4.7 Article

Selenium biofortification in Pleurotus eryngii and its effect on lead adsorption of gut microbiota via in vitro fermentation

期刊

FOOD CHEMISTRY
卷 396, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2022.133664

关键词

Pleurotus eryngii; Selenium biofortification; Bioaccessibility; Gut microbiota; Lead adsorption

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [32072213]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of safe and efficient dietary selenium sources is crucial for improving lead toxicity. This study investigated the biofortification and bioaccessibility of selenium in Pleurotus eryngii by supplying selenate, selenite, SeMet, and Se-yeast. It was found that Se-enriched P. eryngii, particularly cultivated with Se-yeast, had higher organic selenium content and bioaccessibility. Furthermore, these Se-enriched mushrooms promoted the growth of Desulfovibrio, leading to increased lead adsorption by gut microbiota.
It is of great significance to develop safe and efficient dietary selenium sources to improve lead toxicity. In this study, selenate, selenite, SeMet and Se-yeast were supplied to investigate the Se biofortification and bioaccessibility in Pleurotus eryngii. The effects of Se-enriched P. eryngii on lead binding bacteria were investigated via in vitro fermentation. With 40 mg/kg Se in the substrate, the total Se contents of P. eryngii treated with selenite and Se-yeast were 145.22 +/- 8.00 mg/kg and 90.01 +/- 7.01 mg/kg, respectively. Compared with selenite, Se-yeast treatment significantly increased the organic Se proportion in P. eryngii (SeCys2 2.85 +/- 0.17%, MeSeCys 2.33 +/- 0.21% and SeMet 78.19 +/- 1.58%), which led to higher bioaccessibility. With 1 mg/L lead treatment during in vitro fermentation, Se-enriched P. eryngii promoted the growth of Desulfovibrio, which contributed to the increase of gut microbiota lead adsorption. Se-enriched P. eryngii cultivated with Se-yeast could be used as dietary Se sources for lead toxicity improvement.

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

4.7
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