4.6 Article

In Vitro Continuous Fermentation Model ( PolyFermS) of the Swine Proximal Colon for Simultaneous Testing on the Same Gut Microbiota

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094123

关键词

-

资金

  1. Commission of Technology and Innovation of Switzerland (CTI) [11962.1 PFLS-LS]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In vitro gut modeling provides a useful platform for a fast and reproducible assessment of treatment- related changes. Currently, pig intestinal fermentation models are mainly batch models with important inherent limitations. In this study we developed a novel in vitro continuous fermentation model, mimicking the porcine proximal colon, which we validated during 54 days of fermentation. This model, based on our recent PolyFermS design, allows comparing different treatment effects on the same microbiota. It is composed of a first- stage inoculum reactor seeded with immobilized fecal swine microbiota and used to constantly inoculate ( 10% v/v) five second- stage reactors, with all reactors fed with fresh nutritive chyme medium and set to mimic the swine proximal colon. Reactor effluents were analyzed for metabolite concentrations and bacterial composition by HPLC and quantitative PCR, and microbial diversity was assessed by 454 pyrosequencing. The novel PolyFermS featured stable microbial composition, diversity and metabolite production, consistent with bacterial activity reported for swine proximal colon in vivo. The constant inoculation provided by the inoculum reactor generated reproducible microbial ecosystems in all second- stage reactors, allowing the simultaneous investigation and direct comparison of different treatments on the same porcine gut microbiota. Our data demonstrate the unique features of this novel PolyFermS design for the swine proximal colon. The model provides a tool for efficient, reproducible and costeffective screening of environmental factors, such as dietary additives, on pig colonic fermentation.

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

4.6
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