HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 90/2/269    most recent ajcn.2009.27694v1 Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Google Scholar Articles by Zijlstra, N. Articles by de Graaf, C. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zijlstra, N. Articles by de Graaf, C. Agricola Articles by Zijlstra, N. Articles by de Graaf, C.

Effect of bite size and oral processing time of a semisolid food on satiation^1,2,3

¹ From the Top Institute Food and Nutrition, Wageningen, Netherlands (NZ, MM, AS, and CdG); the Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, Wageningen, Netherlands (NZ, MM, and CdG); the Centre for Innovative Consumer Studies, Wageningen University and Research Centre, Netherlands (RAdW); and TNO Quality of Life, Zeist, Netherlands (AS).

² Supported by the Top Institute Food and Nutrition, formerly known as the WCFS (a unique public/private partnership that generates vision on scientific breakthroughs in food and nutrition, resulting in the development of innovative products and technologies that respond to consumer demands for safe, tasty, and healthy foods).

³ Address correspondence to C de Graaf, Division of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University, PO Box 8129, 6700 EV Wageningen, Netherlands. E-mail: kees.degraaf{at}wur.nl.

Background: Food texture plays an important role in food intake regulation. In previous studies we showed a clear effect of viscosity on ad libitum food intake and found indications that eating rate, bite size, and oral processing time (OPT) could play a role.

Objective: The objective was to determine the effect of bite size and OPT of a food on satiation, defined as ad libitum food intake.

Design: Twenty-two healthy subjects participated in all 7 test conditions. Bite sizes were free or fixed to small bite sizes (5 g) or large bite sizes (15 g). OPT was free (only in combination with free bite size) or fixed to 3 or 9 s. Subjects consumed chocolate custard through a tube, which was connected to a peristaltic pump. Sound signals indicated OPT duration.

Results: Subjects consumed significantly more when bite sizes were large than when they were small (bite size effect: P < 0.0001) and when OPT was 3 s rather than 9 s (OPT effect: P = 0.008). Under small bite size conditions, mean (±SD) ad libitum intakes were 382 ± 197 g (3-s OPT) and 313 ± 170 g (9-s OPT). Under large bite size conditions, ad libitum intakes were much higher: 476 ± 176 g (3-s OPT) and 432 ± 163 g (9-s OPT). Intakes during the free bite size conditions were 462 ± 211 g (free OPT), 455 ± 197 g (3-s OPT), and 443 ± 202 g (9-s OPT).

Conclusion: This study shows that greater oral sensory exposure to a product, by eating with small bite sizes rather than with large bite sizes and increasing OPT, significantly decreases food intake.