Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Background Sweet and salty tastes can influence food intake {Sørensen, 2003 #40}. Increased intensity of these tastes has been shown to decrease food intake and increase satiation compared to the less intense taste, independent of palatability {Bolhuis, 2010 #245;Bolhuis, 2011 #251;Chung, 2007 #253;Lucas, 1987 #258;Vickers, 1998 #252;Vickers, 1998 #249;Vickers, 2001 #246;Yeomans, 1998 #244}. Umami taste intensity has been shown to reduce subsequent food intake {Masic, 2014 #7}, especially when paired with protein content in foods {Masic, 2014 #6}. Taste can be related with nutrient content of the diet, with sweet foods having carbohydrates, salty foods containing sodium, and umami foods containing protein {Teo, 2018 #37}.
However, no study has yet investigated the impact of umami and food intake, using the approach of similar palatability and differing taste intensity levels {Forde, 2016 #254}. Given its relationship with nutrient signaling, it is important to explore the relationship between umami intensity and satiation. Therefore, this study aims to compare ad libitum food intake of two levels with similar palatability and differing umami taste intensities (high and low) to food intake from a meal with optimum taste intensity.
Methods Test session 1 Determine individual's most preferred level of umami taste in 10 risotto samples, use Booth's method {Booth, 1983 #247}. Samples will contain a fixed level of salt, and MSG concentrations ranging from 0.2-1.2 w/w%, based on the optimal amount of MSG added to enhance taste to be 0.1-0.8 w/w% {Wijayasekara, 2017 #70}. Per individual, samples that are closest to those situated at -3.5 and +3.5 from the optimum (at 7) will be selected (figure 1).
Healthy, normal weight participants will be included. Previous studies have applied this method in sweet and salty tastes with 15-59 participants {Bolhuis, 2010 #245;Bolhuis, 2011 #251;Bolhuis, 2012 #255;Vickers, 1998 #252;Vickers, 1998 #249;Vickers, 2001 #246}.
Test session 2, 3 and
In a randomized cross-over design, participants will receive the optimum, high and low MSG risotto. The following will be measured:
Subjects will be asked to eat a similar breakfast and to not consume anything between breakfast and lunch session. They will also be asked to refrain from eating for one hour after the test session. Participants will be asked to fill in the tasteFFQ, to investigate the link between dietary taste patterns and hedonic umami taste ratings.
Data will be analyzed using Rstudio. First, normality will be assessed, and data will be normalized if needed. Difference in food intake in grams between the three intensities will be compared using ANOVA. A post-hoc test will be applied if statistical outcomes are significant. Categorical variables will be compared using Chi-square test.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Low umami intensity | Experimental | The low umami intensity meal will have a taste intensity corresponding with the MSG concentration in the sample rated 1.85 units to the left on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) during the first test session in which umami taste preferences per individual will be assessed by hedonic mapping. |
|
| High umami intensity | Experimental | The high umami intensity meal will have a taste intensity corresponding with the MSG concentration in the sample rated 1.85 units to right left on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) during the first test session in which umami taste preferences per individual will be assessed by hedonic mapping. |
|
| Optimum umami taste intensity | Experimental | The optimum umami intensity meal will have a taste intensity corresponding with the MSG concentration in the sample rated closest to the 'Just right' point on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) during the first test session in which umami taste preferences per individual will be assessed by hedonic mapping. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hedonic mapping | Other | During the first session, participants will be presented with risotto samples differing in MSG content and thus umami taste intensity, assigned based on Booth's method (Booth et al., 1983). Based on these individual ratings, umami taste intensities of the ad libitum test meals will be calculated per participant. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in food intake from ad libitum test meal between taste intensity conditions | Difference in food intake in volume (grams) from the ad libitum test meal between the three (high-, low- and optimum) umami taste intensities. | Test session 2, 3, and 4 (week 2, 3 and 4) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in liking before meal between taste intensity conditions | Difference in test meal liking, measured on a Visual Analogue Scale, 0-100 (0 representing not liking at all, 100 representing like very much) between the three (high-, low- and optimum) umami taste intensities. | Test session 2, 3, and 4 (week 2, 3 and 4) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Monica Mars, PhD | Wageningen University | Principal Investigator |
| Ciaran Forde, PhD | Wageningen University | Study Chair |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Department of Human Nutrition, Wageningen University | Wageningen | Netherlands |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 37969327 | Background | Jayasena DD, Kang T, Wijayasekara KN, Jo C. Innovative Application of Cold Plasma Technology in Meat and Its Products. Food Sci Anim Resour. 2023 Nov;43(6):1087-1110. doi: 10.5851/kosfa.2023.e31. Epub 2023 Nov 1. | |
| Background | Forde, C. G. (2016). Flavor perception and satiation. In Flavor (pp. 251-276). Woodhead Publishing. | ||
| 25191607 |
Not provided
Not provided
Individual study participant data will be shared after anonymization upon study publication in an open data repository (e.g. DANS or Yoda).
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Complete block randomized cross-over design.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Ad libitum risotto test meal | Other | During the ad libitum test meal, participants will be presented with 800 grams of risotto with either high-, low-, or optimum umami taste intensity. |
|
| Difference in liking after meal between taste intensity conditions |
Difference in test meal liking, measured on a Visual Analogue Scale, 0-100 (0 representing not liking at all, 100 representing like very much) between the three (high-, low- and optimum) umami taste intensities. |
| Test session 2, 3, and 4 (week 2, 3 and 4) |
| Difference in umami taste intensity ratings of the ad libitum test meal between taste intensity conditions | Difference in taste intensity ratings of the ad libitum test meal, measured on a Visual Analogue Scale, 0-100 (0 representing no umami taste at all, 100 representing very intense umami taste) between the three (high-, low- and optimum) umami taste intensities. | Test session 2, 3, and 4 (week 2, 3 and 4) |
| Difference in water consumption during the ad libitum test meal between taste intensity conditions | Difference in water consumption in volume (grams) from the ad libitum test meal between the three (high-, low- and optimum) umami taste intensities. | Test session 2, 3, and 4 (week 2, 3 and 4) |
| Difference in reported appetite and fullness ratings between the three conditions | Before and after the ad libitum test meals, appetite and fullness ratings of participants, measured on a Visual Analogue Scale, 0-100 (0 representing not at all, 100 representing very much). Differences of these rating between umami taste intensity conditions (low-, high- and optimum umami taste intensity) will be assessed. | Test session 2, 3, and 4 (week 2, 3 and 4) |
| Habitual taste exposure | Habitual taste exposure will be measured with a food frequency questionnaire (tasteFFQ) specifically designed to assess relative food intake based on taste cluster. Individual optimum umami intensity will be compared to habitual dietary taste exposure to the salt, umami and fat taste cluster, as well as to the intake of umami tasting food items. | The month prior to the first ad libitum test meal (session 2). |
| Background |
| Masic U, Yeomans MR. Monosodium glutamate delivered in a protein-rich soup improves subsequent energy compensation. J Nutr Sci. 2014 Aug 13;3:e15. doi: 10.1017/jns.2014.15. eCollection 2014. |
| 21986190 | Background | Bolhuis DP, Lakemond CM, de Wijk RA, Luning PA, de Graaf C. Effect of salt intensity in soup on ad libitum intake and on subsequent food choice. Appetite. 2012 Feb;58(1):48-55. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2011.09.001. Epub 2011 Sep 29. |
| 22049294 | Background | Bolhuis DP, Lakemond CM, de Wijk RA, Luning PA, Graaf Cd. Both longer oral sensory exposure to and higher intensity of saltiness decrease ad libitum food intake in healthy normal-weight men. J Nutr. 2011 Dec;141(12):2242-8. doi: 10.3945/jn.111.143867. Epub 2011 Nov 2. |
| 20705808 | Background | Bolhuis DP, Lakemond CM, de Wijk RA, Luning PA, de Graaf C. Effect of salt intensity on ad libitum intake of tomato soup similar in palatability and on salt preference after consumption. Chem Senses. 2010 Nov;35(9):789-99. doi: 10.1093/chemse/bjq077. Epub 2010 Aug 12. |
| 14513063 | Background | Sorensen LB, Moller P, Flint A, Martens M, Raben A. Effect of sensory perception of foods on appetite and food intake: a review of studies on humans. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2003 Oct;27(10):1152-66. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802391. |
| 24944058 | Background | Masic U, Yeomans MR. Umami flavor enhances appetite but also increases satiety. Am J Clin Nutr. 2014 Aug;100(2):532-8. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.113.080929. Epub 2014 Jun 18. |