Skip to main content
Log in

Fermented Phaseolus vulgaris: acceptability and intestinal effects

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
European Food Research and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Dry beans such as Phaseolus vulgaris are an important source of nutrients, especially in developing countries. However, their consumption is limited by the flatulence problem, which occurs in the gut after their ingestion, owing to the presence of highly fermentable compounds, such as α-galactosides, soluble dietary fibre, and resistant starch. It has been shown that natural fermentation reduces the content of these compounds by about 90%. In the present work, the effects of the consumption of unfermented and fermented beans (P. vulgaris) on the bowel habits (frequency and faecal volume) and on the main adverse intestinal symptoms usually associated with bean consumption were compared. This study was carried out for 28 days with ten women, whose age ranged between 25 and 40 years, eating 45 g of fermented-cooked and cooked beans for 7 days, with a 2-week break between the experimental periods. A sensorial evaluation with 51 panellists was performed revealing that 56% of the panel gave the fermented samples a score between 6 and 9, corresponding to “slightly like it” and “really like it”, respectively. The consumption of fermented beans significantly decreased the flatulence problem by 56.1%, the intestinal noises by 48% and the nausea by 80%. Abdominal bloating was reduced by 11%. It was concluded that the fermented and cooked beans were palatable and that the process could decrease the flatulence problem that is usually caused by the consumption of P. vulgaris by humans.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Salunke DK, Kadam SS (1989) CRC handbook of world food legumes nutritional chemistry processing technology and utilization, vol 1. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, pp 311–314

  2. Leterme P, Munoz C (2002) Br J Nutr 88(Suppl 3):S251–S254

    Google Scholar 

  3. Reddy NR, Salunke DK, Sharma RP (1980) J Food Sci 45:1161–1164

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Jood S, Metha U, Singh R, Bhat CM (1985) J Agric Food Chem 33:268–271

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Khokhar S, Frias J, Price KR, Fenwick GR, Hedley CL (1996) J Sci Food Agric 70:487–492

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Frías J, Vidal-Valverde C, Kozlowska H, Tabera J, Honke J, Hedley C (1996) J Agric Food Chem 44:579–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Granito M, Champ M, David A, Bonnet C, Guerra M (2001) J Sci Food Agric 18:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chang MC, Morris WC (1990) J Food Sci 55:1647–1650

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Noah L, Guillon F, Bouchet B, Buléon A, Molis C, Gratas M, Champ M (1998 ) J Nutr 128:977–985.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ferguson MJ, Jones GP (2000) J Sci Food Agric 80:166–170

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Granito M, Frías J, Doblado R, Guerra M, Champ M (2002) Euro Food Res Technol 214:226–231.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Granito M, Champ M, Guerra M, Frías J (2003) J Sci Food Agric 83:1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Abdel-Gawad AS (1993) Food Chem 46:23–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Prosky L, Asp NG, Schweizer T, De Vries JW, Furda I (1992) J Assoc Off Anal Chem 75:1017–1023

    Google Scholar 

  15. Quemener B (1988) Food Chem 36:754–759.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Holm J, Björck I, Drews A, Asp N-G (1986) Starch/Staerke 38:224–226

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tovar J, Björck I, Asp N-G (1990) J Agric Food Chem 38:1818–1823

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Champ M, Noah L, Loizeau G, Kozlowski F (1995) Proceedings of the AOAC international workshop “Definition and analysis of complex carbohydrates /dietary fiber”, 15–16 September

  19. Wittig E (1982) Evaluación sensorial: una metodología actual para tecnología de alimentos. USACH, Talleres Graff, Chile, pp 83–85

  20. Montgomery DC (1991) Diseño y análisis de experimentos, 1st edn. Grupo Editorial Iberoamérica, México, pp 34–36

  21. Birkett AM, Mathers JC, Jones GP, Walker KZ, Roth MJ, Muir JG (2000) Br J Nutr 84:63–72.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Arrigoni E, Crespo P, Amadó R (2001) Ann Nutr Methods 45(Suppl 1):71–76

    Google Scholar 

  23. Gransten SM, Leinonen KS, Poutanene KS, Gylling HK, Miettinen TA, Mikkänen HM (2000) J Nutr 130:2215–2221

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Teuri U, Korpela R, Saxelin M, Montonen L, Salminen S (1998) J Nutr Sci Vit 44:465–471

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the Direction of Investigation of the Simón Bolívar University and the National Foundation of Science and Technology of Venezuela (FONACIT).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marisela Granito.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Granito, M., Michel, C., Frías, J. et al. Fermented Phaseolus vulgaris: acceptability and intestinal effects. Eur Food Res Technol 220, 182–186 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-004-0982-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00217-004-0982-6

Keywords

Navigation