4.3 Article

Monosodium L-Glutamate and Dietary Fat Differently Modify the Composition of the Intestinal Microbiota in Growing Pigs

期刊

Obesity Facts
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 87-100

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000380889

关键词

High-fat diet; Monosodium L-glutamate; Intestinal microbiota; Energy; Growing pig

资金

  1. Major Program for International Cooperation of the National Natural Science Foundation of China [31110103909]
  2. National Natural Science funds [31272463]
  3. key projects of Hunan province natural science funds [12JJ2014]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The Chinese have been undergone rapid transition to a high-fat diet-consuming lifestyle, while monosodium L-glutamate (MSG) is widely used as a daily food additive. It has been reported that fat alters the composition of intestinal microbiota. However, little information is available on the effects of oral MSG on intestinal microbiota, and no study was done focusing on the interaction effect of fat and MSG with respect to intestinal microbiota. The present study thus aimed to determine the effects of MSG and/or fat on intestinal microbiota, and also to identify possible interactions between these two nutrients. Methods: Four iso-nitrogenous and iso-caloric diets were provided to growing pigs. The microbiota from jejunum, ileum, cecum, and colon were analyzed. Results: Our results show that both MSG and fat clearly increased the intestinal microbiota diversity. MSG and fat modified the composition of intestinal microbiota, particularly in the colon. Both MSG and fat promoted the colonization of microbes related to energy extraction in gastrointestinal tract via different ways. MSG promoted the colonization of Faecalibacterium prausnitzii and Roseburia, while fat increased the percentage of Prevotella in colon and other intestinal segments. Conclusion: Our results will help to understand how individual or combined dietary changes modify the microbiota composition to prevent obesity. (C) 2015 S. Karger GmbH, Freiburg

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据