Applied Nutrition Science

Barley+ is produced using the unique, non-genetically
engineered BARLEYmax™ whole grain

The Barley+ Muesli and Muesli Bar product range contains the whole grain BARLEYmax™ as its key ingredient. BARLEYmax™ is a new, non-genetically engineered, hull-less whole grain barley tcultivar, developed by Australia’s prestigious research institution, the CSIRO. Due to its exceptional nutrition density and potential to positively influence human health, the CSIRO has a long-held interest in barley. BARLEYmax™ emerged from research stemming back to the 1990s, when amongst a collection of new non-genetically engineered barley grains, BARLEYmax™ was identified as a superior cultivar, due to its high levels of dietary fiber including resistant starch-like fiber (for its prebiotic activity), soluble fiber (incl. beta-glucan in high amounts) and insoluble fiber (cellulose, lignin) compared with other conventionally consumed whole grains (Figure 1)(1-3).

 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35




BARLEYMax™



Barley



Wheat



Oats



Rye

g/100 g

Insoluble fiber
Soluble fiber
Resistant starch

Figure 1: Resistant starch, soluble and insoluble fiber levels in BARLEYmax™ compared to other
common whole grains (1).

Americans do not meet recommended
intakes of fiber and whole grains

Dietary fiber is found at high levels in whole fruit, vegetables and whole grains. While some Americans have increased their dietary fiber intakes in recent years, most Americans continue to consume far too little and increased consumption is recommended(8-10). Whole grains are an excellent source of fiber.

The 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend that Americans consume at least 3 serves of 1 ounce-equivalent whole grains each day at the 2,000-Calorie level, and to limit the intake of refined grains and products made with refined grains(10). A 1 ounce-equivalent of whole grains is 16 g(10).

Most Americans do not meet these recommended intakes, with average intakes of whole grains falling far below the recommended levels across all age-sex groups (Figure 2), and average intakes of refined grains well above recommended limits for most age-sex groups (Figure 2). This means Americans are missing out on health benefits derived from the different fiber types combined that are naturally present in whole grains.

One 63 g serving of Barley+ Muesli adds around 2 ounce-equivalent of whole grains to a daily intake and so Barley+ can help Americans meet their recommended intakes of whole grains.

Barley kernel

Adequate consumption of whole grains is a well-accepted dietary pattern associated with reduced risk of chronic disease(4-5). The benefits come from whole grain foods but not refined grains(6), which emphasizes the importance of consuming whole grains like BARLEYmax™.

The accepted US definition for whole grains is that they contain all 3 key parts of the kernel: 1) the bran; 2) the germ; and 3) the endosperm. Whole grains used as ingredients in food products may be labeled as whole grains only if they contain the same proportions of bran, germ and endosperm in the final grain ingredient as in the original grain(7). Refined grains typically lose at least part of their whole grain integrity and consequently, part of their nutrition value.

Average US whole and refined grain intakes versus
recommended daily intakes*

Ounce-equivalents
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0




  • 1-3



  • 4-8




  • 9-13




  • 14-18




  • 19-30




  • 31-50




  • 51-70




  • 70+
Male (years)

Ounce-equivalents
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0




  • 1-3



  • 4-8




  • 9-13




  • 14-18




  • 19-30




  • 31-50




  • 51-70




  • 70+
Female (years)

Average refined grains intake
Average whole grains intake
Range of recommended intake for
whole grains / limits for refined grains intake

Figure 2: Average whole and refined grain intakes in ounce-equivalents per day by age-sex groups, compared to ranges of recommended daily intake for whole grains and limits for refined grains. The brown vertical bars on this graph represent one half of the total grain recommendations for each age-sex group, and therefore indicate recommendations for the minimum amounts to consume of whole grains or maximum amounts of refined grains. To meet recommendations, whole grain intake should be within or above the brown bars and refined grain intake within or below the bars. Graphs adapted from reference (10).

*NOTE: Recommended daily intake of whole grains is to be at least half of total grain consumption.

Defining prebiotic dietary fiber, its effects on gastrointestinal microbiota and probiotic ingredients

Dietary prebiotics are defined as “selectively fermented ingredients that result in specific changes in the composition and/or activity of the gastrointestinal microbiota, thus conferring benefit(s) upon host health” (11, 12). Examples of foods rich in dietary prebiotic fiber include Barley+, legumes and lentils, Jerusalem artichokes, onions, garlic, leek and asparagus(13). Dietary prebiotics essentially provide substrate for the gut microbiota and subsequently can change the composition and activity of resident gut microbiota(13, 14).

In contrast, probiotics are defined as “live microorganisms which when administered in adequate amounts, confer a health benefit on the host”(15).

Probiotics are essentially living microorganisms already present in fermented foods such as yogurt, kefir, miso, sauerkraut or kimchi, or as ingredients added to functional foods and dietary supplements. However, many probiotic commercial products contain bacteria species (bifidobacteria and lactobacilli), which are dominant species in milk-fed infants, but are relatively minor species in adults(14, 16). It has been suggested that for effective use of probiotics, particular strains or species should target specific conditions(14).

The favorable influence of good dietary prebiotic intake on gut microbiota may be a better route to a healthier gut profile in some people. This may be especially relevant when specific probiotics are used in individual condition management.

Gastrointestinal microbiota,
diet and disease

The gastrointestinal tract is inhabited by vast and diverse populations of microorganisms, with the largest and most important found in the colon(12, 17). Over one trillion bacteria contribute to the make up of the human gut microbiota, and play a fundamental role in the wellbeing of the host(17-19). The constituents of the microbiota have been shown to interact with one another and with the host immune system in ways that influence the development of disease(17, 20-22). For instance, changes in the intestinal microbiota can disrupt normal intestinal function(20), irritable bowel disease pathogenesis is linked to the gastrointestinal microbiota(17, 23) and some(24, 25) but not all(26) studies show that obesity is associated with an imbalance in normal gut microbiota. The importance of the link between dietary intake, colonic microorganism metabolism and human health is becoming increasingly well recognized(14, 21, 27) and may at least partly explain the relationship between the protective effects of specific dietary fiber types and serious chronic diseases, including colorectal cancer(18, 28, 29).

Resistant starch prebiotic activity

In humans, one of the major functions of the large bowel microbiota is to produce short chain fatty acids (SCFA), which supply energy to the intestinal cells of the host. Intake of fermentable prebiotic fiber can alter microbiota profiles and increase specific bacteria numbers in the large bowel by providing substrate to gut bacteria or by increasing SCFA supply(31-33). Insufficient SCFA supply limits substrate availability and may influence poor gut outcomes(34). Resistant starch specifically has been shown in human and animal models to modify gut microbiota(35-39), and to promote beneficial effects on large bowel function in healthy adults(39). As expected, the type and magnitude of response to resistant starch is highly variable between individuals, is reversible and is tightly associated with resistant starch intake(39). Recently, resistant starch has also been shown to improve insulin sensitivity independently of the gut microbiota in rodents, highlighting that resistant starch may also exert health effects via other metabolic pathways, such as alterations in the bile acid cycle(40). Other well documented prebiotic effects in humans stem from fructans and fructooligosacharides(41-43), which make up ~10% of BARLEYmax™ whole grains.

Gut microbiota:
typical bacteria profile

The bacterial composition of the gut microbiota varies considerably between healthy individuals, depending on their diet and other environmental factors(17). However, it has been shown that bacteria of the bacteroidetes and firmicutes phyla typically dominate the gut bacteria communities (17, 30). Further, it is suggested that the microbiota profile of most adults can be classified into one of three ‘types’ or enterotypes, based on their particular dominant genera and their ratios to one another (17, 26). Enterotype 1 is dominated by the bacteroides genera; enterotype 2 is dominated by the prevotella genera; and enterotype 3 is dominated by the ruminococcus genera (17, 26). Interestingly, these broad gut microbiota enterotype patterns are largely determined by diet (17, 27).

BARLEYmax™ prebiotic activity
and a healthier gut microbiota

BARLEYmax™ and so Barley+ is a rich source of various prebiotic dietary nutrients, including resistant starch, fructans and fructooligosacharides. It is the bacteria-generated SCFA metabolic end products of dietary nutrient fermentation that contribute significantly to human health(32, 44). Butyrate, propionate and acetate are the bacteria-generated SCFAs of principal importance to colonic health(14, 29, 44) (Figure: 3).

Butyrate is the preferred substrate for the cells in the colon and importantly, butyrate appears to promote a normal phenotype in these colon cells(32).

Fermentation of prebiotic nutrients

Figure 3: Fermentation of dietary prebiotic resistant starch and fructooligosacharides and butyrate production in the large bowel. Lower pH values (and raised SCFA) are believed to prevent the overgrowth of pH-sensitive pathogenic bacteria(32). Figure adapted from reference(32).

 

Resistant starch is the major substrate for colonic butyrate production(29, 39). Fermentation of BARLEYmax™ resistant starch and prebiotic fiber has been shown to favor the production of the butyrate SCFA in the colon(45, 46). It has been suggested that butyrate has the strongest protective effect against colorectal cancer(29). To this end, some experts suggest that the higher colorectal cancer rates observed in developed nations relative to lower risk populations may be attributable to insufficient consumption of resistant starch and other more fermentable fiber types, while populations at lower risk consume higher levels of resistant starch via whole grain intakes and cooking practices (28, 44).

Importantly, it appears that observations of beneficial prebiotic properties of resistant starch to dietary modulation of colorectal cancer risk may be maximized with the combined consumption of insoluble fiber(47). Consuming insoluble fiber and resistant starch together pushes the fermentation of resistant starch further distally in the colon, which subsequently improves conditions in distal colonic regions where tumors most commonly occur(47). BARLEYmax™ has high levels of both resistant starch and insoluble fiber, compared with other conventionally consumed whole grains.While further human clinical studies are needed to elucidate the exact effects of resistant starch and prebiotic dietary fiber on gut microbiota shifts and consequent specific benefits, the following is well established:

  • BARLEYmax™ is a non-genetically engineered whole grain barley cultivar developed by Australia’s CSIRO and contains more resistant starch, soluble fiber and insoluble fiber in the one whole grain versus other commercial grains;
  • Adequate consumption of whole grains is a well-accepted dietary pattern associated with reduced risk of chronic disease(4, 5);
  • BARLEYmax™ and Barley+ provide a rich source of resistant starch and other fermentable nutrients with prebiotic effects;
  • Dietary prebiotics result in specific changes in the composition and/or activity of the gastrointestinal microbiota and confer benefit(s) upon host health(11, 12);
  • Resistant starch and fermentable dietary nutrients can modify gut microbiota (35-38) and promote beneficial effects on large bowel function in healthy adults(39);
  • Fermentation of BARLEYmax™ resistant starch and prebiotic fiber has been shown to favor the production of the butyrate SCFA in the colon(45, 46); butyrate is the preferred fuel for colon cells.

Download

References click to hide

  1. The BARLEYmax™ Better Nutrition Report 2009. BARLEYmax™ Joint Venture representing CSIRO and Australian Capital Ventures Ltd.
  2. Commonwealth of Australia. Nutrient Reference Values for Australia and New Zealand Including Recommended Dietary Intakes. Dietary Fiber. 2006:45-9.
  3. Fuller S, Beck E, Salman H, et al. New Horizons for the Study of Dietary Fiber and Health: A Review. Plant Foods Hum Nutr. 2016;71(1):1-12.
  4. Anderson JW, Hanna TJ. Whole grains and protection against coronary heart disease: what are the active components and mechanisms? AJCN. 1999;70(3):307-8.
  5. Liu S, Stampfer MJ, Hu FB, et al. Whole-grain consumption and risk of coronary heart disease: results from the Nurses’ Health Study. AJCN. 1999;70(3):412-9.
  6. Liu S, Willett WC, Manson JE, et al. Relation between changes in intakes of dietary fiber and grain products and changes in weight and development of obesity among middle- aged women. AJCN. 2003;78(5):920-7.
  7. Lin BH, Yen ST. The U.S. Grain Consumption Landscape: Who Eats Grain, in What Form, Where, and How Much? ERR-50. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Econ. Res. Serv. November 2007. <http://purl.umn.edu/55967>. Last accessed 04/23/2017.
  8. McGill CR, Fulgoni VL, 3rd, Devareddy L. Ten-year trends in fiber and whole grain intakes and food sources for the United States population: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2001-2010. Nutrients. 2015;7(2):1119-30.
  9. Kranz S, Dodd KW, Juan WY, et al. Whole Grains Contribute Only a Small Proportion of Dietary Fiber to the U.S. Diet. Nutrients. 2017;9(2).
  10. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture. 2015–2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 8th Edition. December 2015. Last accessed 05/02/2017.
  11. Gibson GR, Probert HM, Loo JV, et al. Dietary modulation of the human colonic microbiota: updating the concept of prebiotics. Nut Res Rev. 2004;17(2):259-75.
  12. Roberfroid M, Gibson GR, Hoyles L, et al. Prebiotic effects: metabolic and health benefits. BJN. 2010;104 Suppl 2:S1-63.
  13. . Muir JG, Shepherd SJ, Rosella O, et al. Fructan and free fructose content of common Australian vegetables and fruit. J Agr Food Chem. 2007;55(16):6619-27.
  14. Bird AR, Conlon MA, Christophersen CT, et al. Resistant starch, large bowel fermentation and a broader perspective of prebiotics and probiotics. Beneficial microbes. 2010;1(4):423-31.
  15. Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on Evaluation of Health and Nutritional Properties of Probiotics in Food including Powder Milk with Live Lactic Acid Bacteria. (2001). Health and nutritional properties of probiotics in food including powder milk with lactic acid bacteria. Last accessed 04/23/2017.
  16. Sghir A, Gramet G, Suau A, et al. Quantification of bacterial groups within human fecal flora by oligonucleotide probe hybridization. App Envir Microb. 2000;66(5):2263-6.
  17. Clemente JC, Ursell LK, Parfrey LW, et al. The impact of the gut microbiota on human health: an integrative view. Cell. 2012;148(6):1258-70.
  18. Ridlon JM, Hylemon PB. A potential role for resistant starch fermentation in modulating colonic bacterial metabolism and colon cancer risk. Cancer biology & therapy. 2006;5(3):273-4.
  19. Wexler HM. Bacteroides: the good, the bad, and the nitty-gritty. ClinMicrob Rev. 2007;20(4):593-621.
  20. Festi D, Schiumerini R, Birtolo C, et al. Gut microbiota and its pathophysiology in disease paradigms. Dig Dis. 2011;29(6):518-24.
  21. Steinhoff U. Who controls the crowd? New findings and old questions about the intestinal microflora. Immuno Letters. 2005;99(1):12-6.
  22. Chow J, Lee SM, Shen Y, et al. Host-bacterial symbiosis in health and disease. Adv Immuno. 2010;107:243-74.
  23. Peterson DA, Frank DN, Pace NR, et al. Metagenomic approaches for defining the pathogenesis of inflammatory bowel diseases. Cell Host & Microbe. 2008;3(6):417-27.
  24. Ley RE, Turnbaugh PJ, Klein S, et al. Microbial ecology: human gut microbes associated with obesity. Nature. 2006;444(7122):1022-3.
  25. Turnbaugh PJ, Hamady M, Yatsunenko T, et al. A core gut microbiome in obese and lean twins. Nature. 2009;457(7228):480-4.
  26. Arumugam M, Raes J, Pelletier E, et al. Enterotypes of the human gut microbiome. Nature. 2011;473(7346):174-80.
  27. Wu GD, Chen J, Hoffmann C, Bittinger K, et al. Linking long-term dietary patterns with gut microbial enterotypes. Science. 2011;334(6052):105-8.
  28. Fung KY, Ooi CC, Zucker MH, et al. Colorectal carcinogenesis: a cellular response to sustained risk environment. Inter J Molec Sci. 2013;14(7):13525-41.
  29. Ahmed R, Segal I, Hassan H. Fermentation of dietary starch in humans. Am J Gastro. 2000;95(4):1017-20.
  30. Turnbaugh PJ, Ley RE, Mahowald MA, et al. An obesity-associated gut microbiome with increased capacity for energy harvest. Nature. 2006;444(7122):1027-31.
  31. Kleessen B, Sykura B, Zunft HJ, et al. Effects of inulin and lactose on fecal microflora, microbial activity, and bowel habit in elderly constipated persons. AJCN. 1997;65(5):1397-402.
  32. Topping DL, Clifton PM. Short-chain fatty acids and human colonic function: roles of resistant starch and nonstarch polysaccharides. Phys Rev. 2001;81(3):1031-64.
  33. Ohkusa T, Ozaki Y, Sato C, et al. Long-term ingestion of lactosucrose increases Bifidobacterium sp. in human fecal flora. Digestion. 1995;56(5):415-20.
  34. Weaver GA, Krause JA, Miller TL, et al. Cornstarch fermentation by the colonic microbial community yields more butyrate than does cabbage fiber fermentation; cornstarch fermentation rates correlate negatively with methanogenesis. AJCN. 1992;55(1):70-7
  35. Silvi S, Rumney CJ, Cresci A, et al. Resistant starch modifies gut microflora and microbial metabolism in human flora-associated rats inoculated with faeces from Italian and UK donors. J Appl Microb. 1999;86(3):521-30.
  36. Lyte M, Chapel A, Lyte JM, et al. Resistant Starch Alters the Microbiota-Gut Brain Axis: Implications for Dietary Modulation of Behavior. PloS ONE. 2016;11(1):e0146406.
  37. Tachon S, Zhou J, Keenan M, et al. The intestinal microbiota in aged mice is modulated by dietary resistant starch and correlated with improvements in host responses. FEMS Micro Ecol. 2013;83(2):299-309.
  38. Martinez I, Kim J, Duffy PR, et al. Resistant starches types 2 and 4 have differential effects on the composition of the fecal microbiota in human subjects. PloS ONE. 2010;5(11):e15046.
  39. Shen D, Bai H, Li Z, et al. Positive effects of resistant starch supplementation on bowel function in healthy adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int J Food Sci Nutri. 2017;68(2):149-57.
  40. Bindels LB, Segura Munoz RR, Gomes-Neto JC, et al. Resistant starch can improve insulin sensitivity independently of the gut microbiota. Microbiome. 2017;5 (1).
  41. Van Loo J, Cummings J, Delzenne N, et al. Functional food properties of non-digestible oligosaccharides: a consensus report from the ENDO project (DGXII AIRII-CT94-1095). BJN. 1999;81(2):121-32.
  42. Biedrzycka E, Bielecka M. Prebiotic effectiveness of fructans of different degrees of polymerization. Trends Food Sci Tech. 2004 15:170-5.
  43. Eswaran S, Muir J, Chey WD. Fiber and functional gastrointestinal disorders. Am J Gastro. 2013;108(5):718-27.
  44. Topping D, Conlon MA. Feeding a hungry microbiome: large bowel fermentation and human health. MJA. 2014;201(8):438.
  45. Bird AR, Flory C, Davies DA, et al. A novel barley cultivar (Himalaya 292) with a specific gene mutation in starch synthase IIa raises large bowel starch and short-chain fatty acids in rats. J Nut. 2004;134(4):831-5.
  46. Bird AR, Vuaran MS, King RA, et al. Wholegrain foods made from a novel high-amylose barley variety (Himalaya 292) improve indices of bowel health in human subjects. BJN. 2008;99(5):1032-40.
  47. Govers MJ, Gannon NJ, Dunshea FR, et al. Wheat bran affects the site of fermentation of resistant starch and luminal indexes related to colon cancer risk: a study in pigs. Gut. 1999;45(6):840-7.

Barley+ – Healthcare Professionals

Web Pages – Disclaimer

 

Important note to Healthcare Professionals (HCPs):  Please carefully read the terms and conditions below.  By accessing the content for Healthcare Professionals on this site (the “HCP Content”) you accept and agree to be bound by these terms and conditions.

 

The HCP Content is intended to be accessed by HCPs only.   The HCP Content is not intended to be used for clinical decision making.  The purpose of the HCP Content is to highlight to HCPs the extensive body of literature in the areas of fibre metabolism and health.  Freedom Foods Group Limited and its related entities (“FFG”) assumes that HCPs are medically trained and qualified to independently review and interpret scientific literature reviews and scientific publications (“Adequately Trained”). By proceeding to access the HCP Content, you represent to FFG that you are Adequately Trained.

 

If you rely on the HCP Content you are responsible for ensuring, by independent verification, its accuracy, currency and completeness.  FFG does not represent or warrant that the HCP Content is current, authentic or complete or that the HCP Content is suitable for your needs.  FFG accepts no liability or responsibility to any person as a consequence of any reliance upon the HCP Content or for any loss arising from the use of or reliance on the HCP Content.  FFG expressly excludes all representations (expressed or implied) and warranties relating to the accuracy of the HCP Content. FFG will not be liable for any loss, liability or damage which you (or your employees, contractors or representatives) may incur or suffer from use of, or reliance on, the HCP Content.  You agree to indemnify FFG (and its employees and agents) for any loss suffered or liability incurred by FFG (and its employees and agents) arising from use of, or reliance on, the HCP Content or any breach of these terms by you or your employees, contractors or representatives.

 

By presenting the HCP Content as reviews and/or as hyperlinks to scientific publications, FFG does not make any representation as to the health benefits of Barley+™ including as compared with other food products.   The HCP Content should not be construed as endorsing any health claim for Barley+™, as professional advice or as professional recommendation.

 

The HCP Content may include the views or recommendations of third parties.  FFG disclaims any and all liability for any third party’s views or recommendations and hyperlinks in the HCP Content.  Your use of any external website is also governed by the terms of that website.  FFG does not control and accepts no liability for the content of those websites or for any loss arising from the use or reliance on those websites.  The provision of a link to an external website does not authorise you to reproduce, adapt, modify, communicate or in any way deal with the material on that site other than in accordance with the site terms. 

 

These terms and conditions will be governed by and determined in accordance with the laws of the State of New South Wales, Australia.