4.4 Article

Variation of glucoraphanin metabolism in vivo and ex vivo by human gut bacteria

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF NUTRITION
Volume 106, Issue 3, Pages 408-416

Publisher

CAMBRIDGE UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1017/S0007114511000274

Keywords

Cruciferous vegetables; Glucosinolates; Isothiocyanates; Gut bacteria

Funding

  1. National Cancer Institute [R01 CA070913, R56 CA070913]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Glucosinolates, phytochemicals found in calciferous vegetables, are metabolised to bioactive isothiocyanates (ITC) by certain bacteria in the human gut. Substantial individual variation in urinary ITC excretion has been observed in previous calciferous vegetable-feeding studies. We hypothesised that individual differences in gut microbial community contribute to the observed variation in glucosinolate metabolism, i.e. gut microbiota composition between high- and low-ITC excreters differs. We recruited twenty-three healthy individuals and fed them a standardised meal containing 200 g of cooked broccoli. After the meal, 24 h urinary ITC excretion was measured. Study participants with the highest (n 5) and lowest (n 5) ITC excretion provided faecal samples for ex vivo bacterial cultivation with 50 mu M-glucoraphanin, the major glucosinolate found in broccoli. When grown ex vivo, faecal bacteria from the selected high-ITC excreters were able to degrade more glucoraphanin than those from the low-ITC excreters (P=0.05). However, bacterial fingerprints of faecal and ex vivo culture microbiota revealed no statistically significant differences between the high- and low-ITC excreters in terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism analysis of the bacterial 16S ribosomal RNA gene. In conclusion, glucosinolate degradation by faecal bacteria ex vivo may be associated with in vivo bacterial glucosinolate metabolism capacity, but no direct link to specific bacterial species could be established, possibly clue to the complexity and functional redundancy of the gut microbiota.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available