based available commercially 7 comparing analysis This α R 13 or -1,3, α α 16oiolcn that oligoglucans -1,6 14lnae.These linkages. -1,4 α 14glyco- -1,4 α -1,6 α > - elsug ai.USA n aass a,USA) h only the U.S.A.), Va., Manassas, and U.S.A. Calif. Healdsburg, aeil n Methods and Materials States. United the in market commercial the off-flavors. on available to contribute can that metabolites on) acetic (lactic, so acidic and and acids, bodies to color remove as to way purified specific this usually are sufficiently manufactured products be dependent Commercial can likewise speciation. and is facilitate employed, product organism oligomeric the the pattern, on of branching The thereof, profile). lack metabolic or the on man- (depends and/or nitol 2 of the types quantity on significant but depending a contain, employed, amounts), may organism small broths (very and predominate, This 1 3 type 2004). and/or of Chung IMOs and yields organism (Day method bacterial enzyme a [GT]) of glucosyltransferase (1,6- presence dextransucrase the the expressing in of sucrose capable acceptor of maltose fermentation the a involves with B Method 2005). (Zhong this others yeast glucose, with and of fermentation amount secondary via significant removed typically a is yield can approach this cause the “indus- from via resulting which starch product side of by a Resistant as method evident produced. be the also are is should (RMDx) exemplars) This (6 IMOs. IMOs 2 trial” type and 1 type spp an with si.Temtrasicue fretd M n “indus- 6 and IMO ISOThrive “fermented” IMOs. 1 trial” included materials The as-is. Mspoue sn h ehd n lna)aecurrently are (linear) B and A methods the using produced IMOs eea ukIOfo nrdet eeaqie n used and acquired were ingredients food IMO bulk Several Ko n tes21) hsmto ilsamxueof mixture a yields method This 2011). others and (Kwon α α guoiaeezm,tpclyfrom typically enzyme, -glucosidase guoiae(idsra”IO.Aayi fthe of Analysis IMO). (“industrial” -glucosidase o.8,N.2 2017 2, Nr. 82, Vol. α ayae o xml,lmtdxrn.Be- . limit example, for -, TM rboi etr(STrv,LLC., (ISOThrive, Nectar Prebiotic r ora fFo Science Food of Journal α Dgua 6- -D- A spergillus α niger 401 -D-

Food Chemistry Lof μ g/g), and pH 12.50, μ 300 mm @ > × %, 500 + C, NaOH , 2. IMO-900, 3. ° R g/g per analyte, HPAEC- μ L of the 0.5% solution was L on column, Carbopac PA- μ μ , 0.6 mL/min, runtime 25 min, DP 3 were quantified using L- 4 ࣙ Figure 1–Overlaid (offset by 60 nC) HPAEC-PAD chromatograms of 1. ISOThrive AdvantaFiber 90P, 4. Wako IMO, 5. FiberYum, 6. VitaFiber syrup, and 7, VitaFiber powder. A: D-mannitol, B: L- (IS), C: unknown, possibly D-, D: D-glucose, E: D-leucrose, F: , G: sucrose, H: isomaltotriose, I: unknown disaccharides, J: isomaltotetraose, K: maltose, L: D-panose, M-Q: PAN-type IMO DP 4 to 8, andmaltodextrins R: in resistant clusters of increasing molecular weight. SO Bulk DP 1 to 3, mannitol, glycerol, 2 , all PEEK, 10 , details below). First, the amount of the primary + + C) using external standards (0.2% w/w per analyte, ° 250 mm) and guard @ 35 × C with standard gold electrode compared with Ag/AgCl ° L on-column, BioRad Aminex HPX-87H 7 C, isocratic, 0.008N H ° μ Instrumental analysis: Electrode surface effects dictate that RRF compared with ex- diluted material (typically 15%lated to as 25% 500/brix. RDS) The1 needed calculated g was amount in calcu- was a dilutedRDS, 1.5 by HPLC-RID). mL mass Agilent-type to Second, autosamplertransferred 25 vial by (target pipette 0.5%pler to w/w vial. a The tared 1.5 mass mL was Agilent-type recorded. To autosam- this was added 25 onex ICS-5000 internal standard (IS, L-arabinose, Sigma,the 99 total massto was a recorded. To total thePAD). of latter 1 was g added (target DI 15 water and to organic 25 acids were quantified20 via HPLC-RID (Agilent 1100, 65 RID @ 45 see Figure 3). Therides, were quantified/confirmed alcohols, via mono-,onex HPAEC-PAD (ThermoDi- di-, ICS-5000 and oligosaccha- 100 (4 100 mMol, 5 min isocratictime then 25 acetate min, gradient including to 2 min 250 equilibrationat mM, prior run- 25 to injection, PAD running the standard Auexcept quad waveform). for All PAN-type compounds IMOs listed, arabinose as aneach). IS It relative is to importantto to bona-fide make first sure compounds that analyze the (15 anytype sample new ppmw does IMOs matrix not were contain without quantifiedresponse L-arabinose. IS PAN- by factors approximation (RRFs) usingmaltodextrin for the ladder the (DP relative 3 corresponding to8 DP 7: to Supelco in 10: Oligosaccharides Elicityl kit, a DP Oligotech). known ternal standards can driftbecause over RRFs time, are so not an necessarilyfor the IS a same was homologous relative used. series to However, L-arabinose of oligosaccharides with different linkage 5g = , house system,  90% IMO). Vol. 82, Nr. 2, 2017 > r Each IMO exemplar was diluted by a NRRL B-742) as described by Madsen and prebiotic fiber sweetener, powder from corn Prebiotic sweetener, sugar free (Raw Indulgence TM TM Journal of Food Science 1% IMT-type IMO) prepared via fermentation of a sucrose (China), and syrup fromCorp., tapioca Edmonton, (Indonesia, 96% Bioneutra carbohydrate, 91% Global fiber). VitaFiber Wako IMOs (Wako PureJapan). Chemical Industries, LTD., Osaka, FiberYum AdvantaFiber 90 powder, non-GMO(Top Health soluble Ingredients, Inc. fiber (Edmonton Canada) sweetener 2014;try coun- of manufacture: China, 90% IMO). IMO-900 powderYucheng (Baolingbao Shandong, China, Biotechnology, Co. LTD., 100% fiber/dry solids based on 5 g total carbohydrate LTD., Hawthorne, N.Y., U.S.A.; packed in the United States, fiber, from tapioca starch). < Sample preparation: Leuconostoc citreum r r r r r details below) and high-pressure anionwith exchange pulsed chromatography amperometric detection (HPAEC-PAD; ThermoDi- angle refractometer, as g RDS/100sucrose g (Sigma material S7903). (% w/w) Serial relativein dilutions to order, for were analysis prepared via therefrom, high-pressuredifferential liquid refractive chromatography index with detection (HPLC-RID; Agilent 1100, factor of 4 with deionizedHydro water Service (DI & water, Supplies, 18 Inc., M Gaithersburg, MD).dry The refractive solids (RDSs) were measured using an Atago PAL1 critical- 402 provided by manufacturer): others (2015). The 6starch “industrial” hydrolysate IMOs and manufactured typically viato TG followed remove by residual of glucose a include yeast (product name fermentation and description IMO) and a4, very small fractiondonor of in type the 1/IMT-type( presence (DP of 3 a to maltose acceptor via dextransucrase “fermented” IMO, istype made 2/PAN-type up oligosaccharides (DP of 3 a to mixture 8, of 85% mainly PAN-type linear A survey of Imo-based food ingredients . . .

Food Chemistry aac:15 49 03 .92.32.729.77 70.23 32.76 536.04 0.00 20.30 21.77 12.46 0.00 78.23 0.00 0.00 580.81 35.58 1.79 20.29 24.73 0.00 15.29 6.76 75.27 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 572.46 0.54 34.36 5.28 2.93 18.70 0.09 4.13 15.66 11.75 0.00 7.24 99.91 7.02 0.00 0.00 562.07 0.00 8.32 0.00 2.92 0.01 40.91 0.38 1.36 5.15 18.30 21.84 2.19 22.60 10.12 20.30 5.21 1.86 79.70 0.00 7.01 8.20 0.09 0.00 606.27 0.00 0.00 10.08 0.00 0.00 1.41 32.67 0.00 0.40 12.01 0.77 23.85 5.27 20.66 9.49 14.93 97.49 2.76 85.07 of 5.26 1.71 range 0.00 630.18 8.24 the 6.71 in 0.06 0.00 is calibrating the factor the 10.41 between and this 0.00 0.00 Typically, 0.00 case, 0.00 1.79 36.75 mass this ). over in compound, 0.00 (panose normalized 13.30 types factor areas 24.13 0.71 3 23.45 correction peak 1.16 1.58 DP 6.08 75.93 RRF corresponding the 98.42 7.30 an 2.65 on 779.06 2009), 7.91 based 1.79 others 0.00 was 5.95 and reducing 12.11 (Goffin of number groups 0.05 0.00 14.69 and end weight molecular 79.74 0.00 identical 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.07 (despite types 78.83 33.62 0.09 0.90 0.77 75.58 5.32 3.27 3.41 2.99 8.53 0.00 0.61 9.73 6.55 12.12 0.00 Da: 1.73 MWD, 0.00 4.58 0.00 0.00 Balance: 1.18 29.83 0.00 96.98 Total 14.48 1.81 3.36 IMO Total 3.76 23.77 9.47 0.32 IMO PAN 10.06 22.48 13.98 IMO IMT 0.00 MIMO-DP9 0.00 32.14 0.00 0.00 3.17 96.24 0.00 MIMO-DP8 1.58 3.80 MIMO-DP7 11.18 1.15 0.51 MIMO-DP6 0.00 0.40 MIMO-DP5 0.00 0.13 MIMO-DP4 2.07 0.00 95.18 (MIMO-DP3) Panose 0.12 Maltotetraose 0.90 Maltotriose 0.40 Isomaltotetraose 6.80 Isomaltotriose 63.06 0.15 Maltose Sucrose Isomaltose Leucrose Fructose Glucose Glycerol Mannitol Erythritol brix: but all Exemplar# in observed sucrose %/brix the Compound, that Note ingredients. is food MWD unknown. bulk coeluting isomaltooligosaccharide a be 7 to for appears ISOThrive results 1–HPAEC-PAD Table . . . ingredients food Imo-based of survey A 1234567 M otn h u fcmoet rmD o10. to 3 DP from components of sum the content IMO ISOThrive nectar IMO-900 powder AdvantaFiber M 90P w rms-vrg oeua egto P2t 0(oaodse)and skew) avoid (to 10 to 2 DP of weight molecular mass-average or as,s aems etknt ulf h niiulstandards individual the qualify than to rather taken % use. be to area prior must via care not done did so (likely and that mass), purities fractionated found We indicated inadequately 10. were the to 10 reflect 3 to DP 8 series DP PAN/IMT standards the for 0.75 to 0.71 Wako IMO o.8,N.2 2017 2, Nr. 82, Vol. FiberYum prebiotic nraigmlclrweight. molecular increasing of clusters in resistant indicate A-G powder; VitaFiber and 7. Syrup, VitaFiber 6. FiberYum, 5. IMO, Wako 4. 90, AdvantaFiber 3. IMO-900, 2. ISOThrive, 1. of chromatograms HPAEC-PAD 2–Overlaid Figure r ora fFo Science Food of Journal M syrup IMO VitaFiber M powder IMO VitaFiber 403

Food Chemistry ± 3, T: isomaltotriose, > -D-glucopyranosyl-D- α 5.5%. Interestingly, exem- ± Figure 3–HPLC-RID chromatograms of 1. Standard mixture 0.2% w/w per analyte, and 0.5% w/w each of 2.syrup, VitaFiber and 3. FiberYum syrup; wheremaltotriose, A: B: maltose, C: leucrose, D: maltitol, E: glucose, F: fructose, G: mannitol, H: sorbitol, I: xylitol, J: erythritol, K: lactic acid, L: glycerol,formic M: acid, N: acetic acid, O:acid, propionic P: iso-butyric acid, Q: n-butyricR: acid, ethanol, S: DP and U: isomaltose. It can be seen from the fingerprint of the RMDx fractions that In Figure 2, exemplars 2 to 3 (IMO-900, AdvantaFiber) and 5 Within the scope of this work (types 2a and 2b are made from DP 6), relative tothe those made difference from is corn,weight, too of to about small, decisively 10 in Da. differentiateboth terms While them, discrete and the of reproducible RMDx (Figure mass-average 2). profiles molecular are exemplar 1 (ISOThrive) iscause clearly discrete is (it not hasAdvantaFiber) made no are from RMDx similar be- starch), (TG2a),(TG2b) exemplars by exemplar virtue 2 4 of containing and (Wako)ing little, is 3 if to any unique the (IMO-900, RMDx “industrial while IMO”VitaFiber belong- group, syrup) exemplars are 5 essentially and identical 6 (TG2ct)7 (FiberYum, and (VitaFiber discrete powder, from TG2cm). In Figure 2, groups B, D, and E are did not contain a significanttype amount oligosaccharides, of 0.13%/solids either and isomaltose 0.90%/solids, or respectively. The IMT- IMOs were almost exclusivelythe PAN-type comprising solids 79% of (80%ated total by the IMO). presence Exemplar of mannitolfermentation 1 (6.8%/solids), process, a and was byproduct leucrose of further (5-O- the fructose), differenti- a byproduct specific tochemistry IMOs mediated made by via dextransucrase(s). donor–acceptor to 7 (FiberYum, VitaFiber syrup andquantity powder) contain of a unidentified significant materialmolecular evident weight. This as is clusters RMDx. Determined ofthe as whole increasing the from 100%, difference exemplars of 2 and5.5% 3 leading and to 5 mass to 7 closureplar contain of 22.3 4 77.7 contained virtuallyto no 99.9%, RMDx indicating and that the the(2 mass missing balance and mass closed for 3, the 5 otherof to exemplars the 7) was resistanttion likely components. was the more We result complete, perhaps suppose of viadebranching inadequate that use enzymes of quantitation prior the isoamylase/pullalanase to saccharifica- treatment with amylase. corn and type 1a uses high-purityther maltose), differentiated TG into type products 2c made can beand from fur- corn/maize those (TG2cm) made from tapiocatapioca (TG2ct). typically The exemplars demonstrated made a from higher molecular weight (from 0.001 ± 5%/solids 100. ± = 2.5%. 0.05 g glucan) ± ± 3.6%/solids, respectively ± 2) were averaged, integrated, 0.05 g FiberYum (Raw Indul- = ± Vol. 82, Nr. 2, 2017 N r 2) set of experiments comparing the effects = ). TG type 2b features an even bias on PAN-type 4.5%/solids and 17.2 ± N TM 3.1% total IMO). GT type 1a, or exemplar 1, appears ± Journal of Food Science It becomes clear (Figure 1, Table 1) that commercially available Refractive components, given in g refractive material/100 g Upon examination of the results, the authors decided to per- (AdvantaFiber IMO can be sorted intopredominantly of 1 DP of 4 4 and discrete includes exemplars types. 2 TG (IMO type 900) 2a and 3 consists and expressed as glycemic index (GI) where glucose was rapidly ingested and chased withwas 50 mL measured tap in water. Blood triplicate sugar once every blood sugar 15 either min. returnedthat Testing to it was baseline would concluded or not. it The became results evident ( gence LTD.) IMO syrup (equivalent to 20.02 When compared with true dry(for solids (oven), homologues calculation equivalent over brix to10 only) the yields calibrated excellent standards closure97% on to DP balance 103%, 3 of and mass, to total for % example, w/w is usually within sample (brix), were measured using an Atago PAL1 refractometer. 404 Results and Discussion A survey of Imo-based food ingredients . . . distinct from exemplars 2spection to of 7 gross (which composition), are5, featuring quite and a similar the predominance upon presence of in- of DP oligosaccharides up to DP 9. Exemplar 1 a significant amount ofand isomaltose, a relatively for even distribution example, ofcharides, 28 IMT- and 18.4 PAN-type oligosac- (35.5 DPs 3 and 4,tures a and heavy includes bias on exemplar DP(FiberYum, 4 VitaFiber 3 syrup (Wako). (panose), TG and and powder). includes type All exemplars 2c TG 5 types to fea- 7 contained 1 h mark, a 70 gg aqueous glucose solution (Fisher containing either D14) 20.00 or 26.50 their blood sugar. Blood sugarEZ was (Bayer, measured Ascensia using Diabetes a Care, contour Parsippany,meter NJ) next and blood contour glucose next testline strips blood (#7312). glucose After was a measured 12 for h 1 fast, h base- in 15 min interval. At the form a brief ( of glucose and a representative “industrial IMO” (FiberYum) on

Food Chemistry er hteepas5ad6myhv enmnfcue nthe in manufactured been have may 6 ap- and It 5 process. exemplars vary saccharification may that the signature pears in the inconsistencies is, slight That to lot. process/place due the specific of the and/or of manufacture, fingerprints of be to suf- as be discrete may and ficiently TG2cm, from TG2ct differentiating for diagnostic oligos Nondigestible profiles product From work. this with the in profiles given product descriptions of 3–Comparison Table a ∗ 63-67 % Solids, group Constituent work. this with data analytical available of 2–Comparison Table . . . ingredients food Imo-based of survey A 02 sdt efr h G eas otezm cocktails enzyme composition), most in widely Because vary can TG. (and formulations the proprietary are perform McKay to and (Elliot used on) the 2002) so with and originated sorbitol, likely (glycerol, 7 cocktails to enzyme 5 samples in amounts presence metabolic a its similar as byproduct, remains contained glycerol some also where respec- 1, 7 sample 1.71%/solids, Unlike tively. to and 1.86%/solids, 5 1.79%/solids, samples glycerol, same 3, of that Figure the in noted using Additionally, was or 2015). it Ltd plant, Co. same Biology (Baolingbao the were IP in 3 either and origin). 2 manufactured Indonesian exemplars likely of that be suggest to fingerprints known the is Accordingly, (6 factory Indonesian same smloe%: Isomaltose itr br(D)8. 2181.7 62.1 84.4 (TDF) fiber Dietary oligos Digestible oligos resistant Digestion Nondigestible itr br(D)9 092 70 91 oligos Nondigestible work This (TDF) fiber Dietary oligos Digestible oligos resistant Digestion P3ttl % total, 3 DP % PAN, 3 DP % IMT, 3 DP oa M P3t 9 to 3 DP IMO Total RMDx % 9, DP % 8, DP % 7, DP P5 % 5, DP P6 % 6, DP % Glucose, rcoe % Fructose, P4ttl % total, 4 DP % PAN, 4 DP % IMT, 4 DP Isomaltose oa M P2t 9 to 2 DP IMO Total DP Da Mw, compounds all 9 TOTAL, to 2 DP IMO Total uy1,21,nnGOcorn non-GMO 2014, 17, July rdc label. product eus ihNDA. with request pcfiaino smlolgschrd (IMO) isomaltooligosaccharide of specification (tapioca urtoa aa(a 2 03 iaie-M odr elrda VtSgrIoat-lgschrd odigein, nbl fldn (non-G lading of bill on ingredient,” food Isomalto-oligosaccharide “VitaSugar as declared powder, VitaFiber-IMO 2013) 22, (May Data Nutritional inur al RSdcmn Zu ac 2 2005) 12, March (Zhu, document GRAS 3 Table Bioneutra oaalbedata, available no 26 † Indonesia); , + panose + † † † Mxapoiae ydfeec ae nttlo l opud ymass, by compounds all of total on based difference by approximated RMDx Mx4. 8637.7 28.6 42.5 RMDx j inur al RSdcmn Zu ac 2 2005) 12, March (Zhu, document GRAS 3 Table Bioneutra ∗ ∗ + + isomaltose ∗∗ ∗∗ RMDx 27 auatrdb alnboBooyC.Ld China; Ltd, Co. Biology Baolingbao by manufactured , M odrIOsrpSrpsolids Syrup syrup IMO powder IMO 181. 23.8 20.2 15.9 18.1 15.3 12.1 21.8 20.1 12.7 61 17 55 13 42 16 55 01 20 15 20 ISOThrive > < < nectar 75 0.2 1.5 24 .238 .533 .432 3.49 3.21 3.44 3.37 3.65 3.80 4.72 23.8 14.5 12383473951. 10.1 11.8 9.5 7.3 3.4 3.8 11.6 11.2 2566608295687.2 6.8 9.5 8.2 6.0 6.6 23.0 22.5 986. 327. 885. 60.1 54.6 58.8 74.9 63.2 69.6 79.8 848. 979. 537. 78.2 70.2 75.3 99.9 79.7 85.1 98.4 148. 357. 358. 81.9 84.4 83.5 75.0 83.5 84.5 81.4 11.7 7 3 0 6 7 3 581 536 572 562 606 630 779 ; ...... 0.0 0.0 21.8 0.0 0.0 29.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.6 1.7 4.6 0.1 . 401. 471. . 10.1 8.3 10.4 14.7 12.1 14.0 0.4 ...... 5.2 4.1 5.3 7.9 8.5 9.5 0.5 i 79.7 , i i i e 63.1 , ,0.9 , akdi h ntdSae o a nugneLD ieYm urtoa at rmpoutcontainer; product from Facts Nutritional FiberYum, LTD. Indulgence Raw for States United the in Packed . / . . . . 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 n/a 0.1 22 < ; 5 > > IMO-900 b > 22.8 16.7 17.7 a powder alnboBooyC. LTD Co., Biology Baolingbao ,4 45 7.2 1.7 90 95 b b,d a,b ;3.8 b c c c c c ,0.8 ,3.0 16.1 , 17.8 , 32.1 , , 7590.8 37.5 , 49.9 , 95.2 c 161.6 ,1.6 AdvantaFiber 22 95.3 ; h o elhIgeins n.Avnaie 0,Crict fAayi #1090-14071631, Analysis of Certificate 90P, AdvantaFiber Inc. Ingredients, Health Top 505. 404. 44 42.0 44.0 55.6 45.0 451. 4810.9 20.1 14.8 21.8 19.9 16.2 24.1 22.0 14.5 33.6 15.5 29.8 i 90P STrv,LC STrv rboi etr RSitra ouetaalbeupon available document internal GRAS Nectar, Prebiotic ISOThrive LLC, ISOThrive, .104040.0 1.8 0.4 2.2 0.4 2.8 0.71 2.6 h h h 20)vatsigo rahhdoe n ehn hta2 bo- Sangyo g Showa 20 (Isomalto-900(R), composition a IMO that an methane of and dose hydrogen lus breath of testing via (2003) composition. Isomalto-900(R) of work) this icsino lisadntiinlinformation nutritional and claims of Discussion h ae,btol .5gwee46 sITtp,26 is g 2.66 type, IMT is M g the 4.69 and where in g type, described 7.35 purity PAN only at but IMO g paper, 13.5 the (containing doses g/d 20 using bifidogenesis demonstrated of virtue in-vitro by 2001) citing others (Bioneutra and prebiotic is Rycroft is It HPAEC-PAD). composition via the types that PAN claimed and further IMT both (of 36% mately DP only not include do to 7 to 2 exemplars definition, contain proper (AACC of 10,” way and by 3 defines between Thus, interestingly, DP 2001). that, a with 2001) “chains as (March oligosaccharides AACC citing claim by 7, dietary they soluble fiber” to nondigestible Furthermore, “constitute 2 oligosaccharides (BioNeutra). said DP “oligosaccha- units” that of that glucosyl composed claims more, carbohydrates Bioneutra or short-chained bulk. are in expensive rides less IMO- because is known popularity gaining it best is FiberYum the and ingredient perhaps food (4) based is IMO online Wako and VitaFiber and popularity however, to (2) presence, respect IMO-900 With coverage. these, greatest Of the 7. claim to 2 similar exemplars regard- products literature to with dealt prior IMO the of of digestibility/fermentability most ing 2016, in purchase for available h ossec ngyeo uniysget htteeproducts preparation. these enzyme similar that a suggests using quantity manufactured were glycerol in consistency the 33.4 , ,1.8 96.2 , neetnl,i a ae eemndb k n Nakamara and Oku by determined later was it Interestingly, eas IO(si xmlr1 STrv)ol became only ISOThrive) 1, exemplar in (as MIMO Because 23 ‡ ; eie rmgvnifrain o xml,croyrt gadfie gfrom 5g fiber and 5g carbohydrate example, for information, given from derived c aeoadothers and Kaneko Boetactn omt n tes18)and 1988) others and Kohmoto citing (Bioneutra > 0 M.I n ae h ento foligosaccharide of definition the takes one If IMO. 90% n/a Wako IMO 7075.6 97.0 ∗ . 1.2 5.3 , 41.3 o.8,N.2 2017 2, Nr. 82, Vol. > 18 W (1992); ,te hs rdcscnandapproxi- contained products these then 2, = 100 FiberYum Prebiotic 1.4D rDP or Da 619.54 e d ‡ acegCii ua nutyC.LTD, Co. Industry Sugar Caixin Dancheng 4791 34.7 , r ora fFo Science Food of Journal M powder IMO VitaFiber 96 < 5 f f Ocorn MO 2893.3 32.8 , 75 97.5 , f ,1.4 = .3 codn to according 3.73, 25 f Bioneutra China); , 20-25 10-15 M syrup IMO VitaFIber < 15 4-5 7.9 5 g a g g 12.4 , a 75.9 , a a a ,2.9 g 36.1 , , ,0.5 in-vivo 20.2 , 24.0 , syrup 0.8 405

Food Chemistry ± ...aprebi- 3.05). ± 0.31) than indicated. Ketabi and ± is a sweet natural fiber providing TM Figure 4–Effect of glucose and IMOsugar on over blood time in 2 humanTriplicate subjects. measurements (each subject and time) demonstrated that the test meter/strip returned standard deviations ranging from 0.71 to 6.24 g/dL (average VitaFiber: “VitaFiber In Table 2 below, values available from product certificates of In general, for all components up to DP 4, the analytical values AdvantaFiber: “Adds prebiotic, soluble fiber . . . 90% IMO (Iso- FiberYum: “super low-glycemic alternative sweetener with ISOThrive: “Naturally Fermented Prebiotic Soluble Fiber . . . a It appears that all of the commercially available products are Therefore, when comparing the analytical results from this work adopted a loosequantitative definition analysis nor that consequence is of metabolic neither impact. based onanalysis (COA)/specifications an or abstracted accurate from Tablepared 1 with are this com- work, given in bold numbers. from this work were similar to thecited values sources. reported For from the DP various 5icantly and higher, lower our (factor results of wereothers always 2.43 signif- (2011) noted“IMO similar obtained findings from where BioNeutra thetion Inc.” of starting indicated where DPs that material 2 to a15% 8 composi- were to present in 23%, (DP2) (DP4) 18% to 14% 25%, to (DP3) 22%, (DP5) 8% to 10%, (DP6) 6% to low caloriehealth and . . . soluble VitaFiberotic prebiotic . is . greater . fiber than Maintaintra.ca/products 90% healthy for 08-09-2016). blood soluble sugar fiber levels human . . . digestive low GI” (Bioneu- malto oligosaccharide) Fiber” (http://www.tophealthingredients. com/products/advantafiber/ 08-09-2016). awesome amounts of soluble prebiotic fiberfor . . glucose . intolerance Make . special . foods uble . low fiber glycemic per . serving” . . (aproduct-p/clearancefiberyum2.5a.htm sugar serving 08-09-2016). free . is . 5 . 5 g; http://shop.rawrev.com/ g sol- type of complex carbohydrate you cannot digestand . . does . has not no caloriescom cause 08-09-2016). blood sugar spikes” (https://www.isothrive. making similar claims thatof are prebiotics in on human line“prebiotic”) health with described (indeed, by the Gibson the beneficial and first effects Roberfroid use (1995). of thewith term the declared fiberclaims, the content data within suggest the thatare not context quantitatively all of equal. ingredients the It labeled as given appears “IMOs” that most manufacturers have Chinese Journal ., and found that DP . only, and thus it is less likely Vol. 82, Nr. 2, 2017 r Bifodobacteria spp C-labeled IMOs, that the tested mate- 13 and (Bioneutra citing Sheng and others 2006), that Lactobacillus spp reuteri Journal of Food Science actobacillus L 4 would favor These are claims typical of those purveyed by IMO manufac- It is also claimed, based on a publication in the These authors also noted that in large doses, the brush-border 406 reaches the and doesorated not the produce work gas.” of This Kohmoto corrob- andstudying others (1988) digestibility who of estimated, via Co., Ltd, Tokyo, Japan, compositionothers verbatim (1995) from Kaneko and and similar to IMO type 2a; IMO-900) “hardly A survey of Imo-based food ingredients . . . turers/importers including: dose of maltose (whichg is maltose/20 completely g digestible), dose for IMO example, or 14 about 56 kcal/serving. ketogenic (Lee and Kossof 2011),above, these compositions, and particularly so in the on). largereach However, doses as the needed noted colon to (effectively saturatingcan the brush be border expected enzymes), to have a GI of at least 70% of an equivalent of Clinical Nutrition the composition exhibits lowthose GI on and restrictive diets is (diabetics thus (Evert suitable et for al. use 2014), by low-carb for ࣘ representative of a bifidogenic prebiotic. known, the dose administeredmolecular would weight, have according been to of HuVitaSugar relatively and low others (Bioneutra (2013), who Inc., tested Edmonton) as a sole carbon source substrate (isomaltose) allowingering some digestibility, IMO the to 20others g pass. (1988) dose would So, have administered consid- dose delivered, by at of, Kohmoto best, perhaps, 1.5 and a to potential 2.2 prebiotic g. Inasmuch as prebiotic specificity is would be less glycemic. enzymes (sucrase-isomaltase) would saturate with the preferred IMOs with increasing moleculardigestible, weight and became that increasingly “the digestibility in- example, of isomaltose) disaccharides is similar in to IMOIt those (for of can sucrose thus or be maltotriose.” implied that IMOs with higher molecular weight Sangyo Co., Ltd]) was largely digestibleof and the delivered calorific 70% value to of 80% others an equivalent (1995) dose of discovered maltose. via Kaneko and “Rat Jejunum Loop Method,” that rial (prepared in-house and congruent with Isomalto-900 [Showa

Food Chemistry Mxcnb udvdda 1 nidgsil,hgl branched highly 2010). indigestible, an others (1) indigestible and as subdivided be Fuentes-Zaragoza be to can 2006; as RMDx amy- others so to and modified resistant chemically (Sajilata hence or (and activity), granular lolytic retrograded, polyglucan either weight molecular is high that a starch, resistant from RMDx and 84.4%/solids example, summed, for When mass, 81.7%/solids. data. of given closures reasonable the more the get far Adding to we a respect 7. us with to gives amount result 2 this reasonable exemplars to all RMDx for for value data approximated given the to compared (that limited). weight explains kinetically molecular is, to This increasing with panose glycemic. decreases products therefore or digestibility both why and IMT that digestible, either and completely respectively, from are maltose, unit or glucose isomaltose that a yield in hydrolyze promiscuous can somewhat it is sim- likewise sucrase-isomaltase are because oligos” ilar “Digestion-resistant intestine. small glucan- the oligo example, on) for so oligosaccharides, α and with dealing cellobiase, for (disaccharidases glucoamylase, and disaccharides sucrase-isomaltase, with as are dealing such there for Biologically, enzymes class. as such discrete oligosaccharide disaccharides the differentiate isoma- to from for important isomaltose results is our It when used. values are given ltose the “digestible to tested, similar are When oligos” nondigestible.” oligosac- considered di- chain are longer the and epithelium, unclear, charides is intestinal panose and the IMT in of gestibility enzymes hydrolyzed and border is brush 1992 “Isomaltose the that others by assertion and 1995) Kohmoto others (citing and Kaneko (2011) others and Ketabi 3. Table BioNeutra’s example, in for given This profiles, product information 99.9%. product the to similar understand closes better a RMDx to us this any of helps if Clearly, quantitation little 84.4%. containing direct 4) at as 1) (exemplar closure Table approximation, in reasonable an given to is components balance accountable from all the difference of brings by sum the (determined of RMDx 100 Adding 60.1%. us gives 0128 06 36937 40 .7424.4 0.8 0.0 7.7 6.5 4.2 361 0.47 32.3 0.0 5.42 38.8 27.2 83.97 3.77 2074 82.67 0.24 89.17 0.58 7.07 7.07 glc % GI, 94.00 122.17 integral 89.84 128.67 98 117.00 89 74 46 5.0 30 0 for 5.8 9 up, 15 to everything 3 add DP we IMO when total evident example, 9.3 becomes weight. 3.9 20.02 5.3 this molecular the similar Further, with of in 3.0 oligosaccharides RMDx 1.5 PAN-type the the and fractionate includes likelyIMT 0.0 not and DP, (and 2.5 does by product COAs) types g: the IMO IMO individual eq., in the 23.6 GLC similarity qualify of 3.65 given analytical to 44.8 trace others, the use a the 744 that being and conclude 4.48 is we 42.8 5 Thus, that to work. method 0.0 3 this 19.6 FiberYum in DPs used indicated was only respectively, as 10.61 3%, found 6, to and 6.60 2% rat-chow (DP8) formulate and 93.08 to 4%, 2.83 100 to 2% 2470 (DP7) 92.17 1.18 8%, 1.32 112.83 134.00 132.00 glc 108.83 % 89.18 GI, integral stdev 95 78 60 20.00 45 g/dL glc 30 15 g: eq., GLC 0 averages GLUCOSE ( 4–Average Table . . . ingredients food Imo-based of survey A 16guoiae,adta h omri on naudnein abundance in found is former the that and -1,6-glucosidases, eiwo h ieauedfeetae h ietblt of digestibility the differentiated literature the of review A DPs all up adding though, Interestingly, follow to seems convention the that evidently appears it Here, N = )rslsaditgae ausnraie oguoe(GI glucose to normalized values integrated and results 2) = 29.Adn h isomaltose the Adding 32.9%. ࣙ ie o result low a gives 4 /Lsdvaeae l /Lstdev g/dL glc averages stdev g/dL rdcsi ftelte ye o xml,lmtdxrn Thus, . limit these example, in for found type, RMDx latter the the that of appears is products it for of form, results, distribution digestible that the a Given products into (maltodextrin). it reduce oligo quickly example, to able be should on, pullulan (dextranase), and/or acid, heat, via starch from made glucan lblda itr brpr55gsrpds,Fbru)IMO FiberYum) dose, syrup levels. g glucose 5.5 blood per fasting fiber on weight dietary molecular g low 5 of studied as glucose, authors (labeled equivalent the this, to relative test to effect, order the In into well. as constituents that digestible 3 suggests are DP literature these the of but study, Inclusion further DP 3.8). requires of definition (actually average this an 3–10 with DP 5 to 36% 3 approximately contains actually indicates that DP that COA include a to between made be must and (isomaltose) disaccharides including a constituents digestible be include to not. likely or not soluble, is content, and fiber digestible, the of is constituent here described RMDx the otrnilbodguoelevels glucose blood Postprandial n figeinsadntiinlifrain h atri critical is latter The information. nutritional and account- ingredients accurate of more make ing a to providing while manufacturers formulations improved downstream allowing products more between glucose. and of larger dosage equivalent significantly via was elicited crash” with that subjects “sugar than prolonged both the in that observed is was IMO that to An- feature min). unlikely 90 interesting was within other complete amount (absorption observed colon the the reached have and stomach the postprandial) in min began likely weight/weight (15 absorption equivalent time, transit an on on Based basis. glucose hence, anhydrous and digestible, as as 4) Table glycemic, see here, at observed is (84% market, 80% commercial com- least the the of on typical encountered is commonly which positions (5), exemplar GI IMO the “industrial” that the suggest of observations Our comparison. some and small permitted relatively were subjects) (between deviations standard the the and 4. Table 4 in (GI Figure shown glucose are in to relative shown integrals is including results, time tabulated over glucose blood measured flnaetps(e ta.21) r()kona lmtdex- “limit as known ( (3) or -like variety 2013), α small, a al. relatively yield et are to (Lee trins,” starch types transglycosylate linkage that of enzymes other (2) α (,)bace oa orss h ute cinof action further the resist to as so branched -(1,6) lmtdxrncnas emade). be also can dextrin -limit hrfr,w ocueta h ento f“Ms utnot must “IMOs” of definition the that conclude we Therefore, sn cetfial on entosfclttsfi comparison fair facilitates definitions sound scientifically Using an Although ( averaged were results authors’ The α lmtdxrn.Ta s h ento f“oligosaccharide” of definition the is, That dextrins. -limit = N o.8,N.2 2017 2, Nr. 82, Vol. 100). = α xeieti o ttsial significant, statistically not is experiment 2 16guahdoae pluaae,adso and (pullulanase), -1,6-glucanhydrolases > ࣙ 0 oul brfraproduct a for fiber soluble 90% ,ol.Ti stedifference the is This only. 3, r α ora fFo Science Food of Journal -D-1,6-glucan-6-hydrolases N = α (,)guasta are that -(1,4) )adteices in increase the and 2) α − − /Lstdev g/dL and . 1.1 4.8 7.2 0.7 β α -, -amylase = 100) 407

Food Chemistry Lac- as neutraceu- -(1,2)-branched iso- α Leuconostoc -glucosidase level and are slowly digestible in vivo. PloS α . Lett Appl Microbiol 57:108–14. DOI: 10.1111/lam.12076. dextransucrase and characterization of novel Oligosaccharides. Accessed 2016 August 9. = . Biotechnol Agron Soc Environ 14(4):607–16. bifidobacteria &term and = Weissella confusa Aspergillus niger erTM 90P, COA#1090-14071631,product. Lot#14071631, issued July 17,charide 2014. in oligosaccharides Arrived production. with US Patent 7,906,314. downloads/Food/IngredientsPackagingLabeling/GRAS/NoticeInventory/ucm268863.pdf. Accessed 2016 August 08. maltooligosaccharides. J Agric Food Chem 64(16):3276–86. DOI: 10.1021/acs.jafc.6b01356. of fructo-oligosaccharide, galactosyl-sucrose, and isomalto-oligosaccharidesubjects. Eur in J healthy human Clin Nutr 57:1150–6. DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601666. can Association ofreal Cereal Chemists. Chem 2001. 46(3):112–126. TheDocuments/DietaryFiber/DFDef.pdf. Available Accessed Definition from: 2016 of http://www.aaccnet.org/initiatives/definitions/ August Dietary 9. Fiber. Amfermentation Soc properties Ce- of prebiotic10.1046/j.1365-2672.2001.01446.x. oligosaccharides. J Appl Microbiol 91(5):878–87. DOI: Food Safety 5:1–17. DOI: 10.1111/j.1541-4337.2006.tb00076.x. isomaltooligosaccharide. Chin J Clin Nutr 14(4):235–7. K, Tenkanen M. 2016. Optimizationreaction of of isomaltooligosaccharide size distribution by acceptor in comparison with several saccharidesBiochem using 59(7):1190–4. the DOI: rat 10.1271/bbb.59.1190. jejunum loop method. Biosci Biotechnol microbiota in rats. J Appl Microbiol 110:1297–306. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2011.04984.x isomalto-oligosaccharides on human fecal10.12938/bifidus1982.7.2_61. flora. Bifidobacteria Microflora 7(2):61–9. DOI: T, Kobayashi S. 1992.Biotechnol Metabolism Biochem of 56(6):937–40. 13C-isomaltooligosaccharides DOI: 10.1271/bbb.56.937. in healthy men. Biosci uses therefore. US Patent US8637103 B2. Yoo S-H, Hamaker BR. 2013. Enzyme-synthesizedglucose highly generation branched maltodextrins at have the slow One mucosal 8 (4):e59745. general practitioner. Epilepsy Behav 21(2):115–21. doi:10.1016/j.yebeh.2011.03.008. isomaltooligosaccharides. US Patent Applied for PCT/US2015/046441. tion. Tree number D09 698:629. AvailableMB_cgi?mode from: https://www.nlm.nih.gov/cgi/mesh/2011/ Arrived with product. profile issued 2013 May 22. Arrived with product. able from: http://www.bioneutra.ca/_pdf/Structure-FunctionClaims.pdf.08. Accessed August (IMO), IMO900. Available from: http://www.caixin-sugar.com/product/114.html. Accessed 2016 March 24. ticals. US Patent 7291607 B2. osmo-protectants and methodsUS20030175232 for A1. using such compositions inNwankwo R, personal Verdi CL, care. Urbanskifor US P, the Yancy management WS. Patent of 2014. adults Nutritionhttps://doi.org/10.2337/dc14-S120. with therapy diabetes. recommendations Diab Care 37(Suppl. 1):S120–43. Available from: Resistant starch as10.1016/j.foodres.2010.02.004. a functional ingredient: a review. J Foodintroducing the Res concept Intl of prebiotics. 43(4):931–42. J DOI: Nutr 125(6):1401–12. method of quantitative analysistions of by enzymatically AEC-PAD. Chromatographia produced 69(3/4):287–93. isomaltooligosaccharide DOI: 10.1365/s10337-008-0875-0. prepara- of the glucooligosaccharide profiles producedfrom from maltose by two different transglycosidases tobacillus reuteri 13:34. DOI: 10.1186/1475-2891-13-34. Top Health Ingredients Inc. (Edmonton, Canada). 2014. Certificate of Analysis,Zhong AdvantaFib- Z, Zhu J, Li X, Xu X-Y, MuZhu X, J. inventors. 2005. 2005. Method for GRAS the exemption removal of claim. monosac- Bioneutra Inc. Available from: http://www.fda.gov/ Oku T, Nakamara S. 2003. Comparison of digestibilityReport and of breath the hydrogen Dietary gas Fiber excretion Definition Committee to the Board of Directors ofRycroft the CE, Jones Ameri- MR, Gibson GR, Rastall RA. 2001. A comparative in vitro evaluation of the Sajilata MG, Singhal RS, Kulkarni PR. 2006. Resistant starch—a review.Sheng Compr GE, Rev Food Dong-lian Sci CAI, Wan L-L. 2006.Shi Determination Q, of Hou glycemic Y, index Juvonen M, of Tuomainen xylitol P, and Kajala L, Shukla S, Goyal A, Maaheimo H, Katina Ketabi A, Dieleman LA, Ganzle MG. 2011. Influence of isomalto-oligosaccharidesKohmoto on intestinal T, Fukui F, Takaku H,Kohmoto Machida T, Keisuke Y, T, Toshiyuki Arai K, Shota M, M, Mitsuoka Fukui F, T. TakakuKwon H, H-K, 1988. Nakagawa Jeong Y, H-S, Effect Lee Ichikawa J-H, of inventors. 2011.Lee Production B-H, of Yan isomaltooligosaccharides L, and Phillips RJ, Reuhs BL, Jones K, Rose DR, Nichols BL, Quezada-Calvillo R, Lee PR, Kossoff EH. 2011. DietaryMadsen treatments LR, for Oswald epilepsy: J, management Day DF, guidelines Moon forNational Y-H, the Library inventors. of 2015. Process Medicine for - the Medical production Subject of Headings. 2011. Oligosaccharides. Defini- References Baolingbao Biology Co., LTD. 2015. Certificate of Analysis. IMO-900 powder, lot #BioNeutra 15070331. North America Inc. (Edmonton, Canada). 2013. VitaFiberTM IMO Powder, product BioNeutra North America Inc. (Edmonton, Canada). 2016. Selected Scientific Literature. Avail- Dancheng Caixin Sugar Industry Co. LTD. 2013. SpecificationDay DF, of Chung C-H, isomaltooligosaccharide inventors. 2004. Isomaltooligosaccharides from Elliot R, McKay B, inventors. 2002. Compositions containing enzymes stabilized with certain Evert AB, Boucher JL, Cypress M, Dunbar SA, Franz MJ, Mayer-DavisFuentes-Zaragoza EJ, E, Neumiller Riquelme-Navarrete JJ, MJ, Sanchez-Zapata E, Perez-Alvarez JA.Gibson GR, 2010. Roberfroid MB. 1995. DietaryGoffin modulation D, Robert of C, the Wathelet B, human Blecker C, colonic Malmendier microbiota: Y, Paquat M.Goffin 2009. D, A Wathelet step-forward B, Blecker C, Deroanne C, Malmendier Y, Paquot M. 2010.Hu Y, Comparison Ketabi A, Buchko A, Ganzle MG. 2013. Metabolism ofJones isomalto-oligosaccharides JM. by 2014. CODEX-aligned dietary fiberKaneko definitions T, A, Yokoyama help Suzuki M. to 1995. Digestibility bridge characteristics of ‘fiber isomaltooligosaccharides gap’. Nutr J -limit dextrins. α Vol. 82, Nr. 2, 2017 r 3, only. This is the difference between a COA that 90% soluble fiber for a product that actually contains ࣙ > Journal of Food Science L. Madsen designed the study, collected test data, interpreted The authors report a business relationship as partners in This analysis comparing 7 commercially available IMO-based and J. Oswald assistedresults, in and the edited design the manuscript. of the study, interpreted the the results, and drafteddata; P. the Swann manuscript; interpreted the S. results Stanley and collected edited test the manuscript; party. We would like to acknowledgetrative Savana assistance Gilman in for the adminis- preparation of this manuscript. ents. Every effort hasof been facts made with to respect to maintainlisted all unbiased methods ingredients reporting so analyzed. that The authors results have can be replicated by any interested alyzed in theaccurate manuscript. accounting The of reportbringing the is to composition intended light of to andpatient each provide averting populations an product, potential due while health to hazards the to discovered mislabeling certain of ingredi- ISOThrive LLC, a manufacturer of one of the ingredients an- clude DP bohydrate diets). Therefore, we“IMOs,” conclude and certainly, that “fiber,” the muststituents not definition such include of as digestible disaccharidesThat con- is, (isomaltose) the and definition of “oligosaccharide” must be made to in- like, are certainly false,populations and (diabetic may patients and posediets, epileptic a in patients health on particular) hazard ketogenic while to certain misleading others (those on low car- tively equal. It appearsloose definition that that most isanalysis manufacturers neither nor have based consequence adopted on of a because an metabolic claims, impact. accurate such This quantitative as is significant “low glycemic,” “zero calorie,” and the paring the analyticalfiber results content from withinsuggest this the that work context not with of all the the ingredients labeled given declared as claims, “IMOs” the are data quantita- food ingredients demonstratesby that way of most definition, of“oligosaccharides” and these and particularly products with “dietary respect are, fiber,” to mislabeled. content When of com- 408 Author Contributions Acknowledgments they are correct. Conclusion lead to downstreamconsumer products gauges that what they are canon eat mislabeled. restrictive (this diets) is The by especially modern reading trueformation the of given those ingredients on and product nutritional labels. in- It is therefore imperative that for consumers who require ational low-glycemic information product. If given the for nutri- bulk ingredient is incorrect, it can A survey of Imo-based food ingredients . . . tive diets) by reading thegiven ingredients on and product nutritional labels.correct. information It is therefore imperative that they are formation given fordownstream bulk products that ingredient are is mislabeled.gauges incorrect, The what modern they it can consumer eat can (this is lead especially to true of those on restric- erage of 3.8). Inclusionrequires of further DP study, but 3 thegestible, constituents literature as suggests into that well. this these We definition be are conclude di- reconsidered that for labeling requirements products should of this type. If the nutritional in- indicates approximately 36% DP 3 to 10 (actually DP 3 to 5 with an av-

Food Chemistry